Obama Has NO Paper Trail

Dan Rather quote: "But he couldn't sell watermelons on highway if a state trooper was flagging down traffic."

The "watermelon" obama is selling is green on the outside and red on the inside. Obama has tried to sell his communist obamacare melon by using the state run media to "flag down" people to buy his sack of crap. We are not buying your crap barry. Because barry can't sell his communist melon to a public that is becoming more aware he is a fraud every day he will try to force feed the melon to Americans. Obama has the majority in congress. Obama has the state run liberal media vomiting his lies. He has the power of the bully pulpit yet the fraud obama still is a total failure. Obama truly is an empty suit.
........................................................................................

Barack Obama Has No Paper Trail

Most of what we know about Barack Obama, was written by Barack Obama (with a polishing by Bill Ayers), and much of that is false. Barack Hussein Obama is a myth, mostly of his own making. His life story is all made up.

Barack Obama at 50 years of age has no paper trail. There is absolutely not any documentation on his life. This is not an accident. He can be anybody he wants to be, and is. Obama is like an animated cartoon. Obama is pure fiction.

Barack obama is a fraud, and he's lived for almost 50 years without leaving any footprints, none! There is no Obama documentation, no records, no evidence, no paper trail, nothing! He's got an army of lawyers making sure it stays that way, and the unflattering stuff, out there in the world and on the Internet is systematically disappearing down the dark rabbit hole, and what's more amazing is he is not now, nor ever has been, a "natural born citizen," as required by the U. S. Constitution. He was, "at birth," a British subject and citizen of Kenya, a fact published on his own website.

Barack Obama is definitely not who you think he is, whatever that is. His "poor-boy" myth doesn't match the facts.

Obama is:

A master at shaping his own mythology.

A socialist whose politics are rooted in Marx and whose tactics were conceived by the communist, Alinsky.

By birth, blood and training, a Muslim, who later became a member of a Marxist, Black-African church.

A privileged African-American, educated at the finest schools, who has not shared the black American experience.

Obama is completely unqualified to be Commander in Chief.

Obama is not now, nor ever has been, a "natural born citizen".

Obama’s bio a state secret in Canada

Obama’s bio a state secret in Canada

Retired colonel Michel Drapeau, an expert in access-to-information law at the University of Ottawa said it was "silly" for Canadian officials to withhold the biography of such a prominent public figure.

"He's not the former director of the CIA, or anything. I mean, this guy's as public as it comes," Mr. Drapeau said, adding that it's highly unlikely that Canada would be privy to personal or professional information about the president that had not already been disclosed.

(Is it a mystery as to why Canada does not want to release obama's biography? No. Obama's biography is an empty paper trail. I can understand why Canada will not release it. There is nothing to release.) Story Reports

"At Birth," Barack Obama Was A Kenyan Citizen And A British Subject

Obama's "Fight the Smears" website states the following:

"When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children."

"Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4, 1982."

Article II Requires that one be a "Natural Born Citizen", and in terms of the Law as understood by the Framers, anyone with Dual Citizenship could not be "Natural Born". It does not matter that they no longer hold that Citizenship, they fall into the same bracket as a "Naturalized Citizen" because they have/had Divided Allegiance.

The Kenyan Citizenship Issue may not be the main point here, WAS HE, OR WAS HE NOT, an INDONESIAN CITIZEN?

Obama isn’t saying, isn’t mentioning it, is trying to avoid producing any Paperwork at all. Why? If he is/was an Indonesian Citizen, too, the Senator’s entire narrative is a fiction.

Kenyan Citizenship automatically lapses if it isn’t renewed at age 21. Indonesian Citizenship doesn’t. If he was an Indonesian Citizen he would have to actively repudiate that Citizenship. Did he? Has he? Because if he hasn’t, Senator Obama is Dual National Indonesian at this moment, subject to the Laws of BOTH Countries, equally.

We know for a fact obama has stated he was a dual citizen at birth, American/Kenyan because he has documented this fact on his web site. If we believe his documentation. There is no documentation to verify obama was born in America. The certification of live birth obama has presented as fact cannot be verified. If his colb on his website could be verified then this would be documentation that would disqualify him as being president.

It is interesting this paper trail leads nowhere. Is the paper trail that would verify his birth in Hawaii? Because obama has not produced documentation that can be verified any documentation he has produced is useless. Obama is a dead end. A black hole to nowhere.

If Lolo Soetoro adopted him, Obama ceased to be a US Citizen in the mid 1960s, BY INDONESIAN LAW. He also ceased to be a Kenyan Citizen, BY INDONESIAN LAW. By Kenyan and US Law he retained his Original Citizenships, until his 21st Birthday. By Indonesian Law he could have given up Indonesian Citizenship at age 18, but did he? If he didn’t he was displaying a Legal Intention to void his US Citizenship, since he knew he could not Legally hold both Citizenships.

The "Certification of Live Birth" is NOT a birth certificate.

No hospital in Honolulu will even confirm his birth there. That is highly suspicious given the historic nature of Obama's presidency. Hawaii has never before been able to boast a presidential birth -- let alone the first black president. Why would a hospital not make a claim? Why would one not be renaming a wing after its most famous patient? Why would it not be sending out press releases? Why all the mystery?

It is strange that the only living person in the world who claims to have been present for his birth is his Kenyan grandmother. No doctor, no nurse, no relative, no family friend has come forward to say they can confirm his birth in Honolulu. And, of course, the biggest question of all is: Why won't he release the one document that can confirm this, his long-form "Certification Of Live Birth"?

Frank Marshall Davis

Grandpa stanley dunham brought the communist and pornographer, Frank Marshall Davis, into Barry's life.

During Barry's middle and high school years, Frank Marshall Davis, a radical black communist, fed the impressionable Barry a constant diet of Marx and "blackness." He was introduced to Obama by grandfather Stanley -- they were drinkin' buddies and Stanley thought the Obama should have a black influence.

Obama's mentor davis's parting words to Barry on his leaving for Occidental College were, "college is an advanced degree in compromise" and he warned Obama not to forget his "people" and not to "start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that shit."

(Obama took his mentor's words to heart about, "the American way and all that shit.".)

Obama, who grew up in a comfortable white household, has struggled to find an identity as a righteous black men ever since. Obama accepted "the pure and heady breeze of privilege" to which he was exposed as a teenager, but rejected his "white skin privilege" -- or at least tried to.

Barack's Fake Social Security Card

Expanded affidavit by Susan Daniels private investigator, Daniels and Associates Investigations, Inc

Barack's Fake Social Security Card Exposed

In her affidavit, Daniels states that she has located Barack Obama's Social Security Number. She states it was issued between 1977 and 1979 in the State of Connecticut. She states that it is the only Social Security Number Barack Obama ever used.

The number assigned to Barack Obama "appears to be associated with someone born in the year 1890."

(Can you believe this? Obama uses a fake ss card. This information is real. It has not been refuted. The first "black" president of the US is using a fake ss card.)

Occidental College

At Occidental, Obama sought out the more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.

There is an open question regarding Obama's status as a student at Occidental. The question is, did Obama receive student aid as a foreign student? Obama is vigorously fighting the release of his Occidental College records.

Columbia College

Obama's Columbia experience is a complete mystery. No one, absolutely no one, remembers Obama from Columbia -- Fox News asked 400 ex-students and all Fox got was shrugs. There is no picture of him in the yearbook. The only thing we really know about this period is that Obama spent a lot of time at the Marxist-Socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn. Barry lived down the avenue from Bill Ayers.

Obama stopped drugging sometime during the Columbia period. He started abusing marijuana and cocaine at Punahou.

"Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he wrote.

(Obama is blowing "smoke" in Americans face. Recently obama was told by his doctor to cut down on the booze.)

Obama Tries Work and has a tendency towards puffery

Writing in "Dreams...," (p. 135), that his first job after graduating Columbia was as a "research assistant" in "a consulting house to multinational corporations," with "my own office, my own secretary" and "myself in a suit and tie, a briefcase in my hand."

(This is a lie faked to make himself seem more important.)

But as one of his former fellow workers (and an Obama supporter) has written, it wasn't a consulting house; it was a small company that published newsletters on international business, "a bit of a sweatshop" where casual attire and low pay were the norm. His job was essentially copyediting "in the cramped three Wang terminal space we called the bull pen."

Dan Armstrong Coworker

Co-Workers: Obama Inflated His Resume

I have to say that Barack engages in some serious exaggeration when he describes a job that he held in the mid-1980s. I know because I sat down the hall from him, in the same department, and worked closely with his boss. I can’t say I was particularly close to Barack – he was reserved and distant towards all of his co-workers – but I was probably as close to him as anyone. I certainly know what he did there, and it bears only a loose resemblance to what he wrote in his book.

(Obama has been lying for most of his life. Obama is a figment of his own imagination.)

Obama is a racist.

Obama wrote "The emotions between the races could never be pure; even love was tarnished by the desire to find in the other some element that was missing in ourselves. Whether we sought out our demons or salvation, the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart."

Obama’s autobiography writes of his childhood discomfort at the way his mother would sexualize African-American men.

"More than once," he recalls, "my mother would point out Harry Belafonte is the best-looking man on the planet." What the focus groups his advisers conducted revealed was that Obama’s political career now depends, in some measure, upon a tamer version of this same feeling, on the complicated dynamics of how white women respond to a charismatic black man.

Early in his run for the U.S. Senate in 2004, Obama’s pollsters discovered that women loved him, especially nice white ladies who like personalities more than politics and definitely don’t like political arguments.

(In other words obama learned how to tap into stupid.)

Saul Alinsky

Alinsky wrote, "Rules for Radicals," a book he dedicated to Lucifer, whom he called the "first radical'"

Alinsky viewed as supremely important the role of the organizer, or master manipulator, whose guidance was responsible for setting the agendas of the People’s Organization. "The organizer," Alinsky wrote, "is in a true sense reaching for the highest level for which man can reach -- to create, to be a 'great creator,' to play God."

One of Obama's early mentors in the Alinsky method was Mike Kruglik, who had this to say to an interviewer of The New Republic, about Obama:

"He was a natural, the undisputed master of agitation, who could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid-fire Socratic dialogue, nudging them to admit that they were not living up to their own standards. As with the panhandler, he could be aggressive and confrontational. With probing, sometimes personal questions, he would pinpoint the source of pain in their lives, tearing down their egos just enough before dangling a carrot of hope that they could make things better."

(Obama the "natural" conman, deciever. Obama could have dedicated his books to his mentor alinsky and his mentor satan.)

Watch Obama work a crowd at a town hall meeting or reading from the teleprompter. He comes out, says a few words in greeting and then begins his laundry list of all the stuff that's wrong with America, getting the audience all revved up. When the crowd is engaged and sufficiently "pissed off," Obama presents a solution to the all the things that are "pissing them off" -- the chosen one, the anointed one, the Obama -- as president.

Alinsky's goal was to slowly turn the United States into a Communist dictatorship; to this end he tried to convince various groups of poor people and labor unions to push for legislation in that direction; he did this by appealing to their self-interest, whether valid or not, instead of using charismatic leadership, but now we have Obama, who is skilled in the Alinsky method and charismatic.

Bill Ayers

The unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers, was a constant during Obama's "Alinsky" period. Alinsky supplied the method but Bill Ayers supplied the money and the connections to the Chicago Left that allowed Obama to grow his activism into political office. When Obama wasn't agitating, he was elbow to elbow with Bill Ayers on one project or another.

Reverend Wright

In the paperback version of "The Audacity of Hope," in the chapter entitled "Faith," beginning on page 195, and ending on page 208, Obama is telling us that he doesn’t really have any profound religious belief, but that in his early Chicago days he felt he needed to acquire some spiritual "street cred."

So, at 28, Obama finally joined a church, in part to deepen what one friend called "a whole web of relationships" in the community. It also gave him a strong political base and a well-connected mentor.

Obama didn't join just any church, but a huge black nationalist church, the Trinity United Church of Christ (UCC). Its pastor, Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, a former Muslim and racist black nationalist, unabashedly preached a "black" gospel" and the Marxist "Black Liberation Theology."

Membership in this congregation gives Obama the political cover he needed. He now introduces himself as a Christian, although he has never been baptized. Swearing allegiance to the "Black Value System" of a church whose foundation is "Black Liberation Theology" does not make a christian.

Harvard

Being the first affirmative-action president of the Harvard Law Review netted Obama a book deal, which he booted, he spent the money but didn't produce a book, but he got a second advance and headed off to Bali, Indonesia, to finish his fable, "Dreams From My Father," the source of almost everything we know about Obama.

ACORN

In the early 90's, Obama married and practiced civil rights law for a couple of years and then, with the publication of "the book," Obama started blossoming out. He cut back on his law practice. He began teaching at the University of Chicago. He co-chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge with Bill Ares. He did legal work and trained ACORN managers and staff.

Chicago Annenberg Challenge or the first obama "stimulus"

One of Ayers' and Obama's schemes, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, spent $150 million to radicalize Chicago schoolchildren, $110 million (including over $60 million in public funds) was spent on a project that, according to the official review, yielded no discernable result.

("yielded no discernable result." This was obama's first real stimulus. It was a pattern for the 300 billion stimulus congress and obama forced on America. The 300 billion "stimulus" has also yielded no discernable result.)

Alice Palmer

Barack Obama was Alice Palmer's Chief of Staff when she attempted an ill-fated run for the US Congress. Alice Palmer was an executive board member of the U.S. Peace Council, which the FBI identified as a communist front group, an affiliate of the World Peace Council, a Soviet front group.

In June 1986, while editor of the Black Press Review, she wrote an article for the Communist Party USA's newspaper, the People's Daily World, now the People's Weekly World. It detailed her experience attending the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and how impressed she was by the Soviet System.

Palmer lost the congressional race to Jesse Jackson, Jr., and decided that she wanted to hang onto her hard-won state senate seat. Most of the community leaders tried to persuade Obama to withdraw and wait his turn. He was a newcomer after all. Obama said no. He challenged hundreds of signatures on his rivals' nominating petitions and kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama's four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot and won unopposed.

Obama first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it.

(This is exactly what affirmative action does. Obama is the first "black" affirmative action president. A total fraud who is not qualified to be president.)

The Communists/Socialists

During his run for the Illinois state senate seat, Obama received the endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Obama was an associate of the Chicago branch of the DSA, and a member of the "New Party," and signed documents seeking their support.

Obama actively sought and received the stamp of approval of a Marxist third party that operated briefly in Chicago between 1992 and 1998. The group was called the "New Party" and was started in 1992 by Daniel Cantor (a former staffer for Jesse Jackson’s 1988 presidential campaign) and Joel Rogers (a sociology and law professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison).

The New Party was a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to endorse and elect leftist public officials -- most often Democrats. The New Party’s short-term objective was to move the Democratic Party leftward, thereby setting the stage for the eventual rise of new Marxist third party.

(Is obama a communist? Yes. This proves it. It is a documented fact.)

Most New Party members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America (Obama was an associate of the Chicago branch), and the militant organization ACORN. The party’s Chicago chapter also included a large contingent from the Committees of Correspondence, a Marxist coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and Communist Party USA members.

Emil Jones

Obama has spent his entire political career trying to win the next step up. Every three years, he has aspired to a more powerful political position. When Obama was considering a run for the US Senate in 2003, he paid an intriguing visit to Emil Jones, Jr., the Illinois Senate Majority Leader.

"You have the power to elect a U. S. senator," Obama told Jones, a former Chicago sewers inspector, who had risen to become one of the most influential African-American politicians in Illinois.

Jones looked at the ambitious young man smiling before him and asked, teasingly: "Do you know anybody I could make a U. S. senator?"

According to Jones, Obama replied: "Me." It was an audacious step in his spectacular rise from the murky political backwaters of Springfield, the Illinois capital.

(I knew obama was from the cesspool of chicago politics but I didn't know another one of his mentors was a former sewers inspector. The cesspool inspector picked obama from the dark pit of chicago politics. This really stinks. The bo is overwhelming.)

Jones had served in the Illinois Legislature for three decades. He represented a district on the Chicago South Side not far from Obama's. He became Obama's kingmaker.

Several months before Obama announced his U.S. Senate bid, Jones called his old friend Cliff Kelley, a former Chicago alderman who now hosts the city's most popular black call-in radio program.

I called Kelley last week and he recollected the private conversation as follows:

"He said, 'Cliff, I'm gonna make me a U.S. senator.'"

"Oh, you are? Who might that be?"

"Barack Obama."

Jones appointed Obama sponsor of virtually every high-profile piece of legislation in the senate, angering many rank-and-file state legislators who had more seniority than Obama and had spent years championing the bills.

"I took all the beatings and insults and endured all the racist comments over the years from nasty Republican committee chairmen," state senator Rickey Hendon, the original sponsor of landmark racial profiling and videotaped confession legislation, yanked away by Jones and given to Obama, complained to me at the time. "Barack didn't have to endure any of it, yet, in the end, he got all the credit."

Every bill Obama passed as a state senator was passed his last year. During his seventh and final year in the state senate, Obama's stats soared. He sponsored a whopping 26 bills passed into law -- including many he now cites in his presidential campaign when attacked as inexperienced.

It was a stunning achievement that started him on the path of national politics -- and he couldn't have done it without Jones.

(This is a perfect example of the affirmative action fraud obama. Obama takes any and all credit for everything but doesn't really do anything.)


Senator Obama

Obama got a boost, when, on June 2004, the billionaire, George Soros threw a big fund-raiser at his New York home for Obama’s Illinois Senate campaign. Soros and family personally chipped in $60,000.

Then the Democratic Party introduced Barack Obama to the nation on July 27th, 2004, when Obama delivered his now-famous speech before the Democratic National Convention. (The telepromper was another mentor.)

On Tuesday, January 16th, 2007, less than two years after his swearing-in, Obama, who has been repeatedly identified as the most liberal member of the U. S. Senate, took the first step toward running for president by filing papers to create a presidential exploratory committee.

Is Obama A Muslim

He's a Black Marxist and an Alinsky-style "community organizer." Alinsky described himself as a communist, as do many of Obama's closest friends and associates.

Yet, there is a part of Obama that is Muslim. There's the prepubescent youngster who lived in a Muslim household, in a Muslim country, attended a Muslim school.

Obama the Narcissistic

Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. They believe that they're superior to others and have little regard for other people's feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

In his pre-campaign book, "The Audacity of Hope," Barack Obama proclaims, "I find comfort in the fact that the longer I'm in politics the less nourishing popularity becomes, that a striving for rank and fame seems to betray a poverty of ambition, and that I am answerable mainly to the steady gaze of my own conscience."

Some might think this odd testimony from a young and inexperienced freshman senator on the cusp of seeking the highest rank, and the most famous position, in the world. It's a bit like a parish priest saying he's happy with his modest lot in life and then declaring he's throwing his hat in the ring to become pope.

But a closer reading reveals a possible explanation. Perhaps he's an adulation junkie. Maybe the diminishing "nourishment" Sen. Obama receives from "popularity" is actually causing him to ratchet up his pursuit of more and more praise just to get the minimal fix he needs.

He won a Grammy for the Best Spoken Word for the CD version of his autobiography, "Dreams from my father." He won his second Grammy award for Best Spoken Word album for "The Audacity of Hope." These were the credentials that qualified him for the presidency. Two books all about himself. (His Nobel prize came later.) There really is nothing else, because he started his campaign for the presidency the day he was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Obama may be more clever than smart. He has chosen not to release his SAT, LSAT, or his GPA scores. The Obama inner circle keeps these a closely guarded secret.

(The affirmative action president must hide his true identity.)

Obama creates disasters. Obama is a disaster.

He creates a and promotes a crisis, like his professors, Cloward and Piven taught him, and then blames somebody, or something else for the fallout. He's been doing it his entire political career. Since he's occupied the Oval Office, he's been blaming George Bush for his own failures, caused by his own lack of judgment. At the end of 2009, he blamed the "fat cat" bankers for the mortgage meltdown that obama helped initiate. He was involved, at the very, very beginning.

Communist Party USA

"We have a lot to do going forward, so let's celebrate our struggles and future victories: the struggle to fund education and health care, to bring Obama's health plan to fruition as a big step forward on the road to a national health service, for jobs and housing for all, against racism and sexism, and for a more just, democratic and peaceful nation and world."

Obama is a no record

Original, vault copy birth certificate -- Not released (lawyers' fees = $2,000,000 ~ birth certificate = $15)
Certification of Live Birth -- Released -- Counterfeit
Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released (if one exists)

Obama/Dunham divorce -- Released (by independent investigators)

Noelani Kindergarten records -- Records lost (this is a big one -- read two frames)
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro adoption records -- Not released

Fransiskus Assisi School School application -- Released (by independent investigators)

Noelani 3rd Grade records -- Not released

Punahou School application -- Missing
Punahou School records -- Not released
Soetoro/Dunham divorce -- Released (by independent investigators)

Selective Service Registration -- Released -- Under suspicion

Social Security Number -- Under suspicion
Occidental College records -- Not released
Passport -- Not released and records scrubbed clean by Obama's terrorism and intelligence adviser
Columbia College records -- Not released
Columbia thesis -- "Soviet Nuclear Disarmament" -- Not released
Harvard College records -- Not released
Harvard Law Review articles -- None

Illinois Bar Records -- Not released
Baptism certificate -- None
Medical records -- Not released -- nor is the source of this nasty scar
Illinois State Senate records -- None
Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost
Law practice client list -- Not released
University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None

The Illinois State Archives told Judicial Watch that they never received any request from Senator Obama to archive any records in his possession. In 2007, Obama told Tim Russert that his records were "not kept."

On the Internet, there is an organized, systematic cleansing of Obama-related content.

A good example is Kristof's famous New York Times article, in which Kristof quotes Obama saying that the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth" and in which Obama recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, "with a first-class [Arabic] accent", that's gone, from The New York Times

Lenin said this about socialism, "The goal of socialism is communism."

(This is also obama's goal. To socialize America. Obama is a traitor.)

The coverup continues

14 months after the election, the list of stuff we don't know about Obama just grows, and grows.

Voters elected an inexperienced, untested man as President of the United States. Since Obama’s inauguration (January, ‘09) he has exhibited severe narcissistic tendencies, accomplished little, and shown an alarming propensity for wild spending to appease his liberal/radical base.

Judge Gonzo Docket 4145 Is No Longer Hidden From The Public

Chrysler Rejection Opinion by Judge Gonzo Docket 4145 Hidden From The Public

Judge Gonzo Docket 4145 Is No Longer Hidden From The Public. Click On The Link Above For A Copy Of The Document.
.......................................................................................

Public Docket For Chrysler Bankruptcy Has Been Sabotaged To Conceal The Fraudulent Dealer Rejection Opinion by Judge Gonzalez.

Leo Donofrio

Public Docket For Chrysler Bankruptcy Has Been Sabotaged To Conceal The Fraudulent Dealer Rejection Opinion by Judge Gonzalez.

Somebody has seen to it that the public no longer has direct access to the fraudulent opinion written by Judge Gonzalez. This is a very recent development which appears to have happened right around February 1, 2010 – the date Judge Gonzalez was awarded the position of Chief Justice – just four days before he issued his denial of our Motion to Reconsider (docket no. 6341). At that time, I noticed the public docket was not available at all for a few days. Now, upon its return, the most important document pertaining to the rejected Chrysler Dealers’ rights has been mysteriously sabotaged out of the docket.
..........................................................................................

This tells me that our hand going forward on appeal is strong and the villains are trying to hide its strength from bloggers, the public and the press. The Rejection Opinion is a public document and has been available through the public docket from June 19, 2010 until very recently.

Welcome to the new Amerika, kids. If the truth hurts, just hide it from view. If the witness doesn’t say what you want him to say, just change the record to make it appear as if he said what you needed him to say to make the case fit your pre-determined opinion. How the hell would Judge Gonzalez explain his patented “judicial ventriloquism” to his students at NYU School of Law? Oh wait, he won’t have to now that his fraudulent opinion has gone missing.

It appears he’s added magic tricks to his ventriloquism act.

by Leo C. Donofrio, Esq.

Obama care is about the implementation of un agenda 21

The real cost of obamacare is 2.3 Trillion not 900 billion as obama claims. Obamacare will not reduce the deficit but massively increase the deficit. The nuclear option or reconciliation as the liberal democrates are not calling it will be used by the IMPOSTER obama to force obamacare on America. Obama won't use the word "reconciliation". "Reconciliation" rules are traditionally used for deficit reduction and health care reform/obamacare will not reduce the deficit.

The bottom line:

Obama will ram obamacare thru congress using the FRAUD of deficit reduction via the "nuclear option" of a 51 vote majority not a 60 vote majority. The BIG LIE is about deficit reduction. Obamacare is not about health care reform. Obamacare is about un agenda 21 or sustainable development. Un agenda 21 is not a conspiracy theory. The state run media is silent on un agenda 21. Obamacare is trojan horse legislation that rips Americans freedoms away. Obamacare is not about healthcare. Obama care is about the implementation of un agenda 21. Story Reports

Sustainable Development or agenda 21 calls for changing the very infrastructure of the nation, away from private ownership and control of property to nothing short of central planning of the entire economy -- often referred to as top-down control.

Earth Summit un agenda 21 or "Sustainable Development"
...........................................................................................
The FRAUD President has said that he wants a health reform bill in large part because it is necessary to get better control of the federal budget. But the bills that have been developed in the House and Senate fall far short of his stated objectives. The spending would far exceed $900 billion through 2019, and the federal budget deficit would increase dramatically, not decrease, when all of the numbers are honestly accounted for.

Looking at these bills over a true 10-year window of full implementation reveals much higher costs. The Senate bill's provisions, even excluding the "doc fix," would total $2.3 trillion over the period 2014 to 2023, with the coverage provisions fully in place.[7] The House bill's true 10-year cost would be comparably high, even excluding the large costs of the physician fee fix.

Obamacare bills are largely paid for by cuts to Medicare of approximately half a trillion dollars. These cuts will presumably be made to payment rates for certain care providers by decreasing inflation updates. The expectation that this will actually occur is almost laughable. At the same time that lawmakers are proposing to pay for health care form using cuts to Medicare, they are trying to pass the “doc fix” legislation to end cuts to Medicare that were enacted to—you guessed it—contain costs. Every year, Congress is supposed to decrease physician payment rates in order to control Medicare spending. And every year, Congress votes to suspend the doctors’ payment decrease due to pressure from the industry. The House recently passed legislation that would get rid of the payment cuts for good. And yet without blinking an eye, they propose to use the same failed method to pay for health care reform.

These cuts to Medicare are even more unlikely considering their full impact. As Capretta points out, “The Chief Actuary of the Medicare program has warned that these arbitrary reductions could have serious consequences for beneficiaries’ access to care, as [they] would push about one out of every five hospital facilities into insolvency.”

The House and Senate bills received positive cost estimates by the Congressional Budget Office based on these weak spending controls and the fact that the CBO analysis looks at the first ten year window, which for both bills, includes ten years of raising revenue, but only six years of spending. The country is facing a fiscal crisis as the population faces a demographic transformation of 30 million citizens entering old age within the next twenty years, Capretta points out. Lawmakers need to acknowledge the precariousness of America’s fiscal future and be honest about the true cost of Obamacare.
.........................................................................................

The Real Budgetary Impact of the House and Senate Health Bills

by James C. Capretta

The Real Budgetary Impact of the House and Senate Health Bills

Looking at these bills over a true 10-year window of full implementation reveals much higher costs. The Senate bill's provisions, even excluding the "doc fix," would total $2.3 trillion over the period 2014 to 2023, with the coverage provisions fully in place.[7] The House bill's true 10-year cost would be comparably high, even excluding the large costs of the physician fee fix.

President Barack Obama pledged in an address to a joint session of Congress in September 2009 that any health care bill he signed would cost no more than $900 billion over 10 years and would not worsen the federal budget deficit in the short or long term.[1]

The bills that have been passed in the House and Senate violate both of those tests. Supporters of these bills point to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cost estimates to support their contention that the health care plans are fiscally responsible. But a closer look at the bills--and what CBO actually said about them--indicates that both spending and the federal debt will go up much more than advertised by the bills' supporters.

Conveniently Ignoring a $200 Billion-Plus "Doc Fix"

Both the President and congressional leaders have signaled that they will not allow a scheduled 21 percent reduction in Medicare physician fees to go into effect in 2010 or later years. Initially, the House bill included a permanent repeal of the planned fee cuts in their version of health reform legislation, released in July 2009, at a cost of $229 billion over 10 years.[2]

However, after the President announced the $900 billion limit in September, House leaders decided to drop this provision from the legislation and pass it in a separate bill. Senate leaders followed a similar course.

But passing a permanent "doc fix" separately does not change the fact that it increases federal spending. When these costs are properly included, neither the House nor the Senate version reduces the federal budget deficit between 2010 and 2019. Assuming about $210 billion for a "doc fix," both bills would actually increase the deficit by $80 billion over a decade.[3]

Non-Coverage Spending in the Bills

In the House bill, the gross cost of the Medicaid expansions and the entitlement to new premium subsidies in the exchange is $1.055 trillion over 10 years. In addition, the House legislation includes scores of other spending provisions costing $230 billion over a decade. With a $210 billion physician fee bill, the total cost of the House's health care effort reaches $1.5 trillion between 2010 and 2019.

In the Senate legislation, the cost of the coverage expansion is $871 billion between 2010 and 2019. Other spending in the bill totals about $90 billion over 10 years. With about $200 billion more for a permanent repeal of the Medicare physician fee cut, the Senate plan's total cost approaches $1.2 trillion.

The Medicare Double-Count

The House and Senate bills rely heavily on Medicare spending reductions to offset the costs of the entitlement expansions. The Senate bill's Medicare cuts total $467 billion.[4] At the same time, the Administration and the congressional sponsors of these bills are also touting the claim that reduced spending from the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund and increased revenues flowing into it would boost the trust fund's reserves and therefore keep the program solvent for several more years.[5] Others have said that this would double-count the same savings twice: once to pay for a new entitlement and again to keep Medicare going.

CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf issued a clarification on December 23 and agreed that the Medicare HI savings cannot be counted twice.[6] Either it is used to offset a new entitlement or it is used to improve the government's capacity to pay future Medicare benefits.

CBO estimates that provisions in the Senate bill would increase Medicare HI revenues by $113 billion between 2010 and 2019 and decrease HI spending by $240 billion over that same period. If these tax increases and spending reduction provisions were set aside entirely to improve the capacity to finance Medicare benefits, the Senate bill would lose more than $350 billion in current offsets, which would mean that the bill increased the federal budget deficit by well over $400 billion in the first decade alone. Removing the HI savings from the House-passed legislation would have a similar impact on the bill's bottom line.

The CLASS Act Gimmick

Both the House- and the Senate-passed bills would stand up an entirely new entitlement program for long-term care services. Under the Community Living Assistance Services and Support (CLASS) Act, eligible participants would be required to pay premiums well in advance of receiving any benefit payments. Consequently, starting this new program from scratch would produce one-time "savings" from premium collections before any beneficiaries start drawing benefits. These premium collections, however, would be needed later to meet entitlement obligations.

This is again a case of double-counting. The premiums are set aside in a fund to pay future claims, but they are also counted by the bills' sponsors as an offset for expanding health coverage. The CLASS Act premiums total $72 billion over 10 years in the Senate bill and $102 billion over the same period in the House bill.

The True 10-Year Window

None of the key provisions to expand coverage would go into effect until 2013 in the House bill and 2014 in the Senate bill. Meanwhile, many of the spending reductions, such as the cut in Medicare Advantage payment rates, would kick in much earlier, as would the tax increases. Consequently, both bills have 10 years worth of spending and revenue "offsets" paying for only six or seven years worth of spending.

Looking at these bills over a true 10-year window of full implementation reveals much higher costs. The Senate bill's provisions, even excluding the "doc fix," would total $2.3 trillion over the period 2014 to 2023, with the coverage provisions fully in place.[7] The House bill's true 10-year cost would be comparably high, even excluding the large costs of the physician fee fix.

The Certainty of Future Entitlement Expansions

Both the House and Senate bills assume that the new entitlement spending for coverage expansion can be held down with so-called firewall provisions, which essentially preclude many tens of millions of individuals from gaining access to premium subsidies. These firewall rules would create large disparities in the federal subsidies made available to workers inside and outside the exchanges. And there would be tens of millions more families outside the exchange than in it, according to CBO.

If enacted as currently written, pressure would build to treat all Americans fairly, regardless of where they get their insurance. One way or another, the subsidies provided to those in the exchanges would be made more widely available, driving the costs of reform much higher than CBO's estimates currently indicate.

An Honest Accounting

The President has said that he wants a health reform bill in large part because it is necessary to get better control of the federal budget. But the bills that have been developed in the House and Senate fall far short of his stated objectives. The spending would far exceed $900 billion through 2019, and the federal budget deficit would increase dramatically, not decrease, when all of the numbers are honestly accounted for.

James C. Capretta served in the Office of Management and Budget during the Bush Administration and is a Fellow in the Economics and Ethics Program of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

.........................................................................................
Hitler's T4 Program Revived In Obama's Health-Care `Reform'. You will have no recourse because the government can't be sued nor will there be any appeal after a committee determines you are unworthy or life. This is what national health care is all about. Yes there are "death care" panels. In effect "killing off old people" its not crazy or stupid to say that because your health care would be determinded by one of several panels, with no appeal. I WOULD CALL THIS A DEATH PANEL!!

Oamacare is The Destruction of Lives Unworthy of Life and is hitlercare warmed over. Un agenda 21 is the blueprint obama is using. The jig is up. The cat is out of the bag. The scam is exposed.

Obamacare template

UN Sustainable Development is the worst of both the left and the right.

...........................................................................................
The Trouble With "Sustainable Development"

By Tom DeWeese

The Trouble With "Sustainable Development"
...........................................................................................
Many Americans appear to be awakening from their slumber of apathy as government forces are making their move for total control of our lives.

But there is a major component missing from those protests. There is a nearly universal lack of understanding of the issue of Sustainable Development and the dangers it poses to our liberty. Consequently, that issue is being left out of the protests.

Meanwhile, as thousands attend the TEA Parties and protest the Federal Reserve, taxes, and out of control federal government, inside their local city halls, international forces are busy turning the communities into little soviets.

We cannot win this battle to restore our Republic if we don’t understand that what we face is not a bunch of random issues -- but a complete agenda of control -- Sustainable Development. Cap N Trade, global warming, population control, gun control, open borders and illegal immigration, higher taxes, higher gas prices, refusal to drill American oil, education restructuring, international IDs, natural health supplement control, food control, farming "reform," control of private property, NAIS and UN Global Governance are all part of the Sustainable Development/Agenda 21 blueprint.

Cities that are currently enacting Sustainable Development policies.

If this is happening in your town (and it is), I urge you to challenge your local city council and mayor to stop these polices. The battles now must be fought on the local level. Remove Sustainable Development from every community and policies out of the federal government will be neutralized. And only then can we be on our way to restoring the American Republic. ------ Tom DeWeese

Sustainable Development: The root of all our problems

In his book, Earth in the Balance, Al Gore warned that a "wrenching transformation" must take place to lead America away from the "horrors of the Industrial Revolution." The process to do that is called Sustainable Development and its’ roots can be traced back to a UN policy document called Agenda 21, adopted at the UN’s Earth Summit in 1992.

Sustainable Development calls for changing the very infrastructure of the nation, away from private ownership and control of property to nothing short of central planning of the entire economy -- often referred to as top-down control. Truly, Sustainable Development is designed to change our way of life.

In short, it’s all about wealth redistribution. Your wealth into a green rat hole.

(This is obama's goal. To spread the wealth around or wealth redistribution. The global warming HOAX is a tool he plans to use to spread the wealth around as he has stated he will do.) Story Reports

During the Cold War, communists tried to get us to surrender our liberties and way of life for the wisdom of Karl Marx. Americans didn’t buy it.

But now, they have taken the same clap trap and wrapped it all in a nice green blanket, scaring us with horror stories about the human destruction of the environment -- and so we are now throwing our liberties on the bon fire like a good old fashioned book burning -- all in the name of protecting the planet.

It sounds so friendly. So meaningful. So urgent. But, the devastation to our liberty and way of life is the same as if Lenin ordered it.

We now have a new language invading our government at all levels. Old words with new meanings fill government policy papers. The typical city council meeting discusses "community development," "historic preservation," and "partnerships" between the city and private business.

Civic leaders organize community meetings run by "facilitators," as they outline a "vision" for the town, enforced by "consensus." No need for debate when you have consensus! People of great importance testify before congressional committees of the dire need for "social justice."

Free trade, social justice, consensus, global truth, partnerships, preservation, stakeholders, land use, environmental protection, development, diversity, visioning, open space, heritage, comprehensive planning, critical thinking, and community service are all part of our new language.

What are they really talking about? What mental pictures come to mind when those words are used? George Orwell realized that those who control language and manipulate key phrases can control policy.

The language is being changed and manipulated to quietly implement a very destructive policy. Whenever you see or hear these words, know that, in every case, they are defining one thing - the implementation of Sustainable Development.

Rather than good management of resources, Sustainable Development has come to mean denied use and resources locked away from human hands. In short, it has become a code word for an entire economic and social agenda.

I have spent most of the past 12 years studying every facet of this new political agenda which is fast becoming a revolution -- touching every aspect of our businesses, our public education system, our private property, our families and our individual lives.

Interestingly, it is not a Republican or Democrat issue. It’s not liberal or conservative. It is being implemented on a purely bipartisan basis. It is now the official policy of the United States, put in force by literally every department of the government. It is the official policy of every state government, and nearly every city, town and county in the nation.

But, I warn you, accepting the perception that Sustainable Development is simply good environmental stewardship is a serious and dangerous mistake.

So what is Sustainable Development? The Sustainablists insist that society be transformed into feudal-like governance by making nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society.

To achieve this, Sustainablist policy focuses on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control.

Keep in mind that America is the only country in the world based on the ideals of private property. But, private property is incompatible with the collectivist premise of Sustainable Development.

If you doubt that, then consider this quote from the report of the 1976 UN’s Habitat I conference which said: "Land. . . cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore, contributes to social injustice."

According to Sustainablist doctrine, It is a social injustice for some to have prosperity if others do not. It is a social injustice to keep our borders closed. It is a social injustice for some to be bosses and others to be merely workers.

Social justice is a major premise of Sustainable Development. Another word for social justice, by the way, is Socialism. Karl Marx was the first to coin the phrase "social justice."

Some officials try to pretend that Sustainable Development is just a local effort to protect the environment -- just your local leaders putting together a local vision for the community. Then ask your local officials how it is possible that the exact language and tactics for implementation of Sustainable Development are being used in nearly every city around the globe from Lewiston, Maine to Singapore. Local indeed.

Sustainable Development is the process by which America is being reorganized around a central principle of state collectivism using the environment as bait.

The best way to understand what Sustainable Development actually is can be found by discovering what is NOT sustainable.

According to the UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report, items for our everyday lives that are NOT sustainable include: Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment (capitalism, free markets).

Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Rio Earth Summit in 1992 said, ". .. Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class -- involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable."

Are you starting to see the pattern behind Cap and Trade, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and all of those commercials you’re forced to watch about the righteousness of Going Green? They are all part of the enforcement if Sustainable Development.

And one of the most destructive tools they use to force it on us is something called the "precautionary principle." That means that any activities that might threaten human health or the environment should be stopped -- even if no clear cause and effect relationship has been established -- and even if the potential threat is largely theoretical.

That makes it easy for any activist group to issue warnings by news release or questionable report and have those warnings quickly turned into public policy -- just in case.

Many are now finding non-elected regional governments and governing councils enforcing policy and regulations. As these policies are implemented, locally-elected officials are actually losing power and decision-making ability in their own communities. Most decisions are now being made behind the scenes in non-elected "sustainability councils" armed with truckloads of federal regulations, guidelines, and grant money.

The three Es

According to its authors, the objective of Sustainable Development is to integrate economic, social, and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity.

The Sustainablists insist that society be transformed into feudal-like governance by making Nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society. As such, every societal decision would first be questioned as to how it might effect the environment. To achieve this, Sustainablist policy focuses on three components; land use, education, and population control and reduction.

Social Equity

As stated, Sustainable Development’s Social Equity plank is based on a demand for "social justice." Today, the phrase is used throughout Sustainablist literature. The Sustainablist system is based on the principle that individuals must give up selfish wants for the needs of the common good, or the "community." How does this differ from Communism?

This is the same policy behind the push to eliminate our nation’s borders to allow the "migration" of those from other nations into the United States to share our individually-created wealth and our taxpayers-paid government social programs. Say the Sustainablists, "Justice and efficiency go hand in hand." "Borders," they say, "are unjust."

Under the Sustainablist system, private property is an evil that is used simply to create wealth for a few. So too, is business ownership. Instead, "every worker/person will be a direct capital owner." Property and businesses are to be kept in the name of the owner, keeping them responsible for taxes and other expenses, however control is in the hands of the "community." That policy is right out of the Socialist handbook.

Economic Prosperity

Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based on one overriding premise: that the wealth of the world was made at the expense of the poor. It dictates that, if the conditions of the poor are to be improved, wealth must first be taken from the rich. Consequently, Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based not on private enterprise but on public/private partnerships.

(This is exactly the policy obama has executed since he became the first FRAUD president. Obama is destroying private interprise on purpose and he is engrafting the government into private partnerships.) Story Reports

In order to give themselves an advantage over competition, some businesses -- particularly large corporations -- now find a great advantage in dealing directly with government, actively lobbying for legislation that will inundate smaller companies with regulations that they cannot possibly comply with or even keep up with. This government/big corporation back-scratching has always been a dangerous practice because economic power should be a positive check on government power, and vise versa. If the two should ever become combined, control of such massive power can lead only to tyranny. One of the best examples of this was the Italian model in the first half of the Twentieth Century under Mussolini’s Fascism.

Together, select business leaders who have agreed to help government impose Sustainablist green positions in their business policies, and officials at all levels of government are indeed merging the power of the economy with the force of government in Public/Private Partnerships on the local, state and federal levels.

As a result, Sustainable Development policy is redefining free trade to mean centralized global trade "freely" crossing (or eliminating) national borders. It definitely does not mean people and companies trading freely with each other. Its real effect is to redistribute American manufacturing, wealth, and jobs out of our borders and to lock away American natural resources. After the regulations have been put in place, literally destroying whole industries, new "green" industries created with federal grants bring newfound wealth to the "partners." This is what Sustainablists refer to as economic prosperity.

(This is the true meaning of the obama stimulus slush fund. Its purpose is not to stimulate the economy but to destroy the economy for the purpose of sustainable development. This is the goal of obama and the un. Complete control of everyone and loss of freedom.) Story Reports

Ecological Integrity

"Nature has an integral set of different values (cultural, spiritual and material) where humans are one strand in nature’s web and all living creatures are considered equal. Therefore the natural way is the right way and human activities should be molded along nature’s rhythms." from the UN’s Biodiversity Treaty presented at the 1992 UN Earth Summit.

(As you can see the UN wants you to, in effect, worship mother earth. The un considers all creatures equal and considers humans just another creature.) Story Reports

This quote lays down the ground rules for the entire Sustainable Development agenda. It says humans are nothing special -- just one strand in the nature of things or, put another way, humans are simply biological resources. Sustainablist policy is to oversee any issue in which man interacts with nature -- which, of course, is literally everything. And because the environment always comes first, there must be great restrictions over private property ownership and control. This is necessary, Sustainablists say, because humans only defile nature.

Under Sustainable Development there can be no concern over individual rights -- as we must all sacrifice for the sake of the environment. Individual human wants, needs, and desires are to be conformed to the views and dictates of social planners. The UN’s Commission on Global Governance said in its 1995 report: "Human activity... combined with unprecedented increases in human numbers... are impinging on the planet’s basic life support system. Action must be taken now to control the human activities that produce these risks"

(The un is saying humans are like an infestation that must be controlled because they are destroying "mother earth". People are impinging on mother earth's life support. Humans must be controlled and eliminated if necessary.) Story Reports

Under Sustainable Development there can be no limited government, as advocated by our Founding Fathers, because, we are told, the real or perceived environmental crisis is too great. Maurice Strong, Chairman of the 1992 UN Earth Summit said: "A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally-damaging consumption patterns. The shift will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations."

(Obama is increasing government every day. He does not want limited government but bigger government to control Americans while working agenda 21 with the un to achive his goal of complete control of America.) Story Reports

The politically based environmental movement provides Sustainablists camouflage as they work to transform the American systems of government, justice, and economics. It is a masterful mixture of socialism (with its top down control of the tools of the economy) and fascism (where property is owned in name only -- with no control). Sustainable Development is the worst of both the left and the right. It is not liberal, nor is it conservative. It is a new kind of tyranny that, if not stopped, will surely lead us to a new Dark Ages of pain and misery yet unknown to mankind.

The Trouble With "Sustainable Development"

Campaign For Liberty: Featured Articles by Tom DeWeese

(These articles reveal what I have been trying to understand. It puts the obama agenda puzzle into a clear picture. Obama and the UN are in bed togeather. Their offspring worship mother earth and want to destroy the US economy. Obama and the UN are producing green bastards that consider humans equal with the animals and elevate mother earth above everything else. America's are being sacrificed on the alter of global warming/climate change.) Story Reports

Now we know why obama's speech is lacking

The state run media isn't reporting all the facts about barry. It seems barry has a drinking problem. Doctors tell Barack Obama to quit smoking and cut down on the booze.
..........................................................................................

The doctors also recommended "moderation of alcohol intake".

When a person is told to moderate his alcohol consumption, that tells me he's drinking too much. And I'm not the only one who interpreted the word "moderation" in that way.

How many beers a day would Obama need to be drinking before his doctor would recommend "moderation of alcohol intake"?

Interesting question.

Now, some could argue that moderation also could mean that he should increase his alcohol intake in order to get the optimal health benefits, but I highly doubt it. It's clear President Obama enjoys adult beverages from all pictures of him in various settings with some kind of adult beverage in his hand, whether it's a beer or a glass of wine at White House dinners and parties, which according to reports he has quite often.

We don't exactly know much President Obama is drinking, but the Mayo Clinic, a hospital system that President Obama praised for its ability to provide outstanding medical care while keeping health care costs down, says this about moderate drinking:

You've likely heard to drink in moderation, but what does that mean? And why is moderation important?

Moderate alcohol use seems to offer some health benefits, particularly for the heart. But too much alcohol raises the stakes, putting you at risk of adverse health consequences.

Whether you drink is up to you and your doctor. But here are some points on alcohol consumption to consider.

Benefits of moderation

Moderate drinking is defined as two drinks a day if you're a male 65 and younger, or one drink a day if you're a female or a male 66 and older. A drink is defined as 12 ounces (355 milliliters) of beer, 5 ounces (148 milliliters) of wine or 1.5 ounces (44 milliliters) of 80-proof distilled spirits.

So if the president's doctors recommended "moderation of alcohol intake" that signals he is drinking more than the maximum recommended two drinks a day, which in the long run can be detrimental instead of beneficial to his health. Now does that mean he's a drunk? Who knows.

One thing for sure he is "drunk" on power.

The inept way he speaks without a teleprompter is a telltale sign something is wrong.

Makes one question how much barry is drinking. He is drinking too much but how much?

Slow down barry, you can't drink away your troubles. Don't use the bottle to induce self esteem. Be a man. Grow up.

Walk like a man. Talk like a man. Get off the booze.

Doctors tell Barack Obama to quit smoking and cut down on the booze

Global warming is a HOAX and these facts prove it

"Global warming" is a political concoction. It is a pretext to massively increase the size of government. The worldwide Marxist movement invented this as a pretext to attack industry and redistribute wealth.

"Global warming" is a political concoction. Climate Depot Evidence

Obama says he's not a Bolshevik but the Communist Party USA loves Obama. "CPUSA and Obama Platforms are Identical." August 8th, 2008: "Forget for the moment about Bill Ayers and Obama's other Communist friends and mentors of the distant past," and they go on to cite how his agenda and theirs are platforms, Obama's and the CPUSA, are identical.

Because obama is a bolshevik, communist marxist he uses the HOAX of "global warming" to attack industry to redistribute the wealth as he said he would do before the election.

Obama told America he would "spread the wealth around". This is what a communist does. Obama is a marxist. This is why he is pushing his obamacare. Obamacare will spread the wealth around by destroying the insurance industry. Obamacare will also cause the death's of millions in the future. Panels of "experts" will determine who will see a doctor or go to a hospital. Panels of "experts" will determine what doctor you can go to for obamacare. Panels of "experts" will determine when you can get an operation. Panels of "experts" and a "health czar" will determine how much you pay to wait in a cue or line before you can get needed care. Most likely you will die waiting for obamacare panels to say you can live.

Massive tax increases to industry and individuals will result in the economy further being destroyed. Obamacare includes huge tax and crimminal penalties.

Obama will require you to buy obamacare or you will be fined or put in jail if you don't.

This is what a state run government does. The state tells you what to do and when to do it. Individual freedom is now controlled by the state. Obama wants to change America into a controlled central state government that is controlled by communists. Obama is a traitor and a communist who is destroying America every chance he gets.
.........................................................................................
Mark Landsbaum: What to say to a global warming alarmist

Mark Landsbaum: What to say to a global warming alarmist
.........................................................................................

It has been tough to keep up with all the bad news for global warming alarmists. We're on the edge of our chair, waiting for the next shoe to drop. This has been an Imelda Marcos kind of season for shoe-dropping about global warming.

At your next dinner party, here are some of the latest talking points to bring up when someone reminds you that Al Gore and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won Nobel prizes for their work on global warming.

ClimateGate – This scandal began the latest round of revelations when thousands of leaked documents from Britain's East Anglia Climate Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of climate skeptics' views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as global warming defenders contend, the "science is settled?"

FOIGate – The British government has since determined someone at East Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data. If their stuff's so solid, why the secrecy?

ChinaGate – An investigation by the U.K.'s left-leaning Guardian newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not only were seriously flawed, but couldn't be located. "Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?" the paper asked. The paper's investigation also couldn't find corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American scientists, leaving unanswered, "how much of the warming seen in recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather than global warming?" The Guardian contends that researchers covered up the missing data for years.

HimalayaGate – An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as lead author of the IPCC's Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research organization, who later admitted it was "speculation" lifted from a popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least got some researcher funded.

PachauriGate – Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced "voodoo science." After the melting-scam perpetrator 'fessed up, Pachauri admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust him.

PachauriGate II – Pachauri also claimed he didn't know before the 192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who "decided to overlook it." Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was "preoccupied." Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where countries like Pachauri's India hoped to wrench billions from countries like the United States to combat global warming's melting glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauri's resignation.

SternGate – One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has been the U.K.'s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that quietly after publication "some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified." Among original claims now deleted were that northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters disclose the truth. Why is that?

SternGate II – A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original research showed no such link. He accused Stern of "going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence." We're shocked.

AmazonGate – The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet advanced as "peer-reveiwed" science. The Times said the assertion actually "was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise," "authored by two green activists" and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group. The "research" was based on a popular science magazine report that didn't bother to assess rainfall. Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original report suggested "up to 40 percent" of Brazilian rain forest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.

PeerReviewGate – The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC's climate change bible, which calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.

RussiaGate – Even when global warming alarmists base claims on scientific measurements, they've often had their finger on the scale. Russian think tank investigators evaluated thousands of documents and e-mails leaked from the East Anglia research center and concluded readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted, driving average temperatures up about half a degree.

Russia-Gate II – Speaking of Russia, a presentation last October to the Geological Society of America showed how tree-ring data from Russia indicated cooling after 1961, but was deceptively truncated and only artfully discussed in IPCC publications. Well, at least the tree-ring data made it into the IPCC report, albeit disguised and misrepresented.

U.S.Gate – If Brits can't be trusted, are Yanks more reliable? The U.S. National Climate Data Center has been manipulating weather data too, say computer expert E. Michael Smith and meteorologist Joesph D'Aleo. Forty years ago there were 6,000 surface-temperature measuring stations, but only 1,500 by 1990, which coincides with what global warming alarmists say was a record temperature increase. Most of the deleted stations were in colder regions, just as in the Russian case, resulting in misleading higher average temperatures.

IceGate – Hardly a continent has escaped global warming skewing. The IPCC based its findings of reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and in Africa on a feature story of climbers' anecdotes in a popular mountaineering magazine, and a dissertation by a Switzerland university student, quoting mountain guides. Peer-reviewed? Hype? Worse?

ResearchGate – The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the university did find "further investigation is warranted" to determine whether Mann engaged in actions that "seriously deviated from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities." Being investigated for only one fraud is a global warming victory these days.

ReefGate – Let's not forget the alleged link between climate change and coral reef degradation. The IPCC cited not peer-reviewed literature, but advocacy articles by Greenpeace, the publicity-hungry advocacy group, as its sole source for this claim.

AfricaGate – The IPCC claim that rising temperatures could cut in half agricultural yields in African countries turns out to have come from a 2003 paper published by a Canadian environmental think tank – not a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

DutchGate – The IPCC also claimed rising sea levels endanger the 55 percent of the Netherlands it says is below sea level. The portion of the Netherlands below sea level actually is 20 percent. The Dutch environment minister said she will no longer tolerate climate researchers' errors.

AlaskaGate – Geologists for Space Studies in Geophysics and Oceanography and their U.S. and Canadian colleagues say previous studies largely overestimated by 40 percent Alaskan glacier loss for 40 years. This flawed data are fed into those computers to predict future warming.

Man made global warming is a total hoax. Obama is a total hoax. The state run media wants you to believe this hoax. Don't believe their lies about the global warming hoax. Don't believe obama's lies about global warming. Don't believe anything obama says without checking his quotes out. You will find he is a habitual liar. Obama like al gore must continue to use the state run propaganda machine to further their goals.

The main goal is to coverup their FRAUD. They are total frauds. The persons of al gore and barry sorento must hide their true intentions. People are invested in the global warming HOAX. Industry is invested in the global warming hoax. People are invested in the obama hoax. Because industry and individuals are invested in the hoax of obama and global warming they are more than willing to perpetuate the HOAX for their own greed. The defective product will continue to be "sold" to the public. Their will be no recall of the HOAX from obama. The HOAX will continue to be sold as a real product that can be used to relieve the grief man has created to destroy the planet. Al gore carbon credits are the bengay of global warming. Green jobs must be created to further the HOAX of man made global warming. Hoax jobs. Hoax president. It all adds up. Story Reports

Some people can think for themselves. Others let the government controlled media to do their thinking. Some people believe lies. Others seek to verify statements and data.

The people who believe in global warming don't verify data or statments. If they did their belief in the lie of global warming would be changed. These people ignore the facts.

If you ignore the facts and believe lies you will believe global warming is real.

These same type of people believe in obama. They ignore the facts. They believe what obama says. They never check out what obama says. Ignoring the facts becomes the truth to people who believe obama and man made global warming.

The strange fact is people who believe obama ignore the fact obama has been proven to be a HOAX as has man made global warming.


Its like they have to much to loose to face the truth. Its easy to go along with the crowd even if the crowd is all wrong.

Some people like obama speak of consensus.

A consensus is general agreement among a group of people.

Consensus is not fact. Fact is not consensus.

The global warming HOAX is based on facts that are not valid. The consensus among global warming scientists cannot be proven nor backed up with facts that indicate the consensus is valid.

A valid consensus is based on facts that are valid.

A consensus means nothing if it is not base on facts that are valid.

Obama's election was based on a consensus of voters who agreed obama was the best choice for president based on invalid facts.

The invalid facts or hidden facts about obama were propagated by the liberal news media to the general public. Anyone who checked out the state run media propaganda knew obama was a hoax and fraud.

America is waking up to the facts about obama and man made global warming.

Nov 2010 is when obama gets a restraining order by the "court" of American voters.

Obama is similar to satan in that he too knows his time is short.

Climate Depot If you want to know the truth.

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine.

It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it. Ronald Reagan
..........................................................................................
Transcript

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

Back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.

There are many ways in which our government has invaded the precincts of private citizens, method of earning a living; our government is in business to the extent of owning more than 19,000 businesses covering 47 different lines of activity. This amounts to a fifth of the total industrial capacity of the United States.

But at the moment I would like to talk about another way because this threat is with us, and at the moment, is more imminent.

One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine.

Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.

So with the American people on record as not wanting socialized medicine, Congressman Ferrand introduced the Ferrand bill. This was the idea that all people of Social Security age, should be brought under a program of compulsory health insurance. Now this would not only be our senior citizens, this would be the dependents and those that are disabled, this would be young people if they are dependents of someone eligible for social security.

Now , Congressman Ferrand, brought the program out on that idea out , on just for that particular group of people. But Congressman Ferrand was subscribing to this foot-in-the door philosophy, because he said, “If we can only break through and get our foot inside the door, then we can expand the program after that.

Walter Ruther said, “It’s no secret that the United Automobile Workers is officially on record of backing a program of national health insurance. And by national health insurance, he meant socialized medicine for every American.

Well, let us see what the socialists themselves have to say about it. They say once the Ferrand bill is passed this nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicine capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population. Now we can’t say we haven’t been warned.

Now Congressman Ferrand is no longer a Congressman of the United States government. He has been replaced, not in his particular assignment, but in his backing of such a bill by Congressman King of California. It is presented in the idea of a great emergency that millions of our senior citizens are unable to provide needed medical care. But this ignores that fact that in the last decade, 127 million of our citizens, in just 10 years, have come under the protection of some form of privately owned medical or hospital insurance.

Now the advocates of this bill when you try to oppose it challenge you on an emotional basis. They say, "What would you do? Throw these poor people out to die with no medical attention?”

That’s ridiculous and of course no one is advocating it. As a matter of fact, in the last session of Congress a bill was adopted known as the Kerr/Mills bill. Now without even allowing this bill to be tried to see if it works, they have introduced this King bill, which is really the Ferrand bill.

What is the Kerr/Mills bill? It is a frank recognition of the medical need or problem of the senior citizens I have mentioned and it has provided from the federal government, money to the states and the local communities that can be used at the discretion of the state to help those people who need it.

Now what reason could the other people have for backing a bill which says we insist on compulsory health insurance for senior citizens on a basis of age alone regardless of whether they are worth millions of dollars, whether they have an income, whether they are protected by their own insurance, whether they have savings.

I think we can be excused for believing that as ex-congressman Ferrand said, this was simply an excuse to bring about what they wanted all the time -- socialized medicine.

James Madison in 1788 speaking to the Virginia convention said, “Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

They want to attach this bill to Social Security and they say here is a great insurance program; now instituted, now working.

Let’s take a look at Social Security itself. Again, very few of us disagree with the original premise that there should be some form of savings that would keep destitution from following unemployment by reason of death, disability or old age. And to this end, Social Security was adopted, but it was never intended to supplant private savings, private insurance, pension programs of unions and industries.

Now in our country under our free-enterprise system we have seen medicine reach the greatest heights that it has in any country in the world. Today, the relationship between patient and doctor in this country is something to be envied any place. The privacy, the care that is given to a person, the right to chose a doctor, the right to go from one doctor to the other.

But let’s also look from the other side. The freedom the doctor uses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms, it’s like telling a lie. One leads to another. First you decide the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government, but then the doctors are equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him he can’t live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go some place else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.

This is a freedom that I wonder if any of us has a right to take from any human being. I know how I’d feel if you my fellow citizens, decided that to be an actor I had to be a government employee and work in a national theater. Take it into your own occupation or that of your husband. All of us can see what happens once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a man’s working place and his working methods, determine his employment. From here it's a short step to all the rest of socialism, to determining his pay and pretty soon your son won’t decide when he’s in school where he will go or what he will do for a living. He will wait for the government to tell him where he will go to work and what he will do.

In this country of ours, took place the greatest revolution that has ever taken place in the world’s history; the only true revolution. Every other revolution simply exchanged one set of rulers for another. But here, for the first time in all the thousands of years of man’s relations to man, a little group of men, the founding fathers, for the first time, established the idea that you and I had within ourselves the God given right and ability to determine our own destiny. This freedom was built into our government with safeguards. We talk democracy today, and strangely, we let democracy begin to assume the aspect of majority rule is all that is needed. The “majority rule” is a fine aspect of democracy provided there are guarantees written in to our government concerning the rights of the individual and of the minorities.

What can we do about this? Well, you and I can do a great deal. We can write to our congressmen and to our senators. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms. And at the moment, the key issue is, we do not want socialized medicine.

In Washington today, 40 thousand letters, less than 100 per congressman are evidence of a trend in public thinking.

Representative Hallock of Indiana has said, “When the American people wants something from Congress, regardless of its political complexion, if they make their wants known, Congress does what the people want."

So write, and if this man writes back to you and tells you that he too is for free enterprise, that we have these great services and so forth, that must be performed by government, don’t let him get away with it.

Show that you have not been convinced. Write a letter right back and tell him that you believe government economy and fiscal responsibility, that you know governments don’t tax to get the money they need; governments will always find a need for the money they get and that you demand the continuation of our free enterprise system.

You and I can do this. The only way we can do it is by writing to our congressmen even we believe that he's on our side to begin with. Write to strengthen his hand. Give him the ability to stand before his colleagues in Congress and say that he has heard from my constituents and this is what they want. Write those letters now call your friends and them to write.

If you don’t, this program I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country until one day as Normal Thomas said we will wake to find that we have socialism, and if you don’t do this and I don’t do this, one of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.

(Ronald Reagan had a crystal ball into the future. Reagan could have been talking about the disaster plan obama wants to force on America. Reagan could have been calling obama a socialist. Reagan knew if an obama type socialist health care plan was voted into law America will be telling our children what it was like when American men were free.) Story Reports

During the FRAUD'S summit obama's narcissism was on display. It is a mental illness that controls the imposter obama.

Dismissing facts as talking points and not answering or addressing the facts is how obama evaded questions he should have answered. The facts about the disaster obama is pushing on America don't matter to him. All obama wants to do is gain control of our freedom through his obamacare bill. During his walk back to the whitehouse I noticed he turned several times to just look at the camera a few hundred feet away. Obama was overly aware of the tv camera. He seemed to be bothered the tv camera was watching him walk with others of his inept group of advisors. Obama was overly concerned with his perception on camera. I realized then that this is what obama is all about. Obama is overly concerned about his perception on camera and ignores America's desire for him to stand down and cease and desist from pushing an unwanted obamacare fraud on America. He truly is a man/child as Rush calls him.

To me 2 things are obvious about obama. Story Reports

(1) He truly is an "affirmitive action" president. Obama is not capable of being a success as president. He seems to lack the mental capacity to grasp the task he is assigned to execute.

(2) He is a narcissist. His abilities don't match his perception of himself. Obama thinks he is successful because he thinks anything he does is successful. He cannot see his is a total failure and ignores any an all criticism of himself. The facts don't matter to obama. Only obama matters to obama.

Obama Uses Liberal Projection

Liberal projection is the liberal debating tactic where 'A' accuses their enemy 'B' of doing what 'A' is actually already doing. In politics, the classical example is accusing your opponent of a smear campaign while running one yourself.

Some examples of liberal projection include:

* Accusing conservatives of suppressing free speech, while censoring Conservative viewpoints.
* Claiming "freedom of religion" to oppress Christianity.
* Saying their opponents are moral degenerates while tolerating homosexuality.
* Acting as if conservative politicians are irredemably corrupt, while ignoring graft among liberal ones.
* Claiming conservatives are "closed minded" while promoting false scientific theories.

Etc Etc
.......................................................................................

Obama: Yeah, I Kinda Lied About Health Care
.......................................................................................
Obama Said:

The last thing I will say, though — let me say this about health care and the health care debate, because I think it also bears on a whole lot of other issues. If you look at the package that we’ve presented — and there’s some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating. For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your — if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you’re not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge.

(What a sick liar. No provisions were "snuck in".)

Shameless Liar: Actually Those Health Care Talks Really Were on CSPAN

Barack Obama can’t help himself. Today, in front of national cameras, the radical claimed that his hidden health care discussions were actually on CSPAN:

“The truth of the matter is that, if you look at the health care process, just over the course of the year, overwhelmingly the majority of it actually was on C-SPAN because it was taking place in Congressional hearings in which you guys were participating. How many committees were that that helped to shape this bill? Countless hearings took place.”

(Obama is a sick liar. A man who believes his own lies.)

The most telling thing that narcissists do is contradict themselves. They will do this virtually in the same sentence, without even stopping to take a breath. It can be trivial or it can be serious. They will lie to you about things that you did together. They will misquote you to yourself. If you disagree with them, they’ll say you’re lying, making stuff up, or are crazy.

Lately obama has questioned those who question his citizenship.

He has said he is not a bolshevik or communist.

He admitted lying about some of the provisions of health care to republicans.

Obama is a sick man. A man who believes his own lies. Obama is a dangerous man. A man without a country. A traitor.

He knows what the American people think he really is.

74 Central Falls High School teachers are on the gallos

Education Action Group Foundation

The nations schools should follow rhode island superintendent gallos example.

Gallo’s recent decision to push past teachers union obstruction and do what’s best for the district’s struggling high school students is a prime example of the bold actions needed to turn around the nation’s failing schools.

Gallo recommended firing all 74 Central Falls High School teachers after the local teachers union refused to sign off on long overdue reforms needed to save the chronically failing school, which has been on the state’s list of underperforming schools for seven years. Less than half of Central Falls High School’s students graduate and only seven percent are proficient in math, state data shows.

Gallo offered to pay teachers $30 an hour for some of the additional duties, and expected them to kick in a bit of their own time to improve instruction. Central Falls Teachers’ Union balked, then demanded $90 per hour for the extra work.

(The teachers union ignored Dr Gallos's warnings that she would take action if extra work was not done by the teachers to improve the students grades. The union ignored her warnings about under performance. So today Feb 24, 2010 letters of termination are being mailed out. Union pressure from around the country is being focused on the "gallos" that have been erected to remove the "bad apple" teachers.

Obama type thugs will try to reverse Dr Gallos decision. It was the correct decision. This type of collective is similar to the collective mindset of the current democrate majority. The mindset is we will do what we want and don't care what you think. It seems poor teacher performance is on par with the obama administration's performance.

America is getting ready to fire obama in Nov 2010. Dr Gallos has fired the bad apple teachers today. I agree.) Story Reports

We believe the situation in Central Falls is a perfect example of the “me first” teachers union mentality plaguing school districts across the country. Affiliates of the nation’s two largest teachers unions, the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, have long opposed virtually any reforms that bring accountability to the classroom, or affect the union’s bottom line.

We are applauding Gallo’s efforts with the billboard above. It should be on display in downtown Central Falls by the end of the week.

We trust her courageous actions will be supported by the state’s education leaders, who charged her with turning the school around. Hopefully, Gallo’s work in Central Falls will serve as a catalyst for other schools to stand up for their students.

It is about time somebody did.

Superintendent Gallo’s actions are tough but necessary. The entitlement mentality and the notion that teachers unions have the right to obstruct critical reforms that will benefit children has got to come to end. Hopefully Gallo’s brave stand will serve as a flash point for other underperforming schools across America.

Virtually every other sector of the economy is being asked to step up, pitch in and help our country through these difficult times. To have a teachers union with its hand out – and penalizing children on top of it – is particularly insulting.

Hopefully Gallo’s actions serve as a shot across the bow of every teachers union that is putting its interests ahead of the children they purport to serve.

Education Action Group Foundation

(The union represented all the teachers. I'm sure not every teachers was a bad apple. The bad apples must include the teachers union. Its all or nothing with this union. The bad apples that were mixed in with the other apples resulted in ALL THE APPLES BEING THROWN OUT. This union representing the teachers works like the federal government. The federal government works on the assumption of a collective and not the individual. This is why obama supports and inforces the collective decision of unions. The collective form of government is communism. Obama represents a bad apple community organizer lecturer who is a union president that represents the collective.) Story Reports

The ONE as obama has been called is the ONE BAD APPLE THAT SPOILS THE BUNCH!