Peacable Assembly

Call out the National Guard! The Federal government is alarmed because, and I quote: "The Secret Service is investigating a Maryland man who held a sign," "another man stood across the street from a Presidential town hall with his gun on full display," "Los Angeles police officers apprehended a man Thursday after a standoff. . . . officials said the man had mental problems," Rush Limbaugh "legitimizes people who are on the edge to go do something or say something," "someone painted a swastika outside the office of Congressman David Scott of Georgia, one of Obama's supporters."

Let me summarize, a man held a sign, as stupid as the saying was, it is just a sign, and he was exercising a First Amendment right; another person, who as research pointed out actually holds a valid concealed weapons permit in his state, New Hampshire, and thus exercising, even as an alarmist article states, his "legal" Second Amendment right; a mentally ill person was in a stand-off in L.A.--seems to be business as usual in Los Angeles; a talk show host spoke, hmmmm, seems like the First Amendment again; and, an unidentified person painted a swastika on an office. Anyone know who? Any identified Nazis in town? Any groups meeting there? Any uptick in violence? Any Brownshirts marching in the streets? Anything of substance at all?

No.

One anonymous person performed a reprehensible act.

None of these isolated actions widely dispersed and unconnected across the entire country are indicative of a rise in racial hostility. They are not even racial incidents.

However, as the alarmist news report attempts to drive up emotion, God forbid, the bad guys are also associated with rock music and the Internet. Goodness, what will they think of next? These people must be truly evil, the article can impugn them with guilt by association with connotations of racial hatred, rock 'n' roll, and the Internet.

The news media is ratcheting up the rhetoric. Another story from Florida notes that: "city officials, meanwhile, are trying to determine what local crimes might be associated with the posting of the images on public and private properties," about a possible suspect who is posting the Obama as Joker posters.

Graphic source: poster of Soetoro as the Joker at the S.R. 50 underpass in Clermont, Tom Benitez, Orlando Sentinel/12 August 2009.

Why is it that the local police are "currently. . . still conducting interviews of victims, witnesses, and other suspects," yet they have not determined what crime was committed? First they are pursuing an individual for an unknown offense, then they will find the crime. Isn't that the fascist way? Let's face it, at the worst this is vandalism, at best it is free speech and worth defending.

Nonetheless, the alarmists, such as the Southern Law Poverty Center and the Secret Service, are implying as a headline states: "Fear Grows for President as Hate Groups Thrive on Racial Backlash." There is no concrete evidence for this position. Evidence exists that stories are manufactured. For example, Fox News reported that an African-American man from Mississippi admitted to posing as a white supremacist to send a death threat across state lines by Facebook. Even the Department of Homeland Security cobbled a threat assessment together from nothing more than pointless Internet drivel and did not follow standard intelligence practices to conclude that hate groups are thriving.

Yet, that watchdog of violence, the Southern Law Poverty Center, states that there is: "a genuine backlash against Obama."

They are correct to a certain extent. People are simply exercising their liberties under the law. The Center and others are mistaking genuine, simple American frustration with Obama and his misguided policies. If every dumb expression was censored then there is no way to distinguish between truth and falsehood. It is more revealing that the opponents of expression are so dumb founded with legitimate dissent. The cognitive dissonance that they are experiencing demonstrates how out of touch they are with ordinary simple expressions of dissent. Not all dissent is violent, the First Amendment states that there exists: "the right of the people peacably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Peaceable assembly is just as American, and just as authentic. Consider Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s example if peaceable assembly is American. The genuine backlash against Obama may, as in the case of King, involve boycotts, demonstrations, marches and other staples of non-violent protest.

The media created a problem: a cult of personality of Obama as the first black president. Actually, he is not black. If he would release his long form birth certificate we might know for certain but by all reasonable accounts he is a product of a white mother and a black father. Thus, he is half-white and half-black. Nonetheless, he was packaged both by the media and in the election rhetoric as black. Despite his black packaging the American people, 53%, voted for him. The Americans, we have to reasonably conclude, did not invoke the "Tom Bradley" effect, named after a former L.A. mayor who did not garnish white voters since as a black man they would not vote for him.

Meanwhile, real people, an African-American Kenneth Gladney, are physically assaulted by Obama's purple-shirted Union thugs SEIU, yet this incident is not mentioned at all as a racial crime. In addition, the most consistent and incindiary anti-Obama statements are made by African-Americans such as Dr. Alan Keyes,

The Reverend Dr. James David Manning,

Manning interviewed on Fox News, Part 1, in the interview, it is Hannity and Colmes who object to Pastor Manning's characterization of Obama.

Manning interviewed on Fox News, Part 2

and Sonja Schmidt.

The estimates vary but white voters by and large voted for Obama and they are off the hook. They are not racist in electoral voting for the presidency.

When will the mainstream media get off this dead horse? They need to stop waving the bloody shirt and move on.

Peaceable assemblies will continue, more to follow. Get used to it.

ACLU Opposes Obama On Privacy

You know Soetoro is in trouble when even the farthest left of organizations, the ACLU for instance, identifies how intrusive Obama's policies are.

Australia Rejects Cap and Tax

Australia had the good sense to reject a cap and tax proposal similar to the one proposed by Obama. One advantage of the Parliamentary system is that the Prime Minister has to amend the bill or face an early election. I wonder how Soetoro would do in a national referendum on his policies right now.

National Guard drill at high school to prepare for possible H1N1 riot

Is it time for America's Reichstag fire? Health care rationing has set the Americans on fire and awakened a sleeping giant, Soetoro is tanking in the polls, and it may just about time to: invent another crisis. Before there is any emergency whatsoever, the military, this time the National Guard, is in the streets and drilling. In Maine, the headline reads: "National Guard drill at high school to prepare for possible H1N1 riot."

Twain on Truth and Fiction

Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.

Mark Twain

How to Use the Census to Manipulate Elections

Susan Tully, national field director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, explains how the census can be misused to manipulate elections.

Where to Go When You Dump AARP Membership

I dumped AARP and I will receive my remaining membership refund check of $32.15 in 4-6 weeks according to "Vickie Marie." I am disturbed by AARP that suggests supporting health care rationing, despite Barry Soetoro's protestations to the contrary. He knows how the game is played and we should too: AARP of course is "on board" and they support his rationing of health.

I called AARP a week ago and talked to "Steve." I told him my opinion at that time and I was assured that my comments would be taken seriously. In the meantime though, I understand that SEIU remains as a partnering organization with AARP since these "purple shirts" remain listed on AARP's website. You may recall Kenneth Gladney, an unemployed African-American man who attended a Town Hall meeting, trying to raise money by selling patriotic "Don't Tread On Me" flags. The SEIU "purple-shirt" thugs beat him up for his efforts. SEIU remains as a supporter of AARP's "Divided We Fail" campaign, and is listed as a co-sponsor while linked directly to their site from AARP. I noted the connection in my comments to the AARP representative.

As they old saying goes: `Politics makes strange bedfellows' and while checking out AARP's page I also noticed a supporting organization: The Islamic Society of North America. Although ISNA often claims to be a mainstream Muslim organization, it is actually a Wahhabi Muslim organization. The Wahhabi's originate from the extreme purist brand of Islamism characteristic of the Saudi royal family as well as representing the religious background of Osama Bin Laden and his family (Steve Coll, The Bin Ladens, pp. 81-83). Perhaps the Saudi royal family and al-Qaeda does not advocate sound health care practices for Americans and do not wish us well.

It occurred to me also to ask AARP if my comments, since they are "recorded for training purposes," are considered "fishy" and I asked if they would be reported elsewhere, such as to the White House. The answer was in the negative.

In any case, since I am no longer a member of AARP I need to take stock. I considered what services they provide, I get discounts when renting cars and making hotel reservations. Thus, some type of Senior discount membership is useful. Fortunately, there are alternatives. For example, although I am not endorsing anyone in particular, there is another organization that is pro-American and patriot.

AMAC, the Association of Mature American Citizens, may be a handy alternative for others once they cancel their AARP membership. According to their website they state:

As an American, you have the freedom to make your own health care decisions, along with the guidance of your trusted doctor. Imagine this freedom being stripped away by your own government.

Under proposed health care law, your freedom to choose your own doctors, treatments, procedures, and hospital needs would be limited. Government controlled health care would mean rationed health care.

AMAC may be a reasonable alternative and seems to actually advocate the interests of American seniors.

I do not need AARP and apparently they do not need seniors either. Good riddance.

As a follow-up to this blog, according to my blog traffic, D.C. was interested:

Washington, District of Columbia arrived from blogsearch.google.com on "Blog Smith: Where to Go When You Dump AARP Membership" 09:57:59 -- 4 hours 45 mins ago

Washington, District of Columbia arrived from blogsearch.google.com on "Blog Smith: Where to Go When You Dump AARP Membership" 09:37:07 -- 5 hours 6 mins ago

Washington, District of Columbia arrived from blogsearch.google.com on "Blog Smith: Where to Go When You Dump AARP Membership" 09:24:26 -- 5 hours 18 mins ago

Representative and 25 Year Practising Physician, Tom Price, Testifies Before Congress

"Sleeping Giant," A Natural Born Citizen Speaks

"Sleeping Giant" Town Hall protester was once a loyal Democrat but not any more. She is getting calls abusing her as a racist once she opposed health rationing.

Green Is Red

John Bellamy Foster: "The transition to socialism and the transition to an ecological society are one."

Ecology, Capitalism, and Socialism from mrzine on Vimeo.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren Town Hall Meeting: Rationing to Pay for Abortions

Many people do not realize that rationing must include Federal funding for abortions. It is the law and unless an amendment in the various bills explicitly restricts abortion funding, it will be included. I noted this point when Senator Claire McCaskill stated, correctly, in another Town Hall meeting that abortion is not mentioned in the various bills in Congress: exactly. The pro-rationing forces do not want it mentioned or it may engender debate about Federal funding for abortion.

In the Town Hall Q&A a constituent asks Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA 16) to explain why rationing will cover abortions when at least 90% of them are not medically necessary — in other words, the kind of elective surgery that insurance plans usually don’t cover. CA-16 is a heavily Democratic district and she states truthfully: abortion will be Federally funded with rationing, and personally, she believes it should be so.

Soetoro's Facts in Question

Surely Soetoro should name those greedy physicians who are profiting from cutting off feet for profit as he stated at the New Hampshire Town Hall. On the other hand, he irresponsibly states numbers without regard to reality. The American College of Surgeons took issue with Obama: “Surgeons are not paid $30,000 to $50,000 to amputate a diabetic’s foot. Medicare pays a surgeon, on average, from $541.72 to $708.71 for one of two procedures involving a foot amputation.”

Esquire Article About Orly Taitz.

Esquire magazine ran an article about Orly Taitz.

Banned Words in Textbooks: "American"

2.5 million job losses since Obama took office

Google banned Orly Taitz interviewed in Israel

Can't You See I'm On the Phone?

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee blabs on her cell as a woman asks an emotional question about health care rationing at a town hall event.

Other jobs, such as teaching, do not allow a professional to ignore constituents, for example, if this ever happens to a teacher, they could be fined as much as $22,000.

Increased Data Collection In Flights

Oh yeah, nothing wrong with this plan. Some airlines will begin requiring some people making reservations for domestic flights to submit their dates of birth and genders as part of a screening process aimed at keeping boarding passes out of the hands of suspected terrorists, the Transportation Security Administration stated. Not all airlines are fully participating yet and might not request the data. According to the TSA spokesperson, it will up to "individual airlines or travel agents to decide how to collect the required information at the time a reservation is made."

So let me get this straight. We are concerned about terrorism and more data will be collected about a travelers genders and DOB as part of the vetting process to board a flight. And, who is collecting this information? Travel agents who are not trained as counter-terrorism experts. Will they have access to more personal information? Will they be a part of law-enforcement agencies? Are travel agents now an arm of Homeland Security?

These data collection and dissemination efforts are a part of Secure Flight, a program aimed at meeting congressional mandates, including those passed in 2007 to put into practice recommendations from the 9/11 Commission. The TSA said the collection of additional data would make it easier for the agency to more accurately match prospective passengers with the thousands of names carried on the government's terrorism watch lists.

My question is how and who is to compare the data at the point of flight and the lists kept by the TSA? Who gets to use, and by implication abuse, the personal data on a larger pool of citizens?

Civil-liberties groups and privacy advocates have criticized the watch lists, saying they should be more narrowly focused on suspected terrorists. "One government estimate put the number of names appearing on its lists at more than 700,000 two years ago," according to the article in The Wall Street Journal. However, the 9/11 Commission stated that our challenge: "is to prevent the very few people who may pose overwhelming risks from entering or remaining in the Unites States undetected," (The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 383).

If the government has a list of 700,000 persons I think we can reasonably assume that the U.S., although facing a genuine threat of terrorism, does not have that many terrorists in the U.S.

I mean, as a hypothetical let's say, what if the White House were to keep a list of "fishy" individuals for example, and law-abiding citizens ended up on a White House assembled "terrorist" list. We can rationally deduce the list is far too large anyway and Secure Flight is not actually targeting terrorists at all. The only target is the law-abiding natural citizens of the U.S. and other citizens.

The TSA's own lists, however, are smaller than that collected by Federal agencies. A TSA spokesman said publicly late last year that there were fewer than 16,000 names on the lists TSA uses for banning fliers or for subjecting them to special scrutiny. At the very least, the TSA list is more focused and represents about the highest number of possible, actual, persons whose motives are suspect.

Obama: New Lowest Poll Numbers

According to the latest Rasmussen poll:

"Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. That’s the lowest level of total approval yet recorded. The President’s ratings first fell below 50% just a few weeks ago on July 25. Fifty-two percent (52%) now disapprove."

I do not know which is falling faster, Obama's numbers or his Teleprompter. Health care rationing may be his Waterloo.

"Thin Ice," Molotov Mitchell

Barry Soetoro Lying on Tape

“I happen to be a proponent of single payer universal health insurance.”

Soetoro's staged Town Hall meeting yesterday in New Hampshire where he states “I have not said that I was a single payer supporter.” This is a lie.

Obamacare: not a slippery slope, but a cliff By Phill Kline

How To Argue (In These "Wise Latina" Times)

Understanding the difference between an attitude and an argument is a critical step that is all to uncommon today.

Barry Soetoro Without TOTUS: "post office"

Barry without his Teleprompter is a fascinating experience.

What was that Barry? A government-run service, such as the Post Office has difficulties, while privately run postal companies do just fine?

Are you hinting that government-run health care might not be efficient or run smoothly?

Thanks for clarifying that point.

A headline from today is a case in point: "With Fewer Customers and Fixed Labor Costs, U.S. Postal Service Faces $7 Billion Net Loss in 2009."

That whole government take over of health care rationing is sounding bleaker and bleaker Barry; just keep talking without TOTUS so you can clarify it for us.

Bussed In Paid Union Workers for Soetoro Alleged Town Hall Meeting

DHS Made Up Report About Right Wing Extremists

ALG (Americans for Limited Government) discovered a bogus report by filing a Freedom of Information request in April demanding all documents related to the drafting of the controversial “right-wing extremism” memo by the DHS. As suspected, the government wanted a statement with no research or documentation. There was no evidence of any actual active recruitment of "disgruntled veterans" by these groups, no evidence showing that folks who purchase guns or oppose gun-control legislation are necessarily dangerous, and no evidence that the economic downturn or the election of Barack Obama that is fueling any actual ‘resurgence’ of ‘extremism.’” The memo had reported that “right wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans.” “The background DHS used was not based on credible intelligence sources, reporting, and analysis. Instead, what we found is that the Department was apparently surfing the net to see what news stories happened to turn up to support a pre-determined conclusion,” ALG President Bill WilsonWilson explained.

Sonja Schmidt on Friends

Mobs: Then and Now

A Republican satire on Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech.

Graphic source: this image is in the public domain due to its age.

The populist William Jennings Bryan delivered his famous "Cross of Gold" speech to advocate the interests of the people. The speech was delivered at the 1896 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Bryan advocated bimetallism. At the time, the Democratic Party wanted to standardize the value of the dollar to silver and opposed pegging the value of the United States dollar to a gold standard alone. The inflation that would result from the silver standard would make it easier for farmers and other debtors to pay off their debts by increasing their revenue dollars. It would also reverse the deflation which the U.S. experienced from 1873-1896.

The speech gets its popular name from its ending, with its biblical allusions:

Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.

At the conclusion of the speech, Bryan stretched out his arms in a Christ-like manner for five seconds, while the crowd remained quiet. According to the New York World, at that point everyone seemed to go mad at once and shrieked and rushed the stage. The New York Times commented that "A WILD, RAGING, IRRESISTIBLE MOB" had been unleashed.

Today, if a public figure advocates the public interest, as Bryan did, "mob" is a term of derision.

McCaskill Asked About Barry's Long Form Birth Certificate

The original article, which has generated an incredible amount of hits, has mysteriously disappeared: 24 November 2014.

http://www.wnd.com/2010/03/127362/

http://theobamafile.com/_eligibility/DemocraticTwoStep.html

How Obama Circumvented the Constitution

One of the key events prior to November's election received no attention nationally whatsoever; however, I believe that the key to the election occurred months before. Senate Resolution 511, passed in April 2008, and co-sponsored by Barry Soetoro, was an attempt to circumvent the Constitution and to amend the clear statement in the Constitution regarding the "Natural Born Citizen" clause.

SR 511 states that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen:

* Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States;

* Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

* Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;

* Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;

* Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;

* Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and

* Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.

The resolution addresses a Constitutional clause that no law or legislative body has the right to amend.

The term "natural born Citizen" in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States; however, other rulings by the Supreme Court, Congress, and writings such as originating with John Bingham, do define "natural born citizen."

For example, a Chief Justice stated in 1875:

"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first."

-Chief Justice Waite in Minor v. Happersett (1875)

There is no evidence that the Framers or any Congress intended to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President; therefore, the Senate resolved to pass a ‘Gentleman’s Agreement’ or some might call it a devil's bargain when passing the provision.

Most of the resolution means very little but one clause is significant.

Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President.

This is not common knowledge, and the resolution provides no examples so we do not know who the Senate referred to: unless the resolution refers to a current presidential candidate.

Who is actually referred to here as a presidential candidate, with no military experience, yet, born "outside" the United States and wants to be viewed as eligible?

The answer is simple to deduce: Barry Soetoro, or, the co-sponsor of the resolution, Barack Obama. Research has elicited a great deal of personal information on previous presidential candidates but a double-standard exists in regard to Barry. He has released no accurate documentation at all. I am reminded of the old expression, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Formerly, American politicians were the target of parody, hatred, and abuse. It may be unseemly but has been part of the political process for a long time. The only reason Barry is not held accountable is the same reason why statist countries do not allow discussion because they promote the cult of personality: Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini head the list.

Health Care Rationing Bill Replaces Parents

Thanks to Chuck Norris who is still fighting; Norris has identified a dirty little secret or two in the Obamacare disaster. The government will enter homes and usurp parental rights over child care and development.

In sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (page 838), under the heading "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The programs would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

The bill says that government agents "well-trained and competent staff" would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."

Not on my watch will the government tell me how to parent. How will the government know all about each individual child's social, religious, and emotional development? What ever happened to parenting and their rights as adults who can raise their own children?

But the government will be really helpful according to the bill. The bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on page 840 for example: The state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families."

So the government becomes a nanny in place of parents in low-income families? Is Obama saying that low-income families are stupid and they don't know how to raise their own kids? Isn't this a stereotype? Isn't this prejudice?

The government health care rationing includes government child care. Children belong to their parents, not the Federal government. The rationing entails the ever-intrusive nanny state to control and co-opt the nation. A free people should resist the government.

The Spartans tried all this in the ancient world and it was unsustainable then and we should know better now.

Obama Tracking Citizens

The White House Office of Management and Budget plan to end a ban on federal Internet sites using comprehensive tracking and surveillance technologies.

American Civil Liberties Union spokesman Michael Macleod-Ball said the move could "allow the mass collection of personal information of every user of a federal government website."

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Center for Democracy and Technology have also objected to provisions of the change in policy. Google technology, the most sophisticated tracking available, has already been accomodated and exempted from Federal policy. EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg stated: "Our primary concern is that the GSA (General Services Administration)has failed to protect the privacy rights of U.S. citizens."

The Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Pakistan's Nukes Attacked Three Times Already

While Obama insists Pakistan's nukes are safe a report from India Times indicates that Pakistan's nukes have already been attacked three times in the last two years.

Obama's Daughters Get A Good Health Care Plan: Why Don't I?

Obama objected to a reference to his daughters on a school lunch program poster although another, better advertisement might be for American kids to have one entitled: "Obama's Daughters Get a Good Health Care Plan: Why Don't I?" Obama should not be surprised that his kids get an airing on posters; he has shamelessly shilled them when it was convenient and they have had a high profile. Ordinarily the First Family has kept a lower profile, especially when the kids are younger, but he has exploited them at will so far.

Governors Oppose DoD Emergency Powers

The governors may know something we do not but they are urging that the DoD should not handle terrorist incidents or other emergencies in their respective states.

Suggestion for New Warning Sign

What's Wrong with AARP?

Taitz, Anti-Obama Attorney, Receiving Death Threats

Can someone call the FBI and check if this David Rush is indeed the one making death threats
Posted on August 10th, 2009 by David-Crockett

Dr. Orly Taitz

Sunday, August 9, 2009 8:21 PM
From: Dr. Josh Backon
To: dr_taitz@yahoo..com
Cc: police@ci.everett.wa.us

Hi Orly

The person who made the death threat against you is David Rash drash@everettcc.edu of 4612 Silvertip Lane, Everett WA [who teaches history at Everett Community College www.everettcc.edu ]

One takes the IP number, accesses http://www.geobytes.com/IpLocator.htm in the IP number and get the latitude and longitude. One then copies the latitude and longitude to http://maps.google.com This gives you the exact address. You then access http://www.whitepages.com in their reverse address category and you get the person who lives at that address. keys

The IP # gave the address as 4612 Silvertip Lane in Everett WA.

I am sending a copy to the Everett Police Department since David Rash has made multiple death threats against you in the past.

Best wishes

Josh

=========================

For the benefit of the Everett WA police dept., I am quoting the death threat made by David Rash against you:

> Jennifer
> jlover@aol.com
> 71.112.165.151 Submitted on 2009/08/08 at 7:26am
>
> I saw you on MSNBC … My hate for you russian evil woman trying to overthrow our U.S. government only grew. I think you should be tried for sedition and for the comments you made about raising a militia you should be hung for. I’m serious. It should be broadcast on national TV .. There has never been a person more deserving of death penalty under U.S. law than you.

Obama Thugs Attacking Natural Born Citizens: Eugenics Plan in Motion

In a celebrated news story, Mike Sola and his handicapped son who would not be covered under the proposed health rationing plan in Congress, confronted their Congressman, Representative Dingle at an open Town hall meeting. As a follow-up though, Sola was visited at night by an Obama goon since they know where he lives. People are concerned about rationing health care as they would lose health benefits to the misguided whims of deadly doctors. At a time when Obama minions are describing citizens who are petitioning their government for a redress of grievances as "un-America," it is a chilling development for the Bill of Rights. The federal government is attacking its people and blatantly manufacturing consent. Many people are understandably concerned for the Republic.

Manufactured Consent by Obama

The following letter was sent to Obama's 13 million database members. The story was broken by Canadafreepress.com and demonstrates to what extent Obama's regime is willing to go in order to manufacture consent. The idea here is to promote its own agenda, and ignore what the grass roots populace thinks, in order to shove its programs down the throats of the American people. And, to top it off, the Stimulus money paid for by American taxpayers funded the group that wrote the following letter: Organization for America. Obama is engaged in a massive self-promotion campaign, at taxpayers expense. Waterloo Obama now.

From: “Mitch Stewart, BarackObama.com” info@barackobama.com
To: XXXXXXXXXXX
Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 2:44:16 PM
Subject: Visit Rep. Clyburn’s office in Florence
Friend --

All throughout August, our members of Congress are back in town. Insurance companies and partisan attack groups are stirring up fear with false rumors about the President’s plan, and it’s extremely important that folks like you speak up now.

So we’ve cooked up an easy, powerful way for you to make a big impression: Office Visits for Health Reform.

All this week, OFA members like you will be stopping by local congressional offices to show our support for insurance reform. You can have a quick conversation with the local staff, tell your personal story, or even just drop off a customized flyer and say that reform matters to you.

We’ll provide everything you need: the address, phone number, and open hours for the office, information about how the health care crisis affects your state for you to drop off (with the option of adding your personal story), and a step-by-step guide for your visit.

According to our records, you live near Rep. James Clyburn’s office in Florence, SC.

Sign up now to visit Rep. James Clyburn’s office in Florence this week.

(Not your representative, or think there might be another office that’s easier for you to get to? Click here to find a different office.)

As you’ve probably seen in the news, special interest attack groups are stirring up partisan mobs with lies about health reform, and it’s getting ugly. Across the country, members of Congress who support reform are being shouted down, physically assaulted, hung in effigy, and receiving death threats. We can’t let extremists hijack this debate, or confuse Congress about where the people stand.

Office Visits for Health Reform are our chance to show that the vast majority of American voters know that the cost of inaction is too high to bear, and strongly support passing health reform in 2009.

Don’t worry if you’ve never done anything like this before. The congressional staff is there to listen, and your opinion as a constituent matters a lot. And if you bring a friend, you’ll have more fun and make an even greater impact.

Click below to sign up for an Office Visit for Health Reform:

Wherever you live, these visits matter: Many representatives are pushing hard toward reform, and they are taking a lot of heat from special interests. They deserve our thanks and need our support to continue the fight. But those who are still putting insurance companies and partisan point-scoring ahead of their constituents must know that voters are watching—and that we expect better.

Earlier this week, the President wrote that “this is the moment our movement was built for” and asked us all to commit to join at least one event this month. This is the way to answer that call, and rise to the challenge of this moment together.

Thank you for going the extra mile when it matters the most,

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America

Military Surveillance of Citizens and Damage Control

I will admit to being a bit nostalgic because I favor a military that trains and beats the bad guys in other lands. However, the Air Force, along with the other service branches, has announced that it has monitored citizens in an attempt to grasp the response of people in reaction to the New York City flyover debacle. Web 2.0 tools in particular allow immediate, instantaneous and reactive feedback so the military has had to deal with these two mediums in response to news stories. While I can appreciate the need to employ new technology it would seem to me that the military really ought to training and fighting the bad guys overseas.

Monty Python Introduced Obama's End of Life Counseling

Credit should be given where credit is due; Monty Python thought of end of life counseling years before Obama did. They introduce the concept in this video.

Hillary Says We Can Still Speak and, Guess Who is Hiring in Health Care? Obama

Perhaps Hillary senses which way the wind is blowing and she is not personally attacking grass activists opposed to health care rationing; and, when no one is hiring, Obama is hiring minions to promote his health care rationing plan. At least its a job. He told us he only needed $1 Trillion to prevent unemployment from rising above 8%, 9%, 10% . . . .

Congressman Attacks His Constituents for Asking About Health Care Rationing

The news segment presented provides the background. Representative Scott attacks his constituent, who had asked Scott prior to the meeting for an open forum on health care rationing. During Q&A the attendees were allowed to ask about anything but Scott ranted against his constituents.

Dr. Hill has called the Congressman repeatedly for a health care rationing meeting all to no avail but the district will have an upcoming forum on the topic.

African-American Beaten Up by Obama SEIU Thugs Proclaims Liberty

The African-American, Ken Gladney, assaulted by Obama's SEIU

thugs proclaims his love for his country and liberty. He is now heavily medicated and in a wheelchair. The thugs must have really worked him over.

Straight from the Horse's Mouth: On Health Rationing

ObamaCare Cruises for Seniors

African-American Man Beaten Up at Rationing Meeting Interviewed

Neil Cavuto interviewed the Kenneth Gladney, the man who was beaten up at a health care rationing meeting. Apparently he was simply a vendor trying to make a living and sell materials during the meeting; and, he was hurt worst than the reports I had seen earlier about the case. The goons are out in force to hurt people. Obama is telling people to shut up and the message from the White House is to hit back hard. Even the innocent are hurt.

Levin On Town Halls

Complete Information about the Healthcare Plan

Mob vs. Manufactured Support

This is an excellent first-hand account of Pelosi in Denver.

Another Police Officer Disciplined for Trying to Investigate Obama

Just like the two Georgia officers who attempted to run a background check on Obama, another officer, this one in Philadelphia, tried and was disciplined as a result. The regime is clear; no one can question or have doubts about the Leader.

Waiting for Corroboration on Story from Legitimate News Agencies

There is no confirmation on this story by legitimate news sources.

Flag America

The Flag Me White House folks are getting creative as the regime begins its clampdown; however, if I had a good graphics program I would create the Founders with a "flag" as well. Dr. Martin King Jr. should re-appear on the Mall with a "flag." Long may Liberty wave!

Opponents of Health Care Rationing Beaten Up, Locked Out, Abused as Town Hall Turns Violent

A health care rationing town hall meeting turned violent today as the administration beat up, locked out, and abused opponents of the regime. In a meeting a directive from the White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina stated: "If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” according to an official who attended the meeting.

Shared via AddThis

At the St. Louis event, an African-American man is seen being pummeled by his attackers.

St. Louis County police say six people were arrested. Kenneth Gladney, a 38-year-old African-American activist from St. Louis, said he was attacked by some of those arrested as he handed out yellow flags with "Don't tread on me" printed on them. He spoke to the Post-Dispatch from the emergency room of the St. John's Mercy Medical Center, where he said he was waiting to be treated for injuries to his knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face that he suffered in the attack. Gladney, who is black, said one of his attackers, also a black man, used a racial slur against him before the attack started.

A first-hand account, by a gentleman at the Tampa event, who appears in the staid news report at the very end of this post, states:

Thursday, August 6, 2009
Tampa Town Hall - from the outside
MY FIRST-HAND REPORT - As I was walking around the block people were coming the other way saying it was closed (right at 6 pm). But I persevered and was in the flow as the line move around the building. I was able to get almost to the doors when police said no one else could go in - even to the air conditioned anteroom. Throughout the hour they continued to not let anyone in even though others were coming out.

This is a video I made from a few pictures I was able to take. More video follows at end of post.

Yes there was chanting out side from both sides - "read the bill!" "Obama! "Just say NO!" "Public Option!" "Bring it outside!"

If there were opponents banging on windows as has been reported, it must have been on the other side of the building, where reportedly supporters were being let in the back door.

Yes, half of the room was reserved for SEIU.

If there was violence, from everything I have seen, it all came from ObamaCare supporters.

I saw one man come out to try to make a police report. He was right in front of me. His shirt was half torn off and he had a large deep scratch on his chest. Said someone inside twisted his arm, ripped his watch off. I could not hear what he said about his shirt and the scratch. I later learned that he was forcibly pushed out the doors to the actually meeting room before the doors were closed to people in the anteroom even being able to hear and see. He is the one in the green shirt by the closed doors in the video below from YouTube.

I was confronted by two ObamaCare supporters who demanded why I could not find a GOP town hall to attend. I told them that as a citizen of Tampa, Florida and America I had every right to be there. They kept a running "what a bunch of hired goons" commentary going behind me.

Another supporter with a handmade ObamaCare sign asked me a question. When I tried to answer she violently slapped my hand and told me to "stop trying to put out her eye with my f**ing finger!". My finger WAS pointed but my hand was at MY waist next to MY body.

The crowd outside was very large and I would say at least 3/1 Obamacare opponents. I can't report on inside but was told by others I knew who made it in that it was a complete farce. Castor did not answer any questions and left 30 minutes into the meeting by the backdoor.

The meeting was supposed to run from 6-8. Police told us to disperse at approximately 7:10. The actual words were -

"We need you to clear the premises so the people inside are able to exit"

My interpretation - "Americans - get out of the way so the select few can leave safely!"

Many continued to stand in front of the building. I am waiting for the 10 pm news to see how this is reported.

In the words of my soon coming protest song - "I will not apologize, I will not sit down. I will fight for freedom's cause and beat this tyranny down!"

This video from Fox News Tampa shows me at the beginning in the white jacket n the middle. The woman standing behind with long blond hair, sign held high saying "We want public option" is the one who slammed my hand. By the way - I am fully expecting my pick slip from the school district when they see I was there.

According to another first-hand witness, who posted a video on YouTube:

Kathy Castor's union thugs beat up a guy (in the green shirt - evidence 3:21) and shut the doors to prevent the opposing opinions from being heard. She then proceeded leave, not taking any questions, because "she couldn't hear." Translation: she doesn't have answers 'cause she hasn't read the House bill.

There are other videos of citizens who accidentally made it into the hall through the back door before the event because people thought they were union. Castor's constituents were basically banned from the event because they picked a small venue and stacked the audience beforehand.

No surprise here; the politicians are coming home and the people are restless and angry because they are being ignored. The MC of the event made an interesting comment; she stated that it made sense to have two doors: one was pro-regime, the other door (if they were allowed in at all) for the opponents of health care rationing. The doors of discrimination in America has begun again after the civil rights movement broke down discrimination. We are reverting backward to a two-class society once again.

In fact, the same tactic worked at the even more disruptive St. Louis Town Hall meeting. Over 1,000 St. Louis Tea Party Taxpayers attended the Russ Carnahan town hall meeting in South St. Louis; however, they were locked out. On the other hand, the Carnahan staff was sneaking in pro-regime SEIU members in the side door marked "handicapped."

The Founders realized the evil of discrimination. George Washington warned Americans against it. In his Farewell Address he wrote:

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

Subject to the intrigues of foreign influence, Obama should be transparent and release his long form birth certificate, or, alternatively, he could resign as Nixon did and thus save the Republic. Our work during the last two administrations was to fight for the Constitution, Obama is more simply a third term Bush and we can no longer afford blatant assaults on our Constitution.

Orly Taitz on Michael Savage

Next action of Orly Taitz: Censored by Google

Taitz' first filing was "stricken from the court record" because the motion was improperly filed "for the following reasons:"

* Lacks proper notice;
* improper form and format
* Counsel failed to identify her California State Bar No.
* description of motion conflicts or differs from that which counsel entered on Court's e-docket

Orly is going to re-file the recently surfaced Kenyan birth Certificate with Judge Carter.

Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore. Calls for GPS Surveillance

An Oregon congressman says he wants to test having a government GPS unit in every car so a tax could be imposed on the miles driven. The surveillance program, H.R. 3311, will require a $150 million-plus and was introduced by Representative Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore.

Oregon has tested this surveillance and tax system as a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) fee.

If you can contemplate such insanity as normal, inquiring of the Federal government is you can and how you use your own car, the additional tax would be crushing on those businesses who depend on miles driven.

"The current system of levying federal taxes on trucks is as discriminatory as it can be to small business, and harmful, but there are lots of unanswered questions with a VMT," Todd Spencer, vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, told the magazine.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported alarm over the potential for abuse in such a draconian system.

"Are you people convinced yet that it's time to grab the pitchforks and head for the castle?" wrote a participant.

Another expressed frustration.

"I purchased a small car last spring because gas prices were on the rise. This small car averages 43 mpg. This saved me a lot of money when gas prices hit $4.00+/gal. The car also has the smallest carbon footprint of any non-hybrid vehicle being produced today. The small carbon footprint helps save the environment. I travel 100+ miles/day. The government encourages us to use less gas to help the country become less dependent on foreign oil. The people are doing what they want by driving less or driving more fuel efficient vehicles. Of course gas tax revenues are going to decrease. And now they are thinking about a mileage tax because people are doing what they want.....they can't have it both ways..."

Hoyer Stymied Mid-Sales Pitch by TEA Members

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Dem.) was mocked by American citizens in Utica, N.Y. Hoyer was stymied in mid-sale by Don Jeror who organized a Tea Party in April.

Jeror told Hoyer:

"You’re lying to me. Just because I don’t have sophisticated language, I can recognize a liar when I see one."

Yes, lots of Americans out there who aren’t the most articulate, but they know bull when they smell it or lies when they hear them. And they aren’t sitting quietly for it anymore.

Why would you guys try to stuff a health care bill down our throats in three to four weeks, when the President took six months to pick a dog for his kids?"

The gentleman seems quite articulate to me.

AARP is Drinking the Kool-Aid

AARP is going over the deep end and advocating interests counter to seniors. AARP disrespects its members and walks out of their own town hall meeting held in Dallas on 4 August.

JFK on the Press, Secrecy, Scrutiny, Security, Dissent

JFK's speech, "The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association" at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City, 27 April 1961, is a well-worth listen.

The transcript states:

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.

You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.

You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.

We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."

But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.

If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.

I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight "The President and the Press." Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded "The President Versus the Press." But those are not my sentiments tonight.

It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.

Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.

Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.

If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.

On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.

It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.

My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future--for reducing this threat or living with it--there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security--a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President--two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

I

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.

II

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it.

III

It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world's efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

Democratic Gubernatorial Nominee Requests Original Long Form Birth Certificate

The 2006 Nebraska Democratic Gubernatorial nominee David Hahn has asked that Obama produce his original long form birth certificate. Perhaps someone can call him stupid, a mob member, or an extremist right-wing Republican but he is asking anyway.

Hillary Seeks to Supplant the Constitution

Hillary is continuing an ongoing effort to transform the U.S. into an international state. She suggests that the U.S. would be better off as a member of the International Criminal Court. If we lose the Republic, it will be to those forces in the U.S. who seek to supplant the Constitution to outside, foreign influences, in particular, international law. The U.S. formally rejected U.S. participation in May 2002. A main concern was that American servicemen hunting down terrorists abroad might not be safe from politically motivated prosecutions and, of course, for Americans it would mean we would not enjoy the liberties outlined explicitly in the Bill of Rights. International law does not include a bill of rights to protect citizens.

It is interesting to consider that Obama recently visited Africa, but he did not visit his homeland of Kenya, yet, Hillary is there calling for international law in the U.S. Although Obama has involved himself directly

Video sidebar: Obama campaigning for Islam-only candidate, his cousin, Odinga in Kenya.

in domestic Kenyan political affairs,

Video sidebar: Gov. Richardson states that Obama is an "immigrant."

I would suspect that these days a sense of too close an attachment to his homeland would bring undue attention to his status as a

Text sidebar: Article II, Section 1 states, "no person except a natural born citizen ... shall be eligible to the Office of President."

non-natural born citizen.

After Six Months, Obama More of a Failure Than Bush: CNN

Six months in and Obama is considered, according to a CNN poll, as more of a "failure" than Bush.