Benjamin Franklin's 2 questions still stand

From: Town Hall Magazine

by Chuck Norris - April 28, 2013

In 1787, when delegates at the Constitutional Convention were divided and at an impasse how to build our government and frame the U.S. Constitution, an 81-year-old Benjamin Franklin stood and appealed to the other delegates to pray for divine intervention to help them out of their darkness:

In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth – that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that “except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments be Human Wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest. 

I therefore beg leave to move, that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of the City be requested to officiate in that service.

Those are riveting words and questions for any age and country, particularly our own.

The delegates at the Convention decided not to orchestrate a daily formal ceremony led by various clergy in the area due to the advanced stage of the Convention, not because they didn’t believe in the power of prayer or its necessity. They still heeded Franklin’s spiritual entreaty through their private prayers and, shortly after, the public institution of paid governmental chaplains.

As the Wallbuilders website explained: “As it turns out, after the Convention, and nine days after the first Constitutional Congress convened with a quorum (April 9, 1789), they implemented Franklin’s recommendation. Two chaplains of different denominations were appointed, one to the House and one to the Senate, with a salary of $500 each. This practice continues today, posing no threat to the First Amendment. How could it? The men who authorized the chaplains wrote the Amendment.”

(To the chagrin of those who erroneously still try to use the First Amendment to abolish the practice of prayer in public places, also in 1789, after being urged by Congress on the same day they finished drafting the First Amendment, President Washington issued a Thanksgiving Proclamation stating that: “It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor.”)

And did Franklin’s, Washington’s and the other delegates’ prayers pay off?

Answer: Do we have a U.S. Constitution and country?

In 1788, James Madison, the father of the Bill of Rights and our fourth president, reflected a year back on the Constitutional Convention and even earlier on the founding of the republic: “The real wonder is, that so many difficulties should have been surmounted; and surmounted with a unanimity almost as unprecedented as it must have been unexpected. It is impossible for any man of candor to reflect on this circumstance, without partaking of the astonishment. It is impossible for the man of pious reflection not to perceive in it, a finger of that Almighty hand which has been so frequently and signally extended to our relief in the critical stages of the revolution.”

Our enemy is no longer Great Britain. But we have equally, if not more, powerful enemies within and without the U.S., and we are even more divided than in America’s beginnings. But whether local, national or international entities, are those enemies more powerful than the Almighty? Are their manipulations and sway beyond His reach? Has their darkness so overshadowed us that even Providence cannot lead us out? Are their conniving politics, propaganda and Ponzi schemes really more powerful than prayer? Have we fell prey to their lies that our prayers are now impotent and ineffective to change the course of history? And how does our participation in that age-old intercessory practice answer all those questions?

My last and most critical question is this: If the greatest leaders in the history of our country, particularly our founders, called upon the Almighty for heavenly assistance in the most critical and perilous of times and experienced His hand of deliverance, wouldn’t this season in our country’s history warrant exactly the same? Maybe more now than ever before?

If you answer in the affirmative, as I do, I’d challenge and call you to participate in two critical upcoming prayer events.

First, the 62ndAnnual National Day of Prayer, or NDP, will be May 2. This year’s theme is “Pray for America.” More than 40,000 public prayer gatherings are expected to take place Thursday in our nation’s capital, state capitals, county seats, cities, towns and villages across America. You can locate a master list of events around the country at National Day of Prayer Task Force website and find an NDP event near you.

Second, because of the intense strongholds we face as a nation, WND Editor Joseph Farah and thousands of others across the land are calling up America’s spiritual reserves, challenging our spiritual fervor and cranking up our spiritual warfare by also declaring a National Day of Prayer and Fasting – and on what better day than Sept. 11, 2013? You can register your intent to participate and help spread the plan virally by going to 911DayofPrayer.com.

If Martin Luther said he had to pray for two hours daily to overcome the devil, and for three hours during particularly busy days; if Jesus Himself said that certain strongholds would only be overcome through prayer and fasting – a discipline to align our spirit and body in prayer; if Benjamin Franklin called for daily prayers, can we not set aside two days this year to stand up for our country by kneeling on its behalf?

Our duty isn’t to judge the outcome, to discern the impact, but simply to pray, as Benjamin Franklin advised.

His two questions still stand and warrant an answer from each of us:

“Have we now forgotten that powerful friend?”

“And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probably that an empire can rise [or rise again] without his aid?”

Two questions, two events – to help restore the United States of America.

God bless,
JohnnyD

Judicial Watch Uncovers USDA Records Sponsoring U.S. Food Stamp Program for Illegal Aliens

Documents Reveal that Mexican Government Encourages Maximum Participation in U.S.-Funded Program

From: Judicial Watch

April 25, 2013

Judicial Watch today released documents detailing how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is working with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal aliens in the U.S. food stamp program.

The promotion of the food stamp program, now known as “SNAP” (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA with a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance.  Emphasized in bold and underlined, the statement reads, “You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.”

The documents came in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made to USDA on July 20, 2012.  The FOIA request sought: “Any and all records of communication relating to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals, and migrant communities, including but not limited to, communications with the Mexican government.”

The documents obtained by Judicial Watch show that USDA officials are working closely with their counterparts at the Mexican Embassy to widely broaden the SNAP program in the Mexican immigrant community, with no effort to restrict aid to, identify, or apprehend illegal immigrants who may be on the food stamp rolls. In an email to Borjon Lopez-Coterilla and Jose Vincente of the Mexican Embassy, dated January 26, 2012, Yibo Wood of the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) sympathized with the plight of illegal aliens applying for food stamps, saying, “FNS understands that mixed status households may be particularly vulnerable.  Many of these households contain a non-citizen parent and a citizen child.”

The email from Wood to Lopez-Coterilla and Vincente came in response to a request from the Mexican Embassy that the USDA FNS step in to prevent the state of Kansas from changing its food stamp policy to restrict the amount of financial assistance provided to illegal aliens.  In a January 22, 2012, article, the Kansas City Star had revealed that the state would no longer include illegal aliens in its calculations of the amount of assistance to be provided low-income Hispanic families in order to prevent discrimination against legal recipients.

The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch in August 2012, include the following:

• March 30, 2012 – The USDA seeks approval of the Mexican Embassy in drafting a letter addressed to consulates throughout the United States designed to encourage Mexican embassy staffers to enroll in a webinar learn how to promote increased enrollment among “the needy families that the consulates serve.”

• August 1, 2011 – The USDA FNS initiates contact with the Mexican Embassy in New York to implement programs already underway in DC and Philadelphia for maximizing participation among Mexican citizens. The Mexican Embassy responds that the Consul General is eager to strengthen his ties to the USDA, with specific interest in promoting the food stamp program.

• February 25, 2011 – The USDA and the Mexican Consulate exchange ideas about getting the First Ladies of Mexico and United States to visit a school for purposes of creating a photo opportunity that would promote free school lunches for low-income students in a predominantly Hispanic school. Though a notation in the margin of the email claims that the photo op never took place, UPI reported that it actually did.

• March 3, 2010 – A flyer advertises a webinar to teach Hispanic-focused nonprofits how to get reimbursed by the USDA for serving free lunch over the summer. The course, funded by American taxpayers, is advertised as being “free for all participants.”

• February 9 , 2010 – USDA informs the Mexican Embassy that, based on an agreement reached between the State Department and the Immigration & Naturalization Service (now ICE), the Women, Infants & Children (WIC) food voucher program does not violate immigration laws prohibiting immigrants from becoming a “public charge.”

As far back as 2006, in its Corruption Chronicles blog, Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA was spending taxpayer money to run Spanish-language television ads encouraging illegal immigrants to apply for government-financed food stamps. The Mexican Consul in Santa Ana, CA, at the time even starred in some of the U.S. Government-financed television commercials, which explained the program and provided a phone number to apply. In the widely viewed commercial the Consul assured that receiving food stamps “won’t affect your immigration status.”

In 2012, Judicial Watch reported that in a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions questioned the Obama administration’s partnership with Mexican consulates to encourage foreign nationals, migrant workers and non-citizen immigrants to apply for food stamps and other USDA administered welfare benefits. Sessions wrote, “It defies rational thinking, for the United States – now dangerously $16 trillion in debt – to partner with foreign governments to help us place more foreign nationals on American welfare and it is contrary to good immigration policy in the United States.”

“The revelation that the USDA is actively working with the Mexican government to promote food stamps for illegal aliens should have a direct impact on the fate of the immigration bill now being debated in Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These disclosures further confirm the fact that the Obama administration cannot be trusted to protect our borders or enforce our immigration laws. And the coordination with a foreign government to attack the policies of an American state is contemptible.”


God bless,
JohnnyD

Jury: Fraud put Obama on '08 ballot

Democrat officials convicted of making up names for qualifying petition

From: World Net Daily

April 26, 2013

Two Democrats in Indiana have been found guilty of submitting unauthorized names on the petition that placed then-Sen. Barack Obama on the 2008 presidential election primary ballot, meaning he likely did not qualify.

Fox News reports the jury in South Bend found guilty on all counts former longtime St. Joseph County Democratic Party chairman Butch Morgan Jr. and former county Board of Elections worker Dustin Blythe.

The two faced accusations of petition fraud and forgery, as well as falsely making a petition.

The verdicts raise anew questions about election fraud by Democrats, a subject that was
analyzed after the 2012 election.

The report found vote fraud occurred in the 2012 presidential election and cumulatively was likely enough to decide the outcome.

“In reality, although no single instance or aspect of vote fraud was likely enough to tip the election for Obama, the aggregate of their [Democrats] corrupt activities – including illegal campaign donations, taking advantage of states without voter ID requirements, military ballots delivered too late … may well have been,” the analysis said.

Fox News reported that two former Indiana elections board officials who pleaded guilty said Morgan told Democrat officials and workers to fake the names and signatures that Obama and Hillary Clinton needed to qualify for the presidential race.

Prosecutor Stan Levco told Fox, “I think this helped uphold the integrity of the electoral system. Their verdict of guilt is not a verdict against Democrats, but for honest and fair elections.”

Affidavits citing the testimony of former Board of Registration worker Lucas Burkett said the scheme was created in January 2008. Burkett reportedly was aboard the plan at first but later dropped out. Fox News reported he waited three years to reveal the scheme.

Fox News notes that if revelations about any forgeries were raised during the election, the petitions could have been challenged at that time.

A candidate who did not qualify with enough legitimate signatures at the time could have been removed from the ballot.

State law in Indiana requires candidates to have 500 signatures from each of the nine congressional districts to qualify. But in St. Joseph County, Obama qualified with only 534.

Prosecutors alleged that nine of the Obama petition pages apparently were forged, and each contained up to 10 names, bringing doubt on up to 90 names.

“If faked, [they] could have brought the Obama total below the legal limit required to qualify,” Fox News reported.

Fox reported it was told by “numerous voters” they did not sign their names, nor did they authorize their names to be used.

“That’s not my signature,” said Charity Rorie, a mother of four. “It’s scary, it’s shocking. It definitely is illegal.”

Added Robert Hunter Jr., “I did not sign for Barack Obama.”

WND’s extensive report on fraud in the 2012 race looked at claims that Obama, in some districts, got 100 percent of the vote, questions about absentee ballots and efforts by Democrats to prevent poll watchers from observing the election.

Some of the issues that were uncovered:

 

• Seventy-five GOP vote inspectors were ordered to leave Philadelphia poll locations by Democrat poll judges. One judge was caught on audio. A court order sent them back but it’s unknown what happened when they were gone. These poll locations were all within the 59 precincts where Romney received no votes.
• In Philadelphia, the Community Voters Project, an ACORN clone that employs some former ACORN workers, shredded Republican voter registrations. It’s not the first time they have been in trouble.
• The Florida AFL-CIO threatened True the Vote and Tampa Fair Vote with legal action for submitting voter registration challenges.
• Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings issued a highly publicized threat against True the Vote and Election Integrity Maryland just for checking voter rolls. EIM found 11,000 questionable registrations, including 1,566 dead voters. The Maryland Board of Elections took no action.
• Cummings also attacked the Ohio Voter Integrity Project with the same baseless claims.
• Think Progress falsely claimed True the Vote was “under investigation” by Rep. Cummings, when in fact he has no legal authority to do so.
• Despite overwhelming nonpartisan public support for voter ID laws, Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department and liberal jurists have delayed, emasculated or defeated ID laws in Texas, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Arizona and Pennsylvania.
• Holder has vowed to fight voter ID laws as restricting voters’ rights.
• The Obama administration “spiked investigations” of eight states that had major voter roll problems.
• The Holder Justice Department conspired with Project Vote on National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter) enforcement lawsuits, which force state and local agencies to become, essentially, low income voter registration drives.
• In 2009 DOJ announced to its attorneys that it would not enforce voter roll maintenance laws because it wouldn’t increase voter turnout.

The report also found the election rolls nationwide in shambles. Pew Research Center published a report revealing election rolls in a shambles nationwide. It found:

• 24 million invalid or inaccurate voter registrations
• 1.8 million deceased voters
• 2.75 million registered in multiple states.

The WND report also focused on the mechanics of the election: voting machines.
There were a number of complaints about electronic voting machines that tallied votes for Democrats despite a Republican vote and a few instances of the opposite case.

• Voters in Pueblo County, Colo., complained that their votes were being changed to Obama, reported local NBC affiliate KOAA.
• Maryland congressional candidate and veteran investigative journalist Ken Timmerman reported many voters claiming this happened to them, lodging complaints with vote judges. Timmerman has requested to see voting machine records.
• Maryland Delegate Kathy Afzali and Carroll County Commissioner Richard Rothschild have requested the FBI impound two electronic voting machines suspected of switching votes based on complaints from other voters, including a state official.
• Robert Ashcroft, a Republican poll watcher in Allentown, Pa., reported that about 5 to 10 percent of electronic votes would “change the selection back to default – to Obama.”
• EVM problems were also reported to have occurred in Ohio, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas.
• A 2008 Fox News report showed how electronic voting machines can be infected with a computer virus to change votes. A Princeton University study in 2006 found the same thing.

And the fraud didn’t go unnoticed. A few of the higher-profile cases:

• Patrick Moran, son of longtime U.S. Rep. Jim Moran, was caught on video by James O’Keefe’s Veritas Project, telling an undercover journalist how to commit vote fraud.
• Other Veritas videos showed Obama campaign officials in Texas, New Jersey and New York providing multiple forms to journalists posing as voters so that they could vote in two or more states.
• On Election Day, Veritas reporters recorded poll officials on camera telling voters not to vote for Romney.
• The Obama campaign continues to accept illegal donations from other countries. WND’s Aaron Klein proved it by donating to the Obama campaign twice under the name “Osama bin Laden” using a Pakistani web address.
• WND has filed a complaint with the FEC demanding an investigation of overseas donations to the Obama campaign.
• In 2008, the Obama campaign accepted almost $30,000 from Palestinian donors.
• A Korean interpreter in Flushing, N.Y., directed Korean voters to vote Democrat. He was expelled from the poll.
• Two cases of forged votes were reported in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., by Republicans who discovered their votes had already been made.
• Non-citizens were charged with voting illegally in Austin, Minn.
• Cases of double voting in Ohio are being investigated.
• Non-citizen allegedly voted in Iowa
• Double voting is being investigated in North Carolina
• NBC reported dead voters voting in California
• Mentally disabled were coaxed to vote for Obama in North Carolina
• Widespread absentee vote fraud is being investigated in South Texas
• A non-English-speaking, under-18 youth reported he was “told he can vote.”
• Many other cases

God bless,

JohnyD

Lawmakers, aides may get Obamacare exemption

Aides and lawmakers in both parties fear that staffers could be hit with thousands of dollars in new health care costs! Gee what about our increased costs!

From: Politico

By JOHN BRESNAHAN and JAKE SHERMAN | 4/24/13

 

Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, sources in both parties said.

The talks — which involve Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Obama administration and other top lawmakers — are extraordinarily sensitive, with both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides. Discussions have stretched out for months, sources said.

A source close to the talks says: “Everyone has to hold hands on this and jump, or nothing is going to get done.”

Yet if Capitol Hill leaders move forward with the plan, they risk being dubbed hypocrites by their political rivals and the American public. By removing themselves from a key Obamacare component, lawmakers and aides would be held to a different standard than the people who put them in office.

Democrats, in particular, would take a public hammering as the traditional boosters of Obamacare. Republicans would undoubtedly attempt to shred them over any attempt to escape coverage by it, unless Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) give Democrats cover by backing it.

There is concern in some quarters that the provision requiring lawmakers and staffers to join the exchanges, if it isn’t revised, could lead to a “brain drain” on Capitol Hill, as several sources close to the talks put it.

The problem stems from whether members and aides set to enter the exchanges would have their health insurance premiums subsidized by their employer — in this case, the federal government. If not, aides and lawmakers in both parties fear that staffers — especially low-paid junior aides — could be hit with thousands of dollars in new health care costs, prompting them to seek jobs elsewhere. Older, more senior staffers could also retire or jump to the private sector rather than face a big financial penalty.

Plus, lawmakers — especially those with long careers in public service and smaller bank accounts — are also concerned about the hit to their own wallets.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) is worried about the provision. The No. 2 House Democrat has personally raised the issue with Boehner and other party leaders, sources said.

“Mr. Hoyer is looking at this policy, like all other policies in the Affordable Care Act, to ensure they’re being implemented in a way that’s workable for everyone, including members and staff,” said Katie Grant, Hoyer’s communications director.

Several proposals have been submitted to the Office of Personnel Management, which will administer the benefits. One proposal exempts lawmakers and aides; the other exempts aides alone.

When asked about the high-level bipartisan talks, Michael Steel, a Boehner spokesman, said: “The speaker’s objective is to spare the entire country from the ravages of the president’s health care law. He is approached daily by American citizens, including members of Congress and staff, who want to be freed from its mandates. If the speaker has the opportunity to save anyone from Obamacare, he will.”

Reid’s office declined to comment about the bipartisan talks.

However, the idea of exempting lawmakers and aides from the exchanges has its detractors, including Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), a key Obamacare architect. Waxman thinks there is confusion about the content of the law. The Affordable Care Act, he said, mandates that the federal government will still subsidize and provide health plans obtained in the exchange. There will be no additional cost to lawmakers and Hill aides, he contends.

“I think the law is pretty clear,” Waxman told POLITICO. “Members and their staffs should get their health insurance through the exchange; the federal government will offer them health insurance coverage that they obtained through the exchanges because we want to get the same health care coverage everybody else has available to them.”

Waxman has been working on this issue with congressional colleagues and the Obama administration.

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said if OPM decides that the federal government doesn’t pick up “the 75 percent that they have been, then put yourself in the position of a lot of entry-level staff people who make $25,000 a year, and all of a sudden, they have a $7,000 a year health care tab? That would be devastating.”

Burr added: “And that makes up probably about 30 percent of the folks that work on the Senate side. Probably a larger portion on the House side. It would drastically change whether kids would have the ability to come up here out of college.”

Yet Burr, a vocal Obamacare opponent, is also flat-out opposed to exempting Congress from the exchange provision.

“I have no problems with Congress being under the same guidelines,” Burr said. “I think if this is going to be a disaster — which I think it’s going to be — we ought to enjoy it together with our constituents.”

The developing narrative is potentially brutal for congressional Democrats and the White House. The health care law, controversial since it was passed in 2010, has been a target of the right and, increasingly, the left. There are concerns about its cost, implementation and impact on small businesses. If the two sides agree on a fix, leadership is discussing attaching it to a must-pass bill, like the government-funding resolution or legislation to hike the nation’s debt limit.

Republicans, though, haven’t been able to coalesce around a legislative health care plan of their own, either. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) pushed a bill this week that would shift funds from a health care prevention fund to create a high-risk pool for sick Americans. That bill couldn’t even get a vote on the House floor as conservatives revolted, embarrassing Cantor and his leadership team. GOP leadership pulled the bill.

But the secret talks about exempting Capitol Hill hands from the exchanges has the potential to be even more politically risky. During the 2009-10 battle over what’s now dubbed Obamacare, Republicans insisted that Capitol Hill hands must have the same health care as the rest of the American people. The measure was introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who spent months negotiating the details of the health care law but later became a major Obamacare critic.

The mandate on health exchanges doesn’t cover everyone. Aides in lawmakers’ personal offices must obtain health care through the exchanges but not committee staff. Lawmakers and aides older than 65 are covered by Medicare.

OPM also has to decide where the members and staffers would be covered. According to several people who have spoken with OPM officials, lawmakers would probably be in the exchange of the state they represent. But staffers would sign up in the state where they usually live — that means district office employees would join home state exchanges, and Capitol Hill staffers would mostly be in Washington, Virginia or Maryland.


God bless,

JohnnyD

Russian Calls Out Barack Obama As A Communist

From: Freedom Outpost

 

by Leon Puissegur - April 24, 2013

 

Barack Obama is called a pure Communist by the Russian Press and many in Russia are making that statement. Maybe that is why the Boston Bombers could get away with what they did. It seems that Russia knew that the older brother was one to watch and they informed our intelligence community of it, yet the FBI once again failed because they “did not want to inflame people with Jihad connections or ideology!” Obama has declared that the United States will not “attack” those who hate the United States and instead, Obama wants to try to appease the situation in the terrorists’ favor. One individual, a man named Xavier Lerma, who wrote many articles about Obama and what he has done, along with calling the people of the United States stupid and ignorant for putting him in office has openly called Obama a Communist! His article, “Obama’s Soviet Mistake,” discusses why what Obama is doing now has been done before in Russia and it failed.

Mr. Lerma stated:

“Putin in 2009 outlined his strategy for economic success. Alas, poor Obama did the opposite but nevertheless was re-elected. Bye, bye Miss American Pie. The Communists have won in America with Obama but failed miserably in Russia with Zyuganov who only received 17% of the vote. Vladimir Putin was re-elected as President keeping the NWO order out of Russia while America continues to repeat the Soviet mistake.”

This was in the first paragraph of his article where he made the statement about President Obama, “Well, any normal individual understands that as true but liberalism is a psychosis . O’bomber even keeps the war going along the Mexican border with projects like “fast and furious” and there is still no sign of ending it. He is a Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so. How shrewd he is in America. His cult of personality mesmerizes those who cannot go beyond their ignorance. They will continue to follow him like those fools who still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia. Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.”

How many times have the Obama Supporters been called the “Kool Aid Kids?” Yet,Obama still gets his way by making taxes on purchases of anything on the internet. There is no doubt that new internet sales tax legislation will simply be another tax that will be used by Obama to do as he wishes to do! Yep, the United Socialists States of America has tasted the drink of illusion and they will dance in the fire should Obama tell them to do so!

Lerma continued:

“Russia lost its’ civil war with the Reds and millions suffered torture and death for almost 75 years under the tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Russians survived with a new and stronger faith in God and ever growing Christian Church. The question is how long will the once “Land of the Free” remain the United Socialist States of America? Their suffering has only begun. Bye bye Miss American Pie! You know the song you hippies. Sing it! Don’t you remember? The 1971 hit song by American song writer Don McLean:

          “And, as I watched him on the stage my hands were clenched in fists of rage.

          No angel born in Hell could break that Satan’s spell

And, as the flames climbed high into the night to light the sacrificial rite, I saw…

          Satan laughing with delight the day the music died

He was singing, bye bye Miss American Pie

          Drove my Chevy to the levee, but the levee was dry

Them good ol’ boys were drinking whiskey and rye, singing…

          This’ll be the day that I die.

How long will America suffer and to what depths?”

We must wonder just how long will people be dragged along with Obama over the cliff of failure? Obama has lied so much that he has to go back to video to make sure he keeps the lie going. Here we get a small insight into what the Russian people are told about Obama and the United States! Could this be why Obama has not had a very good relation with Russia, because Putin does not like Obama and considers him a fool? In another article by Mr. Lerma he discusses the current gun control measures that Obama has finally pushed while he had the very idea early when he was a Senator, Obama kept it silent until he was re-elected so he could continue on his agenda to destroy the United States. The worst part of this is that if a Russian man can see this, why have no reporters in the United States seen this? It just does not make sense unless they have a part in the forced failure of the United States.

Mr. Lerma wrote about President Obama, the NRA and many other ideas that reporters in the United States just seem to not see in his article:

“The NRA is right, Obama is an “Elitist Hypocrite” but he is actually worse than that. He is a liar and a murderer causing chaos in America and the world. Obama’s sins multiply more than Dorian Gray’s but people still think he looks good. Looking good is all that matters in America, right? The list goes on: he raised taxes on everyone when he said he would not; killing innocent people with drones; executive privilege in “Fast and Furious“; the so called “Arab Spring“; promoting abortions; lying to Russia and pointing missiles at us; paying off his communist buddies to hire Russians to protest against Putin; no effort to lower the US debt by even one penny, etc.. Yet, most people still love him in the US. Those against him stand firm. Obama and those who own him cannot force Americans to give up their guns now, but he will eventually.”

Why is it that the so-called reporters within the United States cannot see what people outside the United States can see? Come on people wake up and inform those who do not know!


God bless,

JohnnyD

Liberalism: Up is Down, Down is Up — Got It.

How Can Anybody of Sound Mind be a Democrat?

From: Clash Daily

By Allan Erickson / April 23, 2013

Decades of developing poison gas and biological agents, along with efforts to develop nuclear weapons, and actual use of gas to kill thousands upon thousands of people in Iraq and Iran: not WMD.

Pressure cookers: WMD.

Wringing the necks of full-term newborns, not murder.

Legally carrying out the death penalty, or defending yourself on the battlefield: murder.

Defending citizens by securing borders and enforcing immigration laws: discrimination.

Forcing people to pay for abortion against conscience and support same sex marriage against conscience: not discrimination.

Taking money from one citizen to give it to another citizen or illegal alien: not stealing.

Working hard and saving your earnings to invest and retire comfortably: stealing.

Embracing the Founders’ vision and speaking out for liberty: racism.

Telling whites to ride at the back of the bus: justice.

Ignoring 1,300 years of Islamic aggression: multiculturalism.

Excluding Christians from equal protection: diversity.

Raising taxes in a recession and increasing spending and debt: economic development promoting recovery.

Cutting taxes, reducing spending and lowering debt: imperialism, colonialism, racism, exploitation of the masses by the crass bourgeoisie.

Expanding massive central government and increasing bureaucratic power to arbitrarily regulate private lives: liberty and justice for all.

Limiting government and empowering private citizens: tyranny.

Confronting enemies and supporting allies: mindless nationalism leading to war.

Surrendering to enemies and throwing allies under the bus: enlightened foreign policy.

Man-made global warming: science.

Intelligent design: religion.

Rule of law: tool of tyrants.

Political correctness: law that rules.

Constitution: outdated, inflexible, irrelevant.

Rules for Radicals: gospel.

Guns: killers.

Abortion doctors: health practitioners.

Terrorists: freedom fighters.

American soldiers: terrorists.

Israel: police state run by genocidal lunatics.

Iran: center of culture, art, learning and spirituality.

God: fantasy.

Man: god.

Thank you for clarifying matters for us, Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama.


God bless,

JohnnyD

To the Parents of Newtown:

From: Town Hall Magazine

by - Mark Davis - April 19, 2013

As this week’s gun control vote settles in, and as the President urges you toward angst and distress that compounds your already profound pain, I want to give you a different perspective that offers love, empathy and clarity.

But before I get to one syllable of the differences I--and millions of Americans-- have with your chosen reaction to the tragedy in your town and in your families, there is something that needs to be said.

It has been repeated countless times, and it should be, to all of you:

You are in our prayers every day. Those of us with children kiss them goodnight and wonder as you do why your children have been taken from you.

Your loss has sharpened our focus on valuing our own blessings, and it has energized our faith as we ask God for healing for you and your community.

These are wishes that transcend all politics. We will never forget you, your beautiful children, and the strength you and your neighbors showed under the worst of circumstances. You are an inspiration.

But it was unavoidable. Sooner or later, we were going to get to a very public debate about how we should respond to this latest tragedy involving a deeply disturbed individual with a gun.

That debate generally sends people into two camps. One contains 2nd Amendment devotees who assert a constitutional basis against any laws that infringe on the acquisition of arms by law-abiding citizens.

The other camp contains those who are willing to mitigate those liberties in the hope that future shootings can be curtailed.

The vast majority of you seem to belong to the more liberal second camp. For those of us who think that view is dangerously misguided, you present a daunting prospect. None of us wants to argue with a grieving parent over anything, much less a cause many of you have taken to heart as a kind of mission in tribute to your lost children.

I have wondered how many of you have been converted by your pain. Is Mark Mattioli the only one of you who recognizes that abridging gun rights will achieve nothing in preventing future Newtowns?

Maybe so. And maybe every one of the rest of you were gun control fans before the morning of December 14.

But if any of you had a core value shaken by personal struggle, you would not be the first. Look at Senator Rob Portman, who shelved his entire value system on the issue of gay marriage because he felt he owed such a surrender to his gay son.

Anyone enduring a pain like yours might well join you, grabbing guns from every hand because any device that would take their children is a thing they might believe no one should ever have

But if that happened, it would mean clarity and objectivity had been destroyed, dashed against the rocks of personal trauma.

You deserve a presumption that your decision to align with anti-2nd amendment efforts is sincere and long-held, and not some knee-jerk reaction to the atom bomb dropped into your lives.

And you deserve honesty and clarity. So, knowing that it comes packaged with all the love and prayers I can muster for you personally, here is what millions of us want to tell you politically:

Your grief does not make you right.

President Obama has wanted to disarm America since the moment he first thought of the issue. He is more than pleased to have a corps of sympathetic figures to use on that march.

I will not suggest, as some have, that you have been used as pawns by a manipulative White House. That is insulting to you, as if you are not acting on your own beliefs, but are subjugating your thoughts to ideological puppeteers.

You deserve better than that suspicion. But you do not deserve automatic acquiescence simply because you have lost so much.

The millions of us who value the 2nd amendment are engaged in the ultimate compartmentalization. On one side is the goodwill we will always send your way as fellow parents and fellow citizens.

On the other, the necessary opposition we must mount against anyone who would tamper with the Bill of Rights. Anyone.

You clearly do not think you are trifling with the constitution, but words have meaning. “Shall not be infringed” means “shall not be infringed.”

That does not contain an option for infringement in cases of political shifts or personal pain. It means what it says.

But my main goal here is not to wag a scolding finger. It is to actually offer a kind of comfort.

I offer the suggestion that the Senate vote is not the dark development you think it is.

None of the measures wrestled with on the Senate floor this week would have done one thing to save your precious babies.

Many of you offered up older siblings to share your sad deflation at the measure’s failure. The sight of brothers and sisters tearing up because they felt they had failed their murdered brothers and sisters broke my heart.

The earthly gun control battle is about those of us left behind. Of course we think of those we have lost as we gear up for this political battle, but it is a wholly concocted notion that we dishonor them if we fail to place obstacles in front of their law-abiding countrymen.

So fight on if you wish. I would never suggest that anyone surrender a heartfelt battle.

But if any of you hear disapproving words in reply to your quest, know that it comes from those of us fighting for our kids, too.

Say anything you wish, but I will ask that you refrain from suggesting that I must join you to protect my children from the next Newtown.

I am fighting for my kids’ right to have their liberties protected from those who would rewrite our founding documents. I will not-- I cannot-- allow myself to back down out of empathy for the life story of my ideological opponents.

The notion that this was a “shameful week in Washington” is a reaction only from those who thought impeding legal gun purchases would save lives.

There is no evidence that it does.

The parents on my side seek a safer America for our children-- and yours-- by losing this obsession with abridging freedoms and focusing on serious enforcement of current laws and an ambitious “no-buy” list which instantly identifies those unfit for gun purchases.

I expect we will be opposed by many, if not all of you. Please know that we will fight for the freedoms we hold dear, and we will not be timid.

But none of our energy and passion against your chosen political path amounts to any distraction from the most important role you play in our lives-- as examples of incredible courage, and objects of our enduring affection and support.

May God bless every one of you, and your sweet children. We will remember them, and you, always.


God bless,
JohnnyD

What recovery?

From: Americans for Limited Government

By Bill Wilson - April 18, 2013

It has been four years and two months since the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” the so-called “stimulus,” was signed into law on Feb. 17, 2009.

That day, Barack Obama told the American people he was keeping his campaign promise that he would “do all that I could to give every American the chance to make of their lives what they want, to see their children climb higher than they did.”

He declared upon signing the bill, “I’m back here today to say we have begun the difficult work of keeping that promise. We have begun the essential work of keeping the American dream alive in our time.”

Now, four years and two months later — including more than $6 trillion of new debt and $2 trillion of monetary easing by the Federal Reserve — it is worth considering just what ever happened to that promise.

To put it bluntly, what recovery, Mr. Obama?

Not even the White House pretends any more that the economy will ever get back to normal growth, as indicated by the economic assumptions in the 2014 Obama budget.

If accurate, nominal economic growth will never again reach its postwar historical 6.5 percent average rate of increase. Instead, it will only grow an average 4.8 percent a year this decade, casting a dark shadow on the nation’s financial picture for a generation.

The Obama economic team has already been proven wrong about everything. In 2009, it overestimated the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by a whopping $1.046 trillion in its first term. It overstated revenues by $1.1 trillion. But for sequestration and the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing and low interest rate bailouts, the debt would be much larger today.

Despite those bailouts, in 2013, the national debt will grow by 7.5 percent — above its 7 percent historical growth rate.

If sequestration over the coming decade is cancelled and/or should inflation strike, forcing interest rates to spike, and if the low growth assumptions going forward prove correct, by 2042, debt to GDP could rise to be as high as 189 percent, if not higher.

Until the economy starts growing faster than the debt, we are skidding down a slippery slope to certain insolvency, with a national debt of $16.8 trillion and counting.

But the problem does not just extend to the GDP.

The housing market, whose downturn caused the current depression we’re stuck in, has not recovered either. Home values are stuck where they were in 2003, and new home sales are still about 64 percent below where they were that year.

And there has been no recovery in labor force participation. Since Obama took office, more than 9.4 million Americans have left the labor force as college graduates cannot find work and Baby Boomers head into their retirement years without enough saved.

The question is why. Why, after more than four years are we still stuck in these doldrums.

The answer is because there has not been a robust recovery in credit markets where the financial crisis began.

From 1946 through 2008, credit outstanding nationwide — that is, all debts public and private — grew at an average 8.3 percent annual rate according to an Americans for Limited Government analysis of Federal Reserve data. That is, until the economy crashed in 2008 amid the first credit contraction since 1946.

Since then, credit has only expanded an average 1.4 percent each year. In 2012, it grew by just 3.3 percent. It has picked up slightly but is nowhere near where it once was. To get back to its historical trend, credit will need to increase by $4.6 trillion in 2013.

The trouble is, there is a direct correlation between credit expansion and economic growth, which in turn has consequences for unemployment, inflation, and other indicators. Whereas once for every dollar of new debt there was a dollar of growth, now it takes more than 2 dollars of debt to generate a dollar of growth.

In short, the economy is addicted to debt. And when credit contracts or even just slows down its rate of expansion, as it has in recent years, the economy tends to follow suit.



This puts in perspective why the financial media is in a panic over banks holding more than $1.7 trillion of excess reserves. And why the government is so desperate to get credit creation started again. Since 2008, it has nationalized mortgage lending markets by placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship.

It nationalized student lending in 2010 by taking over Sallie Mae. It has a guaranteed loan program for so-called “green” energy projects. It is even contributing to the budding market for subprime auto loans.

It also lends tens of billions more for housing via the Federal Housing Administration, to bankrupt socialist countries via the International Monetary Fund, and to businesses via the Small Business Administration.

It even wants to create an $8.8 billion so-called “infrastructure bank” to be leveraged up to make tens of billions of loans to state and local governments and enrich public sector unions that will be the primary beneficiary of the spending.

In addition, as noted by Investors.com, government has even overtaken the private sector as the largest issuer of credit: “At the end of 2012, government-financed home mortgages and consumer credit outstanding totaled $6.4 trillion, up from $4.4 trillion at the end of 2006. Private-sector financed loans fell to $6.3 trillion from $8.45 trillion over the same span” from 2006 to present.

None of it is working. $6 trillion of new debt, $2 trillion of monetary expansion, and hundreds of billions of dollars of government-financed loan programs have all failed to get the economy out of the ditch.

And that’s not just hyperbole. As noted above, Obama is projecting subpar economic growth for the rest of the decade and beyond. Even his own economic team is acknowledging we’re likely to remain in this state for some time.

Ironically, it was John Maynard Keynes, considered the father of fiscal “stimulus,” who reportedly once said, “When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do, sir?”

Now, Obama has 1 trillion reasons to change course — as his economic projections have fallen flat by that much. To continue down the same worn path of demonstrated failure, can only lead to more debt, and eventually economic collapse when, not if, interest rates rise and the bill comes due.

If we wait too long to act, the American people will be left with a debt that cannot be refinanced, let alone be repaid. We will lose the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency, and then, default will be the only option. More debt is not going to get us out of this crisis.

Absent Obama waking up, it is the sworn duty of members of Congress to stand up and say no to any further erosion of the nation’s economic capacity through Obama’s failed fiscal and monetary “stimulus” dogma.


God bless,

JohnnyD