Archive for November, 2009

Treatment Plan for Monday’s Patriotic Flu

Posted on November 29, 2009. Filed under: Soapbox | Tags: , , |

If you are feeling sick as a result of what is happening in our country and are tired of the way Washington treats us, you are infected by the Patriotic Flu
Whether you take the day off Monday in protest or not, be sure to make those calls to tell government we are SICK OF IT!  Without them hearing from us, the protest is meaningless. No need to be fancy, unless of course, you wish to communicate the reason for your illness. The most important thing are these or similar words:
I have been infected by the Patriotic Flu. I am SICK of the way politics is working in Washington and sick of what is happening to our country at your hands. Government is required by the Constitution to represent the people. The people want you to STOP socialist government reforms NOW.
Twitter Example:
I’m infected by Patriotic Flu and am SICK of your socialist government reforms. STOP NOW! #tweetcongress #teaparty #912
Tweet Congress … remember to put #tweetcongress in your tweet.
US Government on Twitter … remember to put #tweetcongress in your tweet.
The Complete List of phone/fax/email, etc.. for Congress
Fax your Senators and Representatives for free
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

The Greatest Scam In The History of Earth

Posted on November 28, 2009. Filed under: Enemies of The State, General Info | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

I recall the op-ed piece  at IBD earlier this month which read:

Control: The House and Senate climate bills contain a provision giving the president extraordinary powers in the event of a “climate emergency.” As chief of staff Rahm Emanuel says, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

If you thought the House health care bill that nobody read has hidden passages that threaten our freedoms and liberty, take a peak at the “trigger” placed in the byzantine innards of both the House-passed Waxman-Markey bill and the Kerry-Boxer bill just passed by Democrats out of Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Environment and Public Works Committee.

As Nick Loris of the Heritage Foundation points out, the Kerry-Boxer bill requires the declaration of a “climate emergency” if the concentration of carbon dioxide and other declared greenhouse gases in the atmosphere exceeds 450 parts per million (ppm). It was at about 286 ppm before the Industrial Revolution and now sits at around 368 ppm.

That figure was picked out of a hat because the warm-mongers believe that’s the level at which the polar ice caps will disappear, boats can be moored on the Statue of Liberty’s torch and dead polar bears will wash up on the beaches of Malibu.

The Senate version includes a section that gives the president authority, under this declared “climate emergency,” to “direct all Federal agencies to use existing statutory authority to take appropriate actions … to address shortfalls” in achieving greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions.

What the “appropriate actions” might be are not defined and presumably left up to the discretion of the White House. Could the burning of coal be suspended or recreational driving be banned? Sen. David Vitter, R-La., asked the EPA for a definition and received no response.

Competitive Enterprise Institute scholar Chris Horner says “this agenda transparently is not about GHG concentrations, or the climate. It’s about what the provision would bring: almost limitless power over private economic activity and individual liberty for the activist president and, for the reluctant leader, litigious greens and courts” packed by liberal Democrat appointees.

Speaking of litigious greens,  published by the Western Legacy Alliance:
In an open letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), dated November 2, 2009, members of the Congressional Western Caucus expressed great concern to Attorney General Holder regarding the ongoing and apparent abuse of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by certain organizations including environmental and special interest groups. The Caucus highlights the complete lack of oversight, accountability, and transparency in the overall process and allocation of funds under EAJA, which appears to have contributed to the egregious abuse.

“Environmental groups have been working to deny grazing rights to America’s ranchers for decades. They do so by claiming violations of environmental policy, suing federal environmental agencies and ultimately, tying up ranchers’ time and resources in costly, and often baseless, court battles,” said Jeff Faulkner, Western Legacy Alliance (WLA) member. “What makes this situation worse is the fact that these environmental groups such as Western Watersheds Project and the Center for Biological Diversity are shaking down federal government programs so they can access taxpayer dollars to fund their radical agendas.”

Two of the federal programs that are seemingly handing out millions, and possibly billions, to environmental groups are the EAJA and the Judgment Fund.

The EAJA was established approximately 30 years ago by Congress to ensure that individuals, small businesses and/or public interest groups with limited financial capacity could seek judicial redress from unreasonable government actions that threatened their rights, privileges or interests.

According the U.S. Department of the Treasury website, the Judgment Fund, which was created in the 1960’s, “…is available for most court judgments and Justice Department compromise settlements of actual or imminent lawsuits against the government. Congress has added a number of administrative claim awards (settlements by agencies at the administrative level, without a lawsuit). The Judgment Fund has no fiscal year limitations, and there is no need for Congress to appropriate funds to it annually or otherwise. Moreover, disbursements from it are not attributed to or accounted for by the agencies whose activities give rise to awards paid. Absent a specific statutory requirement, the agency responsible is not required to reimburse the Judgment Fund.”

Since 2003, the Judgment Fund has paid out $4.7 billion in judgments, including the reimbursement of attorney’s fees. It appears environmental groups have accessed millions of taxpayer dollars from this fund; however, the Web site reporting these payments does not indicate to whom the payments were made or for what purpose. Additional investigation reveals that the same environmental groups benefiting from EAJA payments are accessing the Judgment Fund to millions of dollars each year.

An article at Fox News about the open letter noted:

American taxpayers are being forced to fund thousands of lawsuits filed against the federal government by environmental organizations — with their lawyers clocking thousands of hours and charging fees of up to $650 an hour.

The U.S. government hands out millions of dollars each year to various environmental organizations to help protect fish, wildlife and other aspects of the environment. And every year, those same groups spend millions suing the government over everything from forest policy and carbon emissions to water quality and wolf habitats.

Who paid the attorneys fees? The American taxpayers did.

In the lucrative world of environmental law, the biggest defendant is the federal government, and taxpayers foot the bill. The nation’s ten largest environmental groups have sued the government more than 3,000 times in a nine-year period, according to legal fund the Western Legacy Alliance, an Idaho-based legal fund that defends ranchers and farmers.

Now, the growing number of cases is beginning to attract the attention of some lawmakers in Congress.

Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., has written to the Department of Justice asking for an investigation, pointing out that much of the money being paid comes out of the Equal Access to Justice Act fund, which Congress set up for the indigent and public interest groups to recover legal fees.

Right now, the government does not account for how much is paid out to whom or for what reason.

“These are taxpayer dollars that are being used by the federal government to compensate people who have sued the federal government. I believe that taxpayers have the right to know who those people are and how much they’ve been paid,” Lummis told Fox News. 

They should not expect any help from the current Administration, however.

According to the Institute for Energy Research, half of the nearly 1500 page House Cap and Trade Bill is not about carbon emissions at all, but rather completely alter America’s economy. Dr. Robert Michaels, a Senior Fellow with IER, who examined the bill, found that the rest of the bill is packed with regulations that would completely alter the United States’ economy. He argues that even without cap-and-trade, Waxman-Markey is the most repressive package of new taxes, wealth transfers and obstacles to economic activity that a Congress has ever assembled. His findings are available in a 39 page pdf document.
To further make the point this is not about science, but rather control, President Obama announced this week, after Climate gate broke, he will indeed flip-flop on attending Copenhagen and will, at the conference, obligate America to unreasonable carbon emission standards, which cut emissions by 17%, by 2020.
According to wikipedia, there are currently  five exchanges trading in carbon allowances: the Chicago Climate Exchange, European Climate Exchange, Nord Pool, PowerNext and the European Energy Exchange. Recently, NordPool listed a contract to trade offsets generated by a CDM carbon project called Certified Emission Reductions (CERs).
CCX owns the Chicago, Montreal and London Climate exchanges. CCX is 10% owned by Goldman Sachs (GS) and 10% owned by Generation Investment Management (GIM), an investment firm founded & chaired by Al Gore. This firm was co-founded by the former Treasury Secretary under George W. Bush and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson.
Goldman Sachs was the number one private donor to the Obama campaign.
An article in UK’s Telegraph earlier this month said Al Gore is positioned to be the world’s first Carbon billionaire. And a blog entitled American Everyman talks about Al Gore’s partnership with former Goldman Sachs and Leeman Brothers execs, as well as other Venture Capitalists. He posts the first of these very educational videos as well:
On it’s Board of Directors, none other than Maurice Strong.
External Advisory board chair Chicago Mayor and Friend of Obama, Richard Dailey, and among it’s members are Ed BegleyJr., Joseph P. Kennedy II, and former Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Michael Zammit Cutajar.
As well, General Electric, owners of NBC and affiliate cable channels, often criticized for it’s pro-Obama stance, will help facilitate the carbon transfers through it’s arm, known as  Greenhouse Gas Services, as well as through the various “green initiatives” facilitated by the company.
Another of the big players is also involved:

Bloomberg noted: Billionaire George Soros, looking to address the “political problem” of climate change, said he will invest $1 billion in clean-energy technology and donate $100 million to an environmental advisory group to aid policymakers. [He] announced the investment in Copenhagen on Oct. 10 at a meeting on climate change sponsored by Project Syndicate. The group is an international association made up of 430 newspapers from 150 countries.

…Soros’s announcement comes two months before 190 nations will gather in the Danish capital for a final round of negotiations on a new climate treaty that includes provisions to finance clean- energy projects in developing nations. Talks last week in Bangkok were marked by a dispute between richer and poorer nations over whether to renew or abandon the Kyoto Protocol, the only existing global agreement to reduce carbon dioxide, which is blamed for global warming.

Soros, 79, also will establish the Climate Policy Initiative, a San Francisco-based organization to which he will donate $10 million a year for 10 years.

Soros made his fortune, as you’ll recall, by trashing the pound culminating in Britain’s Black Wednesday in 1992. He is systematically attempting the same thing here and has recently launched another new initiative “The Institute for New Economic Thinking“.
The fact of the matter is, while Cap and Trade deals with the corporate side of carbon, it’s just a jumping off point. Anyone familiar with United Nations Agenda 21 can plainly see it will, in short time, lead to what amounts to a “Breath Tax”, placed on every living thing. This is being undertaken the same way politicians are building Health Care “Reform” for the sole purpose of getting to a single-payer system, also called for in Agenda 21. Neither addresses any substantive issue, they only give control to the government and the UN.
In another great Canada Free Press column by Tim Ball, renowned environmental consultant and former climatology professor, he points out: 

Extreme left journalist George Monbiot ignored all the facts I provided when he was pointing a finger at me. He’s ignoring them again, which forces him to assume the deniers are at fault. He wrote, “There is no point in denying it: we’re losing. Climate change denial is spreading like a contagious disease. It exists in a sphere that cannot be reached by evidence or reasoned argument; any attempt to draw attention to scientific findings is greeted with furious invective. This sphere is expanding with astonishing speed.”

The sphere is expanding for several reasons.

  • All evidence rejects the hypothesis that human CO2 is causing warming or climate change.
  • Facts are gradually getting to the public despite obstructionism by journalists like Monbiot.
  • Temperature projections of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are consistently wrong.
  • Record cold temperatures are occurring everywhere.
  • Motives of those pushing the need for reduction in CO2 are being exposed.
  • Economic costs of a completely unnecessary action are emerging.
A blogger named Granite Grok put up a couple really interesting graphs on their blog I found rather to the point, which clearly show 2009 to be one of the coldest years in recent history, and United States and European emissions are and have been fairly flat since all this started in 1970, compared to those on a global scale.
Proof global warming science is not just “not settled” it’s purely fiction.
On the heels of warnings of faulty and fraudulent “global warming science”  from Former Advisor to Margaret Thatcher Lord Monckton, President of the Czech Republic Václav Klaus and 31,000 scientists , comes “Climategate”.
The stated on November 20, 2009:

Britain’s Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, suffered a data breach in recent days when a hacker apparently broke into their system and made away with thousands of emails and documents. The stolen data was then posted to a Russian server and has quickly made the rounds among climate skeptics. The documents within the archive, if proven to be authentic, would at best be embarrassing for many prominent climate researchers and at worst, damning.

The electronic break in itself has been verified by the director of the research unit, Professor Phil Jones. He told Britain’s Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”

The paper goes on to discuss, at length the individual emails, and if you have not yet seen them, I urge to to follow the link.

In Australia, where the story first broke, the Herald Sun noted:

…So the 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made warming theory – a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science. I’ve been adding some of the most astonishing in updates below – emails suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. If it is as it now seems, never again will “peer review” be used to shout down skeptics.

This is clearly not the work of some hacker, but of an insider who’s now blown the whistle.

Not surprising, then, that Steve McIntyre reports:

Earlier today, CRU cancelled all existing passwords. Actions speaking loudly.

Hackers have broken into the data base of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit – one of the world’s leading alarmist centers – and put the files they stole on the Internet, on the grounds that the science is too important to be kept under wraps.

The ethics of this are dubious. But the files suggest, on a very preliminary glance, some other very dubious practices, too, and a lot of collusion – sometimes called “peer review”. Or even conspiracy.

Canada Free Press Added The Missing Link to the Obama Administration :
Obama Science Czar John Holdren is directly involved in CRU’s unfolding Climategate scandal.  In fact, according to files released by a CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms “a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people”.

“The files contain so much material that it is going to take some time t o put it all in context,” says Ball.  “However, enough is already known to underscore their explosive nature.  It is already clear the entire claims and positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based on falsified manipulated material and is therefore completely compromised.

“The fallout will be extensive as material continues to emerge.  Reputations of the scientists involved are already destroyed, however fringe players will continue to be identified and their reputations destroyed or sullied.”

While the mainstream media is bending into pretzels to keep the scandal under the rug, Climategate is already the biggest scientific scandal in history because of the global policy implications.

According to, there’s more to those emails appears at first glance. I urge you to watch these two, fairly lengthy videos, together taking about 15 minutes of your time, but ending in priceless understanding. Education is a valuable thing.
Those pushing the leftist theology call all who find fault with the global warming agenda “Deniers”. I must ask now who the REAL “DENIERS” are? Remember Alinsky doctrine – if you can not dispute the facts, launch personal attacks. To them I must say,
“Sticks and stones may break my bones,
but names will never hurt me.
Deceit and lies will fuel your side,
but with facts we will subvert thee.”
Ed Note: Please read Green Hell by Steve Milloy, our first book of the month selection here at Soldier For Liberty. You will become enlightened on the truth of the “Green Agenda”.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )

Before You Go Christmas Shopping, Please Check List of Stores Banning “Christmas”

Posted on November 26, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , |

I am sick of companies disrespecting me. I’m done with them.

Many of the chain stores want my Christmas money, but will not acknowledge Christmas. That exploits me and is the ultimate insult to the true meaning of the holiday.

Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ.

Christmas is not a free for all spending spree for no just cause. Hello?

The AFA was kind enough to post their naughty and nice list to help inform us all which stores not to shop at.

Don’t stop, however, with just not shopping at their store. That won’t do. They will merely chalk it up to the bad economy. You must call or email them using the information provided by the AFA and let them know WHY you will not be shopping at their store.

If they want our Christmas money, they need to participate in Christmas. It’s that simple.

If you really want to have some fun, make sure you cheerfully tell all checkers and cashiers Merry Christmas this year. You’ll be surprised how many will look at you as if you just insulted their Mother.

Start your boycott of these stores with the black friday specials… and unless they change their policy, DO NOT SHOP THERE THIS CHRISTMAS SEASON.

The American Family Association posts the following on their site:

These companies have banned “Christmas” from their retail ads, in-store promotions or television commercials.

Please take time to let them know you are offended by their anti-Christian and anti-Christmas bias. Their contact information is below.

We cannot stress to strongly how important it is for you to be firm, yet very kind in your correspondence with these companies. Please be respectful and choose your words wisely.

In addition, companies marked with an asterisk* have gone so far as to substitute the phrase “Holiday or Dream trees” instead of “Christmas trees” in their promotions.

* Target  (612) 304-6073  Guest.Relations@target.comUPDATE – AFA ENDS BOYCOTT

Click Here to read the AFA Press Release

In their official statement, Target said: “Over the course of the next few weeks, our advertising, marketing and merchandising will become more specific to the holiday that is approaching – referring directly to holidays like Christmas and Hanukkah. For example, you will see reference to Christmas in select television commercials, circulars and in-store signage.”


Original Target Issue Concern:
Target refuses to use the word “Christmas” in any of their corporate advertising. Their latest 36-page ad insert did use the phrase “holiday” 31 times. In addition, Target has banned the Salvation Army bell ringers from their stores, but opted to sell items online for customers to donate to the Salvation Army. Ironically, Target doesn’t give a single cent to them, but profits from your purchase. They also charge you to ship the item to the Salvation Army.

Nordstrom (206) 628-2111 President Blake W. Nordstrom 
On their “holiday shipping” section of the website, they only refer to “December 25.”  Their catalogs do not mention the word “Christmas.”  Mr. Nordstrom says he welcomes your comments.

* Sears   (847) 286-2500
Sears, owned by Kmart, is advertising “Holiday” trees on page seven of their circular. It also was noticeably absent of the word “Christmas.” UPDATE: Sears has confirmed that it now displays a sign reading “Merry Christmas” at the entrance to its stores nationwide.


Walgreens (847) 940-2500 President Jeffery Rien –

Because of your efforts, Walgreens has released the following response in 2006: “Next year (2007), you can be assured our advertising will better incorporate ‘Christmas,’ and our holiday trees will be called Christmas trees. Unfortunately, all of this year’s December ads are already printed, so it’s too late to make changes for this season.”

Lowe’s   (800) 445-6937  We are pleased to update you about Lowe’s sale of Christmas trees.  Lowe’s informed the AFA that it is removing banners referring to “holiday trees” from its stores (the actual product signs inside Lowe’s stores did say Christmas trees, but the outside banner did not).  Lowe’s says it has proudly sold Christmas trees in its stores for decades, and continues to do so this year in all of its stores nationwide.  All 49 varieties of live and artificial trees at Lowe’s and on are labeled as Christmas trees. 

Lowe’s assures AFA that the language on the banner was a mistake, and was not in any way an attempt to remove Christmas from the season.  

We applaud Lowe’s for listening to its customers and responding to their concerns.  Just as we alerted Lowe’s to our concerns, now let’s show them our support by sending thank you emails and shopping in their stores.  Click Here To Thank Lowe’s Now!

Office Max   (877) 484-3629
Office Max offers no “Christmas” in their advertising.
Kmart   (800) 635-6278
Kmart promotes a “Holiday Sale” on their website. Links to the trees webpage asks if you “Need it by Christmas,” but refers you to its “Holiday Shipping Dates” section.
Staples   (800) 378-2753
In searching for “Christmas” on their website, results show only three matches. Staples ads avoid using “Christmas.”
Best Buy   (888) 237-8289
Best Buy offers no “Christmas” in their advertising. Kohl’s UPDATE: Kohl’s has provided AFA with a corporate statement.  They dispute the charge made on The O’Reilly Factor and provided a letter stating they “would use the word ‘Christmas’ in some of our advertising.”  AFA is pleased to let you know that this in, in fact, the case.  Kohl’s asks us to inform you of their plans to incorporate “Christmas” in future advertising.  We appreciate Kohl’s listening to their customers concerns and responding in kind.

These companies have banned “Christmas” from their television commercials.  In a review of commercials aired on prime-time broadcast network, these companies clearly marketed their ads to Christmas shoppers without using the word “Christmas.”

In a total of 116 commercials, only 11 (9%) included the word “Christmas” in the ad.

SC Johnson
Therese Van Ryne Public Relations Manager


L.L. Bean

David H. Sternblitz, Vice President

Julian C. Day, President and Chief Executive Officer


Outback Steakhouse

Emails to Outback are being rejected with the message, “Your message was deleted without being read.”  You may wish to make a personal call.
Stephanie Amberg, Director of public relations

Chris T. Sullivan Chairman of the Board

A. William  Allen, III Chief Executive Officer

Benjamin P. Novello President, Outback Steakhouse


Old Navy

Old Navy is proud of their anti-Christmas stance, simply referring to the “holiday” (Christmas) as nothing more than a tradition. 





Best Buy
Susan Busch Director, Corporate Public Relations
612-292-4000, ext 4

Stephen M. Carter, Chief Executive Officer

Reckitt Benckiser
Tom Corran, SVP IR and corporate communications
973 404 2600

Pier 1
Merianne Kimmel Roth, Senior PR Manager

Red Lobster
Darden Media Relations
Joe R. Lee, Chairman & CEO

Office Depot
Bruce Nelson Chairman & Chief Executive Officer

James (Jim) M. Kilts Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and President
John  F.   Manfredi SVP Corporate Affairs

Laurie, Ellison, Executive Director of Communications

Burlington Coat
Monroe G. Milstein – Chairman, President, and CEO
Phone: 609-387-7800


Gail Carvelli Media Relations Manager
401) 431-8697  

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 8 so far )

Happy Thanksgiving From Soldier For Liberty

Posted on November 25, 2009. Filed under: General Info | Tags: |

To You and Yours, A wish for a Happy Thanksgiving Day!



Proclamation of Thanksgiving

Washington, D.C.
October 3, 1863

This is the proclamation which set the precedent for America’s national day of Thanksgiving. During his administration, President Lincoln issued many orders like this. For example, on November 28, 1861, he ordered government departments closed for a local day of thanksgiving.


Sarah Josepha Hale, a prominent magazine editor, wrote a letter to Lincoln on 28, 1863, urging him to have the “day of our annual Thanksgiving made a National and fixed Union Festival.” She wrote, “You may have observed that, for some years past, there has been an increasing interest felt in our land to have the Thanksgiving held on the same day, in all the States; it now needs National recognition and authoritive fixation, only, to become permanently, an American custom and institution.” The document below sets apart the last Thursday of November “as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise.”


According to an April 1, 1864, letter from John Nicolay, one of President Lincoln’s secretaries, this document was written by Secretary of State William Seward, and the original was in his handwriting. On October 3, 1863, fellow Cabinet member Gideon Welles recorded in his diary that he complimented Seward on his work. A year later the manuscript was sold to benefit Union troops.

By the President of the United States of America.

A Proclamation.

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consiousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.


In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.


Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the Unites States the Eighty-eighth.


By the President: Abraham Lincoln


William H. Seward,
Secretary of State






Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Our Government Does Not Seem To Understand Who The Bad Guys Are

Posted on November 24, 2009. Filed under: Soapbox | Tags: , , , , , |

Here we go again. There seems to be some confusion in our government as to who the bad guys are.

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

This on the heels of the Administration’s announcement to hold civilian trials for enemy combatants who confessed to killing over three thousand people at the World Trade Center on September 11,2001.

The announcement came just days after failing to label the massacre at Fort Hood a terrorist attack, despite the shooter’s al Qaeda ties and shouting Allahu Akbar while killing innocent people.

The current Administration has hired a special prosecutor to investigate our CIA for any infractions during interrogation of enemy combatants.

The abuse by our government has it’s tentacles into other groups acting in defense of their country as well.

There was the illegal firing of competent Inspector General Walpin who found improprieties involving friend of Obama, former pro-basketball star, now Mayor of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson, regarding use of Ameri-core funds.

The elitist demonization of Tea Party Patriots by many members of the Administration, Senate and Congress. Homeland security now classifies these citizens as low-level terrorists.

The problem goes back beyond the Obama Administration however.

Under the Bush Administration, our government turned on our Border Security agents and the Minutemen.

There are many other examples, but I believe I have made my point. Our corrupt and misguided government officials are going off the deep end.

In my mind, those soldiers are heroes, putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. Too bad I can not say the same for my government. God help us all.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

A Prayer For Baby Gabriel Is A Prayer For Us All

Posted on November 23, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , , , , , |

When I was born, more than a few decades ago, I was exactly two months early. My twin brother and I were given no hope to live. My brother weighed 2lbs 7oz at birth. I weighed 1lb 14oz. We were born at what was a very small community hospital which they called a “clinic”, with none of today’s modern equipment. By the hand of God, our doctor, the nurses and prayers of my parents, did we both survive.
Today a friend forwarded me a news story hitting the wire. It struck a chord.
At a Tennessee hospital, nine month old  Gabriel  Palmer’s  life was hanging in the balance after an emergency appeal by a group called the Alliance Defense Fund. The press realease said a lawsuit had been filed after East Tennessee Children’s Hospital officials made the decision to abandon care for the baby, despite his family’s wishes to continue.
Baby Gabriel was born prematurely with a genetic abnormality, a club foot, and a narrow airway, but was said to flourish after being allowed to come home from the hospital in June. At home, he was fed through a tube and received some oxygen and medications, according to the press release. One weekend in October, when the baby’s regular doctors were unavailable, his mother took Gabriel to the ETCH emergency room complaining of breathing difficulties. At one point the baby went into shock, developed pulmonary vascular disease, and was placed on a respirator.
Today, Baby Gabriel is in stable condition, alert, active and responsive. His doctor has determined Gabriel could live “a long while”.  The family reports that in recent days, while not sedated, he “spent time kicking his feet, tried to play with his stuffed animals, listened to the voices of his mother and grandmother and responded to his favorite music” , as evidenced by the new video shown here:  
The press release goes on to say ETCH recently began to give up on Baby Gabriel, when on November 13th, the head of ETCH PICU, Dr. Kevin Brinkman, told Mrs. Palmer they would stop feeding him milk, stop giving him his meds, and disconnect his respirator. Staff considered his care “futile”, the press release continues. Brinkman went on to say the decision was a foregone conclusion but an “Ethics Panel” would meet the following Monday to make the final decision. He then said they have made their decision with no bearing as to the family’s wishes.
The family reports that after that conversation, the hospital stopped routine care of Baby Gabriel, including bathing, moisturizing, cut back on diaper changes, disallowed his physical therapy and have gone so far as to attempt to discourage the family from transferring the baby to another hospital.
ADF filed a restraining order and injunction with Chancery Court for Knox County.
We will continue to pray for Baby Gabriel and for his family. You may call the hospital Community Relations Office at 865-541-8165 to let them know your stance on this matter. Call the Senate while you are at it. Don’t delay.
Unfortunately, it seems today, with all the blessings of high tech medical equipment and persons skilled enough to use it, life has far less meaning than it has had in the past. The health care bill being debated in the Senate will make decisions like this commonplace. Just as it is calling for a reduction in mammograms and pap smears and limiting treatment for the elderly, it too, will limit care to the less perfect born among us. 
How is that just? Who will we throw away? 
The true cost of life is not totaled in the hospital bill, but rather in the promise of the life itself.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Sick of Our Government? The Patriotic Flu Hits Tomorrow, November 30th, 2009

Posted on November 22, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , |

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. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.- Declaration of Independence, adopted by Congress July 4, 1776
It has become perfectly clear our government is no longer interested in deriving their power from the consent of the governed. The point was well made last fall when, against the wishes of the American people, $787,000,000,000 of our tax money was “donated” to unworthy corporate “charities”. The point was further driven home by the subsequent passing of HR 1105 , with over 9000 unnecessary earmarks totaling another $410,000,000,000. Neither of which are effectively addressing that which they were intended to resolve.
The same is true with both treasonous pieces of legislation now at front and center in the halls of Congress. Neither Health Care “Reform”  nor Cap and Trade legislation solve the issues they are meant to address. In both cases, as with other segments of the economy, the current Congress’ answer is to socialize and unionize 1/6th of our businesses, bringing the total slice of our economy run by the government to an estimated 49%. With passage of Cap and Trade that number would jump above 75%. These two bills, along with other items on the agenda of the current administration will desecrate our Constitution – the same Constitution they have all taken an oath to protect.
Our government, going back several administrations, and under both parties, has systematically placed us in such a position, that now our backs are against the proverbial wall. We find ourselves on the brink of economic collapse, with our liberties being picked apart one by one. Instead of working to solve these issues, Congress and the Administration insist upon exacerbating them.
Nothing has caught the attention of law makers. Neither millions of phone calls last fall, nor millions of Tax Day Tea Party goers, nor millions of Town Hall participants across this country have made a difference. The government did not even listen as 1,500,000 citizens, many spending money they did not have, came to Washington DC on September 12, 2009 to implore them to “hear us now”. Over the past several weeks, an even larger number of taxpayers and voters have emailed, called, faxed, visited their Representative’s and Senator’s offices to ask them not to go forward with legislation now before them. All to no avail.
With peaceful options dwindling, it is time for citizens to escalate our actions. As Rahm Emmanuel has been quoted as saying “Never let a crisis go to waste”. The time to act is NOW.
Monday, November 30th, 2009, as the Senate comes back into session, an epidemic of “Patriotic Flu” will hit America.
Put succinctly, Patriotic Flu is the inability on the part of disgruntled citizens to perform daily work functions in reaction to recent unconstitutional behavior of our supposed representative government. This disease will manifest itself in a November 30th outbreak of illness across this land.
It is not merely enough, however, to simply call into work sick. Also, to participate effectively, you must notify your Representatives, Senators, and the White House itself, that you have succumbed to the Patriotic Flu.
If for some reason, it is not in your best interest to stay home from work, please participate by notifying those same parties, that you have the disease. All calls, emails, faxes or visits must be made on that Monday.
“The will of the people…is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect it’s free expression should be our first object.”- Thomas Jefferson
With the economy in the state it is in, with unemployment nearing record levels in some areas, another trip to Washington is out of the question for many. The government is encouraging all flu victims to stay home. What better way to accommodate them, than by doing just that.
There is not much time. The Patriotic Flu epidemic will descend on America, next Monday, November 30th.
Please help spread the word. Tell your friends, family and co-workers. Tell bloggers, columnists and news organizations. Tell everyone. If citizens feel disenfranchised by our government, they must now take responsibility to communicate their feelings loudly and clearly. Simply complaining is not a impactful way to impress upon our government representatives we are in serious opposition to their current endeavors.
Please feel free to email, copy, fax or otherwise disseminate this information to all.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 6 so far )

Sounds A Lot Like “Death Panels” (and BS) To Me

Posted on November 20, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , , |

Cardiologist / health administrator Bernadine Healy became the first woman to head the National Institutes of Health from 1991 to 1993. She has been particularly effective in addressing medical policy and research issues pertaining to women. Beginning her career at Johns Hopkins University where she rose to full professor on the medical school faculty, while simultaneously undertaking administrative duties. She served as deputy science advisor to President Reagan from 1984-1985. In 1985 she was appointed Head of the Research Institute of the Cleveland Clinic Foundation until her appointment as director of the NIH in 1991. Healy was also president of the American Heart Association from 1988-1989 and has served on numerous national advisory committees. Healy was named dean of the College of Medicine and Public Health at Ohio State University in 1995. And in the fall of 1999 she became president of the American Red Cross, serving until late 2001. She has been a senior writer for US News and World Report since 2003. If you missed this four and a half minute interview- please watch!


According to HHS: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), first convened by the U.S. Public Health Service in 1984, and since 1998 sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), is the leading independent panel of private-sector experts in prevention and primary care. The USPSTF conducts rigorous, impartial assessments of the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of a broad range of clinical preventive services, including screening, counseling, and preventive medications. Its recommendations are considered the “gold standard” for clinical preventive services.

The mission of the USPSTF is to evaluate the benefits of individual services based on age, gender, and risk factors for disease; make recommendations about which preventive services should be incorporated routinely into primary medical care and for which populations; and identify a research agenda for clinical preventive care.

<!–Select for PDF File (208 KB). PDF Help.


Members include various members of the medical community, but at present contain no known oncologists.
Wikipedia notes the incidence of breast cancer varies greatly around the world, being lower in less-developed countries and greatest in the more-developed countries. In the twelve world regions, the annual age-standardized incidence rates per 100,000 women are as follows: in Eastern Asia, 18; South Central Asia, 22; sub-Saharan Africa, 22; South-Eastern Asia, 26; North Africa and Western Asia, 28; South and Central America, 42; Eastern Europe, 49; Southern Europe, 56; Northern Europe, 73; Oceania, 74; Western Europe, 78; and in North America, 90. Breast cancer can strike at any age, but only 5% of all breast cancers occur in women under 40 years old.Women in the US have a 1 in 8 (12.5%) lifetime chance of developing invasive breast cancer and a 1 in 35 (3%) chance of breast cancer causing their death In 2007, breast cancer was expected to cause 40,910 deaths in the US (7% of cancer deaths; almost 2% of all deaths).This figure includes 450-500 men who die annually in the U.S. out of approximately 2000 who contract it.Medicine Plus notes 

Breast cancer affects one in eight women during their lives. Breast cancer kills more women in the United States than any cancer except lung cancer. No one knows why some women get breast cancer, but there are a number of risk factors. Risks that you cannot change include

  • Age – the chance of getting breast cancer rises as a woman gets older
  • Genes – there are two genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, that greatly increase the risk. Women who have family members with breast or ovarian cancer may wish to be tested.
  • Personal factors – beginning periods before age 12 or going through menopause after age 55

Other risks include being overweight, using hormone replacement therapy, taking birth control pills, drinking alcohol, not having children or having your first child after age 35 or having dense breasts. Symptoms of breast cancer may include a lump in the breast, a change in size or shape of the breast or discharge from a nipple. Breast self-exam and mammography can help find breast cancer early when it is most treatable.

Seer Stats fact sheet estimates that 192,370 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer during 2009 and of those 40,170 women will die of cancer in the same year. The median age for women being diagnosed was 61 years of age, and none were under the age of twenty; 1.9% were aged 20 and 34; 10.5% were diagnosed between 35 and 44. From the ago of forty five the incidence rose sharply 22.5% were between 45 and 54; 23.7% were aged between 55 and 64. After 65 and between 74 the incidence dropped again to 19.6%, 16.2% were aged between 75 and 84; and finally 5.5% 85+ years of age. Just because their were only five and a half percent diagnosed at over 85 merely indicates that there were less women in that age group living.

The incidence was higher in white women as 123.8 per 100,000 women were diagnosed with breast cancer, blacks were diagnosed at 117.7 per 100,000 women, the Polynesians less still as 89.5 per 100,000 women , Hispanics had 88.3 per 100,000 women And native American Indian/Alaska Native had the least number affected. 74.4 per 100,000 women.

Although roughly 20% of women are diagnosed with breast cancer UNDER age 50, and incidences increase with age, with roughly 22% of women diagnosed at age 75 or over, the “C” grade given mammography for women under 50 and over 75, means insurance will no longer cover this procedure. In my opinion, this does indeed constitute a “death panel”, putting middle aged moms and grandma at risk. Particularly, as the cost of a mammogram with doctor and other fees is several hundred dollars, and from personal experience is a four digit figure if a “lump” is found, cancerous or not, prompting the quicker turn time for results. At these costs, the number of cases being diagnosed at a treatable stage is going to decline. If you do the math, you can clearly see that of the nearly 200,000 women who would be diagnosed this year alone with breast cancer, 40% would not have had insurance covered mammograms. How many of those women could pay the  costs and fees associated with the test? Not many. As well, the USPSTF suggests no benefit to self-examination at any age.

Think, America. This is the same group of “independent” consultants who will, under the bill being voted on this weekend, get to determine what is covered and what is not covered going forward. Do you really want them in charge of who gets what? 

Allow me to point out, and believe me, I know how absurd this sounds, this administration believes in total compliance with UN Agenda 21 (sustainable development) which clearly calls for population reduction. Seriously. There are many posts here and elsewhere discussing this. If you know not what I am speaking about, please educate yourself. Science Czar John Holdren wrote a book touting population control by means of spiking water supplies throughout the country. So, just consider, even if you don’t believe me, how much easier it would be to deny medical testing and treatment under the guise of inaffordability.

Made clear by the press release from the Catholic League is the fact abortions will be covered in the bill.

On November 15, presidential advisor David Axelrod made it clear that President Obama opposes the Stupak amendment that bans abortion funding in the House’s version of the health care bill. The Senate has just completed its version, and it contains nothing like the language of the Stupak amendment. As reported today by AP, “On a controversial issue that threatened to derail the House legislation, [Senate Majority Leader] Reid would allow the new government insurance plan to cover abortions and would let companies that receive federal funds offer insurance plans that include abortion coverage.”

President Obama, after telling the public that he would not support a bill that provided federal funds for abortion (he was hailed by the bishops for doing so), is now championing a bill that would do just that. Moreover, he is pushing for legislation that the American people do not support: CNN posted survey results yesterday showing that 61 percent of the public is in favor of banning the use of federal funds to pay for abortion; only 37 percent favor it.


(It is only 2074 pages in length – and hey- what better way to spend your weekend???!)

President Obama said “From day one, our goal has been to enact legislation that offers stability and security to those who have insurance and affordable coverage to those who don’t, and that lowers costs for families, businesses and governments across the country,” adding the proposal “meets those principles.”

Republicans have vowed to block the bill. As you may know, however, there are 58 democrat Senators and 2 more independents that may as well be. Reid, D-Nevada, needs 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to open debate on the bill. It would take another 60 votes to close debate, but final approval of the bill would only require a simple majority, or 51 votes. Leadership says it expects to prompt a vote to start debate Saturday.

Senate Minority leader John Boehner said in a statement:

Just like the original 2,032-page, government-run health care plan from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) massive, 2,074-page bill would levy a new “abortion premium” fee on Americans in the government-run plan. 

Beginning on line 7, p. 118, section 1303 under “Voluntary Choice of Coverage of Abortion Services” the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority to determine when abortion is allowed under the government-run health plan.  Leader Reid’s plan also requires that at least one insurance plan offered in the Exchange covers abortions (line 13, p. 120).

What is even more alarming is that a monthly abortion premium will be charged of all enrollees in the government-run health plan.  It’s right there beginning on line 11, page 122, section 1303, under “Actuarial Value of Optional Service Coverage.”  The premium will be paid into a U.S. Treasury account – and these federal funds will be used to pay for the abortion services.

Section 1303(a)(2)(C) describes the process in which the Health Benefits Commissioner is to assess the monthly premiums that will be used to pay for elective abortions under the government-run health plan and for those who are given an affordability credit to purchase insurance coverage that includes abortion through the Exchange.  The Commissioner must charge at a minimum $1 per enrollee per month.

A majority of Americans believe that health care plans should not be mandated to provide elective abortion coverage, and a majority of Americans do not believe government health care plans should include abortion coverage. Currently, federal appropriations bills include language known as the Hyde Amendment that prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for elective abortions under the Medicare and Medicaid programs, while another provision, known as the Smith Amendment, prohibits federal funding of abortion under the federal employees’ health benefits plan.

Leader Reid’s 2,074-page health care monstrosity is an affront to the American people and drastically moves away from current policy.  The National Right to Life Committee has called the Reid abortion language “completely unacceptable.” The American people deserve more from their government than being forced to pay for abortion.  The pro-life Stupak/Pitts amendment passed the House by a vote of 240 to 194, enjoying the overwhelming support of 176 Republicans and 64 Democrats.  The Stupak/Pitts Amendment codifies current law by prohibiting federal funding of elective abortions under any government-run plan or plans available under the Exchange.  The Reid plan ignores the will of a bipartisan majority of the House, and indeed the American people, by rejecting this bipartisan amendment.

Health care reform should not be used as an opportunity to use federal funds to pay for elective abortions. Health reform should be an opportunity to protect human life – not end it – and the American people agree.  House Republicans have offered a common-sense, responsible solution that would reduce health care costs and expand access while protecting the dignity of all human life. The Republican plan, available at, would codify the Hyde Amendment and prohibit all authorized and appropriated federal funds from being used to pay for abortion. And under the Republican plan, any health plan that includes abortion coverage may not receive federal funds.

There are many other issues Soldier for Liberty finds fault with in the bill. In yesterday’s column we featured a clip Glenn Beck did on his show pointing out just a few of the absurd and vulgar taxes being hoisted on the backs of the American taxpayers. Seniors have much to fear from this program.

Even if this bill does not pass, let this be a lesson to all the younger people in this country. These seniors or those about to become seniors did everything they were supposed to do. They fought wars, sacrificed for their country, saved pennies to fun savings accounts and 401K programs, bought and lovingly maintained their homes, put their kids through college, paid into the social security program – everything. Now, at the cusp of the point in time where they may get to enjoy life – the government and their partners in this ponzi scheme rape their 401K accounts and IRAs, steal (and I do mean steal) the equity in their homes, now they will defund their medical care and revoke privileges for tests and procedures because it’s just too expensive to allow them to live. They have outlived their usefulness and can no longer contribute to the ever hungry government – so- well.. it’s a tough world. AMERICA- WAKE UP! I am not being melodramatic here. This bill penalizes companies if they choose to continue to pay for drug prescriptions for retirees. What do they think they are doing? And furthermore, why in the hell would AARP back this program? Because they sell medigap insurance. Period. If you are paying dues to AARP, you need to call them, NOW (888-OUR-AARP), and tell them to refund your dues. Don’t forget to tell them why. Consider joining Amac – The Association of Mature American Citizens or ASA- American Seniors Association instead. The AARP has been corrupted and no longer fairly represents the seniors of this country, in my opinion. It could be no more evident than the fact they favor cuts to senior care. It’s no small cut either.

The Washington Post noted:

Republicans dismissed it as “another trillion-dollar experiment,” in the words of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.). Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.) said the bill “may claim to be deficit-neutral, [but] it uses sleight-of-hand budgetary tricks by assuming unrealistic tax increases and Medicare cuts that members of Congress will not be willing to follow through on.”

The Senate measure is similar in scope to legislation the House approved earlier this month. It would require most people to buy insurance, and if their employers did not offer affordable coverage, they would be able to shop for policies on new state-based “exchanges” that would function as marketplaces for individual coverage. Insurance companies would have to abide by broad new rules that would ban practices such as denying coverage based on preexisting conditions.

But the bills diverge on other key provisions. The House version would require all but the smallest businesses to offer insurance, while the Senate measure would merely fine companies for not offering affordable coverage. The Senate bill would bar illegal immigrants from buying insurance through the exchanges, while the House would restrict access only to subsidies and federal programs such as Medicaid, which would be vastly expanded under both bills.

Another potential flashpoint is abortion coverage. The issue sparked a major battle in the House, forcing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to agree to an amendment that would bar people who receive federal subsidies for insurance coverage from using that money to purchase policies that pay for abortion.

Reid took a different approach that may or may not pass muster with abortion opponents, proposing to establish a “firewall” that would segregate private premiums from federal funding if abortion coverage were offered in the public insurance plan.

Few details were available Wednesday, but Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), an abortion rights advocate who was working to forge a compromise on the issue, said, “I couldn’t be happier. For those who want to keep abortion out of this bill, Senator Reid did it the right way.”

The National Right to Life Committee, however, called the firewall “completely unacceptable” and said it utilizes “layers of contrived definitions and hollow bookkeeping requirements” to permit federal funding of abortion.

Like the House bill, Reid’s proposal would be financed through billions of dollars in Medicare cuts, as well as new taxes. But while the House would impose a 5.4 percent surtax on income over $500,000 for individuals and $1 million for families, the Senate would rely primarily on a new tax on high-cost insurance policies that has been hugely unpopular among House members.

To blunt opposition, Reid would impose the 40 percent tax on fewer policies, raising the threshold to $8,500 for individuals and $23,000 for family coverage. That change required him to come up with about $60 billion in additional revenue, most of which would come from raising the Medicare payroll tax from 1.45 percent to 1.95 percent on individual income over $200,000 and household income over $250,000. Reid is also proposing a new 5 percent tax on elective cosmetic surgery.

FRED BARNES, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE WEEKLY STANDARD in a panel discussion on Special Report (Fox News): Well, if you were a government bureaucrat you would think they designed this bill just for me. That’s what it does. It gives the government a lot more power and their panels or commissions or commissioners and so on.

If you’re a doctor or a patient, you’re going to have less power. Patients now will have less choice than you get when you go to Starbucks to buy coffee. They’re going to have very little choice.

And then there are up couple of other things: One of the tricks they have used, of course, that are pretty transparent that they have used to make the bill look like it actually will reduce the deficit. Now Bret, if you believe it is going to reduce the deficit, I’ve got a few things I’d like to sell you.

And of course they took out the doctor’s fix and that saved them, what $210, $220 billion? And then they have the taxing and the so-called spending cuts, which they may or may not actually cut, go for 10 years, but the benefits only go for five years. When you get to the second 10 years, then of course it costs so much more. And that’s pretty transparent.

But here’s the hard part: Anything in this bill is going to be hard to change because you’re going to need 60 votes if you want to change the part about abortion or if you want to get rid of the public option. It is going to be hard.

And Republicans are not going to help. They are not going to let this bill be improved because they think at the end of the day it will be an awful bill anyway. Why should we make it nicer so a few of the more moderate Democrats will vote for it? They don’t want to vote for it.

Host BAIER: A. B. They move the spending to 2014, but when the program actually goes into effect — the taxes goes into effect in 2011.

One thing about the Congressional Budget Office’s assessment that Senator Reid has touted again and again as being a good thing, on page nine they say that the public plan that’s in there would typically have premiums that were somewhat higher than the average premiums for the private plans in the exchanges.

In other words: The public plan that’s offered in this plan would cost more than the private plans. I don’t get it. Wasn’t the purpose to drive down premium costs?

The fact of the matter is no matter what they vote on, most of the wording is open to interpretation for whomever is writing the bill (Cass Sunstein). They will meld this with the House bill and end up with some hodge-podge they think they can get passed. The President will sign it, knowing full well with the way it is written they can do just about anything they want to do with it.

Breaking: Sources tell me, the three or four democrats on the fence, are being handsomely rewarded for any consideration they may give to voting for the bill.

Who, in their right mind, would trade $1,000,000 subsidy or $1,000,000,000 one for that matter, for the welfare and shorter life expectancy of their constituents? Who ever they are- they need to be fired, and maybe jailed. 

Stay tuned, we will post names the very minute they are available.

UPDATE: No need to post names – politics as usual in spineless Washington DC. Only robots- no individual thinkers, not even among so called “Independents”. I can only have one repsonse: The 2nd American Revolution Has Begun:

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

What Congress Is Proposing and What You Can Do About It

Posted on November 19, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , , |

If you did not catch Beck Thursday night, please take eight minutes to watch this clip.
Before they vote, I implore you to call, write, email, fax or visit your Senator and tell them NO!
In yesterday’s column I offered information on the various pink slip campaigns and offered a free
email version of the pink slip.
I was curious as to what recourse we had if they do pass this.
In a 2003 Report to Congress  I, unfortunately learned the following:
Under the United States Constitution and congressional practice, Members of Congress may have their services ended prior to the normal expiration of their constitutionally established terms of office by their resignation or death, or by action of the House of Congress in which they are a Member by way of an “expulsion,” or by a finding that in accepting a subsequent public office deemed to be “incompatible” with congressional office, the Member has vacated his congressional seat.

Under Article I, Section 5, clause 2, of the Constitution, a Member of Congress may be removed from office before the normal expiration of his or her constitutional term by an “expulsion” from the Senate (if a Senator) or from the House of Representatives (if a Representative) upon a formal vote on a resolution agreed to by two-thirds of the Members of the respective body present and voting. While there are no specific grounds for an expulsion expressed in the Constitution, expulsion actions in both the House and the Senate have generally concerned cases of perceived disloyalty to the United States, or the conviction of a criminal statutory offense which involved abuse of one’s official position. Each House has broad authority as to the grounds, nature, timing, and procedure for an expulsion of a Member. However, policy considerations, as opposed to questions of authority, have appeared to restrain the Senate and House in the exercise of expulsion when it might be considered as infringing on the electoral process, such as when the electorate knew of the past misconduct under consideration and still elected or re-elected the Member.

As to removal by recall, the United States Constitution does not provide for nor authorize the recall of United States officers such as Senators, Representatives, or the President or Vice President, and thus no Member of Congress has ever been recalled in the history of the United States. The recall of Members was considered during the time of the drafting of the federal Constitution in 1787, but no such provisions were included in the final version sent to the States for ratification, and the specific drafting and ratifying debates indicate an express understanding of the Framers and ratifiers that no right or power to recall a Senator or Representative from the United States Congress exists under the Constitution.

Although the Supreme Court has not needed to directly address the subject of recall of Members of Congress, other Supreme Court decisions, as well as the weight of other judicial and administrative decisions, rulings and opinions, indicate that: (1) the right to remove a Member of Congress before the expiration of his or her constitutionally established term of office is one which resides exclusively in each House of Congress as established in the expulsion clause of the United States Constitution, and (2) the length and number of the terms of office for federal officials, established and agreed upon by the States in the Constitution creating that Federal Government, may not be unilaterally changed by an individual State, such as through the enactment of a recall provision or a term limitation for a United States Senator or Representative. Under Supreme Court constitutional interpretation, since individual States never had the original sovereign authority to unilaterally change the terms and conditions of service of federal officials agreed to and established in the Constitution, such a power could not be “reserved” under the 10th Amendment.

Since so many state governments are in shambles as well, here is what I could learn on recall of State officials:
From a recent report for the Library of the House of Commons in Britain:

Recall of state legislators has been somewhat more successful than that of governors, although still uncommon. For example in California there were 107 attempts to trigger a recall election between 1911 and 1994 and only 4 of these succeeded in reaching the number of required signatures on the petition:

  1. A state senator was recalled in 1913
  2. A state senator was recalled in 1914, and another state senator survived a recall attempt
  3. A state senator survived a recall attempt in 1994 with 59% of the vote
  4. Two Assembly members were recalled in 1995

In 1983 two state senators were recalled in Michigan for the first time in its history.

Recall is used much more often at the local level of government. At least 36 states permit recall of local officials.

Only 7 US states require certain preconditions to be met before a recall petition can be initiated. These are: Alaska, Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Rhode Island and Washington. The signature requirements to initiate a recall election vary between states but are generally based on a formula using the percentage of the vote in the last election as a base. For specific details of these states’ requirements please see: 


Since Michigan was most recently successful at this, let’s take a look at what happened there:



Recall 1983? The History of Michigan’s Great Taxpayer Revolt.

In January of 1983, Governor James Blanchard had a problem. Michigan was in recession, losing jobs, and the legislature was facing declining tax revenues. Blanchard needed to hike taxes in order to maintain government spending, since real spending cuts seemed out of the question. He proposed, and passed through the legislature, a 38% income tax hike.

            Taxpayers revolted. Recall drives were launched against Governor Blanchard and 14 state senators who supported the tax hike. Citizens launching these recalls were not taken seriously at first because no governor or state lawmaker had ever been recalled in the history of Michigan. Why?

Recalls of state officials are difficult. First, there are a huge number of petition signatures that citizens must collect. To recall a governor, citizens must collect valid signatures equal to 25% of the total number of votes cast for governor in the last gubernatorial election. That meant about 750,000 signatures in 1983, and would mean nearly one million signatures to recall Governor Granholm today. For a state representative or senator, citizens need signatures equal to 25% of the votes cast for governor in that lawmaker’s district. And they have only six months to do this.

The second reason recalls are hard is that the entire professional political establishment lines up against them. In 1983, citizens launching the recalls faced hostile local boards of canvassers (appointed partisan election officials) who ruled that the recall petition language was “unclear.” Some of these local canvassers even refused to attend scheduled meetings so that a quorum could not be present to certify recall petitions.

Having the law on your side didn’t always mean having judges on your side. A circuit court judge halted one of the recall efforts, but was later overruled by the appeals court who found in favor of the citizens. Citizen recall organizers also faced legal intimidation in the form of lawsuits brought by the state Democratic Party.

These hurdles were too much to overcome in the Blanchard recall, which failed to collect sufficient signatures. But citizens succeeded collecting signatures and winning court battles in the recall efforts against two state senators, Phil Mastin (D-Pontiac) and David Serotkin (D-Mt. Clemens). Both faced special recall elections in November of 1983. They, and the political establishment, would not give up without a fight.

Both Serotkin and Mastin raised huge sums of money from Lansing interests to defeat the recall, outspending pro-recall citizens by better than 10-1 margins. Both had consultants, staffers and organized interests to campaign on their behalf for a “No” vote in the recall election.

Both were recalled by voters by better than 2-1 margins. …


So.. what can we do? We can do plenty. We can use Saul Alinsky tactics right back at them. You can learn what those are exactly by reading my letter to the President from a few months ago. It lists them in detail and how they are using them against us.

We can call, write or fax every day! Make an email out once a week with pertinent issues and email it every day to their offices. It will only take you a few minutes a week, but will help pile it up, for future reference if nothing else. They are REQUIRED to keep every email, letter, fax, etc.. It will also give you a sense of empowerment, knowing you are doing something.

We can all work hard over the next year to stalemate, if not change, the course of what happens in Washington.

We can work to change the law.

Please, get involved.

I will do my best to find out more on this bill and will cover it in my weekend post.

I do know our health is in mortal danger. I do know they will be stopping payment of preventative tests for seniors over 75. To what degree, I can only pledge to try to find out.

Please stop back over the weekend to learn more.






Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pink Slip Time

Posted on November 19, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: |

If you have not done so, it’s time to Pink Slip Congress






 World Net Daily is sponsoring the “Pink Slip” campaign and will, for $29.95, express deliver a pink slip with your name and address to each member of the house and senate.


Send your pink slips to every member of the House and Senate now for just $29.95

“The pink slips program is a great way to get the attention of members who have forgotten they will have to answer to the people next year on out-of-control spending and Washington power grabs,” Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn. said of the campaign, “I support it! And I want my constituents to know I hear them loud and clear.” 


Many can not afford that proposition, although, it is a wonderful idea, full of merit. Therefore, we present two alternatives here:


Diana Wingfield has come up with a black and white version in Word, that can be printed in black ink, 2 to a page. Just buy pink paper, which you may download here: DianasPinkSlip.doc
Ken Lowder, came up with a .PDF version which can be printed on  postcard stock, available at your office supply, 4 per side, which you may download here:
pinkfront.pdf        pinkback.pdf
Here are the original 6 image files in a .ZIP file which has a front and back file for each format and a Word file with the entire Congressional snail mail database. Post

Congressional traditional mail database:Congressional mailing and phone list.doc


Lastly, for those who may not be able to afford postage, or those who find it simpler to email their members, I have included an email version for you here. You have my permission to cut and paste this into an email. Here is the Congressional email address list which also has the fax numbers in case you wish to communicate the pink slip in that way:














Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Stand Tall, America, Clinging To Your Gun(s)

Posted on November 17, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , , , |

Since when is our Constitution up for debate? I am disgusted by the constant attacks on the very foundation of our country. There are those in government, our president for one, who would just as soon see all weapons stripped from law abiding citizens. The second amendment is clear:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

President James Monroe said: “The right of self-defense never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and alike necessary to nations and to individuals.”

President Thomas Jefferson said:

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” — Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” — Jefferson‘s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

“The beauty of the second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it away”. Thomas Jefferson

Can it be any clearer than that?

Progressives, Fascists and Marxists strive to remove from the citizenry the ability to defend themselves.

Those same persons and groups are determined to legislate “We The People” back in to slavery for the servitude of the government.

Alan Keyes has a very clear stance on the Second Amendment :


Presently, pending in the House, are two diametrically opposed bills:

H.R. 17 Citizens’ Self-Defense Act of 2009

OpenCongress Summary

In correlation with the restrictions outlined by the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, this bill protects and provides context for the possession and use of fire arms, namely in defense of the self or family (or, when relevant, the home) against a reasonably perceived threat of unlawful bodily injury or violent felony.

This bill is sponsored by Roscoe Bartlett (R) MD and has 21 co-sponsors, including Michele Bachmann.

Please check the link above to ensure your Representative is a co-sponsor, and if not, get on the phone!

The other bill, which seeks to impinge upon our second amendment rights, is H.R. 45 Blair-Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009

OpenCongress Summary

The Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act would establish a nationwide system for prohibiting unlicensed gun-ownership. If approved, the law would require gun owners to apply for five-year licenses to own firearms, and would give the U.S. Attorney General broad authority over the program.

This bill is sponsored by Bobby Rush (D) IL and the good news is it has zero co-sponsors. This man MUST GO!

I have received, as have many of my friends, an email circulating regarding fictitious SB 2099. Open Congress says:

 Over the past six months or so, I’ve seen an occasional e-mail about SB 2099, a bill that would supposedly require gun owners to declare their firearms on tax forms. During the past few days, however, the volume of questions about the bill has increased. So, I thought I would write a bit about SB 2099 to try and set the record straightIn short, an inaccurate rumor from 2000 is still running the rounds today, and still scaring people into writing the NRA and their lawmakers to stop it, despite ample evidence to the contrary.

 Even Archie Bunker had the right idea:

Some enlightening recent articles on the subject:

A Brief History of the Right to Self-Defense

by  Bob Heinritz  Posted at


For the first 150-years of the existence of the U.S.A., the right of citizens to carry arms was so fundamental it was not considered worthy of debate. The Founders considered their right to keep and bear arms the ultimate and most fundamental guarantee of life and freedom against crime, foreign invasion, and as a last resort, a despotic government. No knowledgeable American–from the founding of the United States through the mid-1950’s–would have questioned that the Second Amendment to the Constitution meant exactly what it says, “… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This was not a right of a Militia. The “Militia” was–and under current law still is–all able-bodied adults, who are expected to keep their privately-owned arms similar to what is used by the military at the time.Nineteenth-century U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story, called the American right to bear arms “the palladium of the liberties of the republic.” Our Founders believed that in a free society good citizens must always be prepared to defend themselves and their country. Thomas Jefferson said, “The God who gave us life, gave us freedom to defend life.” Being armed was more than a right. It was a moral obligation of citizenship.

The article goes on to detail what has happened in other countries on the subject of guns and gun control and is one of the most concise pieces I have seen on the subject. Extremely poignant and interesting. It concludes:

…You won’t see this data on the American evening news or hear our President, governors or other politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property. Guns in the hands of honest citizens preserve freedom and dignity — from both criminal and government predators. And, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. The gun-control party is now in the majority in Congress. Take note before it’s too late. The next time a politician talks in favor of gun-control, please remind all who are listening of the lesson of history. All credible scholarship indicates so-called “gun-control” laws never work, are dangerous to the rights of the law-abiding, and are inconsistent with the values on which the United States were founded. The Founders of America had it right. With guns, we are “citizens.” Without them, we are “subjects.” Please spread this civil-rights message — the right to life — to all of your friends, and especially all your government servants. You don’t work for them. They work for you.

Another fantastic article I recently came upon was through the Buckeye Firearms Association:

Obama administration backs U.N.’s pursuit of international gun control treaty By Chad D. Baus

Reuters is reporting that the Obama administration has reversed U.S. policy and said it would back launching talks on a United Nations treaty to regulate arms sales, a move that is pro-gun activists warn is one giant leap toward side-stepping Congress and overturning the Second Amendment.

From the story:

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush’s administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, “operates under the rules of consensus decision-making.”

“Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly,” Clinton said in a written statement.

Although President Obama is clearly doing their bidding, gun control extremists are still not happy, saying they are opposed to the proposed concensus rules because decisions on the treaty be made by consensus “could fatally weaken a final deal.”

“The shift in position by the world’s biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers,” Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.

However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus “could fatally weaken a final deal.”

“Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause,” said Oxfam International’s policy adviser Debbie Hillier.

The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.

Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.

Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.

The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better.

The change in policy is opposed by the National Rifle Association, as well as by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which is quoted as saying the treaty will not restrict the access of “dictators and terrorists” to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people…….

Stand tall America and defend your second amendment rights!


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

More Troubling Headlines for H1N1 Vaccine

Posted on November 16, 2009. Filed under: General Info | Tags: , , , , , |


Dr. Roby Mitchell, MD H1N1 Vaccine Does Not Work People Used As Human Guinea Pigs

H1N1 Vaccine and Spontaneous Abortions. Just a Coincidence?
There have been many reports. This link contains several reports from the women themselves.

Canadian Doctor: H1N1 Vaccination a Eugenics Weapon for Mass Extermination  (via realneo)

Canadian doctor Ghislaine Lanctôt, author of the Medical Mafia, has underscored the lawsuit recently filed by Austrian journalist Jane Bürgermeister against the WHO, the UN, and several high ranking government and corporate officials. Bürgermeister has documented how an international corporate criminal syndicate plans to unleash a deadly flu virus and institute a forced vaccination program.

“I am emerging from a long silence on the subject of vaccination, because I feel that, this time, the stakes involved are huge. The consequences may spread much further than anticipated,” writes Lanctôt, who believes the A(H1N1) virus will be used in a pandemic concocted and orchestrated by the WHO, an international organization that serves military, political and industrial interests.

In her book The Medical Mafia, Lanctôt writes about the ineffectiveness and dangers of vaccination. “Because of my professional status, my words weighed significantly in the public eye. The Medical Board’s reaction was immediate and strong. Its leaders demanded that I resign as a physician. I answered that I would do so as long as they could prove that what I had written was false. The Medical Board replied with a call for my expulsion,” she writes. “As I witnessed the disproportionate reaction of the Medical Board, I realized that, for the health establishment, the subject of vaccination was taboo. Unknowingly, I had opened a Pandora’s box. I discovered that, despite official claims, vaccines have nothing to do with public health. Underneath the governmental stamp of approval, there are deep military, political and industrial interests.”

During her trial in 1995, Lanctôt used an episode from the March 11th, 1979, 60 Minutes TV show covering the massive vaccination program foisted on the American public supposedly in response to the 1976 swine flu outbreak. It was later established by the CDC that the virus originated out of Fort Dix in New Jersey. “The Fort Dix outbreak may have been a zoonotic anomaly caused by introduction of an animal virus into a stressed population in close contact in crowded facilities during a cold winter,” note Joel C. Gaydos, Franklin H. Top, Jr, Richard A. Hodder, and Philip K. Russell.

It was also characterized “a rare example of an influenza virus with documented human to human transmission,” according to Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. The virus is “thought to be a direct descendant of the virus that caused the pandemic of 1918,” explained Richard Krause, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the time.

“Public health experts, fearing a possible replay of the 1918 pandemic, engaged in an intense debate about how to respond. Eventually they launched a nationwide vaccination campaign, which was announced by President Gerald Ford in March. By the end of the year, 48 million people had been vaccinated,” write Robert Roos and Lisa Schnirring of the Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy. “But the feared pandemic never materialized.”

Instead, numerous people came down with Guillian-Barre syndrome, a paralyzing neurologic illness, after receiving the government-hyped vaccination.

More than 33 years later, according to Dr. Russell Blaylock, a board certified neurosurgeon, “we are hearing the same cries of alarm from a similar lineup of virology experts. The pharmaceutical companies are busy designing a vaccine for the swine flu in hope that this administration will make the vaccine mandatory before another vaccine-related disaster can ruin their party…. Like SARS and bird flu before it, this swine flu scare is a lot of nonsense. Just take your high dose vitamin D3 (5000 IU a day), eat a healthy diet and take a few immune boosting supplements (such as beta-1, 3/1, 6 glucan) and you will not have to worry about this flu.”

According to a source known to former NSA official Wayne Madsen, “A top scientist for the United Nations, who has examined the outbreak of the deadly Ebola virus in Africa, as well as HIV/AIDS victims, concluded that H1N1 possesses certain transmission “vectors” that suggest that the new flu strain has been genetically-manufactured as a military biological warfare weapon.

In April, Army criminal investigators were looking into the possibility that disease samples went missing from biolabs at Fort Detrick. “Chad Jones, spokesman for Fort Meade, said CID is investigating the possibility of missing virus samples from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases,” the Frederick News Post reported. “Obviously, in light of the current swine flu scare, and the new strain’s possible synthetic origin, the fact that virus samples may have gone missing from the same Army research lab from which the 2001 anthrax strain was released is extremely disturbing,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote at the time.

Jane Bürgermeister “charges that the entire ’swine flu’ pandemic business is premised on a massive lie that there is no natural virus out there that poses a threat to the population,” writes Barbara Minton for Natural Health News. “She presents evidence leading to the belief that the bird flu and swine flu viruses have, in fact, been bioengineered in laboratories using funding supplied by the WHO and other government agencies, among others. This ’swine flu’ is a hybrid of part swine flu, part human flu and part bird flu, something that can only come from laboratories according to many experts.”

The Original 1976 60 minutes Swine Flu Interview

Part 1

Part 2

In an attempt to overcome skeptisism the White House, proficcient in propaganda, announced a contest.On July 9, 2009, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced a video PSA contest on flu prevention. The top ten videos were put to vote on YouTube for the public to select the overall winner. These are those top ten videos plus a special Spanish-language mention. The videos are featured on the website.


The H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic: Manipulating the Data to Justify a Worldwide Public Health Emergency

Our Lives at Risk: Drug Company Greed, Dangerous Vaccines, No Precautionary Principle

H1N1, Global Conspiracies, and Amerikan Gulags


 H1N1: Fact or Fiction?

 Obama Swine Flu National Emergencey: Evidences Vaccine Market-Building for Mass Murder

 Switzerland Authorises Two Pandemic Vaccines

 Switzerland Forbids Vaccine for Pregnant Women, Young and Elderly

 Medical Workers Balk At Mandatory Flu Vaccines

 Mass Vaccinations to Keep Flu at Bay for 2010 Winter Olympics

 Many Italian Doctors Reject Swine Flu Vaccine

 Google Announces Flu Shot Locator Database

 Death After H1N1 Vaccine May Scare People Off

 Teen Diagnosed With Guillain-Barre Syndrome After Swine Flu Shot




Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Is President Obama A Muslim?- In Context of Ft Hood, Afghanistan, NY Trial Decision

Posted on November 16, 2009. Filed under: General Info | Tags: , , , , , , |

Want to know why Obama wants to put off investigation into Fort Hood Terrorist Massacre?
Check out this pdf document from the Presidential Transition Team:
pg 29 of document (pg 32 in pdf browser)

Nidal Hasan

Uniformed Services University School of Medicine


  Somethings just make you go …hmmm… here’s more:

Not to rehash arguments of the past, but I find it necessary to now look at this question through a broader lens.
The Video here is a must see in order to fully understand the question. It is a compilation recently sent me and
does illustrate necessary facts going forward. Not of hearsay, but the President in his own words and deeds.

This is also a rehash, but worth reconsideration.

This registration document, made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiskus Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia, shows the registration of  Barack Obama under the name Barry Soetoro made by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro.    Name: Barry Soetoro

Religion: Islam

Nationality: Indonesian
How did little INDONESIAN, Barry Soetoro, (A.K.A. Barack Obama) get around the issue of nationality to become president?

 Obama Muslim School Doc










In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College .

Released recently, the transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia  as an undergraduate at the school.


The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California.

The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program.

To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

Please see last week’s column for how all this may have impacted our government’s ability or the President’s willingness to take appropriate actions to forestall events at Fort Hood.

If he is Muslim, what, if any, impact would this have in his ability to keep Americans safe, to be commander in chief during a time we are at war in a Muslim country, to assess the dangers of holding the trials of Radical Muslim Terrorists within the United States with full Constitutional rights? Only he can answer, but it’s up to American citizens to ask, and ask loudly!


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

In Loving Memory of My Big Brother

Posted on November 15, 2009. Filed under: Soapbox | Tags: , , |

In Loving Memory

Veteran, Patriot, Seeker of Truth and Justice

My Big Brother

Joseph D. Mirto, III

who passed away Friday, November 13, 2009 

after a valiant battle with cancer.


He could not attend attend Saturday’s Tea Parties

but he was there in spirit.


Joe June 2006


Joe November 2006


Joe Feb 2007



Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Immigration Bill 2010 as Administration Lays Yet Another Faulty Claim

Posted on November 14, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , , , , |

I can’t even hold in my rage for this administration at this point. I came across an article in the Washington Times Friday:

Immigration Bill Is Promoted for 2010 – Napolitano says time is right

Declaring success in border security and immigration enforcement, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday that the federal government has done its work and now it’s time for Congress to pass a broad bill to legalize illegal immigrants.

Her speech signals President Obama will make good on his promise to push Congress to pass an immigration bill next year – adding yet another hot-button issue to an already long and contentious list.

Ms. Napolitano said members of Congress and voters who balked at an immigration bill two years ago, fearing a repeat of the 1986 amnesty that only made the problem worse, can be assured this time is different. She said in those two years, the flow of illegal immigrants across the border has dropped dramatically and the government is doing more to catch fugitive aliens inside the U.S.

“The security of the southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007,” she said in a speech to the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. “The federal government has dedicated unprecedented resources to the Mexican border in terms of manpower, technology and infrastructure – and it’s made a real difference.”

Who are they trying to kid? Once again, they are living in some alternative reality. If, in fact, illegal aliens are coming across the border fewer in number, it is because there are no jobs here – hello??? The U.S. looks more and more like Mexico every day. Why bother?

Who’s to say there are fewer, though? If they know exactly how many illegal aliens are coming over than why can’t they stop them? Obviously, they don’t want to. It doesn’t meet with their agenda. Neither did it meet with the agenda of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc…. I am sick of it!

This administration has done nothing to foster border security. The only “work” it’s done is to push for more free benefits for illegals on the backs of hard working LEGAL citizens who don’t qualify for the same free handouts. Redistribution of our so-called “wealth” to those of foreign lands is becoming the norm for this administration and according to their agenda will continue as long as progressives are allowed control. 

According to Federation for American Immigration Reform (F.A.I.R), if the administration was serious about advancing national security, it would:

* Reverse course and welcome the assistance of local jurisdictions that aggressively identify illegal aliens for deportation.

Instead they are going after Sheriff Joe Arpaio

* Push for the E-Verify system to be adopted as a national requirement for all employers and all workers. In the meantime, implementation of the “no-match” letter screening system would represent a significant deterrent to the mass illegal immigration that compromises border security.

E-Verify was to go into effect in January, then the Obama administration delayed implementation until June, then again until September. They wanted more time to review the program. Yeah, right. They didn’t want to alienate millions of potential future voters. And, of course with groups like ACORN around, they won’t even need to prove citizenship in order to vote.

* Withdraw support for an amnesty for illegal aliens and, thereby, convey the message abroad that the United States is serious about enforcing its immigration laws.

An article in the Washington Times clearly recalls the President’s words recently during the health care debate:

President Obama said this week that his health care plan won’t cover illegal immigrants, but argued that’s all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.
He also staked out a position that anyone in the country legally should be covered – a major break with the 1996 welfare reform bill, which limited most federal public assistance programs only to citizens and longtime immigrants.

* Rapidly pursue implementation of a comprehensive electronic database that matches entry and departure of foreign visitors, and expand the special tracking database for students to include all long-term visitors.


*Reverse the recent expansion of the Visa Waiver Program that allows the entry of nationals of 35 countries to enter without consular screening and gradually eliminate it.

In September 2008, the Government Accountability Office released a report entitled, “Visa Waiver Program: Actions Needed to Improve Management Expansion Process and Assess and Mitigate Program Risks.” The majority of these procedures have yet to be adopted.

*Tighten the criteria for admission of nationals of countries with active terrorist organizations in the refugee and asylum programs.

Not to mention a porous border allows anyone to walk right in. Although the massacre at Fort Hood was done by a natural born citizen, it does remind us there are segments of the population, legal or otherwise who are out to get us.

Today, Saturday, November 14, 2009, at least 53 cities are holding teaparty protests:

Tea Parties Against Amnesty and Illegal Immigration held in over 53 cities and towns tomorrow, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009.

These events are designed to unify Americans of all races, faiths, and political parties who represent the 78% found in a recent Pulse Opinion poll who oppose any path to citizenship or any form of Amnesty for illegal immigrants currently in the United States.

New details are being added to our listing of these events online each hour.

Event times, locations, details, and organizer contact information can be found on our EVENT LOCATIONS page at

F.A.I.R. presents the following facts for your consideration:

The general public overwhelmingly favors immigration reform. Poll after poll shows that Americans want well-enforced, sensible, and sustainable immigration laws.

  • 68% oppose the creation of sanctuary cities (jurisdictions that have a policy of not enforcing immigration law) with only 13% in favor (Rasmussen, October 2009).
  • 73% of Americans want to see a decrease in illegal immigration, while only 3% believe there should be an increase (CNN, October 2009).
  • 56% of Mexicans believe that granting amnesty to illegal aliens in the United States would make it more likely that people they know would attempt to illegally migrate to United States. Only 17% think it would make people less likely to migrate illegally to the United States (Zogby, October 2009).
  • 65% of Mexicans who have a member of their immediate household in the United States said that amnesty would make people they know more likely to attempt to illegally migrate to America (Zogby, October 2009).
  • 55% of Mexicans who expressed a desire to migrate to the U.S. said they would attempt to enter the U.S. illegally (Pew Hispanic Center, September 2009).
  • 56% of U.S. voters believe that the policies of the federal government encourage illegal immigration (Rasmussen, October 2009).
  • 83% of U.S. voters say that citizenship verification should be part of any health care reform legislation (Rasmussen, September 2009).
  • 78% of likely U.S. voters believe that mass immigration has adversely impacted the quality and cost of the U.S. health care system (Pulse Opinion Research, August 2009).
  • 78% of likely U.S. voters oppose amnesty, with 19% in favor. 88% of African-Americans oppose amnesty. (Pulse Opinion Research, August 2009).
  • 70% of American voters feel that increased border control should be the most important priority in immigration reform. Only 22% prioritized legalization of illegal aliens (Rasmussen, August 2009).
  • 50% of American think immigration to the U.S. should be decreased, while only 14% want to see an increase in immigration to the U.S. (Gallup, August 2009).
  • 68% of adults think limiting care to illegal aliens is a good to excellent way to reduce overall health care costs (Zogby, July 2009).
  • 80% of likely voters oppose healthcare coverage for illegal aliens (Rasmussen, June 2009).
  • 67% of liberals and progressives believe that the level of immigration into the U.S. is too high (Pulse Opinion, April 2009).
  • 68% believe that employers who hire illegal aliens should be punished (Rasmussen, March 2009).
  • 79% of voters say the military should be used along the border with Mexico (Rasmussen, March 2009).
  • 73% believe law enforcement officers should check immigration status during traffic stops (Rasmussen, March 2009).
  • Only 32% of Obama voters considered his support for amnesty as a factor in their decisions to vote for him (Zogby, November 2008).  

Summary Demographic National Data (and Source)
Population (2008 CB est.):
Population (2000 Census): 281,421,906
Foreign-Born Population (2008 FAIR est.): 38,110,000
Foreign-Born Population (2000 Census): 31,107,573
Share Foreign Born (2008 FAIR est.) 12.5%
Share Foreign-Born (2000 Census) 11.1%
Immigrant Stock (2000 CB est.): 55,890,000
Share Immigrant Stock (2000 est.): 20.4%
Naturalized U.S. Citizens (2000 Census): 12,542,626
Share Naturalized (2000): 40.3%
Immigrant Admissions (DHS 1997-2006): 9,105,162
Illegal Alien Population (2008 FAIR est.): 13,010,000
Projected Population – 2025 (2006 FAIR): 364,237,000


We pay for immigration through federal taxes

Much of the cost for immigration is paid by the states and municipalities, but a lot is paid for by the federal government too. Illegal immigrants receive taxpayer support for their U.S.-born children, immunizations, subsidized public health and other programs. Legal immigrants are eligible for almost all federal programs with the exception of welfare, which generally is not available for the first five years in the country. In many areas, such as education, the federal government gives matching grants for state expenditures, which means paying twice for those costs of immigration. When states hand a bill to the federal government for the costs of immigration (as is provided for by law in the case of incarceration of illegal immigrants, emergency medical expenditures, or welfare programs for the illegal aliens who were given amnesty in 1986), it is you who will pay regardless of where you live.

The United States is a vast country; it is easy to be deceived into thinking that what goes on in other states does not affect us. But, directly or indirectly, the impact of mass immigration on our country hits us all and hits us hard. For that reason, all Americans should demand that their elected representatives reduce the price they are paying for immigration. The best way to cut those costs is deter illegal immigration and to reduce immigration itself back towards a more moderate level.


The Tyranny of Change: America in the Progressive Era, John Whiteclay Chambers, 1992.

Why Today’s Immigration is a Worse Problem than the Great Wave

Supporters of today’s mass immigration like to claim that we should not be concerned about it, because it is no worse than the Great Wave of immigration at the turn of the last century. But in fact, because times have changed greatly in the last one hundred years, immigration now is much more out of sync with our country’s needs than it was at the turn of the last century.

Today We Need Skilled Workers

In the economy of the Gilded Age (rapid industrial expansion), low-skilled workers were highly employable. New mechanical devices and processes were being introduced that did away with the need for workers with special industrial skills and know-how. As the U.S. Industrial Commission pointed out: “The fact that machinery and the division of labor opens a place for the unskilled immigrants makes it possible not only to get the advantages of machinery, but also to get the advantages of cheap labor.” However, modern technology requires skilled workers, not unskilled ones. Yet, in 2001, only 16 percent of legal immigrants were admitted as skilled workers.

Today’s Immigrants are Permanent and Create Net Costs

Before 1900, there may have been some marginal fiscal gain from immigration. Today, the estimated annual net cost of each immigrant, on average, is $2700. Then, immigrants’ stay in the U.S. was often temporary; today’s immigrants are here to stay. The Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates that the rate of return from 1900 to 1904 was over 37 percent; in the 1990s, the rate of immigrants’ return to their homelands was a much lower 15 percent.

Today Assimilation is Held Back

Ethnic ghettoization and its retardation of assimilation is more serious now than a hundred years ago. At that time, only rarely did a single ethnic group dominate an area of several city blocks, and even then many immigrants moved out of such areas. Now, ethnic enclaves are huge and growing; in the city of Miami, for example, nearly half of the population speaks English poorly or not at all, and 73 percent speak a language other than English at home.

Even at the turn of last century, it was known that the era of needed expansion in the U.S. was at an end. At the 1893 meeting of the American Historical Society, Frederick Jackson Turner began his paper on “The Significance of the Frontier in American History” by noting that the Bureau of the Census had just announced that there was no longer a continuous lie of free unsettled land visible on the U.S. map. The American “frontier” had closed…

Alien Nation, Peter Brimelow, 1995.

Today Our Country is No Longer Empty

During those frontier days, we had a vast empty country and states actively recruited immigrants. Now, our country is increasingly congested and communities pass ordinances to limit the growth of their populations. In 1900, the number of people per square mile in the United States was 25.6; in 2002, it was 82 people per square mile—a more than three times greater population density.

Today We Have Chain Migration

At the turn of the last century, having relatives in the United States made it logistically easier to immigrate here; it did not, however, guarantee that you would be admitted. At the turn of this century, having near relatives in the United States makes you legally eligible to immigrate and guarantees you eventual admission. In 2001, 64 percent of legal immigrants were admitted simply because they had a relative here. Due to the eligibility of the foreign relatives of immigrants, there is a line of several million aliens waiting and eligible for admission as immigrants to the United States.


S.729 – DREAM Act of 2009

A bill to amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to permit States to determine State residency for higher education purposes and to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children, and for other purposes.

This bill would give states the authority to repeal the denial of an unlawful alien’s eligibility for higher education benefits, which have been previously tied state-residency. Additionally, it allows for the adjustment from status of alien to conditional permanent resident and outlines the criteria for such an adjustment by the Secretary of Homeland Security. The bill and its equivalent in the House, H.R.1751, is just as controversial as most other immigration related bills, such as, H.R.1868, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009.


At my last count, 10 states allowed for in-state tuition for illegal aliens and three even allowed for them to receive financial help with that tuition. Does this seem fair to you? To me it seems as if this is another benefit not given to legal citizens of this country.

In any other country, including Mexico, there are strict penalties for illegal entry, but yet, those of us in favor of halting illegal immigration are called unreasonable. More suicidal progressive initiatives dressed up as political correctness.



Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )

George Soros and the Catholic Church Align? The Devil’s In The Details

Posted on November 12, 2009. Filed under: Enemies of The State, General Info, Watchdog Tools | Tags: , , , , , , |

I came upon a story yesterday on the Accuracy In Media site that revealed a surprising connection between the Catholic Church and George Soros.

The critical role of the Catholic Church in passing national health care reform legislation is coming under serious media scrutiny. But the story has taken a strange turn. It has now been revealed that George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator and well-known atheist, has been pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into “progressive” Catholic groups that are significant players in the national debates over health care and immigration.

On the surface, it would appear that Soros would be opposed to many positions of the Catholic Church. A major financial backer of the ACLU, Soros supports such causes as drug legalization, the rights of “sex workers” and felons, euthanasia, radical feminism, abortion rights, and homosexual rights. He does all of this in the name of promoting an “open society.”

The article when on to say collections at many Catholic Churches the weekend of 11/21 and 11/22/2009 will be designated for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, which uses the money to fund ACORN, Gamaliel and other radical community activist groups around the country. ACORN donations have been suspended at present, according to the group. There are many potically progressive causes which have, for one reason or another, aligned themselves with the Catholic Church.
The article contained many surprising Soros connections, which peaked my curiousity. I was shocked when going through the list to learn how many organizations exist for the sole purpose of turning our country upside down. While going through the list, I noticed what is becoming a clear pattern for progressives, who apparently live in some alternate universe. Just as Congress is doing with bills proposed of late, the names of these foundations, in many cases, do the opposite of what they proport to do. I noticed a lot of indoctrination of our youth as well, another now familiar pattern.
It is obvious to me, more so everyday, progressives are the enemy. There is no need for a violent takeover. They are systematically impoding our country from the inside. Please check out this list. I have included the information just as I found it on the Soros Open Society website. In the days ahead we will enlighten you as to the unamerican adgena George Soros, apparently with the help of the Catholic Church and others, is currently funding.
Air Traffic Control

To provide general support to the Air Traffic Control Education Fund, which helps musicians use their talent and high profiles to effect social change by connecting them to activists, organizations, and issue campaigns.

Oakland, CA  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Air Traffic Control

To support Air Traffic Control, an Oakland-based organization which supports musicians and managers in lending their talents to social justice by connecting concerned artists to activists, advocacy organizations and issue advocacy campaigns. 

Oakland, CA  |  $125,000  |  3 years  |

American Rights at Work Education Fund

To support American Rights at Work Education Fund (ARAWEF), a national organization which advances workers’ rights for people seeking a voice and better conditions on the job.  ARAWEF builds diverse coalitions, conducts public education campaigns, and builds innovative engagement efforts to engage community and business support.

Washington, D.C.  |  $150,000  |  1 year  |

Arab American Institute Foundation

To support Yalla Vote, a civic education and nonpartisan voter engagement project to increase civic engagement of the Arab American community in the 2008 election and beyond. 

Washington, D.C.  |  $75,000  |  1 year  |

Asian Pacific Islander American Vote

To provide general support to Asian Pacific Islander American Vote, a national non-partisan organization that encourages local nonprofits working in Asian American communities to build civic and voter engagement activities into their work. 

Washington, D.C.  |  $250,000  |  2 years  |

Ballot Initiative Strategy Center Foundation

To support the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center Foundation, which provides social justice organizations with education, research, and strategic assistance on ballot initiatives and referendums at the local and state levels across the nation.

Washington, D.C.  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Bus Federation Civic Fund

A grant to support the Bus Federation, a unique coalition of five state organizations in Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington that seek to engage young people in civic engagement work and develop them as leaders.

Portland, OR  |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good

A grant to support Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, a national organization that educates Catholics and the broader public about the Catholic social justice vision of the common good and connects that vision to specific advocacy efforts.

Washington, D.C.  |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

Center for American Progress

A grant to support the Center for American Progress, one of the nation’s largest progressive think tanks.

Washington, D.C.  |  $1,000,000  |  2 years  |

Center for American Progress / Campus Progress

To support Campus Progress, which seeks to cultivate a new generation of writers, policy analysts, communications specialists, and activists to build a progressive movement in which young leaders play a leading role in achieving lasting gains for this country.

Washington, D.C.  |  $500,000  |  2 years  |

Center for Civic Policy

To support Center for Civic Policy, which utilizes innovative strategies to build 501c3 nonpartisan civic engagement capacity and advances social justice at the state and local levels. 

Albuquerque, NM  |  $200,000  |  2 years  |

Center for Civic Policy

To support the national convening of the Civic Engagement Networks Project, an emerging effort that includes participation from the Center for Community Change’s Community Voting Project; National Coalition for Black Civic Participation; Pushback Network; State Voices; and the We Are America Alliance.

Albuquerque, NM  |  $25,000  |  1 year  |

Center for Community Change

To provide general support for the Center for Community Change, a national organization and resource center for grassroots organizations, which seeks to build the power and capacity of low-income people, particularly people of color, to change their communities and the public policies that affect their lives.

Washington, D.C.  |  $600,000  |  1 year  |

Center for Community Change

To support the Center for Community Change, a national resource center for grassroots social justice organizations, with a particular emphasis on groups working in low-income, people of color and immigrant communities.

Washington, DC  |  $930,000  |  1 year  |

Center for Community Change / Fair Immigration Reform Movement

To support the Center for Community Change’s Fair Immigration Reform Movement, a national grassroots coalition of immigrant rights organizations working for comprehensive immigration reform.

Washington, D.C.  |  $250,000  |  1 year  |

Center for Community Change / Generation Change

To support Generation Change, a project of the Center for Community Change, which recruits, trains, and sustains the next generation of community organizers and social justice nonprofit leaders. 

Washington, D.C.  |  $300,000  |  1 year  |

Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest

A grant to support the Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest, an advocacy organization that protects the ability of nonprofits to engage in lobbying and other forms of advocacy.

Washington, D.C.  |  $50,000  |  1 year  |

Center for Progressive Leadership

To support the Center for Progressive Leadership, a national training institute dedicated to developing the next generation of progressive political leaders through intensive training programs for youth, advocates, and future candidates.

Washington, D.C.  |  $200,000  |  2 years  |

Center for Public Interest Research / Student PIRGs

To support the Student PIRGs, a national organization which facilitates non-partisan student activism by recruiting and training college students to become engaged in policy campaigns, elections, and the political process.

Chicago, IL  |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

To provide general support for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, one of the nation’s premier policy organizations working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals.

Washington, D.C.  |  $1,500,000  |  2 years  |

Choice USA

To support Choice USA, an organization which mobilizes and develops the skills of young people to be the leaders of a more inclusive and effective reproductive justice movement.  This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund.

Washington, D.C.  |  $150,000  |  1 year  |

Civic Engagement Fund

To provide general support to the Civic Engagement Fund, a re-granting fund dedicated to providing training, education, and technological resources to a national network of leaders and organizations that build capacity for nonpartisan civic engagement, public policy advocacy, and issue-related programs.

 |  $200,000  |  1 year

Colorado Center on Law and Policy / Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute

To support the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

Denver, CO  |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Democracia U.S.A.

To support Democracia U.S.A., a Miami-based national organization that advances civic engagement among the nation’s fasting growing demographic group by conducting nonpartisan voter registration and voter education in Latina/o communities. 

Miami, FL  |  $500,000  |  2 years  |

Drum Major Institute

To support Drum Major Institute for Public Policy, a New York City-based think tank focused on conducting research and promoting progressive economic and social policies.

New York, NY  |  $350,000  |  2 years  |

Drum Major Institute

To provide general support for the Drum Major Institute, a New York City-based think tank focused on promoting progressive economic and social policies, including DMI’s Scholars and Fellows program, focused on the development of a new generation of policy and advocacy leaders from diverse backgrounds.

New York, NY  |  $400,000  |  2 years  |  www.drummajorinstitute

Economic Policy Institute

To support Economic Policy Institute, a Washington, DC-based policy center that researches the impact of economic trends and policies on working people in the United States and around the world.

Washington, DC  |  $550,000  |  2 years  |

Enterprise Corporation of the Delta / Mississippi Economic Policy Center

To support the Mississippi Economic Policy Center’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

 |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Faith in Public Life

A grant to support Faith in Public Life, a national strategy center advancing faith in the public square as a positive and unifying force for justice, compassion, and the common good. This grant is co-funded by U.S. Programs’ Equality and Opportunity Fund in recognition of Faith in Public Life’s work to advance comprehensive immigration reform.

Washington, D.C.  |  $450,000  |  2 years  |

Four Freedoms Fund

To support the Four Freedoms Fund at Public Interest Projects, a collaborative grantmaking pool that addresses issues related to advancing the rights of immigrants, including a nonpartisan civic engagement initiative focused on building the civic engagement capacity of local immigrants’ rights organizations.  

New York, NY  |  $300,000  |  1 year  |

Four Freedoms Fund

A grant to support the annual immigrant civic engagement convening for the Four Freedoms Fund at Public Interest Projects, a national funding collaborative established to safeguard immigrants’ civil rights and civil liberties and promote the full participation of immigrants in a democratic society.

New York, NY  |  $80,000  |  1 year  |

Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute

A grant to support the Roosevelt Institute’s work on economic policy and its student-led network of campus think tanks that connect student ideas to advocacy. This grant is co-funded by the Seize the Day Initiative in recognition of Roosevelt’s leadership in creating a new economic paradigm.

Hyde Park, NY  |  $500,000  |  2 years  |

Funders’ Committee for Civic Participation

A grant to support the Funders’ Committee for Civic Participation, a driving force in the donor community in advancing effective voter registration, education, and protection.

Portland, OR  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Gamaliel Foundation

To support the Gamaliel Foundation, a network of grassroots, interfaith, interracial issue organizations working to build power and a more just society, in its Faith and Democracy Campaign, which combines faith and values work with organizing around issues at the state and national levels.

Chicago, IL  |  $300,000  |  2 years  |

Generational Alliance

A grant to support the Generational Alliance, a national collaboration of youth engagement organizations working to empower low-income youth, youth of color, and LGBTQ youth through community organizing and non-partisan voter engagement, arts and culture, communication and media, policy, and leadership development.

Washington, D.C.  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training

A grant to support the Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training, a national organization that promotes the connection between fundraising, social justice, and social justice movement building, particularly for people of color communities and organizations.

Oakland, CA  |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

Grassroots Policy Project

To provide general support to the Grassroots Policy Project, an educational and research organization working in partnership with grassroots community groups, activist networks, statewide coalitions and other training organizations to encourage strategic approaches to issues of social and economic justice.

Cambridge, MA  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Hip Hop Caucus

To support the Hip Hop Caucus (HHC), an emerging national organization that inspires non-partisan voter participation and community engagement from the hip hop generation, specifically from young people who are not on college campuses. This grant is co-funded by U.S. Programs’ Campaign for Black Male Achievement in recognition of HHC’s work to advance civic participation from—and green jobs for—young Black men.

Washington, D.C.  |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Institute for America’s Future

To provide general support for the Institute for America’s Future, which provides research, training, and communications assistance to organizations working on a wide spectrum of issues.

Washington, D.C.  |  $500,000  |  2 years  |

Interfaith Education Fund

To provide general support for the Interfaith Education Fund, which provides organizing, technical assistance, training, and research support to a broad-based network of local interfaith coalitions known as the Industrial Areas Foundation.

 |  $300,000  |  18 months  |

Jewish Funds for Justice / Funders’ Collaborative for Youth Organizing

To support the Funders’ Collaborative on Youth Organizing, a national intermediary that increases funding for youth organizing groups and develops strategies to promote to funders the importance of investment in the leadership of low-income youth of color in social justice organizing. 

Brooklyn, NY  |  $150,000  |  18 months  |

Kentucky Youth Advocates / Kentucky Tax and Budget Initiative

To support the Kentucky Tax and Budget Initiative’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

Jeffersontown, KY  |  $75,000  |  1 year  |

League of Young Voters Education Fund

To provide general support for the League of Young Voters Education Fund, which engages and supports young people, particularly those who do not attend college, those from low-income communities, and youth of color, helping them to lead and actively participate in creating change in their communities.

 |  $600,000  |  2 years  |

Louisiana Association of Nonprofit Organizations / Louisiana Budget Project

To support the Louisiana Budget Project’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

 |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Movement Strategy Center

A grant to support the Movement Strategy Center for its work to strengthen the social justice movement through increasing the capacity of individuals, organizations, alliances, and sectors to be more strategic, collaborative, and sustainable.

Oakland, CA  |  $150,000  |  1 year  |

Movement Strategy Center

To provide general support for the Movement Strategy Center, which strengthens the progressive movement by teaching organizers and organizations training, movement building, and networking skills through capacity-building, convenings, and research and information.

Oakland, CA  |  $200,000  |  1 year  |

National Domestic Workers Alliance

To support the National Domestic Workers Alliance, a New York City and Oakland-based coalition of 15 domestic worker organizations from 10 major cities that seeks to organize and build the power of domestic workers to improve their living and working conditions, bring visibility to the struggles of this unrecognized workforce, and end the exclusion of domestic workers from protection as a workforce. 

 |  $200,000  |  2 years

National Organizers Alliance

To support the National Organizers Alliance in launching a new web-based career center and job clearinghouse, “Organizers for America,” for community organizers seeking to work with civil rights, faith, issue, labor, and neighborhood organizations.

 |  $40,000  |  1 year  |

National Training and Information Center

To support the National Training and Information Center (NTIC), a 36 year old national resource center that supports, strengthens, and coordinates multi-issue grassroots community organizations working for social and economic justice, on housing, fiscal service regulation, and immigration issues.  (This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund’s Neighborhood Stabilization Initiative and the Seize the Day special funding initiative.)

Chicago, IL  |  $600,000  |  2 years  |

New America Foundation

To support the New America Foundation’s Next Social Contract initiative, a domestic policy effort to develop a new metanarrative to assess how the American social contract evolved, why it fails to meet needs today, and how it can be reinvented for the conditions of a largely post-industrial and increasingly diverse society. 

Washington, D.C.  |  $500,000  |  2 years  |

New Democracy Project

To support the New Democracy Project—a think tank and advocacy organization that promotes democratic participation, economic fairness, and social justice—and the Center for American Progress in producing an agency-by-agency guide for a new administration relying on leading scholars, authors, and former officals. (This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund, National Security and Human Rights Campaign, and Transparency & Integrity Fund.)

 |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

New Jersey Policy Perspective

To support the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

Trenton, NJ  |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

New Organizing Institute

To support New Organizing Institute, a Washington, DC-based organization that enhances civic engagement and social justice organizing by enabling nonprofit groups to take advantage of the latest advances in new technology. 

Washington, DC  |  $200,000  |  2 years  |

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest / National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights

To support the New York City-based National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights, a nationwide coalition of lawyers, academics, students and community activists that joined together in response to a series of Supreme Court decisions that have eroded civil rights protections, particularly in the area of federalism.

New York, NY  |  300,000  |  18 months  |

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest / Campaign to Restore Civil Rights

To support the Campaign to Restore Civil Rights, a coalition of over eighty federal, state, and local organizations that seek restoration of key legal protections eroded by federal courts over the past decade. 

New York, NY  |  $200,000  |  1 year  |

Nonprofit Voter Engagement Network

A grant to support the Nonprofit Voter Engagement Network, a national alliance of direct and human service providers and agencies building the civic engagement capacity of the nonprofit social service sector.

St. Paul, MN  |  $300,000  |  2 years  |

Oregon Center for Public Policy

To support the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

Silverton, OR  |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Partnership for Working Families

To provide general support for the Partnership for Working Families, which provides research and technical assistance to a network of metropolitan-based economic justice organizations focused on community benefit agreements.

Washington, D.C.  |  $350,000  |  2 years  |

Partnership for Working Families

A grant to support the Partnership for Working Families, a national network that provides policy, communications, research, organizing and legal resources to metro-based affiliates that are working to advance economic and social justice in their communities.

Washington, D.C.  |  $300,000  |  2 years  |

People for the American Way / Young People For

To support Young People For, which provides fellowships and internships to youth in an effort to diversify the leadership of social change movements, support young people to effect change, and sustain social change leadership over the long term. 

Washington, D.C.  |  $400,000  |  1 year  |

PICO National Network

To support the PICO National Network, a 36-year-old network of congregation-based community organizations which brings the voices of people of faith and faith leaders to the public debate on national priorities, including housing, health care, and immigration.  (This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund’s Neighborhood Stabilization Initiative and the Seize the Day special funding initiative.)

Oakland, CA  |  $600,000  |  2 years  |

Progressive States Network

A grant to support the Progressive States Network for its work to provide non-partisan support to state legislators with background research on public policy and linking legislators and state advocates to each other across state lines.

New York, NY  |  $300,000  |  2 years  |

Pushback Network

A grant to support the Pushback Network, a national collaboration of grassroots groups and networks, that seeks to build “bottom-up” state-based alliances to increase civic participation by leaders from marginalized communities.

 |  $225,000  |  18 months  |

Right to the City Alliance

To support the Right to the City Alliance, an emerging national network of local base-building organizations and allies committed to building a movement for urban justice, human rights, and democracy, in a strategic planning and organizational assessment process.

Brooklyn, NY  |  $100,000  |  9 months  |

Right to the City Alliance

To support Right to the City Alliance, a Brooklyn, NY-based emerging national alliance of more than 50 urban base-building organizations and allies committed to building a movement for urban justice, human rights, and democracy. 

Brooklyn, NY  |  $500,000  |  2 years  |

Rockwood Leadership Program

A grant to support the Rockwood Leadership Program, a national non-profit that promotes social change by providing individuals, organizations, and issue sectors with powerful and effective training in leadership and collaboration.

Berkeley, CA  |  $400,000  |  2 years  |

Rockwood Leadership Program

To support the Rockwood Leadership Program in conducting an independent, thorough evaluation of its programs, and to provide underwriting support for the incoming class of its most advanced offering, Leading from the Inside Out, the Rockwood Yearlong Fellowship for Social Change Leaders. 

Berkeley, CA  |  $109,000  |  1 year  |

Ruckus Society

To provide general support for Ruckus Society, a capacity-building and intermediary organization that provides trainings to grassroots organizations and young individuals working on environmental, human rights, and social justice issues.

Oakland, CA  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Social Justice Leadership

To support the Harlem-based Social Justice Leadership which provides innovative high-quality leadership training to staff of community organizations, labor unions, and other grassroots social justice organizations in Miami, New Orleans, and New York City.

New York, NY  |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

State Voices

To support State Voices, a network that supports year-round state tables for 501(c)(3) organizations that foster collaborative issue policy work, economies of scale, rigorous evaluation, and efforts to engage socially responsible and historically underrepresented communities in and out of election seasons.

Detroit, MI  |  $200,000  |  2 years  |

State Voices

A grant to support State Voices, the convener and technical assistance provider for 16 permanent, year-round state tables for more than 545 diverse non-partisan 501(c)(3) organizations that foster collaborative voter engagement and multi-issue advocacy work.

Detroit, MI  |  $600,000  |  18 months  |

State Voices / Civic Engagement Fund

To support the Civic Engagement Fund, housed at State Voices, which provides shared voter file access, trainings, and technical and strategic support to more than 540 local, state, and national affiliate non-profit organizations seeking to enhance non-partisan voter participation in sixteen states. 

Detroit, MI  |  $400,000  |  1 year  |

Students for a Sensible Drug Policy

A grant to  support Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a grassroots network of students who are concerned about the impact drug abuse has on communities and how the “War on Drugs” is failing.

Washington, D.C.  |  $100,000  |  2 years  |

Tides Center

To support the We Are America Alliance, an umbrella group of partners and allies dedicated to encouraging maximum civic participation in immigrant communities across the country.

 |  $200,000  |  1 year  |

Tides Center / Opportunity Agenda

To support the Opportunity Agenda, a social justice organization that works collaboratively with other organizations, spanning isolated issues and constituencies, to integrate strategic communications with those organizations’ advocacy and research.  This grant was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund.

New York, NY  |  $400,000  |  2 years  |

Tides Center / WireTap Magazine

To support WireTap Magazine, based in San Francisco, CA, an influential independent news and culture youth web magazine which amplifies the voices of young people from diverse backgrounds in order to shape the political discourse and spotlight issues that impact their lives.

 |  $200,000  |  2 years  |

Tobin Project

To provide general support to the Tobin Project, an alliance of leading academics across the social sciences and humanities that redirects and harnesses academic work for public purposes and policy debates.

Cambridge, MA  |  $450,000  |  2 years  |

Tobin Project

A grant to support the Tobin Project, a network of leading academics from law, economics, history, politics, and policy working to reframe fundamental debates about foreign and domestic policy.

Cambridge, MA  |  $225,000  |  1 year  |

United for a Fair Economy / Tax Fairness Organizing Collaborative

A grant to support United for a Fair Economy’s Tax Fairness Organizing Collaborative, a national network of state-based organizations that educates and organizes for fair taxation at the state and local levels.

Boston, MA  |  $150,000  |  1 year  |

United States Student Association Foundation

To provide general support for the United States Student Association Foundation, which provides education and organizing materials, technical assistance, and training to students in the United States Student Association network who are organizing on issues of access on the campus, state, and federal level. 

Washington, D.C.  |  $600,000  |  2 years  |

University of Wisconsin / Center for State Innovation

To support the Center for State Innovation, an effort to provide policy advice and research to innovative state executives (governors, secretaries of state, attorneys general, and treasurers, primarily).

Madison, WI  |  $250,000  |  1 year  |

Voto Latino

A grant to support Voto Latino (VL), an emerging national organization that informs and motivates Latino youth to engage in civic participation by leveraging the latest technologies to promote positive change. This grant is co-funded by U.S. Programs’ Strategic Opportunities Fund in recognition of VL’s census outreach leadership and the Seize the Day Initiative in recognition of VL’s cutting edge use of new media outreach strategies.

Washington, D.C.  |  $225,000  |  2 years  |

Wellstone Action Fund / Campus Camp Wellstone

To support Campus Camp Wellstone, a project of the Wellstone Action Fund, which runs trainings and develops curriculum for a diverse community of young people and organizations that seek to inspire greater activism from young people.

Minneapolis, MN  |  $200,000  |  2 years  |

Western States Center

To provide general support to the Western States Center, which seeks to build a movement for political reform and economic, racial and environmental justice in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Alaska.

Portland, OR  |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

Western States Center

To support Western States Center, a Portland, OR-based organization that builds power to advance social justice through provide training, consultation and resources to a wide range of community and constituency-based organizations in the Pacific Northwest, Great Basin, and Intermountain West states. 

Portland, OR  |  $100,000  |  1 year  |

Wisconsin Council on Children and Families / Wisconsin Budget Project

To support the Wisconsin Budget Project’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans.  The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

Madison, WI  |  $150,000  |  2 years  |

Youth Engagement Fund and Table

To support the Youth Engagement Fund and Table, which coordinates a 501(c)(3) table of national youth groups and their field programs aimed at mobilizing and permanently engaging young voters, ages 18-29.

 |  $250,000  |  1 year

Youth Engagement Fund and Table

A grant to support the Youth Engagement Fund and Table housed at the Tides Foundation, a non-partisan 501(c)(3) collaborative table of youth civic engagement organizations that exists to increase the ability of each group to meet voter registration and mobilization goals.

 |  $150,000  |  18 months


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Our Government More Concerned With Citizens Speech Than Terrorists

Posted on November 11, 2009. Filed under: General Info, Soapbox | Tags: , , , , , , , , |


The Preamble of the Constitution of the clearly states:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

For almost a year before the terrorist attack by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the FBI had him in their sight.  

In December, Hasan reportedly sent 10 to 20 e-mails to several terror-related Islamic figures, including Anwar Aulaqi, a radical imam from Virginia. Aulaqi has been openly propagandizing for al Qaeda in Yemen and who had ties to several of the 9/11 hijackers, sources told the LA Times.

“I think the very fact that you’ve got a major in the US Army contacting [a radical imam], or attempting to contact him, would raise some red flags,” Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) — ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee — told the Los Angeles Times.

Those messages, intercepted by a Joint Terrorism Task Force during an unrelated investigation, were later referred to FBI and Army investigators in Washington, officials said, but were dismissed as merely “research” and contained no explicit threats or plots. 

As far back as June 2007, Hasan sounded what any normal citizen would view as an alarm bell, by giving a slide presentation to other doctors as what was supposed to be a presentation regarding soldier’s health issues. This presentation, available to view by clicking title, was called The Koranic World View as It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military . Clearly off topic, wouldn’t you say?
I am left to wonder why it’s all right to plot against America in the eyes of our government. It causes me to remember they had warning of the 9/11 attacks before that fateful day and did nothing to stop those as well, most likely simply dismissing these threats, for one reason or another. How many of our tax dollars go to fund the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security and the myriad of other government agencies supposedly dedicated to protecting “we the people”? No disrespect intended to the “boots on the ground” but rather management when I say, we are not getting our money’s worth.

World Net Daily reported a Council on American-Islamic Relations adviser and regular speaker at its events has suggested Islamic law permits Muslims to attack C-130 military transport planes carrying the 82nd Airborne out of Fort Bragg, N.C., according to a stunning new book,  “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America.”  which exposed Washington-based CAIR’s inner workings.

Radical Islamic cleric Zaid Shakir, a frequent guest speaker at CAIR events, tells his Muslim audiences: “Jihad is physically fighting the enemies of Islam to protect and advance the religion of Islam. This is jihad.”


Acceptable targets of jihad, he says, include U.S. military aircraft.


“Islam doesn’t permit us to hijack airplanes filled with civilian people,” Shakir once told a Muslim audience. However, “If you hijack an airplane filled with the 82nd Airborne, that’s something else.”


The 82nd Airborne Division’s elite paratroopers fly out of Fort Bragg, N.C., which is part of North Carolina state Sen. Larry Shaw’s district. Shaw is CAIR’s new chairman.

Knowing this, what is being done to prevent such attacks? If recent history shows us, then perhaps nothing. Why, pray tell, do we outsource the protection of our military bases to private citizens? That seems absurd to me, beyond comprehension. I am afraid, however, it is now indicative of how our government works. Just as we outsource design and construction of our weaponry systems.

President Obama, in July, appointed a Muslim to a top post at Homeland Security. I am not suggesting all Muslims are terrorists or can not be trusted, but I can not get behind a Muslim with questionable sense of loyalties in a top position in our Dept. of Homeland Security given present conditions. noted:

Obama made a presidential appointment of Muslim Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Arif Alikhan for a top job at the federal Department of Homeland Security. In his new job, Arif Alikhan will be Assistant Secretary for the Office of Policy Development at the Department of Homeland Security. Alikhan has been Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles–in charge of public safety for the city.


Why Muslim Alikhan at the Department of Homeland Security you might ask? DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said Alikhan’s “broad and impressive array of experience in national security, emergency preparedness, and counterterrorism will make him an asset”–yes, but on behalf of the U.S. or Muslims? I am not sure what she is talking about and she probably doesn’t know either.


Alikhan says a big part of his job will be fostering communication between agencies. Alikhan, like Obama, also wants to help improve America’s image with Muslims around the world. He will now set policy on security at the highest levels of the federal government. But what policies has the new Assistant Secretary embraced?


During his years in Los Angeles, Alikhan was responsible for derailing the Police Department’s plan to monitor activities within the Los Angeles Muslim community, where numerous radical mosques and madrassas existed, and where some of the 9/11 hijackers had received support from local residents.


Alikhan is strongly anti-Israel; he has referred to the terrorist organization Hezbollah as a “liberation movement.” Hezbollah is on the U.S. official terrorist list while being an affiliate of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Alikhan also opposed President George W. Bush’s prosecution of the war on Islamic terror.


In 2007, Alikhan was instrumental in removing the Muslim terror tracking plan in Los Angeles. The Muslim ‘‘Mapping’’ Plan of the Los Angeles Police Department is now “dead on arrival” according to Chief William Bratton. “It is over and not just put on the side,” said Chief Bratton in a meeting with the Muslim leadership of Southern California at that time. The meeting was moderated by Arif Alikhan.


Chief Bratton acknowledged the hurt and offense caused to Muslims and agreed to send a letter to the Muslim community announcing the official termination of the ‘’mapping’’ plan.


A major reason for the termination of the ‘‘mapping’’ plan was the Muslim community’s vociferous opposition and active civic engagement in making themselves heard beyond Los Angeles. Muslim organizations demonstrated a strong unity of purpose and message on the issue of ‘’mapping’’ that led to a position of strength for Muslims in the meeting. Those involved in the initial phases of this controversy were the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California and the Council on American-Islamic Relations , the Muslim Public Affairs arm.

Muslim Democrats welcomed Alikhan’s appointment at a banquet/fundraiser for the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California recently where the first speaker was Arif Alikhan, a devout Sunni and the son of Pakistani immigrants,,1518,505573,00 .

Other speakers included Professor Agha Saeed of the American Muslim Task Force (AMT) who spoke about “the struggle of the Muslim Community against the pervasive atmosphere of Islamophobia and hatred in the aftermath of 9/11. It was a struggle against the tide–a very strong tide–to prevent Muslims in America from being marginalized and silenced.”


Professor Saeed issued five demands from Muslims to the Department of Justice. These demands included a cessation to the infiltration by spies of mosques and an end to the introduction of agents provocateur. In addition there was to be a cessation of attempts to undermine Muslim groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Un-indicted co-conspirator CAIR was thrilled at the appointment.


Last week, Napolitano swore in Damascus-born Kareem Shora, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC)’s national executive director, to a position on the Homeland Security Advisory Council, an outside-the-department group of national security experts that advises the Secretary.


Shora is the first Arab rights advocate on the panel. Shora has with ties to terror backers.


I am not suggesting Muslims should have no place in America. I am suggesting they should be allowed to participate in accordance with their ability to assimilate. They are only as special as everyone else is special. That is the beauty of America. I am curious as to why  our government doesn’t seem to mind this and insists we ignore this as well. Have we not learned any lessons? They are plotting against us in Islamic mosques and schools right here in America. Have they learned nothing from Europe?


Are you aware, despite being unconstitutional, we have a new branch of government known as Muslim Outreach through the State Department? In June, the State Dept announced, without fanfare so as not to call attention to the appointment, the selection of Farah Pandith, to carry out Obama’s strategy to reach out to Muslims worldwide. Furthermore, the new outreach program offers funding sources for various programs. In August, American Thinker pointed out the various aspects of the program.


I notice there’s no Baptist Outreach, Lutheran Outreach, and as a matter of fact, this past week, Representative Woosley (D) of California is calling for an IRS investigation of the Catholic Church for taking a stand on the Health Care “Reform” issue.


Can you imagine that our government fosters a religion with an agenda to take over the world? One which has a history of total disregard for basic human rights and even human life, but yet they trash all religions traditionally held by the American people?

Our government’s disdain for it’s citizens is evident and they show it on a daily basis. We, as a people, have tolerated too long the systematic removal of Christian and Jewish religion in society for too long. As well, we have for too long tolerated the governments lack of security regarding our open border policies, which are an engraved invitation to terrorists of all ilks to come on over, infiltrate our communities and do what they will.

Then there’s the consistent audacity of the Obama Administration who is more focused on censoring Fox News and, as noted in a report from CBS News,  allows it’s DOJ to disregarded the fist Amendment, and launch an unconstitutional attack on a blogger’s website. If they are not about keeping us safe, why, then, do we need to expand their spying capabilities? 


World Net Daily reported this week:


The Department of Homeland Security and the National Security Agency both recently announced plans for huge new electronic security centers that could monitor, sort and archive e-mails, telephone calls and other intercepted communications.

But critics wonder just who is watching the watchers.


“The director of the NSA is in charge of an organization three times the size of the CIA and empowered in 2008 by Congress to spy on Americans to an unprecedented degree,” said James Bamford, author of the recently published book about the NSA, “The Shadow Factory.”

He told WND the agency’s ability to deal with cybersecurity and other communications is enormous.


“In 2008, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court loosened its control on the NSA and allowed for warrantless eavesdropping,” he said. “Congressional oversight is very weak. A whistleblower for AT&T reported that AT&T has switch rooms in several parts of the country.

“And it wasn’t Congress that found out about the extensive warrantless eavesdropping; it was a couple reporters,” he said.


A number of sources in civil liberties groups say Americans have a right to be concerned about the absence of strict oversight and to wonder whose conversations are being monitored and recorded.


The Department of Homeland Security also recently announced, via Secretary Janet Napolitano, that a new complex planned in Arlington, Va., will mean more security coordination.


“Securing America‘s cyber infrastructure requires a coordinated and flexible system to detect threats and communicate protective measures to our federal, state, local and private sector partners and the public,” Napolitano’s announcement said.


“Consolidating our cyber and communications operations centers within the NCCIC (National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center) will enhance our ability to effectively mitigate risks and respond to threats,” she said. The agency says the project will be a 24-hour watch facility that will focus on “national efforts to address threats and incidents affecting the nation’s critical information technology and cyber infrastructure.”


At virtually the same time, Deputy Director for Intelligence Collection Glenn Gaffney announced the groundbreaking of the NSA’s Camp Williams, Utah, facility that is to “provide intelligence and warnings related to cybersecurity threats, cybersecurity support to defense and civilian agency networks, and technical assistance to the Department of Homeland Security.”


“The NSA didn’t have these facilities a few years ago, but they do now,” continued Bamford. “The question is, ‘Why do they need them now when they didn’t need them a few years ago?’


“If you think how much information can go on a ‘thumb drive’ (or a flash drive), you can get two or three gigabytes of information on a little thumb drive. Think how much information can go into a facility that’s a million square feet,” he said.


“The NSA intercepts communications in any form, phone calls, e-mails, instant messaging, Twitters, all forms of communication,” Bamford said.

“They’re able to store trillions of phone calls, email messages, and data trails: Web searches, parking receipts, bookstore visits, and other digital ‘pocket litter.'”


He further said it’s important to look at the agency’s objectives.


“They could have put them [listening stations] in locations where the cables first come into the United States. If you put the secret rooms there you would be picking up just communications coming in and going out of the United States,” he said. “Instead they put them in locations such as the nine-story switch in downtown San Francisco; there’s a major switch there, which has both domestic and international communications.


“This raises the question: Are they targeting not only international communications but also domestic communications?” he wondered.


“The NSA certainly has the ability to listen in and monitor domestic communications. Their purpose is to eavesdrop on communications.


Lawyer, former Marine Corps officer and former Constitution Party vice presidential candidate Darrell Castle said he’s not convinced that the Department of Homeland Security is really interested in security.


“It is difficult to take Mr. Obama and Ms. Napolitano seriously when they talk about security for the nation. When they are willing to secure our borders so that terrorists are not free to cross at will, they can be taken more seriously,” he said.


Political correctness and tolerance can no longer be allowed to control our voices. You must not be afraid to speak up. If you stay silent, you may be endangering your right to ever speak up. Tell your elected officials how you feel. We must make common sense the law of the land. I am not advocating violence, but I am advocating an end to tolerance of a government who clearly does not have our best interest, or it’s stated goal, at heart.











Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Let’s All Send A Message of Thanks

Posted on November 10, 2009. Filed under: General Info | Tags: , , , |

Click the link above. It only takes one minute to send a free postcard to a soldier to say Thank You for your service. Just choose a card, enter your name and address and hit send. It couldn’t be simpler, yet mean so much. Let them know they are in our thoughts and prayers.
Sign up by clicking the link above- Each week, via email, you’ll receive the name and address of an active duty military man or woman now serving in Iraq, Afghanistan or — in the case of the Navy — on the high seas in support of the men and women on the ground. (Addresses courtesy of: Simply send a note or postcard to the address you receive ..! That’s all … one card or note of appreciation each week.
The Gratitude Campaign is a simple way for you to show your respect and thanks.
Please join us tonight, too, for a very easy way to demonstrate we as a country are forever grateful:
 Join us this Veteran’s Day, November 11, 2009
 at 11 PM Eastern Standard Time

for 11 minutes of darkness all across America

as we honor those who have fought to defend

our country and preserve the Constitution. 

Let this be a message to our government at home as well.



This year, we’ll turn out the lights.
Next year, we’ll vote out the radical members of the 111th Congress.

10:45 PM,  EST : light your home, inside and out.

11:00 PM,  EST : turn off all your lights.
11:11 PM,  EST : turn lights on again, for at least 15 minutes 


Join us, and spread the word.   Lights out, for liberty.










Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

More Corruption Aimed Squarely At Your Vote

Posted on November 9, 2009. Filed under: Enemies of The State, General Info | Tags: , , , , , , , |

What if I were to tell you the same corrupt players have found new ways to steal elections in America?

By electing clean Secretaries of State in 2010, we can ensure fair elections in 2012 across the country. We’re endorsing great candidates who support our goals – and we need your help to get them elected!

We’ve helped to elect 11 of 13 election reform candidates in key states like Minnesota and Ohio. Winning in these states has made a difference already, and now we’re gearing up for more wins in 2010.

By making a small contribution you can make sure unethical Secretaries of State like her and Ken Blackwell, never get to suppress our votes again. Dollar for dollar, the SoS Project is one of the most effective political investments you can make.

Since we launched in the fall of 2005, we have engaged in eleven races and have backed the winning candidate in nine states, including: Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Oregon, New Mexico, Montana, Nevada, West Virginia and Missouri. We lost only in Michigan and Colorado (and there by a tiny margin).

In 2008, we ran a sophisticated, highly targeted campaign in Montana which made the difference in a major upset – ousting the incumbent Republican Secretary of State. Most analysts anticipate a tough 2010 Senate race in Montana, and it is critical to have a fair Secretary of State in place. In Oregon last year we helped beat back a late unexpected surge to capture a critical open seat.

We are proud of our 2006 victory in Minnesota, where long time reformer Mark Ritchie pulled off a major upset, with our support.  He was under fierce media and legal scrutiny as he oversaw the recount of the Franken/Coleman senatorial race, and operated with transparency and integrity, such that the Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously ruled to uphold the extremely close election results, finally sending Franken to the Senate, where his vote is much needed.

We pride ourselves on being fast, nimble, and strategic in our spending. Potential donors should know that the SoS Project’s startup and overhead costs are already fully funded. So your contributions go to providing money directly to candidates in targeted races and independent expenditure campaigns in critical states, not to our operational costs.

We seek donations to our SoS Strategic Fund for three purposes:

  1. to establish state political committees that will conduct innovative independent expenditure campaigns.
  2. to build a reserve that can be deployed, where legally permissible, to benefit the races where it will matter most in the hectic final days before the election.
  3. to grow the donor base for crucial down ballot races by spreading the story to new donors through paid online and social network marketing and activism campaigns.

The Secretary of State Fund, a non-federal 527, can accept unlimited contributions.

Who are these people? According to their website, they are:

Becky Bond works for a socially progressive mobile telephone company based in San Francisco. She serves on the board of the New Organizing Institute* and*.

Lola Elfman is has served as an organizer and trainer for The New Organizing Institute* since 2007, she served as Internet Director for Phil Angelides’ campaign for California Governor*, and was a consultant with M+R Strategic Services*.

Megan Hull was a Project Director for Democracy Reform at the Center for Civic Participation*. In 2004, she was a Co-Director of the coalition that investigated polling place problems and vote counting irregularities in Ohio and New Mexico.

Michael Kieschnick is a social entrepreneur based in San Francisco. He is also a board member of the League of Conservation Voters, among other progressive organizations.

What they forgot to tell you was who else is on their team.

According to Matthew Vadum at American Spectator:

The founders of the Secretary of State Project, which claims to advance “election protection” but only backs Democrats, religiously believe that right-leaning secretaries of state helped the GOP steal the presidential elections in Florida in 2000 (Katherine Harris) and in Ohio in 2004 (Ken Blackwell).

The secretary of state candidates the group endorses sing the same familiar song about electoral integrity issues: Voter fraud is largely a myth, vote suppression is used widely by Republicans, cleansing the dead and fictional characters from voter rolls should be avoided until embarrassing media reports emerge, and anyone who demands that a voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a racist, democracy-hating Fascist.

The group was co-founded in July 2006 by James Rucker, formerly director of grassroots mobilization for Political Action and Civic Action. “Any serious commitment to wrestling control of the country from the Republican Party must include removing their political operatives from deciding who can vote and whose votes will count,” said another co-founder, Becky Bond, to the San Francisco Chronicle in 2006.

Its website claims, “A modest political investment in electing clean candidates to critical Secretary of State offices is an efficient way to protect the election.” Indeed. Political observers know that a relatively small amount of money can help swing a little-watched race for a state office few people understand or care about.

In 2006, the Minnesota ACORN Political Action Committee endorsed Ritchie and donated to his campaign. According to the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, contributors to Ritchie’s campaign included liberal philanthropists George Soros, Drummond Pike, and Deborah Rappaport, along with veteran community organizer Heather Booth, a Saul Alinsky disciple who co-founded the Midwest Academy, a radical ACORN clone. One article on Ritchie’s 2006 campaign website brags about the fine work ACORN did in Florida to pass a constitutional amendment to raise that state’s minimum wage.

It was revealed during a panel discussion at the Democratic Party’s convention in Denver this summer that the Democracy Alliance, a financial clearinghouse created by Soros and insurance magnate Peter B. Lewis, approved the Secretary of State Project as a grantee. The Democracy Alliance aspires to create a permanent political infrastructure of nonprofits, think tanks, media outlets, leadership schools, and activist groups-a kind of “vast left-wing conspiracy” to compete with the conservative movement. It has brokered more than $100 million in grants to liberal nonprofits including ACORN. The aforementioned Pike and Rappaport, who gave money to Ritchie’s campaign, are members of the Democracy Alliance.

According to IRS 8872 disclosure forms, the Secretary of State Project received donations from Democracy Alliance members including Soros, Rob Stein, Gail Furman, and Susie Tompkins Buell.

Who now heads the Democracy Alliance? Howard Dean.
What does SOS say of their recent victories:
In 2006, SoS Project donors helped raise over $500,000 to elect reform candidates in 5 key battleground states – Ohio, Nevada, Minnesota, Iowa and New Mexico. We raised over $200,000 in Ohio to defeat Ken Blackwell with one of the most progressive election officers in the nation, Jennifer Brunner. In the 2008 presidential election, Secretary of State Brunner made decision after decision to keep the election clean and make every vote count. In Minnesota, we helped Mark Ritchie beat a Republican incumbent. Because of Secretary of State Ritchie’s dedication to fairness and transparency, a recount in the Coleman-Franken Senate race ensured every vote was counted and resulted in the certification of Al Franken’s narrow victory in the 2008 Minnesota Senate contest. Dollar for dollar, the SoS Project was one of 2006’s most effective political investments.

The 2008 election was a magnificent one for the Secretary of State Project and our savvy group of supporters helping to win 4 of 4 races! Not only did we help oust a republican Secretary of State incumbent and win three other seats, but we also witnessed returns (as noted above) from our 2006 work to elect Secretaries of State in key presidential battleground states. In Montana alone, we launched a highly targeted campaign to put Linda McCulloch over the top by just 5,305 votes. In a state where Senator John Tester won his seat by less than 1% of the vote, Secretary of State Linda McCulloch will be able to ensure that every vote is counted when he runs for reelection in 2010. Our campaign made the difference.

According to Rebekah Chauhan in a blog on Brevard Tea Party:

Mark Ritchie, a Democrat and former community organizer, largely controlled the electoral process that seated Al Franken as the 60th Democrat in the Senate. Incumbent Republican Norm Coleman led Democrat Al Franken by 341 votes and the Democrats controlled 57 seats in the Senate, compared to the Republicans’ 40. The Minnesota seat was the only one that Democrats could try to steal. Franken was endorsed by ACORN Votes, ACORN’s federal political action committee. Minnesota’s secretary of state isn’t a Democrat by happenstance. Ritchie, who defeated two-term incumbent Republican Mary Kiffmeyer in 2006, received an endorsement and financial assistance for his run from a below-the-radar non-federal “527” group called the Secretary of State Project. The entity can accept unlimited financial contributions and doesn’t have to disclose them publicly until well after the election. The founders of the Secretary of State Project, which claims to advance “election protection” only backs Democrats. The secretary of state candidates the group endorses sing the same familiar song about electoral integrity issues: Voter fraud is largely a myth, vote suppression is used widely by Republicans, cleansing the dead and fictional characters from voter rolls should be avoided until embarrassing media reports emerge, and anyone who demands that a voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a racist, democracy-hating Fascist.

…In 2006, along with Minnesota’s Ritchie, SoS Project-endorsed Jennifer Brunner (Ohio), who defied federal law by refusing to take steps to verify 200,000 questionable voter registrations, trounced her opponent, 55% to 41%.

Discover the network web site says:
The idea for SoSP germinated shortly after that 2004 election, when the group’s Democrat founders blamed Kerry’s defeat on then-Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, who had ruled that Ohio (where Bush won by a relatively slim 118,599-vote margin) would not count provisional ballots — even those submitted by properly registered voters — if they had been submitted at the wrong precinct. Though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ultimately upheld Blackwell’s decision, SoSP’s founders nonetheless received the ruling with the same bitterness they had felt regarding former Florida (Republican) Secretary of State Katherine Harris’s handling of the infamous ballot recount in 2000 (when Bush defeated Al Gore in the presidential election). Moreover, SoSP’s founders accused Blackwell and Republicans of conspiring to suppress Democratic voter turnout in Ohio. “We were tired of Republican manipulation of elections,” said SoSP co-founder Michael Kieschnick, who also serves as President of Working Assets. “It seemed like lots of decisions were made by people who were pretty clearly political operatives.”

To establish “election protection” against similar disappointments in subsequent political races, SoSP in 2006 targeted its funding efforts on the Secretary of State races in seven swing states — Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Colorado, and Michigan. Democrats emerged victorious in five of those seven elections — all except Colorado and Michigan. As USA Today reported at the time: “The political battle for control of the federal government has opened up a new front: the obscure but vital state offices that determine who votes and how those votes are counted.”

What about NY 23 and Hoffman?
Expecting a Hoffman win, based on poll results, the following statement was put out by Big

Multiple sources on the ground in New York’s 23rd Congressional district confirm that ACORN is expected to be actively protesting the election results in Clinton County, New York tomorrow. This move comes on the heels of a legal win for the Hoffman camp today as it was ruled that all poll watchers would have to be registered voters of NY 23.

Rob Ryan, spokesman for the Hoffman campaign, states that the legal decision is all about ballot security and that the move by ACORN is not a surprise.

“The Working Family Party is desperate, Today’s poll show that Doug Hoffman is drawing votes from all Demographics”.

While the focus tomorrow will be on securing a win for Hoffman, Ryan says there are still worries about:


“voter intimidation, absentee ballot fraud and groups like ACORN/Working Families Party and big labor stealing the election from the people of the 23rd district.”

Of course, Hoffman lost to Democrat Bill Owens, by a very slight margin, estimated at under 4% of the vote. Slight enough that I wondered what impact, if any, did groups like ACORN, Democracy Alliance and others of that sort have in this election? How many votes are yet to count or set aside? I can not answer, but would love to know. Were there any irregularities?
In neighboring NY 21 there was plenty of fraud as Eric Shawn at Fox News reported October 20,2009 :
Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out, according to records at the Rensselaer County Board of Elections in Troy, N.Y. Enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the November election to the Democrats

Brian Suozzo voted with an absentee ballot in the Working Families Party primary on Sept. 15 because, as his application stated, he was “at home recovering from medical procedure.”

Jessica Boomhower’s application said she would be attending a “work conference in Boston.”

Michael Ward couldn’t vote in person because he was “taking care of elderly parent.”

Kimberlee Truell was on a “Bus trip to casino,” as was Miguel Vazques.

The only problem with these absentee ballot records at the Rensselaer County Board of Elections in Troy, N.Y., is that they’re phony, voters and investigators say — and they’ve prompted what’s being called an unprecedented investigation of suspected voter fraud. 

Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out — enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the city council and county elections in November to the Democrats. Candidates would have been able to run both on the Democratic and Working Families Party lines in two weeks, and that could have given the Democrats the general election.

A special prosecutor is investigating the case and criminal charges are possible. New York State Supreme Court Judge Michael Lynch ruled that there were “significant election law violations that have compromised the rights of numerous voters and the integrity of the election process.”

Among the reasons cited on the fraudulent forms for absentee voting: “traveling to Buffalo,” attending a “screen printing conference in Syracuse,” “working late shift,” “working construction,” and “home — ill.”

“Someone took my signature and voted with it and I felt extremely violated,” Suozzo told Fox News. He is a soft-spoken 28-year-old environmental engineer who says he never saw, let alone signed, the Working Families Party Absentee ballot application that carried his supposed signature. He was flabbergasted that someone would vote for him and submit it.

“The whole thing seems dirty to me,” Suzzo said. “You wonder how often this happens and people don’t get caught.”

He says he did not have any type of medical procedure, adding “I haven’t been to the hospital in years.”

“I feel that I was gypped,” Boomhower said, ruefully. “I didn’t get to cast my vote on my own.”

Boomhower, a 28-year-old home health care worker, says three men came to her door asking her to sign a ballot application. It wasn’t until after the election that a private investigator brought her the news that an absentee ballot indeed showed she had voted, when she actually had not.

“I can’t believe they thought they would get away with this,” she says angrily, noting that the false claim that she was in Boston could have jeopardized her job. “I don’t want to see this get tossed aside,” she told Fox News.

Michael Ward, whose ballot said he was taking care of an elderly parent, said “I got one parent left, and he lives in Albany and takes care of himself.”

“They tried to steal an election,” says Bob Mirch, the majority leader of the Rensselaer County legislature who suspected voter fraud and started the investigation after being alerted to a large number of absentee ballot application requests that were noticed by the Republican Board of Elections commissioner .

“Not only does it undermine the system, but if these people were allowed to do this, we could never have a fair election… I’ve been doing this for 35 years, when I saw this, it sends a chill through my body right now.”

…The Working Families Party has recently gained strength, and controversy, in New York. Republican and Democratic candidates in the Empire State can also run on third party lines, such as the Working Families Party, as well as the Liberal, Conservative, and Independence parties, among others. The extra line means extra votes that could bring victory.

Hillary Clinton garnered 2.7 percent of her total votes from the WFP line when she first ran for Senate in 2000, which increased to 5 percent of her total vote in 2006. In September, Clinton’s former campaign manager for her 2000 Senate run, New York City Councilman Bill DeBlasio, who has been endorsed by the WFP, beat two long-established politicians in the Democratic primary. Critics also accuse the Working Families Party of having a long association with the troubled activist group, ACORN. Bertha Lewis, ACORN’s CEO, is one of the party’s co-founders. The New York Times reported this month that “Patrick Gaspard, the White House political director, worked with ACORN in New York to set up the Working Families political party and sat on the party’s board with Ms. Lewis.”

The WFP has also endorsed New York Democratic Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, who was one of only seven Senators who voted against cutting federal housing funds to ACORN in September. 

…”We caught this isolated incident, but how many times has this happened?” asks Suozzo, one of the registered Working Families Party voters who didn’t even know about his vote.

 Boomhower is blunt about politicians: “They’re corrupt. I’m sure this goes on a lot in politics, but its very rare that they do get caught.”

What’s unfolding in Troy may prove voter fraud does exist, and threatens honest elections.

So, once again, George Soros, ACORN and the host of usual players are allowed to skirt the system to their own benefit. If you can’t win fair and square, win by any means necessary.
They are already formulating their campaigns for 2010. We need to keep that in mind. Watchdogs in the states touted by the SOS website as targets need to be on high alert and need to point out to fellow constituents what is really happening. Letters to the editor are a very effective tool for this as is calling local radio talk shows to bring up the subject.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Recruiting for the Army for Liberty

Posted on November 9, 2009. Filed under: Army for Liberty Book Club | Tags: , , , , , , |

The more I learn, the more afraid for our country I get.
After watching our government make a mockery of itself yet again Saturday, it frightens me to think what will become of our country if left alone in the hands of inept and corrupt politicians. We all need to get involved, and if nothing else educate ourselves to the truth – the reality of our world today. 
To that end I would like to create the Army for Liberty. Won’t you join? America needs you.
What will be required is very simple. 
The best thing we can do for our country is identify the what, the why and the who is doing this to us.
What our army will look like at first is a book club. The books I ask you to read are imperative information for all patriots to know. If we are going to defeat this, we must have complete knowledge of the enemy. They are much more funded than we are and seemingly much more powerful. I say seemingly, as it is my belief, as we come to understand we can then defeat.
If you do nothing else, please read the following book. It should be required reading for every American dissatisfied with the state of our country. You will be much more able to identify and fight having this knowledge. The book is, as a benefit, a very good and interesting read.
Please, buy it today, or alternatively, you can probably check it out from the library.
I will keep a category in the right hand column called the Army for Liberty Book Club. Please ask your friends to read these selections as well. Perhaps, once you are done reading them, you can pass them along to those on a fixed or limited income. I can not stress how important it is to disseminate this information as quickly as possible.
Thank you, sincerely, for becoming a member of the Army for Liberty, and joining in the fight to take back our country!
Green Hell : How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do To Stop Them by Steve Milloy:
Green Hell JACKET.indd
buy the book from
or the audio book from
or used copies from

Product Description

Everywhere you look, everything is going green. But soon, this trendy green lifestyle wont be voluntary it will be mandatory. Milloy shows how the government will soon have you under its green thumb. –This text refers to the Audio Cassette edition.

From the Inside Flap

Big Brother Has Turned GreenThe environmental movement has cultivated a warm and fuzzy public image, but behind the smiley-face rhetoric of “sustainability” and “conservation” lies a dark agenda. The Greens aim to regulate your behavior, downsize your lifestyle, and invade the most intimate aspects of your personal life.

In this stunning exposé, Steve Milloy unveils the authoritarian impulse underlying the Green crusade. Whether they’re demanding that you turn down your thermostat, stop driving your car, or engage in some other senseless act of self-denial, the Greens are envisioning a grim future for you marked by endless privation.Steamrolling nearly all opposition with its apocalyptic predictions of environmental doom, the Green movement has gained influence throughout American society–from schools and local planning boards to the biggest corporations in the country. And their plans are much more ambitious than you think, says Milloy. What the Greens really seek, with increasing success, is to dictate the very parameters of your daily life–where you can live, what transportation you can use, what you can eat, and even how many children you can have.

Citing the tactics and goals of Green groups as explained by their own activists and leaders, Green Hell demonstrates:

* How Green pressure campaigns threaten the safety of your home and your car, and public health overall
* Why the election of President Obama portends a giant leap forward for coercive Green policies
* Why Greens obstruct the use of all forms of energy–even the renewable sources they tout to the public
* How wealthy Green elites stand to profit fabulously from the restrictions and regulations they seek to impose on the rest of us
* How Green pressure campaigns are hamstringing the military and endangering our national security
* Why big business is not only knuckling under to the Greens, but is aggressively promoting the green agenda to the detriment of its own stockholders
* What you can do to help stop the great Green machineA one-of-a-kind, comprehensive takedown of the entire environmental movement, Green Hell will open your eyes to a looming threat to our economy, our civil liberties, and the entire American way of life.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

« Previous Entries

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...