A Thanksgiving Testimonial

Ps. 68:19 – Blessed be the Lord, who daily loads us with benefits, even the God of our salvation.

I rarely discuss my life, family or personal issues online, including my blog.  In fact, as you will note, both from my comments and the disparity in time frames, I’ve done little with my blog for some time now, choosing instead to post on my own Facebook page.

In fact, past or present, anyone who has followed me since first going online 10 years ago knows that I have never written any article or posted any personal piece on Thanksgiving or Christmas, unless it pertained to the ACLU meddling in these affairs.

That has now changed.  I cannot stay silent.  Please follow what I’m saying.  There’s a reason I’m doing this; in fact, there may be a host of reasons.  You might be blest from reading this is one.  Another is you might be able to relate.  Yet another is you may need Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior which, if just one person comes to Him thru this piece, these personal reflections and comments fulfilled an eternal purpose.

And still another reason you may want to consider all I’ve said, a reason that may not occur to you, is this.

I want to share my Thanksgiving blessings with you – literally; that is, if you are within traveling distance of my home. I want to bless you in the worst, rather best, way possible.

Oh, and I’ll do my darndest to make this as brief and concise as I can, though that won’t be easy, considering that the timeline of events shared below are so woven together that it’s difficult to leave items out.  Nevertheless, for time sake, I will.  But regardless of whether you can come this Thursday – and I’ll share specifics at the end, please read on.

As you may or may not know, my family has been in a financial crisis for roughly the last three years.  After a job layoff in June of 2009, Doris and I had collected unemployment compensation and exhausted all our benefits in May of this year.  For nearly 2½ years now, we have gone thru the vicious cycle of filling out job applications, both online and in person, e-mailing and faxing resumes and much more. I do not exaggerate when I say the number of in-person interviews for the both of us over the last 29 months can be counted on two hands.  That’s how bad the job market has been, no doubt in large part due to Obama’s and Democrat policies; however, we’ll leave that as it is for the moment. Job income has been limited to working a few days for a temp agency last month.

We have been in and out of foreclosure for nearly the last year and a half and by the grace of God alone we are still here in the Indiana home we purchased just 4½ years ago. The details of how this has worked out thus far are nothing short miraculous but by no means are we out of the woods.  In fact, there is a sheriff’s sale set for this property in a few weeks but that is not what I want to share with you in this piece, other than we were supposed to have one at the start of this year but God somehow sovereignly intervened.

I can attest to you that since unemployment expired 5 months ago and with only three months of meager state financial assistance (cut off in September), we still have our gas, water, phone and electricity on. Our township trustee’s office, along with a cooperating church they work with (shhhhh – don’t tell the ACLU), helped pay a chunk of our gas, water and electric in exchange for personal labor at a local cemetery, something I was delighted to do.  Our IRA had long ago depleted so as you can see, we have largely lived by faith.

Though I am reluctant to admit it, we were forced by the lack of jobs and income to apply for a food stamp card back in June. Anyone who knows me knows I don’t want to depend on government subsidies for anything; however, our financial situation forced us to do so. Regardless, I thank God for it and as my witness, He knows we have not abuse its privileges as so many folks there have, buying lobster, filet mignon and other costly food items.

And before I move on to share my unbelievable testimonial, in case you’re wondering what happened to our mortgage payments during this crisis, for some mysterious reason our mortgage company largely ceased asking for payments until late September this year. In fact, for five of those months, we got no calls, letters, zilch from Citibank.  There are so many intricate details as to what occurred during this entire time of foreclosure that is too time consuming to share but suffice it to say God’s hand was in it.  Two individuals, a gospel singer from California and a businessman from Maryland, were recently blessed and used to God to help with the lions share of my need when the lender suddenly made large demands of due payments. They obviously shall remain anonymous but God knows who they are and I owe them eternal thanks and tons of love for their extreme generosity.

OK, moving on to this thoroughly amazing testimony.

Last Monday, Nov. 14^th, I received a phone call from the trustee’s office (the same one who helped pay our utilities, though they could not do so this month), stating that the Portage Township High School Student Council voted to supply my family Thanksgiving dinner this year. While financially indigent (yes, I do hate to admit it), thanks to our generous food stamp card benefits, we were not hurting for food and have never in our lives needed food assistance at any time.  We have no clue how the student council of the local high school (where my 15 year old autistic son attends) got wind of our need but perhaps the proximity of the school to the trustee’s office being walking distance from each other had something to do with it.

Anyway, the very polite young lady (yes, surprisingly, many Hoosiers who work for government entities in this state are that way) told me to go the senior center on the other side of the city on Friday to pick up our dinner.  I was stunned at the call and was briefly inclined to take a pass but not wanting to insult the graciousness of the offer, humbly said thanks and told her I would be there. The office had also previously extended an offer to buy my son a Christmas gift so obviously I was moved at the offer of generosity.

As I headed to the senior center late Friday afternoon (running late), I entered the dining facility which had an appearance cafeteria style with permanently attached tables and chairs. On each of these tables were nine to ten bags of non-perishable grocery items and a turkey to boot.  Now as I observed these tables, my thinking was one of two things – either the bags were for individuals and families who were completely destitute of food or that they were all bags individually lined up on the tables because of space limitations.

My thinking going in was that I would get a turkey and maybe a full bag of groceries, possible two or three at the very most.  Having once been an employee for the Christian Broadcasting Network when it had a Chicago chapter, I was familiar with how Operation Blessing centers and similarly other food pantries operate.

And having read the stories of how food distribution centers are in dire straits today due to food and monetary shortages with one particular one in an affluent suburb of Chicago reported as having no money to run an operation this season, I certainly did not expect anything out of the ordinary. Again, we were in no big need of any food for Thanksgiving as we had adequate funds in the food stamp card to do so. I would be blest with one bag and a turkey, though we could have bought a turkey on our own.

Well, we did end up buying a turkey on our own; for Christmas, that is. That in more detail further on.

The trustee himself was there at the senior facility and after I came up to him and gave him my name, he checked it off on his list and pointed to one particular table.  That table had NINE bags and the turkey.  I was completely stunned as I could not believe that we were going to receive that much food.  This 51 year old grown man was moved to tears.

And to make things even more moving, the trustee personally assisted me in bringing all these items home.  Our car is down so he personally took me, my personal cart (for which I anticipated carrying no more than 3 bags) and the groceries home.  Doris saw the two of us bringing all this food in and she began to cry as well.

What were we going to do with all this food?  Our kitchen cabinets, which were already adequately stocked, were about to be filled well beyond capacity.  Nine bags of groceries obviously indicated that all its contents were not going to be for Thanksgiving alone.

And they weren’t.  There was food for far beyond the holidays.  And let me further state that these nine bags were not solely filled with items containing white generic labels and from Aldi’s stores as one might expect from a food pantry.  There indeed was food from Aldi’s but there were absolutely no generically named items.  We did get a fair amount of items with store brand labels but we got an equal amount, if not much more, of name brand items, brand names.  The items came from Aldi’s, Wal-Mart, Super K-Mart as well as a couple other neighborhood grocers and quite likely elsewhere as well.  Incredible!

To say we were shocked at the amount of items, plus the brand name stuff, would be a monumental understatement.

Time does not permit me to name all the items we got but suffice it to say they were the usual canned and boxed items as well as food items not normally associated with coming from a food panty, like a fancy cookie maker with premium cookies.

Needless to say, my family has been blest beyond measure.  But despite it all, I still was rather depressed over the weekend from our mortgage situation as well as a shoulder injury I suffered in the spring of last year while campaigning for a candidate for Indiana’s then available U.S. Senate seat. The shoulder injury had minimal impact on my daily living but it has increased somewhat in intensity over the last couple weeks and has greatly affected my nightly sleep.

Yet the tangible measure of blessing was a clear indication that God was greatly moving in my life and that if He could take care of the physical needs, He would do so the rest.

Nine bags and a turkey, wow!  Hard to imagine.

But believe it or not, that was not the end of the blessings.  Yes, even harder to believe.

Yesterday afternoon with the TV on, surfing the Internet and doing routine housework, we see a car pull up to the side of the house. At first I thought it would be someone from the sheriff’s office but then I saw the trustee and a middle aged woman coming out of the car and towards the house with a few boxes in hand.

Oh no, I thought, are we going to be further blest?  We don’t need any more stuff.  Our cupboards are already at capacity.

But who were we to deny someone the blessing of further blessing us?

The trustee had said they had food left over that could not be delivered so he comes this way and delivers more food items, nowhere near as much as on Friday but still a fairly good amount.  And this time, along with the food, we get a giant case of toilet paper as well a batch of napkins and paper towels, things we were going to soon need anyway. Doris and I discussed the need for toilet paper so look at what happened.

And if you can believe this, we got another turkey as well.  I was beyond humbled.  I was at a complete loss for words.

We normally would have planned for that turkey to be ours for Christmas but we had picked up a second one from Super K-Mart this past Saturday, the reason being was that the turkey was just a measly $5.  So when we returned home Saturday from our loose ends shopping, we put the second turkey in the freezer, thinking it was for Christmas.

How wrong we were once we saw a third turkey being delivered yesterday Monday.

Well, with our freezer being previously full from our short shopping spree Saturday, we had no place to put the third turkey (the original from Friday currently sits in the fridge) so we temporarily put it in the garage.  And this morning with it gradually thawing out, we sacrificed a shelf box to fit the third one in.

Amazingly, we got the turkey in the freezer, a total of two there and one in the fridge.

We are literally loaded with benefits, far beyond almost any human comprehension, as the Psalmist wrote in the 68^th Psalm.  This cannot be explained in simple human terms. This was the miraculous.  I don’t know if township tax dollars went towards these provisions but I don’t believe they were, given area churches knack to assist.

This brings me to what I am so dying to share with you.

And that is I need your help this Thanksgiving.  I need your help to get people to come to our home this Thursday.

If you have no place to go for Thanksgiving or you don’t know what to do and you live in the Chicago area or within a reasonable radius of Chicagoland, I want you to seriously consider joining the Kareiva household for a memorable meal with lots and lots of leftovers to take home, including some of the excess items we so generously received.  I realize this is on short notice but it was after the second blessing yesterday that I was prompted to put out this request.  I only regret that I couldn’t get out this e-mail sooner.

Regardless of whether you are in proximity of our Northwest Indiana home, I also need your help to e-mail any friends, family members or other contacts in the metro Chicago, Northwest Indiana or Southwest Michigan who have nowhere to go for Thanksgiving or are unsure where to go.  I want to bless as many people as possible with an unforgettable Thanksgiving dinner. Due to space limitations in the house, we can’t accommodate everyone but at minimum I’d love to bless at least 5-10 people who want to share in our Thanksgiving bounty. I would be so disappointed if no one took me up on my offer.  I am a fabulous cook and I want to make a fabulous Thanksgiving dinner for as many as our home can accommodate. We have virtually everything you’d want for Thanksgiving so if you or someone you know is thinking about dining out, save your money and come here.

Luke 14:13-14 – But when you make a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind .And you shall be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee: for you shall be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

While this scripture may not totally be fulfilled in its context, I cannot adequately express the desire I have to serve you or anyone you may know this Thursday, rich, poor or in between and otherwise.  I can and will guarantee that anyone making the trip here will have the best of food, fun and Christian fellowship.

Please contact me thru Facebook or at nedd@inbox.com to let me know if you can come and for directions to our home. Provide contact info and I’ll respond in short order.

Also, if anyone is considering coming a long distance to come here, we will put you up for the night or if that doesn’t work, provide a list of inexpensive lodging facilities near our home.  We want to make your Thanksgiving one for the memory books.  We guarantee not to disappoint.  I promise!

I anticipate your response and hopeful visit from you or your contacts.  God bless you!

---

P.S.  I am hesitant to make a political statement in light of the Thanksgiving holiday but unfortunately the news out there forces me to address it. Had I not seen this on my Facebook page last nite and on World Net Daily, the following wouldn’t be forthcoming.

I refer you to this story and this related piece which is rather graphic – be forewarned.

The last thing I wanted to do is spoil anyone’s Thanksgiving by talking about Islam and its connection in my testimonial.  But the fact of the matter is Butterball has brought this upon itself and it’s going to be up to them to correct it.  I won’t say too much else except that the company has no business and no reason to do halal for any reason.  Muslims must conform to the American and humane way when it comes down to preparing animals for food.  Halal is unacceptable in American culture, period.

And because the turkey I was delivered on Friday, the first of the three altogether, is a Butterball and thus the one we will be serving, I must disclose this information to you.

Personally, while I am not exactly thrilled to serve a turkey that may have been processed other than the traditional American way, I take the words of Paul the Apostle in I Cor. 8:4-9, particularly vs. 4, as scripturally permissible .

Putting it in the modern day setting, if the turkey I serve this Thursday was done in dedication to Allah, I would promptly renounce it in the name of Jesus Christ since Paul viewed idols as nothing and then dedicate the meat to be partaken to the Lord Almighty.

Since this particular turkey was given to us and not paid for by us and since I became aware of this matter after we received it last Friday, I see no problem serving it.  It will be blessed in prayer prior to consumption on Thursday.  But that said, I will not be buying Butterballs in the future unless the company abandons its dedication to halal.

However, if someone wants to come but hesitates because his or her conscience will be troubled by consuming this particular turkey, I will happily cook another great meal (though not another turkey) for him or her out of the many other delicious food items I have in my freezer.  I want this Thanksgiving to be the best possible for everyone coming, despite things being really bad in our once great nation.  I want to share our blessings with as many folks as possible.  Jesus stated in Matt. 10:8, “Freely you have received, freely give“.  That’s what I hope to do on Thursday, praying that even on short notice I can bless at least 5-10 people with a fabulous Thanksgiving dinner.

Thanks in advance for spreading the word.

No Cain Do

I haven’t been doing much of anything with my blog for a long time for myriads of reasons but now I can no longer stay silent.  I am forced to speak out and am using this venue to do so.

Up until maybe three or four weeks ago, I was back and forth with who to support for the Republican presidency next year.  In one sense, none of the current 9 candidates vying for the White House really deserve the presidency because virtually none of them have called Barry out on his constitutional ineligibility for the presidency, let alone his bogus and fraudulent use of a Connecticut Social Security number and fraudulent Selective Service registration.  A couple of them offered verbal tidbits (given the insignificance of their public statements, revealing their identities is not necessary) on Barry’s bogus birth certificate but essentially they are all mum on the issue.  Despite my sore disappointment with that, I wanted to see if someone could come reasonably close to where I stand and think on the issues.  And I finally thought I found that person.

But first, without going into too much detail, here’s a synopsis of why I have rejected the following candidates.  I haven’t covered all of them but here are the primary players and my reasons for turning them down:

1. Mitt Romney – this page totally covers it.  Not one Christian or conservative should back him for these reasons.  And this has zilch to do with his Mormonism, which is no issue for me as president, though I firmly believe it is a cult. The Constitution does not mandate a religious test. Romney should be rejected on the issues alone. I could vote for him if he was pro-life and pro-family. But he is not.
2. Rick Perry – see here, here, here and here, sufficient enough to shoot him down.
3. Michelle Bachmann – her past position as a tax lawyer is somewhat problematic but constitutionally speaking, the duties, obligations and qualifications listed in our U.S. Constitution are described as “he”.  Our blessed document is gender neutral on senators and Congressmen but not so on the president.  I believe the Founding Fathers never foresaw the day a woman would aspire to the highest office in the land. When the world’s “panic” button is about to be pushed, I want a strong man to make that decision to do so. Given a woman’s emotional makeup, I believe the attractive Minnesota Congresswoman would not have the clear and unobstructed thinking necessary for it.  The president must be a man, end of story.
4. Ron Paul – this is in one sense a very tough one as no other presidential candidate in recent memory champions liberty and the Constitution as this Texas legislator has. I cherish Ron Paul for this very reason alone.  I firmly support his view that we must bring our troops home from across the world. America really should not be in other nations unless first attacked. We must make America indestructible as our late great 40^th president firmly sought to do. However, someone who fails to recognize the threat of Islam to America and the world terribly frightens me and lacks serious vision to be our commander in chief. His vote to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell not once but twice is also appalling since he is a medical doctor by trade and his F grade on immigration all but seals my decision not to vote for him.
5. Newt Gingrich – our former Speaker of the House is intelligent, mostly conservative and held his one during the recent Republican Party debates.  But the biggest concern I have, the same one the president of World Net Daily does (the column is worth reading for other reasons, many of which I agree and some of which is already documented above), is his position on global warming. He also has his marriage failings but politically speaking, anyone whose view on a subject like this comes even remotely close to Al Gore poses real concerns for me.
6. Rick Santorum – the former Pennsylvania senator is virtually unrivaled when it comes to his solid pro-life and pro-traditional marriage stance.  He has taken multiple bullets for the pro-life and pro-family cause and without apology or compromise.  His past debate with California Sen. Barbara Boxer on partial birth abortion is one for the pro-life Hall of Fame (the You Tube video associated with it is here but note that the sound quality is quite poor). His immigration grade, however, is as Ron Paul’s, per Numbers USA (big problem) and that likely stems from his Catholic upbringing.  He’s also too pro-war for my liking as he backs the missions Mr. Paul wants to remove us from. But on moral values, second to none.

The others – Buddy Roemer, Jon Huntsman and Gary Johnson – no need to cover them as they have no realistic chance to win and Huntsman and Johnson are already undoable.

That leaves the one candidate who, for about a month now, I warmed up to and frankly, even got me juiced.  In fact, I can’t recall a candidate in years that got me so excited.

That man is Herman Cain.

Most of the controversy surrounding his otherwise exciting campaign stems from his 9-9-9 plan to scrap the current tax code.  While I have my own concerns about it, I do defer to him and the fact that certain facets of economics can be a little complex for my thinking. However, because the past director of fiscal policy of the well respected Cato Institute helped write Cain’s plan, along with the writer of this column who was a financial adviser in the Reagan Administration and who praises the plan, I figured that if these guys think it’s good, it’s going to be a benefit and boon to the nation’s economic climate.

My personal opinion is that a 10% sales tax on everything (except for food, clothing and medicine) and the abolition of the IRS and the tax code will do the trick because if 10% is good enough for the Lord, then why should the federal government get more?  A 10% sales tax eliminates all tax cheats and ensures illegals in this country pay their fair share.  I’d like to make sure that zero income gets taxed and all businesses have zero payroll tax.

But that aside for the moment, I’m content with the Cain fiscal outline for America.

Up until now, I’ve had few issues with the Cain campaign.  I got pumped when I heard the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO state that he would not allow Muslims to be part of a Cain Administration (yes, I know about the religious test issue but I believe that is done away with when viewing the position of Islam as an ideology and not a religion) and that he would support an electrified fence to secure our porous borders.

But now he has, as the new political term goes, “walked back” his comments (noted here).

I am curious as to how Cain will be able to differentiate so-called peaceful Muslims from the so-called radicals.  After all, since the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya permits Muslims to lie if there is a benefit to be gained in some way, I’d like to know how he thinks he’ll be able to accomplish this task, should he win the presidency and indeed appoint them. Last I checked, there are various versions of Muslims but only one Koran.  That’s a problem.

As for Cain backing off of the electrified fence, he should have simply stated what America’s premier sheriff and hero recently said about it and ran with it.  No need to back off.  We need a deterrent at our borders and if such a fence is good enough for Sheriff Arpaio, it should be good enough for Cain. Arpaio doesn’t apologize for what he does with the illegals in his jurisdiction and neither should have Cain.

However, now we have problems, big problems.  Watch this two minute video before proceeding.

In short, my support for America’s first real legitimate black president is ground to a halt.

In short, this position is unsupportable.  This position is no different than someone saying he or she is pro-life but he or she cannot impose their decision or choice on others.

Cain’s choice of words here is “directive“.

I watched the video several times to see if I missed something.  I don’t believe I did. Though the first few moments of the video appear to be redacted or simply missing, I hear a man initially telling me that he’s pro-life without exception, meaning no rape or incest. That thrilled me, considering so many politicians, both at the state and federal level, want to sound moderate by saying they have rape and incest exclusions.  There’s no need for that because it’s never right to willfully kill a baby since babies never commit crimes. A simple explanation of birth facts closes the door to this left leaning argument. Yes, it goes without saying that a rape or incest victim who is pregnant will need tons of support, counseling and love. Such should be given in abundance and without question or delay.  But in good conscience, no one should tell her to kill the child she’s carrying.

This is what is so sad.  Cain says life begins at conception.  It’s so heartwarming to hear that, only to be followed by the statement that abortion is a family matter to be decided without a government directive. That’s what the left and some on the mushy right say, adding that it’s a decision to be made with the woman’s or family doctor.

Can you say disconnect?

As a result, Cain has waded into the thorny issue of when is it OK, if at all, to limit when during a woman’s pregnancy that it’s permissible to abort and whether government should have any say-so on the matter.  Should an abortion be permitted at 6 weeks? What about 3 months?  What about 6 months?  Is it OK to abort right up to birth?

Once you take an objective law, don’t kill, and replace it with something like, “well, it’s OK to kill babies in the womb because they are not yet born and thus not human beings“, then you have transformed it into a subjective law, decided by one’s personal whims instead of steadfast eternal principles.  That’s why when we play God like this, laws that tell us not to kill human beings outside the womb, not to maim them, not to steal, not to lie, suddenly become common place and permissible in society.

In case you haven’t figured it out, those examples are outlined in the 10 Commandments. Any wonder why far left groups like the ACLU want to get rid of them?

The fact is this.  Government does tell us to do things like pay your taxes, drive safely, buckle up, don’t steal, don’t kill, don’t pollute, etc.  There are many good arguments to made to halt some of those things, like getting rid of our tax code and seat belt laws, both of which I firmly agree need to be scrapped.  But the point here is that government does have a voice in our lives.  And shouldn’t it have a voice in deciding the greatest liberty issue, whether an unborn child has the right to live?

Governments also place restrictions on what we do with our own bodies.  Despite the questionable wisdom of overly aggressively enforcing some of our drug laws, for which I somewhat embrace Ron Paul’s position, we are told not to input certain substances like marijuana, crack, meth, heroin, etc.  If these laws are viewed to be for the good of everyone in our nation, how much more laws telling women that they cannot deliberately kill a child housed in their bodies? The issue here is we’re talking another human being inside another, one of the key arguments liberals find so anguishing to accept.

The second paragraph in the Declaration of Independence reads “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness“.  Is Cain willing to exclude those who may still be residing inside of a woman’s body in the name of abortion being a family matter?  If so, then we’re not all created equal.  And if so, then this issue becomes the equivalent of embracing slavery.  And who in their proper faculties is willing to embrace that mindset today?

There was no president in recent decades who was more pro-life than George W. Bush. He had an error filled presidency, filled with too many big government initiatives.  But one thing he stood tall on and that was life.  True, his greatest legacy would have been to publicly declare that Roe vs. Wade be reversed and that Congress should pass a ban on abortion to do so.  Next to that, he could have issued an executive order that the federal government would no longer subsidize taxpayer money for this grewsome inhumane act of humanity.  But thanks to his administration, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA), a ban on partial birth abortion and a fetal pain disclosure measure all saw Mr. Bush’s signature.  He fully believed in a “welcoming society”.

Oh, no doubt, President Bush could have done more for life, much more. But contrasted to the 100 pro-death bogus prez sitting in the Oval Office today, Mr. Bush did much for unborn humanity.  And you clearly could see it whenever he was present around children.

A woman has lots of latitude to do as she wishes with her body and absent her doing anything to interfere with someone else’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, she is free to do as she pleases.  And if she, just as with a guy, as part of her free spirit wants to have lots and lots of sex, she can go ahead and do it.  I am, of course, not recommending that as that business really belongs in the confines of marriage.  But as far as legislating and restricting such activity, any such actions fall outside the purview of government.

However, when a woman becomes pregnant, her previously virtual unrestricted liberty now becomes restricted for a 9 month period, or at least should be under a morally functioning society.  During that time, she is not free to take drugs and poisons to kill her baby under penalty of law.  She still has a so-called “right to choose”.  But that choice is restricted to keeping her baby or consigning it up for adoption.  However, based on Mr. Cain’s interview with CNN yesterday, one could easily infer that abortion is among those options because, as he says, government should not interfere with such a family decision.

And if that’s the case, then Mr. Cain’s position has much in common with that of the current occupant in the Oval Office, even if Mr. Godfather claims life commences at conception. Given Barry’s long time pro-death record, starting with his horrific voting record as Illinois state senator and being the only one who opposed BAIPA at the state level, the thought of only being somewhat pro-life gives me occasion to be repulsed.

Mr. Cain recently was one of two GOP candidates to refuse to sign the Susan B. Anthony group pro-life pledge (the other was Romney).  Given his statements that he was pro-life from the moment of conception, I personally wasn’t terribly put off by it.  There are lots of pro-life groups out there and the SBA group is just one of them. And personally, I’m not a big SBA fan but not because of their pro-life position, though I won’t elaborate.

But now Cain’s refusal to sign this pledge, especially for the reason given, does not wash with me.  In fact, it’s almost to point of the Clintonesque “it depends what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”.  It’s not supportable in any way, shape or form.  It’s not acceptable.

And it’s non-negotiable with me, period. Barring a sincere 180, I’m likely done with Cain.

Does mean I will turn to the most pro-life candidate in this race, former Sen. Santorum? Likely not. Given his current poll numbers, he consistently ranks at the bottom of the pack or well near it so his chances of getting the nomination are slim to none.  And given his weakness on immigration and his support for our wars, this does not endear me to want to throw my support to him. I also feel he would not do very well on the economy in contrast to the non-politician in this race who has a steady history of success at all levels.

I want a candidate that combines the articulations and brains of Herman Cain, the liberty-driven message and mind of Ron Paul without the libertine aspects (though he is solidly pro-life), and the moral convictions of a Rick Santorum. But sadly, I see none out there.

So who or where do I turn to now?  Well, I reckon the drawing board. And I weep at that.

 

---

 

Editor’s Note:  This will likely be my last post for quite some time as our Internet and phone service are scheduled to be shut off next Wednesday for non-payment. With virtually no money or income coming in and this family’s sad and long standing inability to find an employer in our area to hire us (no doubt Obamacare has something to do with it), we will be forced to go offline indefinitely. We refuse to beg for financial assistance but if anyone out there likes articles like these, wants to see more of them coming and can help pay a $300 bill, feel free to note this in the comment section below or e-mail me at theobamacrisis at ymail.com.  Thanks and God bless.

---

---

A Call to Churchillian Action

If you’re like me, you’re wondering what we have to do as a country to remove putative President Barack Obama from the White House as well as his attorney general, Eric Holder. Millions of rallies, pickets, protests, e-mails, calls, faxes, letters, etc. to members of Congress to either impeach Obama or simply call for his removal due to his all but certain lack of U.S. citizenship has fallen on deaf ears. No matter how much we cry out because of Obama’s countless unprecedented and unconstitutional actions, it seems as if the U.S. House & Senate have become immune to the voices of the American people.

So does that mean we toss in the towel and wait until Nov. 2012 to remove the impostor?  Not on your life!  We may not even have a country by then and I do not say that lightly. It’s almost beyond arguable that the actions of King George and his British armies prior to our nation’s founding pale in contrast to today’s constitutionally dubious president.

There are two things we absolutely must do on a daily process while the political process (and our prayers) plays out.  First, we must recall some of Winston Churchill’s most notable quotes such as, “Never, never, never give up”, “If you’re going thru hell, keep going” and “We shall never surrender”.  We must be in this to win.  We cannot even entertain the thought of losing.  Our country is literally at stake.

Second, we would do well to look to the Good Book for guidance, like Luke 18:1-8.

¹And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;

²Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:

³And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.

⁴And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;

⁵Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.

⁶And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.

⁷And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?

⁸I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Vs. 1 instructs us to pray and not faint, or in other words, not to give up.  While the premise of this scripture is to continually seek and petition the Almighty for answers to our prayers, the analogy Jesus describes is the one we should look to in a political sense. However, it is imperative we do not forget God and Christ throughout the process for without staying attached to the Lord, we can accomplish nothing (John 15:5).

Verses 2-5 in our vernacular could be construed (though it has yet to occur) in our modern day to be the equivalent of asking America’s courts to hear the merits of the dozens of lawsuits challenging Obama’s constitutional credentials to be president.  The suits continue to be filed and the cases continue to be dismissed without full hearings.  It’s tempting to give up because the system appears to be rigged.  But we mustn’t do so.

Perhaps that is how the abused woman in this parable felt.  There’s no justice anywhere.  Yet she continually pounded the judge’s chambers to hear her out and eventually he waved his own white flag because he was tired of being pestered. As a result, as the scripture says, he gave her the justice she sought.

Then the Lord reminds us in vs. 6 that the judge who rendered his verdict was “unjust”. And boy, do we have enough of them in today’s courts or what?

It is important in our prayer times (for those of us who know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior) to “never give up”, even when things seem bleak.  It is, however, also important to be reminded that God does not always say YES to our prayers.  He sometimes says NO or tells us to wait or He may answer in an entirely different manner. But it’s vital to never surrender in on our prayers, unless the prayers are totally contrary to the nature of God.

In the same way that we petition to God we must petition Congress continually to begin the constitutional process of removing the putative president.  It appears that no matter what Obama is doing, Congress either ignores it or explains it away.  A willing failure to secure America’s borders, suing a state that chooses to do so and thus protect its citizens, publicly refusing to defend the lawfully enacted Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and now going to war in Libya sans congressional authorization are all impeachable offenses.

We don’t know what it will to take for the U.S. House and Senate to agree that Obama has committed constitutional atrocities that warrant his removal.  If refusing to defend our borders, our marriage laws and refusing to heed Congress before firing strikes on a foreign nation do not qualify as impeachable in the minds of our elected men and women, we don’t know what will.  But that does not mean we quit.  Yes, it’s terribly distressing for those of us with a keen sense of the obvious. Yet we must regularly pray to the Almighty for our protection and for Congress to do its job. We pray, petition our elected senators and representatives and repeat – every week, every month – until Obama is gone.

For sure this will be tedious. But like the poor woman Jesus described, we don’t abandon our constitutional obligation.  We must persist until Congress says YES to the American people. And if we lawfully hassle them enough and show them the monumental proof that our likely illegitimate prez warrants removal, then they may act.  To put it in the late Edmund Burke’s words, Congress may not see the light they have felt the (intense) heat.

Only then would Churchill likely be proud.

Repealing DADT: A Serious Risk to America’s National Security

As the Obama Administration and the U.S. military work to implement the Congressional repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) and force open homosexuality upon our armed forces, it is imperative to know who some of the players are and why this sick social experiment must abruptly be halted. The fact World Net Daily put its current issue of its long running Whistleblower print publication online for the first time ever and for free speaks volumes as to how critical it is that policy be reversed and those who voted for it unquestionably must be removed from office, no matter how solid they are on everything else.  You can see how they voted by going here for the House and here for the Senate.

There was no public outcry to repeal the 1993 measure. In fact, public outcry was why President Clinton retreated when he sought to remove limitations on open homosexuals serving in the armed forces. Then Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn and General Colin Powell (both which have since changed their positions) were among public leaders at the time to urge to keep the then total ban in place. The Clinton Administration did end up modifying it to allow homosexuals to serve as long as they didn’t mouth off about their preferences.

The current outcry came heavily from leftist lawmakers and homosexual groups like the Servicemen’s Legal Defense Network (SDLN) and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), there was no public outcry for its rescission. Nonetheless, the 111^th Congress decided to take action on it to placate the homosexual lobby and gave it what it wanted, ignoring heavy military opposition to it. Pro-life Florida Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen joined the chorus of avowed homosexuals and their gay friendly alllies by issuing an unusually terse statement as to her hatred for the law and essentially military policy.

What Congress failed to note (and no doubt deliberately so) was just half a century ago when this writer was born, Washington declared that not only were avowed homosexuals verboten to serve in the armed services, they were banned from federal employment. In fact, federal law frowned on homosexual conduct from as late as the early to mid 1970s.

During the 1960s, a time that some call the “make love, not war” generation, an avowed homosexual activist by the name of Frank Kameny and his Mattachine Society began to pave the way for the removal of DADT.  He likely didn’t know he would be the father of the law’s repeal but given whom he is and what he sought to achieve early on, he now wears the repeal as his personal badge of honor.

However, Old Frank has done America a great service by posting letters from federal officials and other materials that show how private homosexual behavior was not only forbidden as a condition of serving the military but in any area of federal employment.

On his website, Mr. Kameny posted a damning letter (page 2 is here) from the U.S. State Dept. that every Congressman and senator supporting repeal should have read.  Had they done so, it’s possible a few of them would have changed their minds and voted to keep current policy.  It likely would have had no effect in the U.S. House, given the 75 vote margin of favorability but it could have led to a successful filibuster in the Senate and thus a defeat for repeal.

In his letter, John Hanes, a State Dept. official during the homophobic Eisenhower Administration, told Mr. Kameny (among other things):

So long as this is the attitude of our society – and you are well aware that it is, as expressed both formally in laws, regulations and ordinances, and informally in the average reaction of people toward homosexuals – the homosexual is automatically a security risk because of social and emotional pressure to which he is subject from society and because of the ever present risk that such pressures can be utilized by hostile elements to coerce him into activities other than those which he would undertake of his own free will. Also because of the prevailing mores of society, the homosexual frequently becomes a disruptive personnel factor within any organization.

Who in Washington today would daresay the homosexual is disruptive and a security risk?  If Mr. Hanes was working in the Obama Adminstration today and word leaked out of his writing, there would be mass calls for his resignation and he’d be run out of town.

But perhaps if the likes of Pentagon Secretary Bob Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen had listened to Mr. Hanes, the Wiki Leaks scandal involving the avowed homosexual servicemen Bradley Manning might have never occurred.

Another public official with guts not so many decades ago was John Will, Director of Personnel during the first term of the Nixon Administration.  In a letter (page 2 is here) to Kameny, Mr. Will recounts a matter of homosexual incest (explicit descriptions) among two federal employees and why such conduct reflects adversely on government agencies employing them as well as homosexuals in general.  One paragraph goes like this: 

”The employment of individuals who engage in acts of sex perversion and other homosexual acts of the type described will lead to lack of respect, not only for the individuals concerned but also for other employees and for the agency which employs them.”

It should also be pointed out in Mr. Will’s letter that homosexual conduct was criminal in the state of Maryland less than 40 years ago, perhaps even more so since cousins were involved.  Now the state is poised to enact same sex marriage against the laws of nature, let alone of Almighty God.

And this is what a Congressional Democrat posted in the Congressional Journal regarding a fundraising license given to Mr. Kameny’s Mattachine Society.  Had he spoken this to the current Congress, he would be run out of the party. He wrote back then saying:

“The Mattachine Society is a group of homosexuals.  The acts of these people are banned under the laws of God, the laws of nature and are in violation of the laws of man.  I think a situation which requires them to be permitted a license to solicit funds for their sexual deviations is a bad law and should be changed forewith.”

There’s no doubt that Rep. John Dowdy would have been run out of today’s Democrat Party.  There’s no room for moral conservatives among today’s Democrats.

Even LBJ’s homophobic administration did not view homosexual behavior favorably as documented here and here.

The question that has to be asked is this – if the repulsive nature of homosexual acts were condemned and even punished under federal law nearly a half century ago, how it is such behavior is not only about to be endorsed in today’s military but in an administration that has more homosexuals in it than all previous ones and more than Presidents Bush and Clinton combined? The Obama Administration’s personnel director is one of them.

The homosexual is indeed a security risk on so many fronts and is putting our men and women in uniform in grave jeopardy. And we thank Frank Kameny for showing us proof.
If the entire military and its massive opposition to repeal (not reported by the incompetent lame stream media) were the price paid to “compensate” Mr. Kameny as well as the pro-homosexual groups like HRC & SLDN, then this is something that Rep. Buck McKeon, Chairman of the House Armed Services, and his committee members must investigate.  I would not put it past the Obama Administration that something tangible (a potentially impeachable offense) may have been given to Mr. Kameny, either by Mr. Berry or Obama himself, given their virulent condemnation of the previous enforcement of a ban on homosexuals in the military and government in general. Perhaps that’s had something to do with Kameny getting a handshake from Obama and front seat to the repeal signing.

So how is it that actions once viewed by the federal government and described as immoral, perverse, and disrespectful; behavior which was said to bring “hatred, ridicule and contempt” on an agency of the federal government; behavior that is repudiated by every religion of the world, now be celebrated and publicly honored?

If you’re Barack Obama, you simply chalk it up to “personal (not military) experience”.  If you’re Congressman Barney Frank, who claimed he “owns” the agenda and for which the “two down” quote all but certainly includes open homosexuals in the military, ditto. If you’re Congressman Jared Polis and Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, both of whom, like Rep. Frank, voted for repeal of DADT, dittoes as well.

But how does one account for Republicans like Sen. Mark Kirk, one of 8 Republicans who voted for repeal. Sen. Kirk has served in the U.S. Navy, despite not being entirely truthful about his service?  Doesn’t he know (or care) from experience about the risks of putting open homosexuals in military service? He is suspected of being one himself, despite being previously married.

Why did Sen. John McCain, a Vietnam vet and staunch defender of keeping DADT, decide after the vote to repeal to support its implementation? Is it because his wife and daughter support same sex marriage? Or is it because he has no fixed principles? Or both.

What about Sen. Scott Brown who, like Sens. Kirk and McCain, served in the military? It is well documented of his support for repeal after promising to support the then current policy.  He was bought and paid for as well by the homosexual lobby.

Why did generally reliable social conservatives like Sens. John Ensign and Rich Burr back repeal?  Is there something here as well? Did they not see the logic inference from repeal, that instead of homosexuals being silent about their preferences, they could now be upfront and outspoken about them?

It appears Washington lawmakers are a different breed than the rest of America.

Why did Congressman Ron Paul vote to repeal DADT, not once but twice? Almost anyone with a cursory knowledge of the Texas Congressman Paul recognizes him for his fiercely libertarian streak and strong defense of constitutional liberties for all Americans.  He is known in some circles as “Dr. No” for voting no on almost every bill that comes his way.  However, the fact he was a doctor prior to his time in Congress has to raise a few eyebrows why he would vote for a law that permits unhealthy and repulsive sexual acts in the armed forces. He was the sole Congressional physician to vote this way.

If Dr. Paul doesn’t see the medical risks of permitting open homosexuals in uniform, then his supporters should ask themselves if he has the judgment of being a capable president, his otherwise strong constitutional stances notwithstanding.

As noted earlier, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen was a big supporter for repeal.  Along with Rep. Paul, she was one of only three current Republicans (the other is Rep. Judy Biggert) to vote twice for it in the 2010 Congressional session (the other two supporters were the only Republicans unseated at the ballot box in November).  Notwithstanding that she represents a district in Miami Beach with an influential homosexual lobby, she is well known for her pro-life views, a position that frequently conflicts with homosexual adherents.  But it is perhaps because of this lobby that she virulently defends her pro-homosexual votes – she also has voted for hate crimes legislation, (something Dr. Paul staunchly and thankfully opposes) as well as a myriad of homosexual causes.

And there are others but the question must be asked is why Washington lawmakers are willing to put our men and women in uniform at risk with this repeal.  Are they that utterly clueless on what constitutes homosexual behavior.  Sure, we expect that from Democrats but since some Democrats did not support repeal, it stands to reason that something led the 15 House Republicans (second vote – first vote here), and 8 Senate Republicans to vote to put our troops at risk.
We now turn to Joint Chiefs of Staff Mullen and Secretary Gates. Fox reports that training from top brass to allow open homos to serve will begin (probably already has) this week.  I can’t imagine what this “training” will entail – who knows, maybe one of them will attempt to explain or even engage in a perverted homosexual sex act and then tell other troops to be very sensitive with those inclined to commit such acts.

You may think this is funny but if you think about it, or even try to think to, you will automatically envision one or more sexual acts.  And then if you are a rational human being, you will then say, “Why are we going to allow this to occur in our military?”

Besides this tragically stupid and utterly bankrupt and immoral policy change, I have a question for Mr. Mullen, Secretary Gates and any other current military leaders: Knowing that we have troops on the ground in Islamic countries like Afghanistan and Iraq and knowing what some neighboring nations like them do to known homosexuals, regardless of your personal feelings about this matter, do you really think it’s a good idea to put our troops harm’s way because of this social engineering experiment?

This is a question the press won’t ask.  But they should.

Frankly, every commandant in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard should be unanimous in their response and if they were, every last one of them would tell Obama, “Hell no, we won’t implement sexual perversion on our troops and under no circumstances will we allow embracers and practitioners of such activities in our ranks”.

But folks like Mullen, Gates and clueless senators like Kirk, Brown Burr and Ensign wouldn’t give time of day to listen to those on the front lines who have sense enough to oppose such idiocy.  So we must do so.  And without delay.

And so now we must ask Sec. Gates and JC Mullen the following in an open letter:

“You obviously are aware of the soldier behind scandal involving Wiki Leaks, Bradley Manning.  You were aware that he was an avowed homosexual, right?  You were aware that his young history contained numerous issues pertaining to his sexual identity that could have posed a major problem for the military, right?  Now you’re supporting a policy that will create more Brad Mannings and likely have greater repercussions on our troops, not the least of which is a possible mass exodus of men and women in uniform because, despite all the attempts from the left to normalize homosexual behavior, it is still viewed as repulsive by sizable numbers of men and women in and out of uniform.

Have you checked Manning’s Facebook page, which is laden with love for this agenda?  Can you not see the risks of what may well reoccur if you allow this change in policy to continue?

Had you taken some time to study U.S. history and read government correspondence on homosexuality and its incompatibility with government and military service, you would have found that throughout our first 200 years of history, from Washington to Ford, such behavior was never viewed with even a faint trace of approbation.  Why then do you wish to sacrifice the futures and even lives of our men and women in uniform for the sake of perverse political correctness that America’s putative president chooses to embrace?  Did you not learn a lesson from this scandal?”

There is one point in the whole DADT repeal debate that has been ignored by Sec. Gates, JC Mullen and the 300+ members of Congress who voted to approve this trash.  It’s also ignored by all the homosexual activists, groups and allies.  It’s the one thing that not only debunks the repeal debate but the entire same sex agenda as well. The public has been told that homosexuals like Pvt. Manning, Congressman Barney Frank, Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, actress Ellen DeGeneres, singer Elton John and others cannot help who they are; that it’s part of their makeup (orientation).  The gay identity is unchangeable in the same way that one cannot alter their skin color or gender (there are those who claim to be able to change their gender but that’s a can of worms to be opened another day). This is what we’re being told.  This is what has been sold as a bill of goods to us.

But that bill is now officially rejected. And we can thank Frank Kameny for it.

You see, Mr. Kameny has done the public a great service by posting many of the documents he has accumulated over the years to his website.  From Eisenhower to JFK to LBJ to Nixon, we’ve seen evidence that courageous federal officials rightly rejected homosexuals for government and military service because of the pressures and problems faced due to the lifestyle embraced.  From John Hanes to John Will to John Dowdy and many others not mentioned, such individuals refused to succumb to political correctness in order to placate those embracing repulsive behavior.

But most of all, we thank Mr. Kameny for telling, rather showing, us that homosexual conduct was not a matter of one’s sexual orientation.  See for yourself.

There you have it, folks, sexual preference, not orientation, is irrelevant to federal employment and military service.  Ouch!  Thank you, Mr. Kameny, for telling us the truth that homosexual practices are by one’s choice of sexual partner and not innateness. The nation owes a huge debt of gratitude for your courage to display the revealing (no pun intended) letters, pamphlets and brochures.

Mr. Kameny states on his website that the compilation of all his papers is unrivaled anywhere, be it a library, government office or via the Internet.  The 70,000 documents he claimed to have in the attic of his Washington, DC home is now at the Library of Congress with his protest signs at the Smithsonian Natural Museum of American History. That’s good to know.  Members of Congress, particularly those voting for repeal, must examine the history of homosexuals in government employment and military service in light of the Kameny papers.  The House Armed Services Committee, chaired by Rep. Buck McKeon of California, should subpoena the LOC for copies of Mr. Kameny’s documents.  What he has on his website is no doubt helpful but having the entire stack may shed some additional knowledge as to the reasons for the DADT repeal.

It is now not in doubt that this move by Obama, Mullen, Gates and those voting for repeal was not only political in scope but in appeasement of those who want to pervert the military.  Because perverting and poisoning it is precisely what they want, though they will deny it until they are blue in the face.

Rep. McKeon and his committee should further subpoena court documents on the cases involving Mr. Kameny and his Mattachine Society.  It would also be useful to get copies of all federal correspondence over the last 50 years relative to the issue of homosexuality in government employment and military service.

The left, and particularly its homosexual allies like the Human Rights Campaign, the Servicemen’s Legal Defense Network, the ACLU and many others will cry foul and claim this effort is a witch hunt designed to end in a scorched earth policy.  However, the homosexual infiltration in government and military, from the past Kameny days to the current Wiki Leaks scandal involving Cpl. Manning, appears to have octopus-like tentacles in that it appears to have pervaded all aspects of federal government over the last 30 years.  The unprecedented numbers of homosexuals currently in the Obama Administration and in leadership capacities only adds fuel to what I will now call the DADT repeal scandal.  That particular matter should be investigated by the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee, chaired by California Rep. Darrell Issa.

And perhaps this question should also be asked by these committees.  If homosexuals were unable to obtain security clearance for federal employment or military service because of the behaviors they practice, how is it that America’s commander-in-chief (putative as he may be) was not vetted in this capacity, given the actions claimed to be attributed to him (and which have not been denied by Mr. Obama)?

If no other reason serves a good purpose for hearings and an overturn of the repeal, this certainly qualifies. Congress should also seek the resignations of Mullen and Gates. Their acquiescence to Obama and the left is doing grave damage to the nation’s moral fiber.

If this article goes viral, and I hope it does, there will be a backlash of anger because the public will have a pretty good idea what the repeal of DADT has done.  The people will know who was responsible and the consequences of implementation (if not reversed). It is, at least in this writer’s view, the straw that broke the camel’s back.  Or better put, it will have been the drop of boiling water that scorched the supporters of this trash.  The report by former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt thoroughly rebuts the backers as well as this excellent April 2010 report by Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness. Both were ignored by party leaders in the 111^th Congress as well as Obama.

Congress has a solemn responsibility to impeach and remove Obama for forcing unnatural and immoral sexual misconduct on our finest and all America. And if any serviceman or woman (homosexual or not) ends up being maimed or killed because of this change of policy, knowing what some Muslim nations do to homosexuals, their blood will be on Obama’s hands as well as everyone that voted for repeal.  The public has an obligation of voting out or recalling (if such provisions exist in their respective state constitutions) each such lawmaker at the earliest opportunity.  It should be utilized.

And if you don’t think there won’t now be advocates of concerted efforts to murder our men and women in uniform (be they heterosexual or homosexual), think again.

The homosexual activists will lash out at the truth here.  However, they can’t blame this writer.  Frank Kameny has paved the way for its “frank” revelations, not to mention those revealed by the other Frank, Barney.  The sordid details are there for the world to view.

Shoot the messenger if you must.  But after the messenger goes, the truth won’t.

My Letter to House Speaker John Boehner & Majority Leader Eric Cantor

Dear Readers:

I have faxed the following letter to U.S. House Speaker John Boehner & Majority Leader Eric Cantor with regards to Barack Obama, his all but certain ineligibility and other matters the 112th Congress needs to tackle.  Please feel free to read and use it or any portion of it to contact them in any fashion you wish to.  Congress will not act on Obama’s likely constitutional presidential disqualification unless We the People force them to via being buried with calls, letters and faxes.

---

House Speaker John Boehner
U.S. House of Reps.
Washington, DC  20515
Fax: (202) 225-0704

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor
U.S. House of Reps.
Washington, DC  20515
Fax: (202) 225-0011

2/1/11

Dear Speaker Boehner & Majority Leader Cantor:

I am writing you regarding a few points, though I will attempt to be brief.  This will be copied and posted on my blog www.thatsafact.wordpress.com for all to see.  I am putting the two of you together since you’re both House GOP leaders and the content is related to you both.

Rep. Cantor, on the heels of Speaker Boehner telling PMSNBC that he believes Resident Obama is a natural born citizen, it was reported from Meet the Depressed that you also believe the same thing.  May I ask the both of you one question?  And that is how long are you going to let this drag out while the White House impostor destroys the country?

How is it that the two of you are willing to accept the state of Hawaii’s word while at the same time there are over 400 stories at World Net Daily exposing every angle of this matter?  How is it that there are at least 10 states now that have introduced legislation at the state level that would require state board of elections offices and secretaries of state to obtain proof of eligibility from all presidential candidates? It is expected that at minimum two (Arizona & Texas) will pass thru their respective chambers and ultimately be signed into law with more to come and more states to introduce similar measures.  But if so much as one state makes a statement that our Constitution will be upheld in that regard, then what will you do when that state declares Obama ineligible to run next year because they will have nothing on file from him? This will spread like wildfire as this issue will garner national attention, inasmuch as the lame stream media will wish to ignore it.

How can you continue to ignore the countless number of lawsuits filed by the likes of Phil Berg (a Democrat), Mario Apuzzo, Gary Kreep, Orly Taitz and others and pretend this is not an issue?  Reasonable estimates and polls show that roughly half the country is at least aware of this issue with more talking about. A prospective employer even brought it up to me without any provocation in one of the very rare job interviews I’ve had to this point.  Plus who in their rational state of mind spends $2 million to lawyers to ensure that all his records, including birth certificate, are sealed?

How can you continue to ignore videos like the one from Obuzzard’s wife in her own word saying to the Human Rights Campaign during the campaign trail that Kenya was her hubby’s birthplace?

And how can you and all of Congress ignore the plight of hugely decorated Lt. Terry Lakin who sits in a Ft. Leavenworth military prison because our all but certain bogus commander-in-chief would not comply and show documents proving his natural born citizenship?  This man (Lt. Lakin) is paying the ultimate price for his firm willingness to defend the U.S. Constitution (6 months in prison with a total loss of his income) and yet during his trial he and his legal team reportedly couldn’t call or cross examine witnesses or testify himself. This is a monumental miscarriage of justice that Congress should not hesitate to intervene. And I tell you one person that would back Congressional intervention in a heartbeat.  And that is Florida Congressman Col. Allen West.

And this is just for starters.

Speaker Boehner, on the heels of all the eligibility issue, not to mention the rapidly Marxist state Obama has foisted upon this country over the last two years, please tell me how you could even think of wanting to go golfing with Obama?  Would you golf with Castro, Hugo, Kim Jong Il or dare I say Hitler, Stalin or Mao? If you can’t say NO, then you have a problem with your moral values. And so do I.  Obama may not have slaughtered millions of people as those dictators have but otherwise there is no difference between him or any of them.

Then again, who knows, maybe Obama has something in common with those tyrants. After all, millions of unborn babies have been slaughtered in the womb, thanks to his unequivocal support and votes as a U.S. senator and policies as America’s putative president for unrestricted abortion on demand.  I mean, what’s the difference whether in the womb or out?  They’re human beings.

The both of you can sweep this under the rug all you want but the public attention this is getting, even more so with the recent comments of Hawaii’s governor, will not die down any time soon.  People look at Obama, his ties to Indonesia and Kenya, socialist policies and they see something radically wrong.  State lawmakers see it as well, though not all.  However, it seems like Congress doesn’t want to upset the applecart but instead play nice with Obama.  My Lord, he’s wiping out the country with his effervescent and relentless thirst for government to pervade and control all sectors of our lives, taking with the nation’s destruction our Constitutional liberties and safeguards and leaving our porous borders continually open.  Does this not make sense to you? He’s suing Arizona because the state insists on secured borders. He should be ousted for this reason alone.

The country had issues with Republicans during the Clinton years in which the people supported both the GOP and the then president.  They liked Clinton, even if they wouldn’t give him a Democrat Congress but for the first two years of his presidency.  They wouldn’t let the GOP touch Social Security or Medicare back then.  Clinton was popular.  But Obama is not.  The public will not rise in opposition to any hearings that might be held on his constitutional qualifications or lack thereof.  The public firmly and demonstratively opposed the Democrats’ imposition of Obamacare in the last Congress. There is no reason to believe the same will occur if hearings are held on Obama’s eligibility.  Americans suspect something is wrong with him.  Congress should certify it.

Why would you not want to address Obama’s eligibility in light of the fact that every appointment he has made, every nomination he has offered, every bill he has signed, every executive order he has given is all null and void if he is ineligible?  That would be the best possible recourse for the country rather than go thru the nightmare of trying to reverse every single action thru legislation.

So I am calling on the both of you once again to use your power and influence and call for Congress and its committees to hold public hearings on whether America’s putative president was and is constitutionally to be in the office he currently holds and to take all steps to remove him at the earliest opportunity. Impeachment shouldn’t be a consideration here since such applies only to qualified presidents.  Obama is not qualified, numerous attorneys have said so but more importantly the Constitution says so.  He should be removed sans delay.  Start the process now.

Additionally, here is what the U.S. House should do, also without delay.  Thank you for leading the vote to repeal Obamacare but we must go much further.  Start here.

1. Secure the borders without delay and finish building the fence.  Deport all illegals.  Pass legislation to ensure that no further importation of foreign workers will be allowed and that all verified illegals currently holding American salaried jobs be promptly terminated in order that those jobs be made available to legal Americans.  Employers refusing to use E-Verify to weed out those illegally employed will lose their right to operate their business and/or be fined and jailed.  After dealing with the eligibility issue, the border crisis and its effect on jobs need to be expeditiously addressed.  It can no longer be dismissed.
2. Reverse all laws and policies that have exported jobs to China, India and other nations.
3. Bring all troops home from Iran, Afghanistan and elsewhere and put them on the borders.
4. Defund the abortion industry in full.  Reverse public funding of embryonic stem cell research.  And yes, pass a ban on abortion on demand – isn’t 50 million babies enough?
5. Reverse the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell; it is a moral outrage and against God’s divine law to force government sanctioned homosexuality on America’s troops and the country.
6. Cut government and federal spending to unprecedented levels.  Investigate all czars for constitutional legitimacy. Those deemed unconstitutional shall promptly be defunded.
7. Repeal all laws restricting constitutional liberty.  Abolish the EPA and Interior Depts.
8. Pass a bill that no U.S. representative or senator serves more than 12 years in Congress.

Beyond these agenda items, there’s little else I see for the Congress to do.  It’s encouraging in one sense that it wants to meet less than the previous Congress.  This sends a message that the current Congress (at least the U.S. House) recognizes that the longer it stays in session, the greater the risk of American liberties will be encroached.  I like that a lot.  However, given the oppressive measures the 111^th Congress foisted on the American people (and to a somewhat lesser extent the previously Congresses), it may be necessary to be in session longer to remedy and reverse what it did.  I would like to see the House meet on a regular basis throughout the entire year to fix the matters above and then drastically shorten the second session next year.

As I close, I want to reiterate the first issue here, that being the constitutional qualifications of Barack Obama and his authorization to lead this country.  Please, I beg of you, Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor, grow some spine.  Yes, I know that calling Obama out on his likely ineligibility is certain to rankle Washington Democrats and even put you in fear.  I fully understand the human element here.  However, there is no substitution for doing what is right.  In light of the public opinion of the millions of Americans who question and doubt the credentials of the man in the Oval Office, the lawsuits filed, the court cases heard (none of which has been addressed on the merits) and the numerous legislatures taking up this matter in various fashions, it is imperative for Congress to not bury or pooh-pooh this issue.  It doesn’t matter what clueless politicians think or say.  It matters to us, the American people and the rule of law.  Thus it should matter to you.

Please hear what I and millions of Americans have to say and do not ignore us.  The future of this country (and your jobs) may well depend on what you do and don’t do in the next 23 months.

I am praying for you do to the right thing.

Sincerely,

Nedd Kareiva

A Call to Close All U.S. Abortion Clinics

Dear Readers:

The former chief of staff for the Obama Administration told us that we should never let “a serious crisis go to waste”.  I totally concur.  And in memory of Rahm Emmanuel and his run for mayor of Chicago , I will take him up on his offer.

As was extensively reported by the lame stream media (and highly likely against their heartfelt wishes), America got a big glimpse of what occurs at America’s so-called friendly abortion clinics. And to put it very mildly, it wasn’t pretty at all – literally.

It was downright sickening.  It was abhorrent.  It was ghastly.  It was and is every bit against the nature of a civilized society.

But this is nothing new.  It has occurred at countless other facilities.  And it very likely is occurring today at many clinics across the country.

And as in Mr. Emmanuel’s words, we’re not going to let it go to waste.

But it’s going to take your help and that of your friends, family, churches and colleagues at work and wherever else you socialize to make the difference.  It’s going to require a little activism to do so, even if you have never done so.  It will involve your use of the keyboard, printer and a fax, if you have one.  If you don’t have a printer, find someone who does or go to your local library and use theirs.  If you don’t have access to a fax and can’t find someone who does, then get a few business envelopes and postage stamps.

Because you will be God’s and America’s instrument to forever end the American Holocaust.

It doesn’t matter how old or young or intelligent you are.  If you understand basic biology and the definition of abortion and don’t have a cold heart, you are more than qualified to be America’s voice and the voice of all babies residing in women’s wombs somewhere across the fruited plain.

We will not wait another 40 years before abortion is legally history.  We will not wait another 30, 20, 10, 5, 4, 3 or even 2 years put our imprimatur on it.

We shall do so this year.  And we shall do so without the help of Congress, despite an upcoming measure in the U.S. House to defund it.  It is likely to comfortably pass, even with some Democrat support.  However, there is little chance such would pass the pro-abortion U.S. Senate and most certainly not America’s premier pro-partial birth abortion, pro-infanticide and putative president.

But it will get traction.  And with your help and God’s, it will happen.  How so?  By two avenues:

1. Your state attorney generals
2. Your state senators and representatives (unless you reside in Nebraska where you have but one legislative body)

The reason the attorney generals (or as some call them, attorneys general) go first is due to the power they currently wield by the nature of their position.  We do not have to wait for an act of the state legislature to intervene, though that is what we will push for.  We are under no illusions that state lawmakers in heavily pro-abortion states like California, New York and others across the East & West Coasts will want to take up any measures restricting abortion, despite the grewsome (and yes, that is one way to spell it) acts that were discovered in the state of Pennsylvania.

We will attempt to get these legislators to act since they are duly elected representatives of the people in the districts they reside.  However, regardless of their interest (or indifference), our first goal is to secure the help, resources and full weight of each attorney general’s office and that in conjunction with each state’s health department.  The reason for this is twofold:

1. The attorney general is the chief law enforcement official in his or her respective state and wields immense power to ensure compliance with state laws.
2. The health departments of each state have power to legally act on behalf of the attorney generals and are regulated by the legislatures and the laws legislatures have approved.

Based on points 1 & 2, we are initially urging and insisting that the state attorney generals launch inspections into all surgical abortion clinics operating in their states, particularly those that have previously been under investigation or controversy.  And there are plenty but should you need a couple examples to aid your understanding, check out this one and this one.

And if you think you can stomach reading more, go visit this page.

According to Life Dynamics, there are roughly 750 abortion clinics in America.  From this writer’s research and knowledge, having lived in both Illinois and Indiana, with all due respect to the great work Mark Crutcher and his group do for the unborn, this number may be in error.  Some of those clinics may not be doing or no longer be doing surgical (or chemical) abortions.  They may also simply be doing contraceptive distribution (which is morally wrong in of itself but for the moment I will not address it) or provide other services which may or may not carry a moral compass.

A search at the excellent Priests for Life website, which used to have a page devoted to clinic locations, currently came up empty but an e-mail was sent to its main address to see if a link still exists.  If it does, we will post it once we hear from Father Pavone or one of his staff.

But regardless of what we do have for locations and whether they are currently up to date, the fact is each attorney general and state health department know which clinics exist, which don’t and which does abortions in any capacity and which don’t.  That is the basis for the following letter that we ask you to send to the attorney general for your state.  Since he or she is an elected official, he or she has the obligation to enforce the law and investigate reported violations.

To say that the state of Pennsylvania failed to protect the women and children who entered the abortion clinic in West Philadelphia is a colossal understatement.  As the AP reported, the clinic had no inspections for over 17 years.  This is thoroughly unacceptable as hospitals and veterinary clinics are highly regulated and inspected, often, if not always, unannounced.  The blame here falls on, as the story goes, state regulators (prosecutors and the state health dept.) and that stems all the way to the top to the most recent attorney general and now governor, Tom Corbett.

While it appears that state officials are scrambling to throw the book at the abortionist and his employees (and rightly so), it is imperative that the office of acting attorney general, William Ryan, needs to initiate inspections against the remaining abortion clinics.  There is little doubt now that abortion proponents like the oxymoronic National Organization for Women (NOW), the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and its legal ally the ACLU will aggressively fight such at any and every turn, citing privacy and confidentiality claims. However, the spotlight is shining ever so brightly upon those who commit such sinister acts at these clinics.  Most any rational people who normally pay little or no attention to abortion now wonder if perhaps these deeds go on at other clinics.  They should be rest assured that they do but due to political and other pressure are not inspected. That needs to change now.  And if we have any say so, by the grace of God, it will.

There is no mention of this abortionist and this story on the state attorney general’s website, though there are others.  There also is nothing on the governor’s site, though we should temporarily give him the benefit of the doubt since his transition team is in the process of assuming control. But this has to change, regardless of any political darts thrown their way.  If the brutal murders of these babies by a ghoulish abortionist (with all apologies to ghouls) do not take center stage on their websites, then we should ask ourselves why.  You certainly won’t find any comment or condemnation of the abortionist and his gang on the NOW site, the NARAL site (though you will find condemnation of the House repeal yesterday of Obamacare) or the ACLU.

Therefore, it is imperative that we American patriots force the hands of Mr. Ryan and all 50 attorney generals without delay.  To that end, I have devised a letter that I will send to the office of my state’s attorney general, Greg Zoeller of Indiana with a CC to the PA A/G.  Please read it and then follow the instructions and guidelines after its conclusion.

Mr. Greg Zoeller
Office of the Indiana Attorney General
302 W. Washington, 5^th Floor
Indianapolis, IN  46204

Fax: (317) 232-7979

Dear Mr. Zoeller:

I am writing about an issue of great concern to me as well as millions of American patriots.  However, before continuing, may I express my gratitude for the superb work you and the Indiana A/G’s office are doing in defending its citizens against the oppressive legislative act known in political circles as Obamacare.  With over half the nation’s states now challenging this federal statute, I believe the momentum is on our side to overturn it and return health making decisions, as well as all others, to the people the state serves.  Thank you for helping lead the way.

As you may have read or heard at some point a Philadelphia abortionist was arrested yesterday, along with his wife and 8 other employees, including a 15 year old girl, for a series of horrific acts that took place at his clinic.  Out of respect for your office, I will refrain from graphically detailing the chilling series of events that reportedly occurred as media reports seem to have done that surprisingly well.  However, the findings of Pennsylvania authorities should shock every state attorney general and health department to the point that current procedures for inspecting and closing abortion clinics in their respective states be reviewed and updated without delay.

It is generally understood by the public that medical facilities operating in all 50 states undergo stringent examinations for obvious sanitary and safety reasons prior to practice.  Any hospital or surgery center seeking to conduct business will not be allowed to do so if such measures do not thoroughly satisfy state personnel granting such authorization. Generally speaking, veterinary clinics and restaurants have rigorous standards that must be met before they are permitted to publicly operate, standards that seldom, if at all, are applied to facilities where abortions occur.

Without going into great detail, two of the states bordering our own Indiana have had ghoulish experiences that, had state officials taken the initiative and treated their respective clinics like any other, may very well have not occurred or else prematurely ended.  Two of the more disturbing ones involved a body parts for sales operation (no exaggeration) in downstate Illinois and babies found in dumpsters in Michigan (on more than one occasion).  You may well be aware of these cases but if you are not, you will be able easily research them on the Internet.  The Illinois case ended up with the savages fleeing the state to an unknown location while the two Michigan ones concluded with no prosecutorial action due to being hamstrung by current state law.

I assure you that these are not isolated incidents, Mr. Zoeller.  I cannot guarantee that Indiana has similar cases and clinics that will be found to live in infamy if such deplorable deeds are discovered.  But I can assure you that ghastly deeds in the form of abortion on our own children in the name of “choice” are done in all 50 states, including our own Indiana, and it is up to you and the Indiana Dept. of Health to find out the extent of it by conducting onsite investigations (preferably unannounced) of all facilities performing any sort of abortion (surgical, chemical, saline) in this state.  State laws regulating notification and consent are not considerations in how abortionists operate.  Laws are frequently broken because of lack of oversight.  The Philadelphia story claims that no clinic inspections took place since 1993. That is totally unacceptable as any rational person can deduce that between then and now, countless laws may have been broken.

Groups like Planned Parenthood will scream bloody murder (no pun intended) if they get word that one of their clinics is facing an inspection or investigation, often contacting their legal allies like the ACLU if wrongdoing is suspected, let alone found.  The fact is no business operating legally and ethically will ever refuse to be inspected (announced or unannounced) if it fully believes it has been abiding by current state and federal laws.  The fact that groups like PP complain as much as they do should send signals that necessitate looking into their operation.

The sad thing is that public officials are often intimidated on the rare occasions they believe a facility performing abortions warrant a visit.  There is no reason for that since the state holds an enormous amount of law enforcement power to back up any adverse findings by state officials.  Concerns about lawsuits from the likes of the ACLU do have merit as states find themselves today in short supply of funds.  However, wrongdoing should never take a back seat to money and politics, though sadly this occurs too often today.

As a result of the events in Philadelphia and the historic national neglect of monitoring abortion clinics, I am asking your office, in conjunction with the state health dept., to promptly initiate and conduct visits (preferably unannounced) to each and every medical facility that does abortions in the state of Indiana and that political considerations be set aside to do so.  I ask that any facility found in violation of current health, safety and sanitary standards (which will very likely be most of them, though Indiana has very few such clinics) be immediately shut down

Most anyone reading what took place in Philly will find themselves repulsed and revulsed and based on the hundreds of thousands of posts at various websites covering this house of horrors, want action against the perpetrators of these crimes, starting with the abortionist.  Seeing this story only further compels our culture to become a more affirming and accepting one towards the unborn.  The fact that abortions are steadily declining (though one abortion is one too many) and the fact that abortionists are dying out and not being replaced stand as a testament to our culture moving to cease its hostility to the unborn.

I will also be asking the Indiana state legislature (both houses) to introduce the ACHE Act.  ACHE stands for Abortion Clinic Health Enforcement.  The ACHE Act will involve reviewing current health and sanitary procedures pertaining to such clinics, updating them as necessary and addressing, enforcing and strengthening current law.  It will also require the state health dept. and law enforcement officials (as deemed appropriate by the legislature) to conduct regular timely visits (again, preferably unannounced), draft a document that will serve as an official abortion clinic report and to post such reports online for public viewing. Personal private details of patients and workers may be redacted as necessary.  Any clinic refusing official access or found to be in violation of current and any newly enacted laws will immediately be shut down.  The days where the abortion industry gets special treatment and exemptions are coming to a close.

I urge your support of these measures and welcome your thoughts and comments.  Thank you very much for your time and anticipated response.

Sincerely,

Nedd Kareiva
(Address)
(City, State, Zip)

CC: Mr. William Ryan
Action Attorney General, State of Pennsylvania
16^th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA  17120
Fax: (717) 787-8242

My friends, I am initially asking each of you to send at least two letters or faxes, one to your own state attorney general and the other to Mr. Ryan.  However, if you are willing to do so, please consider sending such a letter to every state bordering your own.  For example, if you live in my state of Indiana, you can send one also to each attorney general in Illinois, Kentucky, Ohio and Michigan.  Depending on where you live, you may have only one surrounding state or you may have many.  Only if you’re in Alaska or Hawaii you will obviously have none.

And if by some means you are willing to send 50 faxes or mail 50 letters (total cost $22), that would be the best way to go.  If you can do, please do so and let me know.  Thank you!

There are some guidelines that I ask of each one who volunteers to put our public officials on the hot seat.  Please obey ALL of them, especially point 7, as failure to do so could jeopardize this effort.  Our goal is 100% abortion closure, be it surgical, chemical or saline.  Here is how to help:

1. All letters to the attorney generals are to be sent by either snail mail or fax (preferable to minimize any chance of being lost in the mail).  Please do not e-mail or use any e-mail forms on the states’ websites. There is no guarantee the content will be read if sent by those means, especially if there is a groundswell effort here (which we hope and pray is the case).  Put your convictions in writing and sign it. Calls may also be made but a paper trail is necessary to track how many letters were sent.  Again, send by snail mail or fax.
   
2. Keep all letters to a max of two pages.  Any more than two pages run the risk boring the reader (it may not necessarily be the A/G his or herself).  Use modest size font (Ariel or Times New Roman preferred) instead of too big or small or anything fancy.  Use black, dark grey or dark blue font color – no bright colors. Use Microsoft Word or some other appropriate format for your letter.  If you need help formatting, ask; I may be able to help.
   
3. Please know what you are writing about.  If you don’t know what you’re saying or you take a point from my letter but don’t comprehend it, don’t discuss it.  If you have a cursory knowledge of abortion and everything surrounding it, talk accordingly.  If you have advanced understanding of the issue and can speak with passion, knowledge and eloquence, do so.  But don’t be someone you aren’t.  It’s not necessarily important that you know everything on abortion.  But it is important that what you do know and put on paper can be backed with proof.  Study the issue – there are boatloads of great groups like the American Life League (www.all.org) and Priests for Life where can get good info.
   
4. Please do not copy word for word this sample letter.  You may use portions of it as you wish but it is critical that your thoughts and views be read as your own.  I’ve been around long enough and done enough proofreading over the years to detect canned and copied letters. This is why I have elected not to set up a petition or web page with a preset letter.  We need originality of thought, passion and conviction.  Thousands upon thousands of individually thought out letters loaded with them can have a very powerful effect on a public official, especially one who publicly expresses belief in the rule of law.
   
5. Please, for God’s sake (literally) and that of this cause, be polite and professional in your letter.  Yes, I know some state officials deserve to be read the riot act.  However, that brings detriment to this vital cause.  Officials in liberal states may well give short shrift to what you say if you do or even if you don’t.  But don’t instigate.  What occurred yesterday has arguably awakened many a folk who have otherwise been indifferent or even hostile to life issues.  No one with any trace of decency can defend this abortionist and the criminal acts he and his employees have perpetrated.  Be reminded of the verse in Proverbs, “A soft answer turns away wrath but grievous words stir up anger”.
   
6. Be sure to CC the PA attorney general at the end of each letter, regardless of how many you send – unless you live in PA in which case you would only contact Mr. Ryan.
   
7. Please, unless you have experience and understanding in working with legislators and how legislatures work and/or are someone who is viewed as having a steel trap mind on abortion (like Judy Brown of ALL or Father Pavone), say nothing relative to the next to last paragraph in your letter.  Leave it out.  I am referring to the “ACHE” section.  The “ACHE” section is not for novices.  We want all 50 states to enact an ACHE but we know that in states like California, New York and Massachusetts that will be all but impossible due to the rabid pro-abortion stances of lawmakers in those states.  We will attempt to get one introduced but are not guaranteed of it, let alone passage.  The ACHE is this writer’s own concept.  Though no trademark or service mark will be filed for its use, as a courtesy, please reference it accordingly if you use the acronym in letter or speech.
   
8. Be sure you have the proper address or fax number for the attorney general(s) you are attempting to write.  Some government websites combine some offices but even if they do, they have separate fax numbers and addresses.  Make sure you are on the A/G web page for the state you intend to write.  Use Google to find them.
   
9. When you are done, you need not send me your draft to look over and comment, should you decide to do so before you mail or fax.  If you wish to do so, note that in your e-mail that you are looking for a critique of your comments.  I may be able to do so but I cannot guarantee it, depending on the volume I get.  If you do not hear from me within 48 hours of your e-mail, go ahead and mail or fax without my input.
   
10. However, once you have sent out your faxes or letters (please do not handwrite), kindly convey the following to me: (1) whether you faxed or mailed your letters (2) which A/G’s did you write or fax – name the state, not the A/G – and (3) the actual letter or fax you sent. I may decide to critique a letter after I have been notified that it has been sent but I will only do so if the letter is poorly worded or lacks professionalism.  The main purpose I have in keeping copies of the letters is simple – I want to know how many went out.  I need to know how powerful this effort is going to be.
    
11. The e-mail address you will use to correspond with me on all the above is the234project@rocketmail.com.

Start those letters now!  This crisis will not go to waste.

For those of you who wish to solely write the A/G’s and/or are not experienced or confident enough to address the ACHE aspect with your state legislatures, your job is done for the moment. But for those who wish to go a step beyond, stay a bit longer as the following section is for you.

If you have ever called a member of Congress or someone in the state legislature, you know that you aren’t necessarily guaranteed a cordial welcome from that voice on the other end. If you have ever written, faxed or e-mailed them, you may or may not have gotten a reply. If you have ever communicated with any of them in any regularity, chances are you have learned a bit about the political process.  And if you have watched Congress on C-SPAN, state legislatures streaming online at the state’s website, or been in person to your state’s capitol while your legislature is in session, you may have a fair grasp of how lawmakers and legislatures operate.  Just getting your own Congressman, senator or state senator or representative to introduce any legislation you support is a Herculean task to undertake.

But the ACHE Act is legislation that needs to be introduced and passed in every state.  Some states already have similar measures in place to regulate clinics.  Some have laws with more teeth than others. Regardless, if such measures do exist, they need to be strengthened with a mechanism of enforcement.  America does not need to see another Philly House of Horrors.

There are three things to be done before anything else.  One is to review current law, if applicable; two is to locate a state senator and representative to sponsor ACHE and three is to get a bill filed in time.  All states have deadlines as to when bills may be filed during a particular session.  Those who fail to meet a deadline to file generally have to wait until the following year.

This is daunting, especially since some states have a short window to file bills due to the length of time the legislatures are in session.  Utah is one such example as they meet for only two months each year.  Indiana is not far behind as it meets for roughly three months on odd number years and two months on even number years.  Some will meet well beyond like Massachusetts which goes right up until the end of the summer.  But even states like those have deadlines.

So we cannot guarantee that we can even get legislation filed in time, even if we do have a state representative and senator to take this on.  But we must try.  The unborn are depending on us.

What I am looking for is one individual from each of the 50 states (minus Indiana) to lead the way on the above three points, someone who will research their own state’s law on abortion clinics as well as bill filing deadlines and seek sponsorships.  I am also seeking one person to oversee this effort and help find someone in each state to represent their respective states.

If you would like to spearhead the ACHE effort in your respective state or be the one to oversee the process over all the states, please contact me the234project@rocketmail.com.  Briefly share your Internet skills, your pro-life views, any supervisor experience you may have and any other credentials you feel fill the bill for this volunteer position.  There is no money in it, though if we get any significant Pay Pal donations, we may be able to help financially in a small way.  However, the main goal here is to eradicate abortion by shutting down every single clinic in America.  If you are passionate about that, then I want to hear from you today.

Thank you for reading this long e-mail and your willingness to end the American Holocaust.

Cordially in Christ,

Nedd

P.S.  To avoid monetary distractions, we will not ask for money in this effort; however, if you feel led to contribute something towards it, e-mail me and I’ll give you the address to send your donation.

The 234 Project

Dear Friends:

I am pleased to launch an effort which I have titled the 234 Project.  The reason for this term is that if you subtract the year our country was born, 1776, from the current year, 2010, you have 234 years. And what we want to do is assign one lawmaker for each of those years.  We want 234 lawmakers to (1) agree to rescind Obamacare and (2) to be put on the record as to whether they will support the impeachment and removal of Barack Obama from the White House and/or whether they will agree to simply remove Obama on account of being constitutionally disqualified from holding the office of the president of the United States.

The proposed means of getting 234 men and women to stand in the gap from 1776 to 2010 is as follows. There are currently 177 Republican Congressmen and women in the U.S. House and 41 Republican men and women in the U.S. Senate.  That number totals 218.  Since no Republican supported Obamacare in the final version (acknowledging Rep. Ahn Cao’s original November vote for it), we will assign each Republican one year in history and this will add up to 218 years.  That leaves us 16 years, thus 16 public officials to take it 234.

We aren’t sure where to make up the gap.  Possibilities include Republican governors, attorney generals or leaders of legislative chambers at the state level.  Legislators would be preferable since they are the ones who make law.  Conservative Congressional Democrat lawmakers like Gene Taylor of Mississippi, Bobby Bright of Alabama and Dan Boren of Oklahoma are also options. Mr. Taylor served in the House during Bill Clinton’s Administration and voted to impeach him in 1998 when Mr. Clinton was charged with committing high crimes and misdemeanors.  There are about 5 other moderate to conservative Democrats from back in the 90s who, along with Mr. Taylor, are still in Congress today and who voted against Obamacare.  Their fairly conservative voting records indicate that they could vote with the GOP to remove Obama.

However, unlike the 90s, there are drawbacks to using Democrats in the current political climate.  It would also be difficult finding 16 Democrats who would join Republicans in this effort.

We could also consider 16 Republican candidates to the U.S. Senate who are currently not Congressmen.

I am entertaining suggestions as to other ideas you may wish to include for the remaining 16 patriots.  You can give me either specifics (such as names of individuals) or generalities (like a name of a group).  Other suggestions are welcomed as well.  The one non-negotiable point is the 234.  Doing away with the number makes the name of the group and project null and void.

I am well aware that a few liberal Republicans are part of the 234 (or 218 thus far).  Ideally, I would just choose to exclude the likes of them (e.g. Kirk, Castle and the 6 others who voted for cap and trade).  However, given that we don’t have 234 Republicans in Washington and given that they all were united in opposing a government takeover of medicine, we are for the time being including them on the patriots’ list.

I am also soliciting input as to all the questions that should be asked.  We want to make them brief but to the point.  There are four that will definitely be asked, though we will entertain changes to the wording.  We will consider (but not guarantee) adding one or two more.  But as it is, here are the current questions we want to pose to each of the 218 Republicans.

1. Given that no Republican in either the House or Senate voted for Obamacare, it is assumed that all Republicans would vote to repeal it, should legislation be introduced in a future Congress. A Republican controlled House could override a presidential veto of such a bill with a 2/3^rd vote. However, since there are no mathematical possibilities for Republicans to have 2/3^rd control in the U.S. Senate in the 112^th Congress (though a sizable GOP majority is possible) to repeal the bill in that chamber, would you vote to defund Obamacare in its entirety in budget appropriations? YES _____ NO _____

2. Reports state that anywhere from 12-20,000 IRS agents will be hired to enforce the mandates and penalties in Obamacare, which would include fines and even jail time for non-compliance.  Given how the IRS has historically been one of the most oppressive agencies in the United States, notwithstanding your views of what form of taxation should replace the IRS (flat tax, fair tax, sales tax, tariffs, etc), would you introduce and/or support legislation to abolish the IRS in its entirety? YES _____ NO _____

3. Multitudes of Americans have called for the impeachment and removal of Barack Obama from the Oval Office.  Mr. Obama’s public support of Islam, both domestically and in foreign policy, his handling of the Fort Hood massacre, the release of a number of terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay to foreign countries, plans to place terrorists in U.S. prisons and hold trials in U.S. courts instead of military brigs, among other items, lead some people to believe he is committing treason, a constitutionally impeachable offense.  Others believe the numerous monetary deals that led to the exchange of votes for the passage of Obamacare, along with alleged offers of political favors in exchange for not challenging the seats of certain Congressional Democrats, constitutes bribery, another constitutionally impeachable offense.

In your perspective, has Barack Obama committed offenses constitutionally worthy of impeachment and removal from office?  YES _____ NO _____.

If your answer to the above question is YES, how would you publicly support his impeachment and removal?  A. In the current Congress or the next one _____ B. In the next Congress only since the current political atmosphere would make it difficult, if not impossible, to proceed _____ C. Neither as this is my personal opinion _____

4. In the same way that thousands, if not millions, of Americans believe Barack Obama has committed flagrant acts against the U.S. Constitution, growing numbers of Americans have questions, doubts and even outright disbelief that Mr. Obama has met the constitutional eligibility requirements for being president, according to Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5, of the U.S. Constitution.  While few Americans, if any, dispute that Mr. Obama is over 35 years of age and has resided in the U.S. for at least 14 years, due to numerous conflicting articles of his alleged birth in Kenya and childhood schooling in Indonesia and multitudes of lawsuits filed in U.S. courts, a vast many of them are uncertain as to whether he is a natural born citizen.

Responses of Congressmen and senators in both parties to querying constituents have widely varied since the issue first surfaced in 2008, from willful silence to mocking and ridicule to outright denial to concessions of possibility and even merit.  A few members of Congress have signed on to legislation from Rep. Bill Posey of Florida to require future presidents provide documentation of natural born citizenship.  However, other than Congressman Nathan Deal, who recently resigned his seat to run for governor of Georgia, no one on Capitol Hill has directly posed the eligibility question to Mr. Obama.

The passage of Obamacare into law has plunged more Americans into the eligibility debate since there are growing doubts as to Mr. Obama’s place in the White House. Many folks are coming to believe that he is not a natural born citizen but a foreigner and thus with no authority to sign any legislation.  If such a view is ever proven, either via Congressional hearings and/or court rulings, then we have an unprecedented constitutional crisis on our hands (which many folks already believe we currently have). Evidence of ineligibility essentially would mean an undoing of every law signed, every executive order given, every judicial and cabinet appointment made and every policy decision Obama has put in place. This should not be treated lightly as many members of Congress are doing.  Congress (both parties) continues to ignore this to their political and the nation’s peril.

Many polls show a heightened interest in the eligibility issue.  Though numbers vary, the interest is bipartisan.  Polls have shown anywhere from 50-60% of Republicans who are skeptical of Mr. Obama’s eligibility and as many as a third of all Californians, regardless of political party, are as well.  Plus the original lawsuit against Obama in this regard came from a lifelong Democrat.

With these details in place and from what you personally know, what would describe your best opinion on this issue?

A. I never had or have any doubt that Barack Obama was a natural born citizen _____
B. I once had concerns about Obama’s eligibility but believe they are now settled ____
C. This issue was initially unimportant to me but as I began to see the direction Obama and Congress were taking this country, I felt that foreign policies and foreign interests were superseding ours and now I must ask whether he is constitutionally legitimate _____
D. Regardless of my personal views, the interests of my constituents must be represented first and foremost and since a good many of them have expressed their concerns to me in this regard, I must ascertain and report to them the truth _____
E. I have always been skeptical as to Barack Obama being a natural born citizen and believe Congress has an obligation to hold hearings to come to a determination ____

It is important that we start this project as soon as possible.  One of the reasons for the request of expedited timing is because Congress is home on Easter recess for this week and next.  If we wait until Congress returns in a week and a half, it will be much harder to gauge their views, partly due to the vast partisanship there currently is in Washington.  I feel that doing this while members of the House & Senate are in their home districts and getting their responses from their homes or local offices will be far more fruitful.

What I propose to do is draft a document in the form of a letter with the above questions (wording of which is not yet final and may yet be modified), along with the additional one or two that we may consider including, and fax it to every Republican Congressman’s and senator’s home office in the states. To this end, I have obtained at least one district fax number for all but 10 of the 218 Republicans in Congress.  Remember, we want to send the original document to home districts, not DC, for maximized response.

Here are the nuts and bolts of what we need.  First of all, we need to get up the website of the 234 Project.  I am taking care of the domain aspect of it and will set up the site, though I am happy to have any web-minded individual to help put it together.  The drafted letter will be up for all to see, however, it will not be needed to send out.  That is something we are taking care of.

The website will not be a long one like some others.  It may only be like 3 pages, probably 5 tops.  However, the content will speak for itself and drive the traffic.

Once the site is up, we will need to spread the word like wildfire.  It may be tough to do, given that there are so many superb patriotic websites out there, so many of which get lost in the shuffle.  However, we hope that World Net Daily, which arguably covers the eligibility issue more than any one else, will pick up on our efforts since this is part of our issue as well.  If they do, as they did with my old StoptheACLU.org address, the hits and visitors will come.  We want to light a fire under Republicans to do what needs to be done and begin the process of removing Obama.  And we hope the 4000+ contacts in the old StoptheACLU database will help facilitate more responses.

Here is where we will need your help, if you are interested.  It’s not a whole lot, though in this economy it might be for some.  What we are looking for is as follows:

• A one year web hosting package with a reliable host company. Estimated cost on the low end for a 3-5 page website: $50.
• Two ink cartridges for my fax.  I will be faxing to all Republican lawmakers.  Estimated costs on the two cartridges for my Panasonic fax: $75
• If possible, someone who can design a logo for The 234 Project on short notice.  Estimated cost to the design preparer varies but on the very low end, can do for $50.
• Money permitting, we would like to mail this letter as well as faxing it.  We will need paper and envelopes.  We have plenty of printer ink cartridges so that is no problem. We would like to reinforce the faxes with letters.  Estimated cost of stamps and envelopes: $100
• Money permitting, we may use a search engine optimization package to drive traffic. Estimated cost of this can be as low as $25.
• Money permitting, we’d like to get a post office box for the site alone. Estimated cost: $50

In summary, we could get started for as little as $125 or perhaps just $100.  To do everything we would like to do would run about $350.  Would anyone be interested in contributing any amount?

Additionally, if funds exceed $350, say to $500, we have a sophisticated multi line, all in one Brother printer/fax/phone that we can use for this purpose; that is, once it is repaired.  A few months ago, via my membership in FreeCycle.com, I obtained this elaborate machine for free from someone who simply wanted to get rid of it.  It is in good shape for the most part but the fax is in need of repair as it does not connect, plus there are some discoloring issues that I cannot seem to fix. I estimate the cost for repair to be about $100 but depending on what is needed, it could go up to $150.  Retail cost of the item when originally purchased, with tax, was over $400.

So we could get started for maybe as low as $100, in medium gear with $300 or in high gear at $500.  I do not want anyone to give if they absolutely cannot do so.  I don’t like asking for money but I have none of my own to start this at this juncture.  We’re barely scraping by, yet we feel the urgent need to light a fire under Republicans in Washington and pray this will help do it.

The good thing is that I have no phone or fax costs (other than the cartridges) to absorb.  Our monthly unlimited phone and Internet package costs under $100 so I can make all the faxes necessary at no charge.  And given how often I fax members of Congress, it pays handsomely.

In addition to anyone interested in building the website or creating a logo, I’d like to have one or two volunteers who would be willing to make follow up calls to offices of “wayward” lawmakers who haven’t completed or returned their surveys.

The best way for anyone who would like to contribute to this effort would be to go to your Pay Pal account and send your donation to my old Stop the ACLU mailbox – nedd@stoptheaclu.org. If you wish to do so another way or if you simply want to volunteer in some capacity, please contact me at the234project@rocketmail.com, however, do not use that address for Pay Pal purposes – there is no account there.

Please note – the Rocketmail mailbox is strictly for 234 Project purposes.  Any non-related e-mail sent there, regardless of content, will promptly be deleted and not responded to.  Use theobamacrisis@ymail.com for all non-234 Project related messages.  Thank you for your understanding.

I would be happy to answer any questions you might have or assist you in volunteering in other ways to promote this effort.  I await any suggestions you have for questions for our lawmakers to answer.  Again, we will consider taking one or two more in addition to the ones above.  And as also noted earlier, I am happy to consider any suggested modifications to the questions as outlined there.

God save our country.

For Liberty,

Nedd Kareiva
Founder, The 234 Project

Whether Obamacare Passes, How to Prepare Yourself

Most of you who are reading this post have read many of the stories about what is going on behind the curtains with the Democrats effort to force Obamacare on the American people.  Whether in an e-mail or whether a visit to a certain website, fears are gripping the American people as to what lies ahead.  Many of us see a government takeover of medicine as the liberals’ crown jewel for socialism on America.

There’s little reason for me to recap the talking points on reconciliation, cost, abortion, the “Slaughterhouse Solution”, etc.  You’ve read them in the e-mails you get and the websites you visit.  I prefer not repeat what everyone else is saying, regardless of their position on Obamacare.

What I want to do here is share some common sense points that may be overlooked as patriotic Americans do everything they can to thwart this fascism that the bulk of us steadfastly reject.  However, should Obamacare clear Congress (legitimately or illegitimately) and go for the White House’s signature, there are still many things to consider and act upon.

Since the House is considering approving the Senate bill as is (there are debates as to whether the so called “Louisiana Purchase” and “Cornhusker Kickback”, among other acts of Congressional bribery, will be left in the bill), the consideration here is to hopefully keep the bill from passage, or better yet, from even going to a vote.  With that in mind, here is what I suggest we all do prior to the passage of Obamacare.

First of all, TRUST GOD!  Without faith in God and His Son Jesus Christ, every other point is moot.  I don’t know how anyone can make it in life without Jesus Christ, much less so during these extremely perilous days.  If you don’t have the Lord as Savior of your life and if you’re not 100% sure you would go to Heaven when your time is up on earth, please contact me at theobamacrisis@ymail.com.  The problem with Obamacare is a spiritual problem more than anything else.  It is putting government as Lord of your life instead of Jesus Christ.

Secondly, remain calm (though resolute), no matter what happens with this legislation.  Yeah, I know, far easier said than done.  But if we’re going to defeat this monster and return America to God and its patriotic roots, we must do so.  It will be that much harder to mobilize and win if we are demoralized because that means our emotions will get the best of us.  Emotion drives liberalism because liberalism is based on feelings.  Conservatism and constitutionalism are based on objective and analytical thinking.  We must not lose sight of that if the worst occurs.

Keep in mind that should Obamacare be signed into law by the Resident (P intentionally omitted), there will be plenty of legal challenges in the courts. Many states will be leading the way.  Voters in Arizona will consider in November ratifying its legislature’s decision to ban government run health care on the ballot.  Both of  Virginia’s legislative chambers have passed a measure blocking forced health insurance coverage (and with heavy Democrat input).  Idaho, Utah and Oklahoma have also passed measures restricting federal intervention into health care issues. Other states have bills in the works.  The 10th Amendment Center has documented much of these details and much more on its website.

Thirdly, know that by and large, polls strongly oppose a government takeover of medicine.  See here for details.

Of course, polls, no matter how damning, don’t matter to the liberals in Congress who want to foist socialized medicine upon the American people, neither do states who want to take up such measures to block enforcement. But it does give small comfort to know that we are in the right and by a fairly solid margin.  It’s worse when we’re in the minority on any issue.  We know we are in the right.  That is the bottom line.

But if you need more encouragement in this regard, just plug “health care Obama” in Google’s search engine and hit “return”.  Read the articles, whether they be from a slanted “mainstream” source or one without spin or bias.  Look for the ones with forums for comment.  Read the comments.  They tell the story.  With perhaps a few exceptions (New York Times, PMSNBC, CBS, ABC), the opposition is quite strong and in some cases massive, whether the sites lean conservative or progressive/liberal.  However, you will even find some  fairly sizable opposition on sites like ABC, depending on the article.  People are angry and it shows.  You don’t have to look far at all to see it in the comments.  It may be depressing to think that Congress wants to go ahead and thumb its nose at the American people but the people are in solid opposition and many of the posters on these sites make no bones about how they feel about Obama and Congress.

It isn’t terribly difficult (in this writer’s view, based on what he has seen) to read of posters claiming they voted for Obama and now are living to regret it.  Again, it may be depressing to see how Congress wants to stick it to us but the educated American voter is anything but for Obamacare.

Fourthly, if you have a Democrat Congressman and he or she is listed as undecided whether to vote for Obamacare, make the call or send the fax.  There is no need to contact any Republicans since all of them are united against a government takeover of medicine.  But it is important to contact any hesitant Democrat.  A list of Democrats who are alleged to be undecided and which way they may be going can be found here (regularly updated).

If your Democrat Congressman or woman is not on the above list, since they are considered to be solid votes for Obamacare, it probably would do little good to contact them, though I hasten to add that I would never discourage any diehard patriots from doing so.  After all, this is America and we have an absolute 1st Amendment right to express our opinions and views to those we elect for public service, even if they ignore us.

Fifthly, if possible, get together with other like-minded individuals, whether they be tea party folks or other compadres.  Go to any rallies that may be in your area.  Check with Meet up and other sources for get-togethers.

Sixthly, do something that probably no one is thinking of doing.  Write a letter to your insurance company and even to insurance companies you aren’t doing business with.  Tell them to stand up against the Obaminations thrust upon them by Barack and his bogus administration.  You may or may not be crazy about doing so but if ever the insurance companies need to hear from the American people, it is now.   Obama is working overtime to institute class warfare between us and them.  It is understandable if you have differences with your insurers.  But there is one big difference between them and your government.  Insurance companies cannot run your life and dictate you to do this and that and the other.  Your federal government can.  Work out your differences with the insurance companies.  If you can’t do so now, make a commitment to do so at some point.  We need massive opposition against Washington and we need to join hands with the insurance industry.  The time is now to do so.  Please take action.

Here is a partial list of companies to write:  Blue Cross, United Healthcare, State Farm, All-State, Farmers, Zurich, Hartford, Aetna.  If you can think of others, make a note of them.  Google them for their addresses.  Make sure you write headquarters and not your local offices.  Look for the presidents and/or CEO’s on their websites.  Write them a short letter, telling them to stand up against the Obama Administration and let them know you understand that Washington is working overtime to divide and conquer.  Believe me, if the insurers get multitudes of letters of public support, it will make it easier for them to say NO to the threats and coercions being forced upon them.

---

This post may be updated during the week.  For now, this should give you, my readers, some encouragement as we all work to drive a stake permanently thru this monster, hopefully never to return.

The Case for Impeaching Barack Obama

Since August of 2008, numerous lawsuits have been filed against Barack Obama by various attorneys, including: Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo and Gary Kreep of the U.S. Justice Foundation. The bulk of these suits were filed to mandate Obama to produce proof that he is a natural born U.S. citizen, according to Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the U.S. Constitution which states that:

“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, neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of 35 years and been 14 years a resident within the United States.”

Anyone following these suits with any regularity or casual review knows three things:

1.      Every case thus far heard before the courts has been dismissed, usually for lack of standing or jurisdiction

2.      No case has yet to be adjudicated on the basis of its merits

3.      The birth certificate provided by Obama’s campaign team and Obama friendly websites has been refuted as bogus by experts and non-experts alike as it is deemed to not be an original copy.

One of the few sources meticulously covering all angles of the Obama eligibility issue is World Net Daily with over 300 articles since this issue first surfaced.  WND has been mocked, ridiculed and treated with contempt on this matter from both the left and the right.  However, its critics have thus far been evidentially unable to refute its findings.

WND has extensively documented the communications coming from both Congress and state legislatures towards constituents with questions pertaining to Obama’s eligibility as well as general comments when presented with this issue.  The comments from elected officials range from ridicule to indifference to the belief that the issue is settled to at least one brave Congressman who has put the question to America ’s putative president.

This writer has posed this issue numerous times to his elected officials in Washington , namely Congressman Peter Visclosky and Senators Evan Bayh and Dick Lugar.  At no time has any of the three responded to the concerns addressed to them.

It should be noted that Rep. Visclosky and Sen. Lugar have been faithful to respond to virtually every concern presented before them.  Whether the issue was cap and trade, Obamacare, hate crimes, spending, sovereignty, etc., both of them always wrote back, even when they admitted they did not agree with my positions and voted accordingly.

But when it came to Obama’s eligibility, this writer has yet to receive any correspondence one way or another.  It is quite telling that perhaps there is a huge cover-up that Congress doesn’t want to let the public in on.

For the record, out of roughly 30 letters sent to Sen. Bayh’s office over the last 2½ years on a myriad of issues, he has responded but twice and one of those was in response to a critical letter of his lack of representation this writer wrote to the local paper.

In this writer’s view, the refusal of Congress to hold hearings on Obama’s eligibility is a monumental miscarriage of justice to the constituents these elected officials serve.  The deafening silence points to a complicit Congress.  The thought that America may have a sitting president who is foreign born and arguably represents foreign interests should shudder Obama opponents and supporters alike.  Americans can disagree with the Obama agenda and fight tooth and nail to prevent its implementation. And Americans can accept him as legitimately elected, even it there were compelling questions relative to his victory.

But no American should have nagging thoughts in his or her mind as to whether their president is a natural born citizen.  It’s clear to any rational thinking individual that, when contrasted side to side, a natural born citizen is more likely to fairly represent America ’s best interests than a naturalized one.  Obama’s fondness for foreign policy and to put America on par with other foreign nations sends clear signals of questionable birth status.

However, while we must continue to force Mr. Obama to set the record straight as to his citizenship, it is time, even if reluctantly so, to turn our attention to impeachment.  Unlike impeachment, a failure or unwillingness on the part of Obama to provide proof of natural born citizenship warrants, according to experts and non-experts alike, simple removal from office.  Two examples of removal without impeachment can be found here.

But since simple removal is not immediately forthcoming, it is imperative that other avenues be pursued to oust America ’s putative president.

The U.S. Constitution states in Article II, Section 4:

“The president, vice-president and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

An extremely lengthy laundry list of cases could be made for impeachment.  In the minds of many folks, Obama’s actions to close Guantanamo Bay and for Islamic terrorists to be transferred to U.S. prisons, the pending trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a New York court instead of a military brig (though that may be changing), among many other items, including giving federal money to the family of the terrorist dictator of Libya, Muammar Gadhafi, likely constitute treason.  High crimes and misdemeanors arguably includes Social Security fraud and Selective Service fraud.

So many other compelling items for the removal of Barack Obama from office, which would take near endless time to document, can be viewed here.

However, I chose to cover the crime of bribery at this juncture because of recent events taking place in Washington.  The Obama Administration faces damning charges if the two events (one which surfaced last month) highlighted here (you need to read this link in order to grasp the full spectre of this matter) are indeed fact. Bribery, as its historically and traditional definition goes, is not in question here, if such jobs were indeed offered.  They should be investigated by Congress.

Of course, I don’t expect Obama & Eric Holder’s “see no evil, hear no evil, know no evil” approach to policy to change.

But an even more recent sinister charge of possible bribery in exchange for buying a vote may signal that the worst is yet to come.  A reason for this is because this one is better known in the public spotlight since it involves a judicial appointment and not just an administration job as in the above cases.  Another is because the vote could conceivably change the course of American history since landmark legislation is literally at stake.

The nomination of an arguably well qualified jurist by Barack Obama (a rare sense of brain power) to the 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals has raised eyebrows since this individual is the brother of an existing Congressman.

In short, Obama had a meeting last week with roughly a dozen recalcitrant Democrats to prop up support for his ailing and failing Obamacare legislation.  One of those Dems was conservative (somewhat) Congressman Jim Matheson of Utah.  Rep. Matheson had voted against the first House version of Obamacare back in November.  Now sibling Scott faces confirmation as a result of his nomination with GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch leading the way.

The initial appearance and credentials of Scott Matheson reports that he may not tilt to the left, unlike a hard core leftist Obama appointee last year to the 7^th Circuit who was deemed not qualified by even the American Bar Association.  Obama has not been shy about picking people ideologically to his liking on every issue.  For him to chart a different course here should not be seen as an obvious move to the so-called center by Obama but a more likely to buy the vote of the gentleman in Utah ’s second district.

What other logic makes sense here?  Well, when you go from a NO vote to “undecided”, what would you think?  If in the end Matheson votes NO the second time around, should Obamacare get a second vote (which is far from a foregone conclusion), then perhaps it was all a coincidence, which would on the surface seem strange.

But if a YES is forthcoming, then YES, it’s all but certain that Obama bought this vote.  It would be virtually certain that this is an impeachable offense.

And in this writer’s opinion, if Republicans (and some Democrats) don’t support the impeachment of America ’s putative president for bribery (among numerous other items), then nothing will.  They can ans should then all be viewed as either sellouts to the Constitution, indifferent or both, worthy of removal.

To further illustrate why impeachment is absolutely warranted (don’t forget we also had the Louisiana Purchase & the Cornhusker Kickback) and why now is the right time to do so, it’s important to note that there are at this moment two impeachment cases currently in place in the House Judiciary Committee. One is for Judge Sam Kent of Texas who was guilty of sexual misconduct, abuse of power and obstruction of justice. The impeachment hearings against Judge Kent are good reading but not specifically relevant here since bribery was not an issue.  If anything, it may be more along the lines with what former President Clinton was charged in his impeachment trial.  This judge is rightfully serving time in the big house for his bad conduct.

But the other case, the impeachment proceedings against Judge Thomas Porteous of Louisiana , is much more apropos since similar charges of bribery are in place and it is as recent as January.  It is also notable in that, as reported by one of the judiciary committee members, that up until then, there were no judicial impeachment cases for over 20 years (see page 38 of the link at the start of this paragraph).

Article I in the Porteous impeachment case states:

G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., while a Federal judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, engaged in a pattern of conduct that is incompatible with the trust and confidence placed in him as a Federal judge as follows:  Judge Porteous, while presiding as a United States district judge in Lifemark Hospitals of Louisiana, Inc. v. Liljeberg Enterprises, denied a motion to recuse himself from the case, despite the fact that he had a corrupt financial relationship with the law firm of Amato & Creely, P.C. which had entered the case to represent Liljeberg. In denying the motion to recuse, and in contravention of clear canons of judicial ethics,

Judge Porteous failed to disclose that beginning in or about the late 1980s while he was a State court judge in the 24th Judicial District Court in the State of Louisiana, he engaged in a corrupt scheme with attorneys, Jacob Amato, Jr., and Robert Creely, whereby Judge Porteous appointed Amato’s law partner as a ‘‘curator’’ in hundreds of cases and thereafter requested and accepted from Amato & Creely a portion of the curatorship fees which had been paid to the firm.

During the period of this scheme, the fees received by Amato & Creely amounted to approximately $40,000, and the amounts paid by Amato & Creely to Judge Porteous amounted to approximately $20,000.

Judge Porteous also made intentionally misleading statements at the recusal hearing intended to minimize the extent of his personal relationship with the two attorneys. In so doing, and in failing to disclose to Lifemark and its counsel the true circumstances of his relationship with the Amato & Creely law firm, Judge Porteous deprived the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals of critical information

for its review of a petition for a writ of mandamus, which sought to overrule Judge Porteous’s denial of the recusal motion. His conduct deprived the parties and the public of the right to the honest services of his office.

Judge Porteous also engaged in corrupt conduct after the Lifemark v. Liljeberg bench trial, and while he had the case under advisement, in that he solicited and accepted things of value from both Amato and his law partner Creely, including a payment of thousands of dollars in cash.

Thereafter and without disclosing his corrupt relationship with the attorneys of Amato & Creely PLC or his receipt from them of cash and other things of value, Judge Porteous ruled in favor of their client, Liljeberg. By virtue of this corrupt relationship and his conduct as a Federal judge, Judge Porteous brought his court into scandal and disrepute, prejudiced public respect for andconfidence in the Federal judiciary and demonstrated that he is unfit for the office of Federal judge.

Wherefore, Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and should be removed from office.

I don’t know about you but a payout to a judge from a legal firm once in close relationship with him in order to influence a particular outcome of a case he presided with them bears scant difference from the Matheson controversy.  Add to that the likelihood (the two cases mentioned and alluded to here earlier) and you have a very good possibility that bribery, which is, constitutionally speaking, an impeachable offense and a federal crime, was committed by the Obama Administration.

It should and must not be ignored.

I had planned to draft a petition for articles of impeachment to be filed against putative president Obama but since there are other websites doing that, we will refrain from doing so for the time being.

However, as things stand, I believe it is quite appropriate to ask the House Judiciary Committee to conduct an investigation into the Sestak and Romanoff cases (the aforementioned ones) as well as the Matheson one and file impeachment charges against Barack Obama as warranted.

As stated much earlier, I believe it is far preferable to have Mr. Obama simply removed for being constitutionally ineligible.  But if Congress will not do it, then we must urge them to begin impeachment proceedings pertaining to the alleged bribery committed.  In this case, we must request the U.S. House to do so since constitutionally speaking, impeachment cases start in the House.

If your Congressman is on the Judiciary Committee, you need to contact him or her and ask them to launch hearings and if appropriate, impeachment charged against Barack Obama for counts of bribery.

But regardless of whether your Congressman serves on the above committee, I urge you to contact Democrat Chairman John Conyers and Ranking Republican Lamar Smith to urge them to file the appropriate documents in preparation for such charges.

Please note – although Congressmen Conyers and Smith may not be your own elected representatives, because they wield a ton of clout for all America as their party’s heads of this committee, you need to let them know of your concerns.

I have outlined below the letter I faxed yesterday to their Washington offices.

---

Congressman John Conyers
Chairman, House Judiciary
U.S. House, Rm. 2138
Washington, DC  20515
Fax: (202) 225-7680

Congressman Lamar Smith
Ranking Republican, House Judiciary Committee
U.S. House, Rm. 2142
Washington, DC  20515
Fax: (202) 225-7082

3/8/10

Dear Chairman Conyers & Congressman Smith:

I write you today with great heaviness in my heart for this country as well as our rule of law.  It is my fervent hope and prayer that you will read everything I have to say and act accordingly.

By way of introduction, my name is Nedd Kareiva.  I am the former director of the Stop the ACLU Coalition (www.stoptheaclu.org – currently inactive) and the current director of a new organization known as Public School Exodus. Our website (currently offline) is www.publicschoolexodus.com.  Between our databases and my personal contacts, I represent roughly 5000 patriots across the fruited plain.

I believe I speak for nearly all of my contacts when I say that I am gravely concerned about the direction our nation is headed. Between high unemployment and a declining economy social infrastructure, I am convinced an about face is vitally needed before America is permanently lost.

It is probably not lost on both of you that America’s putative president, Barack Obama, is rapidly sinking into the political gutter.  Between the current scandals in Washington and on Capitol Hill, massive spending, unprecedented job losses and a relentless push for his highly unpopular health care legislation, public confidence in Washington and this man is nearly at an all time low. The reliable Rasmussen poll today shows a mere 22% in strong support of him with 41% strongly disapproving of his actions.  It’s fairly safe to say that Mr. Obama is political toast.  However, he shows little, if any, sign of caring about any of these matters.  This is quite troubling.

I checked out the House Judiciary’s website over the weekend and observed that this committee has considered impeachment charges against U.S. District Judge Sam Kent of Southern Texas and more recently filed such charges against U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous of Eastern Louisiana.  It appears the charges levied against Judge Kent currently lie dormant, perhaps because he was sentenced to nearly 3 years in the penitentiary for charges of sexual assault and abuse of power.  As horrific as that was, it’s irrelevant for the time being since justice has apparently been served with Judge Kent being locked up.

The charges against Judge Porteous, however, though rather different, are just as serious because abuses of power were committed during his tenure on the bench.  The first charge, the kickback scheme, is one that is most notable and which I want to address.

From what I have read, it appears the Louisiana jurist engaged in wrongful activity as pertaining to a long term financial relationship with a law firm and adjudicating a case in favor of his friend’s legal counsel without disclosure to the opposing legal team.  The Judiciary Committee reported the law firm proceeded to collect $40K from their client and sent half of it to Judge Porteous.

As noted in one of the documents posted on the Judiciary website, such actions on the part of this judge arguably constitute high crimes and misdemeanors   While I believe such a description is thoroughly accurate, I believe it would have been even more fitting had the term “bribery” been used and added, along with the constitutional reference to impeachment in Article II, Section 4.

I fully agree that the actions of Judge Porteous warrant his removal from office.  And I am pleased that the members of the committee were unanimous or nearly unanimous in every count filed against both Judge Porteous and now ex-Judge Kent.  It was notable that, per Congressman Goodlatte and other members of the committee, the desire for swift justice was mutually bipartisan and cordial.

It is along those same lines I respectfully request that members of the committee consider investigating possible bribery charges against the Obama Administration.

As you may know, there is said to be three cases where by Mr. Obama and/or a member of his staff used coercion or other actions in exchange for political favors, charges which could easily be translated to bribery under the proper circumstances.

The first case was reported last summer by the Denver Post over the Senate seat currently occupied by Mike Bennett of Colorado.  Mr. Bennett was appointed by Gov. Bill Ritter to replace Sen. Ken Salazar who went to work as Secretary of the Interior.  It was claimed that a state lawmaker who sought this appointment was offered a position at U.S. AID if he would consider abandoning his run.

The second case involved a possible appointment to Secretary of the Navy for Rep. Jim Sestak in exchange for not challenging incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter in the Democrat primaries. While the Pennsylvania Congressman refused to answer a question as to what position he was offered, he readily admitted that he was offered a job in the federal government.

And most recently concerns the rumors flying that Mr. Obama nominated the brother of Congressman Jim Matheson for a seat at the 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals in exchange for the Utah legislator’s YES vote for the legislation now commonly termed Obamacare.

Congressmen, these are serious indictments that must not be glossed over.  To charge a corrupt judge with abuse of power for bribing a group of lawyers to achieve a favorable outcome but not to charge Barack Obama and/or his administration with abuse of power and bribery to gain certain leverage is a serious offense.  It violates the spirit and law in the 14^th Amendment which forbids the denial of equal protection of the law.  In other words, putative president Obama and Judge Porteous must placed equally under the scrutiny of the law and judged the same way by it.

President JFK once said that it was a federal offense “to offer any man a federal job in return for a favor.”  If the words of JFK mean anything today, Obama and his administration must be fully investigated for bribery, an impeachable offense.  I urge you both to use the full weight of your positions to do the right thing and launch a criminal probe into the White House on these matters.

I am well aware that there are risks, politically and perhaps well beyond, for challenging Mr. Obama. It appears, based on his relationships with foreign power sources, such as George Soros and Middle East Muslims, not to mention his relationship with the ultra wealthy Goldman Sachs, that he is untouchable.  While human nature might dictate a form of reticence, based on Obama’s connections, such must not persuade either of you nor any member of the Judiciary from doing what is right. The public would insist on a thorough investigation of the charges. I cannot strongly urge you enough to do the same. This could well be the Watergate of the Obama Administration.

The possibility that one of these accusations could be true might give little pause if there were no other scandals or controversies.  Two such actions of offering favors for federal employment, while possibly alarming, could be viewed as coincidental.  But three such possibilities, well, I think most betting men wouldn’t bet a full deck on this being nothing.

That aside, sizable majorities of Americans view Obama’s actions to assign Gitmo detainees to American prisons and his desire to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other Islamic terrorists to U.S. courts as treasonous and thus impeachable.  His appeasements with foreign Muslim nations also raise questions as to whether his loyalty is to the United States or some foreign powers.  These matters should be thoroughly looked into as well.

And on top of it all, you have a continually growing uneasiness relevant to Mr. Obama’s questionable constitutional eligibility to be president.  Congress has ignored this elephant on Capitol Hill since the commencement of the 111^th Congress.  The issue is not going way anytime soon.  Congressmen and senators have heard from constituents from all across America who have serious doubts as to whether Mr. Obama is a U.S. citizen and most have given short shrift to their constituents’ concerns.  Congress has neglected to investigate this crisis and it shows, be it thru correspondence to members’ constituents or on the House or Senate floor.  The courts have consistently refused to address it as well, most frequently citing lack of standing or jurisdiction.  Not one case has been decided on the facts and the merits of the case.  No court has dismissed a case based on evidence.

In this writer’s opinion, Congress has done a grave disservice to the roughly half the country who have nagging doubts on Mr. Obama’s eligibility to be president.  It is incumbent upon our elected officials in Washington to ignore this critical issue no more.

For all these reasons and so many more which are not even laid out here, I cannot strongly urge you enough, Rep. Conyers as chairman and Rep. Smith as ranking Republican, to thoroughly investigate the issues above of bribery, treason and eligibility and report to the public an honest dispersal of the facts. The same way the committee has been above reproach and in bipartisanship towards Judge Porteous I expect the Judiciary Committee to do no less in approaching the issues concerning putative president Obama.

A timely response to my letter to you would most certainly be appreciated.  Thank you for taking the time to hear my concerns.

Respectfully,

Nedd Kareiva
(Address removed for this post)

---

Please note the following as you address this with your elected officials.

• Since the House is where impeachment proceedings begin, it is important that at this juncture you only contact your Congressman or woman and not your senators.  Express your concerns similarly as outlined in the above letter and in the full post.  Everyone should contact their representatives, even more so if they are Republicans or if they serve on the Judiciary.  And everyone needs to contact both Congressman Conyers and Congressman Smith.
• While phone calls help tabulate the amount of interest constituents have for the removal of Barack Obama, it is important to have your communications in writing.  In the same way verbal contacts have little, if any, power and meaning behind them, it is the same thing in contacting your elected officials.  A well written (preferably typed) letter (preferably no more than two pages) will get the attention of your elected official and/or his or her staff.  That is not to say a phone call is useless.  It certainly is not.  But calls can be ignored or forgotten. Letters cannot so easily be dismissed as such are considered more thoughtful than communications via the telephone.
• Avoid the e-mail route, if at all possible, since e-mails are frequently deleted without reading or ignored.  Most lawmakers cannot be directly reached today via direct e-mail from your personal account. They now (almost all of them) provide a web form on their websites for you to submit your requests.  However, unlike a sent e-mail from your mailbox which gives you a note of confirmation after sending, outside of calling your lawmakers’ offices, there is little way of knowing for sure whether he or she received your message unless you call them to verify but even then they may not be telling you the truth, particularly if the representative is a liberal Democrat.
• If at all possible, use a fax to get your message to your lawmakers as quickly as possible.  If you don’t have one and can’t afford one, many supply stores, real estate offices and currency exchanges do and you can often get your message over for just $2 or $3 dollars.  Efax.com is also another tool you may use, though there is a limit of how many you can send for free.  Going over their quota will either force you to buy into one of their packages or if you can’t afford to, will result in you being blocked from sending your message.
• If you have the means of doing so, FedEx your letter to your lawmaker’s Washington offices.  That will demonstrate how serious you are about this matter.  Avoid snail mail as that can take up to two weeks for delivery with all the anthrax and other security measures in place.
• If you don’t want to fax or mail your letter and it’s not too far away, take it over to your Congressman or woman’s local district office and ask an aide there to fax it to his or her DC offices.  Obviously that will not work in the case of the Chairman’s or ranking Republican’s offices unless  Reps. Conyers and Smith are your actual representatives in DC.
• While petitions have a modest effect on lawmakers, it is best by far if you can use your own words to draft your letters and thus skip the many online petitions that you can find.  It’s OK to go to those sites to understand the content of what is at stake, sites like here.  But you do best when you put your own words in your letters instead of using a petition to send what is considered by some a canned message.
• And while it is perfectly permissible to use my above letter as your own personal correspondence, it is much better to use the letter as a guideline for what you have to say.  I have laid out many good links in this post for you, my readers, as references.  Please take a little time to do your due diligence to gain a decent grasp of what is at stake and why impeachment is imperative and by far the best way (absent the preferred outright removal) to get the usurper out of office.
• Please close your letters with a request for a reply.
• Please note that in the above letter, it is possible that you might get a ring, no answer or busy signal at the Judiciary Committee’s fax number.  If this persists, then send your faxes to Rep.  Conyers’ & Rep. Smith’s Congressional offices.  Mr. Conyers office fax is (202) 225-0072 and Mr. Smith’s fax is (202) 225-8628.
• And should you decide you would like to fax the entire Judiciary Committee, their office fax numbers are here.
• Keep copies of your letters.  At some point, we might request copies (if you’re willing to share them) so we can get an idea of what was said and to whom it was sent to.

• Of course, be sure to spread the word to everyone who agrees with the absolute need to remove the pseudo-American Marxist from power.

If you have faxed or sent via FedEx letters to your Congressmen and women and/or the Judiciary Committee, please let me know by sending me an e-mail at TheObamaCrisis@ymail.com.

And though we are not yet looking to compile letters, if you would like to now share with me what you wrote, include that in your e-mail.  You may either copy and paste it into the e-mail body or you can send as an attachment in Word or PDF (no other programs, please).

Again, please spread the word and let’s force the Judiciary Committee to do its job again America’s bogus “president”.  Thank you and God bless.

Obot Radio: Another Utter Liberal Failure

The libs just don’t get it, do they?  Thursday’s Obamacare summit was, to put it mildly, a flop; no, a better term might be a colossal skunking.  If you are not a liberal, there’s no way any rationally minded person could say the Democrats won this “debate”.   Politico’s online poll (right margin) shows a more than 2-1 margin of victory in favor of the Republicans over Democrats.  Perhaps if Congressional Republicans articulated a similarly coherent message to Americans in Congress and on the campaign trails, we would not be in as many messes as we are today and there wouldn’t be so many outcries for a third party.  The GOP’s display in the dog and pony show summit was a breath of fresh air .  If the GOP continues making its case like they did on Thursday, the Democrats will be toast in the fall and perhaps well beyond. Kudos to Congressmen Paul Ryan (by far the best) and Eric Cantor as well as Sen. Lamar Alexander (for the most part) and others for a splendid job.

While Democrats continue to be unable to make their case for their socialized medicine to the American people, they now are working to infiltrate and disrupt conservative talk radio in support of their leader’s Obamacare health scam, I mean plan, to force it.   It can be interpreted as desperate, agitative, propagandic, obnoxious, etc.  But whatever it is, it is also like Obamacare and the summit – a colossal disaster. And laughable as well.

One need only read the transcript of the opening segment of Friday’s Rush Limbaugh show to see how this effort from Obama’s Organizing for America is little less than a hilarious joke.  In fact, you may want to click the above link to read all of what Rush so brilliantly stated and then return to this post.

OK, now that you have read the transcript, let’s go to the website for  “Radio Obama Barack” (or ROB – my acronym – for short) and have a little fun.  We’ll see if we can “ROB” them of their ideas – with a sense of humor to boot.

First, take a look at all the shows you can call.  As I click them (under “give me another show“), I will post the shows here.  You may get them in a different order and it’s possible you may get some that I don’t.  But since this is my post, we’ll go on what I find. However, happy clicking on your end.

OK, here they are.  For now, we’ll just list the names and comment on a few afterward

1. The Ed Schultz Show – perfect starter for the Obots and Democrats, considering he recommends multiple voting (i.e. vote early and often)
2. The Dennis Miller Show
3. The Fred Thompson Show
4. New Dimensions – note the bogus area code of 170-746-8983 – missing a digit since you have to dial 1 to make a call beyond your area code
5. What Really Happened
6. Glenn Beck – Weekend Edition
7. Jay Sekulow Weekend
8. On the Media
9. Brian & The Judge
10. Focus on the Family  Weekend
11. Freethought Radio – not sure if this is still running since it was part of the left wing Air America which went bankrupt and is now off the air
12. Wake up, Everybody – hello, any Obots “home”?
13. The Mike Gallagher Show
14. The Rush Limbaugh Show
15. News Talk 1260 Weekend
16. Living on Earth
17. The Glenn Beck Program
18. The Sean Hannity Show
19. The Best of Rush Limbaugh – uh, Obots, that only runs during certain national holidays.  I guarantee 100% you won’t get to talk to Rush.
    
20. The Barry Farber Show
21. The Mutual Fund Show – uh, Obots, that is a show dealing with people’s money, though maybe it would be worth calling to tell the host how expensive Obamacare will cost
22. Best of Dennis Prager
23. KTOE News Information & Music
    
24. Thru the Bible – Obots, where is it in the Bible where the Lord says, “Thou shalt provide health care for all people”?
    
25. Moneytalk – Obots, see #21
26. Steel on Steel
27. Best of Sean Hannity – Obots, see #19
28. KCMO 710: Cover Your Assets – Hmmm, maybe the T should be removed in “Assets”, no?
29. WFNC AM640 News
30. Radio Liberty
31. Dennis Prager Show
32. Roger Hedgecock Show
33. Best of Laura Ingraham
34. Insight for Living
35. Democracy Now
36. Mark Levin Show
37. The Rising Tide: Air America Minnesota AM 950 – uh, Obots, didn’t your Airhead America go off the air?
38. Free Minds America
39. Insight for Living
40. Saturday Night America
    

OK, after continuous clicking, I’m getting the same shows so we’ll stop at 40 for now.  For the record, the Ed Schultz Show (#1) and Democracy Now (#35) appeared yesterday in a test but not today.  Perhaps Obama’s webmaster removed those two since it really makes little sense for liberals (they don’t have much of that anyway, do they?) to talk to their choir directors in support of their beloved leader’s Obamacare.

However, liberals love Freethought Radio (#11) and The Rising Tide (#37), both part of  bankrupt Air America so I guess the directors there can preach to the choir and vice versa.

The Lars Larson Show and the Michael Savage Show were also in Friday’s “test” but not Saturday’s.  Perhaps the webmaster knows the times and days of some of the shows but not all.  It certainly makes no sense to call Rush, Hannity or Beck (and probably many others) on weekends or any “Best of” shows since they never do shows on these days.

So this “Call Now” is really laughable.  You don’t know if the show is on when you call or even if you have the right day.  Perhaps you might get an answering machine or voice mail where Obot defenders can leave their talking points is their best possibility of getting thru.  That would probably be the best thing for them instead of making themselves look like fools by going on live.

Thanks, Radio Obama, for providing us with the names and phone numbers of these shows, including the phony number of New Dimensions.  Their listed area code of (170) must be a new one lost on the phone companies.

Now I just clicked the “Listen now with Radio Time” button under “The Best of Dennis Prager” and I was taken to a new window which says “This topic is no longer available”.  Then you click “Details” and you get taken to this page.   It tells you when you can listen and where.

I also clicked to go to the Thru the Bible show and I got this page.  Now while it says in the left corner to call a particular number, it seems rather obvious that this show isn’t taking on the air calls.  Its mission, per its website, is to read the Bible through 30 minutes a day over a 5 year period.  I don’t think the Obots are going to be able to make a case for their fuhrer’s health scam since the show seems to be absent political flavor.

Feel free to try other shows as you see fit.  And if you want to throw in your two cents under “Report Your Call”, go ahead and do so.  Heck, you don’t even have to pretend that you made a call.  Just do it.  It will go thru immediately. I did and it was fun.

So it appears that whoever this Obama Radio webmaster is, he didn’t do his homework.  Perhaps he should have broken down the shows by days and time slots when to click to go on.  But since the Obots don’t seem to be too bright to think for themselves, I guess this shouldn’t be entirely unexpected.

The near 1200 posters at Politico’s article about Radio Obama almost unanimously agree.  The comments there are well worth reading.  It’s quite clear that almost all of them have avoided drinking the Kool-Aid.

Now as to the posted calling tips and discussion points for callers to go on the air and testify as to how Obamacare will benefit America, they speak for themselves and Rush breaks them down so it would be redundant for me to repeat them here.  However, what he says at the end of his Friday segment is a slam dunk and this is worth repeating, particularly the lunacy expressed below (highlit in bold red)

“As you know, the Obama administration through their website, Organizing for America, has got talking points out there for seminar callers.  They’re tired of getting beat up on the radio, and their hosts can’t succeed.  Look, MSNBC, at some point don’t you think that network would reach a degree of embarrassment and have to do something about it?  One of their hosts advocated ripping Dick Cheney’s heart out of his chest and kicking it down the street or whatever using it as a football and then putting it back in there.  I mean, these people, in their desperate, desperate attempt to get noticed, they are so obviously childish, immature, coarse. It’s just amazing that that network is allowed to continue on as it does.  So Obama, you know, those hosts, networks, nobody watches them.  Twenty-five thousand people one night last week watching CNN.  So Obama said, okay, I gotta get my own talking points on conservative talk radio because that’s all anybody is listening to.  So he’s got this website where he’s advocating people call shows like this one and lie about who they are.  Basically spam.  “Hi, we love you, I listen to you all the time, been listening to you forever, I want to talk about health care,” and then they give talking points.

Now, this is nothing new, it’s been going on since the nineties.  We identified these seminar callers back then.  But Obama has now — a presidential directive.  And we can’t find any!  We have struggled all day.  We’re in the third hour of the program.  We cannot find one Obama acolyte.  We cannot find one seminar caller.  We cannot find one spammer.  Now, it’s been suggested that they’re not up yet, which is a valid possibility.  It’s also just as valid that there just may not be that many of them anymore.  There may not be that many Obama supporters, which would not surprise me.  But, you know, our cameras and microphones are everywhere, and they’re not happy, from what I’m told, at the White House with how this is going.”

Seems like we got some real “smart” Obots here, don’t we?  Since they’re from Chicago, perhaps they were among Obama’s recruits as a community organizer for the Windy City. Maybe Obama, Axlerod, Rahm or others of his Chicago connection can recruit them to start making their Robo-Obot calls and telling their “stories” (AKA fibs).  Given today’s Rasmussen poll, showing a tie for the worst disapproval margin for Obama since taking office, these folks might be all he has left in America (besides Nancy Pelosi and her San Francisco liberal district) to make their case for Obamacare.  After all, they don’t have to fall on the sword or walk the plank as most of the rest of the Democrats in Congress are doing for Usurper Obama.

Priceless!  Is this the best the Democratic National Committee can do for America.

Oh, if you’re not sure this classic piece of idiocy is sponsored by the DNC, just go to the bottom left corner of the Radio Obama page and see the bottom right corner where it is “powered by hope and supporters” like me.

I think not.

Now to permanently put a sword thru this legislation and make these scoundrels walk the political plank this fall.  I’d say we’re well on our way.

Or so I pray.