Sunday, March 29, 2009

American Flag v. Mexican Flag, circa March 2006

This protest has been circulating since March 2006. Many are in an uproar about this protest of immigration legislation by Mexican students. This is the account I found (with pictures) on About.com. http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_mexican_flag.htm

American Flag v. Mexican Flag

Netlore Archive: Emailed images show Hispanic students demonstrating against proposed immigration legislation by hoisting a Mexican flag above an upside-down American flag at Montebello High School in California


Description: Emailed images
Circulating since: March 2006
Status: Images are authentic


Comments: The photos are authentic. All but one of them were taken by Whittier Daily News photographers Leo Jarzomb and Raul Roa on March 27, 2006 (the originals can be viewed in slideshows here and here). The text, on the other hand, is a mash-up of the original newspaper captions, commentary by conservative blogger Michelle Malkin, and the contributions of one or more anonymous emailers.

The occasion was a protest involving approximately 1,000 Hispanic students who walked out of their classes in the El Rancho Unified and Whittier Union High School Districts and marched through the town of Pico Rivera to nearby Montebello High School, where they demonstrated against proposed federal legislation calling for harsher measures against illegal immigration. As these photos and others taken that day show, Mexican flags were common currency at the event, but the standard waving got out of hand when a small group of protestors hoisted the flag of Mexico up the school flagpole with the Stars and Stripes beneath it, upside-down.

District administrators say that despite appearances, few if any Montebello High School students participated in the demonstration. The campus was "on lockdown" for the duration of the protest, which means Montebello students were kept in their classrooms until the gathering dispersed.

A student from El Rancho High School has reportedly been disciplined in connection with the flag-raising incident.


Email example contributed by K. Best, 20 April 2006:

This is one e-mail that you would hope wasn't true, but the pictures seem to tell it all. Very sad!!!

You will not see this heart-stopping photo on the front page of the NY Times or on the lead story of the major news networks.
'American flag v. Mexican flag at CA. high school--disgusting public acts!'
American flag v. Mexican flag at CA. high school--disgusting public acts!

FLAGS FLYING AT MONTEBELLO HIGH SCHOOL SAYS IT ALL.... THE USA IS IN DISTRESS AND MEXICO HAS TAKEN OVER!
'FLAGS FLYING AT MONTEBELLO HIGH SCHOOL SAYS IT ALL ... THE USA IS IN DISTRESS AND MEXICO HAS TAKEN OVER!

THE AMERICAN FLAG COMES SECOND!



School Walk-Outs
03/28 : Student protest in Whittier. Area students from Pioneer, California and Whittier high schools walked out of classes to protest the proposed federal immigration bill March 27, 2006.
03/28: Student protest in Whittier. Area students from Pioneer, California and Whittier high schools walked out of classes to protest the proposed federal immigration bill March 27, 2006.
(Leo Jarzomb/Staff photo)

The protestors put up the Mexican flag over the American flag flying upside down at Montebello High. Our laws state that NO Flag will fly higher than the US Flag, so why does an American school in the USA allow this??? How is this acceptable? These students are in America, not Mexico!!!!!

If you want to stay here, America comes first, last ,and always otherwise go back and make it better where ever you came from but don't try to turn my country into yours by ILLEGALLY entering mine and then demanding all the benefits of a LEGAL citizen of our nation ..... NO funding from federal tax dollars for any student out of class that day or any other day for such subversive activities.......teacher led or not.

Years ago, U.S. Senator from California, S.I. Hayakawa, suggested that English be made the official language of the USA. He was belittled for suggesting it. I predict this stunt will be the nail in the coffin of any guest-worker/amnesty plan on the table in Washington. The image of the American flag subsumed to another and turned upside down on American soil is already spreading on Internet forums and via e-mail. Pass this along to every American citizen in your address books and to every representative in the state and federal government. If you choose to remain uninvolved do not be amazed when you no longer have a nation to call your own nor anything you have worked for left since it will be "redistributed" to the activists while you are so peacefully staying out of the "fray". Check history, it is full of nations/empires that disappeared when its citizens no longer held their core beliefs and values. One person CAN make a difference. One plus one plus one plus one plus one plus one.........

The battle for our secure borders and immigration laws that actually mean something, however, hasn't even begun. Like I said: Welcome to reconquista.

If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under!

Telling CO2 Lies to Destroy America!!

Folks, other nations see right through him. Yet our hapless masses are still awe-struck. Read on...Governmental Gangsterism? Folks, I'm not making this up!!!


CANADA FREE PRESS

Dr. S. Fred Singer, 'the CO2 wars', Greens and the Obama administration war on U.S. Economy

Telling CO2 Lies to Destroy America

By Alan Caruba Sunday, March 29, 2009

My friend, the internationally famed climatologist, Dr. S. Fred Singer, calls them “the CO2 wars.” It is the last ditch attempt by the Greens, under the aegis of the Obama administration, to declare carbon dioxide a pollutant and thus open the door to its regulation.

Singer says such regulation “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification.”

I am increasingly of the opinion that the main goal of the Obama administration through CO2 regulation, exploding deficits, punishing taxation, and any other means at their disposal is the destruction of the economy and the complete control of impoverished Americans.

Governmental gangsterism


This is an administration that exists to impose an Orwellian socialist utopia after the smokescreen clears.

When it comes to CO2, Obama, his so-called science advisors, and the Environmental Protection Agency are all lying. It is governmental gangsterism.

As reported in The Wall Street Journal, “The Environmental Protection Agency has sent the White House a proposed finding that carbon dioxide is a danger to public health, a step that could trigger a clampdown on emissions of so-called greenhouse gases across a wide swath of the economy.”

Here are a few things you need to keep in mind about carbon dioxide:

  • CO2 is not a “pollutant.” It is a trace gas necessary for all life of Earth because it is essential to the growth of all vegetation.
  • Without CO2 all vegetation—grasses, forests, jungles, crops such as wheat, corn and rice—dies. Then herbivores die. Then you die.
  • The CO2 produced by human industry or activity is a miniscule fraction of a percentage of greenhouse gases. It constitutes a mere 0.038% of the atmosphere.
  • The oceans emit 96.5% of all greenhouse gases, holding and releasing CO2 as it has down through the millennia of Earth’s existence.
  • In past millennia, CO2 levels were often much higher than the present.
  • CO2 levels rise hundreds of years after temperature rise on planet Earth.
  • The Sun is the primary source of warmth on Earth. Rising CO2 is an effect of global warming, not a cause.
  • Both global warming and cooling are natural phenomenon over which humans have no control.
  • The Earth is not currently warming. It has been cooling for a decade and likely to continue for at least another twenty years or longer. If a new Ice Age is triggered, it will last at least 10,000 years.
  • Polar ice is now at record levels and still growing.


If you had a choice, would you prefer a warmer or colder Earth?

And consider this, if only the United States was to significantly cut its CO2 emissions, how much effect, if any, would that have in a world where most other nations, including China and India, have no intention of doing so? Both are exempt from the UN Kyoto Protocol. The answer is zero!

The EPA proposal is not about science. It is about power and it is about money. As the Wall Street Journal noted, “The administration has proposed a cap-and-trade system that could raise $646 billion by 2019 through government auctions of emission allowances.”

The federal government, though the aegis of the EPA, would have control over the destinies of an estimated 13,000 facilities if this regulatory obscenity were to become law.

“Coal-fired power plants, oil refineries and domestic industries, such as energy-intensive paper, cement, fertilizer, steel and glass manufacturers, worry that increased cost burdens imposed by climate-change laws will put them at a severe competitive disadvantage to their international peers that aren’t bound by similar environmental rules.”

Such industries would flee the United States as the most toxic place on Earth in which to do business.

This would be the fulfillment of the Obama administration’s goal and explains in part why this new assault on science, industry, and common sense has been put forth by the EPA.

One of the best sites for information about carbon dioxide is ilovemyco2.com
I recommend you visit and browse through its extensive data.

A tip of the hat as well to ilovemyco2.com.

Important New Bill Threatens Small Farmers

Kansas Farmers need to wake up and smell the Congress!!

There is another bill being introduced in congress that threatens the small farmers and intrastate commerce. Very concerning for us here in Kansas. It is HR 875 - The Federal Take-Over of Food Regulation!!! Read about it here:

http://www.ftcldf.org/news/news-02mar2009.htm

Has anyone told those bums that Congress can only regulate INTERstate commerce, not INTRAstate commerce? It is time for us Kansans to mobilize! Pat Roberts, Sam Brownback, and your Representative need to hear from you as soon as possible!

America's Right: Leave Ashley Biden Alone

Jeff Schreiber hits the nail on the head again. Not that we should ignore the story, but that we shouldn't annihilate her. As conservatives, we know how tough these issues are on families. Yes, she is an adult. So is the rotten friend who video-taped the incident with the intent of profiting from the video. It is a sad day. No matter what I think of Joe Biden and his politics, I will not criticize his relationship with his daughter. Ashley and Dad need some "alone time."

America's Right: Leave Ashley Biden Alone

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

We Must Take America Back

Follow the link below, this is an awesome song--one that should be heard by every citizen in the country! The story behind this song personifies what is wrong in this nation. E Pluribus Unum--out of many, one. That wasn't the case for Steve Vaus' song in 1992...big city radio station executives refused to play it because they didn't like the conservative, patriotic lyrics. So, to appease the few, RCA pulled the plug, and the rug, out from underneath Steve Vaus just when the single was moving up the charts. They managed to keep him from re-recording and re-releasing the song for five years. I'm not nuts, the story is copied below. You must listen to the free preview...you will agree with me that this is an awesome song!


Banner


America's Voice

In 1992, Steve Vaus' debut RCA single, We Must Take America Back, was one of the most requested songs on radio - it was zooming up through the Hot 100 on the Billboard charts - until big city radio executives told RCA they weren't going to play it because they didn't agree with its conservative, patriotic message.

That was the end of the road for Vaus - RCA dropped him, they pulled the song off the radio and out of stores - they prohibited him from re-recording or re-releasing the song for five years.

But they can't stop him now.

It is time - a stirring new version of
We Must Take America Back.


| HOME | THE MAN | THE MUSIC | eMAIL STEVE |

800-HIT-SONG
Steve Vaus
P.O. Box 28700
San Diego, CA 9219



Monday, March 23, 2009

New Preamble to the Constitution?!

I think it’s about time common sense is allowed to flourish. Sensible people of the United States speak out! Because if you do not, who will? You may have seen this before, but it is still good!


NEW PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION


[The following has been attributed to State Representative Mitchell Kaye from GA. This guy should run for President one day.]


“We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights.”


ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.


ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone—not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.


ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.


ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need. But we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.


ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we’re just not interested in public health care.


ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don’t be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.


ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don’t be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won’t have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.


ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. (AMEN!)


ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.


ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don’t care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!


ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country’s history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!


Whole New Meaning to the Words "Potato Salad"

Wow! What a plate of potato salad these girls dish up!!!

Sunday, March 22, 2009

My Definition of Stimulous?

Oh, wow! I thought you'd never ask! I've cooked up the perfect plan....

And that would be for both houses of Congress (elected officials, not staffers) AND THE PRESIDENT to volunteer to take half salary this year for all the mess they've caused over the last two years. I'd like Nancy Schmancy Pelosi to give up her airplane and travel like the rest of us peasants. I'd also like Congress to discontinue their elite retirement plan, or at least phase it out over a couple of years. I want them to live like I live--paycheck to paycheck, and I want them to look forward to Social Security and 401(k)s as their retirement options, just like we do.

Does anyone remember way back when John Kennedy was President? Now there's a Democrat that you can shake hands with and not feel like you need a bath afterward, lol. Do you remember that he refused his Presidential salary, always placing it back into the treasury every pay day? His reasoning was that he and his family had enough money to live on, and that they didn't need that salary. Boy, those were the days, eh? A stark contrast to today's society where enough is never enough, isn't it?

Every institution that has been bailed out thus far has paid their executives big bonuses: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, CitiBank, and all the others that I can't remember at the moment. I've been "frosted" for so long over so many atrocities that I'm like an ice cube. :D Every time Mr. Obama approaches a microphone I go into another deep freeze.

In fact, it wouldn't hurt my feelings if we reverted back to the way Congress was convened in the early days: statesmen were not paid, they volunteered their time; congressional sessions were only 3-4 months long and held during the winter so as not to interfere with the farmers' planting and harvesting.

What d'ya think of them apples? :D

Just goes to show what a little imagination can do with Sheeple!!

Your assignment: have some amusement. Best Sheeple movie I've ever seen. :D

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Bob Hope! Best Movie Line Ever!!!

Wow, what a great line! I've played it over and over, laughing each time. I'm so easily amused.

Friday, March 20, 2009

Blogger Gets Visit from Law Enforcement after Letter to U.S. Attorney

[Editor's note: Does a complaint filed, or a letter written to a judge justify such a forceful response from law enforcement? Differing opinions such as bloggers post have long been an integral part of politics in general. Is Obama going to muzzle all dissenting opinions?]

From Phil at The Right Side of Life.

Submitted by Phil on Fri, Mar 20, 2009

Blogger Gets Visit from Law Enforcement after Letter to US Attorney

After hearing from The Washington Times about one private citizen being visited by US Marshals on account of a letter that citizen wrote to Judge James Robertson, TheObamaFile is reporting the following:

Freeper RaceBannon just heard from Freeper Flightline, a personal friend and mutual acquaintance of Walt Fitzpatrick. Walt, an Annapolis graduate (1975), just got a visit from 3 to 4 Police Cruisers and one unmarked Government car from Knoxville, Tennessee. Walt was informed that his most recent column, which he filed as a criminal complaint in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Knoxville, Tennessee, was being responded to as a criminal complaint against Walter himself; that the complaint he filed was ignored and was the basis for the complaint against himself.

The criminal Complaint against Walt specifically stated that Walter’s complaint was considered a threat against the President of the United States.

Walter was interviewed by these officers in his yard and house and openly stated his belief of his criminal complaint along with his own personal documentation to defend his complaint and why he believed it to be true.

Walter was not arrested and the officers who visited his home responded by telling him the apparent threat against Obama was unfounded and they left the premises without incident.

Walter was not arrested, no search of his home was done and the officers were professional.

Again, here is the specific posting that is causing some heartburn with someone affiliated with law enforcement… (warning! lots of pics below!)

While I am sure that many of this site’s adversaries will come up with all kinds of excuses as to why this particular blogger deserves a visit from federal (or other) authorities (maybe some individuals will even come up with a personal reason for why this blogger has no right to his opinion), I would like to know the following:

Have any of the following been investigated when the White House occupant was from a different party?

  • A Google search on “kill Bush
  • Identifying the folks in these pictures:

No? I didn’t think so. Instead, here is what everyone is apparently being asked to do:

And, if you don’t? We’re going to send law enforcement after you, basically telling you to shut the hades up:

…and my personal favorite:

Spin, spin, spin you illegitimizers! Go for it!

-Phil

Classic Charley Reese! 545 People Responsible for America's Woes


THE 545 PEOPLE
RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL
OF AMERICA'S WOES

BY CHARLEY REESE

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations, the House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 235 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a Senator, a Congressman or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY

Don't you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O'Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O'neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetos it, they can pass it over his veto.

REPLACE SCOUNDRELS

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it's because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

This article was taken from the Orlando Sentinel Star newspaper.

[Editor's note: This article was published in the mid-80s by author Charley Reese. Sometimes conservative, sometimes libertarian, sometimes democrat, but always the same Charley. This article is as relevant today as it was in the 80s. You can substitute Nancy Pelosi for Tip O'Neill, Iraq for Lebanon. Same song, 233rd verse (the United States of America is 233 years old in 2009). "We the people" are the ultimate responsible parties, because for some unknown reason we repeatedly vote them back into office.]

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Obama Cuts Weapons

From: http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm

Obama Cuts Weapons

The Russians and the Chinese have just both announced military buildups, and the Iranian nuclear threat was described as, "real" -- "dangerous."

Venezuela offered an island off its Caribbean coast as a support base for strategic Russian bombers. Cuba could be used to base Russian aircraft, too. North Korea threatened war.

Osama bin Laden called for a renewed jihad.

What did Obama do?

He ordered the Secretary of Defense to prepare for the most far-reaching reduction in the Pentagon's weapons portfolio since the end of the Cold War, according to aides.

Two defense officials who were not authorized to speak publicly said Robert M. Gates will announce up to a half-dozen major weapons cancellations later this month. Candidates include a new Navy destroyer, the Air Force's F-22 fighter jet, and Army ground-combat vehicles, the officials said.

More cuts are planned for later this year, after a review that could lead to reductions in programs such as aircraft carriers and nuclear arms, the officials said.

He's only doing what he promised he'd do (video). Sometimes, about some things, you can take this guy's word to the bank.

AIG Gave Obama $101,332!!!

From: http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm

AIG Gave Obama $101,332

Senator Barack Obama received a $101,332 bonus from American International Group in the form of political contributions according to Opensecrets.org. The two biggest Congressional recipients of bonuses from the A.I.G. are -- Senators Chris Dodd and Senator Barack Obama.

The A.I.G. Financial Products affiliate of A.I.G. gave out $136,928, the most of any AIG affiliate, in the 2008 cycle. I would note that A.I.G.’s financial products division is the unit that wrote trillions of dollars’ worth of credit-default swaps and "misjudged" the risk.

With the anger and rage that is being exhibited against A.I.G., perhaps the bonuses Obama received from A.I.G. explain Obama's A.I.G crocodile tears.

Now that the Wall street Journal has revealed that A.I.G. paid bonuses of $1 million or more to 73 employees, it's time to ask if recipients of A.I.G. "bonuses," including President Obama, will give what now ought to be taxpayer money back?

The Trip to Pakistan in 1981 outs Obama

Based upon Dr. Orly Taitz's blog: http://defendourfreedoms.us/
March 9, 2009

Well is He or Isn't He?

It is a popular topic of discussion in political circles these days, and as the weeks pass more and more people are asking, “Is Barack Obama really a natural born citizen of the United States? Is he eligible to serve as President, or isn’t he?” If he is, then so be it. We’ll just have to grit our teeth until this long dark nightmare comes to an end…one way or another.
But what if he is not eligible? What then? Well, in that case we have a problem…a very large problem, the solution to which could tear asunder the fabric of American society.
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that, “No person except a natural born citizen…shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”
That’s pretty straightforward, yet, when confronted with the possibility that the man who sits in the Oval Office may be a usurper, a great many otherwise patriotic Americans can be heard to say, “What difference does it make? The election’s over; the people have spoken. Get over it!”
Well, it’s not quite as simple as all that, and the sooner we can all be satisfied that Obama is or is not a natural born citizen the better. To postpone that finding for a year or two and then find, conclusively, that Obama is not eligible to serve as president would be disastrous. Every new law and every executive order he had signed, every political appointment, every judicial appointment, every order he had given to the military, and every act and every decision of all of his appointees would immediately become null and void. How could we ever undo all of that? The American people would quickly learn that it is not much easier to undo two or three years of history than it is to undo a decade or a century. Obama must end his stubborn refusal to produce his birth certificate, his passports, his visas, and his college records. We must continue to recruit more and more Americans to insist that he do so.
To do that it is not necessary to prove that he was born in Kenya, not in Hawaii…as his paternal grandmother, a Kenyan half-brother, and a Kenyan half-sister insist…or who his natural father may have been. The proof of Obama’s failure to meet the “natural born citizen” standard is much simpler than that.
To convert a non-believer…one who insists that the Constitutional requirements must be met, but who believes that questions about Obama’s citizenship status are nothing more than sour grapes…it is only necessary to establish the facts surrounding Obama’s travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in the summer of 1981.
Although Obama fails to mention that trip in either of his memoirs…not in Dreams from My Father and not in The Audacity of Hope…he made a potentially fatal error when he mentioned the Pakistan trip during an April 6, 2008 speech in San Francisco…the same speech in which he referred to rural Pennsylvanians as “bitter” people who “cling to guns or religion…” In that speech, Obama explained in an offhand manner the value of that trip, vis-à-vis his knowledge of foreign affairs, saying, “I knew what Sunni and Shia was (sic) before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”
When questioned about that trip, Obama’s campaign press secretary, Bill Burton, confirmed to the New York Times, and others, that Obama had visited Pakistan in 1981 on his return from Indonesia, traveling there with a Pakistani friend from Occidental College, Wahid Hamid. According to Burton, Obama stayed in Karachi with the family of another Pakistani friend, Mohammed Hasan Chandoo. Obama has never mentioned the Pakistan trip again.
So it is well established that Obama did travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981. What is not established, and what is critically important, is what passport he used during that trip. There are only three possibilities: Obama could have traveled under a U.S. passport…a passport first issued when he and his mother moved from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1967; he could have traveled under an Indonesian passport, issued following his adoption by his Indonesian stepfather; and it is conceivable that, if he was, in fact, born in Kenya in 1961, he could still have been a British subject, traveling with a British passport. So which is it?
Unfortunately for Obama, in the present circumstance, Pakistan was under martial law in 1981 and certain undesirables…Christians, Jews, and Americans…were prohibited from entering the country. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list, making a U.S. passport no more valuable than an empty chewing gum wrapper at the Karachi Port of Entry.
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration? The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers.
It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities:

  1. He traveled with a U.S. passport;
  2. He traveled with a British passport; or
  3. He traveled with an Indonesian passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he was traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, when adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people deserve to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008. The sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
Is he a “natural born” citizen, or isn’t he? It seems pretty clear from currently available evidence that he is not. If this proves to be the case he should minimize the damage to the country and follow the Nixon example; he should simply resign from office so that we can begin to clean up the mess he leaves behind.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Paul Hollrah is a Senior Fellow at the Lincoln Heritage Institute.

Monday, March 16, 2009

“Give Us The Money Back, AIG”

From Pat Dollard's blog
March 16th, 2009 Posted By drillanwr.


Anybody else recall certain republican Congress members insisting after the first bank bailout that there was no monitoring or watch-dogging going on as to how those who received the bailout money was spending it?

BTW, AIG had these bonuses pre-planned before the bailout … Congress, if they were “smart” would have looked into that and insisted before handing over money that the bank either cease or cutback any and all bonuses. But, as usual, it’s all political theater of indignation with these clowns.

[Ed. note: My personal opinion is that the Whitehouse is floating all these "indignation" rumors because they think that's what the American Public wants to hear.]

CBS:

White House May Want AIG Money Back
Administration Investigates Ways To Retrieve Some Of The Millions
AIG Used For Bonuses

The Obama administration is looking for ways to recoup at least some of the $165 million American International Group, Inc. paid out in bonuses over the weekend, despite accepting billions in government aid to stay afloat, reports CBS News correspondent Peter Maer.

The White House continues to negotiate with AIG to bring any payments in line with the government’s priorities, an administration official told CBS News.

President Barack Obama is scheduled to speak Monday morning on AIG while rolling out his plan to help small businesses. He’s expected to voice anger over the bonuses and could elaborate on administration efforts to recover some of the money, reports Maer.

The administration official said that the bonuses “long been known about inside and outside AIG. But we didn’t want to accept them.”

The White House is seeking what are described as “mechanisms” to recover money spent on bonuses, but the company insists some of the bonuses are part of legally binding contracts signed before the government’s bailout.

The administration is concerned that public reaction to the bonuses could affect the president’s overall economic agenda, reports Maer.

“It is unacceptable for Wall Street firms receiving government assistance to hand out million dollar bonuses, while hard-working Americans bear the burden of this economic crisis,” the official told CBS News.

Meanwhile, AIG disclosed Sunday that it used more than $90 billion in federal aid to pay out foreign and domestic banks, some of whom had received their own multibillion-dollar U.S. government bailouts.

Some of the biggest recipients of the AIG money were Goldman Sachs at $12.9 billion, and three European banks - France’s Societe Generale at $11.9 billion, Germany’s Deutsche Bank at $11.8 billion, and Britain’s Barclays PLC at $8.5 billion. Merrill Lynch, which also is undergoing federal scrutiny of its bonus plans, received $6.8 billion as of Dec. 31.

Lawrence Summers, Director of the White House National Economic Council, said on CBS’ Face The Nation on Sunday that the AIG bonuses were “outrageous… The whole situation at AIG is outrageous. What taxpayers are being forced to do is outrageous.”

The company, now about 80 percent owned by U.S. taxpayers, has received roughly $170 billion from the government, which feared that its collapse could cause widespread damage to banks and consumers around the globe.

In an exclusive interview aired Sunday on 60 Minutes, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke spoke with unusual candor of the frustration he felt in bailing out AIG.

“Of all the events and all of the things we’ve done in the last 18 months, the single one that makes me the angriest, that gives me the most angst, is the intervention with AIG,” Bernanke told 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley.

“Here was a company that made all kinds of unconscionable bets. Then, when those bets went wrong, we had a situation where the failure of that company would have brought down the financial system,” Bernanke said.

“It makes me angry. I slammed the phone more than a few times on discussing AIG. I understand why the American people are angry. It’s absolutely unfair that taxpayer dollars are going to prop up a company that made these terrible bets, that was operating out of the sight of regulators, but which we have no choice but to stabilize, or else risk enormous impact, not just in the financial system, but on the whole U.S. economy,” he told Pelley.

The $90 billion chunk of the bailout money went to banks to cover AIG’s losses on complex mortgage investments, as well as for collateral needed for other transactions.

Other banks receiving between $1 billion and $3 billion from AIG’s securities lending unit include Citigroup Inc., Switzerland’s UBS AG and Morgan Stanley.

Municipalities in certain states, including California, Virginia and Hawaii, received a total of $12.1 billion under guaranteed investment agreements.

FOX:

Lawmakers Target AIG Over Executive Bonuses
Rep. Barney Frank says American International Group is “rewarding incompetence” by paying out millions in bonuses.

Key lawmakers are calling for the government to crack down on American International Group after learning the bailed-out insurance giant is going ahead with plans to pay $165 million dollars in bonuses to its executives.

Though AIG Chairman Edward Liddy claims his hands are contractually tied, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said Monday he’s not convinced.

“I want to look at it very carefully,” said the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. “These people may have a right to their bonuses — they don’t have a right to their jobs forever.”

Appearing on NBC’s “Today” show, Frank noted that federal government “is the 80 percent owner” of the company and has some leverage.

“Maybe it’s time to fire some people,” he said, adding that the bonuses were “rewarding incompetence.”

“Forget about the legal matter here for a second,” Frank said. “These bonuses are going to people who screwed this thing up enormously, who made terrible decisions.”

A subcommittee for Frank’s panel plans to call Liddy to testify during a hearing on Wednesday.

Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., chairman of the subcommittee, said in a statement that lawmakers would investigate the bonuses at the hearing.

“We cannot allow individuals who acted irresponsibly to reap undue benefits,” he said.

The $165 million was payable to executives by Sunday and was part of a larger total payout reportedly valued at $450 million. The company has benefited from more than $170 billion in a federal rescue.

AIG reported this month that it had lost $61.7 billion for the fourth quarter of last year, the largest corporate loss in history. The bulk of the payments at issue cover AIG Financial Products, the unit of the company that sold credit default swaps, the risky contracts that caused massive losses for the insurer.

It also was revealed over the weekend that American International Group Inc. used more than $90 billion in federal aid to pay out foreign and domestic banks, some of whom had received their own multibillion-dollar U.S. government bailouts.

Some of the biggest recipients of the AIG money were Goldman Sachs at $12.9 billion, and three European banks — France’s Societe Generale at $11.9 billion, Germany’s Deutsche Bank at $11.8 billion, and Britain’s Barclays PLC at $8.5 billion. Merrill Lynch, which also is undergoing federal scrutiny of its bonus plans, received $6.8 billion as of Dec. 31.

The money went to banks to cover their losses on complex mortgage investments, as well as for collateral needed for other transactions.

On ABC’s “Good Morning America” Monday, Sen. Richard Shelby said Congress must do everything it can to make sure the government money going to AIG is handled appropriately.

“We ought to explore everything that we can through the government to make sure that this money is not wasted,” the Alabama Republican said. “These people brought this on themselves. Now you’re rewarding failure. A lot of these people should be fired, not awarded bonuses. This is horrible. It’s outrageous.”

AIG has agreed to Obama administration requests to restrain future payments. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner pressed the president’s case with Liddy last week.

“He stepped in and berated them, got them to reduce the bonuses following every legal means he has to do this,” said Austan Goolsbee, staff director of President Barack Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, told “FOX News Sunday.”

Lawrence Summers, a leading Obama economic adviser, said Sunday that Geithner had used all his power, “both legal and moral, to reduce the level of these bonus payments.”

In an interview that aired Sunday on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did not address the bonuses but expressed his frustration with the AIG intervention.

“It makes me angry. I slammed the phone more than a few times on discussing AIG,” Bernanke said. “It’s — it’s just absolutely — I understand why the American people are angry.”

In a letter to Geithner dated Saturday, Liddy said outside lawyers had informed the company that AIG had contractual obligations to make the bonus payments and could face lawsuits if it did not do so.