Barack Obama decided to stop by the C-SPAN station to tell the world what we already knew. “We are out of money”. He forgot to mention that he and his dream of making the Washington of today look more like St. Petersburg of 1917 is the overwhelming reason why.. More on that particular topic a little later on..

C-Span’s Steve Scully decided to ask the logical questions of Obama that very few others have had the decency to ask.

Primer for understanding liberalism: Starting with a question about the “no men allowed” seat on the Supreme Court, Obama said, “I thought empathy wasn’t important and I continue to believe that..” Nearly 600 pandering puffy words later, he finally shut down. Scully then said, “And that’s what empathy is?” Obama then began sputtering again and finished up with, “’s very important..” Words have no meaning to the liberals. They try to use as many of them as possible in order to dodge and deflect. Their goal is to keep you on a lexical Lazy Susan..

Example number two: Obama wants a Justice “who has a sense of how American society works and how the American people live..” Is he looking for a “Supreme Sociologist”? Where does the “law” fit into this Oprah Winfrey style of jurisprudence? As pointed out by Scully nearly 600 words later, this sounds to be a textbook definition of “empathy”. Obama not twelve words later says, “..I thought empathy wasn’t important and I continue to believe that.”

“One of the things I would prefer not see happen is that these confirmation hearings drag on and somebody has to hit the ground running.. without the time to wrap their mind around the fact that they are going to be a Supreme Court justice.. so they can get prepared.” Liberal irrationality doesn’t like the “acrimonious” image of someone questioning the liberal bias of a liberal candidate who is asking for a job for LIFE. (Any liberal with a job let alone one for life, is confusing enough..) Obama himself “understood” that Alito and Roberts took about seventy days to withstand the liberal “dragging on” that was once acceptable. If a nominee can’t “wrap their mind around the fact that they are going to be a Supreme Court justice in seventy days”, then they shouldn’t be considered for the job..

Suddenly, our Justice needs to “get prepared”. When the loyal opposition as well as the outraged citizens of this nation wanted to “prepare” relative to the Obama multiple trillion dollar socialist soiree, “getting prepared” was cast as being “acrimonious”. Unlike our President, this Justice will (hopefully) have “experience” as a judge so their only “preparation” will involve a quick brushing up on the Communist Manifesto or the Democratic Party Platform, whichever is handier.

Where will he be going with this pick? It seems silly to ask.. According to Obama, Justice Scalia is just a “terrific writer..” Yet uber-liberally biased and agenda driven marionettes like “Brennan and Marshall really focused on the broader sweep of history.. (who) broke the political logjam that had locked out too many people in the political process..” Never mind that that “logjam” was put in place and exacerbated by Democratic beavers.. The people locking “too many people out in the political process” were the Democrats who didn’t really give up on the idea, they just altered their game plan and their tactics a bit..

Obama idolizes two of the most destructive liberal deconstruction-ists as his template for a Supreme Court justice. The good news is that they will have to look long and hard to find another Justice as sufficiently basted in liberalism as Ginsburg. The bad news is that they won’t stop looking until they do..

Soon thereafter, Obama again referred to what it was that he either does or doesn’t believe in when it comes to Supreme Court Justices, “..compassion and empathy for ordinary Americans so that everybody is heard..” The “everybody is heard” element is what is particularly fascinating. The new liberalism involves taking the majority and portraying them as “an extremist minority” while simultaneously taking one “proper thinking” liberal and casting them as “the will of the overwhelming majority..” Just be sure to use as your marinate, a Bolshevik with a black robe and a gavel and suddenly “everybody is heard..”

The final question relative to this topic was “would you have any interest in being on the Supreme Court?” Probably the only honest answer that he has given in the last year then appeared, “I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation..” I am not sure as to why he believes this, he managed to duck and dodge all of these typical “Democrat’s discrepancies” while hoodwinking the electorate in 2008..

Then it was onto his “health care hysteria”. Obama believes that we are “operating at a competitive disadvantage with other countries..” I suppose that he can explain the latest “medical breakthroughs” coming from Togo or possibly Trinidad and Tobago.. The socialized medicine that he is forwarding is all about putting us at a “competitive disadvantage”..

“..The single biggest component driving down (down?) our deficits and long term debt is getting control of Medicare and Medicaid costs..” Were this nonsense to actually be true, why did he send so much real and imaginary money to the banks, the insurance conglomerates and the automakers? Does he have any idea what is actually driving UP our deficits? Doesn’t he understand that HE is “driving” the “deficit express” right into the embankment?

All we need to cure this “problem” is “everybody comes at it with a spirit not of ideological rigidity..” Once old Barack becomes a “flaccid fascist” we can consider his progressive perspective to be anything other than “ideological rigidity”.. “We are going to manage how treatments are provided more effectively..” Note the word “manage”. “Manage” means demand. It also means, “ration”. That sentence sounds like the shortest description of socialized medicine that I’ve ever heard. “We are going to initiate things like electronic medical records..” “Initiate”, same as “manage”..

“Every provider, every small community hospital has these things in place and that’s part of the role that the government can play..” This “role” with their “electronic” records systems, sounds like the “government” will be “overseeing” the process.. Maybe if the Obama caliphate read the Constitution, the “role of government” might be a little clearer to them. By the way, there is nothing in the Constitution about the government “providing, demanding, managing or initiating” a socialized medicine pogrom.

Then came the big one from Scully. “..$1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion, at what point do we run out of money?” Obama’s answer, “We are out of money now..” He followed up with, “..we are operating in deep deficits, (his word, “operating”, my word: drowning) not caused by any decisions we’ve made on health care so far..” Please note: “ far..” This is called foreshadowing.

The problem again is “health care inflation” according to the confused communist. He then stumbles into “investments.. even if they don’t reduce them (costs) this year or next, but ten years from now or twenty years from now we end up saving two trillion dollars..” Over twenty years that breaks down to two billion dollars a year even if the possibility existed that the “big spender” would consider slowing down his personal trillion dollar a month habit..

Continuing with the comic relief we were again told that if we “preserve our values and uphold our ideals” we will be safer.. I wish that he would explain how OUR “values and ideals” influence the Muslim terrorists? We had better be prepared to defend “our values and ideals” with ballistic missiles as opposed to awaiting our “report card” from the ticking turban crowd..

Yes, our little President has his totalitarian toolbox in hand (with his journeyman union card as well, I might add..) and he can’t wait to tinker with the Supreme Court, his special “health care hysteria” and our “interrogation techniques”.. That is, after he has done such a bang-up job with the banks and mortgage companies and the automakers. He says we are “broke”, broke in more ways than one. If I may play off of the old saying, “If it’s broke, will someone else PLEASE fix it?”


56 responses to “Broke

  1. In a way, Obama was correct:
    Continuing with the comic relief we were again told that if we “preserve our values and uphold our ideals” we will be safer.. I wish that he would explain how OUR “values and ideals” influence the Muslim terrorists?
    WE will be safer if WE preserve OUR values and uphold our ideals. Personally, I think our values are much better than BHO’s values and our ideals are totally in contradiction with his. Unfortunately, we have too many leftists in the House and the Senate who are salivating over the chance to outlaw our ideals and values and replae them with socialistic ideals and the value of appeasement. In order to preserve OUR ideals and values, we need to clean house in D.C., yesterday!

  2. Oh, I forgot to mention, our ideals and values will influence the terrorists if we aggressively uphold the Bill of Rights by utilizing our military to it’s fullest potential and decimating the Islamo-fascists!

  3. Larry,

    I wish that he would explain how OUR “values and ideals” influence the Muslim terrorists? We had better be prepared to defend “our values and ideals” with ballistic missiles as opposed to awaiting our “report card” from the ticking turban crowd.. …. …. Good one! LoL

    What the gullible fail to understand is that the cheese doesn’t keep coming after the trap is sprung.

  4. I’ve heard more than one person say, “if you think Obama is great, wait a year.” How true. For the first time in my 66 years on this earth, I am really concerned about the immediate foreground future of this country absent any major intervention. I believe that an armed revolution from the majority populace of America would be met with big time bloodshed. At the same time, look how many fools voted for this clown! That’s what’s happened. The One knows his supporters like the back of his hand. He knows just the buzz words and phrases to use. He’s no dummy. His supporters are little more than hypnotized idiots or to stretch the point, Pavlovian dogs. The bell rings and they salivate. For the most part, Americans have never had to live like people in 3rd world countries do. We are close to experiencing that.

  5. Sil in CNY

    “…they will have to look long and hard to find another Justice as sufficiently basted in liberalism as Ginsburg…” Not so long and not so hard after all….it appears he’s found one in Sotomayor….she of the “policy making” branch of the judiciary. I pray she gets questioned about THAT little sound bite EVERY DAY until she is NOT confirmed for the SCOTUS.

    As for Obama saying we’re now broke….no kiddin BO…and you sure helped get us there! ARGGG…everything that comes out of that man’s mouth makes me ill…..sad thing is if he continues to have his way, I’ll have no decent healthcare to make me better!

  6. Margaret in CT

    Obama’s aggressively radical choice for Supreme Court justice shows he is not in the least worried that his policies may be too far to the left. He stumbles over his words, because he is a socialist trying to appear (verbally) to be a centrist.

    We must continue to be more aware of what he does than of what he says.

  7. The Socialists count of 40-50 million uninsured Americans has been completely debunked.
    Seems that the VAST MAJORITY of these are single Americans, working full time, who simply CHOOSE not to buy insurance.
    Its not that they cannot afford it, they simply CHOOSE not to buy it.
    The second largest group are couples making over $50k per year.
    It might be “tougher” for this second group to buy their own insurance, but NOT impossible.
    Its simply NOT a high priority for them.
    Seems that soccer games, fishing trips, beer, and a new 4×30 foot swimming pool take precedence.
    And finally, Oprah, Trump, and Bill Gates are among their list of “uninsured”.
    See, being “self-insured” is the same as “uninsured” when the liberals are doing the counting.
    The ACTUAL estimate of people who NEED insurance but cannot afford it, is between 8-14 million. And of that, how many simply need to get off their ass and go get a job…any job?

    “getting control of the costs” means raising taxes to insure they are properly funded.
    And, to continue to raise more and more taxes as “health care” balloons bigger and bigger with each passing year.
    Sort of like Social Security, but its not just for old people anymore.

    “manage how treatments are provided…” rings the same tone as “spread the wealth”.
    Hum a few bars, I bet I can finish the song…

    “We are out of money now” !! and yet his answer is to spend MORE??
    Imagine going to a debt assistance office for help “managing” your debt, and the first thing they tell you is to go out and get a bunch of new credit cards and MAX THEM OUT!
    Welcome to Obamanomics 101.

    “preserve our values and uphold our ideals” make perfect sense if you simply admit that Obama is himself a Muslim terrorist.
    Then, of course, “OUR VALUES” become the MUSLIM values. “OUR IDEALS” are the MUSLIM ideals.

    Resistance is NOT futile.

    “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
    Forbid it, Almighty God!
    I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! ”
    — Patrick Henry – March 23, 1775


  8. Twenty years ago I worked for cardiovascular surgeons. One of the prtners commented to me “if the counry keeps moving in the direction it is, someday the only people who will get quality health care will be the wealthy.” Qute prophetic, don’t you think?

    The real danger in socialized helthcare is that some person sitting at a desk will make the decision as to whether you get open heart surgery,etc. based on a predetermined rule. That little fact has been little discussed in the ongoing debate. WHO decides who gets what? Too old…..too bad.

  9. I predicted that she would be the nominee and if she gets confirmed by the Judiciary Committee it will be a very bad decision. Senator Schumer is trying to pass her off as a moderator but her legal opinions shows something else all together. She’s another one whom molds and twists the United States Constitution to give her opinion by what the founders “meant” to say. The Constitution needs to stay as our highest legal document. There is no interpretation of the Constitution, the founders may it very clear what their legal intent was and we should honor that legal intent. She’s had three legal opinions/rulings be reversed by the Supreme Court Justices and the deciding judge that overturned that opinion was Justice Souter.

    They’ve said she has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering and demanding during oral arguments, but her questions aren’t penetrating enough and/or don’t get to the heart of the issue involved to get to the heart of the case. During one argument, an elderly judicial colleague is said to have leaned over and said, “Will you please stop talking and let them talk?” Second Circuit judge Jose Cabranes, who said in an interview that “She is not intimidated or overwhelmed by the eminence or power or prestige of any party, or indeed of the media. So like Obama, we now have a female narcissistic judge who will view her ideals, judgment and opinions as those coming from a higher source, herself.

    It’s customary, for example, for Second Circuit judges to circulate their draft opinions to invite a robust exchange of views. Sotomayor, several former clerks complained, bitterness her colleagues by sending long memos that didn’t distinguish between substantive and trivial points, with petty editing suggestions–fixing typos and the like–rather than focusing on the core analytical legal issues. Those who have worked with her say she command of technical legal details: In 2001, for example, a conservative colleague, Ralph Winter, included an unusual footnote in a case suggesting that an earlier opinion by Sotomayor might have inadvertently misstated the law in a way that misled litigants.

    The most controversial case in which Sotomayor participated is Ricci v. DeStefano, the explosive case involving affirmative action in the New Haven fire department, which is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court. A panel including Sotomayor ruled against the firefighters in a perfunctory unpublished opinion. This provoked a colleague Judge Cabranes, a fellow Clinton appointee, to object to the panel’s opinion that contained “no reference whatsoever to the constitutional issues at the core of this case.” (The extent of Sotomayor’s involvement in the opinion itself is not publicly known.)

    But, if this women makes it through (has she paid her taxes?) the Judiciary Committee and Congress approval (I don’t think it will be a slam-dunk as some of those in the MSM believe. There IS an election next year and the Congressional liberal Democrats are fearful of losing their seats. Harry Reid, Chris Dodd and numerous others are no long the favorite political leader. Obama is safe now, he’s got 3 years lefts, but with the arrogance from the liberals and the disgust by many Americans; they may be a change a-coming that the President might not like, becoming a lame duck. If their constituents are against this justice then they’ll listen to them instead of Obama.

    Why I think he has chosen her at this time in his administration, he’s thinking ahead. He believes she’s an un-Constitutional judge, using her personal beliefs, over constitutional law. If he wants this somewhat radical judge on the bench, he better do it now, because he may not have the power to do it if the Republicans take control, especially the Senate side to get the candidate confirmed.

    Another controversy is ahead, the above ruling regarding the Ricci v. DeStefano will most likely will be coming up for review when the Justices return in the fall. If she’s confirmed she will be making a final opinion as Federal Superior Court justice. She doesn’t have to recuse herself from making an opinion in this matter. I looked it up and its at the discretion of the Justice.
    Reasons for disqualification are laid out in the United States Code (Title 28, Section 455), but the justices themselves are their own final arbiters. According to the statute, justices, judges, and magistrates should recuse themselves if they have a personal bias concerning anyone in the case, or independent knowledge of the facts in dispute; if they worked on the case as a private or government lawyer; or if they or close relatives have a financial interest in the case. In general justices are loath to recuse themselves from cases because it opens the way for a tie. When that happens the lower court decision is affirmed by default. But, I’m not sure if the matter can be brought up again later on.

    There was an issue with regard Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg participated in a case before realizing her husband owned stock in some of the companies involved. Ginsburg’s husband divested as the statute prescribes.

    I‘ve been hearing that the Coleman v. Franklin may come up to the Supreme Court to get a final ruling. At issue are the rejected ballots and the reason behind the rejection. Somehow very vote that went for Coleman has something wrong with it, yet they included a ballot where someone wrote in Frankenstein, even those the vote was cast for Coleman. I glad Coleman isn’t backing down, and I’m not sure Franken wants to take his chances with the supreme court because it hasn’t gone there way so far for the liberals. I think Obama is getting all his ducks in a row.

  10. Obama probably made the appearance on C-SPAN for the benefit if those that rely on their big screen TVs for all their up to date news rather than picking up a propagandistic paper, that is if they can read. A paper like the New York Times who would, instead of quoting The One and possibly making him look bad, would soften it’s headlines to “Our Piggybank Doesn’t Rattle.”

    The markets fired warning shots last week when the U.S. Treasury announced plans for a massive sale of new debt. The $162 billion to help finance the government’s $1.8 trillion feficit this year. I believe that Obama is not only dumb, but deaf as well.

    If Obama’s nominee of Sotomayor qualifies as Justice of the Supreme Court, she will be the first Latino to have served. This would bode well for Obama and his fellow liberals, plus some Republicans, that are incessantly pushing the amnesty of illegal aliens as a way of garnering future votes.

    Sotomayor’s veiw’s on executive power is relatively unknown although that will become apparent to us in a hurry, Obama didn’t pick her by mistake. Still he missed the opportunity to nominate Walter Brennan, Pamela Karlan, Harold Koh or Erwin Cherrminsky, any of which could have added true progressive deadweight.

    Sotomayor is highly recommended by Marjorie Cohn, the President of The National Lawyers Guild and a professor at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law. She is also the author of “Cowboys Republic: Six Ways The Bush Gang Has Defied The Law” and “Rules of Engagement: The Politics and Honor of Military Disent”. How ’bout her for a person on your re’sume.

  11. Arthur Nankervis

    “Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.” (a misquote of) George Santayana

    Some who have read a few of my earlier posts would have deduced that I am a disciple of General George Smith Patton Jnr. I never tier of reading about The Best Combat Commander The U.S. has ever had.

    More to the point and questions of the day. Why are we repeating history? The following are excerpts from the book: The Unknown Patton by Charles M. Province. Key words / phrases: publishers; correspondents; United States papers; United States publishers; United States Supreme Court; and (U.S.) Nazi Party.

    There were two incidents which occurred in WWII which caused problems for Patton due to his “comments”. One of these was the “Knutsford Incident” in England. At a gathering at a Women’s Club, it was alleged that Patton said that Britain and The United States were destined to rule the world. This was not the major problem, the problem was that he had supposedly “omitted” mention of our “friends”, the Russians. The fact is that the story is untrue, he had mentioned the Russians and it was duly noted in the English papers. The mention of the Russians was omitted in the United States papers by the United States publishers and correspondents. They then claimed that Patton was the one who failed to mention the Russians. Furthermore, Patton at first refused to speak at the gathering. He was talked into it by one of the ladies of the club. He was promised that there were no news people present, and that his remarks were to be “off the record” and that he would not be quoted.

    The second of the incidents was the “September Affair” in which Patton supposedly compared Nazi’s to Republicans and Democrats. What makes the story even more disgusting is the fact that the United States Supreme Court now allows the Nazi Party to exist within their own borders today.

    A familiar theme? Could very well have been written today.

    It must be remembered that General Patton was only ‘agreeing’ to a suggestion posed by a ‘reporter’ as part of a question concerning the (correct) way in which he used ex Nazis to administer the area under his command. As well, those ‘local officials’ had (most likely) joined the Nazi party to retain their jobs within Hitler’s regime .. otherwise, ‘they were out on the street’.


    (Correct quote) “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” George Santayana. The misquote is more popular and more readily used.

  12. Margaret in CT

    We seem now to have a perversion of Santayana’s thought: Those who REFUSE TO REMEMBER the past are condemned to repeat it.

    Today we have the merry media informing us that “consumer confidence” is on the rise and the recession will end in the third quarter of 2009. Ole Smoke ‘n Mirrors seems to be persuading a lot of people that his fiscal policies are bringing order to economic chaos supposedly induced by the free market.

    Does no one who responds to these polls realize that the most onerous tax bill in our history has yet to be passed? The Thief in Chief’s declaration that “we’re out of money” is all he seems to think he needs to confiscate yours.

    I don’t know which is more unsettling, the sheepish behavior of the public or the determined move toward statism of the Fascists in charge.

  13. Margeret in CT,

    All that is needed for evil to succeed is, that decent people do nothing.

    We are awash in people with little memory and I am having my doubts in the number of those with decency.

  14. After Sonia’s confirmation , the equation will read:


  15. I agree, Joe. Before yesterday’s announcement of the Supreme Court nominee, I had held out hope that the new administration might just be a bunch of bumblers. They aren’t. They know exactly what they are trying to accomplish. Their definition of decency will become clearer as they continue their power grab. At times, 2010 looks to be too far away to stop this juggernaut.

  16. Margaret in CT

    I agree, Joe. Before the Supreme Court nomination, I had been holding out hope that these people are just a bunch of bumblers who don’t know what they are doing. They aren’t. They know exactly what they are trying to achieve. Their definnition of decency will become clearer as the power grab continues. There are times when I think 2010 is too far off to stop this juggernaut.

    (Because of my extraordinary expertise with the computer, this message is apt to appear twice.)

  17. I’ve been doing a lot of research regarding Sonia Sotomayor ruling from the 2nd Court.

    Here are the cases via cut and paste:

    Didden v. Port Chester

    [T]wo Port Chester [New York] property owners joined with the Institute for Justice (the public-interest law firm that litigated the Kelo case) to ask the Supreme Court to look again at the issue of eminent domain abuse and ensure that lower courts do not read Kelo to completely eliminate judicial review. The case illustrates the dangerous results of the Kelo decision and asks what should be an easy question: Does the Constitution prevent governments from taking property through eminent domain simply because the property owners refused to pay off a private developer?

    In 2003, private developer [Gregg Wasser] approached Bart Didden and Domenick Bologna with a modest proposal: they could either pay him $800,000 or give him a 50 percent interest in their proposed business, or he would cause the Village of Port Chester to take their property from them through eminent domain. Outraged, they refused. The Village condemned their property the very next day.

    Bart and Domenick filed suit in federal court, arguing that the taking violated the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which only allows property to be taken for a “public use.” Shockingly, the trial court threw out their case, and the Second Circuit agreed. Because their property lay within a “redevelopment area,” a region the Village had designated as subject to its eminent domain power, the Constitution didn’t protect them from condemnation, even though they had alleged that they were condemned solely because they resisted the developer’s attempted extortion….

    “What the developer and Village of Port Chester did is nothing short of government-backed extortion,” said Didden. “I had an agreement to develop a pharmacy, a plan fully approved by the Village, and in the eleventh hour I was told that I must either bring this developer in as a 50/50 partner or pay him $800,000 to go away. If I didn’t, the City would condemn my property through eminent domain for him to put up a pharmacy. What else can you call that but extortion? I hope the Supreme Court sets things right.”
    Side bar background on the previous Court rulings on Kelo case: They were using a previous Supreme Court ruling KELO et al. v. CITY OF NEW LONDON et al, which states which determined that after approving an integrated development plan designed to revitalize its ailing economy, respondent city, through its development agent, purchased most of the property earmarked for the project from willing sellers, but initiated condemnation proceedings when the petitioners, the owners of the rest of the property, refused to sell. Petitioners brought this state-court action claiming, inter alia (Latin for among other things), that the taking of their properties would violate the “public use” restriction in the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause. The trial court granted a permanent restraining order prohibiting the taking of the some of the properties, but denying relief as to others. Relying on cases such as Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U. S. 229, and Berman v. Parker, 348 U. S. 26, the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, upholding all of the proposed takings.
    Held: The city’s proposed disposition of petitioners’ property qualifies as a “public use” within the meaning of the Takings Clause.
    The taking a private property that benefits another private citizen and have the local government call it eminent domain.
    In our amicus brief, the other property professors and I argue that Kelo should not be interpreted as a blank check for pretextual takings in redevelopment areas. Otherwise, private interests across the country could follow Wasser’s example and use the establishment of redevelopment areas as a tool to extort money from area property owners. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of redevelopment areas around the country, so there is a great deal of potential for abuse if the Second Circuit’s approach to this issue prevails.
    Even if the Supreme Court reverses Didden, it will eliminate only some of the most blatant cases of eminent domain abuse. Kelo and most of the harmful takings it authorized would still continue in place. However, overruling Didden would still be an important step forward in combatting blatantly pretextual takings.
    CONFLICT OF INTEREST WATCH: The property owners in this case are represented by the Institute for Justice, the libertarian public interest law firm that also represented the New London property owners in Kelo. As I have mentioned on this blog in the past, I worked for IJ as a summer law clerk in 1998 and have done several pro bono amicus brief projects for them since then.
    The trial judge ruled in favor of the property owner. The second appeals court ruling reversed the lower courts finding that eminent domain did exist with this case giving the property back to the Village. Basically legalized extortion. Their augment was you cannot place all private property and use the eminent domain augments for these others cases. They cannot be used as a sort of wide paintbrush that all property issues and this case didn’t meet the legal criteria of “public use.” It’s really is legal extortion.
    This case is disturbing on a number of levels, but looking at this administration and their political power grab of GM and Chrysler; the question being should there be legal challenges with regard to the government becoming part-ownership of these companies, like I’ve stated previously Obama is looking ahead and lining all his ducks in a row to stop any challengers who may reverse these findings. To make sure the legal challengers lose this lawsuit, adding Judge Sotomayor maybe a gift in his hip pocket. He knows how she’s ruled in the past. He has or someone on his staff has look at her background, looked at the cases she tried as a lawyer, as a judge and as an Appeal Court judge.
    In reviewing some of her cases, she’s been inconsistent and over 60% of her rulings have been overturned which is not good. So I think you have to wonder why would Obama would choice her?

  18. Eileen,

    There is question of Sotomayor’s conduct in another of the New Haven, Conneticut firefirefighters case Ricci vs. Stefano. Using alleged racial discriminationary practices to deny firefighters promotions as an offense, Sotomayor joined a per curiam opinion that went so far as to bury the white firefighter’s claims of unfair treatment.

    Even Judge Jose Cabranes, a liberal Clinton appointee, chastized her in writing for missing the whole host of Constitutional issues that were before the court.

    Sotomayor, I’ve come to believe, has radical judicial beliefs. She thinks that decisions should be influenced by, “experiences as women and people of color” as stated by her in a 2002 speech at Berkeley and reinterated again in 2005 at Duke Law School.

    Obama is interested in people who will violate their oath of office, as he does. I believe he’s found the right Latino woman to do it. Sotomayor will only further her slanted, racist philisophical veiws of justice, not intrepret those in already in place of our Constitution.

  19. Sotomayer will likely be the next Supreme Court justice, because the GOP will be unlikely to be able to mount sufficient resolve to fillibuster it. With so many moderates left in the ranks, and so many whom figure that if they don’t confirm her the GOP has no hope of getting the Hispanic vote in 2010.

    Hers is a record of reverse discrimination, a policy approved by Barry O himself. We have officially entered the era of ‘Git Whitey’.

  20. Citizensailor

    Larry, again, a very good article and very good comments left by your fine readers.

    St. Petersburg, 1917…are you implying that Washingon should now be the “resting place” of “our” Czars. I could only hope so, if only for the title and not the people in those positions…although…..

  21. Eileen:

    This appointment may be a smokescreen. As you know, I’m a New Yorker, so I spoke to some friends who knew Sotomayor from the Bronx and they said that she is a racist and you can be sure that if there is a Hispanic on one side of a case she is hearing, that she will rule for that side. She does not like whites or blacks. They also said that it is clear that she was not vetted because there is a lot in her background that will be very damaging when it comes to light, as I believe it will.

    The illegal alien squatting in our White House knows that there will be a fight so he probably didn’t put his real choice up first. Even some of the democrats would balk at putting a racist in the Supreme Court. And, she is also a judicial activist, so there will be a lot of tough questions thrown at her. In a war, you don’t necessarily send your best troops in first. If the fraud who thinks he is president can wear down Congress with unacceptable appointees, then he can try to sneak his real choice in.

    This link has a 2005 video of Sotomayor making “some controversial remarks about ‘diversity,’ ‘judicial activism’ and female judges vs. male judges“:

  22. G. Nichols,

    Republicans objections of Sotomayor’s nomination MUST be heard in Congress. They can use it as a teaching tool to the citizens of the country. Use it not to tear down Sotomayor as the left had tried to do with Alito and Thomas, but educate Americans in the proper role of appointing Justices. One thing unfortunately, the left-bent mass media will play the attempt of education as a total display of partisanship.

    A judge that believes that a, “Latino woman is by definition ‘superior’ to a white male because she has had more richness in her struggle” will be biased and dangerous regarding judical decisions.

    Imagine the angry letters, the rebuttals, the threats of riot, from Je$$e Jack$on, Al $harpton, the N.A.A.C.P., La Raza and other minority groups had it been Justice Samuel Alito that made the statement of being ‘superior’ because of his traditional American conservative values.

  23. There were three big cases that were overturned. I stopped from adding what I found because the information was overwhelming and would have clog this board.

    Her comments made in 2002 about her knowing more then some white guy in conjunction with the New Haven Fire Department shows her unfairness towards the white race. But what was done to these fire fights is actually what happened to our schools. The moment the black race and there communities believed that the teachings were far more advanced for them to comprehend our public schools became useless for some whites. The liberal solution is always dumb it down instead of giving them more tools to understand.

    It’s fairly clear that this was a calculated move by Obama to try and hurt the GOP.

  24. Arthur Nankervis

    ‘Well Chunder Downunder’! The following quotes definitely deserve the ‘Technicolor Yawn’ award:

    Politico yesterday 27/5 – White House to Sonia Sotomayor critics: Be ‘careful’ … The latest Gibbs threat concerning comments made on Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s Supreme Court nomination:

    “I think it is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they’ve decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation,” Gibbs said. (Directed at a Newt Gingrich comment).

    From the same article:

    “This is a lawyer’s lawyer,” said Martha Minow, a Harvard Law professor who attended Yale with Sotomayor. “I am so struck by her mastery….This is a pro. This is a very sophisticated person. This is what you see when you have a summa cum laude graduate of Princeton.”

    More retching:

    “Hispanic leaders cautioned that critics, such as Gingrich, risked alienating Latinos …”

    “If there is the perception that somehow she is being treated unfairly or they are distorting her record or comments, I think there will be a backlash in the Latino community,” said Janet Murguía, president of the National Council of La Raza.

    And here I was thinking that ALL you blokes were AMERICANS. It sure looks as if the race card is going to be played a lot more in the days to come.


  25. When segregation came to schools was stopped and the black community was integrated with the white students is what I think caused this education division between whites and blacks. The curriculum was too advanced for the black student. I don’t think at that time the politicians who made these decision had contemplated these circumstances that the black student were far behind in their studies. There solution was to dumb down the material. Now, I think blacks use this as an excuse for why they cannot succeed and yell racism about everything. Because they were given special consideration in the late 60’s, they now believe they are all entitled to it and judge differently then whites.

    I had a large graduating class from High School, there were 432 students who graduated that day only one was black. I always felt bad for him because he was looked at differently. We were and still are a very rich County in NJ with 1 to 3 million dollar homes that were being built and neither the County nor its Freeholders purposely agreed to the new homes so they could keep the riff-raff out. (Jayson Williams who “accidentally” killed his driver lived just up the road from us. He was a rich, basketball star for the NJ Nets and was worth millions, he threw parties a lot and invited all his rich friends and celebrities, the County was willing to make some exceptions. If you were an educated black person, who choose a profession such as a lawyer, doctor, engineer or some high paying job you would be expectable to the Freeholders.) Anyway, I got to know him after graduation, he was smart, very funny and a very engaging man. I liked him a great deal. One day I asked him how it felt for him to enter high school as the only black guy in the joint. He said how comfortable would I be if the shoe was on the other foot and I was the only white person in a sea of black. His parents were professional people one a doctor and other a lawyer. He summed it up as a new experience and he made the most out of the situation. He’d been to other schools before his dad accepted the physician job at the hospital. But, he wasn’t the only black. There was more of a mixture to the school population. He was friendly, always smiling and happy, he ignore the racial comments some of the jocks in our school would say too him. Why aren’t you trying out for football or basketball, aren’t you people supposed to be good at sports stuff he just ignored them and called them ignorant. They didn’t know what that word meant. To this day, I still remember his name, James Walker. Although our school was integrated the community was not and it was just the way the Freeholder wanted it. His mother and father focused him on his studies because the only way to break those stereotypes was to prove them wrong.

    The problem now is they would rather become victims then rise above those stereotypes and the democrats make sure they remain victims, needy and crying out give me more. They don’t have to work hard to get what they want, the government will give it to them for free. It’s a convenience for them to say look at us, poor me, poor me and life sucks. But they have no desire to rise above that, to prove society is wrong, too work harder and receive greater rewards. When Obama was elected I thought about James, and I’m not sure he would be a fan. Obama rose above the stereotype of the “black man” but it appears he wants to keep his black community down. I’m sure he was hoping one day that we’d have a black President, but not THIS black President.

  26. Lady wolf,

    Tomorrow I’m going to try to find more stuff about her prosecutor days. I’ve heard some disturbing comments and I’m going to see if they are true. Has anyone heard that she withheld documents that would have acquitted a man. Instead she did not turn over those documents. If this is true she should have been disbarred. We cannot not have a Justice who has broken the law so she could put another trial in the win category.

    Your right though she probably wasn’t his first choice, they never are, they put up some radical they know won’t be confirm. And Obama more then likely will take this confirmation, and turn it into a political cause. Spin her around the dance floor and then turn around and call the Republicans name, then the media will jump on board and call the GOP names like racist and bigots. I’m sure Ms Garofalo has her nail file ready as she awaits the call from MSNBC and Keith Olbermman (sp and don’t care). We are so used to the name calling from these whirly birds on TV, it’s not concerned normal.

    I knew he would pick her first. I think his real choice is that Calif judge from the 9th Circuit who had the porn on his computer. Now, there is an outstanding candidate to the Supreme Court. But, he is looking ahead and he knows the Dems may lose some seat next year, so he has to put up the most radical one now.

    It’s clear to me that this was a very calculated move on Obama’s part to try to push the GOP in the corner that if they object then he’ll have the press go after them. He’s using her and I guess she doesn’t care. It’s all in the name of liberalism and the spreading more manure on the compost hep.

    It’s late, my tired and I’m off to bed. Good night and I’ll get back to you tomorrow regarding what I find out.

  27. I know this is off subject….but it’s hard to stay on any one thing with this “Usurper.”
    I believe the time has come for the “swarm” of campaign letters to begin arriving in everyone’s mail boxes. My first arrived yesterday from David Vitter’s re-election campaign “cloaked” in a shroud of how proud he was that he supported the “Tea Parties.” He didn’t forget to ask for a campaign contribution.
    I decided to let him know what was upper most in my mind….so I wrote across the front of the letter in black marker…..
    L. YOSS
    I intend to do this with every one I get…I recommend everyone do the same. I believe this issue is about to break…..everyone should do what they can to make it happen. is raising funds for their bill-board campaign which I find a worthy use of my limited funds. I also purchased a bumper sticker….WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?….short, sweet and to the point.

  28. Larry
    I posted a link to your blog here on my twitter for all the followers to check out …
    On another note … I am waiting with bated breath for your excoriation of Sotormayor
    check your powder and make sure you got lots of ammo!
    when you are done freeing Amerika back to America maybe you can help free Canuckistan back to Canada

  29. Rayne and et al,

    While doing research on the political and social issues that are important to me and my beliefs; that I want to eventually place on bumper stickers and/or t-shirt, I found out some interesting things in the process. I learned how Obama got the birth certificate pass.

    It appears that each Presidential candidate is required to show proof of eligibility to (drum roll please) the Speaker of the House. That person is required to verify that the document is real and the supposed candidate meets all the criteria to run. Once that is verify she is required by law to certify her findings and place the Speaker of the House official seal of the documentation (I didn’t know that she even had one) and a witness, via a notary republic needs to be present and also verify the results.

    The facts have only created more doubt knowing what an upstanding person the Speaker of the House is and how truthful she has been so far with the American taxpayers. If she used her Office clerk as the notary then the fix was in. There is no name listed or readable that tells who the witness was.

    I just thought I would share this with you and what I learned what I discovered. The U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Justice Department have confirmed that documentation has arrived at their offices. The numerous challenges regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president have arrived and they will be evaluated. Confirmation came from Defend Our Freedoms organization, the foundation through which California attorney Orly Taitz has been working on a number of cases that raise questions over Obama’s qualification to be president under the Constitution’s demand that the office be occupied only by a “natural born” citizen, which he is not, just based on the fact that his biological father was not a citizen of the United States nor has he given up his dual citizenship to both Kenya and Britton; which is also the basis of Alan Keyes claims.

    Taitz was informed by Karen Thornton of the Department of Justice that all of the case documents and filings have arrived and have been forwarded to the Office of Solicitor General Elena Kagan, including three dossiers and the Quo Warranto case.

    Do you remember when someone in the State Department broke code and breeched protocol over the 3 Presidential candidate’s passports? The reaction from the candidates was also interesting. Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton were concerned and accepted Condi Rice apology. Obama demanded a full out investigation as his personal file and passport was improperly accessed several times earlier in 2007 and no one was notified of the breach. My question at that time was why would someone want to know where they been. Whatever was found would never be released to the public and since 85-90% of the media would never release their findings, unless of course it was negative for the Republican candidate. But if they prove that Obama linage is on his passport and it states where he was born, as were his college records and law school information. So there are some who claims that a wealthy Arab paid his tuition and his natural origins of where his birthplace would also be listed in those documents. The 100 federal lawyers who have gone forth and conquered anyone who would release his private and personal records would be sued to the furthest extent of the law. Does that mean that he is ineligible to be President cans we the people demand his prosecution for lying about his birthplace and forging his documentation, to the furthest extent of the law?

    While trolling the internet I found something interesting that it is also quite possible that Barack Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, gave birth to Barack in Canada. History shows that she had political opinions that were rather critical toward the United States, and it has been suggested that she might have believed that her mixed-race baby might have a better future with Canadian citizenship.

    His father was a native of Kenya, which was part of the British Commonwealth until December 12, 1963, when Kenya became independent. If his father foresaw that his relationship with his sons mother might not last and he may have foresaw that he eventually might want to take his son to Kenya against the mother’s will, then he might have recognized future legal advantages in arranging for the birth to take place in Canada, which was likewise part of the British Commonwealth (until 1982). Just a theory that’s out there. The laws in Canada are not as harsh as they are here, even in 1961. All Barack Sr. has to do would be to present the Canadian birth certificate, and then fly away with the baby to Kenya. In such a situation, the mother’s legal ability to impede the father’s travel with the baby would be significantly reduced based on the laws here as well as Canada.

    At the time of Obama’s birth his mother was not considered an adult under the law. She was 18 and unwed which means under the law, makes him ineligible to meet the requirements needed to be a United States citizen based on residency requirements by the law in 1961. She did not have the requirements to even register his birth. And she became an expatriate giving up her US citizenship when she married LoLo Soetoro and became an Indonesian citizen. Obama used his passport when he was younger and it listed him as an Indonesian Citizen and the laws at that time when he and his mother lived there the Indonesian law states there are no dual citizenships allowed, which means that they both were required to denounce their US citizenship. Some believe and claim the document that was provided believe that his live birth certificate is really his half sister, May Soetoro who was born in 1970, yet she was born in Indonesia but registered in Hawaii herself.

    It would be a very simple process to produce his true birth certificate or even his college records; and instead of producing them as part of the discovery procedures as legal document disclosure he is fighting them in Court to not have to hand them over. If a judge issues a warrant to hand over the documentation and he does not comply, it is serious defying the laws of the US and should be arrested for not complying with the warrant and those charges would be obstruction of justice. I don’t know if this has been done at all and almost all obstruction of justice filings are aimed at crimes committed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and elected officials in general. It’s a malfeasance or nonfeasance in the conduct of the office. Most commonly it is prosecuted as a crime for perjury by a non governmental official primarily because of prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutors and attorneys general however commit obstruction of justice when they fail to prosecute judges and other government officials for malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance in office.

    In United States jurisdictions, these are referred to as crimes of offering interference of any sort to the work of police, investigators, regulatory agencies, prosecutors, or others, usually federal or state government officials. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident needs to exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of “Perverting the course of justice.” What Clinton did while in the White House and the cover up over Monica Lewinsky was a clear violation of obstruction of justice as was Watergate. The charges come about when they try to cover up their or someone else’s misdeeds. Many times the cover up is worse then the original crimes. I think the Valerie Plume thing was an obstruction of justice and why Scooter Libby went to prison. The charges were valid but the media blew it out of proportion as they do absolutely everything related to a Republican, yet remain quiet when someone like Sandy Berger shoved classified documents out of the Federal Achieves and then lied about when asked.

    I’m starting to think that the left want to throw these charges at those who did the water boarding and the lawyers who said it was legal.

  30. Here is a link the shows a Canadian birth certificate made out to Obama. Here is a website I found that shows the Canadian birth certificate and it looks real.

    A friend of Obama’s mom, Susan Blake gave an interview to the Chicago Tribune and commented that she didn’t no how to change a diaper. So Susan’s mom showed her.

    Susan Blake believes she gave birth in Canada because she brought him to her home when he was about 2-3 days old to Mercer Island, Washington state. One no doctor would have given permission for her to fly so close to her due date.

    Then I found this regarding his mother’s social security number still being active. Read more here.

    That’s what I discovered on my search thus far, all in the name of getting the truth to the people.

  31. Eileen,
    Thank you for your extensive investigation of this issue. I too have read all the material available but unlike you, I have neither the patience or the time to educate others.
    I feel like we’re all beating around the “bush” and if anyone truly had the “cajones” to bring this issue into the light of day…this country wouldn’t be going by way of the drain.
    This issue like no other in my 60 years on this earth has left me dis-illusioned and trusting of no one in power. There are few willing to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth…so help me God.
    We debate and bandy about each and every move this Usurper makes when in the scheme of things it’s all about one huge agenda…to destroy the Constitution and America. He is probably an expert on our Constitution…but no one wants to admit…he hates what it says and what it represents….and will do everything in his power to destroy it.
    It will be interesting to see if Ruport Murdoch responds to the letter he received regarding the eligibility issue and why even Fox News isn’t touching this with a 10 foot pole.
    It’s kind of like a disease…treating it is one thing, knowing what causes it is another.

  32. Arthur Nankervis

    A question to Larry and family:

    Are any family members having trouble with not being able to ‘click back’ within the articles as well as having the font change in size (reduce) once an article has been opened? Or, is it my browser (Firefox)? Or, is it my new, super-efficient Virus/malware/spyware suite (a-squared) just doing it’s job? Other than that: ‘All Systems Are Go’.


  33. Is it no wonder that Obama has spent a million dollars in preventing the “long form” birth certificate from being brought forward? If there was no doubt, there would be no problem!

    The man, and I use the term lightly, would have presented the document at the very first point of inquiry about it if it were not questionable, not a “doctored” online form of live birth. Obama is a fake and a liar. When proven not eligible as holding the office of President of the United States of America all legislation that has been forwarded under his administration will be held as null and void according to our Constitution.

  34. Arthur,

    I’ve had no problems of late. I use Foxfire too, mostly because I hate Internet Explorer. I used to use Netscape but the pages came up as gibberish. I love Foxfire but every now and then a page might not come up properly. Usually Fox News when they have an image, the description gets over ridden by the photograph. I also have some issues with Bank of America website when I pay my dad’s credit card payments, it’s not the browsers it’s just that the bank doesn’t support foxfire.


    Time is all I’ve and I patrol the internet looking for ideas, designs and creating s kick ass bumper sticker design. So far I’ve created beautiful America landscapes with famous quotes or song lyrics about America. I think we, as a country tends to forget the beauty and the magic that is America. I just want to remind people that our Nation beauty translates political bullshit. And a few mention the G-word. Only God could create such beauty. I’ve created a newspapers (and networks, cable news) bumper sticker to stop buying their crap and either put them out of business or conform and start writing the all the facts not just the things they want to highlight. I’ve created a lot of famous and not so famous quotes from our founding fathers, passages from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the corruption that has not only taken over our politics but also everything else. I also have done one about the birth certificate. Now that I found out that it was Miss Nancy who verified his eligibility I’m going to include that with another one. And the one I worked on today regarding voting in this country. The background is a mock ballot, it was hard to choose because so many ballots are different in each state. I choice Florida’s because of the 2000 because the liberals said it was too hard when it is not. Just because you didn’t like the outcome doesn’t mean it was too difficult to use. I’ve did a background full of every corrupt Democrat that I could find and made a montage from it and wrote the definition of Treason.

    I make fun of Howard Dean and the rest of the liberal morons. I recreated the Constitution and I’m using that as a background to remind everyone that this Democratic President is no longer following the example of all our former Presidents both alive and deceased. I don’t understand why people aren’t more upset and pissed off.

    I plan to cover everything I think is important. Wall Street guys, Oil Company’s and the speculators who drive the gas prices up. Corrupt agencies like ACORN and their subsidies that hide and launder government tax dollars and how they do it. Mortgage lenders, banks and the Democrats who enable them. The CEO’s and CFO’s who bankrupted a company or bank and walked away with millions but who also donated to the campaigns of the same democrats who are now blaming the greedy SOB’s. If I can by using T-shirt have the face of the executive, the salary they made when they worked for the now bankrupt company and on the back the so-called crimes they committed in the process.

    Poke fun at Hollywood and the liberal idiots who talk whether we like it or not. My targets will be Sean Penn (everyone’s favorite guy), Michael Moore, George Clooney, Pam Anderson, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck and the rest of those out spoken idiots. The car manufacturers, unions, lobbyist to show where they are getting their money from and the firms that use Congress that gets bills or favors from the moneyman. Hugo Chavez has spent million just last year alone with three lobbying firms to change his image with the American people, or that John McCain was instrument in give a contract to France instead of here. Oh, and yes I have created some that promote Larry’s writing and website. The t-shirt front has his banner, a large no left turn sign and the website address. On the back his slogan Never Give in, Never Give Up and Never Again.

    I think and feel part of the problem is that Americans can no longer trust our government or the news media who once oversaw and reported on fraud, corruption and abuses from our politicians, now they are just as corrupt as the politicians. Hopefully, we can have some for Larry to bring with him to CPAC next February.

    They don’t know where to go or who to believe anymore and they don’t have the time or patients to do there own research to find the “real” truth. If I can make it simple and put it on a bumper sticker or t-shirt that can explain and educate them it might help.

  35. LadyWolf, regarding the 2010 Census I discussed in an earlier blog post, here is something that was at the World Net Daily web site on May the 27th:

    Big Brother asks: ‘Do you have a flush toilet?’
    Mandatory Census survey inquires about citizens’ difficulty undressing, bathing

    The federal government is forcing 3 million Americans to disclose sensitive, personal information about finances, health and lifestyle in a 14-page survey – including questions about availability of household flush toilets and difficulty with undressing and bathing.

    The 2009 American Community Survey, an annual supplement to the decennial Census, asks about residents’ personal relationships and whether a home has hot and cold running water, a flush toilet, bathing facilities, appliances and phone services. It also asks how many rooms are in a home and what vehicles are used at each household.

    The new questionnaire asks respondents what they pay for electricity, gas, water and sewer every month and whether residents receive food stamps.

    Question 16 asks, “About how much do you think this house and lot, apartment, or mobile home would sell for if it were for sale?”

    Respondents are required to disclose costs associated with rent or mortgage, annual real estate taxes on and fire, hazard and flood insurance expenses.

    For each person in the household, the questionnaire asks for citizenship status, education level, whether that person attends private or public schools. It also features questions about health coverage, hearing and vision impairment and physical, mental or emotional conditions.

    It asks if residents “have difficulty dressing or bathing” or “doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping” or whether they have difficulty making decisions. Respondents must indicate if they have served in the military, their current marital status and whether they have been married or given birth to children in the last 12 months. The Census Bureau claims its question is used as a “measure of fertility” and is used to “carry out various programs required by statute, including … conducting research for voluntary family planning programs.”

    The letter asks where residents worked last week and whether they drove a car, rode a bus, subway railroad, ferryboat, taxicab or bicycle to get there. It then asks what time they left for work and how long their commute lasted.

    Respondents are also required to disclose their place of employment, duties and income.

    While many recipients may consider the questionnaire to be tedious and meddling, the Census Bureau warns that citizens are required by law to complete it and may be fined as much as $5,000 for willfully refusing. While an individual may feel uneasy about answering each question truthfully, the fine for filing false information can be as much as $500.

    The Census Bureau estimates that the form takes an average of 38 minutes for each household to complete.

    While the U.S. Constitution allows Americans to be counted for purposes of taxation and political representation, Jim Harper, a privacy expert at the Cato Institute, told the New York Post the survey is “a classic example of mission creep over the decades – this constitutional need to literally count how many noses are in the United States has turned into a vast data-collection operation.”

    Rep. Ron Paul blasted the government for spending “hundreds of millions of dollars” on the survey and called the questionnaire “insulting” in his Texas Straight Talk column.

    “The questions are both ludicrous and insulting,” he wrote. “The survey asks, for instance, how many bathrooms you have in your house, how many miles you drive to work, how many days you were sick last year, and whether you have trouble getting up stairs. It goes on and on, mixing inane questions with highly detailed inquiries about your financial affairs. One can only imagine the countless malevolent ways our federal bureaucrats could use this information. At the very least the survey will be used to dole out pork, which is reason enough to oppose it.”

    Paul continued, “The founders never authorized the federal government to continuously survey the American people.

    More importantly, they never envisioned a nation where the people would roll over and submit to every government demand. The American Community Survey is patently offensive to all Americans who still embody that fundamental American virtue, namely a healthy mistrust of government. ”

    (Notice that the willful refusal to fill out the form [should you be one of those selected] results in a fine of $5,000.)

  36. Eileen, there was an excellent link in the Free Republic one that you gave. It has even more incriminating evidence. You can read it at:

  37. Eileen, I don’t know why the URL linked in the period at the end of the sentence! It normally doesn’t do that. So, the web page is:

  38. This administration has got to be one of the most conning, manipulative, racist and total control freak who ever sat behind the desk in the Oval office. He demands to know what over 300 million plus people are doing on any given day. This is clearly we no longer have any right to privacy or an opinion. We are now living in 1984, just 25 years later. We’ve got to stop this jerk. What’s next? What next right and privilege will be usurped? Control over the internet and ban conservative website that are critical of his policies and agenda. Shed the Constitution and replace it with “Obama’s Rules of Governing in Fairness” or better known as “The Obama Manifesto” for living in a formerly free Country, where you have the 1st Amendment with a twist, you can say anything you, you don’t need to support the facts about the claims you are making. You just cannot be critical of his majesty.

    Over the last week I’ve started thinking about the Direction he is taking our Country. He has villainized the US Troops, reduced their funding, supplies and then comes out on Memorial Day declaring he supports the US troops, yet he has turned the Terrorist at Guantánamo Bay to poster boy of American victimization. Only a liberal can turn a terrorist into a victim. Please God save us from this nonsense.

  39. Eileen,
    Thanks for all of your research. The “Annointed One” is also creating a variety of departments , each headed by a ‘czar’ (part of his job-creation promise), each of whom reports DIRECTLY to his highness. Then when a problem arises, he has a scape goat ! Remember, during the campaign, he stated that he is the “visionary”, and others will do the work.

    When he is finally declared a fraud, and everything that he signed becomes null and void, what happens to all of the stimulus money – must it be returned ? And, more importantly , who becomes the president, since (as I understand ) the ‘ticket’ was elected, and not each individual. Therefore, if half of the ticket is a fraud, does it poison the other half ?

    How can so few cause so much damage ?

  40. trivaman:

    Thanks for the heads up. I read the article on the 27th. As an officer in a human rights organization, I was appalled by some of the questions, which clearly violate both the Privacy Act and HIPPA Laws. In 2000, I worked as a census enumerator and some of the questions were on the that questionnaire, however some of the new ones are even more invasive. My immediate reaction to some of them was that it sounded like the interrogation of a criminal. In which case, I would be prepared to take the Fifth. Trust me, an action will be filed and the American people are not going to “roll over and submit to every government demand.”

    For the most part, government already has access to a lot of the information (i.e.: Social Security, IRS, DMV etc.) they want the respondents to answer or how else would they be able to enforce a fine on anyone for filing false information. And, since when, can you be fined for refusing to answer questions you find offensive or too invasive? You have to ask yourself why only certain people are being asked to complete the long forms. I certainly don’t buy the theory that one in every 10 or so houses on a block gets the long form. Someone tried to tell me that there is no way that the government can tell who is filling out the forms. I told him: “Well, there is a bar code on every census form just like on the ones on the forms you used to get from IRS.” That shocked him. As Congressman Ron Paul said: “One can only imagine the countless malevolent ways our federal bureaucrats could use this information.” The sheer number of ways they can use the information really boggles my mind. The Nazis used the censuses to locate their victims. I’m sure that the Despot in Chief and his minions would like to be able to locate certain individuals, like patriots and right wing radicals, etc. when ever they become a problem to the new empire being formed.

    Never give up, never give in and never again.

  41. A little more on the Census Bureau from WorldNet: “The U.S. Census Bureau, reflecting what is apparently becoming a political postition that involves more than one federal agency, has listed “hate groups”, “law enforcement” and “anti-immigrant groups” among those that would be refused permission to become a partner with the 2010 Census. Not so ACORN, whose members have repeatedly been accused (and are in court proceedings) of illegal election activities.

    Only a fool could not see where Obama was headed when he implemented control of the Census Bureau to Executive prerogative.

    Using the Census, Obama wants to stack the deck in Congress with officials elected by ignorant morons who think of nothing other than how much more the government can provide for them, or use intimidation of the still decent peoples of our country should they not answer the fed’s intrusive questions.

    The Census is a nose count, nothing more. It has nothing to do with your toilet, how many rooms in your house or if you crap more than once a day!

    I may be going to prison, folks, cause I sure as hell ain’t gonna answer those damn fool questions. I just hope I don’t end up in the same cell as Barney Frank because I’d have to keep coming up with excuses as to why that little queer always has new black and blue marks.

    You’ve got to fight if you want to win.

  42. Joe:

    I’m begining to think we’re related. You express a lot of the same views I have and I do have relatives somewhere in Nebraska.

    As I said earlier, an action is being filed so Barney’s lumps will have to wait until the issues regarding the Privacy Act and HIPPA Laws, etc. are fully addressed. While they are held up in court, I don’t think they’ll be able to ask the offensive questions so they’ll only be able to get certain information. By the time a decision is issued, the Second Revolution may already be underway.

    Never give up, never give in, never again.

  43. I’m with you folks. I’ll go to prison before I give up my Constitutional Rights (did anyone see Craig T. Nelson on Glenn Beck, great stuff?). In researching information regarding Obama’s plans, hopes and dreams to have everyone will be equal under the Law. We are already equal under the law and it’s incorporated in our Constitution. What HE wants is equal rights over and above to his fans and followers, and ties the financially successful, those who are morally controlled by a God other then HIM. Who cares about traditions? Who cares about a piece of parchment paper with these silly rules and ideas that came from a bunch of fat, wealthy white men who didn’t have the fortitude or understanding that there were more then just a bunch of white people who would live here. As Obama on the campaign trail stated “suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.” Hello? Could it actually be exactly why they choose not to include that socialist mandate because they didn’t want that for the new Country they were creating? With the free enterprise, wealth could be obtained from hard work, instead of “legally stealing” through taxation and manipulating the Country’s wealthy by bankrolling those who work to those who don’t.

    It appears there can be little mistake about what they meant, what their intention was, what they had in mind, what they were thinking and why if you take the time to read the Constitution and those pages and writings from personal journals, written correspondences, legal findings and even some of the founders looked at the Bible as a sort of navigating through the passengers to develop a sort of understanding of what is right, correct and in the best interest for all. They used terms such as morals and values as a code of privately or publicly the proper conduct. Oh my God what horrible people. The Democrats, especially the ultra liberals see morals and values as placing handcuffs on them, I think mostly because THEY love to pay or reward people for bad behavior (let’s face it they are sometimes more corrupt then those who are behind prison walls) . Its fine to kill an unborn child but it’s a murder to kill someone convicted as an actual murderer or serial killer. They want to examine them, probe their minds to learn something from them so we can understand why they did what they did. Could they have done these acts because they enjoyed themselves?

    The legal debate going on now is over whether we should follow the letter and spirit of the Constitution, or whether is merely a symbolic guidepost whose meaning can be changed by clever arguments by attorneys and judges to make or create new policies. Is it really necessary for us to take seriously the restrictions the Constitution places on the powers of the federal government? The founders created an out for the people that should government become too large and abusive we had the legal means to remove them. What do you think, does Obama and his liberal posse views the Constitution the way they had set it up and intentioned? To that all-important question, I’m afraid the unequivocal answer from Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of these supposedly Constitutional “scholars” is a resounding “no.”

    The liberals view the Constitution as a “living, breathing document” that can be shaped and molded by their needs and placed on life support. A passage from his book, “The Audacity of Hope” states the following “What the framework of our Constitution can do is organize the way by which we argue about our future. All of its elaborate machinery – its separation of powers and checks and balances and federalist principles and Bill of Rights – are designed to force us into a conversation, a ‘deliberative democracy’ in which all citizens are required to engage in a process of testing their ideas against an external reality, persuading others of their point of view, and building shifting alliances of consent. Because power in our government is so diffuse, the process of making law in America compels us to entertain the possibility that we are not always right and to sometimes change our minds; it challenges us to examine our motives and our interests constantly, and suggests that both our individual and collective judgments are at once legitimate and highly fallible.” I’m sorry but I cannot disagree anymore with his “logic,” “interpretation” and his external reality. Somehow I believe that most of the founders would also disagree with his understanding about a document created as a separate entity from the outside controls of power and manipulations from King George. It appears he, Obama, wants to reinstate them to become an Oligarchy that the elite in this Country become those who will define us and the directions our Government will take us. I would have to believe that those elites will be the same that support democratic causes; which means 85-90% of the media and most of Hollywood. But let’s not forget Oligarchies have been tyrannical throughout history, being completely reliant on public servitude to exist. So no wonder why they stand so close to the democrats. When Steven Spielberg has an inch on his ass, Nancy Pelosi will be there to scratch it.

    Let us not forget that the almost yearly augments that the Founders debated during this time. Some concessions were made in order to pass the document that became our Constitution. The northern states wanted to give all rights to everyone, which included the freeing of slaves. The southern refused to agree to those terms and John Adams was exceptionally bitter about this change, and Jefferson told him they could reinstate it at a later date. Let’s not forget that the southerners viewed the northerners as radicals, extreme radicals. They fraught over language, terms and principals because they were looking ahead and were afraid that that language would or could be viewed as an interpretation, so they argued and fraught to make it as clear as they could back in 1775-1776. They’re some who hoped to change King George’s mind and refused to go along with this document. They only agreed to these terms and legal understandings once the King blew them off and flipped them the bird.

    These were articulate men, many were lawyers who took and created laws that the King had imposed on them. They threw them out and started from scratch in the hope of preventing a political and legal monopoly and a dictatorship were one person would defined the laws for everyone else as what the King was doing to these early settlers. It is starting to look as if Obama and friends want a dictatorship, he wants to be King George and redefine liberal intent.

    I personally believe that Obama and friends want to take this Nation down the road to a weak and useless Country. By weakening us militarily, remove monetary power to where the dollar has no longer any value. Where everyone is a victim to hate and envy and a sort of social war will take place against all those white men who forced the others and held them all down. The next thing will be the blacks against the whites. I think we are already there and are being herald by ACORN and the other 270 subsidy’s that are wrapped up and under the socialist umbrella; all together to help launder the tax dollars they receive as well as Government Grants. If they float the money through numerous internal organizations enough no one, not even the Government will know where it went. We then become the United States of Deceit.

    Confirming Sonia Sotomayor really needs to be examined thoroughly, her rulings, writing and speeches showcase her liberal views and political talking points (just because she ruled against an abortion case does not make her a moderate, Senator Schumer). There is a very calculated reason why Obama choose her. Based on the upcoming cases that will become before the Court in the fall; to her anti-gun rulings and of course the issue with regard to illegal immigrant (that’s why I believed she would be his first or second choice). If she is not confirmed the liberals as well as the media can come back and say the Republicans are racist and unfairly misrepresented her to the Nation by creating a Hispanic hatred against the Republicans. A large majority of Hispanics are traditionalist, they believe in God, freedoms of opinions and choices. They are against abortion and generally come here to create a better future for themselves and there children. They basically lean toward conservative beliefs and most want to vote towards the Republicans. But, the liberals and the media play the racist card to purposely mislead the Hispanic public in this Country. The Judiciary Committee needs to extract the truth about where her opinions and rulings lie. I think if they do it respectfully and just challenge her rulings and juxtaposition them against to Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it give you the power to make this ruling, Judge Sotomayor?

  44. Eileen,
    You might make it to prison while refusing to give up your Constitutional rights, but I know I will be put in a body bag along with several others if this so-called administration forces the issues.
    As for the Latinos who actually support conservative ideals and the democrats pushing the race card, it would help if we had enough HONEST members of the media who speak Spanish to provide them with the truth. Unfortunately, most of the media is in BHO’s pocket, including most of the Spanish speaking ones. It won’t matter that we oppose Sonia Sotomayor being confirmed based on her judgements and obvious biases; the liberal media will convince the masses it is all due to her ethnicity ( it wouldn’t even matter if we had 1000 other Latino candidates lined up, who were conservative and actually made judgements according to the laws of this country and the Constitution!) As conservatives,
    WE are the only ones who can be labeled as racists.

  45. Maybe I can create a bumper sticker and t-shirt that explains everything for them in spanish. My spanish is very rusty but I could give it a shot.

  46. Eileen,
    It couldn’t hurt to have the t-shirts and bumper stickers in Spanish. I know my espanol is pretty rusty, too, but I would be willing to help with the translations; I still have my English-Spanish dictionary. I just have no idea if we could get enough of them out there to even come close to getting past the media’s blitz of dis-information.

  47. Todd and Eileen:

    I’m sure that I won’ t make it to prison or one of the concentration camps they have set up for right wing radicals like us. I’ve always had a premonition that I would die in some sort of a battle. However, I don’t intend to go down easy.

    In an earlier post, I wrote that “the Israeli’s now had the Sampson Complex. In the Bible, Sampson pushed apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof and killing himself and thousands of Philistines. He chose death over slavery and destroyed his enemies as well.” When I read that quotation many years ago , I knew it had a special meaning. They know where to find me, they can come and get me, and, I won’t be alone.

  48. LadyWolf,
    I may be expecting to go out in a body bag, but I plan to take as many of the government goons with me as I can, if they come for me.
    You do realize that even in Sampson’s time there were democrats, don’t you? Of course, the only part of them that worked even then was their jaws; Sampson used the jaw bone of one of them to defeat an entire army!

  49. Todd:

    We’re on the same wave length. The democrats started, as Eileen said, about the time the oldest profession started. Today they are in a subdivision of that profession called politicians. I’d like to say only democrats are in it, but the truth is, they’re basically all the same. They just have different madams or pimps running them.

    Don’t you also find it very interesting that Jesus only lost his temper with the money lenders in the Temple. It seems like a precursor to events to come, doesn’t it?

  50. I’m not sure, but I think the politicians came along even before the prostitutes, hence this old joke:
    A doctor, an engineer, and a politician were arguing about who’s job was created first,
    The doctor says, “Right in Genesis, it says that God took a rib from Adam to make Eve.That’s the work of a doctor!”
    The engineer says, “But before that, it says God created the Earth out of chaos. That’s the work of an engineer!”
    Finally, after being quiet for quite some time, the politician says, “Well, where do you think the chaos came from?”

    Didn’t Jesus get angry with the money changers for cheating the people and using God’s house to make their own profit?

  51. Todd:

    “Didn’t Jesus get angry with the money changers for cheating the people and using God’s house to make their own profit?”

    That was his reason but the “money changers” can have different connotations as well (i.e.” bankers, insurance companies, anyone who moves money around and cheats for profit might fit the name).

    The words and lessons of the Bible, more often than not, have different interpretions. What I found is striking here is you have two separate issues: Jesus’ anger at what was being done in His Father’s House and the money changers cheating the people for profit. He was far more angry in this case because it was done in his Father’s House. But, even if you substitute the setting of the cheating, I believe Jesus would still be angry.

    Modern “money changers” should beware. The wrath of God is coming.

  52. LadyWolf,
    I think we could take your logic one more step and see that Jesus would REALLY be angry with Obama and Congress, due to the “Stimulus Bill” and the forced take-overs of Chrysler and GM.

  53. Todd:

    I already see beyond that. We can be sure that the “money takers” who profit from the “Stimulus Bill”and the “money givers” in the White House and Congress are also part of His anger. The anger is with all the inhabitants of this planet for their various sins. In the end none of us will avoid His anger, and, we will all face His judgment. Some people will have far more to answer for, however.

    Psalm 91:8

    “You will only observe with your eyes
    and see the punishment of the wicked.”

  54. LadyWolf,
    I really wasn’t trying to get into a religious debate with you. However, I believe those who have accepted Christ into their hearts will receive God’s mercy; only those who have refused to do so will receive His wrath.

  55. Todd:

    Don’t worry, I didn’t take your response as a debate. I know those of us who have accepted Christ into our hearts will receive God’s mercy.

    The basis for my statements are from the Book of Revelation 20:11-15

    “The Dead Are Judged

    11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. ”

    In regard to God’s wrath , I am especially comforted by this passage, also from Revelation:

    “10And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”

    It is my belief that the false prophet now resides in our White House. He sealed his own fate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s