ARE YOU THE PIGEON IN THIS GAME OF POLITICS?

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadis

As I have written before, Obama changes positions more than a Chameleon changes color depending on it's environment. Apparently, the change he was calling foreign his campaign slogan, was not for Washington politics, but for his primary campaign positions. Abortion, gun control, capital punishment, FISA laws, the status of Jerusalem, faith-based federal programs, public financing of his campaign, welfare, NAFTA and free trade, and his commitment to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his Trinity Church all have fallen to reconsideration, rephrasing, changed rhetorical modulation, and other semantic miracles. source : Tony Blankley

As a conservative, of course, I like all his changed views except for the fact that I believe he is insincere. and doesn't believe his current statements of principle any more than he believed his previous positions he used in the primary.

H.L. Mencken defined a demagogue as “one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." It is not surprising that the youth is particularly enchanted by the senator from Illinois. Being young, they are inexperienced in the ways of the world, and subject to flights of fantasy and promises of better times! Obama and his handlers know just the right formula to spin what ever audience he is speaking to, but only a fool would believe a man who means what he says could change positions and policies as often as he changes his underwear!

But as Tony Blankley said in the Patriot Post; " When you are invited to a new poker game and look around the table for the pigeon but can't spot him, you're the pigeon".Our we the pigeon in Obama's political shell game?

IS SEIU TRYING TO BUY THE OVAL OFFICE?

One union with a long time connection with Obama, and 2 million members,is attempting to buy the presidential election this November. The Service Employees International Union was solicited by Obama to help his election campaign, and they jumped in with both feetas this quote from2/15/08 by Jennifer Farmer of SEIU illustrates!

“The outcome of this election will decide whether we finally achieve quality, affordable healthcare for everyone, whether we have economic fairness, whether we bring our sons and daughters home from Iraq, and whether workers in America finally have the freedom to form unions without intimidation” said Dave Regan, President, SEIU District 1199. “We intend to mobilize our members in an unprecedented way in support of Senator Barack Obama,” Regan concluded.

SEIU outlined the key reasons for the Obama endorsement:

This is one of the most important presidential elections workers have faced. Families are struggling, we’re fighting two wars, and a majority of Americans are now worried that their children will be worse off than they are".source SEIU home page


The election laws require that so-called "independent expenditures" by political committees be limited to communications, such as the ubiquitous TV spots and newspaper ads to which we have all become accustomed, but SEIU's PACs have paid for such campaign essentials as door-to-door canvassing for Obama, voter identification and registration, and even bus rental and food for pro-Obama rallies.


A number of the expenditures listed in their report to the Elections Commission, show such reimbursement of SEIU employees' per Diem expenses or food for an Election Day rally, can qualify as "communication" by only the most Clintonian parsing of terms. Instead, they look like the nuts and bolts of running a campaign

The SEIU announced on June 24th that they plan "a budget of $85 million for this election, targeting swing states for Obama's presidential campaign" and other candidates. In addition, SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger said, "More than 100,000 SEIU members will be volunteering their time to ... elect Barrack Obama as our next president." (Which begs the question if the "volunteers' salaries and per Diem's will also be reimbursed.)source: American Thinker


As if to intentionally add new heights to political hypocrisy, the announcement followed by mere days Obama's pronouncement that the Democratic National Committee "won't take another dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. They do not fund my campaign. They will not fund our party".
The truth apparently is a stranger to Obama and his campaign as this quote attests.
The story also raises to new levels Obama's hypocrisy about PAC money, since he is accused of doling out just such donations in exchange for endorsements". source: Washington Post


Obama apparently learned a lesson from the mistakes of the Kerry campaign. By opting out of accepting cash donations directly from PACs. He became the first major party candidate to opt out of federal funding and the restrictions that come with it -- Obama steered the committees who support him, and whose support he even "begged" for, down a path which allows limitless spending on his behalf!

And to rub salt in the wounds of the Republican party, the media elite goes after Vets for Freedom for making a TV buy for John McCain,but they're giving Barack Obama a free ride as he surfs a wave of PAC money to the Democratic nomination, a wave that, if anything, is nearing tsunami proportions despite his boasts (aka: lies) that he doesn't accept money from Pacs.

BALI ROAD MAP TO WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION!

The folly of negotiating with Communist countries is never more evident than in the recent Bali meeting to develop a Global Climate Policy.
The fiasco in Kyoto resulted in the exempting of three of the worst air polluters in the world, China, India and Brazil.

At the conference in Bali(Had to be an exotic vacation location for the pampered ),late last year, China, India and Brazil not only showed up, but were active in shaping policy decisions. They did not commit to concrete standards or goals to reduce emissions, but Bali was noteworthy for the enhanced role that major emerging economies played in shaping the discussion. China, India, and Brazil led the developing country bloc and -- for the first time in the history of the negotiations -- accepted possible commitments to reduce emissions.
The key word here is possible. Yes, maybe they will close all the plants in and around Beijing for the Olympics to make the air breathable for the athletes, and to showcase their concern for clean air. But once the games are concluded they will continue their pollution spewing industries while giving lip service to the Bali agreement.

Now we learn that The United States lost its singular veto power and a group of emerging powers, most notably China, India, and Brazil, and economic powerhouse Russia, have started to use their new economic and political weight to shape negotiations. The European Union tried to retain political leadership by acting as a broker between diverging interests, but it will only be able to make a real difference if the transatlantic climate policy partnership can be revitalized.

This may be why the Germans and French are so giddy about the impending election of the socialist leaning Obama. He will be easier to deal with than a hard line patriot like McCain. He will not give away OUR sovereignty.

The Bali conference agreed upon five basic goals. One is the reason I believe this is just another scheme to confiscate more tax dollars from Americans to give to "developing countries"!
"Developing countries(aka: China, India and Brazil among many others) have to be supported with technology,financing, and capacity building. In oterwords in the name of controlling Global Warming we have to send money and expertise to Communist China. A country that already has thousands of our jobs,
because of their slave labor standards!

Russia too, is a "fly in the ointment" of a successful Global Plan. Russia is the last of the BRIC countries,and has developed into a major headache for the European Union. The Russian delegates stated in informal consultations that it expects to benefit from climate change, and that the proposed reduction commitments were incompatible with President Putin’s goals to double electricity production and to increase oil and gas exports.Damn pollution, we want to be the European economic power house with our oil resources,is what they are saying!source: Sacha Muller-Kraenner of Nature ConservancyThe most alarming domestic development in the United States is the Senate’s discussion of a national cap and trade system for greenhouse gas emissions (the Lieberman-Warner bill). This scheme draws strongly on lessons from the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). If the bill is passed,( God forbid that it does) the auctioning of emission permits would generate significant amounts of funding for the introduction of sustainable energy technologies and international climate change assistance. Author's note: Yes, and it would put our indusrtial production in a great disadvantage because of the restrictions. Lost productivity and lost jobs!

The remaining question is whether a future US administration will accept two necessary cornerstones of any future global climate agreement: legally binding targets and significant finance transfers to developing countries, even if those countries, like China, compete with the United States in other economic areas. China and India are considered developing countries even though they have many thousands working on jobs that were held by Americans, and both have the atom bomb!

Der Spiegel, the left wing newspaperin Germany, had this to say about the Bali"Road Map"."The change of the US administration in January 2009 creates a historic opportunity to resurrect transatlantic leadership on global environmental issues. The European Union and the United States have three major reasons to start a new era of climate policy cooperation. First of all, the United States remains the world’s major emitter of greenhouse gases, even though China has surpassed the United States in emissions of CO2, the main gas under consideration".Sounds like double talk to this writer!

And this is the scary part! "A new American administration in 2009 would be wise to help build a system of international law that will bind Washington to the future-powers-to-be.aka: World law that supersedes our Constitution and laws!

VIEWS OF CURRENT EVENTS FROM MY SIDE OF THE STREET

Maybe America Deserves an Obama Presidency? 9th, 2008 | 11:25 am
The United States of America has essentially become a secularized, humanistic society. Not even faintly symbolic of the Republic that the Signers of the Declaration of Independence or the framers of our Constitution intended this Republic to evolve into.
There have been 27 amendments to the Constitution since it's adoption 221 years ago on 9/17/1787. Only 26 are currently in force, and the Firt is the one that has been used to change this country from a Republic to a quasi-socialist government.
Although the First Amendment explicitly prohibits only the named rights from being abridged by laws made by the Congress, the courts have arbitrarally interpreted it as applying more broadly. As the first sentence in the body of the Constitution reserves all legislative authority to the Congress, the courts have held that the First Amendment's terms also extend to the executive and judicial branches.

From a simple definition of the rights of citizens of the USA that states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". The leftist supreme court "packed by FDR has twisted this amendment to mean that illegal aliens, even those accused of terrorism have the right to the same trial by jury as a citizen of the USA.
They have twisted logic to allow the genocide of our times, abortion on demand, as a right of women to choose!
They have banished the name of God from court rooms and public places, and ruled against all religious displays such as the Nativity scene at Christmas.
The court has made burning our flag legal even though they previously deemed burning a draft card illegal!


In 1969, the Supreme Court decided the landmark Brandenburg v. Ohio,which overruled Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927), a case in which a woman was imprisoned for aiding the Communist Party. Brandenburg effectively swept away Dennis as well, casting the right to speak freely of violent action and revolution in broad terms: “[Our] decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” Some one explain to me the logic of allowing people who enjoy the rights and privileges of the USA can stay out of jail despite advocating the overthrow of the government, not imminently, but in the near future. Sounds like the well worn phrase used by Bill Clinton. "it depends upon the definition of is-is". source: Wikapedia


We Americans who love our Country, and I believe we are the majority, despite it's "warts and faults", have stood by silently while the Marxist/socialists have used our Constitution to destroy us from within. Both Joe Stalin and Nikita Khrushchev must be laughing they dead A**es off in H**L. They said they would never have to defeat us in battle, because they could destroy us from within!
They have been aide on the left,by unions, pro-choice and environmental groups, MoveOn.org, and 527 groups funded by the likes of George Soros, Peter Lewis and the Sandlers. When the smoke clears, and the election is decided,they will have far outspent similar groups supporting the right.
Because of their money, and the MSMedia cover-up of Obama's Marxists leaning policies,Obama will have a huge money advantage in the next four months.

Thus, if an October surprise does not happen, that will expose Obama for the left wing advocate that he his, we will have the most radical left President in the Oval Office in our history. Then only God can help us! And after we stood silent while his name and laws were debased. I wonder if he is not fed up with us?

THE NEW YORK TIMES OUTS THE WRONG PERSON

The New York Times outed a CIA agent who interrogated the mastermind of the (/11/01 Twin Towers attack. This despite the repeated pleas not to use Mr. Deuce Martinez's name in their article. This is the man who used psychology tricks to interrogate Khalid Shaik Mohammed, not water boarding or other "torture" methods as the Times has referred to in the past.
This man himself asked the Times editors not to use his name in the article, and so did numerous CIA officials, but to no avail! Now this man's life and that of his family is in jeopardy, but not to worry! The time editors published a statement that essentially said they needed his name to corroborate the story. They added insult to injury by writing that Al Qaeda poses no threat to individual Americans here in the USA.

I guess when it suits their political and philosophical mind set they use the old bromide, source confidentiality, as was done in the Valerie Plame debacle.

What should be apparent to anyone but a Marxist leaning liberal is that the New York Times, and their equally leftist co-conspirator in Washington, The Washington Post only print what the leftist pseudo-intellectuals want to read. Bad news for anyone in the military, CIA, FBI or Bush administration.

They are careful not to out the "empty suit" running for the Presidency, Obama.
They carefully print story's of his shift to the center. He has a long way to go to run from his leftist record, but they will spend every inch of ink to try to con the American people that Obama is a centrist.

They do not print story's that illustrate that Obama's positions on such important issues is contrary to the majority of Americans, as this list shows.

Obama opposes offshore drilling for oil. Voters support drilling by 67% to 18%. (Rasmussen, June 2008).

Obama supports giving driver licenses to illegal immigrants. Americans oppose this 76% to 23%. (CNN/ Opinion Research, Oct. 2007)

Obama supports affirmative action in public employment, contracting and university admissions. Americans oppose giving an advantage in these areas on the basis of race by a margin of 82% to 14%. (Newsweek, July 2007)

Obama says that he will cut funding for research and development of missile defense systems. 89% of Americans support development of or research for missile defense -- 8% don't. (Program on International Policy Alternatives, March 2004) It's worth noting that Obama's closer to a pre-9/11 view of missile defense. An August 2001 Bloomberg News poll showed only 49% favored missile defense at that time whereas 41% opposed it.

Obama voted against a ban on partial birth abortions. Americans support a ban by a margin of 66% to 28%. (CNN/Opinion Research, May 2007)

Despite his equivocal statements regarding the recent Supreme Court decision striking down the D.C. gun ban, Obama has never met a gun ban he didn't like. Although many Americans support certain types of restrictions on guns, they oppose broad bans by a margin of 68% to 30%. In fact, 58% insist no new gun laws should be passed.(Gallup, Oct. 2007)

Obama opposed the Induced Birth Infant Liability Act while in the Illinois state legislature. The measure is designed to prevent abortion providers from withholding medical care and sustenance from infants born after surviving an abortion attempt. There's no national polling data on this state issue, but when the Senate voted on a analogous piece of legislation -- the Born Alive Infant Protection Act -- the measure passed unanimously.

Obama voted against a bill that would make English the official language for conducting business with the U.S. government. Americans support making English the official language 85% to 11%, including 79% of Democrats. (Rasmussen, July 2006)

While in the Illinois state legislature, Obama voted against parental notification requirements for abortions for minors. Americans support parental notification laws by a margin of 79% to 17%. Even 64% of those identifying themselves as pro-choice support such laws. (Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, April 2005)

Obama maintains that the Supreme Court's recent decisions prohibiting the use of race in determining public school assignments are wrong. In contrast, 71% of American agree with the decisions and only 24% disagree. (Quinnipiac, July 2007)

A good title for an article about Obama would be the Chameleon changes color again, color being a euphemism for positions!

WHO DOES OBAMA BELIEVE HE CAN CONVERT?

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.

Obama was photographed watching a Forth Of July parade in Montana, holding a small American flag. Obama EVEN paid homage to patriotism, faith, service to the community and military service—every national touchstone beside baseball and apple pie. July 4th brought images of Obama immersed in traditional Independence Day pageantry at a picnic and parade with his family in Montana.Nothing but show!!

Previously, he refused to wear a flag lapel pin while campaigning for the nomination, because he said it was not a real show of patriotism.
Now that he has captured the nomination and is assured of the left wing radical element of this country, and is certain to capture the majority of Black voters. He is shifting tactics to trick the middle American voters whom he essentially called early in the campaign, "nothing more than gun loving, religious zealots".

But let us not forget that people like Jane Fonda has said she would vote for Obama. In April of this year she was questioned as she left a restaurant, whom she would vote for? OBAMA, was her answer.


For those of you under thirty, Jane Fonda is not a name you are familiar with. Hanoi Jane went to Hanoi, Vietnam in 1972 and gave a radio address critical of the Nixon administration's waging war against the Communist North.It concluded with this statement:

"But now, despite the bombs, despite the crimes being created- being committed against them by Richard Nixon, these people own their own land, build their own schools- the children learning, literacy- illiteracy is being wiped out, there is no more prostitution as there was during the time when this was a French colony. In other words, the people have taken power into their own hands, and they are controlling their own lives.

And after 4,000 years of struggling against nature and foreign invaders- and the last 25 years, prior to the revolution, of struggling against French colonialism- I don't think that the people of Vietnam are about to compromise in any way, shape or form about the freedom and independence of their country, and I think Richard Nixon would do well to read Vietnamese history, particularly their poetry, and particularly the poetry written by Ho Chi Minh.Many American's believe what Fonda did during the Vietnam war were treason, at least giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Not unlike the modern day equivalent of, marxist dominated Iraq war protesters.

While Obama feigns his patriotism by having photographs staged showing him holding a flag. There are those anti-war,flag burning Marxists who are happy to have Hanoi Jane join the ranks of supporters of an Obama presidency.

McCain’s history as a Vietnam War POW who suffered torture while Fonda gave his captors photo-ops will resonate even further if she takes to the stump on Obama’s behalf. She probably has been told to "bug off", because her presence would draw connections between Obama’s anti-war supporters and the radicals — like Weathermen Ayers and Dohrn,of Fonda’s generation. While that might thrill the MoveOn crowd, it will likely lose Obama the heartland, independents, and centrists who will balk at that kind of radicalism, especially while the more moderate option in Senator McCain.

IFC IS PART OF CARBON CREDIT SCAM

The International Finance Corporation is a member of the World Bank Group.
Their vision is that people should have the opportunity to escape poverty and improve their lives. IFC is now the fastest growing component of the World Bank Group.


IFC allegedly provides investments and advisory services to build the private sector in developing countries. What they do is make money, lots of money, while redistributing our wealth and the money of less supportive nations to Third World Countries.The issue I have is that much of their money goes to some not so poor countries like Communist China and quasi-Communist Russia. Both rich in economies that do not trickle down to the majority of their population, because of the totalitarian regime that controls both countries.

The IFC does this through their investment branch. A company or entrepreneur seeking to establish a new venture or expand an existing enterprise can approach IFC directly by submitting an investment proposal.

After this initial contact and a preliminary review, IFC may proceed by requesting a detailed feasibility study or business plan to determine whether or not to appraise the project.

IFC's project/investment cycle illustrates the stages a business idea goes through as it becomes an IFC-financed project.

Although IFC is primarily a financier of private sector projects, it may provide finance for a company with some government ownership, provided there is private sector participation and the venture is run on a commercial basis. For example:For the World Bank after approving a loan for Shell’s contractors in Nigeria, the IFC immediately moved to the next critical piece of funding for the poor. In mid-June, the Board approved a $1.75 million loan for a 4-star hotel in Port Harcourt because “these companies will continue to demand clean reasonably priced hotel rooms.”source: — Stephen Kretzmann


Although IFC does not accept government guarantees for its financing, its work often requires close cooperation with government agencies in developing countries. Sounds like bureaucratic double talk to me. Either they deal with the private sector or they don't!

But today,their big investment venture is in the new Carbon Credits market. A scheme that has spawned the Global Warming sector that will make huge sums of money for these supposed philanthropists.


The Carbon Finance Unit serves as IFC's in-house resource for all carbon finance-related issues, providing services directly to buyers and sellers. The Unit leads in the development of new products, and serves as an advisor on a variety of products and services to support private sector participation in the evolving carbon market.

IFC is well-positioned to assist project sponsors with participation in the rapidly growing market for 'carbon credits'. Through the Carbon Finance Program, IFC contributes to the development of an important new market for environmental services.

The Carbon Finance Unit brings IFC's extensive experience in project finance to manage long term and credit risks in emerging markets. Carbon Finance products and services include:

Finance Products and Services
Carbon Delivery Guarantee
Monetization of future cashflows from sales of carbon credits
Debt and equity for carbon rich products and businesses
Work with Financial Intermediaries and municipalities to help aggregate carbon credits from their various investment operations

CERs and ERUs (carbon credits) are greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions that are created when a project reduces or avoids the emissions of GHGs, such as carbon dioxide or methane, relative to what would have been emitted under a 'business as usual' scenario. For example, a new wind power plant that displaces existing or expected coal-fired power generation would create a significant amount of credits, as would a project at a landfill that captures and utilizes some or all of the methane that previously escaped into the air. In contrast, a wind power project that offsets hydropower would not generate credits as the baseline itself has no GHG emissions.

The USA is the largest CONTRIBUTOR TO THE IMF BY CONTRIBUTING 24% OF THE IMF ANNUAL BUDGET. Russia contributes 3%, and Great Britain 5%.

The United States had to borrow 47% of the money borrowed from international markets to prop-up our dollar in 2007. Yet we are still contributing more than 450% more money to the IFM than Great Britain, and 800% more than Russia, the European producer of a majority of the fuels used.

IFM is viewed as a philantrophic organisation, but since 1956 when it was formed, it has been a profit making machine.Their 2007 annual report showed an operating income of 2.6 billion dollar profit! This is an operating return on net worth of 21.7% for 2007.source: annual report of IFM
Communist China received 1.5 billion dollars in aid from the IFM in 2007, and even more disturbing is the investment of 2.4 billion dollars in Russia! Russia is a powerhouse economic giant in Europe because they have oil! Why give them monetary assistance?

Even the IFC’s own economists believe the IFC suffers from an “approvals culture, which provides a disincentive for rigorous analysis [that] still persists today.” This “approvals culture” is fueled by the fact that investment officers’ job performance is assessed on the amount of money they can move out the door, not on the success of projects or the social, environmental or development impacts of the projects.


World Bank watchers have their own take on the IFM monetary projects. "The IFC is using tax payer’s money to create corporate welfare for a huge multi–national," says Lori Pottinger, director of the Africa program at International Rivers, an environmental organization in Berkeley, California. And this won’t be the first time. According to Friends of the Earth, an environmental watchdog agency, AES stands to gain a billion dollars in financing from the IFC for the company’s power projects around the world.


IFC investment officers continue to develop projects like luxury resort hotels and shopping malls, which may generate modest foreign exchange and create employment but few other benefits, especially when the investors and occupants are foreigners.
The bottom line is we should stop supporting this World organization. Better to spend the money on the the poor in our own country!

WHAT ARE OBAMA'S HANDLERS TRYING TO HIDE?

THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE HA APPEARED ON NUMEROUS WEB SITES. THE PARTICULAR QUOTE I AM POSTING IS FROM THE AMERICAN THINKER.


July 04, 2008 Forgery Revealed in Kos Publication of Obama 'Birth Certificate' AUTHOR: Rick Moran
"This is an issue that isn't going away for the Obama campaign and unless they address it in an effort to put it to bed, it will become one of those "distractions" the candidate really hates: A few weeks ago, a diary entry at Daily Kos published several documents purporting to be Obama's birth certificate. One of those documents is now a confirmed forgery, ferreted out by the website Israeli Insider:

Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fake Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same Daily Kos blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.

The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the diligent detective work of independent investigative journalists (led by JimJ and Texas Darling) and imaging professionals such as Polarik in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate The Daily Kos, a "progressive" blog site, and the Obama campaign's "Fight the Smears" website, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance. Moreover, the blog and the campaign have been negligent in allowing the promotion of obviously forged and fake official documents together with the purported image of Obama's birth certificate".

It seems to me that each week there is another flip-flop on policy or a revelation of questionable associates in Obama's past.
Is the Obama campaign beginning to unravel? The answer if you rely on the MSM reporting, is certainly not, as they continue the incessant negative reporting of McCain's positions. They even had the Gall to make a big story about the "Judas" generals comments that the prisoner of war status of John McCain, was not an asset to being president.

This is a story that is ongoing, and answers must be forthcoming!

MY WAY TO FUND MEDICARE

The Federal Government is reducing the amount paid to Doctors for treating medicare patients by 10.6% as of last Monday, and there is a scheduled 5% reduction scheduled for 2009.

Because this is becoming a financial burden many private practice doctors are unwilling to absorb, many are opting out of the Medicare program.
In Texas it is a real problem. There are only about 38% of general practice physicians now participating in the Medicare program. In 1990 there were at least 90% of the Texas physicians participating in the program. This bodes poorly for many senior citizens and those about to become eligible for medicare.


Were the 10.6 percent cut and an additional 5 percent cut scheduled for January 2009 to go through, Texas doctors, and in most other states, would lose approximately 18,000 dollars treating the elderly and disabled over the next 18 months.
Congress is mired in partisan bickering about how to pay for the additional funding both parties agree is necessary, already missed a June 30 deadline to prevent the 10.6 percent cut.

The Senate voted last week not to take up legislation passed by the House,that would have dipped into a Medicare pool of money that currently goes to private, fee-for-service insurers and use it for the traditional Medicare program. President Bush had vowed to veto that bill.

Still, Congress is expected to reach a quick compromise next week — partly because neither party wants to alienate millions of seniors voting in November.
Texas Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison say they're hopeful about the prospects of a bipartisan resolution.

But the resolution is widely seen as another Band-Aid, not the fundamental reform that doctors say is needed so battles don't keep coming up annually.
Physicians say the problem is a statutory formula that leaves less money to go around as more people use the program. Left intact, they say, the formula would reduce reimbursements by 40 percent over the next nine years.
Among those who agree with doctors is Cornyn.


Instead of reforming the system, Cornyn said Tuesday in a letter to his Senate colleagues, Congress has made "a never-ending series of patchwork fixes that were inefficient and costly and caused undue hardship on everyone involved."
Real consideration of the legislation is not expected to come until a new Congress takes over in January.


I have an idea where the Congress can discover some of the money needed to keep funding the medicare program at it's present level.
Congress spends the following amounts of your tax dollars supporting America's own genocide, abortion!
In 2003, Planned Parenthood Federation of America extinguished the lives of 244,628 unborn babies — making the organization more deadly than leukemia, brain cancer, skin cancer, diabetes, car accidents, Alzheimer’s disease, and HIV/AIDS combined.

Even the United Nations statement on World Birth Control , says nothing about funding as you can see from this: "All couples and individuals have the right to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children and to have access to the information and means to do so."


Cancer kills a little over five hundred thousand lives a year, but abortion is the number one killer in the USA. Over 1.5million baby's are aborted each year.To this the Saintly Mother Theresa had this to say: "America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts--a child--as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience".
--Mother Theresa -- 2.25.94

How much of Planned Parenthood's activities are paid for by us as taxpayers? In its 2003-2004 annual report, Planned Parenthood announced that it had received more than $265 million in government grants and contracts for just that one year. This is nothing new. In the seven years from 1997 to 2003, Planned Parenthood received more than $1.49 billion from American taxpayers. Tragically, in its annual reports, the organization also admits that it has performed 1,398,574 abortions during that time period alone.

But America’s unsuspecting taxpayers have not only financed the abortion industry giant’s disturbing agenda, we have helped Planned Parenthood to accumulate profits of more than $350 million in just those seven years.
2003-2004 ... $ 35.2 million in tax money
2002-2003 ... $ 36.6 million in tax money
2001-2002 ... $ 12.2 million in tax money
2000-2001 ... $ 38.9 million in tax money
1999-2000 .. $ 59.5 million in tax money
1998-1999 ... $125.8 million in tax money
1997-1998 ... $ 42.1 million in tax money
If all these millions were not given to the abortion industry the government would have the money to keep the covenant they made to US senior citizens when they passed the medicare Bill.

The "right to choose" does not guarantee the right to have the Federal Government(aka: the taxpayers) pay for the abortion! The choice was made when the woman got pregnant, and the bill is hers to pay, if her conscience or lack of, allows her to kill the baby growing in the place that should be the most safe place in the world, a mother's womb.

The time has come for all senior citizens to start a movement to defund Planned Parenthood and the international programs that fund abortions. The money would be more well spent saving lives, than killing them!

HE WOULD MAKE A GREAT HIGH DIVER!

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty.
They will need all our prayers if Senator "flip-flop" gets elected in November!

TODAY,In Fargo North Dakota, Obama made another verbal move to the center of the political spectrum. With his extreme left of center voting record, and his promises to the anti-war zealots,that allowed him to defeat the anointed favorite, Hillary Clinton. Obama's handlers have tacked to the right on Iraq to try to court those of us who believe withdrawal would lead to genocide in Iraq.

Obama opened the door Thursday to altering his plan to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq immediately after his election, as he repeatedly promised during the campaign. He said in Fargo, that based based upon what he hears from military commanders during his upcoming trip to Iraq, he will reformulate his withdrawal plans.

This is just one more "flip-flop" Obama has made since garnering the magic number of electoral delegates to almost guarantee his nomination, in Denver, on the first ballot.

Alex Conant had this comment about the most recent "flip-flop".
"There appears to be no issue that Barack Obama is not willing to reverse himself on for the sake of political expedience,Obama's Iraq problem undermines the central premise of his candidacy and shows him to be a typical politician." Conant is a spokesperson for the Republican National Committee, but he is saying what many Americans must be asking themselves. "How much is Obama willing to betray those who got him to where he is today, and how much can we trust him to not betray us all for his personal agenda? This is a question that needs answering!

I BELIEVE MANY JEWS WILL NOT VOTE IN NOVEMBER

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.

The Jewish religion has always held that their is sanctity in human life. For this reason many who are active in the movement to abolish capital punishment are Jews.
It is with the background of this belief system that I write this blog.
There is a certain dichotomy in the blind following of a man who strongly believes in the "right" to kill a baby that survives an abortion, and the position that holds life is a sacred gift from "I AM WHO AM".

The following is an excerpt from "Jews Choosing Life", by Matthew Berke.
"The sanctity and infinite worth of every human being is a quintessential Jewish value, grounded in the biblical notion that man is made in the image and likeness of God. According to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 4:5): "Whoever destroys one life is as if he destroyed a whole world, and whoever preserves a life is as if he preserved the whole world."

Against this background, it is ironic and vexatious for many pro–life activists that American Jews tend to line up on the "pro–choice" side in the struggle over abortion. "Affirming the Sanctity of Human Life," a conference held last November 12 in Washington, D.C., brought together a hundred or so Jews who are troubled by the Jewish community’s stance toward the unborn, particularly concerning the gruesome late–term procedure known as "partial–birth abortion.
Rabbi Moses A. Birnbaum, from Long Island, NY, ha this to say: "there is much misgiving and guilt in the Jewish community over partial–birth abortion, and people are hungering for an authentic Jewish response. Although Jews cannot, like Catholics, accept a total ban on all abortions, according to Rabbi Birnbaum, it is imperative to "unite with our Christian brothers and sisters" against partial–birth, "a procedure unique in its total violation of Jewish law" and "tantamount to infanticide." He said Jews should not worry about partial–birth legislation leading to a wider ban on abortion, but should consider one issue at a time. He decried the "mantra of choice," arguing that sometimes people must simply "choose life—the best choice of all, the only choice."


I believe that because of the flip-flops taken by Obama on the Palestinian-Israeli problem, and his stance on partial birth abortion(murder), many orthodox and reform Jews will choose to stay home in November. They cannot bring themselves to vote Republican, nor can they vote for a man who violates their religious beliefs.


In every significant interaction in Obama's adult life with those who disdain and vilify Israel - from Rashid Khalidi to Reverend Jeremiah Wright to Louis Farrakhan - Obama has demonstrated passive resignation and indifference.

He did not stand up to his friend Khalidi, the Palestinian activist, professor and former Palestinian spokesman whom Obama honored at a farewell dinner, and object to Palestinian invectives that Israel was an apartheid state. He did not recoil, until Wright insulted him at the National Press Club, from Wright when he learned that Wright considered Israel a "dirty word" and postulated that Israel had invented an "ethnic bomb."

He did not heed (or was oblivious to) public pleas from Jewish organizations to avoid the Million Man March that Farrakhan organized; nor did he years later leave his church when it honored Farrakhan. It took a hateful rant from another wide-eyed preacher against Hillary Clinton, just when Obama needed to cool intra-party animosities, to do that.

AND IF any further proof were needed, Obama's actions with regard to the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, the measure to classify the Iranian National Guard as a terrorist organization, should settle the question of Obama's intestinal fortitude when it comes to Israel. An issue presented itself: a choice between, on the one hand, taking a stance against Israel's most vile enemy, Iran, and, on the other, appeasing the far Left of his own party.

Obama chose to satisfy the MoveOn.org crowd and opposed the amendment. The amendment would have been "saber rattling" and unduly provocative, Obama argued at the time. Senators Dick Durbin, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton and three quarters of the US Senate voted for the amendment. source: U.S. Senate Archives

Once his nomination was secured, Obama told those assembled at the AIPAC convention that he supported classification of the Iranian National Guard as a terrorist organization, a move he well understood was important to Israel's security and to AIPAC's members. Yet under just a smidgen of political pressure during the primary race, he had not been able to muster the will to support a modest measure which inured to Israel's benefit.

Is there anything in all this to suggest that in a potential crisis, when much of the world would be pressuring him to let Israel die, Obama would push all the naysayers aside and demand to "send them everything that can fly"? There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that he would be beyond persuasion when it came down to Israel's survival. In fact, all the available evidence indicates that the opposite is true. Source: Jerusalem PostThat does not mean Obama will not carry the majority of the Jewish vote. Jews are overwhelmingly Democratic, and it is certainly the case that for many American Jews the secular liberal agenda takes precedence over everything else in presidential politics.

For these voters, then, "1973" is not uppermost in their minds. Their devotion to liberalism is controlling, and for their own peace of mind they are willing to accept Obama's generic expressions of warm feelings toward Israel.

Indeed the temptation to believe in Obama's bland promises of support for Israel is a tempting one for liberal Jews. If they can convince themselves that he will be "fine on Israel," no conflict arises between their liberal impulses and their concern for Israel. The urge to believe is a powerful thing, especially when the alternative is an intellectual or moral quandary.

As Sandi Merle put it: "Ultimately, we will have to explain to our children, and our children’s children. L’dor va–dor, from generation to generation, we may have to explain the evil that lives after us."

HAPPY BIRTHDAY AMERICA!

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.

THE ABOVE PRAYER IS APPROPRIATE ON THIS ANNIVERSARY OF OUR BELOVED COUNTRY'S INDEPENDENCE.

It is a day that most people will spend barbecuing, enjoying a day off from their jobs, but few will reflect upon those who gave their lives to establish a country that was independent of the "mother country", England.

In the United States, Independence Day (commonly known as the Fourth of July) is a federal holiday commemorating the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, declaring independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain.

An estimated 25,000 American Revolutionaries died during active military service. About 8,000 of these deaths were in battle; the other 17,000 deaths were from disease, including about 8,000 - 12,000 who died while prisoners of war, most in rotting prison ships in New York. The number of Revolutionaries seriously wounded or disabled by the war has been estimated from 8,500 to 25,000. The total American military loses were most probably in the area of 50,000!

The British surrendered at Yorktown in 1781, but it wasn't until the Treaty of Paris in 1783, that the Revolutionary war was officially over.
The Treaty of Paris, was signed on September 3, 1783, and approved by the Congress of the Confederation on January 14, 1784, formally ended the American Revolutionary War between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the United States of America, which had rebelled against British rule starting in 1775.

TODAY AS WE ALL ENJOY A DAY OF REST AND PLEASURE, LET US REMEMBER ALL THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE GIVEN THEIR LIVES SINCE 1776 TO KEEP OUR COUNTRY FREE! GOD BLESS THEM AND REWARD THEM FOR THEIR SACRIFICE!


.

SYCOPHANTS TRY TO SMOOTH THE WATERS

Rep. Robert Wexler of South Florida, sent an email to all the Jewish leaders assuring them that Obama is a strong supporter of Israel and they should support his election.
While he was doing this, Senator "I lost to the Swift Boats" Kerry, was in Israel meeting with key leaders of government to assure them that Obama is on their side.All this is in preparation for the announced visit by Obama to Israel sometime before the November election.

The root of the matter, as some observers of American Jewish politics see it, may be that Obama’s rhetoric and themes of reconciliation and common ground – the heart of his national popularity – sound off-key and even naive in the context of a grim, confrontational moment in the Middle East.

Obama’s substantively hard line on Israel has cost him friends among Chicago’s Palestinian activists. But his rhetoric has given the pro-Israel side pause. As Israel’s most vocal American allies see it, the divisions there aren’t about partisan name-calling: they’re about murder and the survival of a Jewish state. Faced with apparently implacable enemies like the Palestinian group Hamas and the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, backers of Israel see little room for reconciliation, and little reason for hope.


The following quote is from the Jerusalem Post. It explains the dilemma Obama has with convincing many Jews that he is on their side. Morton Klein, President of the Zionist Organization of America had this to say:
“It was mystifying to me when [Obama] said that one of the reasons there isn’t peace in the Middle East is because of ‘cynicism.’ Cynicism? That’s the reason?” asked Morton Klein, the president of the Zionist Organization of America, a hard-liner who often gives voice to sentiments other Jewish leaders are more comfortable whispering “It makes me think that Barack Obama doesn’t understand the continuing Arab war against Israel.” Klein said he found the notion of an Obama presidency “frightening".
"Obama is regularly rated the “worst for Israel” of leading American presidential candidates by a panel assembled by the liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz. But Klein’s remarks, an open letter to Obama from an Iowa Jewish leader concerned that Obama had spoken of Palestinian suffering, and a host of more quietly expressed concerns, produce a certain weary frustration in Obama’s Jewish backers, who include prominent supporters of Israel.

Obama's past suggestion that the Israeli and Palestinian sides are equally to blame –for the protracted fighting is a matter for pause for Jews whom Obama courts for votes. This provoked the following from the editor of The New York Post, E.J. Kessler.

"Obama fails to understand the totalitarian politics and sensibilities of the folks over there, who are not well meaning".
Kessler,the New York Post editor who’s a longtime observer of American-Jewish politics, continued, “His approach will appeal to a lot of lefty Jews, but it won’t appeal to the serious players,” she said, referring to the better-organized and better funded groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Council, AIPAC.

Meanwhile, never mentioned before by the MSM, Obama's half sister gave a campaign speech to Asian americans in San Francisco.
Soetoro-Ng and Obama have different fathers and the same mother. Her father is Indonesian, his is Kenyan. Her husband is Chinese-Canadian.
The throng of Asian-American donors drew closer, drinks in hand, to hear Barack Obama's sister describe the wide arc of his life: beyond politics and Chicago, into his childhood in Indonesia and Hawaii.

Why have we not heard about his sister? Soetoro-Ng explained:
"Discussion of those ties has taken a back seat to the Obama campaign's efforts to win the Hispanic vote and his ability to rouse young and black voters. In spite of the drawn-out primary season, many voters have heard little about Obama's years in Jakarta — he lived there between 1967 and 1971, while his mother was married to Soetoro-Ng's father, an Indonesian businessman — or about his years in Hawaii, where Asian-Americans are a majority". Source:My Politico.com
How much else is their in the closet that is the life history of BHO? And why has he not answered the question why his birth certificate from Hawaii has no seal or signature?

THE MAIN REASON I WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA!

Being a Navy veteran, and a life long Republican who strayed from the fold only once. I voted fro JFK! I am afraid more than I dislike the Democrat candidate for President. He is a charming, well spoke, affable man who presents a fine image.
I cannot hate him because he is the most liberal in the Senate according to his voting record. I cannot hate him for his long time association with America hating racist, Rev. Wright. I cannot hate him for his past association with Weatherman Ayers, who wished he had blown up more of America, but still holds a professorship at a Chicago University. I cannot hate him because he calls the Catholic "priest" Pfleger a friend, even though this man should have been "de-frocked" long ago for his anti-Catholic pronouncements!
No, I cannot hate him, because he was born in the image and likeness of the God who created him and all the rest of us. I am a Catholic, and I must love my fellow man if I wish to gain the prize of everlasting happiness in the presence of God!

But I do border on hating him for his position on partial birth abortions. He voted against The Induced Birth Infant Liability Act while serving in the Illinois legislature in 2002.
The Bill was to extend the same medical care to babies who happen to survive an abortion attempt as is enjoyed by all babies born alive.
Not satisfied to allow a baby who has miraculously survived an abortion, to live. He used the argument that allowing rights to this live aborted baby would violate the Constitution!

In fact, when a similar measure-- the Born Alive Infant Protection Act-- was brought before the U.S. Senate, not one Senator voted against it. Even NARAL Pro-Choice America didn't oppose the bill.


Call me old fashioned and narrow minded , but It's difficult for me to not hate someone who's eager to extend an array of constitutional rights to terrorists(Guantanamo Bay), but who refuses to provide the most fundamental rights to the most vulnerable living, breathing new born infant.

Perhaps it's my failure to comprehend Obama's exquisite intellectual subtlety. Obama challenged the constitutionality of the bill,contending that conferring equal protection, i.e.,personhood, upon a "pre-viable fetus" would render the bill an unlawful anti-abortion statute. There is nothing "pre-viable about a baby from conception to birth, even if it was tried to be killed by America's Genocide, abortion!

At what point after birth does Obama call a baby a person and not a fetus? One day? Six months?

I have a hard time generating feelings of love or even respect for someone who voted against helping newborns struggling to live.
I suspect most people don't know about Obama's position on babies who survive abortion attempts and it's unlikely that they'll ever find out. The media seem more interested in reporting on the cultural implications, or the racial animus of those who question Obama's policies, and those of his wife. If more people knew about Obama's disregard for babies who have the will to survive an abortion, there would be more scrutiny and less "honeyed words"!

Why Did Obam Remove E Pluribus Unum From His Blue Seal?

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.

From todays edition of Der Spiegel, an excerpt from an article written by Norbert F. Potzi, entitled "Life In a Parallel Society",may explain why Obama's Blue Presidential Seal had the phrase "E Pluribus Unum" removed.It is a statement establish by Congress in 1782 as part of the Presidential seal.
The phrase means "out of many, one".
In this statement it is implied that we all join together top make one country with the same laws and originally suggesting that out of many colonies or states emerge a single nation, it has come to suggest in contemporary times that out of many peoples, races, and ancestries has emerged a single people and nation – illustrating the concept of the melting pot.

But the Germans have found that the majority of the Muslim immigrants have not assimilated. Most have not learned the language, and Sharia law appears to be the rule of law in the "ghettos" where Muslims accumulate.

In this article the author makes the argument that Muslims can live side by side with Germans and still not assimilate into the German society.
There are an estimated 3.4 million Muslims living in Germany, making it the second largest religious group after Christians in Germany. A majority of them from Turkey,but many cam from Bosnia,Iran Iraq and Morocco. They were encouraged to emigrate to Germany to work in the industrial machine that made Germany an economic power house in the 70' and 80's.
As morally indignant young Muslims turn away from what they view as decadent German culture, some are cultivating feelings of superiority. While their immigrant parents and grandparents tried to assimilate, at least on the surface, some young Muslims deliberately flaunt the fact that they are different by wearing strict Islamic clothing in public.
The young, criminal Muslims whose acts of violence are so often in the news are rebelling against the majority society in their own way. They berate the victims of their brutal attacks as "s**t Germans" and "pig-eaters," even to the point of occasionally abusing a police officer of Turkish descent as a "s**t Christian."

The problem of assimilation is not helped by people like Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with his recent inflammatory rhetoric. "Speaking to a cheering crowd of close to 20,000 Turks, some of them already naturalized German citizens, at the Cologne Arena two weeks before the February conference, Erdogan warned his fellow Turks against going too far in their efforts to integrate. "No one can expect you to subject yourselves to assimilation," he said. "Because assimilation is a crime against humanity".

No one had asked the Turks to submit to assimilation, the total removal of cultural and religious identity. But the consequences of a refusal to be integrated into majority German society are all too apparent in the neighborhoods surrounding Sonnenallee in Neukölln"where crime has increased dramatically.

Thus when I first saw Obama posed behind a blue simulated Presidential seal I wondered about the choice of words that replaced the normal wording. Instead of the Latin "E pluribus unum" (Out of many, one), Obama's says "Vero possumus", rough Latin for "Yes, we can." Instead of "Seal of the President of the United States", Obama's Web site address is listed. And instead of a shield, Obama's eagle wears his "O" campaign logo with a rising sun representing hope ahead!
Not only is the wording questionable, the gaul of a man who has not even been formally nominated as his party candidate, standing behind a quasi-presidential seal!

No matter if you or I believe Obama is a Muslim "mole" or the anti-Christ, he does insult the rest of us who have assimilated, and become one of many. It appears to this seasoned citizen that by removing E Pluribus Unum, Obama has declared that living together as one is not necessary to keep this nation together.But then is that not what his pastor of twenty years declared from his pulpit?


The Europeans are experiencing first hand what lack of assimilation produces. Ghettos are developing where Sharia laws prevail, and crime rates and civil disobedience bordering on race riots are happening. All is not well in places like France, Germany and Holland!

DO WE WANT A PRESIDENT THAT BELIVES IT IS O.K. TO ABANDOM "E PLURIBUS UNUM"?

SAY GOODBYE TO THE BLUE EAGLE!

Thanks to J. R. Dunn who wrote an article in today's "AMERICAN THINKER", I have another point to make about the ineptitude of the Democratic selection to run for President.
Only a person who has no knowledge of recent history, at least the last 65 years is not considered ancient history, would know that the vain attempt to revitalize a failing economy by establishing the NRA was one of FDR'S blunders.
As you can see from the following excerpt of the article, Roosevelt's attempt to socialize business including closing the banks was an abject failure. It took the Japanese to salvage our economy when they bombed Pearl Harbor December 7, 1941. This put in motion the machine that is derogatorily refereed to as the military industrial complex.
Many people believe that the Democrat President had prior knowledge of the planned Japanese attack, and let it happen so the USA could regain it's economy on a war time economic machine. It is unkind to say ill of the dead, so I will defer to Roosevelt, and say as did the critics of Bush , that he had bad intelligence.
The result was the greatest war time manufacturing machine in the history of the world. Tool and die makers, "Rosy the riviters" and automobile companies turned out enough planes, ships, tanks and guns to supply not only our troops, but the British, French and Russians. We won the war, but Roosevelt died, and never saw the results of his war machine.

Why Obama allowed himself to be photographed with the symbol of the NRA superimposed over a make-over of the presidential seal is beyond understanding!
It was completely overlooked (as far as I've seen, anyway) that a direct inspiration for the seal was the public symbol for one of Franklin D. Roosevelt's greatest policy disasters. An eagle, a blue background: Blue Eagle. Which happens to have been the emblem of the National Recovery Administration (NRA). FDR's attempt to beat the Depression by collectivizing(aka socializing) the U.S. economy.


"The NRA was the centerpiece of the "Hundred Days", FDR's whirlwind law-passing spree following his inauguration. It was the work of "brain trusters" Rexford G. Tugwell and Adolf Berle, adapted directly from Mussolini's "corporative" system.


The NRA attempted to "organize" the U.S. economy from the largest corporations to the smallest Mom n' Pop store. Businesses were encouraged to sign up with the proviso that they would be able to write their own rules for their industries, effectively turning them into cartels. Member businesses were allowed to place the Blue Eagle in their windows, along with the slogan "We Do Our Part".


Businesses were required to pay minimum wage, abandon child labor, and adapt wage and price controls. As for businesses that held out... well, the NRA was run by an ex-general, Hugh Johnson, who, to put it kindly, was not Colin Powell. Johnson took the Mussolini connection to heart, declaring all businesses not displaying the Blue Eagle to be "enemies of the people", and encouraging the public to boycott them, if not worse.


But it was even more dangerous for companies that signed up. Businessmen were jailed for breaking NRA rules, and goon squads roamed the streets of Manhattan looking for violators The story is told in detail in Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascim. The Secret History of the American Left and Amity Shlae's The Forgotten Man. A New History of the Great Depression.

How this nonsense was supposed to end the Depression is anybody's guess. In short order, it ran afoul of the Supreme Court, which on May 27, 1935, found the NRA illegal in Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States, the so-called "sick chicken" case. The Court struck down the NRA as an unconstitutional extension of executive power. Roosevelt was forced to drastically modify his plans for the economy".

This "empty suit" who speaks well only when he has a teleprompter, will be exposed for his lack of knowledge about anything other than left wing thinking, when the debates begin. He has tripped over his own tongue numerous times up to this point. If the people who run the televised debates are honest about their questions, don't let him know before what they are, he will be exposed for the ameatuer that he is. He is trying to play a professional game with no prior experience in the field of battle, and I would hate to think of what he would do when the"red phone rings in the night", and it will!

GIVING AWAY MORE OF OUR COUNTRY'S SOVEREIGNTY!

The World Bank is one of the two Bretton Woods Institutions which were created BY 44Free Nations in July,1944, to rebuild war-torn Europe after World War II. Later, largely due to the contributions of the U.S.A. Marshall Plan, the World Bank was forced to find a new area in which to focus its efforts.(BLOGGERS NOTE: PERHAPS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISBANDED, AS IT'S JOB WAS DONE, BUT LIKE ALL BUREAUCRACIES IT CREATES "MAKE WORK" TO EXTEND IT'S EXISTENCE!)

Now the body of bureaucrats that numbers over 138 nations, originally formed to accommodate the Marshall Plan, has decided to investigate the Country that was the founder of the organization. The IMF is going to examine the books of the U.S. Treasury.
The strange thing is that President Bush, who normally does not let United Nations Organisations dictate to him, has agreed to this outrageous interference in our sovereignty!
Officials with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have informed Secretary Bernanke about a plan that would have been unheard of in the past, a general examination of the US financial system.

The IMF's board of directors has ruled that a so-called Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) is to be carried out in the United States. It is nothing less than an X-ray of the entire US financial system.


From 1968-1981, the IMF focused largely on poverty alleviation. Begining in the '80's and into the 1990s, its main focus was both debt management and structural adjustment. Another word for redistribution of wealth!

Today the focus, which is little known outside of the "elites", is on the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), goals calling for the elimination of poverty and the implementation of sustainable development.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were developed out of the eight chapters of the United Nations Millennium Declaration, signed in September 2000. The eight goals and 21 targets include:
1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day.

2. Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people.

3. Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger.

4. Achieve universal primary education Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling.

5. Promote gender equality and empower women Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and at all levels by 2015.

6. Reduce child mortality Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-five mortality rate.

7. Improve maternal health Reduce by three quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio.

8. Achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health( aka contraception and abortion!).

9. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS.

10. Achieve, by 2010, universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it. Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases.

11. Ensure environmental sustainability and develop a global partnership for development.
These include removing tariffs and quotas for debt ridden third world countries, and by 2020 to significantly improve the lives of at least 100 million "slum dwellers"!

The majority of the stated goals are "mother's milk" that nobody can fault. But goals,5, 8 and 11 are contrary to a large portion of the population of the USA, and may be in conflict with the majority of Christians. Particularly the mandate to provide contraception and abortion to the world.
Number 11 can be interpreted as being in accord with the Kyoto protocols, and so far we have not agreed to hamstring our economy with the protocols.

Complaints, by Conservatives and Constitutionalists, are also directed toward the International Monetary Fund gold reserve being undervalued. At its inception in 1945,the IMF pegged gold at US $35 per Troy ounce of gold. In 1973 the Nixon administration lifted the fixed asset value of gold in favor of a world market price. Hence the fixed exchange rates of currencies tied to gold were switched to a floating rate, also based on market price and exchange. This largely came about because Petrodollars outside the United States were more than could be backed by the gold at Fort Knox under the fixed exchange rate system. The fixed rate system only served to limit the amount of assistance the organization could use to help debt-ridden countries. Current IMF rules prohibit members from linking the IMF success record is perceived as limited.[citation needed]

While it was created to help stabilize the global economy, since 1980 critics claim over 100 countries (or reputedly most of the Fund's membership) have experienced a banking collapse that they claim have reduced GDP by four percent or more, far more than at any time in Post-Depression history.The considerable delay in the IMF response to any crisis, and the fact that it tends to only respond to them or even create them rather than prevent them, has led many economists to argue for reform. In 2006, an IMF reform agenda called the Medium Term Strategy was widely endorsed by the institution's member countries. The agenda includes changes in IMF governance to enhance the role of developing countries in the institution's decision-making process. Source:Wikapedia

The "cart pulling the horse" arrangement, or the branches dictating to the tree what way to grow!