OBAMA CREATES HIS VERSION OF THE POLITBURO

In Marxist-Leninist states, the party is seen as "the vanguard of the people" and therefore usually has the power to control the state, and the non-state party officials in the politburo generally hold extreme power.

In the Soviet Union for example, the General Secretary of the Communist Party did not necessarily hold a state office like president or prime minister to effectively control the system of government. Instead, party members answerable to or controlled by the party held these posts, often as honorific posts as a reward for their long years of service to the party.
Stalin ruled the Soviet Union for well over a decade before assuming the governmental position of Premier of the Soviet Union during World War II.The Politburo until July 1990 exercised supreme control over the Soviet government.

The Politburo assumed a major position in party and state administration, and it eventually came to overshadow the role of the Central Committee. Because the party secretariat planned the agenda, provided all documentation for debate, and transmitted Politburo decisions to the lower echelons, the general secretary of the Communist Party (Stalin) became the Politburo’s most influential member. Following the power struggles after Lenin’s death in 1924, Stalin achieved a controlling position on the Politburo, exercising complete dominance over it and the party in general.

Officially, the Party Congress elects a Central Committee which, in turn, elects a General Secretary. Under Stalin however, this model was essentially reversed and it was the General Secretary who determined the composition of the Politburo and Central Committee.
Source: Wikapedia

Substitute President for General Secretary and Czars for Central Committee and you have the situation that Obama is developing in Washington. His czars are not responsible to the Congress.
They do not have to reveal their salary, or how they spend the millions they are responsible for, and are accountable to nobody other than the president. Collectively these czars have 1.7 trillion dollars at their disposal!
The president subverted the Constitution by reversing the Bankruptcy laws of the nation. He did this when he put the bond holders at the end of the "deal" he put together to allow the Union and the government to usurp the ownership of the Chrysler and General Motors Companies.

Although I am not comparing the President to either Stalin or Hitler, Obama's establishing of, thus far, sixteen czars accountable only to him. He has created his own governing body within, and yet outside, the Constitutional Government. He has created his own version of a Politburo! If you have read "The Devils Disciple's" you might see the analogy of the inner workings of Adolph "H".
"The Devil's Disciples" is the first major book to examine those lieutenants of Hitler, not only as individuals but also as an administrative group. It focuses on the three most important Nazi principals — Göring, Goebbels, and Himmler — with their nearest rivals — Bormann, Speer, and Ribbentrop. These six men ran the Third Reich until the Allies defeated them in September 1945.

I will, however, state that it appears to me that Obama has little respect for the Constitution, and particularly the Fifth Amendment that guarantees the right of due process to all citizens!

JUSTICE CHICAGO STYLE!!!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

When you look at the decisions that have been made by the present Attorney General you might get the impression, as I do, that justice is being administered the way they did it in the Capone Days in Chicago.
Beginning in the last days of the the Clinton administration Ass.AG Holder was involved with Clinton's last-minute pardon of fugitive felon and Democratic contributor Marc Rich.
Holder was also involved in Clinton's decision to reduce the criminal sentences of 16 members of the Boricua Popular Army, an organization that has been categorized by the FBI as a terrorist organization. The clemency request was initially opposed in 1996 by U.S. Pardons Attorney Margaret Love.
In July 1999, Holder recommended clemency to President Clinton with a report from then U.S. Pardons Attorney Roger Adams that neither supported nor opposed clemency. A month later, the clemency was granted by Clinton. According to The Hartford Courant, the clemency was unusual because it was opposed by the FBI, the federal prosecutor and the victims.
In the aftermath of the murder of the late term abortionist Dr. Tiller, Mr. Holder dispatched U.S. Marshals to guard some Abortion clinics.
However, when an Army recruiter was murdered and a Naval recruiter was severely wounded in a recruiting location. There were no Marshalls stationed outside recruiting depots, nor was there condemnation of the murder forthcoming from the AG's office.

Since being appointed Attorney General, Mr.Holder has made many decisions that indicate to me that he is inclined to view American justice through the prism of race.
He called the United States "a nation of cowards" during his speech to honor Black history month!

Then "two weeks ago, in a highly unusual move, Holder dismissed default judgments his department had won against two of three defendants charged with violating the Voting Rights Act. On Nov. 4, 2008, a billy club-wielding militant in military-style boots and beret stood outside a Philly polling location with a similarly dressed partner. Citizen journalists from the Pennsylvania-based blog Election Journal captured the menacing duo on video. One of the watchdogs observed: "I think it might be a little intimidating that you have a stick in your hand."
The defendants were black, and I doubt that if they were white the decision would have been the same.Default judgements have never been dismissed before, to my knowledge!

"On the heels of this voter intimidation protection plan, the Obama Justice Department issued another decision that undermines electoral integrity -- but bolsters Democratic voter drives. The department this week denied the state of Georgia the ability to enact strict citizenship voter verification rules previously approved by two federal courts. As Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel explained: "DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia's elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant's citizenship status or whether the individual even exists."

On top of all that, Holder recently politicized the legal review process involving the contentious issue of D.C. voting rights. After careful study, the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion that a House bill on the matter was unconstitutional. Holder, who supports D.C. voting rights along with Obama, overrode his staff lawyers' ruling -- and simply ordered up an alternative opinion that fit the White House agenda".SOURCE:MICHELLE MALKIN

The office of Attorney General was established by Congress by the Judiciary Act of 1789. The original duties of this officer were "to prosecute and conduct all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States shall be concerned, and to give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States, or when requested by the heads of any of the departments. Source:Wikapedia

The "Rule of Law" means clear, generally applicable laws by which individuals can organize their affairs and which are applicable consistently, without respect to status. Source: American Heritage.com
Thus,by favoring the union over the creditors with superior rights. Obama violated a fundamental principle of our Constitutional government, and the Attorney General should know that and enforce the law by advising Obama that he was violating the law. But politics take precedence in the Obama administration!

As such, Holder should have advised president Obama that his firing of the CEO of General Motors and assuming over 60% percent ownership of General Motors was no within his power as defined in the United States Constitution. But since he was appointed by Obama and could be fired at any point by Obama, I understand how he might have been reticent to give that opinion.

Apparently, Lady Justice is now protected by an Attorney General who has a blind eye to violations of the Constitution, and a security force armed with billy clubs and lawyers who serve the cause of protecting the re-election of Barack Obama over the rule of law.

IS HE OR IS HE NOT?

During the 2008 campaign, Obama skillfully made himself, through his life story, the personification of change. He never used his middle name, and anyone who spoke his middle name during the election campaign was accused of being a conspirator who was trying to attack him personally. Those who were spokespersons for Obama's candidacy used his twenty year association with Reverend Wright as an indication that he was a Christian, until Wright's hateful sermons became an issue.Then Obama dumped his pastor!
Today the center of the president's attempt to woo the Muslim world, and the theme of his visits to Riyadh on Wednesday and Cairo on Thursday.Is his Muslim experience as a child, his father being a Muslim and the fact that he understands the Muslim ethos more than most Americans.


Obama implicitly contrasted himself with the born-again, evangelical Bush who pursued a post-9/11 "crusade" against terrorism. Obama is presenting himself to the Islamic world as the personification of a new, tolerant - and, yes, partly Muslim - America.
Obama said, "I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam".

"And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples."

Obama said when he was in Turkey, that Americans "do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation". But in his talk to college students in Cairo he stated that America has over 1200 mosques, and he said this, "And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear," said the president, who recalled hearing prayer calls of "azaan" at dawn and dusk while living in Indonesia as a boy.
Where in his oath of office does it say he should be an advocate for Islam?
With one speech in Cairo Obama has "dished" Christianity, the US and Israel, all in one speech. What he does not realize, is that unlike the idiot sycophants in this Country who still support this power happy Socialist, the people over there can see through the thin veneer of his rhetoric, and they don't buy anything that he says. If he is willing to sell out his country, his religion and his allies, he cannot be trusted.

People like Don Surber, who crunched the demographic numbers, and points out that Obama's claim that the USA is a Muslim country, is not accurate. According to Surber, "the US has an estimated three to eight million Muslims, less than one per cent of the world's total and less than at least 23 other countries".

Even if we assume there are six million Muslims in the US, that makes it only the 34th biggest Muslim country in the world - behind Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria, China, Ethiopia, Algeria, Morocco, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Tanzania, Syria, Malaysia, Niger, Senegal, Ghana, Tunisia, Somalia, Guinea, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Burkina Faso and Tajikistan.
Six million may make the US a populous Muslim country in the Middle East but not in the rest of the world. There are hundreds of millions in Pakistan, Indonesian, Nigeria, Bangladesh and many more than six million in India and China. Also, there are more than 10 million in Malaysia, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Sudan, and Algeria.
Once again Obama is telling an untruth as he sees it!

Last week, during a conference call in preparation for President Obama's trip to Cairo, Egypt, where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said "the President himself experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before he's been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father,etc." SOURCE: AMERICAN THINKER

Islam also has doctrines which, I believe states that if one is engaged in war , that one may lie about their affinity to Islam or lie about aspects of Islam if the lie better serves Islam's purposes than being honest. Not an indictment of BHO, but a point that makes me wonder, Is he or is he not a Christian?

THE DOUBLE STANDARD OF LIBERALS

Liberals pulled the race card in many areas of argument for the last 40 years. It was used to justify the billions that have been spent on busing to give minority children the opportunity to attend suburban schools, and to bus suburban kids into the inner city schools to "balance the scales".The result of unintended consequences is that our public schools are turning out graduates that cannot read or write to the level that they should, and mathematics is a lost skill. Without a calculator most public school high school graduates cannot make change when presented with a $20 bill.

Bi-lingual mandates for schools,election ballots and government offices, to mention just a few, was used to not "leave behind"
those who could not speak English. Never mind assimilation and learning the language of the Country that allows them to live here.

Then in the later part of the twentieth century the buzz word became "diversity". Liberals referred to the melting pot that America was in the days of our great grandparents and grandparents. They refer to the time when Italians, Irish, English, Germans and other European immigrants flooded this country. They point out that this is a country of immigrants, and we should welcome the legal and illegal Mexicans, Haitians and Central Americans, who have come here by the millions, by allowing them to keep speaking their native language in schools and the work place. If we do not, we are looked upon as RACISTS who don't want them here.

The main difference is that those who immigrated in the 19th and early 20th century made sure their children learned the English language. They had to, or they could not be assimilated in the work force and prosper in this country.
The new immigrants tend to gather in "ghettos" of like speaking people, that even have their street signs printed in Spanish.

Now we are presented with Obama's first selection for a seat on the Supreme Court. His selection is a like minded person that thinks her Hispanic heritage and experiences make her more qualified than a White male would be! Obama's selection, and announcement of his choice, suggests that the president is well aware of her views and attitudes, and that she personifies his views of how the courts should dispense justice. Empathy has become the "buzz" word for ruling in favor of minorities over White people! Thus Obama has essentially removed the blindfold from "Lady Justice"!

There is no doubt Sotomayor has the judicial credentials, and educational qualifications, but it is the baggage she might have in her mind that concerns me.
Has her successful trip from poverty as a Hispanic woman to the lofty position of Judge left scars that will affect the way she rules on the Supreme Court bench?


Has Judge Sotomayor been so hardened as child of a poor single parent Puerto Rican mother affected her ability to rule on cases brought before her with the "racial blindness" that our Constitution requires. Or will she make rulings like she did in the case of the firemen who brought suit because they were passed over for promotion even though their promotion test grades were higher than the minorities promoted.
In this particular case she dismissed the suit "off hand" as having no merit! An apparent decision that was made with racial bias, or as she and the president have said;"her decision was made with EMPATHY"!

Judge Sotomayor has, in both her words and in her decision as a judge to dismiss out of hand the appeal of white firefighters who had been discriminated against, betrayed a racism that is no less racism because it is directed against different people than the old racism of the past.

The code word for the new racial preference is "diversity." The Constitution of the United States says nothing about diversity, and the Constitution is what a judge is bound by his/her oath of office to pay attention to, not the prevailing buzzwords of the times or his/her empathy toward those who bring cases to be judged.

What the Constitution says is "equal protection of the laws" for all Americans, and that is not supposed to be taken out of context. People have lost their lives to make those words a reality. Now all of that is to be made to disappear into thin air by saying the magic word "diversity."

The landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, like the Constitution, proclaimed equal rights for all, not special rights for those for whom judges have "empathy! Judge Sotomayor has demonstrated a flaw in her ability to serve on the Supreme Court that must not be ignored because of fear of being called a racist!
Source: The Patriot Post

IF ONLY OUR MEDIA WAS UNBIASED!

It is not often that I read the stories printed in the latest edition of Pravda. It is not required reading for this fiscal conservative as it might be for the memers of the CPOA.
But thanks to the Drudge report, I visited the Pravda web site today, and I read an article that illustrates to me that the former Communist propaganda vehicle for the "CCCP", the Communist Party of Russia, realizes what is going on in the United States more succinctly than most Americans.
This is due to the fact that our Main Stream media has put to the "spike" any story or news that would awaken readers and viewers of the rapid pace that Obama is making the Change he promised voters. A move from Democracy to Marxist Socialism!
In fact,The White House press corps is now completely supine, utterly shameless in its groveling cowardice. Stalin himself couldn't have wished for a more slobbering press corps!

To give the full effect of the message that the Russian people and the rest of the World who read Pravda will now think. I will quote the entire article, as any excerpt would not tell the whole story of what others see is going on in the USA.

"American capitalism gone with a whimper"
Front page / Opinion / Columnists
27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru

"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.

True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.

Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.

First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.

Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?"

This article is a wake -up call for those who voted for Obama and still believe his CHANGE will make life better for them. Of course those dedicated to Socialism and the elitist Socialists will not be phased by this article, because they realized from the "get go" that the smooth talking Obama was one of theirs.

HAS OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE ACT?

It wasn't long ago that this great Country of ours had a Legislative, Executive and Judicial branch that controlled the way we lived. The Legislative branch made the laws, declared war when needed, and appropriated the money needed to run the government.
The Executive branch was the Commander in Chief of the Military and had veto power over any Bills that the Legislative body sent to his desk, and the Judicial branch was lead by the Supreme Court. This body was the Court of last resort for redress of individuals and groups who felt they were either cheated by the other two branches of government or thought a law that was in force was wrong and harmful.
This oversimplifies the duties and powers of the three branches of government, but it illustrates that OUR Country was ruled in an orderly and lawful manner up until now!


The Obama administration is making choices that not only favor some and hurt others. President Obama is making decisions that, in my opinion and more learned scholars than I, think are exceeding the powers granted to the president by the Constitution!
It appears that the politically well connected tend to get the favors.( aka:Unions and Acornto mention a few).
Banks were forced to take government money due not slightly to having to loan money for housing to minority groups without their ability to pay the loan payments, as crafted by the likes of Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd. Now they are blocked from paying the money back.
In the meantime, the banks must direct funds where the government wants them to go.This is a direct assault on the Free Enterprise Private Banking industry!

Chrysler and General Motors bond holders had their property(their investment in $) redistributed to the United Auto Worker retiree health-care fund (how the retirees help the companies make cars profitably is left unclear). Stimulus funds go to state governments with lavish contracts with public employee unions. And out of every dollar that goes to a union, a certain number of cents make their way back to the Democratic Party.
And now it appears that Obama's Auto Bankruptcy CZARS are selecting Chrysler dealerships for closure based upon whether they were political supporters of the Democrats or Republicans. A review of the dealerships that have already been notified that they will not have their contracts renewed shows that over 95% of those selected supported Republicans!

And now, without the prior approval of Congress or any legislation authorizing the act, President Obama plans to announce on today(Monday) that the federal government will take a 60-percent ownership stake in General Motors as part of a bankruptcy and reorganization plan for the company.

The White House on Sunday night announced that the plan will require the federal government to provide another $30 billion of taxpayer money to General Motors, on top of the $20 billion in aid the federal government already has given the company.
Source: CNSNews.com

In December, Congress failed to pass legislation authorizing a federal bailout of the auto industry. Analysts James Gattuso and Andrew Grossman of the Heritage Foundation argued at the time that this was “legally wrong” because Bush took the money from the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) that was authorized specifically for purchasing assets from “financial institutions” such as banks, savings and loans, credit unions, brokerages and insurance companies. The Heritage analysts argued that auto manufacturers are not “financial institutions” as envisioned by Congress under the law.

Robert Reich, who served as labor secretary under President Clinton, argued that Bush’s move was unconstitutional because of the limits the Constitution places on the president’s power to spend public money. Specifically, the Constitution says, “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” Why is Mr. Reich so silent now that Obama is compounding Bush's misappropriation of Power?

When asked, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, where Obama derived the legal authority to do what he was doing. Hoyer candidly said he did not know.

“The administration clearly believes it does have the authority to use some of the remaining TARP funds for the automobile industry,” Hoyer told Fred Lucas of CNSNews.com.

“I don't know, technically, but my own view is that if it is perceived they don't have that authority and it is perceived by the Congress they need to have that authority, the Congress would probably be willing to give that authority. But I don't know technically the answer to that question.” I know the answer! The Senate could not muster the 60 votes necessary to stop a filibuster that would kill any authorization giving extra-Constitutional powers to Obama, and Hoyer knows that!
Undoubtedly the House of Representative with so many Liberal members who are in the pockets of the Union movement would pass the authorization, but as I said. It would fail in the Senate. So here we are with a president who apparently thinks he is above the Constitution taking the right away from those who should have them, the bondholders, and taking them for himself and his Union supporters. Can anything be more brazen than this? Only time will tell!

THERE ARE LIARS, DAMN LIARS AND THEN YOU HAVE POLLSTERS!!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Reagan was correct when he said "if it stops moving, subsidize it". GM and Chrysler were each subsidized and now they are owned by the Government. Obama and his mouthpiece Gibbs say they are owned by the "public'-us taxpayers. But has anyone asked you what you think the deal should be with the bloated UAW? Or have they asked, or even taken a poll to determine if the American public will by enough of the "pregnant roller skates" that GM is going to make?

Of course they have not and will not, because they do not want to know what you and I want. They(Obama and his merry band of thieves) think the average American is too uneducated, and generally ignorant of what is good for us, to make trhat decision. So they will make it and many more decisions for us!

Despite the fact that any one who has two brain cells to rub together realizes that Obama is rapidly taking control of one industry after another. First the Banks, then the Mortgage Houses and now Detroit auto makers Chrysler and General Motors. Waiting in the wing is the power grab of the best Medical system of the World.
Despite this march toward Socialism the polls still show the President has an over 60% approval rating.

I have live long enough to realize that pollsters cannot be trusted. Take the Truman, Dewy election. The polls showed Dewey winning by a landslide even up to the day before the election. Truman won!

Kerry vs Bush had Kerry as a sure winner. Bush won! I could go on, but statistics would only cause you to stop reading this blog.

Suffice it to say that their is a disconnect in the polls that show Obama with a favorable rating as high as 65% when the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of American voters say the nation is moving down the wrong track. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say America is heading in the right direction.

Both numbers are largely unchanged from a week ago. But the number of voters who say the country is heading in the right direction is up 10 points from the week Barack Obama was inaugurated as president in January and up 16 points from the first week in November when he was elected.

The percentage of women who see the country as moving in the right direction slipped from 41% last week to 38% this week. Fifty-four percent (54%) of women say the country is heading down the wrong track. Men remained more steady this week, with 36%who responded right direction and 59% who said wrong track. Among African-American voters, who have been the most optimistic demographic since the election, 61% say America is heading in the right direction while 33% say the opposite. Last week, black voters answered right direction by a 70% to 18% margin. White voters showed no change this week, with a third (33%) saying the country is headed in the right direction and 61% who believe the opposite. Twenty-nine percent (29%) of all other voters answered right direction this week, down from 34% in the last poll, while 62% said wrong track. Source: Heritage Foundation

We all realize that Obama has the Main Stream Media in his pocket, they might as well be called his propaganda arm!
The way his "people" strong armed the bond holders in the Chrysler "deal" is illustrated of the power of persuasion that the President has in his control.
But to be more direct to the point of poll results. It all depends on the sample group. A poll taken in a minority area will get results far different than one taken in a suburb of Salt Lake City. Numbers can be obtained that are predetermined before the poll is taken, and there is just false reporting.

It is all conjecture on my part, but I have the feeling that many people who voted for Obama have buyers remorse when they see that his promise of taxing only the so called RICH has turned out to be an untruth! And the taxes will keep on coming to pay for his grand march toward CHANGE!

THE HYPOCRISY OF CO2 EMISSIONS TREATY

The taxpayers have been paying for Congressional "junkets" for decades. The Hypocrisy of these foreign trips is that they are said to be fact finding missions, when in reality most are disguised vacations for both Republicans and Democrats depending which party holds power at the time.
While the president was spending more than a million dollars of the taxpayers money flying Air force one and two other jumbo jets to Las Vegas and Los Angeles to raise money for Harry Reid and the Democrat party. "QUEEN" Pelosi was in Communist China talking up the emissions control line.
What she thinks she will accomplish talking to groups of school children as she did is purely speculative. I think she just wanted to visit China and see the sites, and is using the excuse that she is promoting the idea of reducing carbon emissions.

The Associated Press is reporting that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged Beijing on Thursday to cooperate on climate change, calling a safe environment a basic human right.

Only she was not talking to the Country's leaders. She was speaking at Beijing elite Tsinghua University, Pelosi continued the theme of her five-day China trip,that combating global warming represented a new challenge that both governments must tackle jointly.
Students have very little to say about government decisions as Tienanmen Square proved!

"We are all in this together," Pelosi told an audience of about 200 students and faculty who applauded enthusiastically throughout the 45-minute session. "The impact of climate change is a tremendous risk to the security and well-being of our countries." She might as well been talking to Kindergarten children, because she must know that China has been exempt from any Carbon emission regulations that are mandated by the International body that will draw up a new Carbon Emission treaty in Germany this summer!

CNS NEWS is reporting that the new United Nation's global warming treaty is expected to give some of the world's worst polluters--such as the communist People's Republic of China--and some of the world's wealthiest nations--such as the oil-rich United Arab Emirates--a license to continue freely pumping carbon into the atmosphere while restricting the emissions of the United States.

The United States will be joining other countries next month in attending “climate talks” in Bonn, Germany, in preparation for the United Nations' Conference of the Parties 15 (COP15) climate-change summit that will take place in Copenhagen in December. At the meeting, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will oversee the drafting of an international treaty that will allow some of the world’s wealthiest nations and worst polluters to avoid the legally binding regulations on carbon emissions and greenhouse gases expected in the document. Countries categorized by the United Nations as Annex 1 Parties, including the United States and much of the industrialized world, are considered developed nations that will not be harmed by controlling carbon emissions.

Non-annex I Parties, on the other hand, are countries considered to be “developing” or have “economies in transition.” These Non-annex 1 countries such as China – which emits the most carbon emissions of any country in the world, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Top 20 Countries for CO2 Emissions--will be able “sign on” to the treaty but will not be legally bound by it. And some of the world’s wealthiest nations, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are on the Non-annex 1 Parties list.

So while Communist China is developing the capacity to drill for crude oil in Africa, and any other country that will allow them. We are trying to substitute a proven method of producing the energy that makes the wheels of the Free Enterprise system work, oil. Billions are being spent to develop wind turbines, solar panels and the poor substitute for gasoline, ethanol,to heat and air condition our homes and run the transportation industry. This tact will slowly but surely make the USA a third rate country. If Americans do not wake up to the canard that is being perpetrated upon us by those who stand to get rich on Carbon Credits, and those who want to see this country fail so Godless Communism can take the reigns of power.This Country will run out of oil and the wind turbines and solar power cannot run our airplanes much less run what industry we still have. We have not built a refinery for over 30 years, and the "tree huggers" have convinced Congress to deny drilling off shore, so get ready for an expensive winter just to heat your home!

Perhaps the prediction of John Adams is coming to fruition!
"Remember Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a Democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” – John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

IT MAY BE TIME TO ACT NOT TALK!!

THE REPORT FROM SOUTH Korea, THAT NORTH Korea HAS THREATENED TO CONSIDER ANY INTRUSION INTO IT'S "SEA SPACE", AS AN ACT OF WAR!
Should be a wake-up call for president Obama!
This came after they violated the UN negotiated agreement not to produce nuclear weapons. They did it by setting of a nuclear device yesterday and followed with a barrage of five missiles that were intended to intimidate South Korea.North Korea wants to move the "Treaty" Line between North and South Korea further South.

An article by Hyung-Jin Kim includes this quote from North Korean leaders. "North Korea threatened military action Wednesday against U.S. and South Korean warships plying the waters near the Korea's' disputed maritime border, raising the specter of a naval clash just days after the regime's underground nuclear test.
Pyongyang, reacting angrily to Seoul's decision to join an international program to intercept ships suspected of aiding nuclear proliferation, called the move tantamount to a declaration of war.
Now that the South Korean puppets were so ridiculous as to join in the said racket and dare declare a war against compatriots," North Korea is "compelled to take a decisive measure," the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea said in a statement carried by state media.

Seoul's decision comes at a time when "the state of military confrontation is growing acute and there is constant danger of military conflict," the statement warned.And a memo to president Obama from me. Please understand that tyrants like they have in North Korea and Iran do not pay any attention to UN sanctions or care to discuss accommodation with the USA as this quote illustrates.
The current leader Kim Jong-il, the late president Kim Il-sung's son had this to say about UN sanctions.

"It is a laughable delusion for the United States to think that it can get us to kneel with sanctions," it said. "We've been living under U.S. sanctions for decades, but have firmly safeguarded our ideology and system while moving our achievements forward. The U.S. sanctions policy toward North Korea is like striking a rock with a rotten egg."
His "achievements" as he calls them, are nuclear weapons and long range missiles. He has also beefed up his Naval capability with new warships and submarines that threaten our Fleet in the Sea of Japan, or as the Koreans call it,"the Sea of Korea".
There are some 650 vessels in the North Korea Navy including 3 frigates and 23 submarines (total displacement of approx. 107,000 tons).Source:Wikapedia

This type of provocative rhetoric resonates with the "little mad man" of Iran. Who will be emboldened if the Obama administration lets Kim Jong-Il continue to rattle his sabres without some reactive radical measures. Such as freezing the Jong-Il bank accounts and blockading North Korean waters to in coming and out going commercial shipping unless they stop nuclear weapons production.

I do not worry that North Korea will launch a nuclear weapon against the USA or it's ally South Korea, but I do envision the North Koreans selling "nuke" weapons to terrorist states that will use them against US or our allies in the form of "suitcase" bombs that will be much worse than the disaster we sustained on 9/11/01!

CONSERVATIVES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE SHOULD VOTE AGAINST SOTOMAYOR

MSNBC story line this morning was about president Obamas' pick for the Supreme Court . Yesterday Obama announced that he had selected Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Justice Stevens.
The piece began with this direct quote: "President Obama nominated federal judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court yesterday, putting her in line to become the nation's first Hispanic justice and creating a difficult political equation for Republicans as they weigh how aggressively to fight her appointment.

An all-out assault on Sotomayor by Republicans could alienate both Latino and women voters, deepening the GOP's problems after consecutive electoral setbacks".

"Critics targeted her support for affirmative action, with Rush Limbaugh calling her a "reverse racist" in his syndicated radio program, citing a case in which she ruled against a group of white firefighters who claimed discrimination in hiring practices.

White House officials argued that the comments in the speeches were taken out of context, and they said that the firefighters case was an example of Sotomayor accepting established precedent, something they said conservatives should applaud. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, who are on the verge of controlling a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate, warned Republicans of the dangers of pushing too hard against Obama's first court pick.

Judicial precedent: A judgment of a court of law cited as an authority for deciding a similar set of facts; a case which serves as authority for the legal principle embodied in its decision. The common law has developed by broadening down from precedent to precedent".

A judicial precedent is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision making. This is known as stare decisis (to stand upon decisions) and by which precedents are authoritative and binding and must be followed.

In giving judgment in a case, the judge will set out the facts of the case, state the law applicable to the facts and then provide his or her decision. It is only the ratio decidendi (the legal reasoning or ground for the judicial decision) which is binding on later courts under the system of judicial precedent

Judicial precedent is an important source of English law as an original precedent is one which creates and applies a new rule. However, the later decisions, especially of the higher courts, can have a number of effects upon precedents.. In particular, they may be:

* Reversed: where on appeal in the same case the decision is reversed, the initial decision will cease to have any effect
* Overruled: where in a later case a higher court decides that the first case was wrongly decided
* A refusal to follow: this arises where a court, not bound by the decision, cannot overrule it but does not wish to follow it so it simply refuses to follow the earlier decision
* Distinguished: where an earlier case is rejected as authority, either because the material facts differ or because the statement of law in the previous case is too narrow to be properly applied to the new set of facts
* Explained: a judge may seek to interpret an earlier decision before applying it or distinguishing it, thus the effect of the earlier case is varied in the circumstances of the present case. Source: Law Dictionary.com

The Pew Research reported that in the 2008 presidential election 9% of those who voted were identified as Latino. Of this group, Hispanics voted for Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden over Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin by a margin of more than two-to-one in the 2008 presidential election, 67% versus 31%,

Nationwide, the Latino vote was significantly more Democratic this year than in 2004, when President Bush captured an estimated 40% of the Hispanic vote, a modern high for a Republican presidential candidate. So you see the Latino vote is already decided just as is the Union vote--Democrat!!
Obama's 67% share of the Latino vote in the 2008 general election represented a major reversal of fortunes for him since the Democratic primaries, when he lost the Latino vote to Sen. Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly two-to-one4 . No other major demographic voting group in the country swung so heavily to Obama as Latinos did between the primaries and the general election this year. According to the 2008 National Survey of Latinos, conducted in June and July of this year, 75% of Latino registered voters who said they supported Clinton in the primaries switched their support to Obama. Source: Pew Hispanic Center Report

However, Politico reports that 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate, a 2-percentage-point rise in their national turnout. As in past years, black women turned out at a higher rate than black men.Blacks do not necessarily like Hispanics as I experienced when the Cuban exodus brought thousands of Hispanics into South Florida in the 60's and took away all the jobs in hotels and dining establishments that had been held by Blacks!

A stunning 54 percent of young white voters supported Obama, compared with 44 percent who went for McCain, the senator from Arizona. In the past three decades, no Democratic presidential nominee has won more than 45 percent of young whites.
So you can see the effect on the voters who are Hispanic if the Republicans grow a spine and object to Sotomayors confirmation will be negligible in the 2010 election. Latinos with the exception of Miami Cubans have seldom voted Republican, and the new generation of Cubans appears to have already switched to the Democrat side.

What should be the deciding issue in the vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor is will she follow the Constitution. It appears from her own statements that she will not! Obama picked her because he is convinced that she will vote as a minority who believes the Supreme Court can change the Constitution to accommodate those whom she believes the need the law be changed to accommodate their needs, as she did in the case of the reverse discrimination brought by the firemen who were more qualified( by test scores) but passed over for minority fireman that were promoted to satisfy the "PC" and affirmative action leftists. This was a Direct assault on the rule of law as we see Obama doing with his version of bankruptcy with Chrysler and soon GM. The ignoring of the primacy of bond holders to satisfy the UAW whom contributed over $50 million to the election of Democrats in the last election!

AND IF STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE Constitution IS NOT ENOUGH TO ASK OF A NOMINEE TOO THE SUPREME COURT. PERHAPS THIS WILL MOTIVATE Conservatives FROM ALL BUT THE LEFT COAST AND THE EAST to vote against this Liberal.
President Obama during his campaign described “identity politics” as “an enormous distraction,” Sotomayor has at times been blunt in her belief in the profound importance of racial identity.
Judge Sotomayor told a California audience in 2001 that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion” than a “white male” judge. I thought Justice was color blind!

Let’s Not Place Budget-Cutting Solely At The Feet Of Our Military.

President Obama’s 2010 budget amounts to an eye-popping $3.7 trillion, and opens the floodgates to a projected $42 trillion in the next decade. This is the largest domestic-spending increase in history. The interest on the national debt will be $800 billion in 2014 — more than we currently spend on national defense.

Obama is using his sending more troops to Afghanistan to delude the American public that are not members of the "OBAMESSIA" congregation. But the real trouble to come our way is the growing nuclear threat from North Korea(China's puppet) and the rapidly approaching nuclear weapon capability of Iran.

This point is supported by the fact that U.S. Defense Secretary Gates said the momentum in Afghanistan is with the Taliban, who are inflicting heavy US casualties( not reported by the New York Times or Washington Post like when Bush was in the Oval Office) and hold de facto control of swaths of the country. The defense chief has been moving aggressively to salvage the war in Afghanistan, signing off on the deployments of 21,000 American military personnel and recently taking the unprecedented step of firing the four-star general who commanded all US forces there. Mr. Gates, speaking in his cabin on an Air Force plane, said the administration is rapidly running out of time to turn around the war. Source: Wall Street Journal

To defend both our allies in the Middle East and parts of Europe against nuclear missiles launched from Iran, and to keep South Korea safe from North Korean hegemony. We need sophisticated missile defensive weapons. The "star wars" program is a good start toward the goal of protecting ourselves and our allies, but it needs more research and development.

Unless we continue expenditures on anti-missile defense systems we will be a "sitting duck" to those who would rather see our capitols in flames then the way they are today.

But the spendthrift Obama has begun a drive toward pacifism and diplomacy that does not include any money to advance some of the weapons systems that we will need if Iran or especially Korea make aggressive advances.
Obamas' budget does not include any money to continue the F-22 Raptor fighter bomber, designed to be the most advanced and capable fighter jet in the sky.

The Obama budget calls for terminating the F-22 Raptor program after only a dozen or so more are built, and “replacing” them with the more standardized but less capable F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-22 is far and away the most advanced plane ever built. Its combination of stealth technology, maneuverability, and survivability makes it essential to maintaining air superiority, which enables the use of less-capable assets in our inventory. Attacking the enemy and protecting our own troops demands air superiority, and compromising that goal is a mistake.

Also critical to maintaining unquestioned air supremacy in a theater of conflict is the Air Force’s fleet of aerial refueling tankers, which are nearly 50 years old and need to be replaced. The cost of doing so is in the neighborhood of $40 billion, that is less than 0.1 percent of projected federal spending over the next decade.
Critics complain that the F-22 is expensive and superfluous. But the F-35 is the most expensive program in Pentagon history, with a projected cost of nearly $1 trillion. Additionally, the F-35 was not designed to do what the F-22 can do in establishing air superiority in situations that require high levels of stealth, speed, and range. And as any one who understands the history of modern warfare realizes, air superiority is what wins wars. Despite what naysayers say about "boots on the ground". The ability to resupply the ground troops with ammunition and supplies requires air superiority! They are complementary, not interchangeable.


American military superiority in Europe, Asia and the Middle East depends on the ability of the U.S. military to threaten and, if necessary, to use military force to defeat any regional challenge.
It connet let Russia in the ETO and North Korea or Communist China to become super powers or we will be once again living in daily peril from nuclear attack at either coast!
Is the Change Americans want, the return of the "Cold War"?

THE "BRITTS" WISE-UP, WHEN WILL WE?

Obamas' popularity is still high in the USA despite the fact that he has spent more tax payers money than any president in history.
His approval rating is above 60% because people either do not realize what he is doing to the value of our money, or because they still look at him with adoring eyes as one would to a savior.

The 13 trillion dollar debt that he is running up and the resulting tax increases and devaluation of our dollar have not effected the average person as much as it will in year or two, when bread and cereal may cost $4.00 each!
But the British are realizing that Obamas' attempt to collect taxes from Americans who live and work in England will be an expensive for them, and they get nothing for being Obamas' tax collector.

"Andy Thompson of Association of Private Client Investment Managers and Stockbrokers (APCIMS) said: "The cost and administration of the US tax regime is causing UK investment firms to consider disinvesting in US shares on behalf of their clients. This is not right and emphasises that the administration of a tax regime on a global scale without any flexibility damages the very economy it is trying to protect."

One executive at a top UK bank who didn't want to be named for fear of angering the IRS said: "It's just about manageable under the current system - and that's because we're big. The danger to us is suddenly being hauled over the coals by the IRS for a client that hasn't paid proper taxes. The audit costs will soar. We'll have to pay it but I know plenty of smaller players won't."

The British Bankers Association (BBA) and APCIMS had a meeting with European counterparts 10 days ago to discuss the crisis. A delegation is set to meet the US Treasury's Internal Revenue Service on 16th June to demand they drop the reforms." source:Drudge Report

President Obama's proposals are built on the so-called Qualified Intermediary system which was intended to ensure Americans paid the correct tax wherever they were domiciled. Foreign financial institutions that handle American money have to fill in a US tax form on behalf of the client that has to be audited too. In return, the banks receive a QI seal of approval as a qualified intermediary.
But the seal is not legal tender. It sounds strangely similar to president Roosevelt's NRA sign that merchants could put in their window during WWII if they agreed to price controls.

At the same time, Reuters reported that The dollar fell to a 2009 low on Friday as fears intensified that the United States could lose its triple-A rating, while renewed caution about the world economy and banks prompted Asian and European stocks to slip.


Yesterday, the President was interviewed by Steve Scully of C-SPAN, about the status of our economy, and despite the fact hat he has spent more money than the combined cost of all the wars since WWI, he still takes no blame for the deficit spending that he calls "stimulus".

In the interview he was asked about the possibility that the USA could run out of money. The following is a quote from that interview.
"SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?

OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades.

So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off.

So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit".

So unlike this simple minded citizen, our Harvard Law school president refuses to recognize that he cannot spend the Country out of a recession. He implies that he will spend the estimated trillion dollars to bring about socialized medicine, on top of his massive "spendulus" program.
This will assuredly sink our generation and future generations further into debt, that will result in dollar devaluation and massive inflation to satisfy his quest to Socialize our Country. This is a sign that education doesn't necessarily make one smarter! Or was his intention to wreck the U.S. economy and the free enterprise system all the while?

WHEN WILL SOMONE IN THE MEDIA GROW A SPINE?

A wise signer of the Constitution once said: "A strong an stable rule of law and governance, and a history of paying our debts. Fosters growth and expansion which keeps foreign and domestic investors investing their money in the public coffers".

Unfortunately, the monetary base of this once great country has increased by 13 times under the last year of the Bush administration, but exponentially since Obama took office. This is the highest in our history, and I predict that prime interest rates will become double digit in three to four years. Reminiscent of the Carter years, only worse.Yet there is no clarion cry, not even a peep from the Obama adoring media!

No where can you read or see any warning news that the Obama administration is spending to much money that is the result not of tax income, but by keeping the Treasury printing presses on full bore.

Not only is Obama spending billions that are supposed to be for shovel ready projects, but are in reality to pay back groups that put him in the Oval Office.
His handling of the Chrysler debacle is an example of Obama's pragmatic approach to the rule of law and our Constitution.

Congress gave President Bush the Sarbanes/Oxley law in 2002. This law has A provision called Section 363(b) that relates to the bankruptcy laws, that has allowed Obama to make an end run around Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws. He used this to rig the Chrysler "fast track" bankruptcy IN favor of the auto workers union despite the fact that normal chapter 11 dictates that secured lenders are entitled to first consideration.
Instead Obama gave the unsecured creditors, the union,!0 billion dollars and almost half of the new Chrysler stock.
This violation of a fundamental principle of our Constitutional government gives less than a quarter of a dollar on a dollar invested by teachers' pension funds and other retirement funds. The UAW, while it has made some sacrifices in wages and benefits, will be given more than half ownership of the firm(New Chrysler) - a far larger share than it deserves under Chapter 11.

This lawness began with "The Emergency Economic stabilization Act". This law gave the constitutional powers reserved to the legislative branch to the executive branch. This resultED in TARP, and the avalanche that followed that effectively became a "slush fund" to pay off Obama's friends and allies!

This type of bankruptcy tramples on the constitutional provisions that have governed bankruptcy for decades, and will have a devastating effect on our economy if allowed by Congress, that can stop it, because this "new" bankruptcy deprecates the investor who would buy stocks and bonds normally. But if it is possible to give superior rights to unions or other unsecured participants. What will be the incentive to invest in companies? The lending and capital investment all across our economy will be adversely affected if the Congress allows Obama to strike down contractual rights!

And it is not over by any means. The Gm deadline is June 1st. They cannot possibly make the drastic changes to their administrative and union problems in a few days. I believe they will be handled by the Obama administration the same way Chrysler was . If Congress doesn't stop the trampling of Constitutional rights of Contracts. The Federal government will first take over GM, and then a rapid bankruptcy with secured investors getting 28 cents on a dollar invested, and the UAW will receive $10 billion of the tax payers money besides getting up to 39% OF THE "New GM" for their unsecured 20 billion. Source for information: The Heritage Foundation

Readers remember that "unbridled discretion, brings unbridled power" and we are well on our way to tyranny!

IT APPEARS THE CHRYSLER/FIAT DEAL WILL FAIL

The intrigue surrounding the "rapid" bankruptcy of Chrysler and the pending financial disaster of General Motors on June 1st appears to be never ending.
A story you will not read in the New York Times or see on the main scream media is the progress in Germany and Italy between Opel, Fiat and the German government regarding both Chrysler and GM.

Though the decision on who gets Opel will be up to GM, or the U.S. goverment, the German government will also play a big role because it would likely have to supply billions of euros in financing guarantees to the eventual buyer.

This has made the Opel tender a political hot potato as the German chancellor is just four months away from a general election and must decide how to save jobs and tax-payers money without losing votes.

Fiat chief executive Sergio Marchionne is looking to create the world's second biggest carmaker, after Japan's Toyota, by adding the assets of Opel and Vauxhall to Fiat's own brands and those of US carmaker Chrysler.This information will not sit well with our government and the Chrysler union.

German media reports, however, said the Fiat plan would involve total job cuts of about 18,000, compared to about 10,000 each for Magna and RHJ. Fiat is also seeking some 7 billion euros ($9.7 billion) in government support, about 2 billion more than Magna and RHJ require.
My question is will Obama offer the same amount of money or more if Fiat goes through with the deal?

Addressing growing media speculation, German government spokesman Thomas Steg called for calm, saying that any premature speculation on a political comment on Opel could affect a government negotiating position. He said the government would be looking at three key factors: a deal for carmaker Opel that secures the most jobs and sites in Germany and does not burden taxpayers.

Steg went on to say that until the government had met with industry experts and the federal state representatives no preference could be drawn.

Steg also reiterated that the primary decision lay with the GM/US, which still has to announce whether it is selling GM Europe, thus offering up Opel( a company that is part pf GM) for tender.

The US government has given GM until June 1 to restructure its operations and prove it can be viable without state aid, or face probable bankruptcy.That deadline is fast approaching!

Marchionne said we want to build a real European car company that will achieve worldwide success. We want to combine Fiat, Opel and Chrysler. If we achieve this we will be the second biggest car company behind Toyota and it will provide jobs not just in Germany, but around the world.
I wonder how this will sit with the Union at the new Chrysler if the deal does go through? And where is the U.S.news on the potential deal between Gm and Fiat for Opel?