Spammer-in-Chief

The spammer-in-Chief got caught spamming people in favor of health care rationing. The good news is that once caught the policy will change: if you believe them and their Google-like practices.

Mexican Army Takes Over U.S. Customs

Mexico's Army took over U.S. customs work yesterday in what some have noted as the foreign militarization of America. Not only are U.S. troops increasingly present within the U.S. but foreign troops are as well. There are no constitutional protections from foreign troops.

Dick Armey Predicts Hyped-Up Swine Flu Hysteria: September/October

Dick Armey, head of Freedom Works, stated:

"In September or October there will be a hyped up outbreak of the swine flu which they’ll say is as bad as the bubonic plague to scare the bed-wetters to vote for healthcare reform. . . . That is the only way they can push something on to the American people that the American people don’t want.”

Clearing Up Obama's Lies on Health Care Rationing

Obama's Rationing Makes Worse Health Care

Obama health care rationing ignores U.S. higher survival rates, U.S. shorter wait times.

Congress' Speech Censored by Obama

Members of the House were allowed their Special Orders session where they were able to expound upon this assault of the First Amendment rights of members of Congress.

Flu Vacccine Killed 25 (So Far)

The swine flu vaccination killed 25 people according to a story released today. As in the case of earlier flu vaccines, the brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) perhaps has been triggered by the vaccine.

Among a parents’ fears are the fear of autism, fear of children becoming paralyzed by novel reactions similar to the syndrome that occurred with a different type of swine flu vaccine in 1976. For example, the Nov. 24, 2004 Journal of the American Medical Association article, Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following Influenza Vaccination reports on this danger. According to the article’s abstract,

“An unexplained increase in the risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) occurred among recipients of the swine influenza vaccine in 1976-1977. Guillain-Barré syndrome remains the most frequent neurological condition reported after influenza vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) since its inception in 1990.”

The problem is that the onset of serious side effects could take four weeks or longer to appear. The Journal of the American Medical Association article noted,

“From July 1990 through June 2003, VAERS received 501 reports of GBS following influenza vaccination in adults. The median onset interval (13 days) was longer than that of non-GBS reports of adverse events after influenza vaccine (1 day) (P<.001). The annual reporting rate decreased 4-fold from a high of 0.17 per 100 000 vaccinees in 1993-1994 to 0.04 in 2002-2003 (P<.001). A GBS diagnosis was confirmed in 82% of reports. Preceding illness within 4 weeks of vaccination was identified in 24% of reported cases.”

"There's an App for That"

Representative Fleming: Politicians Take Same Pill as American Rationing

Many Americans have thought that Congress and Senators should be forced to have the same health care rationing plan that Obama is forcing down our throats. However, under the current proposed legislation, they are exempt, and retain their own special “Cadillac care.” On the other hand, Congressman John Fleming (LA-4th) offered H.Res.615 (House Resolution) which states:

- Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Members who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option are urged to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option.

If you too want the Cadillac option, or no rationing, the Open Congress website allows a simply way to express your opinion-—there is a choice of two buttons:

* I Support this Bill
* I Oppose this Bill

You can also express your opinion on Congressman Fleming’s own website. Question:

“Do you feel Members of Congress should be forced to enroll themselves in the health care plan they vote for?”

* Yes
* No

Congressman Fleming is a physician. Fleming explained his resolution to the House of Representatives:

State and Local Governments Deciding on Vaccinations

We are Change Colorado confirmed in interviews with military representatives and the CDS that state and local officials are deciding whether to administer vaccinations.

Dr. Alan Keyes on Alex Jones

Dr. Alan Keyes interviewed on the Alex Jones show.

Keyes highlights critical aspects of Obama's administration by articulating his thesis that Obama has a socialist/communist agenda that parallels Nazism. He invokes the crushing reality of an atheistic society without regard for humanity and as an illustration, the pro-abortion stance of Obama deepens his discussion. Obama is a demagogue who attempts to shape American thinking to achieve his goals and the ease with which he can do so to accomplish his agenda.

John David Lewis, Visiting Associate Professor, Philosophy, Politics and Economics Program Duke University

August 12, 2009 / by Rush Limbaugh

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, what I have here is very long. I cannot read the entire thing. But there are summaries that I can read. This is a piece entitled, “What the Health Care Bill Actually Says,” and it was put together by John David Lewis. It is from the website Classical Ideals. John David Lewis is a professor of classics at Duke University, and here is how he introduces his analysis: “What does the bill, HR 3200, short-titled ‘America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009,’ actually say about major health care issues? I here pose a few questions in no particular order, citing relevant passages and offering a brief evaluation after each set of passages.

“This bill is 1017 pages long. It is knee-deep in legalese and references to other federal regulations and laws. I have only touched pieces of the bill here. For instance, I have not considered the establishment of (1) ‘Health Choices Commissioner’ (Section 141); (2) a ‘Health Insurance Exchange,’ (Section 201), basically a government run insurance scheme to coordinate all insurance activity; (3) a Public Health Insurance Option (Section 221); and similar provisions. This is the evaluation of someone who is neither a physician nor a legal professional. I am citizen, concerned about this bill’s effects on my freedom as an American. I would rather have used my time in other ways — but this is too important to ignore. We may answer one question up front: How will the government … pay for all this?

“Higher taxes, more borrowing, printing money, cutting payments, or rationing services — there are no other options. We will all pay for this, enrolled in the government ‘option’ or not.” So, when we talk about how we’re going to pay for it, “How will the government … pay for all this?” it’s all of the following: “Higher taxes, more borrowing, printing money, cutting payments, or rationing services — there are no other options” to pay for it. “We will all pay for this, enrolled in the government ‘option’ or not.” The first question that he wanted to discover here is: “Will the plan ration medical care?” Then he cites the relevant passages from the bill and then evaluates the passages in real language, not the legalese that he found. This section, rationing medical care:

“1. This section amends the Social Security Act. 2. The government has the power to determine what constitutes an ‘applicable [medical] condition.’ 3. The government has the power to determine who is allowed readmission into a hospital. 4. This determination will be made by statistics: when enough people have been discharged for the same condition, an individual may be readmitted.” In other words, there’s nothing personal about this. That’s why Obama’s answer to the woman with the 100-year-old mother, “Are you gonna take into account the spunk and spirit, the will to live?” was, “I don’t think we can do that.” It’s going to be statistic based. “5. This is government rationing, pure, simple, and straight up.”

There is no other way to analyze this section of the bill. “6. There can be no judicial review of decisions made here. The Secretary is above the courts.” All this language is in this piece. The language from the bill is from the piece. I’m not just going to read that to you. I’m reading his evaluation, stripping away the legalese, what it all means. “7. The plan also allows the government to prohibit hospitals from expanding without federal permission: page 317-318.” The next question that the classics professor at Duke researched is: “Will the plan punish Americans who try to opt out?” and then he gives the relevant portions from the bill as it’s written followed by his evaluation. Number one… Remember the question here is: “Will the plan punish Americans who try to opt out? … 1. This section amends the Internal Revenue Code.

“2. Anyone caught without acceptable coverage and not in the government plan will pay a special tax.” Now, this we know. We’ve seen this ourselves. “3. The IRS will be a major enforcement mechanism for the plan,” as written in this bill. The IRS will be a major enforcer. The next section that he analyzed: “What constitutes ‘acceptable’ coverage?” Because, in the previous passage the bill said: “Anyone caught without acceptable coverage and not in the government plan will pay a special tax” So, what is “‘acceptable’ coverage”? Here are the relevant passages, sentences from the bill. “Evaluation of the passages. 1. The bill defines ‘acceptable coverage’ and leaves no room for choice in this regard. 2. By setting a minimum 70% actuarial value of benefits, the bill makes health plans in which individuals pay for routine services, but carry insurance only for catastrophic events, (such as Health Savings Accounts) illegal.”

Let me read that again: “1. The bill defines ‘acceptable coverage’ and leaves no room for choice in this regard. 2. By setting a minimum 70% actuarial value of benefits, the bill makes health plans in which individuals pay for routine services” out of their own pockets, “but carry insurance only for catastrophic events … illegal.” That is one of the solutions to the problem we have now. Pay for what you want — a standard checkup, a standard visit to the doctor — and catastrophic insurance for when that could break your bank. Doing that will be illegal in the House bill. In other words, paying for your own routine day-to-day services but only having insurance for catastrophic events will be illegal. The next section that our classics professor, an average citizen, was curious about: “”Will the PLAN destroy private health insurance? Here is what it requires, for businesses with payrolls greater than $400,000 per year. (The bill uses ‘contribution’ to refer to mandatory payments to the government plan.)

“Pages 149-150, SEC. 313, EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS IN LIEU OF COVERAGE,” and then the relevant passages from the bill. Here is the evaluation of those passages. Again, what we’re talking about here is: “Will the PLAN destroy private health insurance?” “1. The bill does not prohibit a person from buying private insurance. 2. Small businesses — with say 8-10 employees — will either have to provide insurance to federal standards, or pay an 8% payroll tax. Business costs for health care are higher than this, especially considering administrative costs. Any competitive business that tries to stay with a private plan will face a payroll disadvantage against competitors who go with the government ‘option.’” Now, let me explain this. Small businesses, say eight-to-ten employees, will either have to provide insurance up “to federal standards.” If they don’t, they will pay an additional 8% payroll tax.

“Business costs for health care are higher than [what will be charged], especially considering administrative costs. Any competitive business that tries to stay with a private plan will face a payroll disadvantage against competitors who go with the government ‘option.’” If they go to the government option, they’re fine. If you don’t and you stay private, you’re going to pay a penalty. The penalty will make it ridiculous and stupid business-wise to stay with your private plan. Therefore, you will — your small business will — be forced out of private insurance onto the government option. “3. The pressure for business owners to terminate the private plans will be enormous,” the financial pressure, the business pressure. “4. With employers ending plans, millions of Americans will lose their private coverage, and fewer companies will offer it.”

Now, none of this is anything new. Everybody showing up at these town halls knows this. This is nothing that has already been learned when discussing it. That’s why when Obama is saying, “If you like your plan you can keep it, it’s not true, because the meat and potatoes of the bill is going to make it impossible.” If your private plan is from an employer, your employer is going to find it very difficult to hold onto private insurance and remain competitive with businesses that opt out and go in the government option. When Barney Frank or Obama himself says, “We can’t do this immediately. It’s going to take 10 to 15 years,” this is what they’re talking about: Eventually forcing small businesses and others out of private insurance because they won’t be able to remain competitive with competitors who go the public option.

“5. The Commissioner (meaning, always, the bureaucrats) will determine whether a particular network of physicians, hospitals and insurance is acceptable” even if you do stay private. “6. With private insurance starved, many people enrolled in the government ‘option’ will have no place else to go” if they don’t like it. So all this talk from Obama about adding to competition is the exact opposite, which is what everybody who’s read this understands and which is why they know he’s lying to them when he says, “If you like your plan you can keep it.” Another way to look at that, “If you like your plan, you can keep it,” is: What if everybody decided to do that, but he says the health care plan, the system we have now is unsustainable. It’s horrible.

Yet if you like your plan you can keep it? How do those two go together? The next question that our classics professor at Duke wanted to figure out by reading the bill: “Does the plan TAX successful Americans more THAN OTHERS? Here is what the bill says, pages 197-198, SEC. 441. SURCHARGE ON HIGH INCOME INDIVIDUALS ‘SEC. 59C. SURCHARGE ON HIGH INCOME INDIVIDUALS,” and then it has the legalese. Here’s the evaluation of what it says: “1. This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code. 2. Tax surcharges are levied on those with the highest incomes. 3. The plan manipulates the tax code to redistribute their wealth. 4. Successful business owners will bear the highest cost of this plan.” Successful small business owners, will bear the highest cost of this plan.

“Does THE PLAN ALLOW THE GOVERNMENT TO set FEES FOR SERVICES? What it says, page 124, Sec. 223, PAYMENT RATES FOR ITEMS AND SERVICES,” and then the legalese of the bill. The analysis or the evaluation: “1. The government’s authority to set payments is basically unlimited. 2. The official” commissioner, bureaucrats “will decide what constitutes ‘excessive,’ ‘deficient,’ and ‘efficient’ payments and services. Will THE PLAN increase the power of government officials to SCRUTINIZE our private affairs? What it says, pages 195-196, SEC. 431. DISCLOSURES TO CARRY OUT HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE SUBSIDIES,” then the legalese in the bill.

The evaluation: “1. This section amends the Internal Revenue Code 2. The bill opens up income tax return information to federal officials. 3. Any stated ‘limits’ to such information are circumvented by item (v), which allows federal officials to decide what information is needed. 4. Employers are required to report whatever information the government says it needs to enforce the plan,” meaning your medical records, your employment records, how you’re living your life, what kind of risk that’s posing to the health care system. Next: “Does the plan automatically enroll Americans in the GOVERNMENT plan? What it says, page 102, Section 205, Outreach and enrollment of Exchange-eligible individuals and employers in Exchange-participating health benefits plan,” then the legalese. Here’s the evaluation: “1. Do nothing and you are in” the government plan. “2. Employers are responsible for automatically enrolling people who still work. Does THE PLAN exempt federal OFFICIALS from COURT REVIEW?

“What it says, page 124, Section 223, PAYMENT RATES FOR ITEMS AND SERVICES,” then the legalese and the evaluation. “1. Sec. 1123 amends the Social Security Act, to allow the Secretary to identify areas of the country that underutilize the government’s plan ‘based on per capita spending.’ 2. Parts of the plan are set above the review of the courts.” So the question, “Does THE PLAN exempt federal officials from court review?” and parts of the plan do. This is Mr. Lewis again. His name is John David Lewis, professor of classics at Duke University. He’s a common, average citizen. He’s not a lawyer, not a doctor. What this goes to show is, just about anybody can figure out what’s in this bill if they just take the time to read it. And a lot of people have, and the people showing up at these town hall meetings saying “no,” already know what this bill says and the elements to it, or of it, that I just shared with you.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_081209/content/01125108…

Little Gems From the Obama Health Care Bill

• Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option!
• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatmen ts and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
• Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government=2 0rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review” is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll <>BR • Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll • Page 167: Any individual who doesnt’ have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
• Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” Yes, it really says that.
• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.” • Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you’ll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors’ time, their professional judgment, etc.
• Page 265: Government mandates and controls20productivity for private healthcare industries.
• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on “community” input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone). • Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
• Page 425: Goverment provides approved list of end-of-life resource s, guiding you in death.
• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

Source Jennifer N MS Director Resistnet.com

"Say No to the Vaccine," Trillion

Trillion lyrics:

I put the needle to the record cos the needle is defective
and the needle breaks the record when the needle is the method
for prevention of the fever bringin' death to the receiver
there's no effort in believing that the method feeds the fever
see the leader - diseases are invented in a lab
one believes it on reading recent mentions of the jab
centered in a grand scab of corruption and lies,
injecting views of doom from news room into the public eye
but now the floor has risen on a cause of autism
doctors show research and scores applaud with 'em
it's mercury in vaccines often there's more given
peace ignored and forbidden cos profit is war driven
profit? A Score billion - on vaccines alone
and the government don't care - they're always taxing the clones
and the CDC is right behind this rolling cart,
part involved from the start in this evolving art
of Big Pharma Big Deception, Obama - Big Karma:
enter Wyeth, Roche, Bayer and Baxter Health care (and co)
all a sordid history with stacks of health scares
you got HIV and bird flu mixed up in the shots
Ive been connecting the dots between the money that swaps?
conspiracy? Yeah I sense a couple of plots.

but there is one little word that could save your health, just say NO, say NO to the vaccine.
and if the doctor says YES, then make him take it himself - just say NO, say NO to the vaccine.
there is one little word that could save your health, just say NO, say NO to the vaccine.
and if Lawman says YES, then make him take it himself - just say NO, say NO to the vaccine.

(then pat says)
I don't need your prescription
I ain't go not affliction
Corporate pharmaceutical
Teaming with politician
Put them on proscription
That should be our own decision
Whether we want spending on vaccines
Or health and education
Soon they enlist
The general populous,
They adding to the list
pharmaceutical benefits
Well its thin line
Glaxo Smith Kline,
profit margin fine
still ain't seen a diseased
mad cow, coughing bird, or swine
depopulation linked, with-holding vaccines
rather let a product lapse than save some human beings
now they're busy counting there beans
So they won't hear us runnin' up on the machine
another new flu that is the biggest threat
What about an aging population with no safety net,
so we continue to believe everything we read,
There just ain't No taste in the news feed...

(back to trillion)
Weapons of trial and error, were smiling in terror at the doctor and nurse
take a hold of yourself and control of your health and say no, why don't you go first!

so where was I, conspiracies, secret ops and spy stations
and the catch word of the year - Depopulization
but humans generally are hard to kill, even with a jar of pills,
that's why the politicians have to pass a bill, for compulsory Gardasil
from Malta to Dargaville. and farther still,
another bill protects the maker Merck
from liability for illness and deaths that may occur
cos infertility and cancer are hidden inside the prick
and immune disorders have you bedridden, retired and sick
research is your friend - knowledge keeping is king
every vaccine has a poisoned dollar deep in it's sting
theres no master flu, theyre just after me and you
the last dance is due now their mask is see-through
SARS was a cheats sweep through, swine flu - a scam too,
designed to make a trillion bucks on out of date tamiflu
Manufactured viruses - biological war-fares,
Psychological torture - jail or jab! Dial some more prayers.
our bodies are designed to fight - those bugs intrudin'
But only when our diet is right dont shove junk food in!

The First Amendment is Under Attack by Academics to Placate Islamism

Yale University Press has bowed to Islamists by refusing to publish illustrations about Mohammed in a book about, the banned illustrations.

Camp Preparations

A FEMA camp is pictured in Idaho, June 2009 and the National Guard is recruiting
Interment and Re-settlement specialists. The most difficult thing for people to grasp during the Holocaust must have been that it could actually happen to them. Camps are in the works.

Straight From the Horse's Mouth: The White House is Against the First Amendment

The White House is accumulating information against American citizens and the enjoyment of their constitutional liberties.

Excerpt from the August 13 White House Press Briefing with White House press secretary Robert Gibbs:

BQ: The briefings the past 2 days have been unbelievable. Gibbs is out of control, paranoid and defensive; a growing number of press corps are clearly suspicious of the White House admin’s antics.

One of the more interesting exchanges happened between FoxNews.com’s Major Garrett and Gibbs. This is most of the dialogue, with Gibbs cutting Garrett off at the end, never answering his question:

Major Garrett: Do you in any way seek databases or information about people who might be interested in health care?

GIBBS: I will certainly check. I will certainly check. I am not under that impression. But again –

Major Garrett: I mean, folks have emailed me — I just want to know — would like to know how they get an e-mail from the White House when they have never asked for one.

GIBBS: I’d be interested to see who you got that e-mail from and whether or not they’re on the list. I don’t –

Q May I follow up politely on one of Major Garrett’s –

GIBBS: Well, let me — let me finish needling Major.

Q — this row, please.

GIBBS: Again, I just want to be — but I just want to be very –

Major Garrett: So what you’re telling me is I need to give you these people’s e-mails so you can check them on a list? I’m just asking.

GIBBS: Well, you’re asking me if they’re on a list.

Major Garrett: No, they’re telling me –

MR. GIBBS: If you can figure out a different way of checking without asking me to double-check the name, I’m happy to –

Major Garrett: Perhaps I’m not phrasing this correctly. They’re telling me they’re not — they can’t be on a list because they never asked for an e-mail from the White House.

GIBBS: Right, but what I’m saying is I don’t — I’d have to look and see –

Major Garrett: So there’s no — you don’t have an explanation for how someone who never signed up and never asked for anything from the White House would get an e-mail from David Axelrod?

GIBBS: Well, I hesitate to give you an answer, because you might impugn the motives of the answer.

Major Garrett: Why would you say that?

GIBBS: Because of the way you phrased your follow-up. I’d have to look at what you got, Major. I don’t — I appreciate the fact that I have omnipotent clarity as to what you’ve received in your e-mail box today.

Major Garrett: You don’t have to have omnipotent clarity. You don’t have to impugn anything. I’m telling you what I got — e-mails from people who said they never asked anything from the White House –

MR. GIBBS: And I’m simply saying –

Major Garrett: — and yet they received something.

GIBBS: We can — let me go to someplace else that might be constructive.

UPDATE:

BQ: Major Garrett “keeps pushing” in this excerpt from today’s Laura Ingraham radio show.

Major Garrett: Let me update your listeners to what’s happened since.

I hesitated in the briefing to offer up emails because I didn’t have permission from the few people who contacted me.

Laura Ingram: Right, you actually are respecting people’s privacy

Garrett: And since then – it will come to no surprise to you and your listeners – many have emailed me and said, “Here, give these to the White House. I want an explanation.”

I’ve since gone back to Robert [Gibbs] a number of times and said, ok, I have what you requested, let’s have a substantive conversation about this. I’ve gotten no response.

Ingraham: And so how are we gonna get the answer here then?

Garrett: Well, we’re gonna keep pushing. We’re gonna keep pushing.

And there’s a whole additional issue that’s going on right now that’s in the whole other office management budgets out of the White House, y’know O&B recently put out a new change in federal law, a regulation, taking away a 9-year ban on using persistent internet cookies on federal websites. They want to put those in there so if you come to a federal website more than once or twice the federal government can capture your email address. That’s a change in policy that’s being worked out at the federal regulatory process right now but it’s raised concerns among internet privacy advocates that this is something the government hasn’t done; maybe it ought not to.

Now persistent cookies are used by commercial internet sites all the time but –

Ingraham: gmail

Garrett: Yeah, but are we comfortable with the government using that, I don’t know. It’s being worked out. It’s a separate issue but it’s a part of this larger question of the government having an email address and what it may or may not do with it. I’m not suggesting there’s anything nefarious, I just wanna know!

How did someone who never sent anything to the White House get on a list that would make them able to receive directly – not forwarded, I get that, I’m not dense, I don’t misunderstand the concept of forwarding emails. These are not forwarded, they are directly from the White House. How did it happen?

400,000 Military Troops in the U.S.

If this headline from the Progressive, a liberal publication, does not alarm Americans, I do not know what will. Think it can not happen here? Yes, it can. The headline states: "The Pentagon Wants Authority to Post Almost 400,000 Military Personnel in U.S."

The posting of military troops is in conflict with the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. But we being slowly acclimated to accept the presence of military troops posted in the U.S.

In June, the U.S. Northern Command distributed a “Congressional Fact Sheet” entitled “Legislative Proposal for Activation of Federal Reserve Forces for Disasters.” That proposal would amend current law, thereby “authorizing the Secretary of Defense to order any unit or member of the Army Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Navy Reserve, and the Marine Corps Reserve, to active duty for a major disaster or emergency.”

Previously, the governors of individual states, as a system of check and balances, maintain control of their own National Guard forces, as well as military personnel acting in a domestic capacity in their states.

NorthCom’s Congressional fact sheet refers not just to a “major disaster,” such as Hurricane Katrina, but also to “emergencies.” And it says, “Those terms are defined in section 5122 of title 42, U.S. Code.”

That section gives the President the sole discretion to designate an event as an “emergency” or a “major disaster.” Both are “in the determination of the President” alone.

That section also defines “major disaster” by citing plenty of specifics: “hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought,” as well as “fire, flood, or explosion.”

But the definition of “emergency” is vague: “Emergency means any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, Federal assistance is needed to supplement State and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States.”

The current definition of emergency can be re-defined with legislation.

But even the ACLU is alarmed by proposed legislation. Mike German, the ACLU’s national security policy counsel, expressed amazement “that the military would propose such a broad set of authorities and potentially undermine a 100-year-old prohibition against the military in domestic law enforcement with no public debate and seemingly little understanding of the threat to democracy.”

Flip Flopper Pelosi from 2006: ‘I’m a Fan of Disruptors"

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare

Whole Foods CEO weighs in against Obama and he makes sensible, reasonable suggestions for health care reform.

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.