News for 08/24/2009- Marine Sticks Up for Constitution and other Subverise Material
This Video is AWESOME! Marine Corp Vet Stands Up to Congressman Baird (2 min)
http://www.youtube.co…
The Enemy Within from Give Us Liberty
http://giveusliberty1…
Wow! Check out the video at the end of the article, too.
Obama is Reminding Me of Bill Clinton
Three Clinton Quotes From the Past Are Starting To Sound Like the Democrat Montra:
” the purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people”
— Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993
“You know the one thing that’s wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say.”
– Bill Clinton, May 29, 1993, The White House
“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans . . . .”
— William J. Clinton, USA Today, March 11, 1993
Camps for Dissidents Readied from Dprogram.net
http://dprogram.net/2…
There exists an explosive hot-button issue that U.S. government officials don’t want revealed to the American public; namely, that internment camps have been established—and are at the ready to detain citizens if mass insurrections occur. Under FEMA’s National Level Exercise 2009 (NLE 09), potential trigger events could be economic collapse, widespread bank closures, massive social unrest, or a flu pandemic. This final item led Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) to declare on August 11 that the government “might use a pandemic disease or national disaster as an excuse to declare martial law.” Renowned researcher Michel Chossudovsky addressed the mechanics of this subject in a March 19 article entitled, Preparing for Civil Unrest in America: Legislation to Establish Internment Camps on U.S. Military Bases:“How will the U.S. government face an impending social catastrophe? The chosen avenue, inherited from the outgoing Bush administration, is the reinforcement of the Homeland Security apparatus and the militarization of civilian state institutions.” Are Army bases actually being converted into detainment camps? In his September 2008 newsletter, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) pulled no punches. “Even though we know that detention facilities are already in place, [the government] now wants to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever-popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency.” Conservative author and former presidential candidate, Pastor Chuck Baldwin, confirms this notion in an August 11 article, Why Are Internment Camps Being Built?: “I’ve had military personnel tell me that many of the U.S. military bases that have been recently ‘closed’ are also being prepared as large-scale ‘holding areas.” To counteract these charges, some claim the “renovated bases” will simply be used to hold illegal aliens. A recent news item appeared in the Idaho Observer’s June issue: “In January 2006, it was revealed that Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR), had received a $385 million contract to build detention facilities ‘for an emergency influx of immigrants.’” But to argue that their sole focus is simply on illegal immigrants doesn’t hold water because the U.S. has had an open-border policy for at least three decades. On the other hand, more likely targets for detainment would be anti-New World Order proponents, Second Amendment advocates, dissidents, people who refuse to participate in forced inoculation programs, Christians, tax protesters and those deemed “extremists” and “enemies of the state” under a recent Department of Homeland Security report on “homegrown right-wing terrorists.” To show their seriousness in pushing this agenda, Bob Unruh revealed a disturbing development on August 7 for World Net Daily: “An ad campaign featured on a U.S. Army website seeking those who would be interested in being an ‘internment/resettlement’ specialist is raising alarms across the country.” What specifically would this position entail? The description is clear: “Internment/Resettlement (I/R) specialists in the Army are primarily responsible for day-to-day operations in a military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility.” Legislation introduced by representative Alcee Hastings (D-Fl.) under HR 645 would have the DHS establishing at least half a dozen national emergency centers for large-scale imprisonment of American citizens on military installations. Further, HR 645 would create a Guantanamo-style setting after martial law is declared. At that point, posse comitatus laws would be rendered non-existent, replaced by military jurisdiction over all detainees. As a result, the incarcerated would find it much more difficult to enforce their Constitutional rights to a fair trial and/or legal representation. If skeptics doubt this scenario, they need to reexamine President Obama’s own words in a May 21 speech at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. At this locale, he spoke of “prolonged detention” for all those who posed a threat to U.S. security. Even members of the liberal media were disconcerted by the implications of this proposal, including MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, who questioned the “expectation of future crimes” that seemed implicit in his plan. Maddow had further suspicions about the president’s advocacy of an Orwellian Big Brother-world via the use of “preventive incarceration” to keep certain people in prison indefinitely without charge.
Obama Has “No Teachable” Moments from Liberty’s Watchdogs
http://libertyswatchd…
If ever an opportunity presented itself for some great “teachable moments,” as the President likes to say, it is the health care debate, with all the alleged “myths” being spread about the dems’ Health Care Bill by us right wing fanatics who think that the Bill will lead to:
*a government takeover of a huge segment of the economy;
*rationed care, especially for the elderly and the very ill;
*skyrocketing costs; and
*a huge increase in the already gargantuan deficit.
But despite all his (choreographed) townhall appearances before (hand-picked adoring crowds of pro-Obama) American citizens, our President does not assail these supposed myths one by one, teaching us why people’s fears are misplaced. The President is a lawyer, and should know how to argue his case to the American people. But we hear no substantive discussion of the facts from him, just generalities and promises, and, as always, ridicule of those who dare to disagree. As trial lawyers know, if the facts are with you, you argue the facts. If they’re not, you argue the credibility of the opposition. The facts are not on Obama’s side, and so he and his allies have set about attacking the character of the opposition. So far we’ve been called:
*rude and uncivil;
*shills for insurance companies or radical groups;
*Nazis;
*racists who hate Obama because he’s black (even though undoubtedly a goodly percentage of protesters voted for him and/or supported him after his election);
*un-American;
*mindless enough to believe patently untrue “myths”;
*laughable;
*brainwashed by evil cable news channels; and, LAST BUT NOT LEAST,
*”wee-wee’d up.”
……. This is the real teachable lesson from this debate
News for 08/14/2009- Turmoil Continues and So Does Harrassment of Citizens
We Won’t Let Granny Die? at Canada Free Press http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13698
When the President assured the crowd at a recent town hall meeting on health care that their grandmothers were safe under his proposed health care plan (whatever that is) and that rumors of rationing and D.E.A.T.H. (Department of Euthanasia And Triage of Humans) [see “Shut Up and Hand Me the Wrench!‚” The Future of Health Care Under Obama Universal Care for Health (O.U.C.H.)‚” July 16, 2009 CFP.) Committees were simply right wing extremist propaganda, my first thought was: really? Just how credible is Obama the Secular on the issue of life and where did this newfound compassion come from? Since a single payer plan is inevitable if Obama gets his way, since private insurers (villains, according to Obama and Pelosi) will be driven out of the industry to be replaced in time by government regulated fees, doctor salaries, and low premiums set by Congress; and given the fact that the government does not run many things well and cost overruns are inevitable, how can he, or we, be certain that the government will not be forced to ration health care? It is as certain as the sunrise. And when the time comes to make hard judgments about cutting federal costs, it is a certainty that the elderly and the dying will be screened by politically appointed bureaucrats who must, of necessity make hard decisions about the worth of a human life and the cost-benefit ratio involved in sustaining their lives. But more to the point: from where does this newfound compassion for life come? And how credible is Obama on the issue of life to begin with? Considering the fact that this president is the most pro-death president in history, we should take with a grain of salt his statement that Granny is safe. Frankly, given his past track record, I fear for your Granny and mine.
Townhall Mom Stalked By SEIU, Harrassed by MSNBC from Glenn Beck http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29355/
Full interview along with harrassment of MSNBC Video at link above KATY: The meeting was on Tuesday and the past two days it’s been a whirlwind. GLENN: Are you okay, Katy? Are you okay? KATY: Yeah, I’m okay. Sorry. I just went there to ask a question and these people I’m sorry. These people are calling my cellphone, calling my dad’s office, e mailing my dad’s office. They are trying to set up the normal people of this country. GLENN: Katy KATY: That’s what I see. GLENN: Katy? KATY: Yes. GLENN: Do you have these e mails? KATY: Yes. GLENN: What are they saying in the e mails and what are they saying on your phone? KATY: The phone call I got, the first thing on Tuesday was some coward called me. I don’t know how he got my cellphone number. He said something and then he called me a racist. GLENN: What was KATY: The question, this is not a left or right. This is about America, and I wanted him to go back to Washington and show us that, you know, to I can’t even think right now. They are dismantling our country.
ANOTHER NON-REPRESENTING REPRESENTATIVE:
Dem Congresswoman Throws Out “Disorderly” Town Hall Goers (39 second video)http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/13/dem_congresswoman_throws_out_disorderly_town_hall_goers.html WHY IS IT THEY KEEP SAYING THEY DON”T HAVE TO LISTEN TO US UNTIL WE LISTEN TO THEM? ARE WE THEIR REPRESENTATIVE? Look at the following article…. even though the concerned citizens speaking out are democrats, independents, libertarians and republicans – it’s us agaist them: Democrats Orchestrate Town-Hall Counterpunch from rollcall.com http://www.rollcall.com/news/37762-1.html
Democrats on Thursday mounted a broad counteroffensive against Republicans to try to reverse growing opposition to their health care plans and win back an electorate increasingly sympathetic to town-hall protesters. Americans for Stable Quality Care — which is funded by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the American Medical Association and the Service Employees International Union, among others — Thursday also launched a massive $12 million ad campaign defending President Barack Obama’s and other Democrats’ efforts to reform the health care system.
Internal Memo Details White House Deal With Big Pharma from Huntington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/internal-memo-confirms-bi_n_258285.html
A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the past week. The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return. It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government’s leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada — and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements. In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: “Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion.”
Obama’s Green Jobs Czar is Co-founder of Group Leading Attacks on Glenn Beck By Proud American
A new attack has been released against FOX News talk show host, Glenn Beck. President Obama’s “Green Job Czar” is the co-founder of an African-American activist group that has developed a campaign to attack the sponsors of Glenn Beck’s show. Many of us who have followed Glenn over the years, know how he is passionate about pointing out major wrong doings. In recent weeks he has made it a point to expose those who surround our new President. He has primarily concentrated on the specially appointed czars that have created a great deal of concern amongst the American Citizens and politicians from both parties. Several segments have been done on Van Jones, himself. Beck has exposed Jones’ involvement in Colors of Change along with many other interesting details of his past. As a way of reliating the group Colors of Change has led a strong campaign against Beck, by attacking major companies sponsoring FOX News. It seems their anger stemmed from comments that Beck made where he stated that President Obama was a racist with a deep-seated hatred for white people. Folks, I believe this is only one of many attacks to come against top-rated FOX News talent Glenn Beck and We The People. This is beginning to turn into a vicious battle that stemmed from the attacks against our American Liberties and the good people of America who are willing to step outside their comfort zones to stop the evil wrong doings against America.
Are Democrats losing August? by Politico.com http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26095.html
After an intimate White House lunch last week, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley said he was confident President Barack Obama was working toward a truly bipartisan health care reform bill. But then he went home to Iowa, and the message changed. In a series of tough town halls, he fueled fears of death panels and benefits for illegal immigrants. He suggested the White House would push a purely partisan bill. And he proclaimed himself an outsider in health care negotiations. “I’m not walking away from the table; I’m being pushed away from the table,” Grassley said in Afton, Iowa, warning that Democrats might go it alone on health care . Grassley’s Iowa road show shows just why Democrats feared this August recess. If the Democrats lose Grassley, the top Republican negotiator on the Senate Finance Committee, they very likely lose any hope of a bipartisan bill. Even worse, if Grassley bails, then conservative Democrats like Ben Nelson may follow. While Grassley has always criticized the process in the Senate, his fresh criticisms, before the home state crowd, are magnified as contentious town hall scenes are repeated across the country. And if the August unrest has spooked a safe, respected senior senator like Grassley, it can’t be good sign for the dozens of much more vulnerable moderates from both parties, who worry that the wrong vote on health care could cost them the job next year.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )News for 08/12/2009-The Truth In Their Own Words
As I listened to our President get started at his “townhall” in NH yesterday, I heard him say he hopes we can talk to each other and not over each other. Well, actually, there is no dialogue at all. It is just the government officials pretending to talk to citizens, not listening to the voices of the voters who put them there. News reports have townhall organizers giving preferential seating to ACORN and SEIU members, while the real (actual and unpaid) citizens are left locked out or put in the back in many cases. It is all a total farce. He says the disgruntled citizens are angry due to the plethora of disinformation about health care reform. Really? No. We are angry because he said he would be transparent and is not. We are angry because he said he would give us time to debate, but tries not to. We are angry because when we speak out, no one in government or media listens. We are angry because instead of listening, he calls us names and dismisses us. Hopefully, anyone who is dismissing the voices of the voters will loose their voice in the next election, or by recall, whichever comes first.
More Crap From The Administration and The Media:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090812/ap_on_re_us/us_militia_movement
You know, those seniors, they are DANGEROUS! Granny’s gone postal! Grandpa’s gone wild! Give me a break! This is getting asinine now!
Trust The Government by Newt Gingrich
How much is one additional year of your life worth? Or one more year of life for your father or your wife? For your child? In Great Britain, the government has settled on a number: $45,000. That’s how much a government commission with the Orwellian acronym NICE has decided British government-run health care will pay for one additional year of life for a British subject. Think it could never happen here? Then you need to pay closer attention to what Washington is planning for your health care. The British single-payer bureaucrats arrived at the price of an additional year of life in the same way they decide how much healthcare all British people will get, through a formula called “quality-adjusted life years.” That means that if you’re sick in Great Britain, government bureaucrats literally decide if your life is worth living and, if so, how much longer and at what cost. If it’s more than $45,000, you’re out of luck. In the highest levels of the Obama Administration there is a theory of how to ration health care that is troublingly reminiscent of the British system of “quality-adjusted life years.” Dr. Ezekial Emanuel is a key health care advisor to President Obama and the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Earlier this year, Dr. Emanuel wrote an article that advocated what he called “the complete lives system” as a method for rationing health care. You can read it here. The system advocated by Dr. Emanuel would allocate healthcare based on the government’s perception of the societal worthof the patients. Accordingly, the very young and the very old would receive less care since the former have received less societal investment and the latter have less left to contribute. “The Complete Lives System” would also consider the prognosis of the individual. Quoting Dr. Emanuel: “A young person witha poor prognosis has had few life-years but lacks the potential to live a complete life. Considering prognosis forestalls the concern that disproportionately large amounts of resources will be directed to young people with poor prognosis.” When fully implemented, Dr. Emanuel’s system, in his words, “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” “Chances that are attenuated” is a nice way of saying the young and the old are considered less worthy of health care and, under this system, will get less. The point is not that a health care rationing system like the one favored by Dr. Emmanuel will be implemented in the United States tomorrow. The point is that, as in the British system, once government becomes the single payer or even the main payer of healthcare, what were once intensely personal decisions become public decisions. And as costs rise, government will look for ways to contain them. The inevitable result of this pressure to control costs will be rationing, whether it occurs during this administration or the next. At some point, the government will be forced to deny care to those who don’t meet the latest “quality-adjusted life years” cost-benefit analysis. So the decision on what treatment to pursue that once would have been made by you and your doctor is now made for you by a bureaucrat using a formula — a formula to literally determine if your life is worth saving.
SO WHY ARE WE SPEAKING OF SINGLE PAYER HEALTH PLAN WHEN THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY STATED THIS IS NOT IN THE BILL?:
Obama Says (direct quote):
“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”
Check out these videos:
Obama Wants Single Payer (video)
http://www.youtube.co… watch this whole thread– under three minutes of ACTUAL TRUTH about the plan
Don’t Miss Barney Frank’s Own Words On Single Payer (video)
http://www.youtube.co… (just over one minute)
More Truth (video)
http://www.youtube.co… (under two minutes)
New Hampshire Townhall Discussion by Obama (One and half minutes)
CHECK THE BILL OUT FOR YOURSELF – A Little Light Reading Tonight? – Here’s the Health Care Bill
http://edlabor.house…….
The more of us that read it, the more they will HAVE to read it.
I must ask these two questions: If the bill is so very good and will make so many of us happy, why then does it not take effect until AFTER the next Presidential election?
I must also ask if it’s so good, why will Senators and Congresspeople not even entertain the idea of scrapping their special health care plan and opting in?
Who’s Behind the Internet Snitch Brigade? by Michelle Malkin
More on The Apollo Allianceby RBO
Citizens Thrown Out Of A Georia Townhall For Mentioning the Constitution by Campaign For Liberty
The meeting was last night, at the Georgia 4th Congressional district in Clarkston, held by Congressman Hank Johnson (D). The facilities of the Clarkston campus of Georgia Perimeter College were used. A number of us liberty-minded folks (C4L and otherwise), and some GOP faithful showed up to ensure, at the minimum, skepticism accounted for and to see a real debate fostered over the proposed national health care legislation. As far as I know there was no “right wing” or otherwise organized effort to “swamp” the meetings. By contrast, it was obvious that organized left-wing groups turned out in force. People sporting “Teamster” colors were plentiful, as well as Obama acolytes and “single payer” health care system advocacy groups.
The original time for the meeting was 7pm. Within the day before, it was mysteriously moved up to 6:15 — perhaps to make sure that working people hit the maximum rush hour. No matter; I got there around 5:30, so I got an early-enough place in line to get into the main auditorium. It was pathetically small for the crowd lined up “around the block” to attend the meeting, so only a small portion of the crowd got in. Me and some C4Lers were among them. Others ended up in overflow rooms, having become spectators, watching the proceedings on large TVs. I first got a bad feeling about the whole event being orchestrated when police started warning people not to bring cameras in. No cameras? At a public meeting on a public facility? That’s odd. Well, they weren’t going to stop me from making a voice recording using my small sansa mp3 player.
…And perhaps the most important general comment from those queued up came from a gentleman (I cannot recall his appearance) who expressed confusion at the many bills, but asked if we could somehow have a town meeting when a single bill had been settled on, but before it had passed. Tellingly, Hank Johnson sputtered and bumbled, but finally responded that no, it was not likely we could actually debate the bill that was going to be passed. But, he said, we could certainly have a town hall meeting after the bill had passed! This drew laughs and hackles from the entire crowd. Johnson responded bizarrely by launching into diversionary criticism of the Blue Dog Democrats and Republicans, capping off with an exhortation that we “have gotta do something” (nationally, of course).
This was perhaps the most telling interaction about how the whole system works: we are to be swamped by a confusion of conflicting principles and directives and details, and end up arguing with each other about things that perhaps are in only one version of a bill or another (or none at all), which may or may not appear in a final bill. Then the bill will be passed quickly by congress, after its usual horse trading, and we’ll be unravelling the monstrosity for months if not years to come. This process belies utter contempt for the citizenry and perhaps reveals that our government has reached a stage where it simply cannot function if proposed legislation is clearly and methodically open to scrutiny.
The session was in its final few minutes when the “big confrontation” happened. While the “critics” had been booing, cheering, and heckling Johnson and others from the floor the whole time (and the whole audience was certainly guilty of applausing and cheering out of turn), it was not until C4Ler Sean Mangieri bellowed out “where in the Constitution does it authorize you to do this?” that some sort of invisible line was crossed. Johnson began responding, fumbling a bogus justification that the “general welfare clause” gives the government authority to do anything, but apparently the order had been given. The police came over and tapped me on the shoulder, apparently thinking it was me who had made the remark; to which I said “I didn’t say anything.” Various people in the audience pointed to Sean, who was sitting next to me, and he was “tapped out” by the police. However, they returned anyway and told me I had to go as well and this was my “last chance”. When I protested again that I didn’t say anything, the reply was “it doesn’t matter, they want you out.” Two other people we know were thrown out in this sweep as well, one of whom had just been “warned” not to shout any more comments, but was ejected without having said anything additional. I have the whole session up until that point recorded (audio only; 23MB mp3). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOlB5KZE644 video
UN SAYS WE HAVE FOUR MONTHS TO SAVE THE PLANET: (Another example of false urgency, especially considering the premise is false)
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspeeches/statments_full.asp?statID=557
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Soldier For Liberty 