Prove to the USA you are a Natural Born Citizen

It's a petty mindedness that the Oboits of Obama are in full force, They are so upset for  someone else to be on the ticket they need to sign the Petition to put my name on the ballot falsely and with nasty remarks. I guess Obama the truth is not to be told about you and your Muslim Brotherhood friends who want to destroy Israel and the USA. Another four years of the worst President we ever had and that he ranks under Carter, Another Anti Semite. Sign my petition and remove this Muslim Liar Obama at www.leahlax.com.

I am more than qualified to run for President then Obama. I have a REAL Birth Certificate, I had parents both married to each other who actually were born as CITIZENS of the USA  I am a NATURAL BORN CITIZENS where Barack HUSSEIN Obama  the Muslim is not. He cant even produce the real copy of his birth certificate.  I have never heard of anyone who doesn't have the REAL copy of the Birth Certificate. But in Obama's case he has to go to KENYA to get it.

Where is your Birth Certificate Obama

This is the real Barack Obama

This is the real Barack Obama. Notice it is not the same voice nor does it look like the impostor that in office now
.

Listen to the difference in the voice

Real Obama in 1991 look at the shape of his head and the bridge of his nose lips are different in his smile his teeth are bucked , eyes are different and the jaw line is different.
 Not the same man as who is in office.

teeth are bucked as a baby



Different Jaw line different teeth they fronts teeth are large and bucked. K-9 or eye teeth are are separated,

Not the same teeth . These teeth look like false teeth. There is an excess amount of
rippled skin for a man who is suppose to be toned and tall and skinny, Plastic surgery going bad?
Wonder if he used Michael Jackson's plastic surgeons or the ones on Repo the Gentic Opera?

No way is it the same face in these pictures.
Now the voice.




Why would he say Muslim Faith when the faith is Islam. (A Muslim, (Arabic: مسلم‎) also spelled Moslem,^[1] is an adherent of Islam, a monotheistic, Abrahamic religion based on the Quran, which Muslims consider the verbatim word of God as revealed to prophet Muhammad. "Muslim" is the Arabic term for "submitter" (one who submits to God).) A Muslim is a person not a religion.


To add according to this article Obama was 29 in 1991 That's 20 years later. so that would make Obama 49, 1 year younger then he said he is.

Was this Obama's first national TV appearance? Hilarious video emerges of President from 1991

• Obama was first black president of Harvard Law Review
• Presented 'Black History Minute' segment for TBS
• Voice much deeper and monotonous than present-day

By Mark Duell
Last updated at 10:07 PM on 18th November 2011


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063413/Was-Obamas-national-TV-appearance-Hilarious-video-emerges-President-1991.html#ixzz1eAoG3Idt
Two decades ago Barack Obama was elected as the first black president in history - but of the Harvard Law Review, rather than the U.S.
Now a video has emerged of President Obama aged 29 presenting a Black History Minute public service announcement for TBS back in 1991.
It is believed to be his first-ever appearance on national television and his voice sounds much deeper and monotonous compared to the present day.
Scroll up  for video

Early days: A video has emerged of a young President Obama aged 29 presenting a Black History Minute public service announcement for TBS in 1991

President Obama was talking about Charles Hamilton Houston, the black lawyer known for teaching Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.
The two worked on the landmark court ruling Brown v Board of Education, which marked the end of colour segregation in public schools.

More...

• Jet-setting Obama catches up with globe-trotting Hillary Clinton in Bali... and sends his Secretary of State off to Myanmar
• Man charged with trying to assassinate Obama 'believed he was Jesus on mission from God'
• ‘Quitting smoking is hard. I know': President Obama makes it personal as he puts heat on tobacco companies for fighting new labels

‘The fact that I've been elected shows a lot of progress,’ President Obama told the New York Times in 1990 of his election as Review president.
President Obama, who also attended Columbia University, had previously spent four years leading a initiative helping poor black people in Chicago.

Black history: President Obama was talking about Charles Hamilton Houston, the black lawyer known for teaching Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall

He told the New York Times in 1990 that he intended to spend up to three years working in law and then go into politics or community work.

'I'm Barack Obama, remembering Charles Hamilton Houston and celebrating a great moment in our history'
President Barack Obama

‘The distinguished lawyer Charles Hamilton Houston was born in 1895, eight months before the Supreme Court’s "separate but equal" ruling in Plessy vs. Ferguson,’ he said in the video.
‘He spent his career fighting to overturn that decision.’
He finishes the video saying: 'I'm Barack Obama, remembering Charles Hamilton Houston and celebrating a great moment in our history.'
St John's University history student and political enthusiast Andy Kaczynski, 21, of Queens, New York, uploaded the video to YouTube.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063413/Was-Obamas-national-TV-appearance-Hilarious-video-emerges-President-1991.html#ixzz1eAnywM56

America is not a Christian Country as Tea Party's claim it is

The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense founded on the Christian religion

by Jim Walker

Originated: 11 Apr. 1997

Additions: 26 Dec. 2004

Many Religious Right activists have attempted to rewrite history by asserting that the United States government derived from Christian foundations, that our Founding Fathers originally aimed for a Christian nation. This idea simply does not hold to the historical evidence.
Of course many Americans did practice Christianity, but so also did many believe in deistic philosophy. Indeed, most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism and Freemasonry tenets rather than to Christianity.

---

The U.S. Constitution
The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity, Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.
Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the 1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

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. [bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers.
If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church & State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have more churches than Seven-Elevens.
Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems, regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

---

The Declaration of Independence
Many Christian's who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration of Independence as "proof" of a Christian America. The reason appears obvious: the Declaration mentions God. (You may notice that some Christians avoid the Constitution, with its absence of God.)
However, the Declaration of Independence does not represent any law of the United States. It came before the establishment of our lawful government (the Constitution). The Declaration aimed at announcing the separation of America from Great Britain and it listed the various grievances with them. The Declaration includes the words, "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America." The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold today, and we have more than thirteen states.
Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets and believers, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. It represents a historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our government.
Of course the Declaration stands as a great political document. Its author aimed at a future government designed and upheld by people and not based on a superstitious god or religious monarchy. It observed that all men "are created equal" meaning that we all have the natural ability of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men." Please note that the Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity. It bears repeating: "Governments are instituted among men."
The pursuit of happiness does not mean a guarantee of happiness, only that we have the freedom to pursue it. Our Law of the Land incorporates this freedom of pursuit in the Constitution. We can believe or not believe as we wish. We may succeed or fail in our pursuit, but our Constitution (and not the Declaration) protects our unalienable rights in our attempt at happiness.
Moreover, the mentioning of God in the Declaration does not describe the personal God of Christianity. Thomas Jefferson who held deist beliefs, wrote the majority of the Declaration. The Declaration describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." This nature's view of God agrees with deist philosophy and might even appeal to those of pantheistical beliefs, but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.

---

The Treaty of Tripoli





Unlike most governments of the past, the American Founding Fathers set up a government divorced from any religion. Their establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves of its origin; they knew this as a ubiquitous unspoken given. However, as the United States delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of the U.S. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the U.S. goverenment to a foreign nation. Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." [bold text, mine]




Click here to see the actual article 11 of the Treaty

The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington's last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Joel Barlow wrote the original English version of the treaty, including Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.
So here we have a clear admission by the United States in 1797 that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all U.S. Treaties do (see the Constitution, Article VI, Sect.2: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.") [Bold text, mine]
Although the Treaty of Tripoli under agreement only lasted a few years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the American government.

---

Common Law
According to the Constitution's 7th Amendment: "In suits at common law. . . the right of trial by jury shall be preserved; and no fact, tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law."
Here, many Christians believe that common law came from Christian foundations and therefore the Constitution derives from it. They use various quotes from Supreme Court Justices proclaiming that Christianity came as part of the laws of England, and therefore from its common law heritage.
But one of our principle Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, elaborated about the history of common law in his letter to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814:

"For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it."
". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

In the same letter, Jefferson examined how the error spread about Christianity and common law. Jefferson realized that a misinterpretation had occurred with a Latin term by Prisot, "ancien scripture", in reference to common law history. The term meant "ancient scripture" but people had incorrectly interpreted it to mean "Holy Scripture," thus spreading the myth that common law came from the Bible. Jefferson writes:

"And Blackstone repeats, in the words of Sir Matthew Hale, that 'Christianity is part of the laws of England,' citing Ventris and Strange ubi surpa. 4. Blackst. 59. Lord Mansfield qualifies it a little by saying that 'The essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law." In the case of the Chamberlain of London v. Evans, 1767. But he cites no authority, and leaves us at our peril to find out what, in the opinion of the judge, and according to the measure of his foot or his faith, are those essential principles of revealed religion obligatory on us as a part of the common law."

Thus we find this string of authorities, when examined to the beginning, all hanging on the same hook, a perverted expression of Priscot's, or on one another, or nobody."

The Encyclopedia Britannica, also describes the Saxon origin and adds: "The nature of the new common law was at first much influenced by the principles of Roman law, but later it developed more and more along independent lines." Also prominent among the characteristics that derived out of common law include the institution of the jury, and the right to speedy trial.

---

For another article on this subject visit The Early America Review: http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html

---

Note 1: The end of the Constitution records the year of its ratification, "the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." Although, indeed, it uses the word "Lord", it does not refer to Jesus but rather to the dating method. Incredibly, some Christians attempt to use this as justification for a Christian derived Constitution. The term simply conveys a written English form of the Latin, Anno Domini (AD), which means the year of our Lord (no, it does not mean After Death). This scripted form served as a common way of dating in the 1700s. The Constitution also uses many pagan words such as January (from the two-headed Roman god, Janus), and Sunday (from the word Sunne, which refers to the Saxon Sun god). Can you imagine the ludicrous position of someone trying to argue for the justification of a pagan god based Constitution? The same goes to any Christian who attempts to use a dating convention as an argument against the Constitution's secular nature, and can only paint himself as naive, or worse, as dishonest and deceiving. (For a satire on using calendar words to support pagan Gods, see The United States: A Country founded on paganism.)

---

Sources (click on an underlined book title if you wish to obtain it):
Robert Boston, "Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Separation of Church & State, "Prometheus Books, 1993, pp. 78-79
Morton Borden, "Jews, Turks and Infidels," Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1984)
Charles I. Bevans, "Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America 1776-1949," Vol. II, [ICCN 70600742 // x763]
Merrill D. Peterson, "Thomas Jefferson Writings," The Library of America, 1984
Hunter Miller, ed., "Treaties and other International Acts of the United States of America," Vol. 2, Documents 1-40: 1776-1818, United States Government Printing Office, Washington: 1931
Paul F. Boller, Jr., "George Washington & Religion," Southern Methodist University Press: Dallas, 1963, pp. 87-88
George Seldes, "The Great Quotations," Pocket Books, New York, 1967, p. 145
James Woodress, "A Yankee's Odyssey, the Life of Joel Barlow," J.P. Lippincott Co., 1958

Encyclopedia sources:
Common law: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 6, "William Benton, Publisher, 1969
Declaration of Independence: MicroSoft Encarta 1996 Encyclopedia, MicroSoft Corp., Funk & Wagnalls Corporation.
Internet sites:
By Ed & Michael Buckner: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_buckner/quotations.html
The Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians: http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
Treaty of Tripoli from the American State Papers, Senate, 5th Congress, 1st Session Foreign Relations: Volume 2, Page 18, Page 19

---

Audio file:
Monica Victor (monicavictor82@gmail.com) made an audio file of the above article for people who have visual impairments or for those who prefer to listen through their mp3 players rather than read. To download or to listen to the audio file, click here.

Hey buddy can you spare $15 Trillion to give to Obama and his spending?

Hey buddy can you spare  $15 Trillion to give to Obama and his spending?After  all it's only for a few months and I'll be glad to pay you back in hamburgers. 

Hogwash... Remove Obama now in the Primary Vote for Leah Lax visit her website and sign her petition at WWW.LeahLax.com If you can donate to her campaign 

GOP blasts president as debt reaches $15T

By Erik Wasson - 11/16/11 03:54 PM ET

The national debt surpassed $15 trillion for the first time on Wednesday, according to the Treasury Department, and Republicans are seizing on the occasion to pin the blame on President Obama.

“America has crossed an unthinkable threshold: our national debt now exceeds $15 trillion dollars. That’s more than $48,000 per citizen," Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus said. “In 2009, President Obama promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Instead, he further accelerated its growth, producing three years of record deficits."

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) pointed out that $4.4 trillion in debt had been added since Obama took office.

"Our skyrocketing debt burden is not just bad luck; it is the predictable outcome of President Obama’s policies," Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said.

While Republicans point out that Obama added $800 billion to the debt through his 2009 stimulus package, Democrats say the best way to solve the budget problem is to let the Bush-era tax rates expire. They also note that Obama inherited a recession when he came into office and that the recession lowered incoming tax revenue.

Do you believe in Magic? I don't

Do you believe in Magic? I don't . I don't believe that this man who happens to be a Latino shot at the White House without the White House meaning Obama setting this up for a "I got shot at Pitty vote". And what gives it away everyone knows Obama and his Obamaette Miss Piggy Michelle is on another vacation. Maybe when he spoke about Transparency he was talking about this or this is a plot for gun control to strip the American people of owning guns and remove the 2nd amendment

As passed by the Congress:

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

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Obama will do anything to destroy the Constitution He would go as far as  setting up this shooting. Does he think that the American People are that stupid. He did call us stupid for not voting for him, I must be right out dumb because I didn't vote for him in the Primary! Nor will I call him my President.
 But wait now we are Lazy Stupid Americans, Guess only the Muslims are smart since he surrounds himself with Muslims Czars


Geees on that note.  Vote Obama out in the Primary Elections, Sign Leah Lax's petition on www.LeahLax.com and donate. Help me help the USA and protect the Constitution


Suspect in Shooting Near White House Arrested in Pennsylvania

Published November 16, 2011

| FoxNews.com

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/16/bullet-hit-white-house-window-secret-service-confirms/?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%7C112900#ixzz1dtp8V75u

WASHINGTON – The suspect wanted in connection with a shooting that occurred near the White House has been arrested in Pennsylvania, officials confirm.

The U.S. Secret Service said in a brief statement that Oscar Ortega-Hernandez was found by a Pennsylvania state trooper at a hotel near Indiana, Pa., shortly after noon on Wednesday. He is currently being held by the State Police

The arrest comes as officials continue to investigate the incident, after discovering bullets at or near the White House.

According to a Secret Service statement earlier Wednesday, law enforcement found one bullet that smashed a window at the White House before being stopped by a second layer of "ballistic glass." Another round was found outside the White House. The Secret Service said the damage "has not been conclusively connected" to the shooting.

"An assessment of the exterior of the White House is ongoing," the Secret Service said.

Fox News has learned that the FBI joined the investigation on Tuesday at the request of the Secret Service and U.S. Park Police. The FBI has extensive expertise in evidence gathering, which could explain why the agency was called in to assist.

Law enforcement for days had been searching for the suspect, 21-year-old Ortega-Hernandez. The suspect has a record of arrests in Idaho, Utah and Texas, according to MyFoxDC, and reportedly is believed to be mentally ill.

Park Police originally obtained an arrest warrant for Ortega-Hernandez after discovering an AK-47-style rifle in an abandoned car Friday night. The car was found after Secret Service officers heard shots being fired between two vehicles about a half-mile from the White House.

U.S. Park Police spokesman Sgt. David Schlosser said Sunday that officers had obtained an arrest warrant for the suspect on a felony charge of carrying a dangerous weapon, in connection with the incident.

President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama were in California at the time of the shooting, before traveling to Hawaii for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum.

News of the bullets' discovery broke shortly after the president landed in Australia for a brief 27-hour visit.

Fox News' Mike Levine and NewsCore contributed to this report.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/16/bullet-hit-white-house-window-secret-service-confirms/?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%7C112900#ixzz1dtm7jK2E

Obama BC News

Barack Obama's Economic Plan Revealed

 

Investigative video revealing Barack Obama's economic plan!!

Would someone please give Obama a Laxative to make him GO ----- Away

From PJ Media

Nation Suffering from Obama-Induced Irregularity

Very little is as it should be in Obamaland.

September 5, 2011 - 12:13 am - by Tom Blumer

Thirty-one months after Barack Obama’s inauguration, the nation has come down with a serious case of irregularity. It reveals itself in so many areas it’s impossible to enumerate them all. The three most visible manifestations of irregularity can be seen in the economy, energy, and in the administration’s exercise of bureaucratic power.
There’s nothing regular about how the economy has performed during the past three years. That’s when what I have been calling the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) economy, more recently tagged the fear-based economy, began. Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and Harry Reid promised to fundamentally change how the economy operated. To a large extent, they’ve gotten their way, and it’s not very likely that an opposition party controlling only one-half of one branch of government will be able to do much about it in the next seventeen months.
What a horrific change it has been. Until now, as Investor’s Business Daily graphically demonstrated in an August 26 editorial, every recovery since World War II has seen the economy bounce back to where it was before the preceding downturn in one, two, or at most three quarters. Under Obamanomics, we’re currently at eight quarters and counting since the most recent recession ended — and we’re still not there, regardless of whether you believe it began in December 2007, as the National Bureau of Economic Research contends, or in July 2008, as the normal definition of the word would dictate.
Here it is, graphically per IBD, and numerically per yours truly:


The numbers are even worse if you look at what has happened to the private sector, which has shrunk by over 1% since the end of 2007. Warren Buffett, who paradoxically insists that he’s not taxed enough while his firm keeps fighting with the IRS over tax claims going back to 2002, has stated that as far as he’s concerned, the economy won’t fully recover until “real per capita GDP gets back up to where it was before.” By the Buffett benchmark, we’re still in hole by over 3%.

If second-quarter growth stays at an annualized 1.0% in its final revision, and if the third quarter is at or above 0.5%, it will have taken nine quarters for the economy to officially recover, three times longer than any other post-World War II recovery. Keep in mind that those are two very big ifs. Many prognosticators believe that second-quarter growth will take another hit in the government’s late-September revision. Others, including 2001 Nobel Prize winner Michael Spence and lefty Robert Reich, have recently adjusted their odds that we’re either already or about to be in a double-dip recession to 50-50. Pimco’s Bill Gross says that the double-dip odds are “better than 50-50.” Clearly, anything beyond the mildest downturn will push the economy further behind what by historical standards is already an ancient original line of scrimmage.
Keynesian deficit spending in overdrive, while clearly a major contributor to the current malaise, doesn’t deserve all of the blame. The Obama administration’s abuse of Keynes’s theories in its stimulus plan’s energy “investments,” as well as its overall irregular energy policy, deserves dishonorable mention.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act directed billions towards solar energy companies and solar projects. During the first five months of 2009, before it could have been influenced by stimulus dollars, solar accounted for 0.132% of all U.S. energy production. Through May of this year, that percentage jumped to, uh, well, 0.145%. That may be the high-water mark. Solar companies are either going bankrupt or getting bought at fire-sale prices. A significant percentage of production is moving to China and elsewhere overseas. Thousands of U.S. jobs have been lost.

Meanwhile, the administration’s clear opposition to meaningfully increasing fossil-fuel production has never been more clear. Rather than speed up its absurdly slow approvals of deepwater drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico — down from a monthly historical average of 5.8 to its current 1.7, at a cost of thousands of jobs — Obama decided to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Gas prices still went up. Only as the prospects of his reelection have begun to seriously diminish has Obama moved to appear more fossil fuel-friendly. But, conveniently enough, the administration’s most visible positive move thus far, the State Department’s conclusion that the 1,700-mile TransCanada pipeline won’t harm the environment, will have no immediate effect, and can be reversed later during other regulatory processes if he is reelected.
Never let it be said that the administration is against all pipelines. According to a recent compilation of related statistics by the National Center for Policy Analysis, “The Federal Register notes that more than 4,200 regulations are in the pipeline.” The aggressiveness and innate hostility of Team Obama’s highly irregular regulatory regime is unprecedented in postwar American history.
According to the Heritage Foundation, ObamaCare alone has added over 6,500 pages to the Federal Register. The administration recently trumpeted how it will reduce regulatory costs by $10 billion over five years. Big deal. That $2 billion per year average is only 0.11% of the estimated cost of regulatory compliance to consumers and businesses of $1.75 trillion in 2009 alone. Heaven knows how much higher the annual cost is now. According to Wyoming Senator John Barrasso, the administration largely undid most of its alleged improvement in July alone, as it “proposed over $9.5 billion in new regulatory costs.”
The relatively firm dollar amounts cited don’t include the difficult-to-quantify costs of regulatory uncertainty. One thing which is certain is that these are also going up. Just ask Boeing, Gibson Guitar, the health insurance companies intimidated into silence, and other businesses affected by the federal government’s heavy regulatory hand.
Besides obviously anemic economic growth, the most visible manifestation of uncertainty’s impact can be seen in the government’s two different sets of job statistics, as seen below:

The more inclusive Household Survey, based on phone calls to homes, shows that the economy had almost 700,000 fewer people working in July 2011 than were working twenty-five months earlier when the recession ended in June 2009. But the Establishment Survey, based on contacts with employers, shows that almost 700,000 more Americans were working for private and government employers. The overall effect is that there are almost 1.4 million fewer Americans who are either working on their own or working at entities the Establishment Survey is unable to find or estimate. About the only way to interpret this anomaly is that, on a net basis, many Americans who might in more regular times have considered starting a business simply aren’t doing it. The engine of future economic growth isn’t engaging.
The danger is that we as a nation may come to accept our administration-induced chronic irregularity as the way things will be indefinitely, or as what Obama cheerleaders in the establishment press try to tell us is “the new normal.” If we do, we won’t recognize our country in several years — which is why the irregularity must be stopped in seventeen months.

Michael Coren - The Arena

Michael Coren - The Arena - Mark Steyn & Ann Coulter 




We go High Def for the inaugural edition of The Arena with Michael Coren (aired August 30, 2011).

Guests:

Mark Steyn 5:00
Ann Coulter 18:10
Tarek Fatah 26:00
Juan Williams 35:00

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to U.S. President Barack Obama: Your Words Are Worthless

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to U.S. President Barack Obama: Your Words Are Worthless

Following are excerpts from an interview with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, which aired on Syria TV on August 21, 211.

"Reforms, as Far as All These Western Colonialist Countries are Concerned… Mean that You Give Them Everything They Want, Giving Up All Your Rights"

Bashar Al-Assad: "What is reassuring today is not the security situation, which, indeed, seems to be improving. What is reassuring is the fact that the scheme was entirely different: They wanted to topple Syria within a few short weeks. What protected the country was the awareness of the Syrian people. This is what we draw confidence from. Therefore, the escalation of events does not constitute a problem." [...]
Interviewer: "Why did the West respond negatively to these reforms?"
Bashar Al-Assad: "If we consider our past experience with the Western governments, we see that their traditional response to anything you do is: This is not enough. [...]
"They tell you that it is not enough because reform is not really their goal. The truth is that they do not want reforms, and some of them even get upset because they want you to refrain from reforms, so that your country will remain backward and will not develop.
"Reforms, as far as all these Western colonialist countries are concerned – and I'm not talking about the entire West, but only about the colonialist countries – mean that you give them everything they want, giving up all your rights. These are reforms as far as they are concerned: Give up the resistance, give up your rights, defend your enemies – all the things with which we are familiar, when it comes to the colonialist countries of the West.
"I say simply: Not in their wildest dreams – not now and not under different circumstances."
"The consequences of Any Action Against Syria would Exceed by Far what They Could Possibly Bear"
Interviewer: "Recently, Obama, by means of his secretary of state – and he was followed by Britain, France, and Germany – called upon you, loud and clear, to step down. What is your response?"
Bashar Al-Assad: "In several meetings with Syrian citizens in recent days, I was asked this question, but in a different way. They didn't ask me what my response was, but why I didn't respond.
"Sometimes one responds, and sometimes one doesn't. We deal with each case in the appropriate manner. When dealing with a friendly country, we sometimes respond in order to make our position clear, especially if we know that this country adopted a position that runs counter to its convictions, due to certain international circumstances.
"When dealing with non-friendly countries, we sometimes respond in order to convey the message that if they plan to take their policies too far, we are ready to go even further. In other cases, we want to convey the message that their words are worthless, by refraining from responding.
"In the case in question, we chose the latter approach, in order to tell them that their words are worthless.
"But since I am talking to Syria TV, which is very dear to every Syrian citizen, and for the sake of transparency, I can say that if I had wanted to discuss this, I would have simply said that this is not something you say to a president for whom being a president is not the main thing, a president who was brought to power not by the U.S. and the West, but by the Syrian people. This is not something you say to a people that rejects a high commissioner, whoever he may be. [...]
"The consequences of any action against Syria would exceed by far what they could possibly bear. The first reason is the geo-political position of Syria. The second reason is the Syrian capabilities, only some of which they are familiar with, and the impact of which they would not be able to bear.
"So we should draw a distinction between psychological warfare and facts, without underestimating this kind of intimidation. [...]
"The Syrian decision is far more important than any international resolution. This is a matter of principle. End of discussion. Security Council or not – we don't care. [...]
"The countries that make threats are themselves in a mess – militarily, economically, politically, and even socially. They are weak, much weaker than in the past. We did not give in to them six years ago, when they were at the peak of their might, so what, are we supposed to give in today?! Absolutely not." [...]

Steel guard for London Blitz memorial defaced by ‘racist’ ‘Kill the Brits’ vandals

Posted on August 13, 2011 by Eeyore

Somehow I bet the racist CBC would not call the gangs who did this “racist”

From The Daily Mail:

By Chris Hastings
Last updated at 10:14 PM on 13th August 2011
A war memorial to honour civilians killed in the London Blitz has had to have protective 5ft high metal railings built around it after youths scrawled offensive slogans on it including ‘Kill the Brits’.
The elegant modern sculpture of a dove in flight, the traditional sign of peace, sits in the Hermitage Memorial Park, Wapping, overlooking the River Thames in London’s East End and has been subjected to continual graffiti attacks since its unveiling three years ago.

Behind bars: The eye-catching symbol of peace has had to be fenced off after it was vandalised

Residents of the borough of Tower Hamlets, one of the capital’s most ethnically diverse communities, have long blamed local youths for the attacks on the £80,000 memorial, which some think may be racially motivated.
One, who asked not to be named, said that some of the vandalism on the side of the monument facing the river was ‘hostile and horrible’.
‘Anyone walking along the path in front of the park would have noticed that the front of the memorial was covered in Asian names and what appeared to be the tags of Asian gangs,’ the resident said.
‘This part of London is a multi-racial area so in a way you would expect that. You would think it was just the work of local kids.
‘But what passers-by didn’t see was the vandalism and the graffiti on the side facing the river. Some people felt it was clearly racist – and it did include phrases such as “Kill the Brits”.’

‘Anyone walking along the path in front of the park would have noticed that the front of the memorial was covered in Asian names and what appeared to be the tags of Asian gangs.’
Local resident
The vandalism has been particularly upsetting for those who fought a long campaign to establish the park, which is built on the site of a former Second World War bomb shelter. London’s East End was one of the areas worst affected by the Blitz. Hermitage Memorial Park is now a popular attraction and the monument, the work of acclaimed local sculptor Wendy Taylor, is a local landmark.
But the battle against the graffiti thugs has been unrelenting – with the vandals seemingly going out of their way to defile the monument.
On one occasion Ms Taylor, who lives close to the park, had to flee the site after she confronted a number of hostile youths who she felt were disrespecting the sculpture.
And even when wire fencing was erected around the monument last year so a £10,000 clean-up operation could begin, the attacks continued. On one occasion, a group of youths was spotted trying to break through the wire with bolt-cutters.
Ms Taylor, who has now managed to clean the sculpture, installed the new railings in February and so far they have kept the memorial safe.
Frank Muldoon, a member of the Hermitage Environment Group, which raised the funds to pay for the sculpture, said: ‘The railings are not something we wanted but the monument was being defaced so we had to.

Devastation: Rescuers search for survivors after a bombing raid on the East End of London in September 1940

‘I personally don’t think the graffiti was racially motivated. I remember seeing names scrawled on it and the gang tags.
‘It is true they were probably Asian in origin but people should not read too much into that. This area has a lot of Asian young people so in a sense you would expect that.’
Jim Fitzpatrick, the local Labour MP, said: ‘It is sad that we have had to protect the monument in this way but if this is the price we have to pay then so be it.’
A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said: ‘In 2010 we did receive reports of antisocial behaviour and criminal damage occurring in and around the memorial park in Wapping. In particular, the criminal damage appeared to centre around the war memorial within the park.
‘The fence was erected in February and there have been no further reports of criminal damage within the park or directed towards the memorial.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2025756/Steel-guard-London-Blitz-memorial-defaced-racist-Kill-Brits-vandals.html#ixzz1UxDUAdgZ

. Dr. Steve Pieczenik: Top Doctor Confirms Bin Laden Had Marfan Syndrome 3 parts

White House Photo Violates SEALs Families' Wishes

Thursday, 11 Aug 2011 12:23 PM
WASHINGTON — A White House photographer was allowed to take and widely distribute a photo from the ceremony Tuesday for the return of the remains of 30 American troops killed in a weekend helicopter crash in Afghanistan — despite the Pentagon's claim that any public depiction of the scene would violate the wishes of bereaved families.

News media coverage of the ceremony had been banned by the Pentagon over the objections of several news organizations.

Pentagon officials had dictated that no images could be taken because 19 of 30 of the American families of the dead had objected to media coverage of the remains coming off a plane at Dover Air Force Base. In addition, the Pentagon rejected media requests to take photos that showed officials at the ceremony but did not depict caskets.

President Barack Obama attended the ceremony, called a "dignified transfer," for those killed in the worst single loss of the nearly 10-year war. An official White House photo of a saluting Obama was distributed to news media and published widely. It also was posted on the White House website as the "Photo of the Day." It showed Obama and other officials in silhouette and did not depict caskets.

Doug Wilson, head of public affairs at the Pentagon, said the department did not know the White House photographer was present and had no idea a photo of the event was being released until it became public. He said the photographers who routinely travel with the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were not allowed to go to the event, and no official Pentagon photos were taken or released.

The Associated Press did not transmit the White House photo to its customers, in accordance with its policy of refusing government handout images of events it believes the media should have access to.

When asked about the photo Wednesday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said the picture was carefully taken so that it did not show the cases containing remains.

"The White House routinely releases photos taken by the White House photographers in specific circumstances where it would be inappropriate to include members of the media," Carney said. "In this case, the White House released the photo, in the interests of transparency, so that the American people could have as much insight as possible into this historic and sobering event."

Under a Pentagon policy set in 2009, media coverage at the Dover base is allowed only when family members of the war dead approve. In the case of multiple sets of remains returning as a group, photographers take pictures of those approved caskets only and are ushered away before the remains of any troops whose families declined coverage are brought out of the plane.

The Pentagon said that in this case no family could give permission because any given case could contain the remains of troops whose families did not want coverage. The Pentagon said that during initial notification of next of kin, 19 of the 30 families said they did not want media coverage.

The AP and other media organizations argued that images could be taken of the tarmac, plane or dignitaries that would depict the occasion without showing a casket.

The base in Delaware serves as the entry point for all remains of U.S. troops killed overseas.

The Pentagon has said it expects to identify all 38 people who died, 30 U.S. troops and eight Afghans, and will return their remains to families for burial. The Pentagon planned to release the names of all Americans who died on Thursday, after an internal debate over whether doing so might endanger families of the SEAL Team 6 troops. Other members of that same elite special operations team killed Osama bin Laden in May.

Under the Pentagon policy spelled out in March 2009, the option to allow media access is explained to family members when they are notified of their loved one's death, and "primary next of kin will make the family decision regarding media access to dignified transfers at Dover."

The AP has covered every ceremony in which a family has agreed to coverage since the Pentagon lifted a total ban on media coverage at Dover in 2009, a total of 68 ceremonies this year at Dover through June 30.
© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


Read more on Newsmax.com: White House Photo Violates SEALs Families' Wishes
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

why the UK! Liberal thinking

I'm Listening with Leah Lax Presidential Candidate and Co-host Jim Seigfreid at 9 p.m. EST to 10pm EST, British time 2am to 3am Israel time 4am to

Thursday, July 28 · 9:00pm - 10:00pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Location www.blogtalkradio.com/leahlax4-president
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Created By Leah Lax
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More Info I'm Listening with Leah Lax Presidential Candidate and Co-host Jim Seigfreid at 9 p.m. EST to 10pm EST, British time 2am to 3am Israel time 4am to 5am
call-in number: 1 (323) 843-6037,
www.blogtalkradio.com/leah​lax4-president
On I'm Listening
...We will have an open forum
Hobbits ? and 50 lies of Obama? Israel and Muslim love of Obama .
So far the Stalker refuses to come on the show. We believe now she is many people since its style of writings change from one to another.
Liberalism is a disease and I have a stalker on Facebook. Her name is Vickie Lee Wall. She has called me names because I have my own
views and I am running against Obama. I am wondering if this Vickie Lee Wall has the testicular fortitude to call my show but like many other big mouth liberals she won't.
Come on Vickie Lee Wall put your money where your mouth is and face the conservatives. You want to discuss this further call me on the air LIVE Tuesday if you have the guts to do it. Then again you liberals love to take away everyone else's freedom of speech and implement censorship on those who do not agree with you or comply to your theories.

Bloomberg Still Trying To Spin Dismal ObamaNomics News: Durable Goods Orders “Unexpectedly” Fall…

Vote for Leah Lax Challenger of Barack Hussein Obama . Remove him in the Primary election! If you are a Republican NO PROBLEM  Just switch parties and after the Primary switch back. You want him out this is the way.

Bloomberg Still Trying To Spin Dismal ObamaNomics News: Durable Goods Orders “Unexpectedly” Fall…

(Bloomberg) — Orders for U.S. durable goods unexpectedly dropped in June, raising the risk that a slowdown in business investment will weigh on the world’s largest economy in the second half of the year.
Bookings for goods meant to last at least three years fell 2.1 percent after a 1.9 percent gain the prior month that was smaller than last reported, the Commerce Department said today in Washington. Demand for business equipment, including machinery and computers, also dropped.

Other recent Bloomberg “unexpectly” headlines below the fold:

Posted by ZIP on Wednesday, July 27, 2011, at 11:09 pm

call Debbie Wasserman Schultz tell her you are voting for Leah Lax  candidate challenger against Barack Hussein Obama

 

Washington, DC Office

Debbie Wasserman Schultz 118 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-7931
Fax: (202) 226-2052

Pembroke Pines, FL Office

Debbie Wasserman Schultz 10100 Pines Blvd.
Pembroke Pines, FL 33026
Phone: (954) 437-3936
Fax: (954) 437-4776

Aventura, FL Office

Debbie Wasserman Schultz 19200 West Country Club Drive, 3rd Floor

Aventura, FL 33180
Phone: (305) 936-5724
Fax: (305) 932-9664

Top 10 Outrageous Debbie Wasserman Schultz Quotes

by Human Events

04/16/2011 

Any chance that the Democrats would try to run to the political center during the 2012 elections went out the window when Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida was named recently to head the Democratic National Committee (DNC). With a rating of 100% by Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) and a 0% rating from the American Conservative Union (ACU), Wasserman Schultz is a hard-core leftie. These Top 10 Outrageous Debbie Wasserman Schultz Quotes prove the point.

1. Death trap for seniors: When Republican Rep. Paul Ryan unveiled his sensible attempt to control government spending, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz hysterically responded by saying, “We see a clear attempt for the government to back out of its commitment to seniors. As a result, many seniors in America will be forced into poverty, and worse. Some seniors will end up dying because they are forced to put off getting that pain checked out due to huge out-of-pocket costs that will skyrocket for them. … This plan would literally be a death trap for some seniors.”

2. Don’t call it ObamaCare: Wasserman Schultz asked for a rules clarification on the floor of the House of Representatives, saying Republicans’ use of the term ObamaCare was disparaging to the President. “Is it a violation of the House rule wherein members are not permitted to make disparaging references to the President of the United States? In two previous gentlemen’s statements on the amendment, both of them referred to the Affordable Care Act, which is the accurate title of the health care reform law, as ‘ObamaCare.’ That is a disparaging reference to the President of the United States. … It is clearly in violation of House rules against that.”

3. Empathetic judges: Wasserman Schultz wants federal judges who can feel your pain—apparently upholding the Constitution is secondary. “Diversity on the bench is critical. As practitioners, you need judges who ‘get it’! We need judges who understand what discrimination feels like. We need judges who understand what inequality feels like. We need judges who understand the subtleties of unfair treatment and who are willing to call it out when they see it.”

4. Class warfare: Wasserman Schultz clings to the old stereotype that the Democratic Party represents the common man and Republicans only care about the super rich. In actuality, Democrats are beholden to the Hollywood elite, academia, gay activists, feminists, and public employee unions—not exactly the Woody Guthrie crowd. Says Wasserman Schultz: “We must expose the stark difference between the Democrats fighting for the middle class and Republicans fighting for the elite and the ultra-wealthy.”

5. Belittling to include military: When the House Judiciary Committee considered adding an amendment to include attacks against military veterans to hate crimes legislation, Wasserman Schultz said that would be belittling to gays, blacks and Jews: “I represent one of the largest gay populations in the United States of America. One of the largest Jewish populations in the United States of America. Our region has a very large African-American population. It really is belittling of the respect that we should have for these groups to suggest that members of the armed services have somehow systematically been the victims of hate crimes.”

6. Global warming death knell: Wasserman Schultz must have drunk a large portion of global-warming-hysteria Kool-Aid. Here she is predicting catastrophe for Florida due to rising temperatures: “The effects of global warming threaten global environmental upheaval over the coming century. But for South Florida and the Everglades, it could be our death knell if urgent action is not taken.”

7. Demonizes Tea Party: Wasserman Schultz held a small rally last year outside the office of Republican Allen West, denouncing the war hero who was running for the Florida congressional seat he eventually won. Explaining the difference between the expression of her First Amendment rights and Tea Party rallies, she said, “I don’t see any swastikas or any pictures of the President in black face or burned in effigy here. The difference between the way we express our First Amendment rights and the way I’ve seen Tea Party extremists—Republican Tea Party extremists—express their right is dramatically different.”

8. “Mommy, are you going to get shot”: After Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in Arizona, Wasserman Schultz used her daughter’s anxiety to score political points: “After my daughter heard that, you know, Gabby had been shot, the first thing she asked me was, you know, ‘Mommy, are you going to get shot? Does that mean you're going to get shot? … But Mommy, Florida's going to pass an immigration law like Arizona and then people are going to be mad at you.’ ”

9. Union rabble-rouser: Wasserman Schultz, in an address at George Washington University, said that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker deserved the “organizer-of-the-year award” for energizing public-employee unions after trying to rein in the cost to the state of their lucrative pensions and health care benefits. “The sleeping giant has been awakened,” she said, according to Politico.

10. Democrats’ communication problem: Wasserman Schultz echoes President Obama’s assertion that Democratic election woes are due to not communicating all their accomplishments, not that they've pushed unpopular policies. At her first press conference as DNC chairwoman, she said: "This past election was tough. We must do a better job of clearly articulating our accomplishments to the American people."

---

HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom.

You can also follow Human Events on FACEBOOK