Falling Toward Socialism and Worse

[nChrist]

Let's get REAL and tell it like it is. They want MANDATORY AND UNRESTRICTED ACCESS TO OUR CHILDREN TO INDOCTRINATE THEM! They need the next generation coming up to BE GOOD LITTLE PARTY MEMBERS who will report anyone not following the party LINE AND AGENDA! Those being reported will include brothers, sisters, other family members, and even PARENTS!

They will need RE-EDUCATION AND FORCED-INDOCTRINATION CAMPS! It will require BRAIN-WASHING! FREEDOM - ESPECIALLY FREEDOM OF SPEECH - MUST END! THE PARTY WILL BE IN CHARGE OF EVERYTHING YOU SEE AND HEAR! CHRISTIANS ARE AN ABSOLUTE NO BECAUSE GOD CAN'T BE IN CONTROL OR AN OVERSEER OF ANYTHING! THE PARTY DETERMINES MORALS AND ETHICS - NOT GOD AND THE BIBLE!

Wake up everyone because this is where the powers that be want to go. Read about this in the HOLY BIBLE. The TRUTH has already been foretold by GOD. Christians won't be here for the entire fight, but great hosts of people will be saved during the Tribulation Period. Those new Christians of the Tribulation Period will face death for proclaiming CHRIST!

[Soldier4Christ]

Don't count out 'mandatory' service yet
Provisions dropped from one bill, but appear in another

A proposal in Congress to study whether "mandatory" service should be required of all young people in the United States has suddenly disappeared from a bill that would reauthorize other national service programs such as AmeriCorps. But the plan has appeared in another bill at just about the same time.

WND reported more than a week ago on a plan in the U.S. House of Representatives to determine whether "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" should be developed across the United States. But the language that was included in H.R. 1388 suddenly disappeared.

At about the same time, H.R. 1444 by U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., appeared and was assigned to the House Committee on Labor and Education.

The bill, under Section 4 (b)6, states:

    Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.

The original plan not only reauthorized existing programs but added "new programs and studies" with a forecast funding level of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

It raised immediate concerns that the effort, which is intended to include 250,000 "volunteers," is the beginning of what President Obama called his "National Civilian Security Force" in a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate.

WND reported when a copy of the speech provided online apparently was edited to exclude Obama's specific references to the new force.

As the presidential campaign advanced last year, another video appeared that for many crystallized their concerns over such a "corps." It shows a squad of young men marching and shouting praises to Obama.

The newest plan says the aim is "to establish the Congressional Commission on Civic Service to study methods of improving and promoting volunteerism and national service, and for other purposes."

It would be directed to identify how issues that deter volunteerism "and national service" can be overcome, determine what role should government have "in overcoming" those issues, evaluate the "existing databases" for linking "would-be volunteers and service providers," and referred to the "workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement."

The proposal also speculates on a "public service academy, a four-year institution that offers a federally funded undergraduate education with a focus on training future public sector leaders."

Like the provisions in the earlier bill, it also includes children down to primary school, requiring a review of "the means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding and promoting service options for primary and secondary school students and by raising awareness of existing incentives."

According to a report by Canada Free Press, "'volunteerism' that kept America running since the days of its founding" would be "wiped out with the stroke of a pen."

"It becomes forced labor and like the practice of another era, presses American citizens of all ages and creeds, unknowingly into military service," the commentary said.

The plan in the earlier bill generated this concern from Resistnet.com: "This is the equivalent of brown shirts."

A forum participant wondered "what's going to happen to those who refused to 'volunteer.' Maybe they will be put into a different 'campus.' I guess we will soon find out."

On the Albany Insanity blog, this concern was raised: "What gives the government the right to require individuals to give three years service under the guise of 'volunteer' service? It is not explicit exactly who is required but I think they get the bill passed and then iron out the details. It talks about uniforms and 'camps.' They revise the word 'camps' and call it 'campus.' There is language about Seniors and Community organizations."

The blog noted such work forces would be used for "pressing national and local challenges" that apparently could range from weather disasters to economic uncertainty.

WND also reported when the official website for Obama, Change.gov, announced the president would "require" all middle school through college students to participate in community service programs.

However, after a flurry of blogs protested children being drafted into Obama's proposed youth corps, officials softened the website's wording.

Originally, under the tab "America Serves," Change.gov read, "President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in under served schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps.

"Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year," the site announced.

Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND, used his daily column first to raise the issue of a "national civilian force" and then to elevate it with a call to all reporters to start asking questions.

"If we're going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn't this rather a big deal?" Farah wrote. "I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?

"Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?" Farah wrote.

Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel coauthored a 2006 book entitled "The Plan: Big Ideas for America' that called for three months of compulsory civil service for all Americans aged 18 to 25.

The Obama/Biden campaign website proclaims that "Obama and Biden will expand AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps with "a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year, and will establish a new tax credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year."

After completing college at Columbia University, Obama in 1983 became a community organizer in the Chicago-based Developing Communities Project, an organization that operated according to principles articulated by Saul Alinsky, whose 1971 book "Rules for Radicals" articulated a socialist strategy for gaining political power to redistribute wealth from the "haves" to the "have-nots."

[nChrist]

UM? - Maybe he can sell this MANDATORY YOUTH CORP PROGRAM TO RED CHINA OR NORTH KOREA! After all, the PARTY can never have enough POWER, and the youth might be able to get the older folks under control!

BUT HERE YOU ASK?  --  NO!

THIS IS STILL A FREE COUNTRY!

HERE, THE PARENTS ARE STILL IN CHARGE OF THEIR CHILDREN - NOT THE GOVERNMENT!

NO THANKS MR. PRESIDENT!  --  IN FACT - NO! - PERIOD! - END OF STORY!

WE WILL RAISE OUR CHILDREN THE WAY THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE RAISED IN A FREE COUNTRY!

IF WE NEED HELP IN RAISING OUR CHILDREN, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL BE THE LAST TO CALL!

WE'LL USE OUR LOCAL CHURCHES AND CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATIONS IF WE NEED HELP WITH OUR CHILDREN!

WE WILL CHOOSE WHAT PROGRAMS OUR CHILDREN VOLUNTEER FOR - NOT THE GOVERNMENT!

WE WILL PROBABLY CHOOSE EXCEPTIONALLY WELL-RUN CHARITIES AND CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATIONS!

SOCIALIST ORGANIZATIONS ARE NOT AND WILL NOT BE ON OUR LIST TO VOLUNTEER FOR!

IF WE WANT SOMETHING LIKE THAT - WE'LL MOVE TO RED CHINA OR NORTH KOREA!  --  SO, NO!

[Soldier4Christ]

Tancredo: Clinton aids Obama's 'war on guns'
Criticizes her claim U.S. at fault in Mexican drug violence

Former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., says Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is just aiding and abetting President Obama's war on guns with her new suggestion that the U.S. is at fault in the Mexico drug cartel war.

"She's part of Obama's plan to conduct a war on guns," he said. "He's opposed to private ownership of guns, opposed to concealed carry laws. He doesn't believe we should be able to carry guns as individuals."

Tancredo was interviewed by Greg Corombos of Radio America on the issue of the violence along the Mexico-U.S. border, blamed on battles among the various drug cartels in Mexico.

In an interview with Fox News, Clinton said the drug gangs have moved into the United States to feed the addiction of "American young people." And she added that the border between the nations is "unstable, insecure."

Then she continued, "It would inaccurate to absolve ourselves of responsibility or to absolve the Mexicans of responsibility. This is a shared responsibility. We share the border. And as you rightly said, the demand for illegal drugs is what keeps these guys in business. And it's a, you know, multi-billion-dollar, $25-plus billion industry.

"The guns that are sold in the United States, which are illegal in Mexico, get smuggled and shipped across our border and arm these terrible drug-dealing criminals so that they can outgun these poor police officers along the border and elsewhere in Mexico," she said.

"So we've got to help out here. We can't stand by and say, Well, you know, you guys just do the best you can, when we, unfortunately, are the market for drugs, when a lot of the money is laundered in the United States back into the hands of the drug kingpins, and when the weapons have come from our country. So I think recognizing the co-responsibility is just stating the obvious," Clinton said.

Tancredo said that's just wrong, and Clinton knows it.

"The heavy weaponry is not coming from the U.S.," he said, citing the Mexican military as a source for drug cartels for automatic weapons, as well as gun dealers throughout South and Central America.

He said the Mexican army has sustained 110,000 desertions in the last few years alone, and those soldiers often have taken their weapons with them to sell them later on.

Tancredo said the solution is to militarize the border, a move that would stop the drugs going north.

[Soldier4Christ]

'Income redistribution'
coming in Dem budget
Tax hikes to hit $250,000 earners,
'maybe even going further down'

The nation needs to face the fact that income will be redistributed and health care rationed under a federal budget plan moving through Congress at the behest of President Obama, according to an official who served under President Clinton.

The plan, according to Lawrence J. Haas, former communications director for Vice President Al Gore, said Obama "wants to make permanent all the tax cuts from those years [2001 and 2003] for people making up to $250,000 a year and frankly to redistribute income a bit in a fair way so he would raise taxes on those above $250,000."

His comments came in an interview with Greg Corombos of Radio America.

Haas, who also was communications director for the White House Office of Management and Budget under the Clinton administration, later worked as director of public affairs for the president at Yale University.

The interview starts out with Haas' condemnation of a GOP proposal for an alternative budget this year, saying it contains "unrealistic spending cuts."

Haas also said in recent budgets, the income "has been redistributed … in exactly the other direction," condemning tax cuts for anyone in an upper income bracket, a category that includes many business owners.

Haas said GOP plans for restraint are "radical."

"They would impose … they propose to severely limit spending across the board other than for defense and veterans programs," he said.

He explained the income redistribution plan:

"The tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 provided a disproportionate amount of the benefits for those in the top one, two percent of earners, so in essence what the president is attempting to do is make things a little bit fairer by way of asking those who have done so well in recent years to pay a little bit more … [while continuing] tax relief for people at the bottom, in the middle, in all candor who have struggled in recent years."

He said while the president "has proposed" protecting from tax increases those who make less than $250,000, even that's not assured.

Feel like you've lost control of your country? Get "Taking America Back," Joseph Farah's manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

"To the extent we need to raise taxes down the road we're going to have to sort of work our way down that income level starting with people making over $250,000," he said, "and maybe even going further down. I hope we don't have to do too much of that."

He said health care costs will play a major role in coming budgets.

"That's going to cause us to make some real decisions as to who gets how much health care and when they get it," he warned.

President Obama famously created an issue during the 2008 campaign by telling a plumber his goal was to spread the wealth.

WND also reported Obama believes the Constitution is flawed, because it fails to address wealth redistribution, and he says the Supreme Court should have intervened years ago to accomplish that.

Obama told Chicago's public station WBEZ-FM that "redistributive change" is needed, pointing to what he regarded as a failure of the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in its rulings on civil rights issues in the 1960s.

The Warren court, he said, failed to "break free from the essential constraints" in the U.S. Constitution and launch a major redistribution of wealth. But Obama, then an Illinois state lawmaker, said the legislative branch of government, rather than the courts, probably was the ideal avenue for accomplishing that goal.

In the 2001 interview, Obama said:

    If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK

    But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

    And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

[nChrist]

WHAT THEY WANT

TO DO

IS ILLEGAL

AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!

IT MUST BE

CAN BE

AND WILL BE

STOPPED!!

[Soldier4Christ]

GOP congressman: 17 'socialists' in House
Bachus worried Obama being steered too far by Congress

Touring his Birmingham-area district today, U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus started the day in Trussville, where he treated a breakfast of municipal and county leaders to his thoughts on guns, socialists and the federal budget.

As for President Barack Obama, the Vestavia Hills Republican said he has "some hope."

"He's a better listener than George W. Bush," Bachus said. "He tries to get ideas from people."

But he said he is worried that he is being steered too far by the Congress: "Some of the men and women I work with in Congress are socialists."

Asked to clarify his comments after the breakfast speech at the Trussville Civic Center, Bachus said 17 members of the U.S. House are socialists.

Bachus did not support small city officials who asked if he would oppose all gun bans. Instead, he said, it may be necessary to support some assault weapon bans in order to keep all guns from being outlawed.

__________________

Just 17? I think that he needs to keep counting.

[Soldier4Christ]

House votes on 'hate crimes' bill
Will Christians face prosecution for speaking out against homosexuality?

The U.S. House Judiciary Committee will vote tomorrow on a "hate crimes" bill that some say might allow federal officials to prosecute Christians who speak out against homosexual behavior.

Barney Frank, an openly homosexual congressman, announced Thursday that the House Judiciary Committee will be considering "hate crimes" legislation, H.R.1913.

The bill is named the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. It has 42 co-sponsors and was introduced into the House on April 2 by U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

In his April 2 introductory speech, Conyers cited the FBI's national data on reported hate crimes. For 2007, the most current data available, the FBI identified 7,624 bias-motivated criminal incidents directed against individuals because of their personal characteristics.

According to the report:

    * racially motivated bias accounted for 50.8 percent of all incidents
    * religious bias accounted for 1,400 incidents, or 18.4 percent
    * sexual orientation bias accounted for 1,265 incidents, or 16.6 percent
    * ethnicity/national origin bias accounted for 1,007 incidents, or 13.2 percent

"The statutes do not permit federal involvement in a range of cases where crimes are motivated by bias against the victim's perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability," Conyers noted. "The federal government must have authority to be involved in investigating and prosecuting these crimes when state authorities cannot or will not do so."

Jeff King, president of International Christian Concern, warned that the bill could allow federal prosecutors to target Christians who teach that homosexual behavior is sinful and that Islam is a false religion.

But in his speech, Conyers said, "The bill only applies to bias-motivated violent crimes and does not impinge public speech or writing in any way."

Section 10 of the act states, "Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution."

However, the ICC cites United States Code Title 18, Section 2, as evidence of how the legislation could be used against people who merely speak out against homosexuality. It states:

    Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.

Critics argue that under this reasoning, a Christian pastor or other teacher could be tried for openly speaking out against homosexuality if someone misconstrues their message as encouragement to commit a violent crime against another person – even if the Christian leader never advocated the offense.

"H.R. 1913 is a backdoor tool from the far left and radical homosexuals to shut down legitimate free speech from Christians and others who oppose their lifestyle," King said. "It is political payback from the new administration to the homosexual lobby, and could have radical ramifications."

Conyers called the act "a constructive and measured response to a problem that continues to plague our nation."

"These are crimes that shock and shame our national conscience," he said. "They should be subject to comprehensive federal law enforcement assistance and prosecution."

But King noted that pastors in Europe and Canada have already been arrested for preaching against homosexuality based on similar legislation.

As WND reported, Julio Severo, a prominent Brazilian pro-family activist, has been forced into exile because of the "hate crimes" laws that are being implemented in his native land.

"It is imperative that we contact all members of the House and demand that they vote against this bill as it will not protect a pastor, Bible teacher, Sunday School teacher, youth leader or anyone else from prosecution if he or she teaches against homosexuality if an individual who hears their message then goes out and commits a crime against a homosexual," wrote Pastor Rick Scarborough of Vision America Action.

WND has also reported that the Obama administration has stated its dedication to strengthening "federal hate crimes legislation" and expanding "hate crimes protection."

Critics have said "hate crimes" laws actually criminalize thought because they demand enhanced penalties due to the "perception" of the victim by the perpetrator. A mugger, for example, who attacks a victim while screaming an epithet denoting a race or sexual preference could receive a much more significant penalty than a mugger who attacks a victim but doesn't say anything.

Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs at Liberty Counsel, has spoken out repeatedly in opposition to the idea.

"The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law," he said. "Hate crimes legislation is … [a] violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in that it elevates one class of citizen based upon their chosen sexual behaviors above other people."

King said Christians are acting like the proverbial frog in a slowly heating kettle that boils to death.

"They need to wake up and take action to oppose this threat to religious liberty."

The following is a list of seven Republican co-sponsors of H.R.1913 alphabetized by state:

Rep. Mary Bono Mack, R-Calif.
Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla.
Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Ill.
Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill.
Rep. Anh Cao, R-La.
Rep. Leonard Lance, R-N.J.

The following is a list of 35 Democrat co-sponsors of the bill alphabetized by state:

Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif.
Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif.
Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif.
Rep. Lynn Woolseym D-Calif.
Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo.
Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla.
Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla.
Rep. Sanford Bishop, D-Ga.
Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii
Rep. Bruce Braley, D-Iowa
Rep. Dennis Moore, D-Kan.
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md.
Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.
Rep. James McGovern, D-Mass.
Rep. John Olver, D-Mass.
Rep. Gary Peters, D-Mich.
Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn.
Rep. William Clay, D-Mo.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.
Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.
Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.
Rep. José Serrano, D-N.Y.
Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y.
Rep. Nydia Velázquez, D-N.Y.
Rep. Steve Driehaus, D-Ohio
Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy, D-Ohio
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore.
Rep. Raymond Green, D-Texas
Rep. James Moran, D-Va.
Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis.

[Soldier4Christ]

FCC attack on talkers beginning?
'I hope you will not hesitate to propose aggressive solutions'

The acting chairman of the Federal Communications Commission has told members of a "diversity" committee who almost exclusively represent left-leaning organizations to tackle the status quo in America's broadcast industry and suggest "aggressive" solutions to what they see as problems.

According to The O'Leary Report, published by author Brad O'Leary, author of "Shut Up, America!: The End of Free Speech," the FCC's "Diversity Committee," headed by "Fairness Doctrine," supporter Henry Rivera, has begun its work.

The report said the committee made it clear at a meeting yesterday its members will force President Obama's supporters into positions of power within the broadcast industry.

The message came when acting FCC chief Michael J. Copps "forcefully denounced the current racial and gender makeup of the broadcast industry and called its lack of diversity 'a shameful state of affairs,'" the report said.

"Is it any wonder that minorities are so often stereotyped and caricatured and that the positive contributions of the minority community are so often overlooked?" Copps claimed, according to the report.

(Story continues below)

          

The members, who represent groups such as the National Urban League, the Asian American Justice Center and One World Economy, were told by Copps:

"Be bold. Take these issues and run with them. This is not a ceremonial appointment. This is your chance to make a real and lasting difference. I hope that you will set an aggressive agenda for yourselves and that you will not hesitate to propose aggressive solutions," the report said.

WND reported earlier when the membership of the committee was named. It also was reported when a think tank headed by John Podesta, co-chairman of Obama's transition team, mapped out a strategy in 2007 for clamping down on conservative talk radio by requiring stations to be operated by female and minority owners, which the report showed were statistically more likely to carry liberal political talk shows.

That report found the best strategy for getting equal time for "progressives" on radio lies in mandating "diversity of ownership" without ever needing to mention the former FCC policy of requiring airtime for liberal viewpoints, known as the "Fairness Doctrine," a plan thrown out in the 1980s.

The mission of the new diversity committee, according to the FCC website, is to "make recommendations to the FCC regarding policies and practices that will further enhance the ability of minorities and women to participate in telecommunications and related industries."

Seton Motley, director of communications for the Media Research Center, further commented on the lineup of 31 activists and media moguls chosen to form the committee.

"Not a single conservative organization is taking part in this commission," Motley writes. "More than a dozen leftist groups are. A little ironic for a 'diversity' panel, is it not?"

At no time during the committee meeting was mention made of a recent Zogby poll that showed 66 percent of American voters opposed the creation of advisory committees designed to promote diversity in the broadcast industry.

Rivera's statements were no less ominous than Copps'.

"The public is here and the press is here so you might want to keep that in mind as you formulate your thoughts," he warned.

Nowhere was the process of selecting committee members explained, nor was there an explanation why conservative groups were not included.

But Rivera did confirm the committee now will begin making suggestions to the FCC on how broadcasters will be required to submit reports on the race and gender of individuals in their companies.

That will be a large part of what the "Diversity Committee" will analyze, Rivera said, with a "race-based rulemaking procedure" possibly in the offing, according to the report.

O'Leary's book warns that the FCC also may look to shortening the broadcast license renewal period from eight years to two, forcing broadcasters to make immediate changes or jeopardize their license.

After the FCC abandoned the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987, talk radio exploded from fewer than 150 stations nationwide to more than 3,000. But many of those stations carry popular syndicated programming from politically conservative hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, prompting some politicians to seek more "balance" on the airwaves.

As WND has reported, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, has joined up with other influential Democrats, including President Bill Clinton, Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa and Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, in calling for a resurrection of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

It's time to put up or shut up, America. Literally. Get the book that shows how to fight the assault on your freedom of speech!

And President Obama, while he has eschewed support for the "Fairness Doctrine" by name, has made statements in speeches and on the White House website that read as through they were taken directly from Podesta's plan for using "diversity" to make radio more "fair."

The full membership of the committee is listed below:

    * Henry Rivera, Emma Bowen Foundation for Minority Interests in Media
    * Raul Alarcon, Jr., Spanish Broadcasting System
    * Jenny Alonzo, Mio.TV
    * James M. Assey, Jr., National Cable and Telecommunications Association
    * Geoffrey C. Blackwell, Chickasaw Nation Industries, Inc.
    * Matthew Blank, Showtime Networks
    * Maria E. Brennan, American Women in Radio and Television
    * Kathy Brown, Verizon
    * Toni Cook Bush, Virgin Mobile
    * Alan B. Davidson, Google, Inc.
    * Ralph de la Vega, AT&T Mobility and Consumer Markets
    * Steve Hillard, Council Tree Communications
    * David Honig, Minority Media and Telecommunications Council
    * Rodney Hood, National Credit Union Administration
    * Ronald Johnson, Ronson Network Services
    * Debra Lee, BET Holdings, Inc.
    * Jane Mago, National Association of Broadcasters
    * Robert Mendez, ABC Television Network
    * Marc H. Morial, National Urban League
    * Karen K. Narasaki, Asian American Justice Center
    * Melissa Newman, Qwest
    * Jake Oliver, Afro-American Newspapers
    * Susan K. Patrick, Patrick Communications
    * Lisa Pickrum, The RLJ Companies
    * Rey Ramsey, One Economy Corporation
    * Michael V. Roberts, Roberts Broadcasting Companies LLC
    * Andrew Schwartzman, Media Access Project
    * Anita Stephens Graham, Opportunity Capital Partners
    * Diane Sutter, Shooting Star Broadcasting
    * Charles Warfield, Inner City Broadcasting
    * James Winston, National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters

[Soldier4Christ]

Moonbats Dream of Taking Our Cars

Even after the Ascension of the Anointed One, we’ll have to hurry to catch up to Europeans in the race into the encroaching dark ages of moonbat totalitarianism. The New York Times praises the Nazi military base turned Green Party haven of Vauban, Germany for making it almost impossible to drive a car:

    Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district on the outskirts of Freiburg, near the French and Swiss borders. Vauban’s streets are completely “car-free” — except the main thoroughfare, where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs, and a few streets on one edge of the community. Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park — large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home.

    As a result, 70 percent of Vauban’s families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. “When I had a car I was always tense. I’m much happier this way,” said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor.

All we have to do is give up our cars and the independence they offer us, and we’ll all be much happier. But since we don’t know what’s best of us, the government will have to impose the bliss of not owning a car by force:

    In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting “car reduced” communities, and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously. Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill to be approved this year, [David] Goldberg [of Transportation for America] said. In previous bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other transport.

Those percentages will be changing dramatically. While bureauweenies pour fortunes we can’t afford down light rail boondoggles, highways will be left to crumble.

Meanwhile, in the statist dystopia formerly known as Great Britain:

    “Development comprising jobs, shopping, leisure and services should not be designed and located on the assumption that the car will represent the only realistic means of access for the vast majority of people,” said PPG 13, the British government’s revolutionary 2001 planning document. Dozens of shopping malls, fast-food restaurants and housing compounds have been refused planning permits based on the new British regulations.

Eventually we’ll all live in “smart communities,” where no one can go where planners haven’t decided we should go.

[nChrist]

Those percentages will be changing dramatically. While bureauweenies pour fortunes we can’t afford down light rail boondoggles, highways will be left to crumble.

   I love the new term "bureauweenies". We need that term because we have a bunch of them loose. I want to know who let them out of their rubber rooms. Since they are loose, I think that it's only fair to warn the general public and maybe have them wear red helmets. Is it too much to ask that we restrict them to one part of the country?

All kidding aside, there are many ways to REMOVE FREEDOM AND CONTROL PEOPLE. Sadly, this appears to be the future unless we're able to stop it.

[Soldier4Christ]

'Extremists' offered identification card
Identifies those who support 2nd Amendment, oppose abortion

With little fanfare and no effort for any significant level of publicity, a law firm specializing in defending the constitutional rights of American citizens has begun offering an identification card for "Right-Wing Extremists" – as labeled by the Department of Homeland Security.

And the phones have been ringing off the hook.

The card is from Liberty Counsel and states:

    Official Liberty Counsel card-carrying Right-Wing Extremist. If confronted by an agent of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), or any other law enforcement official who has read the DHS Intelligence Assessment dated April 7, 2009, on so-called Right-Wing Extremism call Liberty Council at 1-800-671-1776.



Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, told WND it sends a message, "if the government considers me an extremist because I'm pro-life, pro-veteran, pro-family, pro-self defense and pro-limited government, then I'm proud to wear this as a badge of honor."

It's also a protest of the government targeting people and ideas that made America great, he said.

"We have had this overwhelming response from people about the country," he said. "They want that card now."

He said the feeling has been: "If they are going to call me an extremist, so be it."

He said more in line with reality is that the government has become extremist, and is out of step with the values, ideas and fundamental values on which the United States has been built.

The card pictures a Minute Man, with the statement, "The 18th Century version of a Right Wing Extremist, as cited by the DHS Intelligence Assessment, was a Colonial Minute Man!"

On the back, it says: "I'm proud to be a Right-Wing Extremist … as described in the DHS Intelligence Assessment of April 9, 2007. I have taken one or more of the following positions: The right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution, killing unborn babies in morally wrong, lower taxes are better than higher taxes, local and state solutions are usually more efficient than federal expansion, interpreting the Bible literally is not a crime, and veterans deserve honor, not special monitoring by Big Brother."



Ironically, the Washington Times reported at the same time the DHS was confirming that it had pulled the report that identified those involved with "right wing extremism" as veterans and individual opposed to abortion.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said the report was going to be replaced or redone "in a much more useful and much more precise fashion."

[nChrist]

'Extremists' offered identification card
Identifies those who support 2nd Amendment, oppose abortion

With little fanfare and no effort for any significant level of publicity, a law firm specializing in defending the constitutional rights of American citizens has begun offering an identification card for "Right-Wing Extremists" – as labeled by the Department of Homeland Security.

And the phones have been ringing off the hook.

The card is from Liberty Counsel and states:

    Official Liberty Counsel card-carrying Right-Wing Extremist. If confronted by an agent of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), or any other law enforcement official who has read the DHS Intelligence Assessment dated April 7, 2009, on so-called Right-Wing Extremism call Liberty Council at 1-800-671-1776.



Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, told WND it sends a message, "if the government considers me an extremist because I'm pro-life, pro-veteran, pro-family, pro-self defense and pro-limited government, then I'm proud to wear this as a badge of honor."

It's also a protest of the government targeting people and ideas that made America great, he said.

"We have had this overwhelming response from people about the country," he said. "They want that card now."

He said the feeling has been: "If they are going to call me an extremist, so be it."

He said more in line with reality is that the government has become extremist, and is out of step with the values, ideas and fundamental values on which the United States has been built.

The card pictures a Minute Man, with the statement, "The 18th Century version of a Right Wing Extremist, as cited by the DHS Intelligence Assessment, was a Colonial Minute Man!"

On the back, it says: "I'm proud to be a Right-Wing Extremist … as described in the DHS Intelligence Assessment of April 9, 2007. I have taken one or more of the following positions: The right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution, killing unborn babies in morally wrong, lower taxes are better than higher taxes, local and state solutions are usually more efficient than federal expansion, interpreting the Bible literally is not a crime, and veterans deserve honor, not special monitoring by Big Brother."



Ironically, the Washington Times reported at the same time the DHS was confirming that it had pulled the report that identified those involved with "right wing extremism" as veterans and individual opposed to abortion.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said the report was going to be replaced or redone "in a much more useful and much more precise fashion."

I want this card in my wallet. I am "PRO" all of those things, and I'm not ashamed of it. Further, I'm proud of it and don't consider it to be extreme at all. I'll put it right next to my NRA Card. The Founder's Principles are of RIGHTS, FREEDOMS, DECENCY, AND GOD!

[Soldier4Christ]

Shut down! Guess which
auto dealers got targeted
Chrysler showroom political donations
linked to government closing 'hit list'

As part of its Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Chrysler is terminating one-fourth of its franchises – but some say its catalog of doomed dealerships looks more like a hit list that specifically seeks to put Republican donors out of business.

Chrysler will now be eligible for up to $8 billion in taxpayer-funded federal aid. The federal government has already provided $8.58 billion to Chrysler and Chrysler Holding between the months of January and May of this year. The Treasury also loaned $1.5 billion to the automaker's lending arm in January.

President Obama has said the bankruptcy will give the company "a new lease on life," after his administration spearheaded a plan requiring the company sell to Italian automaker Fiat. Chrysler's stronger operations will be owned by Fiat, labor and the U.S. and Canadian governments. The sale could close as early as this Friday.

Obama said the bankruptcy would be a "quick" and "efficient" step toward Chrysler's "survival."

"The necessary steps have been taken to give one of America's most storied automakers, Chrysler, a new lease on life," Obama said. "This is not a sign of weakness."

But WND reviewed the list of 789 closing franchises and databases of political donors and found that of dealership majority owners making contributions in the November 2008 election, less than 10 percent gifted to Democrats while 90 percent gave substantial sums to Republican candidates.

The listed franchise owners contributed at least $450,000 to Republican presidential candidates and the GOP, while only $7,970 was donated to Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign and $2,200 was given to Sen. John Edwards' campaign.

Obama received a combined total of only $450 in donations – $250 from dealer Jane Baldock in Wenatchee, Wash., and $200 from Waco, Texas, dealer Jeffrey Hunter.

Many of the majority owners who donated to Republican campaigns last year also contributed additional thousands to George W. Bush's presidential campaign in 2004 and to help elect GOP representatives.

The first dealership on Chrysler's list of facilities marked for termination by June 9 is located in Venice, Fla., and belongs to Republican Rep. Vernon G. Buchanan.

Buchanan gave $2,300 to John McCain in 2008 and has contributed nearly $150,000 to GOP candidates and organizations since 2007. He discovered that his location was scheduled for closure when he crossed paths with Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich.

According to the Associated Press, Miller told Buchanan, "I heard you're going to lose your Dodge franchise."

"Oh, really?" Buchanan said in a state of surprise.

The dealership's operating partner, Shelby Curtsinger, said he was astonished by Chrysler's decision because the location has been profitable – selling more than twice the stock of an average Chrysler dealership every year.

Houston dealer Robert Archer is one of 330 people contesting Chrysler's decision to close their locations. He donated $1,000 to National Republican Congressional Committee and $500 to Americans for a Republican Majority.

Archer told the New York Times he ordered 700 new vehicles and $1.7 million in new parts after Chrysler told him he could survive unless he stocked more cars. He sacrificed his profits to help the company survive.

Now he is set to lose his franchise.

Other GOP contributors include Michael Maroone, a dealer in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. He gave $20,000 to the Florida Republican Party, $12,700 to the Republican National Committee and $2,300 to presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Likewise, Menomonee Falls, Wis., dealer Russ Darrow and his family gave $19,000 to the Republican National Committee, $6,029 to the Wisconsin Republican Party, $2,300 to John McCain and $1,000 to Rudy Giuliani. Bedford, Texas, dealer Eric Grubbs gifted $11,500 to Mike Huckabee, $4,600 to Rudy Giuliani, $6,500 to Texas Republican Congressional Committee, $1,085 to the RNC and $500 to National Republican Congressional Committee. Midlothian, Va., dealer Max Pearson donated $18,000 to National Republican Senatorial Committee, $6,900 to the RNC, $6,900 to John McCain, $3,600 to Virginia Republican Party and $1,000 to National Republican Congressional Committee.

The list continues with more than 60 political donors who are scheduled to lose their franchises – many of whom gave thousands of dollars to Republican candidates – and only seven dealers who contributed a total of less than $12,000 to the Democratic Party and its candidates.

Blogger Doug Ross reviewed patterns on the closure list and noticed the unmistakable trend.

"I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once on the list," he wrote. "And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates."

With 2,392 Chrysler dealerships remaining, some bloggers claim to have already begun the exhaustive process of checking each majority owner to determine whether Chrysler has been more merciful toward those who donate to Democrats while simultaneously giving walking papers to Republican contributors.

Chrysler has not responded to WND's requests for comment. The company claims it evaluated the dealerships based on raw sales volume, location, market, history of experience and market share. According to the company's bankruptcy court filing, the 789 dealerships listed for closure "lack the operational, market, facility and linemaker characteristics necessary to best contribute to the ongoing dealer network under current or future ownership."

Dealer Jim Anderer told Fox News' Neil Cavuto he doesn't understand why Chrysler is shutting down his Long Island dealership because he claims his dealership is quite profitable – with sales volume ranking in the top 2 percent.

Asked why he believes the company targeted him, Anderer said, "They won't tell us. They seem to be running for cover right now because they won't give us a solid explanation. They come up with all these reasons, but none of them seem to make sense."

He continued, "This is insanity. The government is stealing my business. And they're telling me there's nothing I can do about it."

Anderer said Chrysler claims it wants to combine its stores or that dealers cost the manufacturer money to stay in business.

"In the dealers that they cut, there seems to be no cohesive way that they did it," he said. "There was no process that you could put your finger on and say, 'Hey, we cut 25 percent of the lowest performing dealers.' They didn't do that. Nobody will give us a real clear explanation of the formula that they came up with."

An anonymous employee affected by the dealership closings blogged at Cars.com:

"This isn't about business. It's about politics and control. My dealership is in the top 125 out of the 3,500-plus dealerships nationwide ... yet we are on the list. We are not small nor are we rural. We are in a large major metropolitan area. Our new vehicle inventory alone is well over $4.0 million. Is that small?"

The employee continued, "This is so much more than 'just business.' This is about control and power by our present administration in Washington. An administration that will stop at nothing to bring complete socialism to this once great country. Wake up people or get in line now to 'drink the Kool-Aid.'"

Chrysler's bankruptcy court review process began May 14 and is scheduled to end by June 9. According to a May 14 Chrysler memo, dealers learned of their fate via UPS letters arriving earlier this month. A Senate committee is conducting hearings this week as dealers file their requests to block their termination.

George C. Joseph, owner of Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu in Melbourne Fla., has sent out his plea to several online media organizations, including WND.

Joseph said his family paid for his franchise 35 years ago and employs more than 50 people. The company is active in the community and the local chamber of commerce, and he claims it is financially profitable.

"On Thursday, May 14, 2009 I was notified that my Dodge franchise, that we purchased, will be taken away from my family on June 9, 2009 without compensation and given to another dealer at no cost to them," Joseph wrote. "My new vehicle inventory consists of 125 vehicles with a financed balance of 3 million dollars. This inventory becomes impossible to sell with no factory incentives beyond June 9, 2009."

He said that without the franchise his family can no longer sell Dodge inventory as "new" or conduct any service warranty work. Joseph wrote that his parts inventory – worth $300,000 – is now practically worthless because Chrysler will not be required to buy vehicles, tools or parts from terminated dealers under bankruptcy rules.

To make matters worse, Joseph said Chrysler recently required his facility to be renovated, requiring a multi-million dollar debt in the form of a mortgage.

"This is a private business, not a government entity," he wrote. "This is beyond imagination! My business is being stolen from me through no fault of our own. We did nothing wrong."

Joseph continued, "This atrocity will most likely force my family into bankruptcy. This will cause our 50+ employees to be unemployed. How will they provide for their families? … How in the United States of America can this happen?"

[nChrist]

There's a want to be dictator and his CORRUPT GANG loose in Washington, D.C. The closings were determined by being DIRTY and CORRUPT! All of the dealers need to FILE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL ACTIONS!

There is NOTHING CONSTITUTIONAL about anything that was done with the auto makers, and the same is true for the banking institutions! It's far past time for A MASSIVE NUMBER OF CIVIL AND CRIMINAL ACTIONS!

Taking TAXPAYER MONEY for these and other planned actions is ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL! We must ALL send a rude and blunt message that the WASHINGTON, D.C. MOB IS NOT ABOVE THE RULE OF LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION! They are taking POWER that is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL POWER, and they are using that power to COMMIT CRIMES!