“THE SYNTHESIS” 1-5-12 POST PRIMARY EDITION: AFTER SANTORUM’S SURGE, IOWA CROWNS SANTORUM NOMINEE CONTENDER: what the numbers reveal... the Tea Party Chief discusses nomination strategy, general election strategy, and beats the drum for Obama’s impeachment and removal from Office:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hvqsqiTMBDjiderB_K9nsqyqtJ2JMBdB8nxJLV0cHas/edit?pli=1&hl=en_US
2011teaparty Tea Party Chief
How great: Google finally makes sure now that Rick Santorum's last name is not the 1st search but he 4th, that he proves he's 'da sh-t' !!
TAKEN FROM THE 5-8-2011 EDITION: NOPE, NOT BLUNDERER IN CHIEF, “LIAR IN CHIEF”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j_IfOwQbfN839fqcQ9BNcZ7BCCgKjHxgmvpDJnl2rI8/edit?hl=en_US
THE SUCCESS OF THE NEXT PRESIDENT WILL BE TO UNDO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S POLICIES THAT FURTHERED WHAT PEOPLE DETESTED ABOUT GEORGE BUSH JR., SO WITH THIS IN MIND, WE ARE LOOKING FOR A CANDIDATE THAT:
1) SUPPORTS OBAMA’S IMPEACHMENT AS A MEANS OF DEFUNDING PROGRAMS
2) SUPPORTS THE GANG OF 6 AND THE TEA PARTY’S BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CUTS
3) SUPPORTS THE 2012 PATH TO PROSPERITY PASSED BY THE HOUSE
4) SOMEONE WHO REPLACES THE SENATE DEADLOCK WITH SOLUTIONS THAT ACTUALLY WORK
“THE NEW, NOT MITT!” -wsbtv2’s Fred Blankenship reporting
WHAT WORKED FOR SANTORUM, AND WHY DID HE RISE FROM THE GROUND TO THE HEIGHT OF NOMINATION...
JUST “WHO IS” RICK SANTORUM:
WHO: RICK SANTORUM
WHAT: Lawyer, Politician, GOP contender nominee
WHEN: came to the House in 1990, the Senate in 1995, and held that position over 10yrs. as 3rd chair ranking Republican member
HOW: Rick Santorum has a 20 year summary of experience in politics and serving the people, not serving himself
WHY: He wants to restore our Nation
Richard John "Rick" Santorum (born May 10, 1958) is an American lawyer and politician. A member of the Republican Party, he represented the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the U.S. House of Representatives (1991-1995) and the U.S. Senate (1995-2007). As a Senator, Santorum was the chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, making him the third-ranking Senate Republican from 2001 to 2007.
Santorum is considered both a social and fiscal conservative.[2] He is especially well-known for his strong social conservative positions,[3] his role in enacting welfare reform[clarification needed] in 1996,[4] and his views on U.S. foreign policy towards Iran.[5]
Since leaving public office, Santorum has worked as an attorney, served as a Senior Fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., and been a contributor to Fox News Channel.
Santorum is a candidate for the Republican nomination for president of the United States in the2012 election. He formed a presidential exploratory committee on April 13, 2011, and formally announced his candidacy on June 6, 2011.
SANTORUM’S STRATEGY: connect and engage voters
CONSERVATIVE VALUES/SOCIOECONOMIC PLATFORM-also changed his tax plan to include an 8% or 28% tax brackets*
*Santorum was the leading pick by the Tea Party from the summer, subsequent to Bachmann’s migraines and politicizing repeal for votes,
then when Perry entered the race, the Tea Party became torn between them both
SANTORUM’S MESSAGE RESONATED BY SPENDING ONLY $1.65 per vote, and reverberated with voter sentiment that is: anti-Obama, esp. concerning family values, Conservative leadership, and how that plays into government finance
MORE ON RICK SANTORUM:
After running in the bottom tier of candidates for months, Santorum gained significant momentum in the weeks before the Iowa caucuses, and scored a significant second-place finish in the caucuses with just eight votes less than the first-place finisher Mitt Romney.
WHAT THE TEA PARTY LIKES ABOUT RICK SANTORUM:
- born in Virginia, raised in West Virginia
- his ancestry is Italian and Irish
- his family supported the VA
- he went to high school in Illinois
- has a bird name “Rooster”, in likeness the Bird Clan Native Americans
- actually has a degree in Political Science and Master’s in Business
- defended the WWF from anabolic steroid regulations, because wrestling is competition and entertainment
- doesn’t resort to popularism politics: does what is right and supports family values
- supports positions on foreign policy that don’t make us feel compromised or uncomfortable
He pointed to the historical date of a Muslim siege in Europe, Sept. 11, 1683, as evidence that radical Islamists were waging a more than 300-year old crusade with the intent to restore Shia clerics to power in the Western world.
WHY DO I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH RICK SANTORUM?
Newt likes to take credit as Speaker, but Rick Santorum composed and authored the Welfare Reform Act of 1996.
Early life, education, and legal career
Santorum was born in Winchester, Virginia, and raised in Berkeley County, West Virginia, and Butler County, Pennsylvania. He is a son of Aldo Santorum (1923-2011)[6][7] and his wife, Catherine Santorum (née Dughi, born 1918).[7] His father was an Italian immigrant, originally from Riva del Garda, Italy,[6] and his mother is of half-Italian and half-Irish descent.[8][9][10][11]Both of Santorum's parents worked at the Veterans’ Administration (VA) Hospital in Butler, and the family lived on the VA hospital post. His father became licensed as a clinical psychologist in August 1974.[12] He attended schools in the Butler Area School District,[13] where he gained the nickname "Rooster", allegedly because he "always had a few errant hairs on the back of his head that refused to stay down", and he was "dogged and determined like a rooster and never backed down".[14]
Santorum graduated from Carmel High School in Mundelein, Illinois, in 1976,[15] where his father transferred within the VA hospital system. He lists his residency as Penn Hills, Pennsylvania, and maintains a home in Leesburg, Virginia, for his work in Washington, D.C.
Santorum earned a B.A. in political science from the Pennsylvania State University in 1980 and a Master of Business Administration from the University of Pittsburgh in 1981; during his time at Penn State, he joined the Tau Epsilon Phi fraternity. Five years later, Santorum received a law degree from the Dickinson School of Law, was admitted to the Pennsylvania bar, and began practicing in Pittsburgh at the law firm Kirkpatrick & Lockhart (now K&L Gates). In one case he represented the World Wrestling Federation, arguing that professional wrestling should be exempt from federal anabolic steroid regulations because it was not a sport.[16] He met his wife Karen Garver while he was recruiting summer interns for Kirkpatrick & Lockhart (Garver was a law student at the University of Pittsburgh).[14] Santorum left private practice after being elected to the House in 1990.
Early political career
Santorum first became actively involved in politics through volunteering for the late Senator John Heinz, a Republican from Pennsylvania.After earning his Juris Doctor, Santorum became an administrative assistant to Republican state Senator Doyle Corman, working for Corman until 1986. He was director of the Pennsylvanian Senate's local government committee from 1981 to 1984, then director of the Pennsylvanian Senate's Transportation Committee until 1986.
In 1990, at age 32, Santorum was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives to represent Pennsylvania's 18th congressional district, located in the eastern suburbs of Pittsburgh. He scored a significant upset, defeating a seven-term Democratic incumbent Doug Walgren by a 51%-49% margin.[17]Although the 18th District was heavily Democratic, Santorum heavily criticized Walgren for living outside the district for most of the year.[18]
The 18th District was redrawn for the 1992 elections, and the new district had a 3:1 ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans; Santorum still won re-election with 61% of the vote.[19] In Congress, as a member of the Gang of Seven, Santorum was involved in the naming of the Representatives involved in the House banking scandal.
U.S. Senate
Elections
1994
Main article: United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, 1994In 1994 during the 1994 Republican takeover, Santorum was elected to the U.S. Senate, narrowly defeating the incumbent Democrat, Harris Wofford, 49% to 47%. The theme of Santorum's 1994 campaign signs was "Join the Fight!"
2000
Main article: United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, 2000Santorum was re-elected in 2000, defeating U.S. Congressman Ron Klink by a 52%-46% margin.
2006
Main article: Pennsylvania United States Senate election, 2006In 2006, Santorum sought re-election to a third term in the U.S. Senate. His seat was considered among the most vulnerable for Republicans, and he ran unopposed in the Republican primaries.[20] His Democratic opponent was State Treasurer Bob Casey, Jr., the son of popular former governor Robert Casey, Sr., who was well known for his pro-life advocacy despite being a Democrat. Santorum's seat was a prime target of Democratic efforts to gain Senate seats in the 2006 elections. Casey's candidacy was bolstered by his opposition to abortion, negating one of Santorum's key issues.[21]
For most of the campaign, Santorum was behind by 15 points or more in polls. Polls showed that Santorum was closing on Casey during the summer of 2006, but Casey's margin increased back to double-digits in September.[22] A potential Green Party candidate was not allowed ballot access,[23] further hurting Santorum's prospects, as there were no other candidates to siphon away some Casey voters.[24] Some Santorum supporters had also funded the Green Party candidate, raising suspicions that some federal election laws may have been violated to help Santorum.[25]
THE ORIGINAL GREENBACK PARTY:
Greenback Party | |
Founded | 1874 |
Dissolved | 1884 |
Succeeded by | |
Official colors |
The Green Party hit a 90’s revival, then morphed into the Occupy Insurrection Libertarian and Anarchist Movement:
 * | CaucusesThree identity caucuses have achieved representation on the GNC:
Three other caucuses are working toward formal recognition by the GNC: The Blue Greens (workers' caucus) and the Native American caucus also exist, but have not established organizing committees as of yet.[citation needed] |
Chairman | |
Founded | 1991 |
Headquarters | |
International affiliation | |
Official colors | Green |
The Green Party of the United States of America emphasizes environmentalism, non-hierarchicalparticipatory democracy, social justice, respect for diversity, peace and nonviolence. Their "Ten Key Values,"[6] which are described as non-authoritative guiding principles, are as follows:
- Grassroots democracy
- Social justice and equal opportunity
- Ecological wisdom
- Nonviolence
- Decentralization
- Community-based economics
- Feminism and gender equality
- Respect for diversity
- Personal and global responsibility
- Future focus and sustainability
- The Green Party does not accept donations from corporations. Thus, the party's platforms and rhetoric critique any corporate influence and control over government, media, and American society at large.
The Green Party is Libertarian:
Chairman | |
Founded | December 11, 1971 |
Headquarters | 2600 Virginia Avenue NW, Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20037 |
International affiliation | Interlibertarians |
Official colors |
THE MAIN RUB BETWEEN RON PAUL AND RICK SANTORUM, IS THAT RON PAUL IS LIBERTARIAN -- NOT TEA PARTY.
IN FACT, WE HAVE JOKED THAT RON PAUL IS A FLAVOR ALL HIS OWN:
LIBERTARIAN LOCO
THE ‘SAND IN THE DRAWERS’ EFFECT IS THAT MOST TEA PARTY MEMBERS ARE SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES AND FISCAL CONSERVATIVES:
SO THEY DO NOT SEE LIBERAL SOCIAL POLICIES AS THE WAY TO ARRIVE AT BEING A FISCAL CONSERVATIVE.
IN SHORT, LIBERTARIANS WANT ALL THE FREEDOMS AFFORDED BY GOVERNMENT, BUT THEY DON’T WANT TO PAY FOR THEM: THEY FORGET THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO DEFEND THOSE FREEDOMS BY MILITARY MEANS, AND THEY THINK THAT ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS ARE DUE TO A LACK OF DIPLOMACY AND FAILURE TO LEAVE OTHER PEOPLE ALONE.... YAH~ RIGHT.....
LIBERTARIANS ARE JUST LIKE DEMOCRATS: EXCEPT DEMOCRATS WANT YOU TO FUND AN UNSUSTAINABLE-SIZED GOVERNMENT THAT THEY WANT YOU TO HAVE,
SO THEY CAN SPEND THE MONEY ON WHOM AND WHAT THEY PLEASE.
NOW THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THESE POLITICAL UNDERCURRENTS, YOU WILL SEE THE CONFLICTS THAT RICK SANTORUM HAD, AND WHY THESE ATTACKS WERE POLITICAL RATHER THAN ETHICAL VIOLATIONS OR ISSUES OF MORAL TURPITUDE:
- [26] Santorum was mired in controversy over his residence in Virginia, where he and his family stay while the Senate was in session. He admitted that he spent only "maybe a month a year, something like that" at his Pennsylvania residence,[27] which critics argued was hypocritical because Santorum himself had denounced, and defeated, Rep. Doug Walgren-PA for living away from his House district.
- [28] Santorum faced damaging stories that he enrolled five of his children in an online "cyber school" in Pennsylvania, for which the Penn Hills school district was billed $73,000, despite the fact that all the children lived in Virginia.
(Meaning Santorum wanted his children to be privately educated online from home, so he billed it to the public school system where he was paying taxes and having to report his income in Pennsylvania.)
- [29] Santorum aimed a television ad suggesting that his supporters had been under investigation for various crimes. The negative ad backfired, as the The Scranton Times-Tribune found that all but a few of Casey's contributors donated when he was running for other offices, and none were investigated for anything.[30] In fact, two of the persons cited in Santorum's campaign ad actually gave contributions to him in 2006, and one died in 2004.[31] Santorum's campaign countered that those donations were not kept, and had been donated to educational institutions.[32] Santorum faced controversy for statements against "radical feminism", which he claimed had made it "socially affirming to work outside the home" at the expense of child care.
(Santorum questioned his opponent, and the Press, for not really putting his opponent’s cards on the table, and the ad was criticized by his opponent and the Press, though we know how Press is bought nowadays!)
Female voters resented his statements, and in his defense, he said that in a family of two wage earners, the second wage earner made only 25% of the first's wages on average.
(Santorum caught flack from his opponent again, for challenging the status quo beliefs on Islam, its funding mechanisms, and ties to terror, by citing the history of Islam itself. While Ron Paul goes into cardiac arrest here, I am grinning from ear-to-ear, and so is the Tea Party!)
Santorum shifted his campaign theme to the threat of radical Islam and Islamic terrorism in the United States. He gave a speech invoking British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, referring to multiple forces trying to undermine the U.S. in a "gathering storm" (the term Churchill used to describe the causes of World War II).[33] He pointed to the historical date of a Muslim siege in Europe, Sept. 11, 1683, as evidence that radical Islamists were waging a more than 300-year old crusade with the intent to restore Shia clerics to power in the Western world.[34]Casey told the press that Santorum's claims were outrageous, saying, "No one believes terrorists are going to be more likely to attack us, because I defeat Rick Santorum. Does even he believe that?" A heated debate between the candidates occurred on October 11, 2006.[35]
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette described both candidates' performances during the debate as "unstatesmanlike".[35]
In the November election, Santorum lost, with 41% of the vote to Casey's 59%,[36][37] the largest margin of defeat ever for an incumbent Republican Senator in Pennsylvania.[38]
WHILE SANTORUM DID NOT WIN THE ELECTION, HE DID NOT COMPROMISE HIS OWN PERSONAL FAITH, HIS COMMITMENT TO THE PEOPLE, OR MINCE WORDS FOR PUKEY MODERATE VOTERS. IIN OTHER WORDS, HE MAY HAVE LOST A BATTLE, BUT NEVER LOST SIGHT OF THE MISSION OR WINNING THE WAR.
Specter endorsement
Santorum's support among social conservatives in his failed 2006 re-election was eroded by his endorsement for his Senate colleague Arlen Specter over Congressman Pat Toomey in 2004. Many socially and fiscally conservative Republicans considered his endorsement to be a betrayal of their cause.[39][40][41]
I DO AGREE THAT ENDORSING SPECTER WAS NOT A GOOD WAY TO REGAIN TRACTION: SPECTER IGNORED HIS CONSTITUENTS, AND THAT IS MORE OF AN ISSUE WITH THE VOTERS THAN PROTECTING SUPERPAC OR SUPREME COURT APPOINTEES.
However, Santorum says he endorsed Specter to ensure that President George W. Bush's judicial nominees would make it through the Senate, as the Los Angeles Times reports:
"As Santorum tells voters, Specter was then-chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tasked with confirming Bush's nominees to the Supreme Court. At the time, the Republicans held a 51-49 seat majority and were in danger of losing their Senate majority. (White House aides calculated that the veteran Specter had a much better chance of holding the Pennsylvania seat than Pat Toomey, the conservative challenger in the primary.)
Santorum praises Specter as a stalwart supporter of Republican judicial nominees, and uses the post-election confirmations of John Roberts in 2005 and Samuel Alito in 2006 to make his case.
'I have no doubt that Sam Alito would not have been confirmed' without the re-elected Specter's help, Santorum maintains. 'That's a pretty good trade, in my judgment,' he adds."[42]
Tenure
In 1996, Santorum served as Chairman of the Republican Party Task Force on Welfare Reform, and contributed to legislation that became the Welfare Reform Act of 1996. Santorum was an author and the floor manager of the bill.[4] It was written by E. Clay Shaw, Jr. and passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. In 1996, Santorum endorsed moderate Republican Arlen Specter in his short-lived campaign for president. Reporters have observed that Santorum and Specter differed on social policy, but Specter provided him with key political staff for his successful run in 1994.[43][44]WHAT ELSE DO WE LIKE ABOUT RICK SANTORUM?
- He sponsored the Workplace Religious Freedom Act
- Partial privatization of of Social Security
- Pro-Israel and Jewish supporter
Santorum served in the U.S. Congress as a Senator from Pennsylvania from 1994 to 2006. From 2001 until his leave in 2007, he was the Senate's third-ranking Republican.[45] He sponsored Workplace Religious Freedom Act (WRFA) with U.S. Senator John Kerry (D-MA). He supported partial privatization of Social Security, and following President Bush's re-election, he held forums across Pennsylvania on the topic. He was also a strong ally for Israel and American Jews. In 2003, Santorum and fellow Republicans heard from Hillel, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Zionist Organization of America to determine how to combat anti-Semitism in American colleges.[46] Santorum drafted language on "ideological diversity," which Race & Class magazine suggested was tantamount to "policing thought."[47] Inside Higher Ed suggested that he was pandering to David Horowitz and had no deep-seated position on the legislation.[48]
Even U2’s Bono, though igged by Santorum compulsion ‘to say what you don’t want to hear’, did not negate the title as “DEFENDER OF THE LEAST OF THESE”.
In 2006, U2 front man Bono told New York Times columnist David Brooks, "I would suggest that Rick Santorum has a kind of Tourette’s disease; he will always say the most unpopular thing. But on our issues, he has been a defender of the most vulnerable."[49][50]
AFTER FINDING OUT THAT OBAMA WASN’T MODERATE OR REMOTELY TEMPERATE IN HIS SOCIAL POLICIES, VOTERS REVILED, BECAUSE OBAMA DOES NOT SHARE THEIR SAME KIND OF FAITH, THAT TRANSLATES INTO GOOD POLICY, OR EVEN FAIR POLICY. HIS TYPE OF FAIRNESS CAUSED MISAPPROPRIATION:
PAYOUTS TO GREEDY BANKERS
AND HANDOUTS TO THOSE NOT MOST DESERVING,
THREATENING OUR ELDERLY AND COMPROMISING THE WEAK FOR VOTES AND POLITICAL SUPPORT.
OBAMA WENT FROM BEING ONE OF THE MOST-LIKED AND TOLERABLE POLITICIANS, TO ONE KNOWN FOR HIS LIES, SCANDALS, AND GRAND THEFT SCHEMES, WHO IS THE MOST HATED IN LESS THAN THREE YEARS.
THE SOURING THAT OCCURRED WAS WORSE THAN BUSH JR.’S SECOND TERM, IN ONLY HALF THE TIME, AND THE WORST OF ANY MODERN PRESIDENT.
THE ONLY ONE WHO ABUSED HIS POWERS AS A PROGRESSIVE LIKE TAFT, EXCEPT HIS CLOUDY POLICIES WITH MEXICO RESULTED IN THE DEATH OF A BORDER AGENT, FROM OBAMA’S COMPLICIT INVOLVEMENT AND HOLDER’S COVER-UP OF THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN SUPPLYING GUNS TO CARTELS THAT KILLED ONE OF OUR OWN:
In his only term, Taft's domestic agenda emphasized trust-busting, civil service reform, strengthening the Interstate Commerce Commission, improving the performance of the postal service, and passage of the Sixteenth Amendment. Abroad, Taft sought to further the economic development of nations in Latin America and Asia through "Dollar Diplomacy", and showed masterful decisiveness and restraint in response to revolution in Mexico. The task oriented Taft was oblivious to the political ramifications of his decisions, often alienated his own key constituencies, and was overwhelmingly defeated in his bid for a second term in the presidential election of 1912. In the Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States Taft receives an aggregate ranking of 22nd.
After leaving office, Taft spent his time in academia, arbitration, and the search for world peace through his self-founded League to Enforce Peace. In 1921, after the First World War, President Warren G. Harding appointed Taft Chief Justice of the United States. Taft served in this capacity until shortly before his death in 1930. He is the only former president to administer the oath of office to another President and the only Chief Justice to serve with associate justices whom he had appointed to the court.
THIS IS WHY PEOPLE HAVE GRAVITATED TO SANTORUM, WHO IS NOT A POLITICAL QUACK PUT ON A PEDESTAL BY MONEY, AS A CORPORATE SELLOUT OR TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER DU JOUR, NO MATTER FROM WHENCE THE MONEY FLOWS. IN STARK CONTRAST, SANTORUM IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF OBAMA... :
Social conservatism
Santorum has attracted support and criticism because of his strong social conservative views. Santorum advocates "compassionate conservatism" which he says "relies on healthy families, freedom of faith, a vibrant civil society, a proper understanding of the individual and a focused government to achieve noble purposes through definable objectives which offers hope to all."[51] He is known for his "confrontational, partisan, ‘in your face’ style of politics and government.”[52] “I just don’t take the pledge. I take the bullets,” Santorum said. “I stand out in front and I lead to make sure the voices of those who do not have a voice are out in front and being included in the national debate.”[53] In his 2005 book, It Takes a Family, he advocates for a more family values oriented society centered on monogamous, heterosexual relationships, marriage, and child-raising. He is strongly pro-life and opposes same-sex marriage saying the American public and their elected officials should decide on these "incredibly important moral issues", rather than the Supreme Court, which consists of "nine unelected, unaccountable judges.”[54]While in Congress, Santorum supported efforts to fight global AIDS, provide assistance to orphans and vulnerable children in developing countries, combat genocide in Sudan, and offer third world debt relief. He also supported homeownership tax credits, offering savings accounts to children from and rewarding savings by low-income families, funding autism research, fighting tuberculosis, and providing housing for people with AIDS. He supported increased funding for Social Services Block Grants and organizations like Healthy Start and the Children’s Aid Society, and financing community health centers.[55]
Intelligent design
Main article: Santorum AmendmentIn 2001, Santorum sought to amend the No Child Left Behind bill to include a provision affecting the teaching of evolution.[56][57] According to Santorum, his goal was that students studying evolution should hear "competing scientific interpretations of evidence," including "such alternative theories as intelligent design."[58] The provision came to be known as the "Santorum Amendment" and was written with the assistance of the Discovery Institute.[56][59] The Senate's approval of the amendment "was hailed by anti-evolution groups as a major victory and criticized by scientific organizations."[60][61][62][63]
The Santorum Amendment was not included in the final version of the Act made law, but similar language was included in the accompanying report of the conference committee.[60] The Discovery Institute and many intelligent design proponents, including two Ohio Congressmen, have repeatedly invoked this to suggest that intelligent design should be included in public school science standards as an alternative to evolution.[64][65] In a 2002 Washington Times op-ed article, Santorum wrote that intelligent design "is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes."[66]
By 2005 Santorum had adopted the Discovery Institute's Teach the Controversy approach,[67] stating in an interview with National Public Radio, "I'm not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom. What we should be teaching are the problems and holes, and I think there are legitimate problems and holes in the theory of evolution,"[68] a statement that mirrors the Teach the Controversy strategy, the most recent iteration of the intelligent design movement.[69] Santorum resigned from the advisory board of the Thomas More Law Center because he disagreed with the Center's role in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case, where the Center represented a school board that had gone beyond "teach the controversy" and had required the teaching of intelligent design.[70] Santorum wrote the foreword for the 2006 book Darwin's Nemesis: Phillip Johnson And the Intelligent Design Movement a collection of essays largely by Discovery Institute fellows honoring the "father" of the intelligent design movement, Phillip E. Johnson. When asked, Santorum stated that he believes in evolution within "a micro sense".[71]
SANTORUM CAUGHT FLACK FOR HONEST EXPOSITORY OF HIS BELIEFS ON HOMOSEXUALITY BEING CONTRARY TO A HEALTHY AND WELL-FUNCTIONING SOCIETY:
2003 interview and Google bomb
Main articles: Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality and Campaign for "santorum" neologismAn interview Santorum gave to the Associated Press erupted in controversy when it outlined his views on homosexuality. The interview, dated April 20, 2003, had asked him his views on the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests. Santorum said the priests were engaged in "a basic homosexual relationship", and said, "I have a problem with homosexual acts". He argued that the extended right to privacy ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut did not exist in the United States Constitution and that laws should exist against polygamy, adultery, sodomy, and other actions "antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family". Santorum said those actions were harmful to society, saying, "Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman.... In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality".[72]
Santorum later said that he did not intend to equate homosexuality with incest and pedophilia, but rather as a critique of the specific legal position that the right to privacy prevents the government from regulating consensual acts among adults (such as bigamy, incest, etc.).
In protest of the remarks, Dan Savage launched a contest among his readers in May 2003 to coin a new word "santorum" with an unflattering sexual definition, and followed this with a Google bombing campaign to spread the new term. Since 2004, Savage's Google bomb has regularly been the top search result for Santorum's surname, leading to what commentators have dubbed "Santorum's Google problem".[73][74] Santorum has characterized the campaign as a "type of vulgarity" common on the Internet.[74] In September 2011, Santorum unsuccessfully requested that Google remove the definition from its search engine index.[75]
Controversy regarding Catholic sex abuse
In 2005, a controversy developed over an article Santorum wrote in 2002 to a Catholic publication. In it, he said that liberalism and moral relativism in American society, particularly within seminaries, contributed to the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal. He wrote, "...it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm."[76] The comments were widely publicized in June 2005 by the Philadelphia Daily News by columnist John Baer. He told readers, "I'd remind you this is the same Senate leader who recently likened Democrats fighting to save the filibuster to Nazis."[77] In Massachusetts, Santorum's remarks were heavily criticized, and on July 12, 2005, The Boston Globe called on Santorum to explain his statement. The newspaper reported that Robert Traynham, Santorum's spokesman, told him, "It's an open secret that you have Harvard University and MIT that tend to tilt to the left in terms of academic biases. I think that's what the senator was speaking to." A spokesman for Mitt Romney then Governor of Massachusetts, also rebuked the comments. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) delivered a personal rebuke to Santorum on the Senate floor, saying "The people of Boston are to blame for the clergy sexual abuse? That is an irresponsible, insensitive and inexcusable thing to say."[78](AND YOU SEE MITT THE FLIP FLOPPER UP THERE)
SANTORUM REFUSES TO APOLOGIZE FOR CITING AN ARTICLE FOR WHAT SOMEONE ELSE INDICATED AND FOR THINGS HE DID NOT SAY, AND HE OWNS WHAT HE SAID AND MEANT BY HIS STATEMENTS:
Santorum has stood by his 2002 article and to date, has not apologized. During the controversy, he said the statement about Boston was taken out of context and that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had targeted his article, written three years earlier, to coordinate with Kennedy's speech against him. Santorum continued to agree with the broader theme of a cultural connection, saying that it is "no surprise that the culture affects people's behavior. [...] the liberal culture—the idea that [...] sexual inhibitions should be put aside and people should be able to do whatever they want to do, has an impact on people and how they behave." He again agreed with the premise that it was "no surprise that the center of the Catholic Church abuse took place in very liberal, or perhaps the nation's most liberal area, Boston." He recalled mentioning Boston because in July 2002, he said, the outrage of American Catholics, as well as his own, was focused on the Archdiocese of Boston.[79]
---
He sponsored the Syria Accountability Act of 2003, which required Syria to end all engagement in Lebanon and cease all support for terrorism. He originally wanted to go further with the bill, asking for the United States to create economic sanctions on Syria if it did not do so.[93] In June 2006, Santorum declared that weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) had been found in Iraq.[94] Santorum's declaration was based, in part, on declassified portions of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command.[95] The report stated that coalition forces had recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions that contain degraded or vacant mustard or sarin nerve agent casings. The specific weapons he referred to were chemical munitions dating back to the Iran–Iraq War that were buried in the early 1990s. The report stated that while agents had degraded to an unknown degree, they remained dangerous and possibly lethal.[94] However, officials of the Department of Defense, CIA intelligence analysts, and the White House have all explicitly stated that these expired casings were not part of the WMDs threat that the Iraq War was launched to contain.[96]
In 2005, Santorum sponsored the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which appropriated $10 million aimed at regime change in Iran. The Act passed with overwhelming support. However, Santorum nevertheless voted against the Lautenberg amendment, which would have closed the loophole that allows companies like Halliburton to do business with Iran through their foreign affiliates.[97] He said Iran was at the center of "much of the world's conflict" but was opposed to direct military action against the country in 2006.
The Associated Press reported that on July 20, 2006, Santorum stated that "Islamic fascism rooted in Iran is behind much of the world's conflict, but he is opposed to military action against the country", in a speech where he "also defended the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay."[98] The senator indicated that "effective action against Iran" would require America's fighting "for a strong Lebanon, a strong Israel, and a strong Iraq."[98]
On September 7, 2006, Santorum outlined his views on foreign policy in an op-ed piece for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and discussed Islamic fascism, closing with a rally cry:
I believe we are at war with Islamic fascists and I singled out Iran and Syria as examples of Islamic fascist regimes. Many Muslims say the same thing, and the editors should, too, for it is undeniable. [...] I have said time and time again across Pennsylvania these past weeks that the fight against Islamic fascism is the great test of our generation. Leaders are obliged to articulate this threat and to propose what is necessary to defeat it. That is my purpose, and our national calling. The American people have always rallied to the cause of freedom once they understood what was at stake. I have no doubt that they will again.
—Rick Santorum[99]”
Santorum has referred to his grandfather's historical encounter with Italian fascism as an inspiration for his 2012 presidential campaign.[100]
During the lame-duck session of the 109th Congress, Santorum was one of only two Senators who voted against confirming the nomination ofRobert Gates as Secretary of Defense. Santorum stated that his objection was to Gates's support for talking with Iran and Syria, because, in Santorum's view, it would be an error to talk with "radical Islam".[101]
During his third term re-election campaign for his Senate seat against Bob Casey, Jr., Santorum introduced the term "Islamic fascism", while questioning "his opponent's ability to make the right decisions on national security at a time when 'our enemies are fully committed to our destruction.'"[33]
Party Leadership
As early as 2002, in a PoliticsPA feature story designating politicians with yearbook superlatives, he was named the "Most Ambitious".[102]As chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, Santorum directed the communications operations of Senate Republicans and was a frequent party spokesperson. He was the youngest member of the Senate leadership and the first Pennsylvanian to hold such a prominent position since Senator Hugh Scott was Republican leader in the 1970s. In addition, Santorum served on the Senate Agriculture Committee; the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; the Senate Special Committee on Aging; and the Senate Finance Committee, of which he was the chairman of the Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy. He also sat at the candy desk for ten years.[103][104]
In January 2005, Santorum announced his intention to run for United States Senate Republican Whip, the second-highest post in the Republican caucus after the 2006 election.[105] The move came because it was presumed the incumbent whip, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, was viewed as having the inside track to succeeding Bill Frist of Tennessee as Senate Republican leader.
IN OTHER WORDS, IOWA VOTERS FELT THAT RICK SANTORUM’S EXPERIENCES ARE THOSE OF WHAT A PRESIDENT FACES, AND HE FACED THEM DOWN, DID NOT COMPROMISE, OR LOSE HIS SELF-RESPECT, AND THEY FEEL THIS VETTED HIM FOR NOMINATION. THIS IS THE PRIMARY REASON THEY VOTED FOR HIM.
Santorum developed and articulated many of his political positions during his terms in office. See that section of this article for details.
Abortion has bankrupted the Congressional purse, Obama insists we offer these services, and continue doing more of them
In the 40 years since abortion has been permitted following the passage of the Omnibus Bill on May 14, 1969, about 3.2 million babies have been killed in this country. That’s the size of Montreal, the country’s second-largest city, or Alberta, the fourth-largest province (or all of Atlantic Canada and Manitoba). That is a staggering number of lost lives.
Privacy
Santorum has frequently stated that he does not believe a "right to privacy" exists under the Constitution, even within marriage; he has been especially critical of the Supreme Court decision in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which held that the Constitution guaranteed the aforementioned right, and on that basis, overturned a law prohibiting the sale and use of contraceptives.[80] He has described contraception as "a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."[81]Illegal immigration
In 2006, Santorum opposed the Senate's immigration reform proposal.[82] Instead, Santorum stated that the U.S. should act to enforce currently existing laws. He has openly stated his strong opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants. He supports the construction of a barrier along the U.S.–Mexican border, an increase in the number of border patrol agents on the border, and the stationing of National Guard troops along the border. He also believes that illegal immigrants should be deported immediately when they commit crimes, and that undocumented immigrants should not receive benefits from the government. Finally, the former senator believes that English should be established as the national language in the United States.[83]---
Foreign policy
Santorum is a supporter of the War on Terror and shares the views of neoconservatives and the Bush Doctrine in regards to foreign policy. He says the war on Terror can be won and is optimistic about the U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for the long-term.He sponsored the Syria Accountability Act of 2003, which required Syria to end all engagement in Lebanon and cease all support for terrorism. He originally wanted to go further with the bill, asking for the United States to create economic sanctions on Syria if it did not do so.[93] In June 2006, Santorum declared that weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) had been found in Iraq.[94] Santorum's declaration was based, in part, on declassified portions of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command.[95] The report stated that coalition forces had recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions that contain degraded or vacant mustard or sarin nerve agent casings. The specific weapons he referred to were chemical munitions dating back to the Iran–Iraq War that were buried in the early 1990s. The report stated that while agents had degraded to an unknown degree, they remained dangerous and possibly lethal.[94] However, officials of the Department of Defense, CIA intelligence analysts, and the White House have all explicitly stated that these expired casings were not part of the WMDs threat that the Iraq War was launched to contain.[96]
In 2005, Santorum sponsored the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which appropriated $10 million aimed at regime change in Iran. The Act passed with overwhelming support. However, Santorum nevertheless voted against the Lautenberg amendment, which would have closed the loophole that allows companies like Halliburton to do business with Iran through their foreign affiliates.[97] He said Iran was at the center of "much of the world's conflict" but was opposed to direct military action against the country in 2006.
The Associated Press reported that on July 20, 2006, Santorum stated that "Islamic fascism rooted in Iran is behind much of the world's conflict, but he is opposed to military action against the country", in a speech where he "also defended the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay."[98] The senator indicated that "effective action against Iran" would require America's fighting "for a strong Lebanon, a strong Israel, and a strong Iraq."[98]
On September 7, 2006, Santorum outlined his views on foreign policy in an op-ed piece for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and discussed Islamic fascism, closing with a rally cry:
I believe we are at war with Islamic fascists and I singled out Iran and Syria as examples of Islamic fascist regimes. Many Muslims say the same thing, and the editors should, too, for it is undeniable. [...] I have said time and time again across Pennsylvania these past weeks that the fight against Islamic fascism is the great test of our generation. Leaders are obliged to articulate this threat and to propose what is necessary to defeat it. That is my purpose, and our national calling. The American people have always rallied to the cause of freedom once they understood what was at stake. I have no doubt that they will again.
—Rick Santorum[99]”
Santorum has referred to his grandfather's historical encounter with Italian fascism as an inspiration for his 2012 presidential campaign.[100]
During the lame-duck session of the 109th Congress, Santorum was one of only two Senators who voted against confirming the nomination ofRobert Gates as Secretary of Defense. Santorum stated that his objection was to Gates's support for talking with Iran and Syria, because, in Santorum's view, it would be an error to talk with "radical Islam".[101]
During his third term re-election campaign for his Senate seat against Bob Casey, Jr., Santorum introduced the term "Islamic fascism", while questioning "his opponent's ability to make the right decisions on national security at a time when 'our enemies are fully committed to our destruction.'"[33]
Party Leadership
As early as 2002, in a PoliticsPA feature story designating politicians with yearbook superlatives, he was named the "Most Ambitious".[102]As chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, Santorum directed the communications operations of Senate Republicans and was a frequent party spokesperson. He was the youngest member of the Senate leadership and the first Pennsylvanian to hold such a prominent position since Senator Hugh Scott was Republican leader in the 1970s. In addition, Santorum served on the Senate Agriculture Committee; the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; the Senate Special Committee on Aging; and the Senate Finance Committee, of which he was the chairman of the Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy. He also sat at the candy desk for ten years.[103][104]
In January 2005, Santorum announced his intention to run for United States Senate Republican Whip, the second-highest post in the Republican caucus after the 2006 election.[105] The move came because it was presumed the incumbent whip, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, was viewed as having the inside track to succeeding Bill Frist of Tennessee as Senate Republican leader.
IN OTHER WORDS, IOWA VOTERS FELT THAT RICK SANTORUM’S EXPERIENCES ARE THOSE OF WHAT A PRESIDENT FACES, AND HE FACED THEM DOWN, DID NOT COMPROMISE, OR LOSE HIS SELF-RESPECT, AND THEY FEEL THIS VETTED HIM FOR NOMINATION. THIS IS THE PRIMARY REASON THEY VOTED FOR HIM.
Political positions
 * |
Santorum developed and articulated many of his political positions during his terms in office. See that section of this article for details.
Iran nuclear capability
In 2012, Santorum criticized Obama for not doing enough to block Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Santorum said that, if elected, he would call upon Iran to open its facilities to international inspection and begin to dismantle them, and that if Iranian leaders did not comply, he would bomb the weapons sites.[128]Energy and environment
Santorum has said that global warming is "junk science" and has supported a policy of "Drill everywhere" for oil.[129]THE SECOND REASON THAT IOWA VOTED FOR RICK SANTORUM IS HIS PRO-LIFE STANCE, WHICH IS TIED IN WITH THEIR FAITH AND THE PRIME REASON THEY VOTED FOR HIM:
EXCERPT FROM " THE SYNTHESIS " 5-27-2011 EDITION: OBAMA THE TRAITOR, THE BETRAYAL OF AMERICAN LEGACY:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A4T0XhS1PHvBxwWY8t_uf-NvFnNbFKJuHQbmsxVPwkE/edit?hl=en_USAbortion has bankrupted the Congressional purse, Obama insists we offer these services, and continue doing more of them
The costs and consequences of abortion
| Author: Paul Tuns Editor
With 3.2 million abortions over four decades, Canada has suffered greatly due to the licence to kill its preborn
In the 40 years since abortion has been permitted following the passage of the Omnibus Bill on May 14, 1969, about 3.2 million babies have been killed in this country. That’s the size of Montreal, the country’s second-largest city, or Alberta, the fourth-largest province (or all of Atlantic Canada and Manitoba). That is a staggering number of lost lives.
Over the past two decades, about 100,000 unborn children have been lost annually to abortion. That’s the size of Kingston or Moncton or Thunder Bay. Imagine eliminating a medium-sized city every year for 20 years. That is what Canada has been doing.
Despite the cosmetic limitations on abortion that remained in the Criminal Code after the Omnibus Bill amendments, the number of abortions rose quickly every year after Parliament permitted surgical abortions in hospitals if they were approved by a (sham) therapeutic abortion committee. These TACs rubber-stamped abortion requests and there was a steep increase in the number of abortions committed annually. (See chart below.)
All of this has had consequences. Consequences for society and consequences for the women who had abortions, not to mention the lethal consequences to the children killed by abortion. Abortion advocates sell abortion as a solution to the problem of an unplanned pregnancy and abortionist Henry Morgentaler has gone so far to say that legal abortion solves some of society’s problems, such as crime and child abuse (even though both are way up since abortion was legalized in 1969). But rather than solving problems, abortion creates new ones. Today, there are millions of families affected by abortion and many daughters, mothers and sisters are suffering physically, mentally and psychologically. For society, there is the cost of so many missing children – the empty classrooms and the economic fallout of slower population growth. For our political and professional culture, the lie of abortion inevitably corrupts the institutions that permit the killing of the unborn to continue unabated. And finally, abortion opens the Pandora’s box to other immoral and dehumanizing phenomenon, such as utilitarian bioethics and euthanasia.
Consequences for women
There is extensive evidence of physical, mental and emotional consequences for women and their families when pregnant mothers use abortion to end an inconvenient pregnancy.
Major Articles and Books Concerning the Detrimental Effects of Abortion reports that in the short term (eight weeks after the abortion), there are numerous indicators of emotional distress: 44 per cent of women who have abortions complain of nervous disorders, 36 per cent have trouble sleeping, 31 per cent regret their decision to abort and 11 per cent have been prescribed psychotropic drugs. But it is the longer-term problems that bear more scrutiny.
Using the most conservative estimate of post-abortion syndrome, or PAS, Dr. Brenda Major in the Archives of General Psychiatry in 2000, found 1.6 per cent of women who have an abortion will suffer from PAS, a variant of post-traumatic stress disorder. In Canada, that would mean approximately 50,000 women are suffering emotionally due to their abortions. Dr. Hanna Söderberg’s studies suggest the number could be closer to 60 per cent. Either way, there are many women with PAS. In Canada, the 1977 Report of the Committee on the Operation of the Abortion Law cited a five-year study in two provinces that found women who had an abortion used medical and psychiatric services much more often than others; in fact, 25 per cent of women who aborted made at least one visit to a psychiatrist compared to just 3 per cent of other women.
Alcoholism and drug abuse are higher among women who have abortions than those who don’t. The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology noted in December 2002 that later alcohol and drug use during subsequent pregnancies could place newborn children at higher risk of congenital defects, low birthweight and even death. In all, there are nearly two dozen studies that link abortion to alcohol and drug abuse. Extrapolating from research conducted by Dr. David Reardon of the Elliott Institute, as many as 5,000 Canadian women will “begin abusing drugs and/or alcohol as a means of dealing with post-abortion stress.”
In 1996, the British Medical Journal reported that the suicide rate for women “after an abortion was three times the general suicide rate and six times that associated with birth.” This confirmed earlier studies and has been replicated since. Reardon says “one reason for the strong abortion-suicide link exists in the fact that in many ways, abortion is like suicide. A person who threatens suicide is actually crying out for help. So are women who contemplate abortion. Both are in a state of despair. Both are lonely. Both feel faced by insurmountable odds.” So it is no wonder that abortion does not solve the perceived problem: that of the inconvenient pregnancy.
Post-abortive women are more prone to suicide, cigarette smoking, divorce, low self-esteem, sexual dysfunction, eating disorders and reduced maternal bonding with future children, resulting in child neglect or abuse. Women who have had abortions are more likely to be on public assistance, because their pathologies (promiscuity, inability to form healthy relationships, drug and alcohol abuse) are likely to make them single parents. In 2004, Thomas Strahan, a researcher with the Association of Interdisciplinary Research in the United States, found that abortion hurts women economically: “The repeated utilization of abortion appears to lead not to economic prosperity or social well-being, but to an increasing feminization of poverty.”
But post-abortion health problems are not merely emotional. The Elliott Institute has collated the best available data on the physical risk complications of abortion and it reports that “approximately 10 per cent of women undergoing elective abortion will suffer immediate complications, of which approximately one-fifth (2 per cent) are considered life threatening.”
The most common immediate major complications include infection, excessive bleeding, embolism, ripping or perforation of the uterus, anesthesia complications, convulsions, hemorrhage, cervical injury and endotoxic shock. Minor complications include infection, bleeding, fever, second-degree burns, chronic abdominal pain, vomiting, gastro-intestinal disturbances and Rh sensitization. In the Canadian context, that means 10,000 women a year suffer complications and 2,000 face potentially life-threatening major complications.
Other problems manifest themselves over time. There are more than 30 studies that show a correlation between abortion and breast cancer, with women who had abortions more likely to get breast cancer. Women also face increased risk of cervical, ovarian and liver cancer. The risk for these four cancers are linked to the unnatural disruption of hormonal changes accompanying pregnancy. Untreated cervical damage increases the chances of getting cervical cancer. Between 2 and 3 per cent of all abortion patients suffer perforation of the uterus; this often leads to complications in subsequent pregnancies, the need for a hysterectomy and other complications, including osteoporosis. Smaller cervical lacerations can also cause problems, including cervical incompetence and subsequent labour complications.
Abortion also increases the risk of placenta previa in later pregnancies, which is life-threatening to both mother (excessive bleeding) and unborn child (perinatal death), and increases the chance of fetal malformation. Women who have abortions are more than twice as likely to suffer subsequent labour complications, including premature delivery. Pre-term delivery increases the risk of neo-natal death and handicaps. Abortion increases the risk of ectopic pregnancies and pelvic inflammatory disease, both of which can reduce future fertility or threaten the life of the mother.
Recent nation-wide data is unavailable in Canada, but Alberta and Nova Scotia statistics indicate that repeat abortions account for about one-third of all procedures. Repeat aborters vastly increase their risk of complications and this has serious consequences for those who routinely utilize abortion as birth control; it also costs the health care system.
Perhaps most worrying is that women who have abortions are more likely to die prematurely. Reardon notes, “Women who abort are approximately four times more likely to die in the following year than women who carry their pregnancies to term” – and that ” women who carry to term are only half as likely to die (pre-maturely) as women who were not pregnant.” That includes accidental deaths, suicides and homicides, among other causes.
The evidence that abortion harms women – and their loved ones – is overwhelming. But the harm goes beyond individuals.
Societal costs
No one knows for sure how much abortion costs taxpayers through the country’s socialized health care system. With the exception of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, which do not cover the entire cost of abortions committed in private facilities, the provinces pay for abortions in both hospitals and free-standing facilities. LifeCanada estimates that the cost just for the surgical abortion procedures is $80 million (an average of $800 multiplied by 100,000 abortions). Because of under-reporting of abortion, there is reason to believe the cost is actually greater. In 1995, the Library of Parliament Research Branch said determining the cost of abortion is a “complex and inexact process.”
But that is only the surgery. The number of follow-up visits for immediate complications is not made public (if tracked at all) and so those costs are unknowable. There is also the cost of long-term problems including fertility treatments, psychiatry and drug/alcohol treatment.
There are other costs, as well; that of missing students, consumers and taxpayers.
The loss of 100,000 children every year means smaller classrooms and closed schools.
In 2005, People for Education, an advocacy group, reported that the rate of school closures in Ontario has more than doubled in recent years. Between 1986 and 1995, an average of 24 Ontario schools were closed every year, but between 1999 and 2005, it was an average of 52 schools per year. Remarkably, that is despite attracting the bulk of the country’s immigrants. The fact is that Canada is an aging country in which many smaller communities and older neighbourhoods no longer have the children and teens to sustain elementary and high schools. According to the Canadian Council on Learning, “The steepest declines tend to occur in small, rural and remote school districts.” It cites as an example British Columbia, where 10 school districts have seen their enrolments fall by at least 15 per cent since 2001, seven of which are rural districts with smaller populations.
From 1997-2005, 11 of 13 provinces and territories experienced a drop in enrolment, with six of them seeing declines of at least 10 per cent. The problem is worst in Atlantic Canada. Dr. Gerald Galway of the Faculty of Education at Memorial University in St. John’s gave a presentation to the 2009 Atlantic School Boards Conference entitled, “Where have all the children gone?” In it, he noted that school enrolment in Atlantic Canada has fallen precipitously over the past several decades. While intra-provincial migration accounts for some decline in population, he mostly blames falling fertility rates. Notably, in Newfoundland, enrolment has declined every year since 1971, except in 1984 (with the introduction of Grade 12). In fact, the school-aged population has been cut in half since 1971, from 160,000 to 80,000.
Over the long term, more communities will lose their schools and policy makers will have to make difficult decisions on how to provide quality education in sparsely populated areas.
There are also ramifications for public finance. Pierre Fortin, a professor of economics at the Université du Québec à Montréal, says there will be “a marked deterioration of public finances” because of increased health care costs and pension liabilities as the number of seniors grows rapidly and income tax revenues decrease due to fewer workers. The result is fewer taxpayers supporting more retirees. By 2015, there will be more seniors over 65 than children under 15; it is estimated that by 2030, those over 65 will comprise 25 per cent of the population.
According to the 2008 documentary The Cost of Abortion, the cumulative financial loss of nearly 50 million abortions in the United States from 1973-2007 was $37 trillion in GDP over the course of 35 years. That’s lost production and lost consumption due to the 50 million missing children and (later) workers. Assuming that Canada would have suffered a proportionate loss, the Canadian GDP over the past four decades would be in the neighbourhood of $4 trillion – or $100 billion per year. That represents about 7 per cent of the current Canadian economy. In other words, the economic activity of a population not decimated by abortion would be equivalent to more than twice the stimulus package Ottawa announced in January. But after 3.2 million abortions over four decades, the missing children translate into missing economic activity.
The cheapening of human life
The greatest cost imposed on a society that permits abortion is the devaluing of human life and the diminishment of family life. Abortion does not stalk the nation alone; but rather, as part of the larger culture of death. Since the legalization of abortion, contraception, gay sex and divorce in the 1960s, there has been a decline in marital stability, with growth in sexual activity outside marriage and other sexually deviant behaviour and new assaults on human life. There are more ways to chemically eliminate newly conceived life with the abortifacient morning-after pill and abortion drugs like RU-486. With pregnancy made easily avoidable, is it surprising that courts (and later Parliament) ignored the reproductive role of marriage when they redefined the institution to include same-sex partners?
In 2003, the Liberal government passed legislation opening the door to destructive embryonic stem cell research, cloning and other scientific experimentation that treats human life as raw material to be harvested and exploited. If inconvenient human life can be eliminated by mothers and doctors, why not create convenient lives for scientists and other researchers?
And lastly – though not yet – is euthanasia. Once the principle is established that inconvenient human beings can be killed, the question becomes who’s next. The answer, if the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and Oregon and Washington are harbingers, is the terminally ill, the disabled and the old. Of course, we’ve already had Tracey Latimer and Sue Rodriguez and dozens of others whose names weren’t quite national news. But these are renegades, operating outside the law. Perhaps, though, not for long. Twice in the past four years, Bloc Quebecois MP Francine Lalonde has introduced a private member’s bill to legalize euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Public opinion leans toward so-called “mercy killing.” The principle of eliminating inconvenient people is well established.
The great corrupter
Abortion corrupts every institution that promotes or even countenances it. Two examples are government (and politics) and the medical profession, although one could also look at the failure of religious leadership, the denigration of the law and so much more.
As Fr. Alphonse de Valk noted in his 1979 pamphlet The Worst Law Ever, the medical profession didn’t take long to become fanatical in its support for abortion. In fact, de Valk said “the one group which obviously has suffered most from the 1969 law is the medical profession.” In the 1960s, the Canadian Medical Association lobbied for widening the abortion law to permit abortions to save the life or protect the health of the mother (albeit with a broad understanding of mental and emotional health). By 1973, it endorsed abortion on demand. Two years later, it amended the Hippocratic Oath to remove the reference against abortifacients that had been in place for 2,500 years. In 1977, it attempted to make abortion referrals mandatory, even in cases in which doctors were morally opposed. That battle continues more than three decades later.
Over the past 40 years, medical professionals have been harassed over their opposition to abortion and most medical schools screen applicants to keep pro-lifers out. Nurses have been fired, removed from certain duties and refused work because of their pro-life views, as have pharmacists. In order to make “choice” available to those seeking abortions, the choice of health care professionals to act according to their consciences has been compromised and even excised.
Abortion has also corrupted the political process. Parliament fashioned a dishonest and untenable amendment in 1969 – the therapeutic abortion committees which sanctioned the killing of the unborn. The Supreme Court threw out the minimal restrictions in 1988 and ordered Parliament to write a new abortion law. The Mulroney government twice introduced legislation to address the abortion issue, but the limits were once again giant loopholes that would not have restricted abortion. Since then, abortion has been permitted within the vacuum created by the absence of a law.
Politicians are scared of the issue. Many provincial politicians refuse to answer questions about abortion, claiming it is a federal matter (which it is as a matter of criminal law, but not as health policy). Many federal politicians hide behind the false notion that the 1988 Morgentaler decision established a right to abortion. (It did not, with only one of seven justices suggesting such a right.) In the 2000 federal election, then-prime minister Jean Chretien declared that Canada had “social peace” on the issue of abortion; in reality, it was the silence of timorous politicians enforced by a rigid media censorship of any substantive debate on the topic.
That censorship is widespread. Since 1995, British Columbia has had a legislated bubble zone prohibiting any pro-life speech near abortion facilities. In 1994, the Ontario government asked for and received a “temporary” injunction prohibiting pro-life speech near five abortion mills; that injunction remains in place today. In Quebec, a limited bubble zone is in place in several municipalities. Such censorship has moved to university campuses, where pro-life groups are denied club status and pro-life speakers or demonstrators are prevented from making their presentations.
To protect abortion from any criticism or resistance, genuine human rights, such as freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of conscience, are curbed. Such illiberal and intolerant measures are deemed necessary to defend “choice.”
Conclusion
These are but a few of the consequences of a broad abortion licence, a quick overview of the toll of abortion. Sold to a willingly ignorant public as a matter of personal choice, abortion has had terrible consequences for society and, tragically, the women who choose abortion thinking it is a solution to their perceived problems. The enormity of the consequences, one would presume, would lead to a massive re-thinking of unrestricted legal abortion. But instead of either sober reflection or a vigorous debate on abortion’s societal and individual ramifications, there is silence. And more death. And more suffering. Forty more years and millions more deaths are too great a cost for a dearth of necessary leadership to oppose abortion. But someday, these costs and consequences will be too great to ignore. Until then, we will continue to pay in blood, treasure, women’s health and a myriad of other ways.
Welfare and unemployment have drained us financially.RICK SANTORUM’S POST-IOWA STRATEGY:
ROMNEY STRATEGY: BOUGHT SUPPORT, MORMON ADS, MANIPULATION OF ONLINE DAILY POLLING, AND ANTI-OBAMA RHETORIC
OBAMA FUNDED, MEDIA-INDUCED ROMNEY HYPE
WHO: MITT ROMNEY ‘OBAMONEY’
WHAT: Businessman, failed MA Governor, GOP nominee hopeful
WHEN: RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, AFTER LOSING NOMINATION TO MCCAIN
WHERE: “I’M A MORMON”
WHY: “I’M A MORMON”
Willard Mitt Romney (born March 12, 1947) is an American businessman and politician. He was the 70th Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007 and is a candidate for the 2012 Republican Party presidential nomination.
The son of George W. Romney (the former Governor of Michigan) and Lenore Romney, Mitt Romney was raised in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and later served as a Mormon missionary in France. He received his undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University, and thereafter earned Juris Doctor/Master of Business Administration joint degrees from Harvard's law and business schools. Romney entered the management consulting business, which led to a position at Bain & Company, where he eventually served as CEO and brought the company out of crisis. He was also co-founder and head of the spin-off company Bain Capital, a private equity investment firm that became highly profitable and one of the largest such firms in the nation. The wealth Romney accumulated there would help fund his future political campaigns. Very active in his church, he served as ward bishop and later stake president in his area. He ran as the Republican candidate in the 1994 U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts, losing to incumbent Ted Kennedy. Romney organized and steered the 2002 Winter Olympics as head of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, and helped turn the troubled games into a financial success.
Romney was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, but did not seek reelection in 2006. He presided over a series of spending cuts and increases in fees that eliminated a projected $3 billion deficit. He also signed into law the Massachusetts health care reform legislation, which provided near-universal health insurance access via subsidies and state-level mandates and was the first of its kind in the nation. During the course of his political career, his positions or rhetorical emphasis have shifted more towards American conservatism in several areas.
Romney ran for the Republican nomination in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, winning several primaries and caucuses, but eventually losing the nomination to John McCain. In the following years he gave speeches and raised campaign funds on behalf of fellow Republicans. On June 2, 2011, Romney announced that he would seek the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.
WHATEVER!!~~ OBAMONEY’S IDEAS ARE GREAT AND SELF-SERVING... GUESS WHAT? WE HAD SO-CALLED MODERATE PRESIDENT, WHO REALLY TURNED OUT TO BE SELF-SERVING. THIS IS LIKE WHIPPING OUT THE WHITE FACE PAINT <POOF: ROMNEY> OBAMA HAD GREAT IDEAS, BUT NOW IT IS HIS POLICIES THAT HAVE REPELLED VOTERS, EVEN HIS OWN PARTY. ROMNEY IS THE SAME... HE HAS GREAT POLITICAL EXAMINATIONS IN HIS BOOK, GREAT IDEAS ON HIS WEBSITE, AND A CONCOCTED POLITICAL SHOWING AND INFLATED LEAD, BUT HE HAS FAILED TO CONNECT VOTERS OR CONQUER IN IOWA, NOR DOES HE HAVE THE NATIONAL SUPPORT TO WIN A GENERAL ELECTION.
JOHN MCCAIN’S SUPERPAC SUPERFAKE THUMBS UP AND DRY CHUCKLE DID NOT HELP.... IT WAS BAD ENOUGH TO ROLL OVER TO OBAMA, BUT THEN TO BE FORCED MONEYWISE TO SUPPORT THE PERSON WHO LOST THE NOMINATION TO YOU FOR THE PARTY IN THE LAST ELECTION.
~GAGS~
Romney’s strategy after Iowa:
WHO: RON PAUL
- RICK SANTORUM CAN WIN THE NOMINATION BY PICKING UP BACHMANN SUPPORTERS. MOST LIKELY, THEY WILL SPLIT EVENLY BETWEEN HIM AND PERRY, FOR NOW.
- RICK SANTORUM MUST CONTINUE HIS MOMENTUM, LARGELY DUE TO HIS ABILITY TO CONNECT, ENGAGE, AND RESONATE WITH SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES.
- RICK SANTORUM MUST BE WILLING TO EXPLAIN TO VOTERS WHY SOME VOTES HE MADE DID NOT PAN OUT, WORK OUT THE WAY HE WANTED, AND HOW SOCIOECONOMICS IS A BETTER POLICY THAN JUST SHEER NUMBERS AND JOB CREATION FIGURES.
- RICK SANTORUM WILL BE SPLITTING HAIRS NOW WITH NEWT, PAUL, AND PERRY... CONSERVATIVES ARE RETRACTING ON PAUL’S LACK OF FOREIGN POLICY, OBNOXIOUS REMARKS ABOUT ISRAEL, HIS WACKY POLITICAL CIRCULAR DIATRIBE, AND RON PAUL SUPPORTING OCCUPY INSURRECTION.
- RICK SANTORUM MUST GO AFTER PAUL, SQUASH HIM IN THE DEBATES, PITCH HIS TENT HIGHER THAN ROMNEY, AND LEAVE PERRY ALONE, UNLESS IT IS TO DEFEND SOME OF HIS VOTES THAT ARE NOT POPULAR WITH FISCAL CONSERVATIVES. HE WOULD DO WELL TO PREPARE HIS ANSWERS, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT WON’T BEHOOVE PERRY, PERRY WILL DO IT AS A MATTER OF INTEGRITY EVENTUALLY.
- NEWT’S SUPPORTERS WILL ABANDON HIM BECAUSE NEWT’S SUPPORTERS THINK A CAMPAIGN IS ALL ABOUT MONEY. NEWT HAS LITTLE, AND IT TOOK HIM 6 MONTHS TO GET OUT OF A -$1.5 MILLION DOLLAR HOLE. PLUS, SANTORUM USING REAGAN TAX POLICIES WILL LURE THEM AWAY TOTALLY.
ROMNEY STRATEGY: BOUGHT SUPPORT, MORMON ADS, MANIPULATION OF ONLINE DAILY POLLING, AND ANTI-OBAMA RHETORIC
OBAMA FUNDED, MEDIA-INDUCED ROMNEY HYPE
WHO: MITT ROMNEY ‘OBAMONEY’
WHAT: Businessman, failed MA Governor, GOP nominee hopeful
WHEN: RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, AFTER LOSING NOMINATION TO MCCAIN
WHERE: “I’M A MORMON”
WHY: “I’M A MORMON”
Willard Mitt Romney (born March 12, 1947) is an American businessman and politician. He was the 70th Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007 and is a candidate for the 2012 Republican Party presidential nomination.
The son of George W. Romney (the former Governor of Michigan) and Lenore Romney, Mitt Romney was raised in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and later served as a Mormon missionary in France. He received his undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University, and thereafter earned Juris Doctor/Master of Business Administration joint degrees from Harvard's law and business schools. Romney entered the management consulting business, which led to a position at Bain & Company, where he eventually served as CEO and brought the company out of crisis. He was also co-founder and head of the spin-off company Bain Capital, a private equity investment firm that became highly profitable and one of the largest such firms in the nation. The wealth Romney accumulated there would help fund his future political campaigns. Very active in his church, he served as ward bishop and later stake president in his area. He ran as the Republican candidate in the 1994 U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts, losing to incumbent Ted Kennedy. Romney organized and steered the 2002 Winter Olympics as head of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, and helped turn the troubled games into a financial success.
Romney was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, but did not seek reelection in 2006. He presided over a series of spending cuts and increases in fees that eliminated a projected $3 billion deficit. He also signed into law the Massachusetts health care reform legislation, which provided near-universal health insurance access via subsidies and state-level mandates and was the first of its kind in the nation. During the course of his political career, his positions or rhetorical emphasis have shifted more towards American conservatism in several areas.
Romney ran for the Republican nomination in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, winning several primaries and caucuses, but eventually losing the nomination to John McCain. In the following years he gave speeches and raised campaign funds on behalf of fellow Republicans. On June 2, 2011, Romney announced that he would seek the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.
A RICH MAN, WHO WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT...
SO, HE EITHER WANTS MORE MONEY, MORE POWER, OR HE WANTS TO DECLARE MORMONISM AS ‘THE NATIONAL RELIGION’ BY BECOMING ‘THE LEADER’ THAT ‘YOU FOLLOW’....
WHATEVER!!~~ OBAMONEY’S IDEAS ARE GREAT AND SELF-SERVING... GUESS WHAT? WE HAD SO-CALLED MODERATE PRESIDENT, WHO REALLY TURNED OUT TO BE SELF-SERVING. THIS IS LIKE WHIPPING OUT THE WHITE FACE PAINT <POOF: ROMNEY> OBAMA HAD GREAT IDEAS, BUT NOW IT IS HIS POLICIES THAT HAVE REPELLED VOTERS, EVEN HIS OWN PARTY. ROMNEY IS THE SAME... HE HAS GREAT POLITICAL EXAMINATIONS IN HIS BOOK, GREAT IDEAS ON HIS WEBSITE, AND A CONCOCTED POLITICAL SHOWING AND INFLATED LEAD, BUT HE HAS FAILED TO CONNECT VOTERS OR CONQUER IN IOWA, NOR DOES HE HAVE THE NATIONAL SUPPORT TO WIN A GENERAL ELECTION.
JOHN MCCAIN’S SUPERPAC SUPERFAKE THUMBS UP AND DRY CHUCKLE DID NOT HELP.... IT WAS BAD ENOUGH TO ROLL OVER TO OBAMA, BUT THEN TO BE FORCED MONEYWISE TO SUPPORT THE PERSON WHO LOST THE NOMINATION TO YOU FOR THE PARTY IN THE LAST ELECTION.
~GAGS~
Romney’s strategy after Iowa:
- Romney will have to use his money accordingly. He found that spending hundreds more is really bought support, and this won’t win a general election.
- Romney will fight to stay alive by South Carolina, because the best ad put out is the one against him, not his endless ‘I’m a Mormon’ ads, but where it shows him clearly divided on abortion and gun rights, his voice, flip-flopping throughout the years, tied up with a little John McCain jeer like a bow on an election handed to Democrats, with a ‘I approve this message’.
- Romney’s lead will collapse. Paul will not benefit from this collapse, because diehard Paul loyalists have trouble replicating their message, because it seems so wacky. If you split Romney’s lead between Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, and Newt, Newt will not save the day for the Old Hat GOP.
- Both Rick Santorum and Rick Perry will be facing each other in contention for nomination by South Carolina. By March, for Georgia’s primary, whether Perry gets to appear on the ballot does not matter: Perry has national support from the GA Tea Party in retraction to Newt. We simply won’t vote in the primary.
- Paul can not run Third Party and win, and he knows it: he is like Ross Perot all over again, except that Perot actually qualifies as being “sane” in his discourse and positions. Perry could run Third Party and win, even Donald Trump could run Third Party and win. Romney is not safe there: even though Paul can not beat him, Paul should knock Romney off of his horse in the debate, because that is what Paul is capable of doing. Romney needs to put on his big girl drawers!!
- Santorum and Perry have been reluctant to go after Romney because of this pseudo-perceived support, but Romney will have hell to pay now: he is going to catch it from all 3 of them, with Newt’s icy biting remarks.
- Money will not win this for Romney. He is going to have to put his presidential policy in writing and convince us why his contract is more worthy than Newt’s tarnished sterling contract.
WHO: RON PAUL
WHAT: ANARCHY
WHEN: I DISSOLVE THE FEDERAL RESERVE
WHERE: AT AN OCCUPY INSURRECTION NEAR YOU
WHY: THAT IS WHAT FREEDOM IS ALL ABOUT....
Paul is a proponent of Austrian School economics; he has authored six books on the subject, and displays pictures of Austrian School economists Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and Ludwig von Mises (as well as of Grover Cleveland)[85] on his office wall. He regularly votes against almost all proposals for new government spending, initiatives, or taxes;[66] he cast two thirds of all the lone negative votes in the House during a 1995–1997 period.[19] He has pledged never to raise taxes[203] and states he has never voted to approve a budget deficit. Paul believes that the country could abolish the individual income tax by scaling back federal spending to its fiscal year 2000 levels;[90][204]financing government operations would be primarily by excise taxes and non-protectionist tariffs. He endorses eliminating most federal government agencies, terming them unnecessary bureaucracies. Paul has a consistent record as an inflation hawk[dead link], having warned of the threat of hyperinflation as far back as 1981.[205] While Paul believes the longterm decrease of the U.S. dollar's purchasing power byinflation is attributable to its lack of any commodity backing, he does not endorse a "return" to a gold standard – as the U.S. government has established during the past – but instead prefers to eliminate legal tender laws and to remove the sales tax on gold and silver, so that the market may freely decide what type of monetary standard(s) there shall be.[206] He also advocates gradual elimination of the Federal Reserve System.[207]
Paul endorses constitutional rights, such as the right to keep and bear arms, and habeas corpus for political detainees. He opposes thePatriot Act, federal use of torture, presidential autonomy, a national identification card, warrantless domestic surveillance, and the draft. Citing the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, Paul advocates states' rights to decide how to regulate social matters not cited directly by the Constitution. Paul terms himself "strongly pro-life",[208] "an unshakable foe of abortion",[209] and believes regulation or ban[210] on medical decisions about maternal or fetal health is "best handled at the state level".[211][212] He says his years as an obstetrician led him to believe life begins at conception;[213] his abortion-related legislation, like the Sanctity of Life Act, is intended to negate Roe v. Wade and to get "the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters."[214] Paul also believes that the notion of the separation of church and state is currently misused by the court system: "In case after case, the Supreme Court has used the infamous 'separation of church and state' metaphor to uphold court decisions that allow the federal government to intrude upon and deprive citizens of their religious liberty."[215]
He opposes federal regulation of the death penalty[211] (although he opposes capital punishment),[216] of education,[217] and of marriage, and endorsed revising the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy to concern mainly disruptive sexual behavior (whether heterosexual or homosexual).[218] As a free-market environmentalist, he asserts private property rights in relation to environmental protection and pollution prevention.[citation needed] In 2009, he claimed that climate change is a hoax.[219] He also opposes the federal War on Drugs,[220] and believes the states should decide whether to regulate or deregulate drugs such as medical marijuana.[221] Paul pushes to eliminate federal involvement with and management of health care, which he argues would allow prices to decrease due to the fundamental dynamics of a free market.[222] Referring to the federal government, Ron Paul has also stated that "The government shouldn't be in the medical business." He is also opposed to federal government influenza inoculation programs.[223] He is an outspoken proponent for increased ballot access for 3rd party candidates and numerous election law reforms which he believes would allow more voter control.[224]
Paul was critical of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, arguing that it sanctioned federal interference in the labor market and did not improve race relations. He once remarked: "The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society".[225] Paul opposes affirmative action.[226]
On April 15, 2011, Paul was one of four Republican members of Congress to vote against "The Path to Prosperity".[227] OKAY... THESE ARE THE WORDS TO LISTEN FOR IN THE NEXT DEBATE FROM THE RON PAUL DICTIONARY: ENDLESS WAR, UNENDING WAR, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, FAR RIGHT-ESTABLISHMENT, NEO-CONS, WAR MONGERERS, FEAR MONGERING....
LET US SEE IF RON PAUL CAN SAY ANYTHING ELSE THAT TICKLES OUR FREEDOM FRENZY WITHOUT USING THOSE WORDS, THAT SOUNDS REMOTELY INTELLIGENT, COHESIVE, AND WITHOUT ANSWERING EVERY DEBATE QUESTION BY TALKING IN A CIRCLE.
RON PAUL’S POST IOWA LOSS:
“Although the Senate is not in recess, President Obama, in an unprecedented move, has arrogantly circumvented the American people by 'recess' appointing Richard Cordray as director of the new CFPB. This recess appointment represents a sharp departure from a long-standing precedent that has limited the President to recess appointments only when the Senate is in a recess of 10 days or longer. Breaking from this precedent lands this appointee in uncertain legal territory, threatens the confirmation process and fundamentally endangers the Congress’s role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch.
“The CFPB is poised to be one of the least accountable and most powerful agencies in Washington. Created by the deeply flawed Dodd-Frank law, it is subject to none of the checks that independent agencies normally operate under, and will have an unprecedented reach and control over individual consumer decisions. Earlier this year, 44 of my Senate Republican colleagues and I served notice that we will not confirm any nominee as director, regardless of party, until structural changes are made to make the bureau accountable to the American people—and more transparent. Our request was met with silence from the administration. As a result just last month the Senate rejected Cordray’s nomination. Congress has a constitutional duty to examine presidential nominees, a responsibility that serves as a check on executive power. But once again, the President has chosen to circumvent the confirmation process.”
President Barack Obama and the State Department claim the $55 million contribution will provide critical health, education, and humanitarian services to five million Palestinian refugees in the region.
Of this contribution, $29 million will support the United Nations Relief and Works Agency's core services in Jordan, while $24 million will support UNRWA’s emergency programs in the West Bank and Gaza; and two million will support UNRWA’s ongoing relief assistance in Lebanon for those displaced during the 2007 conflict in Nahr al Bared refugee camp.
What the State Department neglected to mention regarding the Palestinians in Lebanon is that they are undergoing training by the Lebanese-based terrorist group Hezbollah, say many counterterrorism experts.
In 2011, the United States provided $75 million to the United Nations West Bank/Gaza emergency programs, $15 million to emergency programs in Lebanon, and $10 million for the construction of five new schools in Gaza, which will serve an estimated 10,000 schoolchildren. However, the U.S. is not allowed input into the school curriculum which is notoriously anti-Israeli.
In fact, the Law Enforcement Examiner in 2011 ran stories regarding the indoctrination of children and the terrorist training provided by Hamas to youngsters living in Gaza.
In December 2011, the Law Enforcement Examiner reported that members of Palestinian groups, including terrorists from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, met with representatives from President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party on Tuesday in Cairo, Egypt. Egypt's representatives at the meeting included members of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists.
The Palestinians and Egyptians discussed the implementation of an Egyptian-brokered reconciliation pact reached on May 4, 2011.
The leaders of the Palestinian groups held talks regarding the implementation of the pact, elections, and social reconciliation, according to a Hamas spokesperson, Ismail Radwan.
The subject of releasing political prisoners was discussed as well as reforming the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to represent more militant groups, especially Hamas and Islamic Jihad movement.
Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Along with serving as WND's senior staff reporter, Corsi is a senior managing director at Gilford Securities. Gilford Securities, founded in 1979, is a full-service boutique investment firm headquartered in NYC providing financial services to institutional and retail clients, from investment banking and equity research to retirement
More ↓
Subscribe to author feed
Just as famed Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is preparing to release results of his investigation of Barack Obama’s eligibility for Arizona’s 2012 ballot, a top-gun activist who led a successful campaign to recall a key Arpaio ally is now targeting the sheriff himself.
In the coming weeks, it will be decided whether transplanted radical attorney-activist and “community organizer” Randy Parraz can force Arpaio to resign before the sheriff’s Cold Case Posse has a chance to deliver a report in February.
Parraz, who has made his career applying Saul Alinsky-style community organizer tactics for radical leftist movements in the U.S. and Canada, has told WND that Arpaio “has to go.”
Arpaio’s response: “No way will I resign,” he told WND.
Parraz’s skills as a leftist political activist are not to be underestimated. Last year, he helped lead the recall campaign that removed long-time Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce after Pearce championed the passage of Arizona’s tough immigration bill, SB 1070.
With Pearce gone, Parraz has set his sites on Arpaio.
WHEN: I DISSOLVE THE FEDERAL RESERVE
WHERE: AT AN OCCUPY INSURRECTION NEAR YOU
WHY: THAT IS WHAT FREEDOM IS ALL ABOUT....
Political positions
Main article: Political positions of Ron PaulPaul at the 2007 National Right to Life Committee Convention in Kansas City, Missouri, June 15, 2007.
Paul has been described as conservative, Constitutionalist, and libertarian.[8] According to University of Georgia political scientist Keith Poole, Paul had the most conservative voting record of any member of Congress since 1937.[195] He has been nicknamed "Dr. No",[19] representing both his medical degree and his insistence that he will "never vote for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution",[30] and "Mr. Republican".[196] One scoring method published in the American Journal of Political Science[197] found Paul the most conservative of all 3,320 members of Congress from 1937 to 2002.[198] Paul's foreign policy of nonintervention[199] made him the only 2008 Republican presidential candidate to have voted against the Iraq War Resolution in 2002. He advocates withdrawal from the United Nations, and from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, for reasons of maintaining strong national sovereignty.[200] He endorses free trade, rejecting membership in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization as "managed trade". He endorses increased border security and opposes welfare for illegal aliens, birthright citizenship and amnesty;[201] he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006. He voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists in response to the September 11 attacks, but suggested war alternatives such as authorizing the president to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal targeting specific terrorists. An opponent of the Iraq War and potential war with Iran, he has also criticized neoconservatism and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, arguing that both inadvertently cause terrorist reprisals against Americans. Paul has stated that "Israel is our close friend" and that it is not the place of the United States to "dictate how Israel runs her affairs".[202]Paul is a proponent of Austrian School economics; he has authored six books on the subject, and displays pictures of Austrian School economists Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and Ludwig von Mises (as well as of Grover Cleveland)[85] on his office wall. He regularly votes against almost all proposals for new government spending, initiatives, or taxes;[66] he cast two thirds of all the lone negative votes in the House during a 1995–1997 period.[19] He has pledged never to raise taxes[203] and states he has never voted to approve a budget deficit. Paul believes that the country could abolish the individual income tax by scaling back federal spending to its fiscal year 2000 levels;[90][204]financing government operations would be primarily by excise taxes and non-protectionist tariffs. He endorses eliminating most federal government agencies, terming them unnecessary bureaucracies. Paul has a consistent record as an inflation hawk[dead link], having warned of the threat of hyperinflation as far back as 1981.[205] While Paul believes the longterm decrease of the U.S. dollar's purchasing power byinflation is attributable to its lack of any commodity backing, he does not endorse a "return" to a gold standard – as the U.S. government has established during the past – but instead prefers to eliminate legal tender laws and to remove the sales tax on gold and silver, so that the market may freely decide what type of monetary standard(s) there shall be.[206] He also advocates gradual elimination of the Federal Reserve System.[207]
Paul endorses constitutional rights, such as the right to keep and bear arms, and habeas corpus for political detainees. He opposes thePatriot Act, federal use of torture, presidential autonomy, a national identification card, warrantless domestic surveillance, and the draft. Citing the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, Paul advocates states' rights to decide how to regulate social matters not cited directly by the Constitution. Paul terms himself "strongly pro-life",[208] "an unshakable foe of abortion",[209] and believes regulation or ban[210] on medical decisions about maternal or fetal health is "best handled at the state level".[211][212] He says his years as an obstetrician led him to believe life begins at conception;[213] his abortion-related legislation, like the Sanctity of Life Act, is intended to negate Roe v. Wade and to get "the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters."[214] Paul also believes that the notion of the separation of church and state is currently misused by the court system: "In case after case, the Supreme Court has used the infamous 'separation of church and state' metaphor to uphold court decisions that allow the federal government to intrude upon and deprive citizens of their religious liberty."[215]
He opposes federal regulation of the death penalty[211] (although he opposes capital punishment),[216] of education,[217] and of marriage, and endorsed revising the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy to concern mainly disruptive sexual behavior (whether heterosexual or homosexual).[218] As a free-market environmentalist, he asserts private property rights in relation to environmental protection and pollution prevention.[citation needed] In 2009, he claimed that climate change is a hoax.[219] He also opposes the federal War on Drugs,[220] and believes the states should decide whether to regulate or deregulate drugs such as medical marijuana.[221] Paul pushes to eliminate federal involvement with and management of health care, which he argues would allow prices to decrease due to the fundamental dynamics of a free market.[222] Referring to the federal government, Ron Paul has also stated that "The government shouldn't be in the medical business." He is also opposed to federal government influenza inoculation programs.[223] He is an outspoken proponent for increased ballot access for 3rd party candidates and numerous election law reforms which he believes would allow more voter control.[224]
Paul was critical of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, arguing that it sanctioned federal interference in the labor market and did not improve race relations. He once remarked: "The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society".[225] Paul opposes affirmative action.[226]
On April 15, 2011, Paul was one of four Republican members of Congress to vote against "The Path to Prosperity".[227] OKAY... THESE ARE THE WORDS TO LISTEN FOR IN THE NEXT DEBATE FROM THE RON PAUL DICTIONARY: ENDLESS WAR, UNENDING WAR, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, FAR RIGHT-ESTABLISHMENT, NEO-CONS, WAR MONGERERS, FEAR MONGERING....
LET US SEE IF RON PAUL CAN SAY ANYTHING ELSE THAT TICKLES OUR FREEDOM FRENZY WITHOUT USING THOSE WORDS, THAT SOUNDS REMOTELY INTELLIGENT, COHESIVE, AND WITHOUT ANSWERING EVERY DEBATE QUESTION BY TALKING IN A CIRCLE.
RON PAUL’S POST IOWA LOSS:
- GENERAL ELECTIONS ARE NOT DECIDED BY DELEGATES, OCCUPY INSURRECTION PROTESTS, OR EVEN MONEY. PAUL HAS LITTLE CHANCE OF CONVINCING THE GOP THAT HE IS THE NOMINEE.
- PAUL WILL HAVE TO EXPLAIN “END THE FED” WITH CRISP, RELEVANT, AND SANE EXPLANATION, OR HE IS DOOMED.
- PAUL WILL HAVE TO SEPARATE HIMSELF FROM OCCUPY INSURRECTION, AS IT IS A HUGE TURNOFF TO EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS, SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES AND FISCAL CONSERVATIVES ALIKE -- TRANSLATION: EXIT THE WHITE PROTESTANT AND THE ENTIRE MIXED RACE CATHOLIC VOTE. THAT LEAVES MODERATES, UNDECIDEDS, AND LOYALISTS.
- PAUL WILL HAVE TO APPEAL TO DEMOCRATS. WHILE HE IS NOT THE ALTERNATIVE TO OBAMA, HE MUST COURT FISCAL CONSERVATIVES WHO ARE DEMOCRATS TO HIS CAUSE.
- COURTING THE DEMOCRATS IS THE ONLY WAY THAT PAUL WINS AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WINS BY SPARING MORE GROUND LOST. EVERYONE HATES OBAMA, NANCY PELOSI, HARRY REID, AND OTHERS, TO THE POINT THEY ARE ON OUR TWITTER AUTO-FILL. #WeCantWait for you to #Impeach #Obama
- Paul not reaching out to the Democrats will seal his fate, and the Democrats’ party will be lost for a good 30yrs.
- SPEAKING OF OBAMA, HE MUST APPEAR IN COURT ON 1/26 ON INELIGIBILITY CHARGES, SO BACHMANN AND ROMNEY, WHO PLOTTED THEIR CAMPAIGN PLATFORM ON OBAMA’S ONE-TERM PRESIDENCY MAY NOT GET TO SEE HIM FULFILL THIS LAST YEAR OR EVEN CONTEND WITH HIM... HE HAS CERTAINLY BEATEN HIMSELF!
PRESS RELEASES
Home / News / Press ReleasesPress Releases
Jan 04 2012
Arrogantly Circumventing the American People with an Unprecedented ‘Recess Appointment’ of an Unaccountable Czar
Louisville, KY – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell issued the following statement today regarding the President’s unprecedented recess appointment of Richard Cordray as director of the new CFPB while the Senate is not in recess:“Although the Senate is not in recess, President Obama, in an unprecedented move, has arrogantly circumvented the American people by 'recess' appointing Richard Cordray as director of the new CFPB. This recess appointment represents a sharp departure from a long-standing precedent that has limited the President to recess appointments only when the Senate is in a recess of 10 days or longer. Breaking from this precedent lands this appointee in uncertain legal territory, threatens the confirmation process and fundamentally endangers the Congress’s role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch.
“The CFPB is poised to be one of the least accountable and most powerful agencies in Washington. Created by the deeply flawed Dodd-Frank law, it is subject to none of the checks that independent agencies normally operate under, and will have an unprecedented reach and control over individual consumer decisions. Earlier this year, 44 of my Senate Republican colleagues and I served notice that we will not confirm any nominee as director, regardless of party, until structural changes are made to make the bureau accountable to the American people—and more transparent. Our request was met with silence from the administration. As a result just last month the Senate rejected Cordray’s nomination. Congress has a constitutional duty to examine presidential nominees, a responsibility that serves as a check on executive power. But once again, the President has chosen to circumvent the confirmation process.”
Obama contributes millions of taxpayer dollars to Palestinians
Jim Kouri
, Law Enforcement Examiner
January 3, 2012 - Like this? PrintPresident Barack Obama and the State Department claim the $55 million contribution will provide critical health, education, and humanitarian services to five million Palestinian refugees in the region.
Of this contribution, $29 million will support the United Nations Relief and Works Agency's core services in Jordan, while $24 million will support UNRWA’s emergency programs in the West Bank and Gaza; and two million will support UNRWA’s ongoing relief assistance in Lebanon for those displaced during the 2007 conflict in Nahr al Bared refugee camp.
What the State Department neglected to mention regarding the Palestinians in Lebanon is that they are undergoing training by the Lebanese-based terrorist group Hezbollah, say many counterterrorism experts.
Advertisement
The State Department's press release claims that United States recognizes the critical role the Agency plays in assisting Palestinian refugees and maintaining regional stability and calls upon other donors to enhance their support for UNRWA. Sadly, Israeli intelligence sources say some of the aid money is used to purchase weapons such as fully-automatic firearms, rockets, and explosives.In 2011, the United States provided $75 million to the United Nations West Bank/Gaza emergency programs, $15 million to emergency programs in Lebanon, and $10 million for the construction of five new schools in Gaza, which will serve an estimated 10,000 schoolchildren. However, the U.S. is not allowed input into the school curriculum which is notoriously anti-Israeli.
In fact, the Law Enforcement Examiner in 2011 ran stories regarding the indoctrination of children and the terrorist training provided by Hamas to youngsters living in Gaza.
In December 2011, the Law Enforcement Examiner reported that members of Palestinian groups, including terrorists from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, met with representatives from President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party on Tuesday in Cairo, Egypt. Egypt's representatives at the meeting included members of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists.
The Palestinians and Egyptians discussed the implementation of an Egyptian-brokered reconciliation pact reached on May 4, 2011.
The leaders of the Palestinian groups held talks regarding the implementation of the pact, elections, and social reconciliation, according to a Hamas spokesperson, Ismail Radwan.
The subject of releasing political prisoners was discussed as well as reforming the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to represent more militant groups, especially Hamas and Islamic Jihad movement.
WND EXCLUSIVE
SHERIFF JOE TARGETED FOR OUSTER
Faces 'resign now' campaign as Cold Case Posse prepares Obama eligibility report
Published: 13 hours agoby JEROME R. CORSI Email | ArchiveJerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Along with serving as WND's senior staff reporter, Corsi is a senior managing director at Gilford Securities. Gilford Securities, founded in 1979, is a full-service boutique investment firm headquartered in NYC providing financial services to institutional and retail clients, from investment banking and equity research to retirement
More ↓
Subscribe to author feedJust as famed Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is preparing to release results of his investigation of Barack Obama’s eligibility for Arizona’s 2012 ballot, a top-gun activist who led a successful campaign to recall a key Arpaio ally is now targeting the sheriff himself.
In the coming weeks, it will be decided whether transplanted radical attorney-activist and “community organizer” Randy Parraz can force Arpaio to resign before the sheriff’s Cold Case Posse has a chance to deliver a report in February.
Parraz, who has made his career applying Saul Alinsky-style community organizer tactics for radical leftist movements in the U.S. and Canada, has told WND that Arpaio “has to go.”
Arpaio’s response: “No way will I resign,” he told WND.
Parraz’s skills as a leftist political activist are not to be underestimated. Last year, he helped lead the recall campaign that removed long-time Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce after Pearce championed the passage of Arizona’s tough immigration bill, SB 1070.
With Pearce gone, Parraz has set his sites on Arpaio.
“Our focus right now is to hold Sheriff Arpaio accountable for what he has done – his abuse of power, the corruption, all the things he has done under his leadership,” Parraz told WND in a telephone interview. “We need to have a fresh start; we need to get him out
Parraz said “the only way we can do this is to engage the citizens in a way in which they have never been engaged before.”
He has focused his strategy on the five-person Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the governing body that directly oversees the operation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.
“We are going to the Jan. 11 meeting of the Board of Supervisors to get placed on the agenda the recent Department of Justice and the report of the 400 uninvestigated sex crimes,” he explained.
A vote of three of the five supervisors or a decision by the chairman is required to get an item placed on the board’s agenda.
As WND reported, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice has issued a 22-page report charging that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has engaged in racial profiling of Hispanics and other violations of federal civil rights laws.
Parraz’s maneuver is strictly political, since the Board of Supervisors lacks the authority to force the sheriff to resign.
If at first you don’t succeed …
This is by no means Parraz’s first attempt to pressure the Board of Supervisors to demand Arpaio’s resignation.
A few weeks ago, Parraz tried his maneuver without success at the Dec. 14 board meeting. He appeared with about 100 members of his non-profit group, Citizens for a Better Arizona, to get his complaints against Arpaio placed on the agenda.
Undeterred, Parraz now intends to make a repeat appeal to the board at its Jan. 11 meeting.
“We are trying to get these items on the Board of Supervisors agenda so we can introduce a resolution to demand the resignation of Sheriff Arpaio,” Parraz said, explaining that a resignation demand could only be introduced in relation to an item already on the agenda.
“Once we are on the agenda, we can during our presentation say that because of this behavior – this wall of distrust, these constitutional violations, the racial profiling unprecedented against Latinos – we want you to join us in calling for Sheriff Arpaio’s resignation.”
by BOB UNRUH Email | Archive
Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.More ↓
Subscribe to author feed
For the first time in dozens of court cases challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, a judge has ruled that Obama must, in order to be a candidate on the Georgia ballot for president in 2012, meet the constitutional demands for candidates for the office.
A hearing has been scheduled later this month for evidence on the issue that has plagued Obama and his presidency since long before he took office. At issue is the constitutional requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen.” Some allege he was not born in the U.S. as he has claimed and, therefore, is not eligible.
Others, including top constitutional expert Herb Titus, contend that the term “natural-born citizen,” which is not defined in the Constitution, would have been understood when the document was written to mean the offspring of two U.S. citizens. That argument is supported by a 19th-century U.S. Supreme Court decision
Under that standard, Obama could not qualify, because his father, as identified on the “Certificate of Live Birth” image released by the White House, was a foreign national who came from Kenya to study in the U.S. and never was a citizen.
The ruling came today from Judge Michael W. Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings.
In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.
While Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had argued that the requirements didn’t apply to candidates for a presidential primary, the judge said that isn’t how he reads state law.
“Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this court finds that the cases cited by [Obama] are not controlling. When the court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step … is to examine the plain statutory language,” the judge wrote. “Section 21-2-1(a) states that ‘every candidate for federal and state office’ must meet the qualifications for holding that particular office, and this court has seen no case law limiting this provision, nor found any language that contains an exception for the office of president or stating that the provision does not apply to the presidential preference primary.”
The decision from Malihi came as a result of a series of complaints that were consolidated by the court. They were brought against Obama’s inclusion on the 2012 election primary ballot by David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by attorney Orly Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield.
The judge’s decision was to refuse to dismiss the complaints, an action that had been sought by Obama. He also granted a motion to sever the cases, and he scheduled a hearing at 9 a.m. on Jan. 26 for the complaint brought by Weldon. Following immediately will be hearings for the cases brought by Swensson and Powell, and the issue raised by Farrar, Lax, Judy, Malaren and Roth will be third.
Malihi’s ruling said: “The court finds that defendant is a candidate for federal office who has been certified by the state executive committee of a political party, and therefore must, under Code Section 21-2-5, meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
There are similar challenges to Obama’s 2012 candidacy being raised before state election or other commissions in Tennessee, Arizona and New Hampshire as well.
Taitz told WND she will present the decision to a court in Hawaii, where she is arguing to have access to Obama’s original birth documentation as it exists in the state, which for many years allowed relatives of babies to simply make a statement and register a birth, even though the child may not have been born in Hawaii.
Irion had argued in his opposition to Obama’s demand to dismiss the concerns that, “The only fact relevant to this case is the fact that the defendant’s father was not a U.S. citizen. This fact has been repeatedly documented and stated by the party opponent, defendant Obama. This fact is also evidenced by plaintiff’s exhibit 6, previously submitted with plaintiff’s pre-trial order, and apparently authenticated by defendant’s citation to this exhibit in defendant’s ‘Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute,’ number 7.
“The lengths to which the defendant goes in order to avoid the one relevant fact is telling. The defendant asks this court to interpret Georgia election code in a way that leaves the code in conflict with itself, goes against the plain language of the law, leaves the law without meaning, and conflicts with common sense. He then cites freedom-to-associate precedent to support an assertion that has never been supported by such precedent, and which would nullify election codes in several states. All of these arguments are futile attempts to distract from the undeniable conclusion: Barack Obama is not constitutionally qualified to hold the office of president of the United States,” Irion wrote.
He continued, “It is true that some states lack election codes authorizing any state officials to screen candidate selections from political parties. In these states political parties have essentially unfettered authority to determine which candidates appear on ballots. However, these instances represent decisions of the states to not screen candidates. It is the states’ right to decide how to administer its elections. The fact that some states have decided to not protect their citizens from unqualified candidates does not mean that other states don’t have the right to screen candidates. It simply means that some states have left the screening to the political parties.
“Georgia has determined that it is in the best interest of its citizens to screen candidates prior to placement on the ballot.
“Because it is undisputed that Mr. Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, the defendant can never be a natural-born citizen, as that term was defined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, the defendant cannot meet the constitutional requirements to hold the office of president. See U.S. Const. Art. II Section 1.5 Georgia election code requires such a candidate to be stricken from any Georgia ballot.”
The U.S. Supreme Court opinion cited is Minor v. Happersett from 1875. It includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the U.S. Constitution on only the U.S. president.
That case states:
“Without such certification from the party, Obama will not appear on any ballot in the 2012 general election,” his organization said in an announcement when the cases were launched.
Liberty Legal said it is not addressing Obama’s place of birth or his birth certificate.
“These issues are completely irrelevant to the argument. LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined ‘natural-born citizen’ as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen. His place of birth is irrelevant,” the group said.
WND has reported that Maricopa, Ariz., County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has launched a formal law enforcement investigation into whether Obama may submit fraudulent documentation to be put on the state’s election ballot in 2012. A full report is expected within weeks.
The White House in April released an image of a “Certificate of Live Birth” from the state of Hawaii in support of Obama’s claim that he was born in the state. The White House has not addressed the questions raised by Obama’s father’s nationality. In addition, many computer, imaging, document and technology experts have stated the document image appears to be a forgery.
The image that the new lawsuits contend is irrelevant:
An extensive analysis of the issue was conducted by Titus, who has taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also was the founding dean of the College of Law at Regent University, a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney in the Department of Justice.
“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it; there is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”
If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country,” he said.
“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”
WHICH BRINGS ME TO RICK PERRY:
The conservative principles that have guided him as governor are the same principles that will guide him as president: Don’t spend all the money. Cut taxes and regulation. And get government out of the way so the private sector can create jobs and renew the American economy.
Rick Perry has proven that conservative ideas really work. Under his leadership, Texas has gained more than one million jobs while the rest of the nation lost over two million jobs. His state represents 8% of America's population, but nearly 40% of America's job gains since June 2009.
It's time for a leader who will allow us to believe again – to believe that America's best days are ahead, that we are not consigned to a fate of high unemployment and economic despair, and that our place in the world can once again be secure with a policy of peace through strength.
That leader is Rick Perry. And the restoration of the American Dream begins today.
ALL THAT SAID, I DO HAVE A BONE TO PICK WITH RICK PERRY... IT SEEMS HE IS BEING ACCUSED OF WILLFUL BLINDNESS BY AMY CHARRON: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16g6QYB981MH_FtiFt7Sa3-81M17-w5exeje37tU-8hE/edit?hl=en_US
IN PREPARATION FOR 2012, WE WANT TO COMPOSE WINNING TICKETS THAT WILL BE THE BEST FOR OUR COUNTRY. WE WANT CANDIDATES OF EITHER PARTIES TO MAKE THIS A GREAT RACE TO RESTORE OUR COUNTRY TO GREATNESS....
WE WANT CANDIDATES WITH THE FOLLOWING TO DO LIST/AGENDA:
1) REPEAL H.R. 4872 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND DEFUND IT ENTIRELY.
2) IMPEACH OBAMA BY SEPTEMBER 2011, AS HE HAS NO RIGHT TO BE IN OFFICE ANYWAY AND CHEATED US OF A FAIR ELECTION IN 2008.
3) CONSIDER AND APPLY BAREBONES BUDGET CUTS TO OBAMA’S 2010 BUDGET AS PROPOSED TO THE GANG OF 6 BY TEA PARTY GROUPS.
4) CANDIDATES WHO REPRESENT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY NOT POLITICAL SHOWMANSHIP AND GAMES.
5) CANDIDATES WHO ARE ACTIVELY TEARING DOWN THE OBAMA AGENDA NOW AND NOT USING IT AS CAMPAIGN PROMISE OR PLEDGE, BUT ACTIVELY PURSUING ITS ERADICATION, AS WE SPEAK.
6) CANDIDATES WHO VOTE AGAINST RAISING THE DEBT CEILING.
WHAT DID THE 2011 TEA PARTY ACCOMPLISH TOWARDS THOSE
6 RESOLUTIONS:
1) ON 11/11/11, THE TEA PARTY DECLARED H.R. 4872 ‘DEAD LEGISLATION’...
I TOLD JUSTICE KAGAN, THAT I FEARED FOR HER LIFE, AND I WOULD DO ALL IN MY POWER TO DEFUND THE LEGISLATION. WE HAVE NO MONEY TO FINANCE IT ANYWAY, IN A $15 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT, NOW AT 100% OF GDP. IT VIOLATES LAWS OF CONSCIENCE, IT IS MISAPPROPRIATION, AND IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
2) OBAMA’S IMPEACHMENT ORDER BECAME EFFECTIVE 1/1/12:
3) THE TEA PARTY CREATED AN ANNUAL $2.5 TRILLION BASE BUDGET, PREVENTING THE THIRD GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aq5m9QEGEZpOdDE0R0o1YmFJRDdyVkFIcVE0dkthUXc&hl=en_US#gid=0
4) CANDIDATES WHO HAVEN’T CUT THE MUSTARD, WHO WERE SIFTED:
SHE HAD THE REPEAL LEGISLATION SINCE 8/2010, BUT SHE WAS NOT A WOMAN OF HER WORD.
5) THE NOMINEES AGGRESSIVELY GOING AFTER OBAMA, WHILE NOT POLITICIZING IT ARE: RICK PERRY AND RICK SANTORUM
YAH~ RIGHT!
6) TO MICHELE BACHMANN AND RICK PERRY’S CREDIT, YES, THEY DID NOT VOTE TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING. THE PROBLEM IS NOW THAT IT IS NO LONGER A MATTER OF STICKING TO ONE’S PRINCIPLES, BECAUSE THE INTEREST KEEPS MAKING US BUMP OUR HEADS THE LONGER WE WAIT TO ENTER A DEBT PAYMENT PLAN.
PERHAPS WE’LL CHANGE THIS RESOLUTION TO CANDIDATES WHO HAVE A PLAN THAT WORKS TO FUND THE CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT WE WANT, IN A WAY THAT DOESN’T TAX US TO DEATH, OR CUTS OFF THE REMAINING MONEY WE MAKE AFTER PAYING BILLS. AFTER ALL, 9-9-9 WOULD’VE HIT THOSE ON FIXED INCOMES OR THOSE MAKING $1,000 OR SO A MONTH THE HARDEST, INCLUDING SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS, DOUBLE AND TRIPLE-TAXING TO REDUCE INERRANT UNLAWFUL MISAPPROPRIATION OF OBAMA. WE WILL ANALYZE THESE PLANS FROM THEIR BOOKS AND WEBSITES IN DETAIL, LIKE WE DID 9-9-9, THAT DIDN’T WORK TO ADDRESS JOB CREATION OR ONE-SIZED FITS ALL SOLUTION FOR THE DEFICIT, AS CAIN PITCHED IT.
THE 2011 TEA PARTY STRATEGY: our strategy is extremely effective.
Obama will appear in court 1/26, despite it taking Congress the length of a school year to conclude its investigations on the corruption and various vents of misappropriation. Boycotts were the essential ingredient:
WAY TO BOYCOTT THOSE CHINESE GOODS!!! YOU GOT THE INVESTORS' ATTENTION!! WAY TO GO TEA PARTY, ALL DAY EVERY DAY !!!!!
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/earnings/story/2011-11-15/Wal-Mart-3Q/51211668/1 REPORTED 11/15/11: Wal-Mart on Tuesday reported its first quarterly gain in revenue after nine consecutive quarters of declines at its branded U.S. stores by focusing on low pricing and stocking the brands and products that people care most about.
SO WERE PRAYER RALLIES:
http://www.facebook.com/notes/aja-brooks/we-are-coming-against-obama-in-prayer-for-his-treason-with-china-and-other-matte/10150250305746225
WE ARE COMING AGAINST OBAMA IN PRAYER, FOR HIS TREASON WITH CHINA AND OTHER MATTERS:
by Aja Brooks on Thursday, July 7, 2011 at 12:12pm
CHEROKEE NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE
CHIEF AJA BROOKS, CHEROKEE TRIBE/BIRD CLAN
5916 EAST LAKE PKWY. SUITE #107
MCDONOUGH, GA 30253
email: teapartychief@gmail.com
Greetings to all of the Cherokee Nation, elders, respective tribes and recognized clans of the United States:
My name is Aja Brooks, I am descended from my Great grandmother’s line of Cherokee (her father was full-blooded), and my grandmother Peggy Lou Brooks, maiden name Robbins (her grandfather was full blooded) taught me of natural medicine and the Way before her death in 2007. My father is of the deer clan. I have bird and deer clan in my family. While I would like to research my ancestry more, my grandmother’s records contain this rich family history. It is for this reason that I communicate with you today:
My Great-great grandfather’s legacy contradicts the invasive government of today. While I would like to say that the tone of this letter is one of joyful celebration, or that we have realized the actualization of peace as prophesied by the appearance of the white buffalo calf in 1994, I am very concerned as with others a tide of violence against the current governing powers that be. We called for the resignation of Obama last year, regarding his non-citizen status, at which time, cries for his assassination by the general public were only silenced by Congress’ progression towards impeachment proceedings. This matter as being pressed for by several Congressmen in Georgia and those of my own party. At that time, we believed that impeachment was the civil way to redress the grievances being laid at our feet, for due process and to retain peace.
Now it seems that the Supreme Court is reluctant to touch the matter, despite a 22-page report from the FBI regarding the criminality of this disputed non-citizen status of Obama. As with the 2008 election, the court insisted that it was waiting for the plea agreement from Obama’s fundraiser Tony Rezko before pressing him with election fraud for the DNC’s failure to do so, and for the election committee conspiring with them to overlook sufficient investigation of these inquiries.
Over the past year, something more sinister has occurred, my reason for writing you this day 7-7-2011:
While some of this goes back further than just last year, it is important for back drop purposes. In 2008, Obama was implicated with fraudulent donations from two Hamas brothers giving him monetary gifts to lobby him for the New Palestine, a direct violation of lawful lobbying rules and conflict of the United States’ interest with Israel. While this was dropped from lobbying records, it did indeed occur, and only when he was called out on it did he return the money in order not to face ethics charges. Shortly thereafter, the oil rig exploded in the Gulf, and some believe tampering or the possibility of it being an act of terrorism. Our country has also been subject to a security threat once a month during the first year of this sham Administration, and the ties to corruption go further recently with Obama conspiring with the Chinese.
He lobbied China from their last visit to the White House, in which 59,000 fake missile tracker chips were purchased by our Navy, and not only were they defective, they also came equipped with a back door feature that permitted the Chinese to disable them at-will, remotely at their whim. Not only were we stuck with the exorbitant cost to our defense budget, that China imposed with this contract to levy retribution from our debt by defrauding our Navy, Obama and the Chinese imperiled our entire military that could have relied upon their good faith of providing us weaponry that would have failed in our hour of need. Thus, I am further convinced by Obama’s own actions that he is not just a non-citizen illegally occupying the Office without preclusion of Constitutional amendment, but that he is an enemy within.
The exacerbation over the Congressional budget has brought this to head, with Obama wasting $9 trillion in less than 3yrs., outspending any President in the history of the United States. Taking this to heart with his actions of covert war with the Chinese, and his refusal to cut anything from his 2010 budget to avoid the $1.7 trillion dollar vacuum that puts us into the debt supercycle on 8-2-2011, I believe this is intentional on Obama’s part and that he hopes to make us vulnerable to attack on our own soil; with half the value of the Treasury given in pledge to other countries based on these debts his Administration has created in less than 3yrs., is indeed not just a matter of ineptitude, but one of sabotage.
While we have demanded that Congress impeach him by September 2011, in order that we may cut these commitments to the 2010 budget, Obama also refused to write a budget for the 2011 fiscal year, so the cries for his death again have become louder since Congress has not formally impeached him from last year’s request.
While I did tell him that I could order a directive to have him scalped as a Cherokee, as I am very angry with his imposition of H.R. 4872 upon the entire country which does not protect or address the health of Native Americans or our way of life, instead I told him that I would petition the Native American Council to come against him specifically in prayer. We have asked Christians to join against him too in prayer in peaceful resistance, for the treason that he’s committed with China, and we will now boycott Chinese goods. If Congress fails to impeach Obama to protect his life, his blood will be on their hands. It is interesting to note that subsequent investigation of the J.F.K. assassination, that he was murdered in a conspiracy involving Chase Bank, to the tune of $4 billion in silver certificates that would’ve interfered with them making money off of taxpayers in tough economic times. In as much after Kennedy ordered issuance, that these were then taken out of production after his death. Since then, we have gone from an era of demanding accountability and truth to perpetuating and expanding a government machine; lies for political gain, corruption, and conspiracy at such heights and depths of evil that it can no longer be cajoled, tolerated, or left to nought without serious repercussions to befall our entire country.
What I mean now is, Obama intends to finance his 2012 campaign with money from the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the reason for the Weiner-gate scandal, in which Anthony Weiner married a daughter of prominent Muslim Brotherhood association. When Weiner won the NYC mayoral race, he would give the money to the DNC to finance Obama’s nest egg campaign for 2012. The Muslim Brotherhood believes that “Islam is the solution”. There is no room for religious freedom from that singular political scope! C.A.I.R., mosques, and Muslim moderates have also been investigated since 9/11/01, and they have been overtly funding or covertly funding acts of terrorism around the world and are being used as recruitment stations and hideouts for radical theology, the Taliban, and Al Qaida. While Muslims have demanded equal rights and respect of their religion, we do not recognize or respect them until they respect us: until they purge the pollution of the law of abrogation from their interpretation of the Quran and Sura http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150244545516225 that defines Christianity as idolatry.
I am sure that my concerns are duly noted, and that I am not alone. I intend to honor a fast now through 9/11/11 to address these matters through prayer, and I invite you to join me in doing so. There are many ways to go about this, and God has been swift to answer me in various ways regarding my other concerns. This will be no different. I petition that you join me before we take measure to act upon this knowledge. Please feel free to share, post, or recirculate this within your communities, councils, and fireside circles.
May the blessings of the Great Spirit take you over, that peace is sought but it must be maintained as well, and this can only be done through prayer and earnest examination of the truth. I am not afraid of Obama, his Mungiki, or his evil plans, but I am afraid what end I would meet if I did not honor the Great Spirit in addressing you this day.
-Ms. Aja Brooks
GA Tea Party Chief
--
"THE RESTORE AMERICA ACT OF 2012" also known as the '2011-2012 6pt. Tea Party Deficit Reduction Strategy':http://t.co/p63iYHk
ga-teapartychief.blogspot.com
CREATIVE INNOVATIONS
Aja Brooks - Creative Director
5916 East Lake Parkway
Suite #107
McDonough, GA 30253
Production hours:
9AM-3PM EST MON.-THURS.
*now has mobile web*
EMAIL FOR NEW # TO TEXT
teapartychief@gmail.com
Find me online by typing Creative Innovations,
Aja Brooks, Synthesis, Synthesis Group,
2012 Anti-Deficit Purple Agenda, or
*MAD HATTER NEWS* in the Facebook Search Bar.
TEA PARTY LITERATURE 2009-2011 ARCHIVES:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=365798615431
In 2yrs. "The Synthesis" online viewership is 2,000 through direct email, 10,000+ through Facebook Group Sharing. This is not counting twitter audiences, or resharing, which is 4x that, and circulates political circles w/in a month of released edition.
Here are my online listings:
http://www.facebook.com/TeaPartyConsortium http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/profile/thePhoenixhttp://www.facebook.com/pages/GA-Tea-Party/115334838544068 http://www.facebook.com/pages/WRITE-IN-RED-THE-RED-LETTER-CAMPAIGN-GOT-SOMETHING-TO-SAY-TO-CONGRESS/173207994643http://www.facebook.com/cholorecords http://current.com/users/THE_PHOENIX.htmhttp://creativeinnovations27.blogspot.com/ http://www.myyearbook.com/oijvblackribbonhttp://twitter.com/2011teaparty http://twitter.com/cholorecords http://www.myspace.com/creativeinnovations27http://www.myspace.com/viptattoostudiotracer http://artid.com/PHOENIX_ARThttp://hubpages.com/profile/thePHOENIX2010
THE TEA PARTY 2012 ASPIRATIONS AND RESOLUTIONS:
2) DEFUND H.R. 4872 AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD VIOLATING FEDERAL LAW AND STATE FUNDING GUIDELINES
3) REMOVE BLACKLISTED POLITICIANS:
2012 OUST LIST/BLACKLISTED POLITICIANS:
Remember, Ben Nelson provided the final and deciding vote Democrats needed to pass Obamacare.
In exchange for his vote, Nelson took $45 million in taxpayer-funded Medicare subsidies – the "Cornhusker Kickback" – embarrassing every hard working man and woman in Nebraska.
Americans simply can't afford for Ben Nelson to be re-elected.
That's why I'm reaching out to you today. In order to take back this seat next year, we need the early support of conservatives around the country.
As the state Attorney General since 2003, I made sure Nebraska was one of the first states to join the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of President Obama's – and Ben Nelson's – health care law.
I firmly believe Obamacare tramples on individual liberty, is unconstitutional, and unfairly burdens states with a massive new entitlement program.
While serving as Attorney General, I helped create a self-funding Medicaid Fraud Unit, which has recovered more than $33 million for state taxpayers. Throughout my career, I have worked to reduce the size and reach of the Federal government. I'll do the same in the United States Senate.
2. RAHN MAYO - (D-91) GEORGIA
3. RALPH LONG - (D-61) GEORGIA
4. ALISHA MORGAN - (D-39) GEORGIA
5. HUGH FLOYD - (D-99) GEORGIA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the message is that while you may have escaped the first round of Tea Party cuts, you won't make it past 2012. I deleted 25 email addresses, struck them from the Assembly roll today for email contacts, and only one member went onto to run for Congress! Not only that, but Tea Party platform succeeding in regaining House leadership, to repeal H.R. 4872, and we will now defund in the Senate. Please contact me with your state's blacklist.
Re: CIMS00003298393 - FOLLOW-UP TO INFORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE FCC FOR VIOLATION OF STATION LICENSE:
The crime was not on the internet: they broadcasted hate-filled anti-Christian ads while 5 churches blew up, on the radio, the day that it happened on CHRISTMAS DAY, during their evening broadcast, when no one was at the station.
It was a robo-ad for the morning show, which they have refused to apologize for, nor has Clear Channel apologized, as we were only seeking a written apology, no monetary suit or calumny:
If you don't strip Project961/Atlanta's radio station of their license, we will make sure that they don't have the money to pay for it: or we will hit their investors in the pocket, by refusing to buy their advertised products.
Starting with Clear Channel and affiliates... because that doesn't cost us to pay for a lawsuit, but we have the choice to boycott the station and anything associated with it.
Good day,
Ms. Aja Brooks
Tea Party Chief declines phone-in interview with Project961 Atlanta radio station, TWICE:
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Romans 11:32
-----Original Message-----
From: AJA BROOKS <teapartychief@gmail.com>
To: cbuteg <cbuteg@yahoo.com>
Cc: WSB-TV Talk2Us (CTV-Atlanta) <talk2us@wsbtv.com>
Sent: Wed, Dec 28, 2011 2:55 pm
Subject: Tea Party Chief declines phone-in interview with Project961 Atlanta radio station, TWICE:
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 2:26 PM, AJA BROOKS <teapartychief@gmail.com> wrote:
Aja's Profile · Project 9-6-1's Profile · Aja's Wall
Aja Brooks
Bill Maher goes too far this time.... oh and Project961.com ran ads mocking Jesus on Christmas, the day of the bombing of 5 Catholic Churches, in which they called him "Baby J" as a Modern day Jesus, who counseled women to become strippers instead of learning how to fish to survive, and who counsled men who had impregnated a woman that they weren't married to, to pay for an abortion. Not only was it disrespectful to all Christians, it was near blasphemy to discredit Jesus and misrepresent him in such a way. It also used no discretion to run the ads while no one would be manning the radio station or when the FCC would not be in town. Then to have recorded the ads, and to automatically robo-play them when 5 churches in Nigeria where bombed, equally devastating and worth reviling. http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2F2011%2F12%2F27%2Fbill-mahers-tim-tebow-twe_n_1171902.html&h=kAQEfFNYpAQHbUC9zKYZxKhscfssMMK9kPhqdIwoH8wIrsQ&enc=AZOLiIX3fgniMjaEZUWh7yjsiUGO3OdTne6gjjIY7lTgtUgt1X5gENit6AIzjKa3oadZsi11wBuv8vOaLovYj7yL
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:14 PM, <FCCInfo@fcc.gov> wrote:
CNBC – 1 hour 27 minutes ago
PARTICIPATE: RESHARE, MEET ONCE A DAY OR ONCE A WEEK, AND EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH AND THOUGHT. I WOULD SUGGEST PLANNING AHEAD; STOCKPILE FOOD, WEAPONS, GOLD, AND ADJUST YOUR STOCKS ACCORDINGLY. IF WE CAN NOT REACH AN AGREEMENT BY MARCH, THE GOVERNMENT WILL SHUT DOWN THIS FOURTH TIME, AND YOU NEED TO BE READY TO SURVIVE FOR THE NEXT 9 MONTHS OR SO....
Parraz said “the only way we can do this is to engage the citizens in a way in which they have never been engaged before.”
He has focused his strategy on the five-person Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the governing body that directly oversees the operation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.
“We are going to the Jan. 11 meeting of the Board of Supervisors to get placed on the agenda the recent Department of Justice and the report of the 400 uninvestigated sex crimes,” he explained.
A vote of three of the five supervisors or a decision by the chairman is required to get an item placed on the board’s agenda.
As WND reported, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice has issued a 22-page report charging that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has engaged in racial profiling of Hispanics and other violations of federal civil rights laws.
Parraz’s maneuver is strictly political, since the Board of Supervisors lacks the authority to force the sheriff to resign.
If at first you don’t succeed …
This is by no means Parraz’s first attempt to pressure the Board of Supervisors to demand Arpaio’s resignation.
A few weeks ago, Parraz tried his maneuver without success at the Dec. 14 board meeting. He appeared with about 100 members of his non-profit group, Citizens for a Better Arizona, to get his complaints against Arpaio placed on the agenda.
Undeterred, Parraz now intends to make a repeat appeal to the board at its Jan. 11 meeting.
“We are trying to get these items on the Board of Supervisors agenda so we can introduce a resolution to demand the resignation of Sheriff Arpaio,” Parraz said, explaining that a resignation demand could only be introduced in relation to an item already on the agenda.
“Once we are on the agenda, we can during our presentation say that because of this behavior – this wall of distrust, these constitutional violations, the racial profiling unprecedented against Latinos – we want you to join us in calling for Sheriff Arpaio’s resignation.”
WND EXCLUSIVE
COURT: OBAMA MUST BE ‘CONSTITUTIONALLY’ ELIGIBLE
Judge denies president's motion to dismiss challenge to 2012 candidacy
Published: 19 hours agoby BOB UNRUH Email | ArchiveBob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.More ↓
Subscribe to author feedFor the first time in dozens of court cases challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, a judge has ruled that Obama must, in order to be a candidate on the Georgia ballot for president in 2012, meet the constitutional demands for candidates for the office.
A hearing has been scheduled later this month for evidence on the issue that has plagued Obama and his presidency since long before he took office. At issue is the constitutional requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen.” Some allege he was not born in the U.S. as he has claimed and, therefore, is not eligible.
Others, including top constitutional expert Herb Titus, contend that the term “natural-born citizen,” which is not defined in the Constitution, would have been understood when the document was written to mean the offspring of two U.S. citizens. That argument is supported by a 19th-century U.S. Supreme Court decision
Under that standard, Obama could not qualify, because his father, as identified on the “Certificate of Live Birth” image released by the White House, was a foreign national who came from Kenya to study in the U.S. and never was a citizen.
The ruling came today from Judge Michael W. Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings.
In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.
While Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had argued that the requirements didn’t apply to candidates for a presidential primary, the judge said that isn’t how he reads state law.
“Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this court finds that the cases cited by [Obama] are not controlling. When the court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step … is to examine the plain statutory language,” the judge wrote. “Section 21-2-1(a) states that ‘every candidate for federal and state office’ must meet the qualifications for holding that particular office, and this court has seen no case law limiting this provision, nor found any language that contains an exception for the office of president or stating that the provision does not apply to the presidential preference primary.”
The decision from Malihi came as a result of a series of complaints that were consolidated by the court. They were brought against Obama’s inclusion on the 2012 election primary ballot by David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by attorney Orly Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield.
 *Barack Obama |
The judge’s decision was to refuse to dismiss the complaints, an action that had been sought by Obama. He also granted a motion to sever the cases, and he scheduled a hearing at 9 a.m. on Jan. 26 for the complaint brought by Weldon. Following immediately will be hearings for the cases brought by Swensson and Powell, and the issue raised by Farrar, Lax, Judy, Malaren and Roth will be third.
Malihi’s ruling said: “The court finds that defendant is a candidate for federal office who has been certified by the state executive committee of a political party, and therefore must, under Code Section 21-2-5, meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
There are similar challenges to Obama’s 2012 candidacy being raised before state election or other commissions in Tennessee, Arizona and New Hampshire as well.
Taitz told WND she will present the decision to a court in Hawaii, where she is arguing to have access to Obama’s original birth documentation as it exists in the state, which for many years allowed relatives of babies to simply make a statement and register a birth, even though the child may not have been born in Hawaii.
Irion had argued in his opposition to Obama’s demand to dismiss the concerns that, “The only fact relevant to this case is the fact that the defendant’s father was not a U.S. citizen. This fact has been repeatedly documented and stated by the party opponent, defendant Obama. This fact is also evidenced by plaintiff’s exhibit 6, previously submitted with plaintiff’s pre-trial order, and apparently authenticated by defendant’s citation to this exhibit in defendant’s ‘Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute,’ number 7.
“The lengths to which the defendant goes in order to avoid the one relevant fact is telling. The defendant asks this court to interpret Georgia election code in a way that leaves the code in conflict with itself, goes against the plain language of the law, leaves the law without meaning, and conflicts with common sense. He then cites freedom-to-associate precedent to support an assertion that has never been supported by such precedent, and which would nullify election codes in several states. All of these arguments are futile attempts to distract from the undeniable conclusion: Barack Obama is not constitutionally qualified to hold the office of president of the United States,” Irion wrote.
He continued, “It is true that some states lack election codes authorizing any state officials to screen candidate selections from political parties. In these states political parties have essentially unfettered authority to determine which candidates appear on ballots. However, these instances represent decisions of the states to not screen candidates. It is the states’ right to decide how to administer its elections. The fact that some states have decided to not protect their citizens from unqualified candidates does not mean that other states don’t have the right to screen candidates. It simply means that some states have left the screening to the political parties.
“Georgia has determined that it is in the best interest of its citizens to screen candidates prior to placement on the ballot.
“Because it is undisputed that Mr. Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, the defendant can never be a natural-born citizen, as that term was defined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, the defendant cannot meet the constitutional requirements to hold the office of president. See U.S. Const. Art. II Section 1.5 Georgia election code requires such a candidate to be stricken from any Georgia ballot.”
The U.S. Supreme Court opinion cited is Minor v. Happersett from 1875. It includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the U.S. Constitution on only the U.S. president.
That case states:
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
Irion said the goal would be an injunction that would deprive Obama of Democratic Party certification.“Without such certification from the party, Obama will not appear on any ballot in the 2012 general election,” his organization said in an announcement when the cases were launched.
Liberty Legal said it is not addressing Obama’s place of birth or his birth certificate.
“These issues are completely irrelevant to the argument. LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined ‘natural-born citizen’ as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen. His place of birth is irrelevant,” the group said.
WND has reported that Maricopa, Ariz., County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has launched a formal law enforcement investigation into whether Obama may submit fraudulent documentation to be put on the state’s election ballot in 2012. A full report is expected within weeks.
The White House in April released an image of a “Certificate of Live Birth” from the state of Hawaii in support of Obama’s claim that he was born in the state. The White House has not addressed the questions raised by Obama’s father’s nationality. In addition, many computer, imaging, document and technology experts have stated the document image appears to be a forgery.
The image that the new lawsuits contend is irrelevant:
 *Obama long-form birth certificate released April 27 by the White House |
An extensive analysis of the issue was conducted by Titus, who has taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also was the founding dean of the College of Law at Regent University, a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney in the Department of Justice.
“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it; there is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”
If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country,” he said.
“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”
WHICH BRINGS ME TO RICK PERRY:
Rick Perry: the Right Leader for Tough Times
WHO: RICK PERRY ‘RETIRED’ GOVERNOR OF TEXAS
WHAT: JOB CREATION
WHEN: REPEALING H.R. 4872, PASSING A BALANCED BUDGET, REPEALING OVER 200+ OBAMA REGULATIONS
WHERE: NATIONWIDE, NOT JUST TEXAS
WHY: LIVED THE AMERICAN DREAM, AND ENSURING IT FOR THE FUTURE GENERATIONS
"I am a conservative of conviction, not of convenience. As president, I will take a wrecking ball to the Washington establishment and get government out of the way so we can get America working again."–Gov. Rick Perry
Rick Perry will get America working again.The conservative principles that have guided him as governor are the same principles that will guide him as president: Don’t spend all the money. Cut taxes and regulation. And get government out of the way so the private sector can create jobs and renew the American economy.
Rick Perry has proven that conservative ideas really work. Under his leadership, Texas has gained more than one million jobs while the rest of the nation lost over two million jobs. His state represents 8% of America's population, but nearly 40% of America's job gains since June 2009.
It's time for a leader who will allow us to believe again – to believe that America's best days are ahead, that we are not consigned to a fate of high unemployment and economic despair, and that our place in the world can once again be secure with a policy of peace through strength.
That leader is Rick Perry. And the restoration of the American Dream begins today.
ALL THAT SAID, I DO HAVE A BONE TO PICK WITH RICK PERRY... IT SEEMS HE IS BEING ACCUSED OF WILLFUL BLINDNESS BY AMY CHARRON: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16g6QYB981MH_FtiFt7Sa3-81M17-w5exeje37tU-8hE/edit?hl=en_US
WHILE CHARRON HAS A STRONG CASE AGAINST THE FOLLOWING, WHO WERE PERRY’S PEERS:
CPS/DFCS in Texas needs to be audited, along with the following:
CPS workers - Debra Reyna and Jennifer Clark for perjury and misconduct
CPS head - Debra Mayo for perjury and conspiracy to commit crimes of misconduct
CPS Regional Director - Scott Dixon for failure to ethically operate CPS within the integrity of law for the state of Texas
Judge Pat Shelton - for legislating from the bench and failing to honor family law of Texas, in accordance and accounts of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and accepting perjurious testimony
UNLESS CHARRON CAN PROVE THAT PERRY AS GOVERNOR SIGNED HER COMMITTAL, THUS VIOLATING HER CIVIL RIGHTS AND NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS, OR THAT HE COMMITTED WILLFUL BLINDNESS IN HAND-SELECTING THE JUDGE FOR THE TASK, IN THAT HE BRIBED HIM, PAID HIM, OR GAVE HIM SOME SORT OF POLITICAL FAVOR IN ADDITION TO THE EXTRA CASES HE WAS HANDLING AS A GUEST JUDGE, CHARRON MAY SEEK RESTITUTION AND CALUMNY FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS AND WIN, THEN WIN IN A SUIT ON PERRY. WHILE THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO GET PERRY CHARGED WITH A FEDERAL CRIME OR EVEN AN ETHICS PROBE IN TEXAS ON HIM ALONE, IT IS ENOUGH FOR HER TO WIN A CIVIL LAWSUIT AGAINST HIM, IF SHE IS AWARDED A FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST THE STATE.
IT IS NOT ONLY A STUMP IN THE EYE OF TEXAS JUSTICE, BUT THESE PEOPLE, WHO ARE PERRY’S RESPONSIBILITY IN ANSWERING TO HIM, MAKE HIS LEADERSHIP LOOK BAD.... I MEAN DOWNRIGHT ROTTEN.
WHAT IS EXPEDIENT AND COST EFFECTIVE FOR TEXAS IN FROWNING UPON SINGLE MOTHERS CAN MORPH INTO A REALLY EXPENSIVE LAWSUIT OVER VIOLATION OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND IN WINNING SUIT AGAINST THE OTHERS LISTED, CHARRON COULD THEN SUE PERRY FOR HIS FAILURE TO ACT, INTERVENE, OR FOR SIMPLY LETTING IT PASS BY HIS DESK WITHOUT QUESTIONING THE LEADERSHIP HE OVERSAW.
WHILE THERE IS A DEFINITE ISSUE OF MALPRACTICE, THIS IS NOT THE KIND OF LEADERSHIP ANYONE WANTS TO SEE IN A PRESIDENT. I PRAY THAT AS PERRY REASSESSES, THAT HE SEE THE ERROR OF THIS. IT IS HURTING HIS CREDIBILITY WITH FISCAL CONSERVATIVES WHO SEE HIS RECORD, BUT WHO WOULD TURN TO RICK SANTORUM INSTEAD, WHO PUTS FAMILY VALUES ABOVE STATE POLICY, IN LETTING THAT GUIDE PRESIDENTIAL POLICY.
PERRY’S STRATEGY, POST-IOWA, IN THE WAKE OF BACHMANN’S WANING ‘CORE OF CONVICTION’:
- PERRY IS GOING TO HAVE TO STOP PUNCTUATING.... AT THIS POINT, WE ALL KNOW THAT HIS AD DISAGREES WITH RICK SANTORUM’S EARMARKS, BUT IT IS UP TO PERRY TO EXPLAIN WHY HIS POLICIES WORKED IN TEXAS, AND WHY THEY WILL WORK FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.
- PERRY NEEDS TO SHOW EVERYONE HOW HUMBLE HE IS: HE CAME FROM PAINT CREEK, DIDN’T HAVE RUNNING WATER, SERVED IN THE MILITARY RIGHT OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL.
- PERRY NEEDS FOR EVERYONE TO CONNECT ON HOW HIS LOVE FOR COUNTRY STILL MOTIVATES HIM TO WANT TO SERVE HIS COUNTRY, THOUGH HE COULD SIT BACK AND NOT WORK, COLLECTING HIS MILITARY PENSION.
- PERRY NEEDS TO SHOWCASE HIS 10YRS. AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS. IF THAT IS ALL THAT PERRY HAS HOLDING HIM BACK, IS THE AMY CHARRON CASE, THEN THAT CAN BE EASILY SETTLED WITH HER GETTING PROPER RECOURSE THROUGH COURT. SHE CLAIMS HE WON’T PERMIT HER TO FILE REPORTS AGAINST ANYONE, BUT SHE HAS FEDERAL AGENCIES AND LAWYERS WHO ARE PICKING UP HER CASE.
- PERRY NEEDS TO WORRY LESS ABOUT LOOKING BAD, AND HE NEEDS TO INSTEAD CONCENTRATE ON WHY HE LOOKS GOOD AND WHY HE IS BETTER THAN ANYONE UP ON THAT STAGE: WE WILL DISCUSS HIS BOOK AT LENGTH AND OTHERS, IN UPCOMING NEWSLETTERS.
- GOING AFTER SANTORUM WILL NOT HELP HIM: HE MUST OUTWIT NEWT, SHOW HIS FISCAL POLICIES SUPERIOR TO THAT OF NEWT, ROMNEY, AND PAUL, WHICH HE CAN DO. AFTER TAKING THEIR SUPPORT, IT WILL BE EASY FOR HIM TO SAY TO SANTORUM: EVEN IF YOU WIN THE NOMINATION, YOU CAN NOT DUPLICATE AS PRESIDENT THE SUCCESS THAT I HAVE AS GOVERNOR, AND THAT MAKES ME WORTHY OF THE NOMINATION AND THE OFFICE.
TALKING POINTS:
WITH BACHMANN’S PERT EXIT, PERRY EASILY GETS THOSE VOTES OVER NEWT. NEWT’S CAMPAIGN HAS BEEN WINTERIZED BY IOWA, AND HE WILL NOT UNTHAW WITH GEORGIA TEA PARTY VOTERS, MODERATES, AND THE EVANGELICAL VOTE, WHEN THEY WILL MIMIC IOWA’S LEAD.
NEWT WILL HAVE TO RESURRECT HIS CAMPAIGN FROM THE DEAD, AND IT WILL TAKE A JESUS MIRACLE TO CONVINCE US THAT HE IS THE NOMINEE.
HUNTSMAN IS NOT REALLY A CONSIDERATION, EXCEPT TO RILE UP NEWT. ONCE NEWT IS RILED UP, HE WILL LOSE HIS OLD HAT SUPPORT, WHO ARE ALREADY WANTING TO PUT THEIR MONEY ELSEWHERE, AS THEY ARE SUFFERING PRIMARY REGRET, FOR LIFTING HIM UP AND SETTLING THIS MAN’S SELF-INDUCED -$1.5 MILLION CAMPAIGN DEBT FOR NOTHING.
YES, IT HAS BEEN GOOD PRESS FODDER, YES IT HAS PUT PRESSURE ON THE DEMOCRATS, BUT I AM CONVINCED THAT NOTHING COULD FORCE OBAMA TO COME BACK TO HIS DESK, SIGN THE PIPELINE PERMIT, OR ACTUALLY DO ANY WORK EVEN IF ISRAEL WAS ON FIRE.
THE TEA PARTY 2011 REFLECTIONS:
IN PREPARATION FOR 2012, WE WANT TO COMPOSE WINNING TICKETS THAT WILL BE THE BEST FOR OUR COUNTRY. WE WANT CANDIDATES OF EITHER PARTIES TO MAKE THIS A GREAT RACE TO RESTORE OUR COUNTRY TO GREATNESS....
WE WANT CANDIDATES WITH THE FOLLOWING TO DO LIST/AGENDA:
1) REPEAL H.R. 4872 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND DEFUND IT ENTIRELY.
2) IMPEACH OBAMA BY SEPTEMBER 2011, AS HE HAS NO RIGHT TO BE IN OFFICE ANYWAY AND CHEATED US OF A FAIR ELECTION IN 2008.
3) CONSIDER AND APPLY BAREBONES BUDGET CUTS TO OBAMA’S 2010 BUDGET AS PROPOSED TO THE GANG OF 6 BY TEA PARTY GROUPS.
4) CANDIDATES WHO REPRESENT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY NOT POLITICAL SHOWMANSHIP AND GAMES.
5) CANDIDATES WHO ARE ACTIVELY TEARING DOWN THE OBAMA AGENDA NOW AND NOT USING IT AS CAMPAIGN PROMISE OR PLEDGE, BUT ACTIVELY PURSUING ITS ERADICATION, AS WE SPEAK.
6) CANDIDATES WHO VOTE AGAINST RAISING THE DEBT CEILING.
WHAT DID THE 2011 TEA PARTY ACCOMPLISH TOWARDS THOSE
6 RESOLUTIONS:
1) ON 11/11/11, THE TEA PARTY DECLARED H.R. 4872 ‘DEAD LEGISLATION’...
- NO ONE GOT HEALTH INSURANCE,
- PREMIUMS WENT UP,
- AND THE CLASS ACT WAS REPEALED.
- THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE WAS RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN THE LOWER COURTS,
- AND THE LEGISLATION HEADS TO THE SUPREME COURT.
I TOLD JUSTICE KAGAN, THAT I FEARED FOR HER LIFE, AND I WOULD DO ALL IN MY POWER TO DEFUND THE LEGISLATION. WE HAVE NO MONEY TO FINANCE IT ANYWAY, IN A $15 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT, NOW AT 100% OF GDP. IT VIOLATES LAWS OF CONSCIENCE, IT IS MISAPPROPRIATION, AND IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
2) OBAMA’S IMPEACHMENT ORDER BECAME EFFECTIVE 1/1/12:
- FOR ALL INTENT AND PURPOSES, THE TEA PARTY CONSIDERS HIM IMPEACHED.
- SUBSEQUENT TO THE RULING BEING PUBLICLY READ ONLINE, OBAMA SCHEDULED ON 1/3/12 JANUARY DOCKET TO APPEAR IN GA COURT FOR INELIGIBILITY CHARGES ON 1/26/12,
- AFTER THE TEA PARTY PUSHED FOR 3 YEARS TO GET A SUBPOENA, FOR A BIRTH CERTIFICATE THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE.
- HOLDER’S HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR 1/24/12, AFTER WHICH TIME, OBAMA HAS NO LEGAL SHIELD AND WE MAY PROCEED WITH REMOVAL/FORMAL IMPEACHMENT, AS HOLDER REFUSES TO DEPORT OBAMA.
- WE WILL ALSO BE GEARING TOWARD RECALLING AND REPLACING HALF OF THE SENATE.
3) THE TEA PARTY CREATED AN ANNUAL $2.5 TRILLION BASE BUDGET, PREVENTING THE THIRD GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aq5m9QEGEZpOdDE0R0o1YmFJRDdyVkFIcVE0dkthUXc&hl=en_US#gid=0
- THE TEA PARTY RE-PRIORITIZED GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND DEFINED ITS CONSTITUTIONAL STIPULATIONS
- THE TEA PARTY MANAGED TO ANALYZE THE BUDGET, THEN MAKE CUTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO GET A UNANIMOUS MOTION TO PASS A CONTINUING RESOLUTION.
- TO ACHIEVE THE CUTS NECESSARY, WE WILL HAVE TO CUT VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS BY PERCENTAGES AND ENTER INTO A DEBT PAYMENT/DEBT CONSOLIDATION PLAN.
- THE TEA PARTY DID GET GRANTS RESTRICTED, FOREIGN AID CUT OFF TO PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN, WHILE EXPOSING OBAMA’S UNETHICAL TIES TO CAIR AND OTHER RELIGIOUS FRONTS FUNDING TERRORIST OPERATIONS/ORGANIZATIONS.
4) CANDIDATES WHO HAVEN’T CUT THE MUSTARD, WHO WERE SIFTED:
- SPEAKER BOEHNER AND MARCO RUBIO DECLINE THE NOD, TO HAVE THEIR NAMES THROWN IN THE HAT
- TRUMP DECIDES NOT TO RUN, WRITES FANTASTIC BOOK INSTEAD
- PALIN REFUSES TO RUN AGAIN - HER MEMOIR AND BOOK TOUR WERE A HUGE TEASER AND LET DOWN, AND SHE LEFT MANY FOLLOWERS WONDERING.... ‘WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?”
- JOHNSON DROPS OUT - LEGALIZATION ISSUES ARE LEGISLATION ISSUES, NOT A MATTER OF PRESIDENTIAL POLICY CHANGE
- CAIN BOWS OUT - HIS PERSONAL LIFE WAS A DISTRACTION TO THE GOP AND TEA PARTY MESSAGE OF CONSERVATIVE VALUES, AND HIS 9-9-9 WAS A GIMMICK FOR OBAMA’S MISAPPROPRIATION, NOT A VALID BUDGETING SOLUTION. IT RAN WELL FOR A BUSINESS MODEL, BUT NOT A GOVERNMENT MODEL.
- BACHMANN SHOWN OUT - THE IOWA CAUCUS PROVED THAT BACHMANN COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE SUCCESS OF HER CONSERVATIVE MESSAGE FROM WINNING THE STRAW POLL, BECAUSE SHE DID NOT PASS THE REPEAL BILL, BUT POLITICIZED IT FOR HER CAMPAIGN: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jK6-kGCB_Dbb5K98YSS9o9kSNBwLJsSb7XQ5GQSvTks/edit?authkey=CIS_je8I&hl=en_US&authkey=CIS_je8I
SHE HAD THE REPEAL LEGISLATION SINCE 8/2010, BUT SHE WAS NOT A WOMAN OF HER WORD.
5) THE NOMINEES AGGRESSIVELY GOING AFTER OBAMA, WHILE NOT POLITICIZING IT ARE: RICK PERRY AND RICK SANTORUM
- THE TEA PARTY WITHDREW THEIR SUPPORT FOR BACHMANN EARLY ON
- THE TEA PARTY CEDED FROM THE GOP IN GEORGIA, OVER THE CHAIRMANSHIP RACE AND GOV. DEAL’S ENDORSEMENT OF NEWT
- THE TEA PARTY WITHDREW IT’S SUPPORT OF HERMAN CAIN, THE DAY HE SHOWED UP LATE TO THE CSPAN INTERVIEW, DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS OF PAYOUTS FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT, FOR LYING TO A REPORTER
- ROMNEY, NEWT, AND PAUL HAVE ALL POLITICIZED THE DAMAGE OBAMA HAS DONE TO OUR NATION: THEY ARE WRITING BOOKS, COLLECTING MONEY, AND FROLICKING WHILE WE’RE GOING UP IN FLAMES, ASKING YOU TO VOTE THEM IN AS PRESIDENT, AND THEY WILL MAGICALLY FIX IT ALL.... JUST LIKE OBAMA PROMISED HE WOULD FIX WHAT BUSH JR. DID HIS SECOND TERM...
YAH~ RIGHT!
6) TO MICHELE BACHMANN AND RICK PERRY’S CREDIT, YES, THEY DID NOT VOTE TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING. THE PROBLEM IS NOW THAT IT IS NO LONGER A MATTER OF STICKING TO ONE’S PRINCIPLES, BECAUSE THE INTEREST KEEPS MAKING US BUMP OUR HEADS THE LONGER WE WAIT TO ENTER A DEBT PAYMENT PLAN.
PERHAPS WE’LL CHANGE THIS RESOLUTION TO CANDIDATES WHO HAVE A PLAN THAT WORKS TO FUND THE CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT WE WANT, IN A WAY THAT DOESN’T TAX US TO DEATH, OR CUTS OFF THE REMAINING MONEY WE MAKE AFTER PAYING BILLS. AFTER ALL, 9-9-9 WOULD’VE HIT THOSE ON FIXED INCOMES OR THOSE MAKING $1,000 OR SO A MONTH THE HARDEST, INCLUDING SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS, DOUBLE AND TRIPLE-TAXING TO REDUCE INERRANT UNLAWFUL MISAPPROPRIATION OF OBAMA. WE WILL ANALYZE THESE PLANS FROM THEIR BOOKS AND WEBSITES IN DETAIL, LIKE WE DID 9-9-9, THAT DIDN’T WORK TO ADDRESS JOB CREATION OR ONE-SIZED FITS ALL SOLUTION FOR THE DEFICIT, AS CAIN PITCHED IT.
THE 2011 TEA PARTY STRATEGY: our strategy is extremely effective.
Obama will appear in court 1/26, despite it taking Congress the length of a school year to conclude its investigations on the corruption and various vents of misappropriation. Boycotts were the essential ingredient:
SUCCESSFUL BOYCOTT CELEBRATED
Like ·
- Mark Saint-John, Tracy Hood and 2 others like this.
- Mark Buse Don't boycott Made-in-Taiwan electronics, which are also labelled "Made in China"
- December 28, 2011 at 3:51pm · Like
- Allison Brooks I think we should buy American made goods, just out of principle....
- December 28, 2011 at 10:30pm · Like
WAY TO BOYCOTT THOSE CHINESE GOODS!!! YOU GOT THE INVESTORS' ATTENTION!! WAY TO GO TEA PARTY, ALL DAY EVERY DAY !!!!!
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/earnings/story/2011-11-15/Wal-Mart-3Q/51211668/1 REPORTED 11/15/11: Wal-Mart on Tuesday reported its first quarterly gain in revenue after nine consecutive quarters of declines at its branded U.S. stores by focusing on low pricing and stocking the brands and products that people care most about.
SO WERE PRAYER RALLIES:
WE ARE COMING AGAINST OBAMA IN PRAYER, FOR HIS TREASON WITH CHINA AND OTHER MATTERS:
By Aja Brooks in Unified Militia Communications Network · Edit Doc · Deletehttp://www.facebook.com/notes/aja-brooks/we-are-coming-against-obama-in-prayer-for-his-treason-with-china-and-other-matte/10150250305746225
WE ARE COMING AGAINST OBAMA IN PRAYER, FOR HIS TREASON WITH CHINA AND OTHER MATTERS:
by Aja Brooks on Thursday, July 7, 2011 at 12:12pm
CHEROKEE NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE
CHIEF AJA BROOKS, CHEROKEE TRIBE/BIRD CLAN
5916 EAST LAKE PKWY. SUITE #107
MCDONOUGH, GA 30253
email: teapartychief@gmail.com
Greetings to all of the Cherokee Nation, elders, respective tribes and recognized clans of the United States:
My name is Aja Brooks, I am descended from my Great grandmother’s line of Cherokee (her father was full-blooded), and my grandmother Peggy Lou Brooks, maiden name Robbins (her grandfather was full blooded) taught me of natural medicine and the Way before her death in 2007. My father is of the deer clan. I have bird and deer clan in my family. While I would like to research my ancestry more, my grandmother’s records contain this rich family history. It is for this reason that I communicate with you today:
My Great-great grandfather’s legacy contradicts the invasive government of today. While I would like to say that the tone of this letter is one of joyful celebration, or that we have realized the actualization of peace as prophesied by the appearance of the white buffalo calf in 1994, I am very concerned as with others a tide of violence against the current governing powers that be. We called for the resignation of Obama last year, regarding his non-citizen status, at which time, cries for his assassination by the general public were only silenced by Congress’ progression towards impeachment proceedings. This matter as being pressed for by several Congressmen in Georgia and those of my own party. At that time, we believed that impeachment was the civil way to redress the grievances being laid at our feet, for due process and to retain peace.
Now it seems that the Supreme Court is reluctant to touch the matter, despite a 22-page report from the FBI regarding the criminality of this disputed non-citizen status of Obama. As with the 2008 election, the court insisted that it was waiting for the plea agreement from Obama’s fundraiser Tony Rezko before pressing him with election fraud for the DNC’s failure to do so, and for the election committee conspiring with them to overlook sufficient investigation of these inquiries.
Over the past year, something more sinister has occurred, my reason for writing you this day 7-7-2011:
While some of this goes back further than just last year, it is important for back drop purposes. In 2008, Obama was implicated with fraudulent donations from two Hamas brothers giving him monetary gifts to lobby him for the New Palestine, a direct violation of lawful lobbying rules and conflict of the United States’ interest with Israel. While this was dropped from lobbying records, it did indeed occur, and only when he was called out on it did he return the money in order not to face ethics charges. Shortly thereafter, the oil rig exploded in the Gulf, and some believe tampering or the possibility of it being an act of terrorism. Our country has also been subject to a security threat once a month during the first year of this sham Administration, and the ties to corruption go further recently with Obama conspiring with the Chinese.
He lobbied China from their last visit to the White House, in which 59,000 fake missile tracker chips were purchased by our Navy, and not only were they defective, they also came equipped with a back door feature that permitted the Chinese to disable them at-will, remotely at their whim. Not only were we stuck with the exorbitant cost to our defense budget, that China imposed with this contract to levy retribution from our debt by defrauding our Navy, Obama and the Chinese imperiled our entire military that could have relied upon their good faith of providing us weaponry that would have failed in our hour of need. Thus, I am further convinced by Obama’s own actions that he is not just a non-citizen illegally occupying the Office without preclusion of Constitutional amendment, but that he is an enemy within.
The exacerbation over the Congressional budget has brought this to head, with Obama wasting $9 trillion in less than 3yrs., outspending any President in the history of the United States. Taking this to heart with his actions of covert war with the Chinese, and his refusal to cut anything from his 2010 budget to avoid the $1.7 trillion dollar vacuum that puts us into the debt supercycle on 8-2-2011, I believe this is intentional on Obama’s part and that he hopes to make us vulnerable to attack on our own soil; with half the value of the Treasury given in pledge to other countries based on these debts his Administration has created in less than 3yrs., is indeed not just a matter of ineptitude, but one of sabotage.
While we have demanded that Congress impeach him by September 2011, in order that we may cut these commitments to the 2010 budget, Obama also refused to write a budget for the 2011 fiscal year, so the cries for his death again have become louder since Congress has not formally impeached him from last year’s request.
While I did tell him that I could order a directive to have him scalped as a Cherokee, as I am very angry with his imposition of H.R. 4872 upon the entire country which does not protect or address the health of Native Americans or our way of life, instead I told him that I would petition the Native American Council to come against him specifically in prayer. We have asked Christians to join against him too in prayer in peaceful resistance, for the treason that he’s committed with China, and we will now boycott Chinese goods. If Congress fails to impeach Obama to protect his life, his blood will be on their hands. It is interesting to note that subsequent investigation of the J.F.K. assassination, that he was murdered in a conspiracy involving Chase Bank, to the tune of $4 billion in silver certificates that would’ve interfered with them making money off of taxpayers in tough economic times. In as much after Kennedy ordered issuance, that these were then taken out of production after his death. Since then, we have gone from an era of demanding accountability and truth to perpetuating and expanding a government machine; lies for political gain, corruption, and conspiracy at such heights and depths of evil that it can no longer be cajoled, tolerated, or left to nought without serious repercussions to befall our entire country.
What I mean now is, Obama intends to finance his 2012 campaign with money from the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the reason for the Weiner-gate scandal, in which Anthony Weiner married a daughter of prominent Muslim Brotherhood association. When Weiner won the NYC mayoral race, he would give the money to the DNC to finance Obama’s nest egg campaign for 2012. The Muslim Brotherhood believes that “Islam is the solution”. There is no room for religious freedom from that singular political scope! C.A.I.R., mosques, and Muslim moderates have also been investigated since 9/11/01, and they have been overtly funding or covertly funding acts of terrorism around the world and are being used as recruitment stations and hideouts for radical theology, the Taliban, and Al Qaida. While Muslims have demanded equal rights and respect of their religion, we do not recognize or respect them until they respect us: until they purge the pollution of the law of abrogation from their interpretation of the Quran and Sura http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150244545516225 that defines Christianity as idolatry.
I am sure that my concerns are duly noted, and that I am not alone. I intend to honor a fast now through 9/11/11 to address these matters through prayer, and I invite you to join me in doing so. There are many ways to go about this, and God has been swift to answer me in various ways regarding my other concerns. This will be no different. I petition that you join me before we take measure to act upon this knowledge. Please feel free to share, post, or recirculate this within your communities, councils, and fireside circles.
May the blessings of the Great Spirit take you over, that peace is sought but it must be maintained as well, and this can only be done through prayer and earnest examination of the truth. I am not afraid of Obama, his Mungiki, or his evil plans, but I am afraid what end I would meet if I did not honor the Great Spirit in addressing you this day.
-Ms. Aja Brooks
GA Tea Party Chief
--
"THE RESTORE AMERICA ACT OF 2012" also known as the '2011-2012 6pt. Tea Party Deficit Reduction Strategy':http://t.co/p63iYHk
ga-teapartychief.blogspot.com
CREATIVE INNOVATIONS
Aja Brooks - Creative Director
5916 East Lake Parkway
Suite #107
McDonough, GA 30253
Production hours:
9AM-3PM EST MON.-THURS.
*now has mobile web*
EMAIL FOR NEW # TO TEXT
teapartychief@gmail.com
Find me online by typing Creative Innovations,
Aja Brooks, Synthesis, Synthesis Group,
2012 Anti-Deficit Purple Agenda, or
*MAD HATTER NEWS* in the Facebook Search Bar.
TEA PARTY LITERATURE 2009-2011 ARCHIVES:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=365798615431
In 2yrs. "The Synthesis" online viewership is 2,000 through direct email, 10,000+ through Facebook Group Sharing. This is not counting twitter audiences, or resharing, which is 4x that, and circulates political circles w/in a month of released edition.
Here are my online listings:
http://www.facebook.com/TeaPartyConsortium http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/profile/thePhoenixhttp://www.facebook.com/pages/GA-Tea-Party/115334838544068 http://www.facebook.com/pages/WRITE-IN-RED-THE-RED-LETTER-CAMPAIGN-GOT-SOMETHING-TO-SAY-TO-CONGRESS/173207994643http://www.facebook.com/cholorecords http://current.com/users/THE_PHOENIX.htmhttp://creativeinnovations27.blogspot.com/ http://www.myyearbook.com/oijvblackribbonhttp://twitter.com/2011teaparty http://twitter.com/cholorecords http://www.myspace.com/creativeinnovations27http://www.myspace.com/viptattoostudiotracer http://artid.com/PHOENIX_ARThttp://hubpages.com/profile/thePHOENIX2010
I want to introduce to you our war strategy:
NATIVE AMERICAN/MODERN EQUIVALENT:
FORTIFICATION
1) INFORMATION CIRCULATION
5-20 members 100-500 members or GROUPS
2) COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
(LOW-COST MINGLING)
ASSAULT TACTICS
3) NON-VIOLENT PROTEST DEMONSTRATIONS
INDIRECT ASSAULT
4) BOYCOTTS
PERSPECTIVE
5) VOTER REGISTRATION/FRAUD PREVENTION
CONCLUSION
6) ACCOUNTABILITY
AS AN INDIVIDUAL, YOU ARE CHARGED TO:
1) READ A POLITICAL PUBLICATION ONCE A WEEK (OR THIS ONE)
http://www.facebook.com/teapartychief/timeline/story?ut=32&wstart=1293868800&wend=1296547199&hash=101504977820286702) PARTICIPATE WITH A GROUP OF CLOSE FRIENDS OR ATTEND AND EVENT ONCE WEEKLY
3) PARTICIPATE IN A PROTEST DEMONSTRATION OF YOUR CHOICE
4) BOYCOTT GOODS NOT MADE IN AMERICA, STOP BUYING GAS OVER $3 IF YOU CAN HELP IT, AND BOYCOTT PRESCRIPTION PILLS CONTAINING OPIUM
http://www.facebook.com/teapartychief/timeline/story?ut=32&wstart=1293868800&wend=1296547199&hash=101504848900236705) RESEARCH THE CANDIDATES YOU VOTE FOR A YEAR PRIOR TO VOTING. REPORT SUSPECTED FRAUD AND TAX EVASION TO THE I.R.S. AND OTHER FORMS OF FRAUD BY SENDING IN AN EMAIL.
6) HOLD YOUR LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE TO ETHICS STANDARDS, IMPOSE PUNISHMENT, FINES, AND CONSEQUENCES FOR SUB-STANDARD LEADERSHIP.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS GOING TO TAKE MORE THAN JUST INVESTIGATING OBAMA, IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OR THE 2012 ELECTION TO UNDO THE DAMAGE HE’S DONE IN ONLY 3 SHORT YEARS.
THE TEA PARTY 2012 ASPIRATIONS AND RESOLUTIONS:
1) REMOVE OBAMA FROM OFFICE AND DEFUND REMAINING MISAPPROPRIATION
2) DEFUND H.R. 4872 AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD VIOLATING FEDERAL LAW AND STATE FUNDING GUIDELINES
3) REMOVE BLACKLISTED POLITICIANS:
2012 OUST LIST/BLACKLISTED POLITICIANS:
By Aja Brooks in Unified Militia Communications Network · Edit Doc · Delete2012 OUST LIST/BLACKLISTED POLITICIANS:
- BEN NELSON - (D) NEBRASKA
Remember, Ben Nelson provided the final and deciding vote Democrats needed to pass Obamacare.
In exchange for his vote, Nelson took $45 million in taxpayer-funded Medicare subsidies – the "Cornhusker Kickback" – embarrassing every hard working man and woman in Nebraska.
Americans simply can't afford for Ben Nelson to be re-elected.
That's why I'm reaching out to you today. In order to take back this seat next year, we need the early support of conservatives around the country.
As the state Attorney General since 2003, I made sure Nebraska was one of the first states to join the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of President Obama's – and Ben Nelson's – health care law.
I firmly believe Obamacare tramples on individual liberty, is unconstitutional, and unfairly burdens states with a massive new entitlement program.
While serving as Attorney General, I helped create a self-funding Medicaid Fraud Unit, which has recovered more than $33 million for state taxpayers. Throughout my career, I have worked to reduce the size and reach of the Federal government. I'll do the same in the United States Senate.
2. RAHN MAYO - (D-91) GEORGIA
- poorly represents my district's values of Constitutionally-limited government and fiscal responsibility
- idolizes Obama, thinks himself as Obama on state level
- participated in racially-tinged arguments on Facebook, teaming up with Ralph Long, lobbying solely for what only their choice black constituents want, those who pay to keep them up/not what the majority of Georgia taxpayers have asked and required of them
- honestly one of the most racist mixed people I've ever met! I say this as being a mix of Native American and 3 European lineages myself: he's Obama's right-hand stooge in the South.
3. RALPH LONG - (D-61) GEORGIA
- poorly represents my district's values of Constitutionally-limited government and fiscal responsibility
- while he doesn't idolize Obama, he will call you 'unpatriotic' if your opinion disagrees with his opinion or Obama's
- participated in racially-tinged arguments on Facebook, teaming up with Rahn Mayo, lobbying solely for what only their choice black constituents want, those who pay to keep them up/not what the majority of Georgia taxpayers have asked and required of them
- while I believe Ralph Long's intentions is to aspire to be like MLK JR, or Mandella, and he handles debate better than the giggling and Ebonics-speaking Mayo, Long is being judged by the company that he keeps: Rahn Mayo is his cohort, along with several other black legislators, as in: "if you aren't black, they're on the attack, from their blackberries that is..."
4. ALISHA MORGAN - (D-39) GEORGIA
- doesn't embody the kind of communication skills that we as taxpayers demand and expect from those who ride on our tax dollars... she asked to be removed from SYNTHESIS discussion, so it is quite clear that she doesn't want to hear what the majority has to say
- she doesn't seem pro-Obama, but more akin to black church mafia
- while I don't believe that she intends to come across this way, she aligns herself with the same legislators who accommodate black bias, lobbying solely for what only their choice black constituents want, those who pay to keep them up/not what the majority of Georgia taxpayers have asked and required of them
5. HUGH FLOYD - (D-99) GEORGIA
- poorly represents my district's values of Constitutionally-limited government and fiscal responsibility
- this guy acts like he's a rock star: he'll reject your email, ignore your documents, and tell you that you're not 'his' constituent, though you're paying for him to ignore your pleas
- to boot: this guy is a Methodist, not just lackluster for Jesus, but wants everyone to know that his methodology and contrived way of neglecting you in his district goes further than just ego/it's a religious prerogative for him.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the message is that while you may have escaped the first round of Tea Party cuts, you won't make it past 2012. I deleted 25 email addresses, struck them from the Assembly roll today for email contacts, and only one member went onto to run for Congress! Not only that, but Tea Party platform succeeding in regaining House leadership, to repeal H.R. 4872, and we will now defund in the Senate. Please contact me with your state's blacklist.
THESE ARE THE SENATE MEMBERS WHO DESPITE THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS POLLED, A HOUSE MAJORITY WHO VOTED FOR REPEAL, AND TWO PEOPLE NOT VOTING, ALL SENATE DEMOCRATS AREN'T REPRESENTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, TO REPEAL H.R. 4872, WHO HAVE NOW BEEN BLACKLISTED:
NAYs ---51
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 2
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Warner (D-VA)
We will now move to defunding H.R. 4872 through Senate Committees, as the mandate is unconstitutional. We don't have to pay for legislation, just because they say so.
6. CLAIRE MCCASKILL:
White there were no indications of illegality or ethics violations in terms of the flights and McCaskill has said she'd repay more than $88,000 to the U.S. Treasury, a realization of how toxic the story is in the current political climate.
But on Monday the story got even more poisonous for her political future. Politico reported that she and her husband failed to pay $287,273 in personal property taxes on the airplane.
(ALL THAT VOTED AGAINST CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE WERE DEMOCRATS, EXCEPT FOR 5 DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED TO SUPPORT US, AND 9 REPUBLICANS BETRAYED US, REFUSING TO STOP OBAMA AND THE SENATE FROM WASTING MORE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS)
WHILE IT IS INTERESTING, I MUST FORMALLY WITHDRAW MY SUPPORT FOR BACHMANN; A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT IMPLIES THE REPEAL OF OBAMACARE, AND SHE VOTED AGAINST A BALANCED BUDGET.
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS PULLED AN OBAMA, AND SHE VOTED PRESENT, AND THAT MEANS THAT SHE DOES NOT HOLD A POSITION ON THE DEFICIT AND WAS ONLY VOTE BARTERING AND DID NOT WANT TO STICK UP FOR YOU AS A TAXPAYER:
SHE AND 7 OTHERS DID THAT TO TRY TO PREVENT PASSAGE OF THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT.
---- NOES 190 ---
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Bachmann
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Canseco
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DesJarlais
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Mack
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rohrabacher
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
---- NOT VOTING 8 ---
Blumenauer
Capuano
Castor (FL)
Ellison
Engel
Giffords
Hinchey
Young (AK)
Like · Unfollow Post · July 21, 2011 at 4:37am
5) BOYCOTT ALL PRO-OBAMA BUSINESSES, INVESTORS OR THOSE WHO PERPETUATE ANTI-CHRISTIAN MESSAGES, ESPECIALLY THROUGH MEDIA AND PRESS.
A SPECIFIC PRODUCT LIST WILL FOLLOW, BUT ESSENTIALLY EVERYONE WHO ADVERTISES WITH THESE GROUPS, DO NOT BUY THEIR PRODUCTS!!!
NAYs ---51
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 2
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Warner (D-VA)
We will now move to defunding H.R. 4872 through Senate Committees, as the mandate is unconstitutional. We don't have to pay for legislation, just because they say so.
6. CLAIRE MCCASKILL:
White there were no indications of illegality or ethics violations in terms of the flights and McCaskill has said she'd repay more than $88,000 to the U.S. Treasury, a realization of how toxic the story is in the current political climate.
But on Monday the story got even more poisonous for her political future. Politico reported that she and her husband failed to pay $287,273 in personal property taxes on the airplane.
(ALL THAT VOTED AGAINST CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE WERE DEMOCRATS, EXCEPT FOR 5 DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED TO SUPPORT US, AND 9 REPUBLICANS BETRAYED US, REFUSING TO STOP OBAMA AND THE SENATE FROM WASTING MORE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS)
WHILE IT IS INTERESTING, I MUST FORMALLY WITHDRAW MY SUPPORT FOR BACHMANN; A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT IMPLIES THE REPEAL OF OBAMACARE, AND SHE VOTED AGAINST A BALANCED BUDGET.
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS PULLED AN OBAMA, AND SHE VOTED PRESENT, AND THAT MEANS THAT SHE DOES NOT HOLD A POSITION ON THE DEFICIT AND WAS ONLY VOTE BARTERING AND DID NOT WANT TO STICK UP FOR YOU AS A TAXPAYER:
SHE AND 7 OTHERS DID THAT TO TRY TO PREVENT PASSAGE OF THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT.
---- NOES 190 ---
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Bachmann
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Canseco
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DesJarlais
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Mack
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rohrabacher
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
---- NOT VOTING 8 ---
Blumenauer
Capuano
Castor (FL)
Ellison
Engel
Giffords
Hinchey
Young (AK)
Like · Unfollow Post · July 21, 2011 at 4:37am
Rebecca Hill and Carolyn Knight like this.
Valerie Renee League likes this.
Aja Brooks Gerry Emery January 31 at 3:37pm Reply • Report
I'm asking each recipient to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on your address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise. In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011.
THIS IS HOW TO FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
1. Term Limits.
12 years only, one of the possible options below..
A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms
2. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman will collect a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.
Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time!
THIS IS HOW TO FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
July 21, 2011 at 4:37am · Like
Rebecca Hill Incredible...
August 1, 2011 at 8:40pm · Like
4) INSTITUTE A PART-TIME CONGRESS: IF THEY CAN’T ADHERE TO A BASIC BUDGET WHEN OUR ANNUAL REVENUE IS $2.5 TRILLION, THEY ARE NOT WORTH BEING PAID AS FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
5) BOYCOTT ALL PRO-OBAMA BUSINESSES, INVESTORS OR THOSE WHO PERPETUATE ANTI-CHRISTIAN MESSAGES, ESPECIALLY THROUGH MEDIA AND PRESS.
A SPECIFIC PRODUCT LIST WILL FOLLOW, BUT ESSENTIALLY EVERYONE WHO ADVERTISES WITH THESE GROUPS, DO NOT BUY THEIR PRODUCTS!!!
WE ARE NOW BOYCOTTING PROJECT961 AND CLEAR CHANNEL RADIO FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR, FOR FAILING TO ISSUE PUBLIC APOLOGY, EVEN THOUGH WE TOLD THEM THAT WE WOULD NOT SUE FOR CALUMNY.
WE WILL NOT ONLY BOYCOTT THE STATION, BUT WILL BOYCOTT THEIR SPONSORS, PRODUCTS, AND INVESTORS OF CLEAR CHANNEL:
WE WILL NOT ONLY BOYCOTT THE STATION, BUT WILL BOYCOTT THEIR SPONSORS, PRODUCTS, AND INVESTORS OF CLEAR CHANNEL:
- TEA PARTY SET TO BOYCOTT PROJECT961, CLEAR CHANNEL, AFFILIATES, AND ADVERTISERS OVER ANTI-CHRISTIAN ADS PLAYED WHILE 5 CHURCHES EXPLODED IN NIGERIA ON CHRISTMAS:
Re: CIMS00003298393 - FOLLOW-UP TO INFORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE FCC FOR VIOLATION OF STATION LICENSE:
The crime was not on the internet: they broadcasted hate-filled anti-Christian ads while 5 churches blew up, on the radio, the day that it happened on CHRISTMAS DAY, during their evening broadcast, when no one was at the station.
It was a robo-ad for the morning show, which they have refused to apologize for, nor has Clear Channel apologized, as we were only seeking a written apology, no monetary suit or calumny:
- They mocked Jesus, calling Him 'Baby J' as Modern Day Jesus, dispensing advice for women to become strippers to support themselves and for men who had impregnated a woman who was not his wife, to have an abortion.
- It was two separate ads, or skits, advertising the morning show, followed by injections of: "HAPPY/MERRY CHRIS-MA-HANU-KWANZA"
If you don't strip Project961/Atlanta's radio station of their license, we will make sure that they don't have the money to pay for it: or we will hit their investors in the pocket, by refusing to buy their advertised products.
Starting with Clear Channel and affiliates... because that doesn't cost us to pay for a lawsuit, but we have the choice to boycott the station and anything associated with it.
Good day,
Ms. Aja Brooks
| AJA BROOKS <teapartychief@gmail.com> |
Tea Party Chief declines phone-in interview with Project961 Atlanta radio station, TWICE:
| AJA BROOKS <teapartychief@gmail.com> | Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:27 AM | |
| To: Sahar Hekmati <sahar04@aol.com> | ||
|
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Romans 11:32
-----Original Message-----
From: AJA BROOKS <teapartychief@gmail.com>
To: cbuteg <cbuteg@yahoo.com>
Cc: WSB-TV Talk2Us (CTV-Atlanta) <talk2us@wsbtv.com>
Sent: Wed, Dec 28, 2011 2:55 pm
Subject: Tea Party Chief declines phone-in interview with Project961 Atlanta radio station, TWICE:
The KiddChris Show I will never write you an apology. Especially for something that happened on a day that I wasn't even at work ha ha!
I have had Fred and Shirly on my radio show thru the years already. Quite frankly, I wouldn't mind being a target of theirs.. their "enemys" are usually American soldiers.
You should re-consider coming on the show.
5 minutes ago · Like
Aja Brooks Well you should apologize, to all Christian Churches, and you should apologize to the families who were victimized, whose families got blown up in Nigeria the very day the ad that you and Thomas COMPOSED was aired as their wounds were fresh. Just wait, you'll regret those words when Westboro will boycott you.... trust me....
2 seconds ago · Like
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 2:26 PM, AJA BROOKS <teapartychief@gmail.com> wrote:
Aja's Profile · Project 9-6-1's Profile · Aja's Wall
Aja Brooks
Project 9-6-1
Bill Maher goes too far this time.... oh and Project961.com ran ads mocking Jesus on Christmas, the day of the bombing of 5 Catholic Churches, in which they called him "Baby J" as a Modern day Jesus, who counseled women to become strippers instead of learning how to fish to survive, and who counsled men who had impregnated a woman that they weren't married to, to pay for an abortion. Not only was it disrespectful to all Christians, it was near blasphemy to discredit Jesus and misrepresent him in such a way. It also used no discretion to run the ads while no one would be manning the radio station or when the FCC would not be in town. Then to have recorded the ads, and to automatically robo-play them when 5 churches in Nigeria where bombed, equally devastating and worth reviling. http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2F2011%2F12%2F27%2Fbill-mahers-tim-tebow-twe_n_1171902.html&h=kAQEfFNYpAQHbUC9zKYZxKhscfssMMK9kPhqdIwoH8wIrsQ&enc=AZOLiIX3fgniMjaEZUWh7yjsiUGO3OdTne6gjjIY7lTgtUgt1X5gENit6AIzjKa3oadZsi11wBuv8vOaLovYj7yL
Twitter continues to swell with a flood of complaints against comedian Bill Maher in response to a particularly scathing Tweet the outspoken television host made about Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow during Christmas Eve's Broncos-Bills showdown, NBC Sports reports. Tebow had just thrown his fo...
Project 9-6-1 I would LOVE to take credit for that, but I don't remember that ever happening.. thanks for the credit though! - KiddChris
6 hours ago · Like
Aja Brooks Well your show sucks, we will boycott it, and for you to deny that you ran the ads for your stupid and foolish morning show doesn't mean that it didn't happen. If you don't know who's running the ads for your OWN show, what kind of a DJ are you?
Project 9-6-1 sorry, not responsible for what ADS get played on my show. You shouldn't have heard it since you don't listen. Nice try though, hotty
5 hours ago · Like
That's okay the FCC can receive the report: I like the music, I just hate your show, about as equally as I detest Aly throwing a bitch fit for being an Obama supporter, when I used to email Giant Brian a copy of my political newsletters. I ...See More
5 hours ago · Like
Project 9-6-1 lol! - KiddChris
5 hours ago · Like
Colin Brian Lubbe I worship Cobra.
5 hours ago · Like
INFORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE FCC FOR VIOLATION OF STATION LICENSE:
I am all for free speech, but there are consequences for free speech: while one may freely criticize a religion, or take position against it, or take issue on religious beliefs, Project961 is not a religious entity or authority, just a rock music station.
There is a point when a license to operate and use free speech crosses the line to provocation: when use of that licensure becomes insulting, defamatory, an issuance of lies for use of indoctrination or propaganda.
People have a choice whether or not to read my newsletter, attend my political gatherings, and align themselves with me. When listening to the radio, we don't have a choice to turn the dial if we want to listen to the music, without the diatribe that accompanies it. I also believe it to be a gross misrepresentation of the musicians and artists whose work these DJ's use to make a living, playing their music on the air and detracting from it in the process.
Let the music speak for itself and just play the music... how hard is that? There is a problem when I would want to stop listening to the music I love, so that I don't have to hear the disrespectful, rude, and intrusive opinions over top of it, souring the music.
I understand that this station has problems paying for its license, and that it is up for review.
Here are some examples of why they are in violation of their broadcasting license, because of several DJ's at the station: Kidd Chris, Thomas, and Aly.
While it is not every DJ who works at the station, these DJ's are hurting the station with their personal feelings on politics or religion injected into their shows, broadcasts, and advertising for the station.
I recommend that these DJ's seek other employment, because they are ruining the station. I would ask that they send a written apology via email, or Atlanta listeners will boycott the entire show. These DJ's are poisoning the music program, with their attitude or by the advertisements with their show. What was an exhibition of free speech has become a prolonged display of disrespect for the listeners.
Aja Brooks Hey we are going to boycott the station, that's what happens.
Aja Brooks Why yes it is... I live here, and while it may not be MY station any longer, that I will listen to, this is MY post. Poof begone~
4 hours ago · Like
|
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:14 PM, <FCCInfo@fcc.gov> wrote:
You are receiving this email in response to your inquiry to the FCC.
Hello
There are currently no federal or state laws regulating the use of or content contained on the Internet. Congress has considered federal regulations restricting the content of material on the Internet and the FCC may be directed to establish and enforce such rules. However, since no legislation has been passed, FCC rules do not apply to the Internet.
The Internet Crime complaint Center has a web site for reporting Internet-related crimes. Go to: http://www.ic3.gov . They are the partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C), and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).
Representative Number : TSR09
In Election Year, January Is Even More Crucial for Markets
CNBC – 1 hour 27 minutes ago- 1
Companies:
RELATED QUOTES
Symbol | Price | Change |
1,270.35999 | -6.70 | |
 * |
Presidential election years typically spell tough sledding for stocks, so the market will need all the help it can get from January to establish some positive momentum in what promises to be a volatile political landscape.
While the January Effect and its closely watched cousin, the January Barometer, are usually good market predictors no matter the year, the correlation is especially prevalent during the final year of the presidential cycle - when voters either re-elect an incumbent or choose his successor.
Since 1945, a positive January in an election year has never missed in predicting a full-year gain for the Standard & Poor's 500 (INDEX: ^GSPC - News), going 8-for-8 and posting an average gain of 16 percent, well above its normal average, according to Sam Stovall, chief equity strategist at S&P. A negative first month, meanwhile, has predicted a full-year loss 56 percent of the time, with an average 3.9 percent decline.
"Whatever the S&P 500 doesn't provide in absolute return this year, it will likely make up for in predictability," Stovall said in a research note.
However, 2011 was anything but predictable when it came to following the election-cycle script.
The third year of the cycle is supposed to be the best one for stocks, with a stellar 16.1 percent gain the historical norm. But sovereign debt storm clouds over Europe, as well as political and fiscal uncertainty in the U.S., made trading volatile, with the market's fluctuating violently within a fairly tight trading range.
That break from the norm could cause a deviation from what normally would be expected from the fourth year of the cycle.
"People are sort of done with what's going on," said Nadav Baum, executive vice president at BPU Investment Management in Pittsburgh, Pa. "Something in Europe is going to come to a head, and they're looking at this and saying, 'Wait a minute, U.S. domestic companies have never been in better shape.' They're doing all the right things if there weren't for all these crazy headlines."
Baum thinks fatigue over Europe and the U.S. Republican primary race will push investors to focus on bargains in the stock market and away from geopolitical turmoil.
"This is a very inexpensive market," he said. "The problem is the emotions start to cloud the investment decisions because everybody gets nervous. That's why you're getting all the whipsaw trading and volatility."
History, though, suggests that the market will slog through most of the year and wait to rally until the election is over in November.
While much has been made over the old maxim that the market loves gridlock, the opposite is actually true. A divided Washington has provided the lowest market returns, while complete Republican control or a Democratic president with a full Republican Congress have proven the best times.
"We doubt this year's contest will prompt a significant upturn in the stock market," John Higgins, senior market economist at Capital Economics in London, said in a note. "After all, the economy looks set for another weak outturn, profit margins are stretched and valuations do not appear especially attractive from a historical perspective."
Any enthusiasm for a changing of the guard could be short-lived, he added.
"There is no real room for further fiscal stimulus," Higgins said. "What's more, while the stock market has tended to do better since 1928 in an election year when the eventual winner has been a Republican rather than a Democrat, it has actually done comparatively worse the following year."
Investors, meanwhile, likely will have cast their votes already by the time the actual election date rolls around.
The three months leading to previous elections have proved accurate predictors 88 percent of the time - when the market is up from July 31 through Oct. 31, the incumbent or his party wins, and when it's down the other side gets the nod.
"The economy sets the tone for the election," said Jim Paulsen, chief market strategist at Wells Capital Management in Minneapolis. "Whoever wins the election, whether it be Obama or the Republican, will be forced to the middle in their management. That's what's important for the markets."
More From CNBC
PARTICIPATE: RESHARE, MEET ONCE A DAY OR ONCE A WEEK, AND EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH AND THOUGHT. I WOULD SUGGEST PLANNING AHEAD; STOCKPILE FOOD, WEAPONS, GOLD, AND ADJUST YOUR STOCKS ACCORDINGLY. IF WE CAN NOT REACH AN AGREEMENT BY MARCH, THE GOVERNMENT WILL SHUT DOWN THIS FOURTH TIME, AND YOU NEED TO BE READY TO SURVIVE FOR THE NEXT 9 MONTHS OR SO....
| CIRCULATION: EXPONENTIALLY BY POWERS OF 10, IF THESE VIEWERS RESHARE TO 10 PEOPLE... |
| SUBSCRIBERS THROUGH FACEBOOK GROUPS AND CONTRIBUTORS: FACEBOOK GROUP NAMES: MEMBERSHIP ROLL: ACROP WATCH 1159 2012 ANTI-DEFICIT PURPLE AGENDA 265 THE GEORGIA GANG 1286 CLAYTON COUNTY TEA PARTY 16 FAYETTE COUNTY TEA PARTY 6 HENRY COUNTY TEA PARTY 33 JONES COUNTY TEA PARTY 3 SPALDING COUNTY TEA PARTY 16 PATRIOT ACTION NETWORK 4160 SYNTHESIS LEGISLATIVE WORK GROUP 300 WOMEN’S ONLINE TEA PARTY 110 ANTI-SECRET SOCIETY 169 BBA TASK FORCE 220 BEN CRYSTAL’S OUTSIDE THE ASYLUM 160 CITIZEN DEFENSE COALITION 3175 CONSERVATIVE VOTER COALITION 5006 CHIMPY’S REAL AMERICAN 2336 DEFEAT OBAMA - RON PAUL 2012 272 FREE COREY CLAGETT 4400 GA 8TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT FOR HERMAN 515 GEORGIA FIRST 2862 GEORGIANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT 1191 IT’S NOT “PUBLIC SCHOOL” IT’S “GOVT. SCHOOL” 1287 JAMES GROUP OF ACTIVISTS 121 NORTH GEORGIA 9-12 266 OUR VETERAN WALL 3210 POLITICAL FRIENDS 192 REFOUNDING AMERICA 2467 SYNTHESIS ARCHIVES 322 TEA PARTY CONSORTIUM 63 US GOVT. AGENCIES-THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH 69 UNDERSTANDING PERSONAL SOVEREIGNTY 917 UNIFIED 25 WE WANT A PUBLIC INVESTIGATION INTO CLIMATE 366 CHANGE UNIFIED MILITIA 1561 |
It’s a blog with full of latest and spectacular information’s childcare hills area
ReplyDelete