Sunday, December 11, 2011

Who is that Guy in the Oval Office? (Part 11)

Obama's Kiss of Death to the Poor
By Attorney Jonathan Emord
Author of "The Rise of Tyranny" and "Global Censorship of Health Information"
February 20, 2012
When the economy is in the doldrums, those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder suffer the most. Their solution is not a promise of government programs to train a small subset of them or employ an even smaller subset in temporary make-work jobs. Those “solutions” provide momentary relief only to a fraction of the poor who participate in the government programs, only as dictated by government planners, and only for so long as the federal funds keep flowing. The solution, rather, is an immediate alteration in the relationship between government and the private sector to permit the private sector to grow freely, without federal direction, constraints, or tax burdens and draw down the ranks of the unemployed to meet the demands of the market. The means to achieve that immediate alteration are to reduce substantially the size and scope of the federal government, cut taxes on business, and eliminate the personal income tax.
President Obama is possessed of that same unfounded confidence which feeds the minds of all intoxicated with elective office who subscribe to the view that government planning can achieve for the market greater results than the market can achieve for itself. Rather than give back to the productive the money the federal government takes from them so that they may expend their resources as they think fit and employ people with the skill sets they need, the President proposes to raise taxes by over $1 trillion and create a series of new federal initiatives (transportation infrastructure, education, school modernization, new teacher hires, and a whopping $8 billion federal job training program), all designed to placate temporarily a subset of those he must convince to re-elect him (including, for example, the unemployed, parents struggling with student loans, and public employees fearing or experiencing job cuts). With the varnish removed, Obama’s government planning initiatives are drawn from the same moribund concept that proved Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot utter failures. One of the most commonly confirmed historical verities is that government planned economies fail and fail miserably. Government cannot predict the outcome of ever fluctuating demand for goods, services, or labor. While Obama intends to spend billions on job training initiatives, neither government nor academia can predict the precise skill sets that industry will need next year, let alone over the next decade. Rather, industry itself, if freed from government constraints and heavy tax burdens, can finance its own education initiatives geared precisely to satisfy each company’s immediate needs.
From Obama’s rhetoric, one would think that there is a dislocation between industry and education when, in fact, any such effects are temporary and market driven. If companies pay enough for qualified talent, students will acquire the education necessary to satisfy that demand. If there is a shortage of certain skilled laborers, employers will pay more to get them, and those entering school will take the courses needed to reap the financial benefits. Some large companies would rather have the government subsidize the cost of labor and, so, Obama’s $8 billion fund will be but another political gambit indicative of the crony capitalism he so frequently embraces.
Portraying himself as the representative of the downtrodden, President Obama’s budget is, in fact, a kiss of death for the poor. It offers them no solution to poverty. Instead, it offers them a deceptive token, a false promise from that somehow the billions he will pump into government programs will translate into a meaningful change in the state of poverty in America. His is a promise of a better day that is very long on promise and very short on the kind of fundamental reform in the relationship between government and the private sector necessary to permit private sector growth and job creation. What the poor need is not a pledge of a subsidy for attendance at a community college (read a few books while you starve) or a temporary state funded construction job (earn enough to survive the summer). What the poor need is precisely the same as what all Americans need: a vibrant private sector in which opportunity abounds and the chance to prove oneself exists at every turn. That comes only if a government that maintains debt in excess of the gross domestic product shrinks to the limits of its tax revenues and removes every obstacle to free enterprise that government has put in the way—from regulation to taxation.
Government is a parasite. It cannot create wealth nor determine how wealth is to be created by the productive. The productive must be set free. They will then do what they have done historically and so well, satisfy demand, build empires, and produce an upwardly mobile economy in which the poor, and indeed all of us, have opportunities to succeed. We reached record low levels of unemployment a decade ago not because of government programs but because of a vibrant private sector, infused with brilliant contributions from the likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
The President’s budget proposal, Dead On Arrival in the Republican House and one that is in fact his 2012 campaign platform, calls on government to reduce the present $1.33 trillion dollar deficit by a paltry $400 billion in each of the next ten years, bringing present spending to an unacceptably high deficit of $901 billion by 2013 and failing to achieve a balanced budget at any point in the foreseeable future.
At a time when regulatory and tax relief for all, the rich and the poor, is essential to jump start the economy by leaving in private hands the power to decide for oneself how to invest, spend, and produce, the President wants to draw even more private wealth into the government by ending the Bush era tax cuts, eliminating tax deductions for the wealthy, requiring those who earn a million dollars or more to pay 30 percent of their income in taxes, imposing $61 billion in new taxes on banks, and ending tax breaks for oil, gas, and coal companies (thereby increasing taxes on those industries by $41 billion annually).
Private concentrations of wealth are essential for job creation, for creating self-sustaining employment. Vast stores of money, whether invested or expended, create opportunities for employment that satisfies market demand. By contrast, government programs to train, make work, or publicly employ are dead end investments. They require a draw on private wealth to pay for them and they cannot be continued without continuous additional draws on private wealth in future. In short, they add to the debt, reduce capital available for private growth, and increase public dependence on government.
When we take into account the federal financial obligations coming from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2014 and beyond, the President’s planned spending overwhelms the paltry $400 billion in annual cost reductions his plan offers. Consequently, he is digging the debt hole much much deeper, inviting a collapse of the economy and of the government itself.
The bankrupt ideas of the President are a microcosm of the actual bankruptcy implementation of them would bring to the United States. His re-election depends on an assumption that the American people are too ignorant to comprehend the sleight of hand inherent in his proposals or the essential need for substantial reductions in federal spending. The American people, however, are increasingly cognizant of the fact that this President has no real solutions to the problems befalling the country. They increasingly recognize soberly that the debt crisis is dire and promises to bring down this great nation in less than a decade. Whatever inflated credit that may mistakenly be given to President Obama (rather than to Seal Team Six) for Obama’s decision to allow U.S. special forces to take out Osama bin Laden [untruth as bin Laden was dead years ago - Deline] is trifling in comparison to the monumental blame he will richly deserve if his irresponsible fiscal policies are adopted and bring about the destruction of the United States economy and, indeed, the government itself.
Jonathan W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law before the federal courts and agencies. Congressman Ron Paul calls Jonathan “a hero of the health freedom revolution” and says “all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom [victories] on behalf of health freedom.” He has defeated the FDA in federal court a remarkable eight times, six on First Amendment grounds, and is the author of Amazon bestsellers The Rise of Tyranny, and Global Censorship of Health Information. He is also the American Justice columnist for U.S.A. Today Magazine. For more info visit
Booing the Gluttony of the Obamas
Gluttony is a dominating factor in all things Obama
Judi McLeod
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Michelle Obama and her two daughters off skiing in Colorado this long President Day weekend has nothing to do with health and fresh air, nor even to show sports prowess on the slopes.
The Colorado ski trip is just another demoralizing campaign tactic.
You’re at home hoping homemade biscuits will stretch the Sunday’s roast chicken dinner to feed visiting relatives while the exhilaration of powdered snow is painting Happy Faces on the women in Obama’s life.
Women is what Obama wants you to think this presidential campaign is all about.
All communication from the Obama regime portrays Republicans as deliberately forcing women back to the Beaver Cleavers of the 1950s when the male-inspired dictate of the day ostensibly was: “No birth control for you, Miss Alice.”
All male chauvinist pigs are Republican according to the Democrats’ latest smear campaign.
Gluttony is a dominating factor in all things Obama.
From his introduction from DNC fake Greek columns, Obama and later his unelected hippy czars made the 40%-plus of people who support the man whose main mission is the Fundamental Transformation of America, gluttons for punishment. These are the gluttons who cannot live without their food stamps and free telephones; those gullible enough to believe they will be bailed out of their mortgage responsibilities in much the same way as the too-big-to-fail General Motors was bailed out of its financial responsibilities to become the failed Government Motors.
The Obama family are gluttons. Gluttons for bling, gluttons of spite, and gluttons for attention.
In three and a half years, the gluttony for bling hasn’t stopped. The gluttony for spite has been a lifetime pursuit for Mama and Papa Obama, beginning when they managed to drag long simmering class warfare out of the south side of Chicago to spread across the fruited plains.
Nothing speaks louder or is more demanding than the Obama’s outright gluttony for attention.
Their gluttony for attention could be treated in the same commonsense way of Alcoholics Anonymous, who tell the loved ones and friends of alcoholics: “As soon as it is safe to do so, walk away from the alcoholic who depends on a captive audience.”
The Obamas are not just merely ducking duty by disappearing from responsibility with once-a-month vacations from the White House. Nor is the main problem their pathological laziness or hedonism. It’s their spite-fueled hatred of all little people against them: decent, hard working Americans trying to hold it together—even in the face of state-imposed Marxism.
People should hope for the best but expect the worst about the November 6 election. They should be preparing themselves emotionally and financially for the possibility of—dare we say it?—Soetoro-Obama’s reelection.
Barry Soetoro, who made it all the way to the White House straight off Chicago streets, has all the cards stacked on his side: the cheating skills of well-funded groups like ACORN under all of its new names, 46 million on food stamps; 12 million, and growing, free telephone users able to be texted and emailed by Obama’s campaign round-the-clock; absolute control of the mainstream media, and control of the Internet without even having to shut it down.
If Obama is not convinced all of the above will reelect him, he will rely on anarchy to impose martial law and suspend elections.
This is why all who put family survival above Marxist politics should be preparing now for life post November 6, 2012. (More on that in a future column).
Even as Barry-Barack continues to tap golf balls with that downright smarmy smile on his face; even as the stardust covers Michelle’s perpetually photographed upper arms in the form of powdered snow, signs of hope and change are waiting in the not-too-distant future.
The day will come when, rather than stand back while Obama’s motorcade is parked in front of your hometown’s ‘Hamburger Heaven’ or ice cream shoppe, crowds will boo at their first sight of the First Family.
That day will come not only because feisty patriots will only put up with so much spite, but because in real life booing the Bad Guy is only Human Nature.
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh,, Drudge Report,, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at:
Obama includes Canada in his 'King of World' territory
Marxist policies of the President Barack Obama regime
Judi McLeod
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Canadians, watching the Fundamental Transformation of the United States of America, from the safety of over-the-border observation, consider themselves too distant from the expanding Marxist policies of the President Barack Obama regime.
Even the many who worry about American friends losing jobs and homes would admit “It’s not like being there”.
But Obama, whose proverbial ego is as big as Texas and whose mission for One World Government is inspired by punishing the US for imagined past crimes, has now turned his ambitious sights on Canada.
“Canada is launching a full-court press in an attempt to prevent the United States from passing bank reforms that may impact Canadian investors, financial markets and the economy.” (Winnipeg Free Press, Feb. 14, 2012).
“In separate letters to Washington policy-makers, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney complain sweeping reforms under the “Volcker rule” would reach well beyond their intended scope, and beyond borders.”
Canadians in-the-know would recognize former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker as the man who gave a pass to all shysters never brought to justice in the $34 million “independent investigation’ into the United Nations Oil-for-Food scandal during the watch of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and his under secretary general and special adviser, (including North Korea, Environmentalism and UN Reform) UN Poster Boy, Canadian Maurice Strong, who bailed out to China during investigations.
During the skewed Volcker ‘investigation’, which took over 16 months, and employed some 75 staff from 28 countries, Secretary General Kofi Annan, his deputy secretary-general, Canadian Louise FrĂ©chette, and his chief of staff, Iqbal Riza “were all informed of the issue of kickbacks, but remained passive”. (Claudia Rosett, Sept. 26, 2005).
There are virtually no Freddie Mack and Fannie Mae horrors in the Canadian financial story. Canadian financial institutions have been relatively unscathed by the ongoing worldwide economic turmoil.
To bring the Canadian banking picture into sharper focus: The two countries, geographic proximities notwithstanding, banks failed in Canada and the U.S. at very different rates.
What about the noughties? Nick Rowe makes some relevant points: Canada has fewer major banks and they are more tightly regulated, hold more capital, and housing is not encouraged so much by law. It is harder to walk away from an underwater mortgage.
Here is Megan McArdle on Canada.
…it doesn’t seem to be as simple as “Canadian banks are more tightly-regulated”.
1. We never had restrictions on interstate banking, so Canadian banks spread their assets and liabilities across Canada. (So it doesn’t matter if a local housing market goes bust).
2. We don’t have Glass-Steagal. The investment banks joined the retail banks some years ago.
3. We don’t have mortgage interest deductibility from taxes. So paying down your mortgage is a tax-free investment. So most people want to pay down their mortgages.
4. (Except in Alberta), mortgages are fully recourse. You can’t just walk away from a negative equity home and hand the keys to the bank; the bank will come after you for the difference.
It is not just hype that portrays Obama as self-appointed ‘King of the World’. Add the United Kingdom, Japan, the whole of the European Commission and others as complainants along with Canada. That’s because In the proposed new U.S. bank rules, Obama’s octopus arms would have an unprecedented extraterritorial reach and significant cross-border effects.
Bank of Montreal economist Douglas Porter puts the proposed new U.S. bank rules in alarming perspective: “The problem is that the rule does not just apply to Canadian bank operations in the United States, it would apply to their operations around the world.”
“Most Canadian banks have operations in the United States so interlinked that even strictly Canadian activities could come under the changes. As well, while U.S. government treasury sales are exempted, Canadian government bonds are not.”
Since his election, Obama has seen only one defeat when Canadian businessmen forced back his hand on Buy America Act.
Obama, whose mission seems to be to push America over the cliff, now works to take Canada down with it.
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty should force Obama to take his octopus arms out of the country that will never belong to him.
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh,, Drudge Report,, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at: 
Samuel L. Jackson Drops the Act: Admits He Only Voted for Obama because of Race
idiocracy: America is so degraded that we actually elevate unsophisticated, ignorant buffoons
Selwyn Duke
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Hey, Jackson, is it Samuel L. or Jesse? Actually, it’s more likely that the actor was channeling Jeremiah Wright.
In a racial-epithet-laced interview with Ebony magazine, the Pulp Fiction star proved that his politics is a fiction and his head is filled with, well, you fill in the blank. Jackson admitted that he only voted for Barack Obama because of the president’s skin color. Said the actor, “I voted for Barack because he was black. ‘Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people – because they look like them. That’s American politics, pure and simple. [Obama’s] message didn’t mean **** to me.”
Well, Jackson certainly isn’t alone in his ignoring of Obama’s message. As for people voting for those who look like them, Sammy, project much? In 2008, 43 percent of whites overall cast ballots for Obama, which is only 4 points below Jimmy Carter’s share in 1976; moreover, 54 percent of young whites voted for Mr. Hope and Change, a record for a Democratic candidate for the last three decades. These facts prove that whites can be colorblind and fail to see red just like anyone else.
In contrast, 96 percent of blacks supported Obama in 2008. Although, few are as honest as Jackson, who clearly is proud that he never lets politics get in the way of his bigotry. But the actor was just getting warmed up. He then told Ebony:
“When it comes down to it, they wouldn’t have elected a ####. Because, what’s a ####? A #### is scary. Obama ain’t scary at all. ####s don’t have beers at the White House. #### don’t let some white dude, while you in the middle of a speech, call [him] a liar. A #### would have stopped the meeting right there and said, ‘Who the **** said that?’ I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years, ‘cuz he ain’t gotta worry about getting re-elected.”
Hey, classy guy. I suppose Jackson would prefer a president such as the character in Idiocracy (warning: profanity). Although, to be frank, a man who can’t spell communism is far less threatening than one who worships it.
Speaking of “idiocracy,” the real tragedy here is that America is so degraded that we actually elevate unsophisticated, ignorant buffoons such as Jackson to positions of prominence. So, no, Sammy, not all Americans vote only for those who look like them – not all are bigoted. As your success proves, however, not all are exceedingly smart, either.
Selwyn Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show. His work has appeared in Pat Buchanan’s magazine The American Conservative and he writes regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective.
Selwyn can be reached at: 
Our Fraudulent President Cannot Pass an E-Verify Check
By Frosty Wooldridge
February 6, 2012
If you walk up to a barn, you might say, “Something stinks in there.”
If you talk to today’s teenagers, you might hear, “Hey dude, what smells?”
In Shakespeare’s time, “Something is rotten in Denmark.”
Hamlet Act 1, scene 4, 87–91: The character Marcellus, and not Hamlet, is the one who coined the phrase. There's a reason he said the "State of Denmark" rather than just Denmark: the fish are rotting from the head down—all is not well at the top of the political hierarchy.
In 2012, you might say, “Something is rotten in the U.S. Congress.” At this time, Americans give Congress a nine percent approval rating. That nine percent need to have their own minds checked.
Barack Obama enjoys 46 percent approval after three years of failed policies, 46 million Americans subsisting on food stamps and another 15 million unemployed. That’s for starters.
For three years, top investigators have pursued Barack Obama’s legitimacy for being president of the United States. His mother was a U.S. citizen, but his father was from Kenya. That’s in question because Obama bears zero resemblance to his purported father. Jerome Corsi wrote a book: Where’s the Birth Certificate? His evidence shows compelling facts that Barack Obama is not a U.S. citizen. Lawyer Orly Taitz pursued the question all the way to a federal court in Georgia last week. Georgia State Administrative Judge Malihi ordered Obama to appear. Obama failed to attend. A retired Denver, Colorado ICE agent, John Sampson, testified that Barack Obama cannot pass an E-Verify employment check because of a fraudulent social security number made out to a man in Connecticut who died before Obama was born.
Nonetheless, no American citizen is given any other person’s social security number and no American citizen is given a social security number other than the state from which he or she resides at the time of the issuance. Barack Obama’s social security numbers starts with “042” showing that he obtained it in Connecticut. However, Barack Obama has never lived in or has he worked in or in any way been connected to the State of Connecticut.
His grandmother, however, worked for the Social Security office and the speculation remains that she stole a dead man’s number from Connecticut and gave it to Obama. Thus, compounding the fraudulent identity of Obama.
While Judge Malihi last week found Obama not guilty of fraud as to his birth certificate and allowed him to remain on the ballot for the next presidential election in Georgia, the quest of Obama’s fraudulent Social Security number looms large.
“As the U.S. Constitution allowed for every citizen to pursue success, happiness and fortune, to the best of each one's ability and desire, because of the promise that the rule of law, as opposed to the rule of man, would protect their rights and their property, so too did it draw to this country, the best the world had to offer,” said Dwight Kehoe of Little Silver, New Jersey. “This is what America is and America is the U.S. Constitution. Clearly the Constitution has been under attack from the left and from the right for many years now. This past week, as Judge Malihi's obviously political ruling settled over this nation like a dark onerous cloud, one could not help but think the enemies of our democratic republic are winning in their struggle to destroy the freedoms we have for so long enjoyed.”
Additionally, because Obama did not answer his subpoena to appear before court, how could he win the decision? That’s like Ali and Frasier fighting for the heavy weight title, but Ali didn’t show up, but later was pronounced the winner and Frasier the loser.
Someone must have gotten to Judge Malihi with money, threats or other persuasions. You cannot find someone innocent when they didn’t show up for the trial. Obama didn’t show up and his lawyers abdicated.
Ironically, Obama has reportedly spent $2 million to seal all his records and maintain a full time law firm to keep his records under strict secrecy.
Returning to Judge Malihi’s questionable decision, Kehoe also asked these four pertinent questions:
1. Why did the Judge make a ruling on "credibility" of the witnesses without either cross examination or appointing an expert to review the charges and testimony?
2. Why did the Judge reach out to a lower court ruling, where clearly the few people involved in that case had no clue about Article II, and ignore case after case from our own United States Supreme Court? Could it be because he was operating on an agenda as opposed to the law?
3. If the Judge was going to allow the defendant not attend or testify under oath and thereby made his ruling based upon the "defense" he provided for the defendant, why were the plaintiffs not given the opportunity to cross examine the Judge before he made his ruling?
4. Since Judge Malihi was performing as the defendant's advocate, should he not have been put under oath and questioned as to why he refused to have other experts verify that the birth certificate is a forgery and that Obama's SSN failed E-Verify instead of simply dismissing the testimony?
To that I say, “Something really stinks in the Barack Obama presidency.”
Why? No matter how you cut it, obfuscate it, cover it, falsify it and evade it—Barack Obama, if he gave his social security number to a prospective employer for a check at E-Verify to determine if he is a U.S. citizen and eligible to work in this country—Barack Obama would fail.
In other words, this country has been misled, duped, lied to, scammed and buffaloed.
In this coming election, the American people must demand honesty, integrity and honor to the U.S. Constitution. That cannot occur with a president that possesses a falsified Social Security number, which leads any rational person to appreciate that one lie leads to another and that Barack Obama is a liar and he knows it. Lies can never be covered up and they will be exposed in the course of time in this free country governed by the rule of law and not of men.
It’s only a matter of time before the truth comes out in a court of law.
Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdays as he interviews top national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" at at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time zone.
Frosty Wooldridge possesses a unique view of the world, cultures and families in that he has bicycled around the globe 100,000 miles, on six continents and six times across the United States in the past 30 years. His published books include: "Handbook for Touring Bicyclists"; “Strike Three! Take Your Base”; “Iimmigration’s Unarmed Invasion: Deadly Consequences”; “Motorcycle Adventure to Alaska: Into the Wind—A Teen Novel”; “Bicycling Around the World: Tire Tracks for Your Imagination”; “An Extreme Encounter: Antarctica.” His next book: “Tilting the Statue of Liberty into a Swamp.” He lives in Denver, Colorado.
His latest book. ‘Immigration's Unarmed Invasion—Deadly Consequences.’
A Short Review of Obama's Agenda
by Alan Caruba
Friday, February 3, 2012
What word describes a President who knowingly and deliberately decreases the nation’s access to energy by stopping an oil pipeline that will not cost the taxpayers a penny and will generate 20,000 jobs?
# Who imposed a moratorium and oil production in the Gulf of Mexico that cost an estimated 12,000 jobs;
# Whose EPA is causing coal-fired plants that provide electricity to shut down;
# Whose administration has put uranium-rich lands off limits to mining to fuel the nuclear plants that represent 20% of the electricity the nation uses?
What word describes a President who knowingly and deliberately plans to cut the Pentagon budget by half a trillion dollars or more in the next decade?
# Who will force the Army to cut as many as eight of its 45 brigades;
# Who has announced that seven of the Navy’s cruisers will be decommissioned sooner than planned;
# Who will leave the Navy with a fleet of fewer than 230 ships if “sequestration” cuts another $500 billion by next January;
# Who appears to believe that the next war can be fought with drones?
The President takes an oath found in the U.S. Constitution that says, “ I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
What if he ignores the Constitutional limits on presidential powers?
Even in matters related to recess appointments, Barack Obama has shown an indifference to the Constitution and has appointed “czars” who largely went unvetted by the U.S. Senate and who presumably have more power to effect policy than the Secretaries of the various executive branch departments.
In March, the Supreme Court will hear a case against Obamacare brought by 28 State’s attorney generals who say that it is unconstitutional.
Whether by reason of intent or stupidity, President Obama is causing this nation to be systematically deprived of sources of energy vital to the economy and the welfare of Americans. He is undermining the ability of the nation to defend itself in the event of an attack and to project force throughout the world to maintain peace in the face of those nations that threaten it.
While declaring himself the protector of the poor and minorities both have become poorer and both have experienced unemployment at rates far higher than any other element of the population.
He has swelled the ranks of those dependent on government handouts. He is the “food stamp President” and he yet may become the “soup kitchen” President if he is reelected.
Americans have lost more wealth since Obama’s inauguration than during the 1930s Great Depression era. Their homes are worth less, their wages have either fallen or stagnated, and they are paying more for all their needs, food, gas, and other necessities.
Having driven the nation’s debt to the highest in its history, doing more in three years than all previous presidents from Washington to Clinton combined, he is now asking Congress to raise the debt ceiling by another $1.5 trillion. He has done this despite the first, historic downgrade of the nation’s credit rating.
He will not be impeached, but he must be defeated.
He is leaving Americans in the dark and unprotected.

The Girl Killed by Obama: She "never saw it coming" by grtv
Barack Obama says the drone attacks he authorises are targetted only at named people on a list of active terrorists who are a direct threat to America. The facts tell a different story.
Michelle ‘Fancy Pants’
Boosting foreign profits
Judi McLeod
Monday, January 30, 2012
First Lady Michelle Obama has her unwanted nose in the plates of American children. The British press has its nose in her lavish lingerie.
Only satin and lace bloomers and such are good enough for Barry’s wife—$50,000 of it in just one shopping spree!
It wouldn’t make much difference to loving parents that unschooled nutritionist Michelle gets to dictate what their little ones eat just because she wears satin bras from an overseas shop called ironically enough, Agent Provocateur.
“The First Lady—better known for shopping at more modestly-priced High Street stores—along with the Queen of Qatar, Sheikha Mozah, closed off part of Madison Avenue to spend time in the luxury lingerie shop. Their purchases contributed to a market-spanking 12.5pc lift in sales.” (The Telegraph, Jan. 29, 2012).
“Agent Provocateur, which is styled on vintage Hollywood glamour, sells handmade Calais lace corsets that sell for up to £900, which could ruffle the feathers of more than just President Barack Obama in an election year.”
Perhaps The Telegraph doesn’t know that the last time Obama got his feathers ruffled over anything British was right after election when he shipped a long-standing Oval Office bust of the great Winston Churchill back to England.
$50,000 smackeroos for laced up corsets and such would be excessive even if it weren’t that mainstreet Americans are struggling to hold onto their jobs and mortgages in a deepening Recession.
Now hear this: While the First Lady’s hubby is sending American jobs overseas, his spouse is doing her bit for America: “Gary Hogarth, Agent Provocateur’s chief executive, refused to be drawn on the store’s closely kept “secret client list”. But he admitted the brand had attracted a high number of “unexpected famous names”—especially in the U.S. where sales have overtaken the UK.”
Global citizens Barack and Michelle would approve of Agent Provocateur’s global branding: “On the back of this growth, Agent Provocateur, which is owned by listed private equity firm 3i, is launching an aggressive expansion strategy with more than 20 new shops opening globally in 2012.
“Last-minute purchases of lace corsetry and satin bras pushed Christmas trading across the eight weeks from November 27 up 8.1 pc on a like-for-like basis and 15.2pc overall. In the last 43 weeks, trading has been up 12.5pc on a like-for-like basis and 21.6pc overall, outstripping most of its retail rivals. The company’s lack of competition, celebrity status and up-market clientele have insulated it from problems endured by most rival retailers. In October the company said that half-year sales were up a third to £26.6m with earnings of £3.3m.”
Nice to know that the Brits of King George III’s day now back contemporary American patriots by keeping them in-the-know with a mainstream American media looking the other way, giving Michelle a panty pass.
Perhaps talk show radio king Rush Limbaugh’s celebrated songster Paul Shanklin can immortalize Michelle’s lingerie in a knockoff rendition of Al Hirt’s Fancy Pants.
Meanwhile in that strange gone-Marxist, party-it-up DC world, not only are some animals more equal than others, so are some people’s underwear.
White House fury at ‘false’ claims Michelle Obama ‘closed off Agent Provocateur’s Madison Avenue boutique to spend $50,000 on lingerie’
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh,, Drudge Report,, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at:
‘Mr. $3 Tweet Man’ back from vacation today
Obamas and their hanger on friends blitzed Cyberspace with tasteless Three Dollar Tweets
Judi McLeod
Monday, January 2, 2012
There’s a healthy shiver of anticipation running down the spines of untold millions of patriots today. Barack Obama’s on his way back from Hawaii and fate begins to unfold to November 6.
No one had to dig too deeply to find out what Obama and his entourage were up to during the latest lavish holiday.
Reality TV missed out on the comedy of all time.
While Obama and Company were peeling shrimp in $4-million vacation luxury—the same Internet the Obama regime keeps under threat of shutdown—was working overtime for them.
In their self centered world held together by only the bubblegum of politics, the Obamas and their hanger on friends blitzed Cyberspace with tasteless Three Dollar Tweets.
Surely of all his nicknames, “Three Dollar Tweet Man” is the best.
But you won’t get to hear how miserably they are failing at bringing in the New Year sheaves.
Incredibly, just moments before midnight on New Year’s Eve, the Barack Obamas actually thought you were thinking about them. While party revelers were waiting for the countdown to 2012 and ordinary people were looking for loved ones to kiss and sincerely wish the best, Obama was texting millions looking for what has become the Democrats absurd “$3 or more” quest.
This, in his own words, was the Marxist megalomaniac’s New Year’s Eve message to the masses:
We’re just a few hours from 2012 and our deadline.
If you’re out celebrating and away from your computer, you should know that we’ve made it incredibly easy for you—or anyone you’re with—to make a donation from your mobile device.
Give it a shot before midnight local time:
Happy New Year,
Obama for America
It is safe to say that no one, not even his most gullible fan was thinking of Barack Hussein Obama on New Year’s Eve.
And it’s even safer to suggest that if it weren’t for the passion of his Marxist megalomania Obama would be just another irresponsible lout out there spending all of his time on the golf course or shooting hoops.
Here is the skinny on what taxpayers got for the $4-million Hawaiian vacation: a picture from the British media of bling-crazed Michelle sporting an alleged $2G sun frock; a hilarious picture of Obama the Saviour on his way to release four (count ‘em) green sea turtles into the sea at a popular snorkeling spot on the island of Oahu. Make that releasing to the open sea, the same kind of sea turtles that radio talk show giant Rush Limbaugh wants out of Dodge back in Palm Beach. (What a coincidence!)
The actual picture of Obama starting off on the rescue mission is priceless. Wearing flip-flops and surrounded by a coterie of high living freeloaders, he looked downright goofy, while an unidentified cuter little boy panning for the camera was much more true to life.
To Obama the Sea Turtle Saviour, some animals will always be more equal than others.
It was only weeks ago when he quietly signed into law a spending bill that restores the American horse-slaughter industry, just a few months after a government investigation said the ban on slaughtering was backfiring.
“The domestic ban didn’t end horse slaughter but instead shifted the site of butchery to Mexico and Canada—which meant increased abuse or neglect as the horses were shipped out of the country and beyond the reach of U.S. law.” (The Washington Times, Nov. 30, 2011).
Obama conducts a lot of business offshore, like forcing the cost of abortions in other countries on the American taxpayer and filling his $1-billion re-election coffers from foreign contributors.
As anyone could safely conclude getting to $1billion takes a lot of $3 donations with dinner with the Obamas thrown in.
While still on Hawaiian soil, Obama sent his latest “Boo!” to the hapless masses by signing H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2012.
What he’s saying on Drudge headlines is: “I have the power to detain Americans—but I won’t.”
What he means is ‘I want you to think of me being able to do so every day this year’.
But rather than Obama’s ominous threats leaving Americans quaking in their boots, they’re shaking their fists in “Bring it on!” mode.
Welcome back to the White House, and the new status quo which happened while you were holidaying, Mr. Obama. Your future is even more bleak than the innocent middle class Tea Party folk you’re unsuccessfully trying to wipe out.
The only difference is the enemy can provide the Hope and Change for America you failed to deliver.
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh,, Drudge Report,, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at:
America’s Communist President
Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century
Alan Caruba
Saturday, December 10, 2011
In his extraordinary book, “Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century”, the historian, Dr. Paul Kengor, stated in his introduction that “We now know that American Communists and their masters in Moscow were acutely aware that they could never gain the popular support they needed to enlist the support of a much wider coalition that could help them push their private agenda.”
Most threatening, however, was Dr. Kengor’s discovery that “it was nothing short of stunning to research this book during the presidential bid of Barack Obama and hear so many of the names in my research surface repeatedly in the background of the man who became president of the United States of America. The way in which so many names and themes from the Cold War past aligned and made their way into Obama’s orbit was chilling.”
Obama’s December 8th speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, revealed to anyone paying any attention that the President is a Communist. Speaking of the nation’s economic system that has created the greatest wealth for the most people anywhere, Capitalism, Obama said, “It doesn’t work. It has never worked.”
No one would argue that capitalism is “fair”, nor would they argue that life is “fair.” These are things that never were and never will be, but Obama’s reelection campaign theme will be that Americans are suffering because of Capitalism, because of a lack of fairness.
Obama is not a defender of the middle class but has been its mortal enemy
In a December 8 Washington Times commentary, Jeffrey T. Kuhner wrote, “There is only one problem with the White House’s narrative: It’s completely false. Mr. Obama is not a defender of the middle class but has been its mortal enemy. His policies have impoverished working-and-middle-class Americans.”
Other than the utterly brain-dead liberals for whom facts are meaningless, most Americans understand, as Kuhner pointed out, “His massive stimulus failed to restore economic recovery…his trillion-dollar deficits and skyrocketing debt have mortgaged the future of our children…Obamacare suffocates businesses, stifles job creation, and adds another unsustainable entitlement. It is creeping socialized medicine, which is wrecking the world’s finest health care system.”
Rush Limbaugh denounced the speech as “alien to American ideals and principles…your vision for this country is not rooted in any—not one—American tradition.”
Obama’s history, what is known of it given his extensive efforts to hide the facts that are usually available about a candidate or president, is testimony to the fact that he is a Communist and the only reason this remains clouded to many Americans has been the shameful failure of the Fourth Estate, the liberal mainstream media, to expose it.
He remains in office due to the failure of both the media and the Republican Party to cite the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition against anyone holding the office who is not a “natural-born” American. Obama’s father was a Kenyan, a subject of Great Britain. He should not have been on the Democratic Party ballot and he should not be in the Oval Office as this is written.
Many of the known facts about Obama were published in Dr. Jerome Corsi’s 2008 book, “The Obama Nation:
Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality.” Thirty-five pages of footnotes citing the documentation of the facts cited were there for anyone to read. Obama was born into a family of Leftists. As a youngster he was mentored by Frank Marshal Davis, a member of the Communist Party USA.
Of his early college years, Obama said in his memoir that at Occidental, “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.”
Obama’s political career began with a fund-raiser in the living room of two dedicated, self-identified Communists, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. As Dr. Corsi pointed out, “The problem is that Obama sought out his relationships with the Alinski organization, the Ayers-Dohrn radicals, the scandal-ridden (Antoin ‘Tony’) Rezko, Reverand (Jeremiah) Wright and black-liberation theology, and Farrakhan and the Black Muslims. At the time he wanted these ties.” In the course of his 2008 campaign he rejected all efforts to tie him to these individuals.
The appointment of the many “czars” to oversee and guide the actions of government departments and agencies became the subject, first of ridicule, followed by the realization he was infiltrating the government with known radicals of different stripes. The one that quickly gained attention was Van Jones, an avowed Communist. When that became known, Jones resigned.
The Osawatomie speech was classic Obama. In the past he has sought to align himself with former presidents and this time around it was Theodore Roosevelt, a progressive. As Americans have sought to peel away the many layers of deceit surrounding Obama, the single abiding factor in his life is Communism. The views he expressed were a combination of class warfare and an attack on Capitalism.
In 2008, Americans, reeling from the financial crisis that all too conveniently began in the final months of the Bush43 presidency, were duped into believing that a man with nothing more than a message of “hope and change” was a messiah that would lead the nation out of its problems.
Obama was and is the first Communist President of the United States of America
Obama was and is the first Communist President of the United States of America. We have a President who rails against “millionaires and billionaires”, corporations, Wall Street, and all other aspects of our Capitalist economy.
We have a President and a Democratic Party that have tipped their hat to the Occupy Wall Street radicals.
We have a President and a Democratic Party totally aligned with the unions in America
We have a President and a Democratic Party totally aligned with the unions in America, some of which put the auto industry in jeopardy, others in the public sector that have plundered state treasuries with sweetheart deals for pensions and health plans, and who we have seen thuggishly oppose the restructuring of collective bargaining. It is why a close ally of Obama, Andy Stern, the former president of the Service Employees International Union (SIEU), praised the Chinese Communist economic model in a December 1 Wall Street Journal article.
And we now have a President who says Capitalism “doesn’t work” and “It has never worked.” That is utterly absurd, but it reveals his ideology and his goal of fomenting a Communist revolution in America by bankrupting the nation to achieve it.
Obama is a horrid aberration, the result of a combination of the Democratic Party, the liberal media, and the education community to dumb down Americans and make them ready for the Communist America that Obama advocates.
Communism did not die with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is alive and well in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam and in Venezuela. The soft form, Socialism, has brought a number of European nations to ruin and threatens the U.S.
In 2010 Americans returned power in the House of Representatives to the Republican Party. We must finish the job in the Senate and in the White House in 2012. If we do not, the America we love will perish.
Alan has a daily blog called Warning Signs. His latest book is Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy. Alan can be reached at
Can anyone figure out President Obama’s job creation strategy??
He claims he wants to see more Americans working, but then he rejects private sector projects that would create tens of thousands of American jobs
Institute for Energy Research
Friday, December 9, 2011
It’s difficult to understand President Obama’s job creation strategy. He claims he wants to see more Americans working, but then he rejects private sector projects that would create tens of thousands of American jobs. It appears that the President prefers pandering to special interest above job creation and a sustained economic recovery.
Consider what the President said during his trip to Brazil earlier this year. He told the Brazilians, “We want to work with you. We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”
There’s no problem with buying oil from the Brazilians. But why does the President have a problem with building the Keystone XL pipeline to allow Americans to buy more oil from the Canadians? U.S. companies work with the Canadians to produce oil in Canada , and American workers would build the majority of the Keystone XL. Also, getting more oil from Canada would mean fewer imports from less friendly countries.
It’s hard to believe, but maybe the President doesn’t believe that building a 1,700 mile pipeline will create jobs. Consider his statement yesterday:
I know the suggestion right now is, is that somehow, well, this Keystone issue will create jobs. That’s being determined by the State Department right now, and there is a process. But here’s what I know: However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline, they’re going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance.
I can’t speak to the number of jobs created by a payroll tax cut, but what does the President mean, “I know the suggestion right now is, is that somehow, well, this Keystone issue will create jobs.” The Keystone XL would be a $7 billion project. It would be a 1,700 mile pipeline. This is a large infrastructure project. A couple years ago the he was touting infrastructure projects as economic stimulus. What’s different this time?
Of course, President Obama’s whole system for determining the number of jobs created by any infrastructure project is now completely discredited. Most Americans remember well the administration’s stimulus-era promise of unemployment topping out at 8 percent if the stimulus were passed. The stimulus was passed and unemployment then spiked above 10 percent. So the President is going to have to forgive us if we doubt his ability—and that of his advisers—to predict what policies will create jobs.
The facts, though, about job creation in the energy sector are undeniable. And we’re not talking about the green energy experiments like Solyndra that went bankrupt and laid off its workers. We’re talking about affordable energy development in places like North Dakota , where production in the Bakken Shale has resulted in the lowest unemployment in the country (3.5 percent).
The president wants to buy Brazilian oil, but not Canadian oil
So the bottom line seems to be this: The president wants to buy Brazilian oil, but not Canadian oil. He wants to create infrastructure jobs, but not private-sector jobs on projects that promise greater energy independence. He wants to speed the approval process and government backing for unproven green energy companies like Solyndra, but he indefinitely stalls on affordable energy transported by TransCanada.
The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society. [see below]
Obama's Muslim Connection
By Jon Christian Ryter
January 16, 2008
In 1991 a young Muslim Harvard Law College graduate named Barack Hussein Obama (who has denied his Islamic past and Muslim roots for as long as he has been a public figure) became a civil rights community activist working out of the Trinity United Church of Christ. Obama worked as a community organizer for Trinity in poor black neighborhoods. Trinity's senior pastor Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr, a black racist, who preached radical Afrocentric theology and didn't mind delivering profanity-spiked sermons found a congregation-builder in Obama. Because of what Wright called Obama's multiple-faith background and his Harvard education, he was a natural community-builder.
When Obama broke onto the national political scene in 2004, not only did he attempt to erase all traces his Islamic childhood, but he also tried to erase the nature of his relationship with Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr, the pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ. (When your country is at war with Islamic extremists being a Muslim is not the shortest route to the White House.) Obama has told the media his reason for shielding his pastor was because "...he respected Mr. Wright's work for the poor and his fight against injustice." In reality Dr. Wright's work was to denounce the United States as a white racist nation. That's not good press for an African American candidate who needs to win a majority of the white vote to win the office of President.
It would have been not only natural, but expected, for Barack Obama—when he decided to run for the presidency—to make the announcement from the pulpit of the 8,500 member Trinity United Church of Christ. Obama would later state he did not in order to shield his pastor from the spotlight of the media. Dr. Wright has never shunned positive publicity. It was obvious to the media—in particular the New York Times which noted in an April 20, 2007 article that Obama was very deliberately distancing himself from Jeremiah Wright. Instead, Obama announced his candidacy on the steps of the old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois—where Abraham Lincoln announced his candidacy—on Feb. 10, 2007. Obama sees himself as an archtype of Lincoln who will "free his people from the tyranny of the oppressor." What people are those? The inner city people of color whom Dr. Wright believes are part of the Black Value System? Or does he see himself as the man who will free the Muslim world from the Great Satan since his first action, he says, as President of the United States will be to pull all Americans troops out of the Middle East? The voters need to figure out exactly who Barack Obama's constituents really are because when I add 2 + 2 + Obama, it doesn't come out four.
When Obama's early history and his Islamic upbringing was first reported, Obama's website posted a statement dated Nov. 12, 2007 with the headline: "Barack Obama is Not and Has Never Been a Muslim." The statement reiterated that Obama was not a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian.
On Dec. 22 at the Smoky Row Coffee Shop in Oskaloosa, Iowa, the locals asked Obama about his Muslim roots. He said: "My father was from Kenya. A lot of people in his village were Muslim. He didn't practice Islam. Truth is, he wasn't very religious." That was a lie. Obama's father and stepfather were devout Islamics. Both faithfully practiced their religion. His stepfather, who had a much greater impact on Obama's upbringing, was a radical Wahabbi Muslim. "My mother was a Christian from Kansas." That was also a lie. Obama's mother, his material grandmother and grandfather were all atheists. "They married and then divorced. I was raised by my mother. So, I've always been a Christian. The only connection I've had to Islam is that my grandfather on my father's side came from that country. But I've never practiced Islam...For a while I lived in Indonesia because my mother was teaching there. And that's a Muslim country. And I went to school—but I didn't practice Islam." Another lie. Obama's mother married Lolo Soetoro, a Wahabbi extremist who lived in Indonesia. When Obama's mother moved to Indonesia—before she married her second Muslim husband—she enrolled her son in Francis Assisis Catholic School. He was enrolled as a Muslim because he was a Muslim. The enrollment form required each student to choose one of five state-sanctioned religions when enrolling: Buddhist, Catholic, Hindu, Muslim, or Protestant. Had he been a lifelong Christian, or even a recent convert, he—or his mother—would have circled Protestant.
When confronted with this information, Obama said he couldn't understand how such an error could have happened. Los Angeles Times reporter Paul Watson, who dug into Obama's allegation of error, said "...his former Roman Catholic and Muslim teachers, along with two people who were identified by Obama's grade school teacher as childhood friends, says Obama was registered by his family as a Muslim at both schools he attended. The registration meant that during the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion classes. The childhood friends say Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque." (Something else Obama claims he never did.) "...Obama's younger sister, Maya Soetoro, said in a statement released by the campaign that the family attended the mosque only 'for big communal events' not every Friday." Obama, who belongs to a church that teaches that the Muslims of the world were wronged by both Israel and the United States, cannot afford to be labeled as a "Muslim" by voters who expect the United States to win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan where their sons and daughters are being killed by Muslims.
Jim Wallis, a Christian antipoverty community activist and a friend of Obama's said Obama comes from a very secular, skeptical family. His faith is a personal and adult choice. His material grandparents—who were professing atheists—had previously been Baptist and Methodist. His mother's tutelage leaned towards Islam only because her new husband was an ardent Muslim—and he demanded it.
She was not, however, the docile Muslim housewife most Muslim men expected. Obama's half-sister Maya admitted that her "...whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim." Because religion of any type rubbed his mother the wrong way, when he was 10, Obama's mother sent her son back to Hawaii to live with her parents.
In 2005 Obama met his paternal step-grandmoher (whom he calls his grandmother). Sarah Hussein Obama, 85, who lives in Kenya. She told the New York Times that she is "...a strong believer of Islamic faith," adding that she still rises at 5 a.m. to pray for an hour before tending to her crops and the three orphans she has taken in.
A camera which caught Obama on the political stage during a fund raiser for Sen. Tom Harkin in Iowa with presidential candidates Bill Richardson and Hillary Clinton shows his lack of respect to this nation during the singing of the National Anthem. Angered that the photo was released (and because the reporter erroneously stated the photo was taken during the Pledge of Allegiance rather than the singing of the national anthem, Obama said: "This is the classic dirty trick. This was not the Pledge of Allegiance. The woman was singing the Star Spangled Banner."
As a sign of respect to their nation, many Americans place their hand over their heart when the National Anthem is played as well as when they recite the Pledge. In his case, Obama said "...I was taught by my grandfather that you put your hands over your heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. The Star Spangled Banner, you sing." Only, when you look at the photo, its very clear that neither Obama nor the others on stage are singing. It was, however, the singing of the national anthem.
All the time he was around either his father or stepfather, Obama was either in Hawaii or Indonesia. Thus, neither his paternal grandfather nor the father of his stepfather would have tutored him on placing his hand over his heart during the US Pledge of Allegiance, nor the singing the American Star Spangled Banner. Rest assured that Indonesian homes don't recite the Pledge or sing the US national anthem. And while Hawaii had been a State for three years before Obama was born, logic suggests its not likely an atheist mother and an Islamic father would teach him to recite the Pledge of Allegiance or sing the Star Spangled Banner.
In his teen years Obama moved back to Honolulu where he lived with his maternal grandparents. In his rebuttal, you will recall, Obama claimed his grandfather had taught him to place his hand over his heart during the Pledge, and to sing the national anthem. History has a problem with that on both sides of the family. Like his mother who was an atheist, so were her parents. Obama's grandmother, he said in interviews, "...was too rational and too stubborn to accept anything she couldn't see, feel, touch or count." His maternal grandfather was also an atheist who "...had an innate rebelliousness and a complete inability to discipline his appetites...who...experimented with marijuana and cocaine." An atheist is not going to teach his grandson to respect the Pledge of Allegiance which pays homage to God.
In August, 2006 US Senator Barack Obama [D-IL] made a special trip to visit a special man in Kenya. The man's name was Raila Amolo Odinga. He is the head of the National Muslim Leaders Forum [NAMLEF] in Kenya. The political party he heads is called the Orange Democratic Movement [ODM]—although there is definitely nothing democratic about his political party of NAMLEF. The ODM is dedicated to overthrowing the legitimate democratic government of Kenya. Odinga is not really concerned how he achieves his objective. It matters little to him if he assumes power through a free election—or by revolution. But, by hook or crook, he is determined to become the president of Kenya. If he succeeds, he will be president for life and Kenya will become another Afghanistan.
When the US Senator visited Kenya to meet with Odinga in Nairobi, the Kenyan government officially denounced the visit. And, most specifically, they denounced Obama. According to a Kenyan government spokesman, Obama's bias for his friend was so blatant that the government found it necessary to complain that Obama appeared to be Odinga's stooge. Not only did Obama campaign for his Islamic friend, he convinced former Clinton adviser Dick Morris to become Odinga's campaign adviser.
Odinga bothers the US State Department for a couple of reasons. First, after losing the democratic election on December 27, Raila Odinga cut a deal for support from Vladimir Putin and the former Soviet Union. Odinga knows he has to overthrow the government to gain power. When he lost the election, he protested that the vote was rigged to keep him from claiming an election he won. He incited his tribal followers to go on a murderous rampage in towns that were primarily Christian. Throughout Kenya, hundreds of people were murdered. What shocked the west is that the Kenyan media—and the political power brokers within the country—out of fear of Odinga, appear to be suggesting that perhaps the election should be held over to stop the violence and the potential for long term Muslim terrorism.
In a wave of violence aimed at protesting what they call the illegal election of newly-elected Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki, a group of Christian women and children—some entire families—barricaded themselves in a church. Muslims, inflamed by Odinga's men, torched the church and burned to death everyone inside. This is the man Obama campaigned for in Kenya, and sang the praises of. This is also the man who claims that Barack Obama is a close, personal friend. Christianity would be outlawed.
There would be a complete ban on the public consumption of alcoholic beverages and a ban on western-style dress for women since this type of garb is considered immoral and an offense to the Muslim faith. Raila Obinga, it seems, would impose the same type of Shariah law that was imposed on Afghanistan by the Taliban. Odinga would degree that no Muslim living in Kenya—whether a citizen, visitor or relative of a citizen of Kenya (such as Obama, whose grandmother is a citizen of Kenya)‚shall be subject to any legal process involving the laws of a foreign country and in particular any Muslim arrested for, or suspected of, terrorism, or of any other international crimes shall only be tried inside the borders of Kenya and shall be granted a competent lawyer of his or her choice at the expense of the government.
The American people need to be asking Barack Obama a whole different list of questions when they attend his political rallies on his quest to become the leader of the free world. They need to ask the man who he really is because, up to this point on the campaign trail, he has lied to them. The American people need to find an honest candidate. Barack Obama is not that man.
Jon Christian Ryter is the pseudonym of a former newspaper reporter with the Parkersburg, WV Sentinel. He authored a syndicated newspaper column, Answers From The Bible, from the mid-1970s until 1985. Answers From The Bible was read weekly in many suburban markets in the United States.
Today, Jon is an advertising executive with the Washington Times. His website, has helped him establish a network of mid-to senior-level Washington insiders who now provide him with a steady stream of material for use both in his books and in the investigative reports that are found on his website.
Also See:
Who is that Guy in the Oval Office?
(Part 1)
16 February 2009
(Part 2)
22 April 2009
(Part 3)
16 June 2009
(Part 4)
03 August 2009
(Part 5)
03 January 2010
(Part 6)
20 May 2010
(Part 7)
21 November 2010
(Part 8)
14 February 2011
(Part 9)
03 August 2011
(Part 10)
10 October 2011