Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Thug to Thug: "A Big F__king Deal!"
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Born in the USA? Elena Kagan Tied to Obama's Birth Certificate
It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, doesn't it?
From WorldNetDaily
Just when you thought there couldn't be any more players in the ongoing soap opera over the hunt for President Obama's original birth certificate and his constitutional eligibility for office, there comes yet another name: Elena Kagan.
Yes, the same Elena Kagan nominated by the commander in chief to be the next justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has actually been playing a role for some time in the dispute over whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House.
Here's the connection. Kagan served as solicitor general of the United States from March 2009 until May of this year.
In that role, she legally represented the U.S. government in numerous cases coming before the Supreme Court.
A simple search of the high court's own website reveals Kagan's name coming up at least nine times on dockets involving Obama eligibility issues.
Read the rest of this entry >>
Monday, June 21, 2010
Rahm Traded Favors with Blago: Report
When we heard yesterday that Rahm (Dead Fish) Emanuel will be leaving his position of White House Chief-of-Staff, we suspected that news probably had something to do with information flowing from the trial of fellow Chicago thug Rod Blagojevich. Indeed, before a 24 hour news cycle had past, "good reasons" had given way to "real reasons." The corruption of the man is about to be revealed, and we doubt very much that Emanuel will be the only White House thug exposed.
Truth is the daughter of time, and it will be good for America to learn once again that character matters and that it is best to know the backgrounds of those to whom we entrust the highest offices in the land.
President Barack Obama's chief of staff, then a congressman in Illinois, apparently attempted to trade favors with embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich while he was in office, according to newly disclosed e-mails obtained by The Associated Press.
Emanuel agreed to sign a letter to the Chicago Tribune supporting Blagojevich in the face of a scathing editorial by the newspaper that ridiculed the governor for self-promotion. Within hours, Emanuel's own staff asked for a favor of its own: The release of a delayed $2 million grant to a school in his district.
Read the rest of this entry >>
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Will Blagojevich Trial Lead to Obama's Impeachment?
From NBC Chicago
Former governor Rod Blagojevich's defense team asked Thursday to issue a trial subpoena to the President of the United States of America. The motion, intended to be heavily redacted, was improperly edited -- the full document was easily viewable if the text is copied and pasted to another document (an error first revealed on Capitol Fax). Below, the six revelations the redacted portions were meant to conceal.1. Obama may have lied about conversations with convicted fraudster Tony Rezko
Blagojevich's lawyers allege that Rezko admitted breaking the law by contributing "a large sum of cash" to a public official. Blagojevich's attorneys say that public official is Obama. Obama said that Rezko never relayed a request from a lobbyist to hold a fundraiser in favor of favorable legislative action. But the point may be moot: regardless of Obama talking/not talking to Rezko, Blagojevich's attorneys say that Obama refused the request regardless.
Redacted portion: However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and the United States Attorneys a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the
government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having
conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.
Redacted footnote: The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama.
2. Obama may have overtly recommended Valerie Jarret for his Senate seat
Blagojevich's defense team basically alleges that Obama told a certain labor union official that he (Obama) would support Valerie Jarrett's candidacy for the Senate seat. Jarrett, referred to as "Senate Candidate B", is now a senior advisor to the president.
Redacted portion: Yet, despite President Obama stating that no representatives of his had any part of any deals, labor union president told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to labor union official on November 3, 2008 who received a phone message from Obama that evening. After labor union official listened to the message labor union official told labor union president “I’m the one”. Labor union president took that to mean that labor union official was to be the one to deliver the message on behalf of Obama that Senate Candidate B was his pick. (Labor union president 302, February 2, 2009, p. 7).
Labor union official told the FBI and the United States Attorneys “Obama expressed his belief that [Senate Candidate B] would be a good Senator for the people of Illinois and would be a candidate who could win re-election. [Labor union official] advised Obama that [labor union official] would reach out to Governor Blagojevich and advocate for [Senate Candidate B] ... [Labor union official] called [labor union president] and told [labor union president] that Obama was aware that [labor union official] would be reaching out to Blagojevich.” (Labor union official 302, February 3, 2009 p. 3).
3. A supporter of President Obama may have offered quid pro quo on a Jarrett senate appointment
Redacted portion: Supporter of Presidential Candidate Obama is mentioned in a phone call on November 3, 2008, having offered “fundraising” in exchange for Senate Candidate B for senator (Blagojevich Home Phone Call # 149).
4. Obama maintained a list of good Senate candidates
Redacted portion: President-elect Obama also suggested Senate Candidate A to Governor Blagojevich. John Harris told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to President’s Chief of Staff on November 12, 2008. Harris took notes of the conversation and wrote that President’s Chief had previously worked as Blagojevich's press secretary. Obama agreed of Staff told Harris that Senate Candidate A was acceptable to Obama as a senate pick. (Harris handwritten notes, OOG1004463) President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that “he could not say where but somewhere it was communicated to him that” Senate Candidate A was a suggested candidate viewed as one of the four “right” candidates “by the Obama transition team.”
5. Rahm Emanuel allegedly floated Cheryl Jackson's name for the Senate seat
Redacted portion: President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that he had a conversation discussing the Senate seat with Obama on December 7, 2008 in Obama’s car. President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI “Obama expressed concern about Senate Candidate D being appointed as Senator.
[President’s Chief of Staff] suggested they might need an expanded list to possibly include names of African Americans that came out of the business world. [President’s Chief of Staff] thought he suggested Senate Candidate E who was the head of the Urban League and with President’s Chief of Staff’s suggestion.
6. Obama had a secret phone call with Blagojevich
Redacted portion: President-elect Obama also spoke to Governor Blagojevich on December 1, 2008 in Philadelphia. On Harris Cell Phone Call # 139, John Harris and Governor’s legal counsel discuss a conversation Blagojevich had with President-elect Obama. The government claims a conspiracy existed from October 22, 2008 continuing through December 9, 2008.6 That conversation is relevant to the defense of the government’s theory of an ongoing conspiracy. Only Rod Blagojevich and President Obama can testify to the contents of that conversation. The defense is allowed to present evidence that corroborates the defendant’s testimony.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Obama's Thug Government Marches On, Mother's Records "Missing"
First we learned that the FBI has destroyed its records on Obama's grandfather, now it appears that the State Department has destroyed all records, in the years surrounding Obama's birth, for his Marxist mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.
At what point does America recognize that these are not merely Marxist thugs, but that they have carried out a coup d'etat?
Thursday, February 14, 2013
President Kennedy's Secret Society Speech
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."~ Thomas Jefferson
Monday, July 5, 2010
America Rising: An Open Letter to Democrat Politicians
On the day of the thug's inauguration, we posted Chopin's Funeral March, because anyone listening knew that this lot meant the destruction of an America most Americans cherish. We regret that time has proven us right. But this video speaks powerfully for all the newly aroused Tea Party patriots who are determined to reclaim our nation, and roll back the socialism and the web of laws and executive orders that strike at the moral and legal foundations of our country. This November may be our last chance to save America from a new dark age.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Big Pharma, Big Food, Big Fuel, And Big Fascism
Now, what kind of system do we actually have today? Because the original system has been perverted – first by ordinary criminals, then by the conspiracy for world government – the system we have now, the perversion, began as “mercantilism” and today is best described as Fascism.
“Mercantilism” was the system the Founding Fathers designed our new country to reject. In part, it meant government control of the economy and colonies controlled by force of arms. One example of a mercantilist enterprise was the British East India Company, which ruled that country for the Queen. Another was the Dutch East India Company, which, at the height of its power, had forty warships.
A man named Benito Mussolini renamed this system and installed it in Italy after World War I. He called it “Fascism.” Remember that Fascism had nothing to do with oppressing Jews. Mussolini came to power legally in 1922, after the infamous March on Rome, when no one had ever heard of former Corporal Hitler. Hitler would not become Chancellor, legally, for another eleven years, not until 1933. Both Mussolini and Hitler were basically street thugs, but, again, they took control of their governments legally, within the constitutional frameworks of their respective countries.
What was and is Fascism? Mussolini is the expert. Would you believe him? According to Mussolini, Fascism is an amalgamation of the monster corporations and the government, which gives the former the force they need to impose their will and gives the latter the power they crave. Indeed, Mussolini’s system also became known as “the corporate state.”
In the beginning, there was considerable admiration for Mussolini’s system in Washington, District of Corporatism. Yes, he was a thug, and, yes, his followers wore black shirts, but he certainly did “make the trains run on time.” Indeed, there was even some enthusiasm in the District for Adolf’s typical German efficiency at the very beginning, before the discovery of the Holocaust.
There is considerable reluctance among patriots to call our present, perverted system “Fascism,” because that is what the Communists traditionally have called it, and a patriot rightly shrinks from parroting something the Communists say. That reluctance should be dismissed because the difference is that the Communists want to replace Fascism with their version of Socialism, which is of course Communism, while patriots want to replace the present Fascist system with the original system of Free Enterprise. Patriots want to revive the dormant Constitution.
Read the rest of this entry >>
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Obama Drops to His Lowest Approval Rating Ever as Obamacare Scandal Explodes
With millions of Americans losing their health insurance thanks to the Obamacare health care law that pro-life groups warned would ration care, President Barack Obama is now at his lowest approval rating ever of his presidency.American voters disapprove of the job President Barack Obama is doing by a 54-39 percentage point margin, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll that has him at his lowest marks ever. Even women disapprove 51 – 40 percent, according to the survey released today.President Obama’s lowest score before today was a 55 – 41 percent disapproval in an October 6, 2011 survey by the independent Quinnipiac University. Today, disapproval is 58 – 37 percent among men, 91 – 6 percent among Republicans and 63 – 30 percent among independent voters. Democrats approve 79 – 14 percent. White voters disapprove 62 – 32 percent while black voters approve 75 – 15 percent and Hispanic voters disapprove by a slim 47 – 41 percent margin.Read more at LifeNews.com >>
Thursday, June 14, 2012
The Catholic Vote Swings
From National Review Online
By Michael Novak
The new wisdom is that Catholics vote just like everybody else. That purported wisdom isn’t wise.
The Catholic vote differs in four decisive ways from the Protestant, Jewish, and secular votes.
(1) The Catholic vote is concentrated mainly in the largest states in the Electoral College: California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, New Jersey.
(2) A larger proportion of Catholics than of any other religious group except Jews votes regularly, every election. In some jurisdictions (Chicago, Boston) Catholic voters have been known to vote at a rate of 104 percent or more when necessary, some of them after their natural deaths.
(3) In some key states, the Catholic vote, although tending more Democratic, is fairly evenly split between the Democrats and the Republicans. Keeping the Catholic vote for the Democrat down even to 52 percent may be enough to get a Republican elected.
And (4) — most important of all — in many states Catholic voters frequently swing between parties by margins of 3 to 6 percent. And even more in some years.
As political professionals know well, each swinger counts twice. Each takes a vote away from one column and puts it into the other. If on a national basis the 25 million Catholic votes (24 percent of all votes cast) swing by 1 million votes toward Romney and away from Obama, that gives Romney a net gain of 2 million votes in relation to his competitor, and Obama a net loss of 2 million. This year it seems more likely to be a swing of 2 million for Romney, a net loss to Obama of 4 million. And it may be even a larger swing, depending on how powerful the broad-based campaign to protect religious liberty turns out to be.
The historical record of these large swings helps to explain why the Catholic vote has gone with the winning side in so many elections since 1952. Put another way, the Catholic swing vote has more than any other decided the winner, just because it is of such significant numbers. No Democrat since 1952 (except for Clinton in 1992) has ever won the White House without a majority of the Catholic vote.
In some states, as noted above, Republicans do not have to win a majority of the Catholic vote to carry the state; they need only hold down the Democratic Catholic majority by two or three percentage points. In Pennsylvania, my home state, the rule among professionals was that if the Catholic vote for the Democrat could be held down to 52 percent, the Republican could take the state.
Percentage of Catholic Vote for Presidential Winners
1952: Eisenhower, 44%
1956: Eisenhower, 49%
1960: Kennedy, 78%
1964: Johnson, 76%
1968: Nixon, 33%
1972: Nixon, 52%
1976: Carter, 57%
1980: Reagan, 47%
1984: Reagan, 61%
1988: Bush, 49%
1992: Clinton, 47%
1996: Clinton, 55%
2000: Bush, 46%
2004: Bush, 48%
2008: Obama, 53%
(The figures above are from Gallup. In the three-way race of 1968, Nixon lost the Catholic vote to Hubert Humphrey by a margin of 59 percent to 33 percent, but managed to squeak out a victory, since much of the Southern Protestant vote went to George Wallace. In 1972, however, Mr. Nixon’s 52 percent broke the Democratic lock on the Catholic vote.)
Finally, it may be that in some years a particular factor affects a significant slice of Catholic voters more than most others — the chance to elect the first Catholic president in 1960, for instance.
And Catholics tend to identify themselves as Catholics long after they have ceased going to church (“born Catholic” or “non-practicing Catholic,” these tend to qualify their identity). The difference in voting patterns between Catholics who go to Mass at least weekly and those who don’t is in some matters (partial-birth abortion, e.g.) unusually large. In 2012, I expect the defense of religious liberty to cut as deeply against Obama as 3 million Catholic voters or more. Worth watching.
Michael Novak is distinguished visiting professor at Ave Maria University and co-author, with Jana Novak, of Washington’s God.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Southern Avenger: Praising Arizona
Perhaps there is a silver lining to America's unfolding tragedy. States are beginning to assert their legitimate rights and sovereignty in the face of the federal meltdown. Let us pray that California, New Mexico and Texas soon follow Arizona's lead in addressing a problem that Obama, like most Americans, knows would ultimately destroy our nation.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Massa Details Naked Shower Fight With 'Son of the Devil's Spawn'
It's now becoming clear that Representative Eric Massa's problems and his sudden resignation from Congress are the result of blackmail by White House thug-in-chief Rahm Emanuel. It is intended as a lesson, no doubt, to any other Democrats who might be tempted to represent their constituents rather than rubber stamp the Marxist agenda for America prepared by the Obama administration.
And if this is what they are willing to do to one of their own, a Democrat representing the most Republican district in New York State, imagine what these racketeers will do to win the next election!
From Fox News
Embattled Rep. Eric Massa used his final hours in office to settle scores with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and other Democrats he claims are pushing him out of office to clear the way for health care reform.
It sounds like the kind of bad dream that only congressmen have -- White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, stark naked, approaches you in the locker room to give you a piece of his mind for not supporting the president's budget.
Only this actually happened, according to Rep. Eric Massa, the embattled New York Democrat who resigned Monday and used his last hours in office to settle some scores with party leaders.
He reserved his most excoriating stuff for Emanuel, whom he called "son of the devil's spawn" on his weekly radio show Sunday.
"He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to a front end of a steam locomotive," Massa said. Illustrating his point, he told the story of how he winded up in an argument with the chief of staff while they were both naked in the congressional gym showers.
Massa said Emanuel came up to him last year, shortly after he entered Congress, while he was trying to clean up to give him grief about a budget vote.
Read the rest of this entry >>
Monday, August 10, 2015
Hero SAS Sniper Saves Father and Eight-Year-Old Son from being Beheaded by ISIS Maniac
Here is the dramatic story from the Daily Express:
A HERO SAS sniper gunned down a knife-wielding Islamic State (ISIS) maniac just as he was trying to brutally behead a father and his young son.
An SAS sniper took out the ISIS executioner just in time |
The brave British marksman saved the terrified eight-year-old and his father after taking out the crazed jihadi with a head shot from 1,000 metres away.
The special forces crack shot then killed two other members of the hated terror group, who were also taking part in the sick planned execution.
ISIS militants had decreed that the little boy and his father must die after branding them "infidels" because they refused to denounce their faith.
They were just seconds from death when the hero sniper intervened to stop the barbaric killing in the Syrian desert. The pair were part of the minority Shia sect of Islam which ISIS considers to be heretical.
They were saved from a cruel and painful death at the hands of the fanatics after an Iraqi spy tipped off British special forces to the planned execution.
Special forces troops who arrived at the killing site, where ISIS was carrying out a series of rigged 'trials' of locals, discovered a gruesome scene with several headless bodies already lying bloodied on the desert floor.
The dramatic rescue operation took place last month near the Syrian border with Turkey, where an elite SAS unit had been conducting covert patrols.
Defence sources described how the SAS unit moved into a position just outside a village where ISIS members were holding the 'trial' in front of a crowd of locals who had been forced to attend at gunpoint.
The crack team considered calling in an air strike using a Reaper Drone, but the elite troops feared many of the innocent civilians who had been forced to watch the executions might also be killed.
Instead the SAS unit decided on a risky long-range kill using the team’s sniper.
Speaking to the Daily Star Sunday, one source said: “There were several decapitated bodies already lying on the ground.
"Through binoculars the soldiers could see that the crowd were terrified and many were in tears."
A man and a young boy were dragged out in front of the crowd and were made to kneel down.
"They were both wearing blindfolds and looked terrified.
"A tall bearded man emerged and drew a long knife.
"He began addressing the crowd and slapping the father and his son around the head and kicking them on to the floor.
"Standing either side of the executioner were two other Isis fighters, both armed with AK47s."
The SAS marksman, using a .50 calibre sniper rifle fitted with a silencer, killed the executioner just in time.
The source added: "The ISIS thug who was about to decapitate the father was shot in the head and collapsed.
"Everyone just stared in confusion. The sniper then dispatched the two henchmen with single shots – three kills with three bullets.
"Someone from the crowd then ran over and untied the father and son’s hands and took their blindfolds off.
"They just stared at the bodies and then ran. They were last seen heading towards the Turkish border in a pick-up truck.
"It was a good day’s work."
The SAS team was later told the village held a party to celebrate the deaths of the ISIS fighters and it is understood terrorists have since refused to enter the town.
SAS teams have fought alongside resistance fighters in both Iraq and Syria for more than a year.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
O Canada!
It took Canada a mere 37 days to do the right thing. How is it possible that after two, long years, so many Americans fail to grasp that Barack Hussein Obama is a radical Marxist thug, having spent his whole life being mentored by and consorting with Communists and domestic terrorists, and who is committed to overturn, through any means possible, the basic institutions of the United States?
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
A Face that only a KGB Thug Could Love
Thursday, October 30, 2008
An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches
An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches (pdf) (thanks to Right Truth reader Junichi)THE EVIDENCE IS HERE: This document contains over 60 pages of evidence and analysis proving Barack Obama’s use of a little-known and highly deceptive and manipulative form of “hack” hypnosis on millions of unaware Americans, and reveals what only a few psychologists and hypnosis/NLP experts know.
Barack Obama’s speeches contain the hypnosis techniques of Dr. Milton Erickson, M.D. who developed a form of “conversational” hypnosis that could be hidden in seemingly normal speech and used on patients without their knowledge for therapy purposes. Obama’s speeches intentionally contain:
- Trance Inductions
- Hypnotic Anchoring
- Pacing and Leading
- Pacing, Distraction and Utilization
- Critical Factor Bypass
- Stacking Language Patterns
- Pre-programed Response Adaptation
- Linking Statements/ Causality Bridges
- Secondary Hidden Meanings/Imbedded Suggestions
- Emotion Transfer
- Non-Dominant Hemisphere Programming
Obama’s techniques are the height of deception and psychological manipulation, remaining hidden because one must understand the science behind the language patterns in order to spot them. This document examines Obama’s speeches word by word, hand gesture by hand gesture, tone, pauses, body language, and proves his use of covert hypnosis intended only for licensed therapists on consenting patients. Obama’s mesmerized, cult-like, grade-school-crush-like worship by millions is not because “Obama is the greatest leader of a generation” who simply hasn’t accomplished anything, who magically “inspires” by giving speeches. Obama is committing perhaps the biggest fraud and deception in American history.
Obama is not just using subliminal messages, but textbook covert hypnosis and neuro-linguistic programming techniques on audiences that are intentionally designed to sideline rational judgment and implant subconscious commands to think he is wonderful and elect him President. Obama is eloquent. However, Obama’s subconscious techniques are shown to elicit powerful emotion from his audience and then transfer those emotions onto him, to sideline rational judgment, and implant hypnotic commands that we are unaware of and can’t even consciously question. The polls are misleading because some of Obama’s commands are designed to be triggered only in the voting booth on November 4th. Obama is immune to logical arguments like Wright, Ayers, shifting every position, character, and inexperience, because hypnosis affects us on an unconscious and emotional level. To many people who see this unaccomplished man’s unnatural and irrational rise to the highest office in the world as suspicious and frightening and to those who welcome it, this document uncovers, explains, and proves the deceptive tactics behind true “Obama Phenomenon” including why younger people are more easily affected.
EXPOSING OBAMA’S DECEPTION MAY BE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT DEMOCRACYThe full article in pdf, pages, is located here and I suggest you read it all.
I found the following of great interest:Specific examples of Obama using 14 separate hypnotic pacing statements in his Denver 2008 Convention speech Elementary pacing examples from Obama include, “now is the time”, and “as I stand here before you.” These statements are undeniably true in the simplest terms and commonly used parts of his pacing techniques, because of course now is the time, and if he is there speaking, of course he is standing before us.I suppose anybody can win the White House if you use hypnosis and illegal foreign campaign donations.
These are things the hypnotist says that are verifiably true, and used to lower our critical factor defenses to allow implantation of subconscious messages. Looking at “pacing” statements alone, Obama’s 2008 Democratic National Convention Speech in Denver48 uses them throughout. Yet, nobody suspects these language patterns to be anything other than an innocent part of his powerful speech.
Three of Obama’s favorite hypnotic paces are “that’s why I stand here tonight”, “now is the time”, and “this moment.” Just these three pacing statements are used by Obama a total of fourteen (14) times throughout this single speech.
Monday, April 13, 2009
An Historic Opportunity to Reassert States' Rights
South Carolina needs more than websites, transparency and public relations campaigns; it needs bold and decisive leadership.
Editorial from The Washington TimesGovernment bailout funds are the roach motel for financial institutions - they check in, but they can't check out.
Banks that were forced to take bailout money are running into political obstacles that prevent them from repaying it. The White House is unwilling to give up the additional control over the banks - the ability to make operational decisions, fire executives and dictate pay scales - that the bailout funds allow. All this has happened as the Congressional Budget Office has raised the estimated cost of the Troubled Asset Relief Program to taxpayers by almost $200 billion to a total bill of $356 billion.
In many cases, this government dependency is not the fault of the banks because many were being run responsibly. According to Fox News judicial analyst and New Jersey Superior Court Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, banks with no financial problems were forced to sell stock to the government or face the threat of costly and harassing public audits. This happened to banks that had "no bad debt, no credit default swaps, no liquidity problems, and no subprime loans" and didn't want or need any government funds. Judge Napolitano called the government actions what they are: "classic extortion."
Read the rest of this entry >>
Friday, November 16, 2012
Secession!
"We are disgusted that Republican leaders, even in states like our own South Carolina, not only acquiesce to the GOP betrayal, but were among Governor Romney's strongest supporters."
Nominating the liberal, northeastern Governor who is famous for his lack of principled convictions, and who authored the prototype for Obamacare, is at best offering less of the same. The failure of Congressional Republicans to even raise the question of impeachment for Obama's many impeachable assaults on the U. S. Constitution, and the reelection of that same, failed GOP congressional leadership, fuels the rightful despair and opposition leading to secession movements.
Secession petitions now filed for all 50 states
Petitions signed by hundreds of thousands of Americans seeking permission for their states to peacefully secede from the union have now been filed for all 50 states on the White House website.The secession petition push began last week on the site's We The People section after a Slidell, La., man filed a petition on Nov. 7 to allow Louisiana to secede. Residents from other states followed suit.As of Wednesday afternoon, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas—all states that voted for former Gov. Mitt Romney—as well as Florida each had accumulated more than 25,000 signatures, the threshold needed to trigger an official response from the Obama administration. Collectively, the secession petitions now have more than 700,000 digital signatures.Texas is in the lead with more than 99,000, but Gov. Rick Perry said on Tuesday that he does not support secession."Gov. Perry believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it," a statement from the governor's office read. "But he also shares the frustrations many Americans have with our federal government."Meanwhile, residents of Austin, Texas' stubbornly liberal stronghold, have petitioned the White House to allow the city to "withdraw from the state of Texas [and] remain part of the United States."Of course, the petitions are little more than symbolic—and nothing new. Similar petitions were filed after the 2004 and 2008 elections. And at least one petition filed on the site asks that the president sign an executive order to strip U.S. citizenship from anyone who signed a petition to secede and requests that they are "peacefully deported."Secession, though, is not the only thing people are petitioning the White House for. Included among the 140 petitions currently displayed on the site: two seeking federal legalization of marijuana, one asking for the halt of U.S. drone strikes and one demanding a recount of the election.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Mark Levin on Worthless RINOs, Government Shutdowns and the Power of the Purse
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
The Light Breaks Through: One Day's Revelations About America's Enemy Occupiers
We have been ridiculed for our characterization of Obama and his regime as "illegitimate," "thugs," and "criminals," but a glance of one day's headlines makes clear what we have always believed; we were restrained in our characterizations of this traitorous, outlaw regime.
Yesterday also saw revelations that the Obama Justice Department secretly obtained two months of phone records for Associated Press journalists and singled out those who asked tough questions for special harassment by the IRS. Any one of these revelations would be enough to bring down governments in many parliamentary democracies, as they would have here in the days when the United States Constitution was the revered law of the land.
Americans have also seen nationally orchestrated efforts to undermine democratic processes through voter fraud carried out by an array of Obama-allied, Alinsky front groups.
Contempt for Congress and the separation of powers has been a hallmark of Obama's governing style. He has literally and unconstitutionally bypassed the legislative process through the promulgation of hundreds of Executive Orders.
Obama's arrogance is so over-the-top, that on a day when most politicians would be in crisis mode, Obama took a break from the links to attend yet another fundraiser with entertainment glitterati in New York.