The Agenda

November 15, 2009

Today, as I did on Nov 4, 2008, I literally sobbed in fear and anguish for the future of my country.

With Eric Holder’s treasonous decision to bring KSM to NYC for a civilian trial, no doubt at the behest of his boss, the Traitor-in-Chief, and with the arbitrary decision to dismiss Orly Taitz’ case in California at the end of last month, the agenda becomes crystal clear – we are helpless to stop the onslaught of the overturning of our government and our way of life by Islam and its sympathizers who have infiltrated our government and our judicial system. There is no longer any justice, and the terrorists will not only go free, they will be turned loose on our soil.

Consider:
– Cases against Barack Obama, while still a “Senator”, arbitrarily dismissed for lack of “standing”, and the attornies of record sanctioned.
– Cases against Barack Obama that reached the Supreme Court mysteriously removed from the docket and court documents destroyed by a clerk within the Court.
- Cases against Barack Obama tentatively scheduled for trial and suddenly dismissed after the judge’s office hires a former associate of one of the law firms representing Obama.
- Cases against Barack Obama to which AG Holder will not even file responses required by the court.
- A radical Islamist officer in the US Army is put in a position where he could sabotage the troops’ mission, the Army is told to ignore the danger signals, and Congress is ordered to sit back and let Holder’s bunch handle it.

We were complacent as a country, despite what happened in Germany in the Nineteen-Thirties, despite witnessing how South and Central American countries have been hijacked by vicious dictators. We were smug, and said it could never happen here. The millions who swallowed Obama’s lies voted him into office without vetting him in the ways that patriotic lawyers have been struggling to compel the courts to order; his appointments of radical and traitorous associates to high-level positions of authority have been either rubber stamped by the Senate or have been unConstitutional and unaccountable usurpations of executive power. Everywhere we turn our Constitution is being trampled, our freedoms are being suppressed; our security is threatened. Laws are being arbitrarily overturned or ignored in order to reward political allies. Our economy has been gutted and handed by virtue of trillion-dollar bread-and-circus legislation to nations with histories of checkered friendship to our country and political ideologies diametrically opposed to our own. 17% of our work force is unemployed, and those who still have jobs know that the arbitrary policies of the White House “czars” can throw them out of work at a moment’s notice. Our sovereignty is being threatened, with the spectre of world government, and transnational law which trumps our Constitution, looming large. The only religion being given protection by the government is Islam.

All of it leads directly back to Barack Obama. He is deliberately setting the stage for revolution, daily throwing more fuel on the fire in order to escalate a situation in which he can declare marshal law and suspend all civil liberties except those which he determines serve his interests, and which will be accorded only to those who bow to him. It is vital to his goals that the American people be fed up and ready for armed revolt by the end of Summer 2010.

The few elected officials who are not in Obama’s hip pocket, or who have not been intimidated into silence and complicity, are focused on the elections in scheduled for November, 2010. I submit that there will be no elections in 2010, or thereafter, unless some of the people surrounding Obama remember that their oaths of office require them to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, not that traitorous SOB in the White House, and act accordingly.

One more prediction: once Obama feels that the Islamist agenda has progressed sufficiently that there is no turning back, he will suddenly announce that he has decided to return to the religion of his childhood. I submit he never left it, nor ever ceased working to accomplish its radical purposes, which by their very nature are treason against the United States.

The Real Test of BHO’s Draw

November 6, 2009

Much has been said in the recent weeks leading up to Tuesday’s elections, and in the three days since, about the diminished clout of Obamamania. Let’s face it – our President is an important person in our government, but the way the Constitution was written really only empowers him to direct the manner in which legislation from Congress is implemented. (Pre-BO, of course – he seems to think he is a law unto himself, and the Constitution a mere inconvenience to be ignored at will).

However, it is well-worn wisdom that a large chunk of the electorate only shows up to exercise its franchise in Presidential elections, as if who it is sending to DC and the state houses is of no consequence. This is a leftover attitude of primitive societal structures that would require the blood of the king if the crops failed, and the members of the electorate who only show up every four years are only too willing to lead the ruler to the slaughter.

Of those quadrennial voters, most are content to just hit the straight-ticket button in the voting booth, regardless of what they are voting for, regardless of an incumbent’s record or a newbie’s positions. Many don’t even bother to show up for the midterms, not knowing or caring that 100% of the House and 33% of the Senate are re-elected every two years.

At the risk of being labeled a raaaaacist, a subset of the quadrennials is that segment of the Afro-centric community whose total consideration when viewing Obama’s qualifications in 2008 was his 50% African heritage. An objective observer could note that 96% of black voters supported Obama last year, including millions of black voters who didn’t even bother to vote in 2004. Last year, they felt they had a real stake in seeing that a black candidate was elected; many would have voted for Rev. Wright had he been on the ticket, for no other reason than race; there is no reason to think that 2012 will see a diminution of that short-sighted tunnel-vision. Given that the majority of the black vote typically goes to the candidate fielded by the Democrats, even Hillary was only expected to garner 80% had she won the nomination. There was nothing in Obama’s resume to justify that additional 16% of the black vote, which no doubt included many who traditionally voted for conservative candidates.

It is that additional 16% that conservative candidates need to recapture, and the way to do that is to hammer home the lost promise of Obamamania; highlight the gross incompetence of this administration in everything from the economy to national defense; point out over and over again the egregious usurpation of power by the executive branch from the other branches and from the private sector; emphasize the proliferation of radical and anti-American czars, appointed without Congressional approval or vetting by DHS; pound the corrupt connections between the White House and ACORN and SEIU, with emphasis on fired Inspectors General who got too close to the truth. Don’t forget to mention the American Apology Tour.

A candidate’s qualifications and record must be more than skin-deep, regardless of your own racial background. If the entire electorate can be brought to recognize in 2012 just how toxic Obama has been for America, so that even the black voters run screaming in the other direction, then and only then can we truly say that we have colorblind elections.

Rein In Our “Prime Minister”

October 20, 2009

Wikipedia, while a less than perfect source for everything, is usually my go-to for initial quick and dirty background on a topic.

Take the concept of a “Prime Minister“. Wiki’s definition is:

“A prime minister is the most senior minister of cabinet in the executive branch of government in a parliamentary system. The position is usually held by, but need not always be held by, a politician. In many systems, the prime minister selects and can dismiss other members of the cabinet, and allocates posts to members within the Government. In most systems, the prime minister is the presiding member and chairman of the cabinet. In a minority of systems, notably in semi-presidential systems of government, a prime minister is the official who is appointed to manage the civil service and execute the directives of the president.”

Hmmm. Well, that certainly sounds like a Chief of Staff.

The article goes on to say:

“In parliamentary systems fashioned after the Westminster system, the prime minister is the presiding and actual head of the government and head of the executive branch. In such systems, the head of state or the head of state’s official representative (i.e the monarch, president [emphasis mine], or governor-general), although officially the head of the executive branch, in fact holds a ceremonial position. The prime minister…..is expected …. to ensure the passage of bills through the legislature. In some monarchies the monarch may also exercise executive powers (known as the royal prerogative) which are constitutionally vested in the crown and can be exercised without the approval of parliament.”

Hmmm, I said again. Sure sounds like the way Rahm Emanuel functions.

Article 2, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, grants to the President the power to appoint such advisors as he deems necessary, under the following conditions:

“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

The current office of White House Chief of Staff was officially named by Eisenhower, having been morphed from the “Assistant to the President”, originally created under the authority granted to the President by the Reorganization Act of 1939 (5 USC Sec 133 (1939) ). I am still digging around and trying to find the original text of this bill, so that I can see in explicit terms why the White House Chief of Staff, a de facto prime minister who wields as much or more power than the President, and who can actually hold the President hostage to his own agenda, refusing to permit access to or from the Oval Office, is exempt from the Senate confirmation process.

In the decision rendered by the US District Court of Appeals in DC on CREW v. Office of Administration (08-5188) in May, 2009, the court reiterates its stubborn policy of disregarding the explicit will and intent of Congress that no office or agency of the government should be above the scrutiny of the public. This intent, as is clear in the language of FOIA as amended in 1974, defines an “agency” as:

“any executive department,military department, Government corporation, Government controlled corporation, or other establishment in the executive branch of the Government (including the Executive Office of the President), or any independent regulatory agency.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(f)(1).1

So all a crook in the White House has to do is to bring someone in as an “advisor”, and he is immune to scrutiny of any kind? So Rahm Emanuel is holding the reins of government, controlling the President’s schedule, granting or denying access, wielding power, sitting in on all policy meetings, making policy, dictating to Congress, specifying what laws will be passed, authorizing billions of dollars in expenditures, engaging in personal vendettas against private persons, including the press, and he is immune? Every other unaccountable czar in the White House answers to him, and it begs the question of just how many of the czars and new agencies in the White House – all immune from scrutiny – have been the results of his machinations. Fifty-three percent of the electorate may have chosen Barack Obama as the President, but zero percent of the electorate okayed Rahm Emanuel to be actually running our country (into the ground, I might add), not even indirectly through the Senate confirmation process. And maybe he’s not the first Chief of Staff to think he’s the one in charge, but I will say, he’s the worst, and he’s carried it the farthest.

Did I miss something? When did we become a monarchy, when did our head of state become a mere figurehead, and when did we authorize a prime minister to run our country?

We don’t even get to have a vote of no-confidence to kick him out, unless we kick out his frontman puppet first.

The Key to All the Corruption

October 17, 2009

As Ways and Means chairman, Mr. Rangel holds one of the premier positions on Capitol Hill for raising money for the party from individuals and groups looking to influence legislation moving through the committee, which writes the tax code and is involved in shaping major policy.

New York Times , Oct 16, 2009.

This single statement proves instructive as to exactly why the corruption in Washington is so deeply entrenched, and why, regardless of which candidate is elected, it persists.

Five hundred thirty-six – counting the President – citizens are elected to represent the interests of the other 325 million of us in the seat of national government. They are not elected to serve their own interests, they are not elected to sell access and preferential treatment to lobbyists, corporations, unions, moguls, or the media. If the New York Times, of all places, admits that this is what the Democratic Party’s elected officials, including the most corrupt member of the US Congress at this time, represent, I think it would behoove us to demand legislation prohibiting this type of pay-to-play. Certainly it is a matter of free speech, as defined by the Supreme Court, to speak with dollars in the form of campaign contributions; equally, it is within our purvue as citizens to require that those persons elected to the public trust are forbidden to listen, by means of soliciting and accepting what amount to de-facto bribes, to this “speech”.

And if the lobbyists, corporations, unions, moguls, or the media want to exercise their free speech, I would suggest they utilize the methods outlined in the First Amendment: free assembly, free press, petitioning the government for redress of grievances, their open mouths. Putting dollars into the equation only invites corruption of those who can be corrupted, and acts as a disincentive to their equally corrupt parent organizations to ever rein them in.

Let’s Make Sure We’re Angry at All the Players

September 27, 2009

There is a justifiable sense of outrage at the White House for sitting on intelligence about the second (of how many) hidden uranium enrichment facility in Iran, as evidenced by Victor Davis Hanson’s column yesterday.

Given that this intelligence was obtained in 2008 before the election, we need to be angry with, and to hold accountable, everyone who was at that time in a position to use it in ways that enhanced world security, instead of letting that false face in Iran gleefully lead everyone a merry dance for a year, including the bozo in the White House.

Naming Names:

George W. Bush, POTUS in 2008

Dick Cheney, VPOTUS in 2008

Senate Intelligence Committees in 2008 and 2009

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives

Joe Biden, Chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2008, VP Candidate in 2008, and current VPOTUS

House Permanent Select Committees on Intelligence in 2008 and 2009

and last, but by no means least:

Barack Hussein Obama, former member of Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, former member of Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information and International Security, former member of Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, former member of Senate Subcommittee on African Affairs, Presidential candidate in 2008, and current POTUS.

There is no excuse for our government to have sat on this, instead of throwing the glaring spotlight of international publicity on it long since.

Time for Pakistan to Wise Up

September 24, 2009

Dictionary.com defines an insurgent as someone who “rises in forcible opposition to lawful authority, esp. a person who engages in armed resistance to a government or to the execution of its laws”.

Bearing that in mind, is there any question, anywhere, that Pakistan has a relatively stable government, long in place and functioning? Is there any doubt that the Taliban operating in Pakistan is comprised of nothing more than murdering thugs, pipsqueaks whose only validation in life is engendering death, destruction, and turmoil wherever they go? Is there a lack of perception that the Taliban now in Pakistan is the same bunch, grown stronger and more numerous, as those who have made Afghanistan the simmering hellhole it’s been for years, with nothing to recommend it except a reputation for the production of opium and international terrorists?

Why, then, does Pakistan continue to tolerate their mere presence in the mountains that form the border with Afghanistan? Why doesn’t the Pakistan government get together with the Afghanis and just bomb those mountains into rubble? They can do it; that mountain range represents a clear and present danger to the safety and security of both of those nations. What are they waiting for?

What Price Freedom?

September 19, 2009

Those of us who have been scratching our heads trying to figure out why ObysMal threw Europe under the Russian, cum Soviet bus this week got our answer on Thursday: $$$$.

It seems that, in the balance of protecting our allies in Europe and deterring the nutjobs in the Middle East from lobbing missiles, freedom came out on the light side of the scales. Apparently, a $70 million dollar missile fired to take out one that only cost $15 million was seen as a bad tradeoff. So he’s cancelled the star wars, and plans to use water-borne defenses as missile deflectors – the same ones, apparently, that Congress has just cut the funding for, the same ones that are supposed to be watching our back in the Pacific whenever Kim Jong Il decides it’s time to test a new toy.

ObysMal’s analysis has apparently failed to take into account the incalculable cost in human life if one of those inconsequential missiles from Iran detonates. They have apparently failed to factor in how increased knowledge of security from aggressive neighbors contributes to a corresponding freedom to pursue those intangibles like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and wealth. And they most certainly ignored what happens to a country that ignores its treaties and abandons its allies, while exposing their underbellies to attack: that country may find itself isolated and friendless when the enemy trains its sights in the faithless nation’s direction.

Or, perhaps that was factored in after all. It is increasingly apparent that isolated, friendless, and alone, except for the goodwill of the likes of Chavez, Putin, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, Castro, Zelaya, et al, is exactly where he wants us to be. The better to set Obama up for life.

I would sooner trust a snake.

What is amazing about all of this is the silence of Vice-President Biden, whose knowledge of the shifts of foreign policy tides and the capabilities of the Communist dictators whose asses ObysMal is kissing was generally on target while he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. What is amazing is that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not involved in this latest boneheaded decision, yet has been dispatched to Poland to attempt to do damage control – and been snubbed for her trouble. What is amazing is that ObysMal is systematically making deals, apologies, and concessions all over the world, embracing our enemies, abandoning our allies, and eviscerating our treaties, and Congress sits silently by. He is directly exposing us to danger and destroying our ability to defend ourselves from our enemies.

It’s about time that our Senators and Representatives call this SOB out for exactly what he is: a traitor who gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States of America, the United States Constitution, and the citizens of the United States. If they can’t do it in the hallowed halls of Congress, then let them do it in public, singly or, if they worry about the MSM attacks, en masse.

Unlike Congress, I am not constrained from calling him out – he hasn’t yet succeeded in taking the First Amendment away from me. Civility be damned.

So Much for the Moral High Ground

August 23, 2009

The LA Times yesterday contained a story of the Obama administration’s first rendition – the extra-legal practice of removing terrorists and other high-profile perps to a foreign country for detention and prosecution. This case involves, not a terrorist, or an insurgent bent on undermining the democratic process, as you might expect. It involves a Lebanese contractor in Afghanistan accused of the heinous crime of – are you ready? – bribery. Invoicing irregularities. White collar crime. Obama’s morally bankrupt DOJ minions claim they did nothing wrong, even though the man they arrested was allegedly handled in a less than humane fashion, being hooded, threatened, intimidated, deprived of nourishment, etc… All the things Obama, Holder, and Pelosi have been so intent in exposing as having been used by the Bush Administration against suspected terrorists in Gitmo.

The Traitor-in-Chief wants to provide aid and comfort to the enemy by releasing into America the murdering terrorists rounded up in combat who have been instrumental in killing our guys in uniform, as long as he or his tame dogs can blame Bush for their rendition, but thinks nothing of detaining and threatening white collar criminals when it comes to his own people.

It is apparent that taking the moral high ground only applies when criticizing one’s predecessor’s actions. One’s own actions are of course immune to such scrutiny.

Once More, Convenient Timing

August 22, 2009

A week ago, I wrote that I thought it was time for Senator Ted Kennedy to gracefully step down, and then this week, a letter surfaced in the offices of the Massachusetts leaders, purportedly written by Kennedy early in July, which seeks to have the Massachusetts legislature modify a law put in place at Kennedy’s behest in 2004 to require US Senate replacements to be elected, not appointed. In 2004, Kennedy sought to prevent a Republican governor from appointing a replacement – likely from the GOP – if John Kerry won the Presidency; now, supposedly, he wants to ensure that his own seat is filled by a Democratic appointee of a Democratic governor. A more self-serving and transparent ploy coming from Kennedy would be difficult to imagine, and yet, you can imagine him having the chutzpah to do it, which is why it rings true.

What doesn’t ring true is the timing. Did he write it and instruct an aide or a family member to hold it until his condition had so deteriorated that he was no longer functional? Why wait nearly two months to send it, when his apparent concern is the untenable delay an election within five months would mean to his constituents bereft of their representation? Are we expected to believe that as little as eight weeks ago, he was in denial about the prognosis of the fatal disease from which he suffers? If true, this certainly proves my point about compromised judgment due to the progression of his cancer. No, this letter has conveniently surfaced just before Obama is supposed to take his little vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, and I don’t believe that is a coincidence.

Coincidences around Obama are usually planned, and frequently occur just in time to boost some portion of Obama’s agenda.

Consider:

During the summer of 2008, the oil commodities market was being manipulated for no other reason than to send the price of gas soaring, to compromise the public’s already flagging comfort in the economy, and to increase the dissatisfaction with the party in the White House. Who benefited from this? Obama.

In September, just when Obama’s poll numbers were flagging after the Republican Convention, “someone” pulled billions out of the stock market in seconds, and caused an already shaky economy to melt down like Chernobyl. Who benefited? Obama.

In October, two weeks before the election, Obama pays a heavily publicized visit to his “ailing” grandmother, who, by a subsequent coincidence of convenient timing, is reported to have died the day before the election. While I hesitate to suggest that there was anything amiss in the timing or manner of her death, I must say it was awfully good of the old girl to pop off so conveniently as to boost the pity vote he could garner from her passing. He was so broken up about it, of course, that he couldn’t take time off to go to her funeral just then, although I note that this week he invoked her “suffering” when it was convenient to his purpose, just as he threw her under the bus last year for being a typical white bigot when it was convenient.

Now his numbers are tanking again, his grandiose scheme for health care reform is dying, and this letter from Kennedy, champion of the health care fight, suddenly surfaces, just before Obama is set to go on vacation to Kennedy’s home state? Sorry, guys, I don’t buy it.

I am not convinced that Ted Kennedy is the author of that letter. Knowing the progress of the disease afflicting him as I do, I have serious doubts that he could have been able as recently as only two months ago to put together a coherent letter of such importance, let alone sign his name to it. I am not even convinced that it actually originated from his office. Obama and company have not hesitated in the past to pass off manufactured documents as the genuine article, their Chicago-style thuggery and crime-ridden tactics are legendary, their contempt for the American public’s intellect and ability to smell a rat is all-too-evident, and his crew have been – coincidentally – crawling all over Martha’s Vineyard and Massachusetts for several weeks in preparation for his vacation. How simple to just inconspicuously drop a letter in any mailbox convenient to the Senator’s vicinity?

As for his successor, this is not England, the Senator’s unconstitutional knighthood notwithstanding, where one’s place in the House of Lords is part of your inheritance. Assuming that Kennedy did write that letter, it is unseemly for him, having held a lifetime seat in the Senate mostly by virtue of his name and relationships to a JFK and RFK, to now in his waning days be attempting to dictate who replaces him and how.

Again, this is all too convenient, given that Obama takes up temporary residence on Martha’s Vineyard this week.
Betcha there’s a bully session scheduled with Obama, the governor and legislature, or maybe an expensive cocktail party to schmooze all the critical players into changing the law – out of pity, of course. It’s pretty unlikely that Obama would hesitate to stoop that low.

The worst thing in the world that can happen with this health care debacle is to have it pass on a pity vote, which can’t be far from Obama’s mind as he plays the Senator’s impending death for all it’s worth. Think how easy it was to get the new slave act (Kennedy Service Act of 2009) passed, just by attaching Kennedy’s name to it and reminding all and sundry of the Senator’s illness and absence. Initially, the Senate was considering a health care bill supposedly drafted in its infancy by Kennedy, and Obama is not hesitating to repeatedly invoke Kennedy’s lifetime commitment to health care issues. No doubt Obama also is calculating how well it will play in the media if he is seen to pay a kingly visit to the dying knight.

Trouble is, Kennedy might even now be so far gone, or so heavily sedated, he probably won’t even know Obama is there. It would serve Obama right.

Time to Say Goodbye

August 15, 2009

Having watched my mother die of glioblastoma multiforme, the brain cancer that afflicts Ted Kennedy, I have been following reports of his health and activity – or lack thereof – in the Senate. I also noted his conspicuous absence from his sister’s funeral. My mother attended Mass until she was no longer able, and attended family events just weeks before her death. Had a close family member died while she was still cognisant and able to leave her bed, she would have insisted on attending that person’s services.

This is a tragic and heartbreaking disease, but it is foolish for anyone to be talking about hope of a “recovery”. These tumors, once they get going, act like Alzheimer’s in fast-forward, and affect cognitive, speech, and motor abilities, and especially, judgment.

Without bringing unnecessary grief to Senator Kennedy’s family, this disease is always fatal, and if it has progressed to the point where Senator Kennedy is no longer able to function, then no one – not his family, not his constituents, and not the nation – is being served by continuing with the pretense that he is just temporarily out on medical leave, and is fulfilling all of his Senate duties from his sickbed. The possibility that at this time he is contributing to any legislation with a national impact gives me great cause for concern as to the quality of his judgment, and even more concern that protective family members or staffers may be the actual authors of work purporting to be his.

Senator Kennedy’s legacy to the nation – whether for good or ill – is secure. The time may have arrived, though, for the “Lion of the Senate” to gracefully retire.