Constitutional Watchdogs

Glenn Beck made an interesting observation when he said that it is so easy to pick out all the garbage that is being thrown at us from this administration, the tough part is to bring solutions to the table that will fix the system, get these guys out of office and we get our America back. Glenn learned something a couple of weeks ago when they got their second watchdog. "There is something about a giant 100‑pound German Shepherd that's running towards the fence at you when you try to come to my house, it sends a message. But there's something even more powerful, more than twice as powerful and that is two dogs running towards the fence."

So, here is briefly what he proposes that the millions of listeners and followers he has do to help find the solutions:

"I need you to be a constitutional watchdog because we need to stop these people in their tracks, and the one thing I learned is while there is one thing about one watchdog, there's something more than twice as powerful in two watchdogs. Now imagine with the radio audience and the television audience, imagine ten million watchdogs. I need you in the next couple of days to help me. This is like a 100 front war. He is overwhelming the system. It is right out of the playbook from Saul Alinsky. It is what a community organizer does: Overwhelm the system. That's why people call me ‑‑ in fact, somebody just called me a little while ago and said, Glenn, how come you didn't talk about this. I did. I just no longer have the time to stand on one issue because the entire forest is on fire.
But see, here's the secret: I or Rush or anybody else, they don't have to do it alone. We don't need the mainstream media anymore. The paradigm is about to shift. Don't worry about the media. The media will find themselves in the dustbin of history. We have each other. We currently have all forms of communication available to us. We currently ‑‑ and I don't know how long this lasts, but we currently have an unrestricted Internet where we can communicate and we can find the answers. You will be amazed on how many answers you can find. You will be amazed on how transparent things really are when you just know what to look for. I need you to help me define what the fronts are. What are the lines that they are moving in and pushing on. For instance, healthcare cannot be passed. No form of universal healthcare. Because it is not about the healthcare. It is about the structure, and I will outline this in the next few days. Structure is what matters. Nothing else matters. Structure is what matters. We need to watch the czars. We need to watch cap and trade, structure on cap and trade. We need to watch ‑‑ quite honestly we need to guard, as much as I hate every member of congress, we need to guard congress because the executive branch is devouring all other branches. They are devouring it, and the people in congress are so stupid, so insipid or so in on the game, they are going to find themselves irrelevant wildly fast. We must guard all three branches of government. It is a shell game. It is a transformation. And what I said to you over a year ago, you will wake up someday and your country will not be the same. It's happening, and it's happening right now. But one person can't watch it all. No media source can even do it. I have ‑‑ it's Sophie's Choice every day. I come in and I don't know what to talk about because I've got so much to talk about. I can't cover it all. I can't do it all justice. Don't worry about it. You just make sure they don't move. You just pin them and make sure they don't move. That's all that has ‑‑ there needs to be wrenches in the gears of this government. I have never been for a "Do nothing" congress. I mean, I like it when they do nothing. It's much better when they're doing nothing than something. But I have never been ‑‑ I've always hated the obstructionists. I've always hated the parties who were like, "Yeah, well, now they're just going to thwart everything." And they do. The Republicans do it and the Democrats do it. It's time for the people to do it. Stop the machinery of this government because they are building something, and you do not want to have that unveiled. Believe me, you do not want that unveiled. Stop the machinery of government. Watch them on ‑‑ and here's the great thing. You don't have to watch them on all fronts. There are 10 million listeners. Pick the thing that interests you. Are you into guns? Are you into healthcare? Do you know it? Do you feel it? Do you watch something on TV and say, "I know this, I know what they're doing!" Follow it! Don't pay attention to all of it. You'll get lost. That's what they want us to do. So don't follow all of it. Follow the thing that your gut says "This is important and I understand this and I get this." Just follow that one thing and alert me. We will put the gears into at least neutral. Eventually we will jam that back into reverse. And if we don't, we'll strip all the damn gears because it will be time to get out of the car and rebuild it the American way. So I ask you, will you be a constitutional watchdog. The time has come to bark and to bark loudly. Understand what this means. What this means is you may be called a racist, a homophobe, a hate monger, you want to starve children. Whatever it is, whatever your category is, they will find a way to ridicule you because that's what Saul Alinsky taught them to do: Have no fear. No fear no more! Stand up! You know the truth. Stand for the truth because only the truth will set us free.
http://www.glennbeck.com/

Inside The Proposed Healthcare Bill

Here are a few of the particulars in Obama's health care reform bill along with a link to the bill so you can check it yourself. http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/hrdraft.pdf
I suggest that if you believe that the government has your best interests at heart, you had better read the entire bill!!

Inside the Healthcare Bill:

Page 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!!
Page 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits 4 you. you have no choice!
Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise
Page 58HC Bill - Government will have real-time access to individuals finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued! In other words your privacy is completely gone!!
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your banks accounts for electronic funds transfer
PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Government control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the Exchange
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Government will ration your Healthcare!
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Government mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example - Translation for illegal aliens
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Government will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Government HC plan
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of benefit levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed
PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice
pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue the government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly.
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The Government will tell YOU what you can make.
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option pays 8% tax on all payroll
pg 150 Lines 9-13 Business with payroll between 251k & 400k who doesn't provide public option pays 2-6% tax on all payroll
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesnt have acceptable HC according to Government will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay)
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans finances and personal records.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that
Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected
Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesnt matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same
PG 253 Line 10-18 Government sets value of a Doctor's time, professional judgment, etc. Literally value of humans.
PG 265 Sec 1131Government mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries
PG 268 Sec 1141 Federal Government regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs
PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Government will penalize hospitals for what Government deems preventable readmissions.
Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors, treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission the Government will penalize you.
Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.
Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Government is mandating hospitals cannot expand
pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have oppt to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can u say ACORN?!!
Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Government mandates establishment of outcome based measures. HC the way they want. Rationing
Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing peeps in to Government plan
Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Government will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people!
Pg 379 Sec 1191 Government creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Committe. Can you say HC by phone?
PG 425 Lines 4-12 Government mandates Advance Care Planning Consultation. Think Senior Citizens end of life
Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Governmentt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney Mandatory!
PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death
PG 427 Lines 15-24 Governmentt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends
Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "advance care planning consult" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates
PG 429 Lines 10-12 "advance care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from government.
Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The government will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order. PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life
Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?
PG 489 Sec 1308 The Government will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Government into your marriage
Pg 494-498 Government will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services

Sounds just peachy doesn't it??

Czar Appointments - Your Non-Elected Officials Who Answer To NO ONE!!

What is a "czar" exactly? Wikipedia defines it this way:
Originally, the title Czar (derived from Caesar) meant Emperor in the European medieval sense of the term, that is, a ruler who claims the same rank as a Roman emperor, with the approval of another emperor or a supreme ecclesiastical official (the Pope or the Ecumenical Patriarch).
Occasionally, the word could be used to designate other, non-Christian, supreme rulers. In Russia and Bulgaria the imperial connotations of the term were blurred with time and, by the 19th century, it had come to be viewed as an equivalent of King.

NON-ELECTED officials, who are backed by The White House, who are given the tools and resources to do the bidding of the President and they are accountable to NO ONE! These czar's don't have to undergo Senate Confirmation Hearings, they just get appointed.

1. Herb Allison-TARP Czar
2. Alan Bersin-Border Czar
3. Dennis Blair-Intelligence Czar
4. John Brennan-Terrorism Czar
5. Carol Browner-Energy Czar
6. Adolfo Carrion, Jr-Urban Affairs Czar
7. Ashton Carter-Weapons Czar
8. Aneesh Chopra-Technology Czar
9. Jeffrey Crowley-AIDS Czar
10. Cameron Davis-Great Lakes Czar
11. Nancy-Ann DeParle-Health Czar
12. Earl Devaney-Stimulus Accountability Czar
13. Joshua DuBois-Faith-based Czar
14. Kenneth Feinberg-Pay Czar
15. Danny Fried-Guantanamo Closure Czar
16. J. Scott Gration-Sudan Czar
17. Richard Holbrooke-Afghanistan Czar
18. John Holdren-Science Czar
19. Van Jones Green-Jobs Czar (Did you know that Jones is a communist? Here it is in his own words: Speaking to the East Bay Express, Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots. "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist. I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary." hummmm!!
20. Gil Kerlikowske-Drug Czar
21. Vivek Kundra-Information Czar
22. George Mitchell-Mideast Peace Czar
23. Ed Montgomery-Car Czar
24. Dennis Ross-Mideast Policy Czar
25. Gary Samore-WMD Czar
26. Todd Stern-Climate Czar
27. Cass Sunstein-Regulatory Czar
28. Paul Volcker-Economic Czar

So there you have it. The Obama Kings that I am currently aware of.

Does anyone know ANYTHING about these people? Guess what? That's the point. You don't know them so they are anonymous. It's easier to "get things done" when you are anonymous.
Anonymous, Unaccountable, Invisible.

A Quote from Brian Steinberg, a Communist Party USA member, "Obama’s election represents an expansion of democracy in our country, won by the unity of the people, which must continue on." The Commies love him, I wonder why?????

This leaves no question in my mind as to whether Obama is a Communist or at the very least a Communist sympathiser! I thought it was against the laws of this country to have a Communist of any sort being involved in the running of the United States...have I missed something??

Obama TOLD us this was coming...

From the Glenn Beck daily news letter today July 28, 2009 The comments you will read from Obama, his wife and Rahm Emanuel were all documented video clips that were shown on todays program. After seeing the program today, I thought you should all get a chance to at least read this! You can sign up for Glenns daily newsletter in your email, it's free, just go to http://www.glennbeck.com/


GLENN: From Radio City in Midtown Manhattan, the third most listened to show in all of America. Hello, you sick twisted freak. Welcome to the program. I'd ask you for 20 minutes here. If you don't have time for the next 20 minutes, please only listen you know, listen later. Punch to another station, I ask that you listen because I'm going to put something in context, and you've heard some of this audio before, but it needs to be put in with context and heard with fresh ears today. With all of the things that are going on, with the czars, with healthcare, with the beers that are being had at the White House on Thursday, with the stimulus package, with the out of control spending, with all of it. You ask yourself and you have if you're anything like me what is going on. How is this coming together? What are they doing? Well, give me 20 minutes. President Obama's going on vacation next month. You know that, right? He's great. I mean, he deserves it. He's worked hard these last six months. He has worked hard transforming our country. He's been paying people's mortgages, putting gas in their automobiles.

VOICE: Because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he's going to help me.

GLENN: I've personally never seen President Obama, you know, gas anybody up at a Shell station, you know, but I don't get to New Jersey that often. I mean, maybe that's where he's pumping everybody's gas these days. I don't know. How does that woman feel today? It was in last October she said that. How is she feeling now, as she continues to write her own checks for her own mortgage or maybe she will lose her home and still fill up her own tank, or run out of gas? I wonder if she is disappointed by Barack Obama yet or if she's excited for the change that is still coming. We're now hearing from more and more people who are disappointed because they didn't understand the change. I wonder how did you miss that? The latest poll shows that a growing number of Americans strongly disapprove of his performance. It's now in double digits over those who strongly approve. To many Americans Barack Obama was a moderate and now all of a sudden he's governing for the left. Hello? Are you kidding me? Barack Obama could not have been any more clear about who he was and what he planned to do if he was elected, but everyone refused to listen and many Americans still are. He told us every step of the way up to and including his community organizer plans for America. He even told the American people that ACORN would help shape his agenda.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: But let me even say before I even get inaugurated. During the transition we're going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda. We're going to be having meetings all across the country with community organizations so that you have input into the agenda for the next presidency of the United States of America.

GLENN: He mentioned that he wanted to build an AmeriCorps type volunteer organization that would be just as strong and well funded as the U.S. military.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.

GLENN: A civilian force. I guess we just shrug that off as the peace corps, a Greenpeace. Although, how strong and powerful and well funded do you have to be to plant trees or throw buckets of water on beached whales? Do you need a tank to spray them down? Maybe they'll save sperm whales now with their new peace corps aircraft carriers. And by the way, your kids aren't really going to have a choice because they are making community service now super sexy. Oh, yeah, public service? First we're tying them into student loans. But the good news is their student loans will now be erased, picked up entirely by the taxpayer, if your children just serve as a government bureaucrat for ten years. But even more good news. Soon your kids won't have to worry about making tough decisions like should I serve in a government approved organized group like ACORN or AmeriCorps? They don't have to worry about that because Rahm Emanuel is there. The choice will have already been made for your children because it's good for the collective.

VOICE: The idea of universal citizens service, you have to participate.

EMANUEL: Citizenship is not an entitlement program. It comes with responsibilities. Everybody somewhere between the ages of 18 and 25 will serve three months of basic training in a kind of civil defense. That universal sense of service, somewhere between ages 18 and 25 will give Americans once again a sense of what they are to be American and their contribution to a country and a common experience. And you look at World War II. That was a draft. This is not a draft. It's a universal service. It is not an accident that we started our big march towards civil rights and expanding post World War II because the country came through and experienced together.

VOICE: So is this compulsory then?

EMANUEL: Well, you have to in a sense that it's required of everybody.

GLENN: It's required. It's not a draft. It's required. It's not a draft. It's universal service. It's required. It's not socialism. It's social justice. Does the book "1984" come to mind to anybody? Obama's taxation policies haven't been exactly timid but then I guess we should have known that.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance at success, too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.

GLENN: Oh, it's good. When we spread the wealth around, it's good for everyone. But that wasn't Marxist. No, no, no. That's not Marxist. That was just a good rule of thumb, sort of a social justice safety tip. Is it possible he learned that ideology very early on from his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed communist? And from his favorite professors in college of whom he spoke in his new book, Dreams of My Father.

GLENN: 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 pullets who smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night in the dorms we discussed neocolonialism, Frantz Fanon, Eurocentrism and patriarchy. When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet, we set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting Bourgeois society's stifling constraints.

GLENN: Oh, but Glenn, you can't hold him to that. He was in his early 20s at the time. Even though he said he carefully selected his Marxist professors. Okay, can we hold him to something he said on an Illinois public radio station in 2001 when he was a state legislator?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers and the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted. And Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you. But it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted, and one of the, I think the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that.

GLENN: We went through the courts and so we lost focus on the community organizing on the ground, which is the way you bring about redistributive wealth. The Constitution didn't break free from those founding constraints. It's a document mostly of negative liberties. What a powerful endorsement of the most perfect political document in the history of the world. Thank you, Barack Obama sorry. Thank you, Mr. President of the United States. Unfortunately it also didn't bring about that redistributive change that we and when I say "We," I mean Karl Marx wanted so badly. Here was his response to a caller to that same public radio show.

VOICE: With Karen. Good morning, Karen, you are on Chicago public radio.

CALLER: Hi. The gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn't terribly radical. My question is with economic changes. My question, is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically and is that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place.

VOICE: You mean the court?

CALLER: The courts, or would it be legislation at this point.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, maybe I'm showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor but, you know, I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know, the institution just isn't structured that way.

GLENN: He needs to change the structure of the institution. Remember, his last phrase was "Community organizing." Now, you might be thinking, okay, Mr. Fatty Fat Fatso, witch white guy, you are just concerned about a piece of your big fat pile of your Brinks truck cash being taken from you and heaven forbid given to, shhh, a person of color. Really? Do only the rich have electricity in this country? I mean, I know they do in Zimbabwe or where George Onyango Obama lives in his hut in Kenya. But most of us don't live in those conditions. I'm just, I'm thinking out loud here that most, if not all, low income wage earners in this country have things like lights, TVs, radios, air conditionings. And they just might be affected by something else: Obama clearly spelled out during the campaign.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even, you know, regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money; they will pass that money on to consumers.

GLENN: Obama was kind enough to alert us to the fact that some of our rights may be curtailed because we don't want to offend our close personal Euro trash friends and their tender sensibilities with our lifestyle. God forbid we do that.

MICHELLE OBAMA: Barack, as Oprah said, is one of the most brilliant men you will meet in our lifetime.

GLENN: Here's what he said about driving our SUVs. Cut 74, 074.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times whether we're living in a desert or we're living in the tundra and then just expect that every other country's going to say, "Okay."

GLENN: Let me tell you something. My studio is set right now at 65 degrees. I don't care what the Frenchy frogs think about it. Why are liberals always so concerned about the French and what the French are going to France is a rat hole. They are setting cars on fire. They are kidnapping their bosses and threatening to blow up automobile plants if they don't get raises. Why would we care about a country that is out of control, filled with beret wearing, wine swilling surrender monkeys? I'll put this thermometer in this studio at 38 below zero if I want to. It's my damn thermometer. If I want to hang frozen sides of beef in here, I'll do it. I'll park an idling Cadillac Escalade in the studio if I want, with the heaters running at full blast just to stay warm in the 38 below zero studio conditions that I've created with my ridiculously low thermostat temperature while I eat frozen pudding and jelly doughnuts! And I'll be fine... or will I? You see, I can't do that because if I eat too many jelly doughnuts, then I would be bad for the collective health, and the new healthcare system would punish me. If I left my Escalade running, that would be bad for the collective. It would be bad for global health. And it's illegal in New York to let your car idle now unless you're the mayor. Plus, don't forget, GM, Government Motors. They are not even going to be making the Escalade anymore, cars that are supposedly unfriendly to the environment. No, no, we'll soon all be driving the 1 1/2 passenger squirrel powered Yugo. But let's not forget Michelle told us things were going to change. We were hoping for this change. And once we change, we'll never, ever be allowed to go back to our lives before Obama.

MICHELLE OBAMA: And Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism, that you put down your division, that you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones, that you push yourselves to be better and that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual.

GLENN: Of course, as soon as she said that, she was hidden on the campaign trail. We were promised that there would be change, transformation over and over and over again. When will America open their eyes to the promises of a fundamental transformation of America?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.

GLENN: He said it as plain as it possibly could be said and people lived in denial. No one, almost no one, took him at his word. You want a president that you can take at his word. You want a president you can believe in. You want a president who will say what he means and means what he says. And yet when you get one, you think it's campaign rhetoric. You think he doesn't believe in taking wealth from one group and giving it to another. You think he doesn't mean that he's actually going to change or make useless the Constitution through community service groups. You think he actually means or doesn't mean that he's going to start an AmeriCorps where your children will be required to serve. You think he doesn't actually mean that you won't be able to go back to your life as you knew it. You think he doesn't actually mean that you're not going to be affording electricity. You think he doesn't actually mean that you can't have your thermostat at 72 because of what Europe thinks. It's time we take this politician at his word. People haven't been doing it for a while.

My question is will you start to do it now?
We are now 6 months into the total distruction of America, I hope everyone is starting to pay close attention to the recless way our country is being run into the ground!

Palin To Feds: Alaska is Sovereign State

Gov. Sarah Palin has signed a joint resolution declaring Alaska's sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. 36 other states have introduced similar resolutions as part of a growing resistance to the federal government.

Alaska's resolution states:
Be it resolved that the Alaska State Legislature hereby claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
Be it further resolved that this resolution serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

Seven states thus far – Tennessee, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Alaska and Louisiana – have had both houses of their legislatures pass similar decrees, Alaska Gov. Palin and Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen are currently the only governors to have signed their states' sovereignty resolutions thus far.

May I just step in here and tell Gov. Palin and Gov. Bredesen how proud I am of them and their legistatures for having the gumption to step up to the plate and tell the federal government to back off! I can't tell you what this has done for my moral in the fight to regain control of this country!!

The Tenth Amendment says: "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Tenth Amendment is similar to an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

Looks like America is starting to Wake Up!!

Can A Sitting President Be Removed?

Here is some very interesting information about removing a sitting president. The wife and I were discussing yesterday that once a president is in office, it is vertually impossible to have them removed. This information below came from the http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/ blog, and if you read this the following plus Part 1 and Part 3 of this brief on the naturalborncitizen site, it should help you understand about removal......basicly what I told people all along who said "if he gets into office and starts screwing things up, we will just impeach him.......good luck.....no president who has been impeached has ever been removed from office, Nixion stepped down on his own, he was the only one, and he personally made that decision to do so, he did not have to step down!

QUO WARRANTO LEGAL BRIEF - Part 2:
The Federal Quo Warranto Statute Is The Only Constitutional Means of Removing a Sitting President Other Than Impeachment
Posted on March 5, 2009 by naturalborncitizen
The issue of whether the President can be removed from office other than by impeachment is the single most important question presented with regard to challenging the eligibility of a sitting President. This section of the brief contains important new information supporting the conclusions discussed in Part 1 of this legal brief .
Please understand that if the Constitution limits Congressional power to remove the President to only cases of impeachment then there is no Constitutional mechanism available to remove a President who is proved to be a usurper. And if that’s true, then the federal quo warranto statute doesn’t have the power to remove a sitting President… even if it was proved beyond any doubt he was ineligible.
The best dream team of lawyers you can draft may bring all the law suits they like for the best possible reasons in favor of the most perfectly possible plaintiffs with undeniable standing as to injury in fact and causality, but the courts do not have the authority - under the Constitution - to remove a sitting President. Those law suits will fail and they should fail.
In order to protect the Constitution, we must not subvert the separation of powers.
If it can’t be done by quo warranto, then it can’t be done at all. Why?
Because Congress is the only branch authorized by the Constitution to remove the President should he be found ineligible. And the only court Congress has delegated that power to is the District Court of the District of Columbia, and such delegation of power is strictly limited to actions governed by the federal quo warranto statute.
If we are going to challenge eligibility to protect the Constitution, then we certainly cannot do an end around the separation of powers. I have recognized this from the outset and that’s why I tried to have the eligibility issue litigated prior to election day and then again prior to the electoral college meeting. After the electoral college met and cast its votes for Obama, he went from being an ordinary candidate to being the President-elect.
That metamorphosis has important Constitutional consequences which cannot be ignored. The Constitution provides that once we have a President-elect, the eligibility of that person can be challenged by Congress. The political question doctrine kicks in at that point and the ability of any other branch to challenge for POTUS eligibility is probably nullified. And once the President-elect is sworn in and assumes office, the Constitutional separation of powers certainly controls the issue.
Recall, Congress didn’t challenge Obama’s eligibility before he was sworn in, so those provisions are now moot. And once a person is sworn in as President, the Constitution then provides specific means for removing the President from office, none of which grant such power to the Judicial Branch. Now please consider the following two points:
1. Nowhere in the Constitution does it give the Judicial Branch the power to remove a sitting President.
Those who are currently petitioning the Judicial branch to challenge Presidential eligibility are seeking to subvert the Constitution.
They will argue Obama isn’t legally President and so therefore the Constitutional separation of powers can be ignored. Should a court ever accept that theory, you will have the recipe for civil war, and you will be doing more damage to the nation than you can even imagine. Protest all you like, but the US Government recognizes his authority.
Furthermore, United States Courts all the way up to SCOTUS have refused to get involved, and this was the case before Obama was sworn in when the Judicial Branch actually did have the power to adjudicate the eligibility issue. They punted. Fact.
Now that Obama has taken the office of President and is officially recognized as President, no court is going to suddenly take a leap around the separation of powers by agreeing the Constitution doesn’t apply to Obama as President. That will never happen.
Let that sink in because it’s true.
2. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that impeachment is the sole means of removing the President.
Some who support Obama’s eligibility will seek to subvert the Constitution by arguing that the Constitution states that the sole remedy for removing the President is impeachment. Nowhere in the Document does it say that. Those who believe it must "imply" or "assume" that is the case. But the Constitution does not state that impeachment is the sole means of removing the President.
The Constitution does say that Congress has the sole authority to impeach and the Senate to convict, and that the President "shall" be removed upon conviction, but it does not say that impeachment is the sole means of removal. You will hear people say that it does say that in the days ahead. It is a lie.
I have uncovered a plethora of evidence - within and without the Constitution - which I strongly believe proves that the framers provided Congress with the power to remove a President who is found to be ineligible. This makes sense because not every person who is found to be ineligible is guilty of a crime.
HYPOTHETICAL:
Two double agents born in the evil nation of "KILLAMERICASTAN" sneak a child into America over the Canadian border and later obtain false documents indicating they are US citizens and that their child was born in the United States. The child is raised like a Manchurian Candidate and believes his parents are US citizens and that he was born in the US. The child grows up a gifted politician and eventually becomes President. After being sworn in, the truth is discovered by US Intelligence and proved beyond any doubt. The President then refuses to leave office since he didn’t do anything wrong and had no knowledge of the plot.
What happens?
Well, the President has done nothing to be impeached. He’s not guilty of any high crimes or misdemeanors, bribery or treason. Did the framers leave us naked in such a situation? I don’t believe so. We will return to this shortly.
SEPARATION OF POWERS
My respect for the separation of powers in our Constitution is the core reason I was so willing to drop the eligibility fight once the Electoral College met. I understand and respect the Constitution. And I would never further damage it by aiding a new Constitutional crisis which might help to bring our Republic down.
We must respect the separation of powers or we will lose the Constitution and the Republic for which it stands.
The separation of powers argument will be the proper undoing of every single POTUS eligibility law suit running through the courts at this moment in time. They will all fail. And they should, because for any of them to prevail, the separation of powers would be violated.
Even in law suits where federal courts have been petitioned to request Congress investigate - by way of mandamus - Obama’s eligibility (as opposed to seeking removal), the courts will dismiss on the basis of separation of powers limitations and/or subject matter jurisdiction, even if the plaintiffs were found to have passed the difficult standing tests (and that’s not going to happen either).
While I respect the litigants and the efforts they have made, I take issue with some of the tactics employed and I’m also not that impressed with many of the pleadings. I hope that, by publishing this brief, I will correct some of the previous errors and provide the public at large with the best possible education so that proper pressure can be applied to authorized Government officials. Knowledge is power. I seek to empower you.
Should those officials not respond, I also hope the following will act as a template for any attorneys who may wish to pursue a quo warranto petition. This should save time and resources.
I have reached out to some of the attorneys who impressed me, but none have brought a law suit which can succeed in light of the separation of powers enumerated in the Constitution.
IS THERE A CONSTITUTIONAL SOLUTION?
It appears there is a Constitutionally viable method available for the eligibility issue to be litigated which does not violate the separation of powers enumerated in the Constitution. I strongly believe the federal quo warranto statute provides the only Constitutionally viable means by which a sitting President can be removed from office if found to be a usurper, whether such usurpation is intentional or unintentional. Full details and analysis below, but first let’s discuss the following:
REVIEW OF CURRENT QUO WARRANTO ACTIVITY
As far as I can tell, only one attorney has filed for an actual quo warranto claim at this point in time. Unfortunately, that attempt will fail as it was brought on behalf of private plaintiffs. As you will see below, any action in quo warranto must be brought on behalf of the United States. The attorney needed to first petition the Attorney General or US Attorney in DC to institute an action in quo warranto. Additionally, that same action was brought in the wrong venue. According to the statute, a quo warranto action to challenge the eligibility of a United States officer - whether elected or appointed - can only be brought in the District Court of the District of Columbia.
Another attorney has sent a "pre-litigation" letter to Attorney General Holder. But the statute requires a "verified petition" be forwarded to the Attorney General and/or the US Attorney requesting consent plaintiffs be allowed to institute a quo warranto action in the name of the United States. No such petition has been filed.
This "letter" sent to AG Holder insists he recuse himself due to an alleged conflict of interest since the Attorney General’s office is the designated defender of the President. But that is only true as to the President’s official actions. A Quo warranto dispute is not related to official activity of the President’s office. It relates to whether the President is eligible to hold the office and that is not an "official action" undertaken by the President. The statute defines quo warranto as a civil action. I believe the President would have to hire private counsel to defend him.
So, there’s probably no legal conflict of interest requiring Eric Holder to recuse himself. Any conflict of interest which exists is probably limited to the personal gratitude AG Holder may have for Obama since he appointed him. But that’s not the type of conflict which requires recusal. For example, a Supreme Court Justice does not have to recuse himself in a dispute involving the President who appointed him.
It’s not fair to suggest AG holder won’t do his job because he owes personal allegiance to Obama. I believe in fighting a fair fight even if others fight unfairly against me. It’s only fair that the man be given the chance to do the right thing. Furthermore, no verified petition has even been forwarded to the Attorney General’s office.
The federal quo warranto statute provides that the "United States attorney" may institute an action in quo warranto on his own motion. The US Attorney for the District of Columbia is Jeffrey Taylor. He was appointed to that position in 2006 by the Bush administration and certainly has no conflict of interest. I am not aware of anybody who has contacted US Attorney Taylor in this regard. It will only take one of those officials to bring the action, not both.
WHY EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE BY THE PUBLIC TO PRESSURE AG HOLDER AND US ATTORNEY TAYLOR TO INSTITUTE - ON THEIR OWN MOTION - AN ACTION IN QUO WARRANTO ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES WITHOUT EX RELATOR PLAINTIFFS
While arguments about whether the military make the best plaintiffs have been raging, the simple truth is that a quo warranto case with the best chance of success ought to be initiated with no private plaintiffs at all. The federal quo warranto statute shows a preference for cases brought on behalf of the United States by the Attorney General or the US Attorney. And until respectful pressure is applied to those officials, the nation is deprived of the most perfect avenue to justice. Until this course of action is exhausted, I pray that all private attorneys briefly delay requesting consent from these officials while an effort is made to persuade them that it’s in the best interests of the nation for them to proceed on their own motion.
This is not a private issue. The controversy is raging. Nobody can deny that. AG Holder and US Attorney Taylor need to consider that the citizens, the military, the Government - as well as Obama himself - will all be better off once clear title to the office is established.

All the above from: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/ by naturalborncitizen Click on the link to go to the site and read Parts 1 & 3 This is a good site to bookmark!

A Forwarded Reference to Obama's Cairo Speech on June 4th, 2009

OBAMA made the statement in his Cairo speech on June 4th 2009: "I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America 's story."

Well Mr. Obama: Were those muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed?Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one muslim signature on the United States Constitution? Declaration of Independence? Bill of Rights? Didn't think so.

Did muslims fight for this country's freedom from England? No.

Did muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America? No,they did not, and in fact, muslims to this day are still the largest trafficers in human slavery. Your own 'half brother' a devout muslim still advocates slavery himself, even though muslims of arabic descent refer to black muslims as "pug nosed slaves." Says a lot of what the muslim world really thinks of your family's "rich islamic heritage" doesn't it Mr.Obama?

Where were muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present. There are no pictures or media accounts of muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were muslims during this country's Woman's Suffrage era? Again, not present, and in fact, devout muslims demand that women are subservient to menin the islamic culture. So much so that often they are beaten for not wearing the 'hajib' or for talking to a man that is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, them muslims are all for women's rights aren't they?

Where were muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi's in killing Jews.

Finally Mr. Obama, where were muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren't flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing more than 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the middle east. No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other news networks that day. Strangely, the very "moderate" muslims who's asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11.
To many of us Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

So THAT, Mr. Obama, is the "rich heritage" muslims have here in America . Your made-up
history as told in Cairo on June 4th is simply that, the fiction that exists in your own mind.

Wisdom From Todays Guest Contributor - Thanks J.M.

When the US keeps lowering its standards to meet the lowest denominator instead of expecting the lowest denominator to rise to meet excellence, it's no wonder the US continues to lose its lead in almost everything to the rest of the world. We are witnessing the decline of an empire which has been repeated throughout history through greed and neglect of the rights and the values under which they were found. While our society has always been based, and rightfully so, on the rights of the individual being more important than the rights of the society, not every individual has the right to everything. Your rights should be expected to add to the excellence of our society not distract , devalue or lower it. We have continually allowed our Government to continue an overly liberal agenda which, in my opinion, has the effect of reducing the rights of the individual not adding or enhancing them.

When I attended my 30 high school reunion many of us were discussing the important topics of the day. Of course many felt the war in Iraq and terrorism were on top. I told all of them that the Mexican border and China would have more of an impact on the rest of their lives and the lives of their children then Iraq or terrorism ever would. I suggested that they tell their children to learn Spanish or Chinese if they really wanted to succeed in the coming new world.
Mediocrity is excellence to the mediocre.

Nazi Party Platform of 1920

I read the words "We Demand" allot in this platform...much of what I read here rings true to our current administration now controlling Washington....they haven't implemented all of these "demands" and some of what you read will actually describe the current administration in complete reverse, but the results are just as damaging to our republic....such as Germany wanted to keep everyone out who was not true German, but here in current day U.S.A. the current administration is allowing massive illegal entry into this country baring any consequences whatsoever, and putting a heavy burden upon the honest taxpayers of this country. Read this very carefully, it will help you understand the platform on which Mr. Obama and his socialist cronies currently stands.

THE PROGRAM OF THE NATIONAL-SOCIALIST (NAZI) GERMAN WORKERS’ PARTY

The Program of the German Workers’ Party is a program for our time. The leadership rejects the establishment of new aims after those set out in the Program have been achieved, for the sole purpose of making it possible for the Party to continue to exist as the result of the artificially stimulated dissatisfaction of the masses.

1. We demand the uniting of all Germans within one Greater Germany, on the basis of the right to self-determination of nations.
2. We demand equal rights for the German people (Volk) with respect to other nations, and the annulment of the Peace Treaty of Versailles and St. Germain.
3. We demand land and soil (Colonies) to feed our People and settle our excess population.
4. Only Nationals (Volksgenossen) can be Citizens of the State. Only persons of German blood can be Nationals, regardless of religious affiliation. No Jew can therefore be a German National.
5. Any person who is not a Citizen will be able to live in Germany only as a guest and must be subject to legislation for Aliens. 2
6. Only a Citizen is entitled to decide the leadership and laws of the State. We therefore demand that only Citizens may hold public office, regardless of whether it is a national, state, or local office.
7. We demand that the State make it its duty to provide opportunities of employment first of all for its own Citizens. If it is not possible to maintain the entire population of the State, then foreign nationals (non-Citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.
8. Any further immigration of non-Germans is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after August 2, 1914, be forced to leave the Reich without delay.
9. All German Citizens must have equal rights and duties.
10. It must be the first duty of every Citizen to carry out intellectual or physical work. Individual activity must not be harmful to the public interest and must be pursued within the framework of the community and for the general good.
We therefore demand:
11. The abolition of all income obtained without labor or effort.
Breaking the Servitude of Interest
12. In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the Nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the Nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13. We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts).
14. We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises.
15. We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes.
16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class; the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen. We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities.
17. We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes. Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land. 3
18. We demand ruthless battle against those who harm the common good by their activities. Persons committing base crimes against the People, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished by death without regard of religion or race.
19. We demand the replacement of Roman Law, which serves a materialistic World Order, by German Law.
20. In order to make higher education—and thereby entry into leading positions—available to every able and industrious German, the State must provide a thorough restructuring of our entire public educational system. The courses of study at all educational institutions are to be adjusted to meet the requirements of practical life. Understanding of the concept of the State must be achieved through the schools (teaching of civics) at the earliest age at which it can be grasped. We demand the education at the public expense of specially gifted children of poor parents, without regard to the latter’s position or occupation.
21. The State must raise the level of national health by means of mother-and-child care, the banning of juvenile labor, achievement of physical fitness through legislation for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and maximum support for all organizations providing physical training for young people.
22. We demand the abolition of hireling troops and the creation of a national army.
23. We demand laws to fight against deliberate political lies and their dissemination by the press. In order to make it possible to create a German press, we demand:
a) all editors and editorial employees of newspapers appearing in the German language must be German by race;
b) non-German newspapers require express permission from the State for their publication. They may not be printed in the German language;
c) any financial participation in a German newspaper or influence on such a paper is to be forbidden by law to non-Germans and the penalty for any breech of this law will be the closing of the newspaper in question, as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-Germans involved. Newspapers which violate the public interest are to be banned. We demand laws against trends in art and literature which have a destructive effect on our national life, and the suppression of performances that offend against the above requirements.
24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations, provided that they do not endanger the existence of the State or offend the concepts of decency and morality of the Germanic race. The Party as such stands for positive Christianity, without associating itself with any particular denomination. It fights against the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a 4
permanent revival of our Nation can be achieved only from within, on the basis of:
Public Interest before Private Interest.
25. To carry out all the above we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the Reich. Unquestioned authority by the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and over its organizations in general. The establishment of trade and professional organizations to enforce the Reich basic laws in the individual states.
The Party leadership promises to take an uncompromising stand, at the cost of their own lives if need be, on the enforcement of the above points.
Munich, February 24, 1920.

July 8, 2009 From the Glenn Beck Newsletter. To sign up and have it delivered to you email daily, go to: http://www.glennbeck.com/

Last week Glenn got a call from a very impressive young man named Jerome Hudson, who told Glenn he had written an op-ed during the 2008 election on being a black conservative. He sent it in and it's fantastic. Enjoy!

While attending a black fraternity party, I recently learned it’s a bad idea to profess one’s affinity for Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity.

Worse, according to current polls, it appears I may be the only black 22 year old in America who will be voting for Sen. John McCain.

It’s not that I was unaware that being a black conservative Republican puts me in the ultimate “minority.” After all, Shelby Steele’s classic article “ The Loneliness of the Black Conservative” has become an article of faith that I’ve all but committed to memory.

But I guess I had made the mistake of buying into all that liberal yammering about being “open minded” and supporting “diversity” that I’d deluded myself into believing that a civil, discussion about the herd-like ideological mentality of so many of my contemporaries suffer from was possible.

Boy, was I wrong. Big time!

My official “Negro” card got stripped away. I instantly lost my “blackness.” And now, consequently, I now am greeted with this: “Hey, y’all, here comes The Black Republican.”

And that’s when I think to myself, Hmmm…so this is how it feels to be an "Uncle Tom."

Still, being labeled “The Black Republican” is undoubtedly a promotion from: "Hey, why are you dressed so nice? You got a job interview or something?" Or, worse, “Man, why are you talking like that? You sound white? Who do you think you are? A conservative Kanye West?”

But my path to ideological emancipation began where all the most important things always begin—with my father and mother. Growing up, my Army drill sergeant father was a firm believer in tough love. My parents instilled in us Christian values. But I believe that first part—having an involved mother and father—was critical. With 70% of all black babies being born out-of-wedlock, it’s no wonder black poverty remains entrenched, welfare has become a way of life, and that many of my fellow young black male counterparts choose gangsta life over college.

But it wasn’t until college that I realized I had been ensnared in what John McWhorter calls the “Cult of Victimology.” One of my professor’s pointed me toward a world of literature I’d never been introduced to: Thomas Sowell, John McWhorter, Shelby Steele, Star Parker, Angela McGlowan, Larry Elder, Walter Williams—they obliterated the Leftist foolishness that floods my community.

It was then that my eyes were opened to the truth, a truth that my father was willing to give his life for, a truth that hundreds of thousands of American soldiers have paid the ultimate price to pass on to future generations. And that truth is this: America remains the greatest country that God gave to man.

So imagine me, a member of various organizations that largely consist of young black Americans, most of whom are womb to the tomb Democrats and liberals, speaking openly about the many opportunities and blessings we enjoy in our great nation and refuting Michelle Obama’s supposition that America is a “downright mean place..”

Can you say…..social suicide?

"So Jerome,” the partygoers asked, “you’re REALLY a Republican?!"

Duh!

Of course I’m a Republican! And your great grandparents were too!

Yes, I’m a member of the Anti-Slavery Party, the party responsible for: the 13 th (abolished slavery), 14 th (gave former slaves full citizenship rights), the 15th Amendment (gave slaves voting rights), the Civil Rights Act of 1871(protecting southern blacks from the Ku Klux Klan), the Reconstruction Acts, and the 1866, 1875, 1957, 1960, and 1964 Civil Rights Acts.

And no, my brothers and sisters, yesterday’s southern Democrats are NOT today’s Republicans! If so, former Klansman, Sen. Robert Byrd—the highest ranking senate Democrat and President Pro-Tempore of the Senate—apparently didn’t get the memo and forgot to switch parties.

But it’s more than just the history. I’m proud to stand for self-empowerment, personal responsibility, strong family values, small government, low taxes, free markets, a strong military, and individual achievement etc.

And don’t even get me started on which side stands up for the precious 1.4 million unborn children (32% of whom are black), who will be casualties in the war inside the womb. When I see these so-called “black leaders” bashing conservatives for “racist policies,” I wonder how they justify cheering on the political team who proudly defends the annihilation of 13 million black children since 1973.

And conservatives don’t care about black people? I don’t think so!

No, I think I’ll ride with the team who says enough with the welfare cancer that has destroyed people’s innate desire to achieve. Yes, I’ll ride with the folks who respect me enough to consider me their equal and not insult me with Affirmative Action racism. Yeah, I’ll ride with the gang who would rather create effective policies than emotional “feel good” symbolism that robs individuals of their desire to aspire.

So while it may take a little getting used to walking into college parties where I’m known as “The Black Republican,” I now realize I am a newly inducted member of a rich tradition of ideologically emancipated black conservatives. And guess what? I’m more than cool with that. I’m proud, actually.

“The conservative Kanye West”?

Hmmm….

Has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

Jerome Hudson is a sophomore at Tallahassee Community College with plans to transfer to Florida A&M University in the fall.

Nice to see people who really get it and are not willing to compromise their beliefs!Way to go Jerome!!

Quote of the Day

It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state. - Sean Hannity.

Quote of the Day

Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary, and you allow him to make war at pleasure. - Abraham Lincoln.