In a speech in Green Bay on Sept. 22, 2008, then candidate Obama was quoted as saying:
“We must change Washington. We must reform our regulations, our politics and our government, but we will not be able to make these changes with the same policies, the same lobbyists or the same Washington culture that allows politicians and special interests to set their own agenda.”[i]
Nice sentiments indeed, for a politician who only a few months later, nominated a Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, who had allegedly made “hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting and speaking fees from health and pharmaceutical interests, some of which would be at the heart of any effort to overhaul the nation’s health care system”[ii] – an HHS Secretary also found to be owing $128,000 in back taxes.
From 2009 – 2011, Kevin Jennings served as Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar,” with the formidable official title of Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, U.S. Department of Education.
According to Fox News, Jennings – a former teacher himself – has advocated for the promotion of homosexuality in schools and, on one known occasion, failed to report a probable sexual encounter between a 15 year old student and an older adult.[i] When told by the boy: ‘Well, I met someone in the bus station bathroom and I went home with him,'” Jennings told the student, “You know, I hope you knew to use a condom.” The young man answered “Why should I? My life isn’t worth saving anyway.”[ii]
Following media reports showing the boy as 15 and therefore, underage in Massachusetts, where the incident occurred, the ex-student reportedly came forward to advise that he was actually 16 at the time – the Massachusetts age of consent. He also said in an interview with Media Matters, that he “…had no sexual contact with anybody at the time.”[iii]In a 2000 speech however, Jennings indicated the boy was 15.[iv] This was apparently Jennings’ belief at the time of the incident.
[iv] William F. Jasper, (December 7, 2009), The New American, Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar”: Homosexual Activist and Founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network Kevin Jennings, Now Obama’s Safe-Schools Czar, Is Using His Position to “Queer” American Education, Volume 25, Issue 25, 17+
Following are the words of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), ardent Obama supporter and a Democrat not afraid to play the race card when it buys ink or air time. Here, she attacks GOP Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich as a racist.
“Let me say that the code words are, as far as I’m concerned words that generate and signify race. You recall, Martin, that comments made by someone other than the president when he was a candidate in 2008, caused him to make a significant speech on race to say “Race is a factor in the United States, but I work and will represent all people.” Here we have Newt Gingrich, taking the opposite road, if you will. It’s I will use race to divide.
“I will call the president the food stamp president, obviously not knowing that food stamps are utilized by our soldiers, utilized by Caucasians in a higher percentage than both African-Americans and Latinos. Food stamps are for people in need. Food stamps are for children.
“But, these code words are dividing us – telling us that a janitor who makes $37,000 a year would be in a better position to give his job up so that the children of the poor in New York, I think he used the example, the school district predominantly Latino and African-American can pick up a broom and work. So, we know that those children and children from other places as well, should have an opportunity to be an astronaut, mathematician, a scientist – and absolutely, we’re not against work. These children want work. They’re fighting for summer jobs. But, that is a code word to, if you will, portray poor children and poor school districts that they have seen no one work legitimately; that they don’t have a work ethic and these janitors are overpaid unionized workers who don’t have family and not making $37,000 a year.
“I think Mr. Newt Gingrich should be ashamed of himself and we should not want to win at any cost. Let’s bring the country together. Let’s not destroy Mr. Obama. Let’s talk about helping the American people.”[i]
Of course, there is always more than one way to look at words, actions, and intentions. The filter used by Congresswoman Jackson Lee is incorrect, an obstacle to lasting solutions and still another useless racial trigger. She points out that “food stamps are…utilized by Caucasians in a higher percentage than both African-Americans and Latinos…” This is true on its face, but represents a very selective manipulation of statistics – one that serves nobody. It would be more productive for Jackson Lee to base her words and actions on reality, rather than racial defensiveness. The general population of the United States, according to the U.S. Census, is broken down in part, as follows: White non Hispanic, 63.7%; Black, 12.6%; Latino, 16.3%.[ii] In terms of reliance on Food Stamps however, a 2005 study revealed that among rural recipients, 53% were white non Hispanic and 27% black. Among urban recipients, 34% were white non Hispanic and 35% black.[iii] This means two things: First, as a percentage of food stamp recipients, whites comprise the majority of rural recipients and only one percent less than blacks as urban recipients. In this respect, Jackson Lee is 100% correct. Unfortunately, this would suggest the need to apportion the bulk of our dedicated financial and other resources at programs that would assist white food stamp recipients in becoming less reliant on government assistance – a very wasteful approach, when the same statistics are properly interpreted.
The second thing these statistics tell us then, is this: As they relate to their percentage of representation in the overall population, whites are underrepresented as Food Stamp recipients, by nearly 11% (rural), or 30% (urban), while blacks – based on their participation in the overall population – are over represented as food stamp recipients by 214% and 278%, respectively. Ignoring, or defensively manipulating these statistics for political correctness, or racial defensiveness does not help blacks out of this difficult problem.
Additionally, Rep. Jackson Lee ignores the fact that Gingrich’s own daughter worked as a janitor during her teens – making his comments very unlikely to have been racially motivated. Nobody wins with this type of rhetoric – a style of choice for Democrats since Obama became President.
Peter Dreier, as described in Radical-in-Chief, was a member of the Democratic Socialists of America’s National Executive Committee, a frequent contributor to The Nation, a major influence on Community Organizing, “a key strategist” in the development of ACORN’s bank pressuring campaign, and a proponent of a scenario in which the expansion of state spending takes the public sector and – ultimately the entire country – to the brink of financial collapse. This forces a call for spending cutbacks which, in turn, mobilizes those receiving government entitlements to protest, even to the point of revolution.[i] Sound familiar? We need look only to our experience in Wisconsin to see a living albeit minor example.
Dreier reportedly believes that this entitlement crisis may result in violent revolution and lead the country finally into either Fascism or Socialism. He advocates the use of community organizers to assure that it is the latter and suggests the importance of having “a left wing grassroots movement already in place” to accomplish this.[ii] Again, we may have current examples under the Obama Administration – the “Occupy” movement, supported by Obama and the membership of Obama’s Organizing for America: a force of unknown size and strength. Could this be Obama’s Civilian National Defense Force?
Coincidentally, Dreier believes that corporations should be controlled by Labor Unions and community organizations. According to author Stanley Kurtz, “a 1980 piece in Social Policy” contains a drawing depicting such an organization – oddly enough – called “U.S. Motors.”[iii]
In spite of all these similarities to current events, if it still seems a distant stretch, it is also of interest to note that Dreier served as an Advisor to Obama’s 2008 Presidential campaign.[iv]
(Excerpt from 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama)
[i] Stanley Kurtz, Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism, (New York, 2010, Threshold Editions), 43-49
During his 2008 campaign, Senator Obama claimed kinship with a number of very famous people, including actor Brad Pitt.[1] As we honor our nation on this July 4th, please take a few moments and read again, one of our greatest documents; written, signed, distributed and defended by some of our bravest citizens. Could our current president claim kinship with any of these inspired Americans? Interestingly, he does number six U.S. Presidents among his cousins – one of whom he has treated most shabbily: George W. Bush. [2]
When President Obama says America is not a Christian nation, perhaps he should read this Declaration as one of the best fact checking mechanisms available. Does Obama believe he derives his “…just powers from the consent of the governed…?” If he did, perhaps he would be far more concerned about working with, rather than around our Congress. Perhaps he would show greater respect to Americans who disagree with his policies, rather than attempting to publicly ridicule them.
We know it would be ridiculous to compare President Obama to a King. Yet, how striking the similarity between the following excerpt from the Declaration of Independence and the struggle that has played out between our own federal government and the state of Arizona.
“He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.”
To be sure, we are a very long way from experiencing the government abuses borne by our forefathers. Still, an imaginative mind might find a few other startling similarities in this document.
Thank God for this Declaration and for the long line of brave, committed Americans who, throughout our history, have placed their “Lives,” their “Fortunes” and their “Sacred Honor” on the line to preserve it. Thank God for a system in which we can place an end to political abuses at the polls, rather than through revolution.
God bless you and yours on this July 4th!
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:
Column 1 Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton
Column 2 North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton
Column 3 Massachusetts:
John Hancock Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Column 4 Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean
Column 5 New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
Column 6 New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton
[1] Ebru News/AP, (March 28, 2008), Ebru News web-site, Barack Obama’s Famous Relatives, retrieved July 3, 2012, from http://news.ebru.tv/en/4355
Speaking before the Cuban American Foundation, then Presidential Candidate Obama once again launched a verbal assault on then President George W. Bush. Based on Obama’s purported intellect, we can only presume that he knew the first portion of this statement to be a lie.
“…Since the Bush Administration launched a misguided war in Iraq. Its policy in the Americas has been negligent towards our friends, ineffective with our adversaries, disinterested in the challenges that matter in the peoples’ lives and incapable of advancing our interests in the region. No wonder then, that demagogues like Hugo Chavez have stepped into this vacuum.”[i]
“His predictable, yet perilous mix of anti-American rhetoric, authoritarian government, “checkbook diplomacy,” coddling the repressive regime in Cuba, offers the same false promise as the tried and failed ideologies of the past.”[ii]
Hugo Chavez was elected President of Venezuela in 1998. He “stepped into this vacuum” on Clinton’s – not Bush’s watch! Here, Obama talks judgmentally about “coddling the repressive regime in Cuba,” when he called for flexibility in dealing with Cuba at the Summit of the Americas. This might fit the definition of Hypocrisy!
As to the second portion of Obama’s statement, can you tell whether he is speaking about Bush, or Chavez? Did he know? Did he care?
(An excerpt from 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama)
Reason #34
Obama: America has “gotten a little soft”
Apparently, Obama does sometimes consider America to be a decent country. On occasion, he has even – as shown in the following quote – called us “Great.” On September 29, 2011, speaking with Orlando WESH-TV’s Jim Payne, the President noted:
“The way I think about it is, this is a great, great country that had gotten a little soft and we didn’t have that same competitive edge that we needed over the last couple of decades. We need to get back on track.”[iii]
This is probably one of the nicest things Obama has ever said about America – before, or after becoming President.
(An excerpt from 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama)
In his first address to the Summit of the Americas, Obama affably responds to comments by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega – a man responsible for death, destruction and the economic plunder of his own nation. Obama notes that we should not be trapped by history and suggests the need for flexibility in dealing with places like Cuba.
“…All of us must now renew the common stake that we have in one another. I know that promises of partnership have gone unfulfilled in the past, and that trust has to be earned over time. While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. But I pledge to you that we seek an equal partnership. (Applause.) There is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations; there is simply engagement based on mutual respect and common interests and shared values. So I’m here to launch a new chapter of engagement that will be sustained throughout my administration. (Applause.)
“To move forward, we cannot let ourselves be prisoners of past disagreements. I am very grateful that President Ortega — (applause) — I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old. (Laughter.) Too often, an opportunity to build a fresh partnership of the Americas has been undermined by stale debates. And we’ve heard all these arguments before, these debates that would have us make a false choice between rigid, state-run economies or unbridled and unregulated capitalism; between blame for right-wing paramilitaries or left-wing insurgents; between sticking to inflexible policies with regard to Cuba or denying the full human rights that are owed to the Cuban people.[i]
Interestingly, while he strikes an apologetic tone by voicing his perception that the U.S. has, “at times been disengaged, and at times sought to dictate our terms,”(in Latin America), he makes no similar apology for attempting to overrule the Honduran Constitutional process by demanding the return to power of their ousted President, Manuel Zelaya.
In 1990, Obama called our Country “mean-spirited,” and ungenerous. Some might think this ancient history – as ancient as Obama’s association with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. But, In 2008, campaigning for her husband, before parishioners of a predominantly black South Carolina church, Michelle Obama gave her own view of life in America. According to Michelle:
“…life in America in 2008, and life is not good. We’re a divided country, we’re a country that is ‘just downright mean,’ we are ‘guided by fear.’ We’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents.”[i]
* * *
Reason #31
Obama: Americans Manic and Self Absorbed
In Dreams From my Father, Obama tells us that he decided to become a community organizer in 1983 and provides a few insights into his thinking. The first is that he was dedicated to “change” – change in everything from the White House to the Congress, to what he called the “manic and self absorbed” “mood of the country.”[ii]
Another Obama pick is Dr. John Holdren, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. He is indeed, an interesting addition to the Obama Team and a person who would probably like to weigh in on the current contraceptive issue. In 1977, he co-authored a book called Ecoscience, providing several population control options, including a system in which a long term sterilization capsule could be implanted under the skin of young girls when they reach puberty – a capsule that “…might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”[i]
The selection of Holdren as Director of Science and Technology Policy says a great deal about Obama – and provides a serious warning for the rest of America.
* * *
[i] Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich & John Holdren, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, (San Francisco, 1977, W. H. Freeman), 787
Senator Obama voted against the 2006 Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. His was a vote to allow “…taking minors across State lines in circumvention of laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions.” In other words, Obama believes that if you live in a state that requires parental consent for abortion, it’s o.k. for your 14 year old daughter to cross state lines, or to be taken across state lines by someone else, in order to have an abortion in a state with no such requirements.[i]
* * *
Reason #25
Abortion and Slavery
After more than a year of controversy and delays, Dawn Johnsen, President Obama’s early pick as the head of the Dept. of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, withdrew from consideration in April, 2010.[ii]
Johnsen’s nomination was apparently negatively affected by “her positions on torture and the investigation of previous administration actions.”[iii] But, we can’t say that President Obama didn’t try. And why did her nomination stay on the table for more than a year? Could it have had anything to do with her position on abortion?
As the head of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) in 1989, Johnsen filed a brief with the Supreme Court, in which she asserted that “Any restriction that makes abortion less accessible is, in her view, tantamount to ‘involuntary servitude’ because it ‘requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state’s asserted interest [in the life of the unborn].’ In effect, a woman ‘is constantly aware for nine months that her body is not her own: the state has conscripted her body for its own ends.’ Such ‘forced pregnancy,’ she contends, violates the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibits slavery.”[iv]
[i] On the Issues: Every Political Leader on Every Issue, Vote number 2006-216 notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions on Jul 25, 2006 regarding bill S.403 Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act – Results: Passed 65-34 – Democrats voting on 2006-216, retrieved January 9, 2012 from http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2006-216.htm
Our Free 50 