Right Wing Extremists A Threat?

Homeland Security has put out an assessment on right wing extremism. Since left wing extremists are for abortion on demand, partial birth abortion, unlimited spending, bigger government and universal healthcare, just to name a few, then what is wrong with the right wingers? Why is Homeland Security involved? Now we know that there are those on either side of the fence that go too far but why the need for a ten page document? It says that the rights are mainly anitgoverment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state and local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. The one that gets me is the concern with returning veterans because they possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right wing extremists. The document says these veterans have violent capabilities that could be useful. Well if the government is going to spend my money, my children's money, grandchildren's money in the idiotic spending bill you don't have to be a veteran to have these capabilities. Look at the Tea Party's that have gone on today. There were left and right wing people at the protests. People are just fed up with our government and want action now. In my opinion the government sees those who believe in the Constitution as a threat because the Constitution holds them in check of what they can and can't do. From this document the right are the ones holding more to the Constitution than the left. Maybe that's why they are scared.

Will bill give Obama control of Internet?

A pair of bills introduced in the U.S. Senate would grant the White House sweeping new powers to access private online data, regulate the cybersecurity industry and even shut down Internet traffic during a declared "cyber emergency." Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., are both part of what's being called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, which would create a new Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor, reportable directly to the president and charged with defending the country from cyber attack. Privacy advocates and Internet experts have been quick to sound the alarm over the act's broadly drawn government powers. The whole thing smells bad to me," writes Larry Seltzer in eWeek, an Internet and print news source on technology issues. "I don't like the chances of the government improving this situation by taking it over generally, and I definitely don't like the idea of politicizing this authority by putting it in the direct control of the president." In a statement explaining the bill's introduction, Sen. Rockefeller said, "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs – from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records – the list goes on." Critics, however, have pointed to three actions Rockefeller and Snowe propose that may violate both privacy concerns and even constitutional bounds: First, the White House, through the national cybersecurity advisor, shall have the authority to disconnect "critical infrastructure" networks from the Internet – including private citizens' banks and health records, if Rockefeller's examples are accurate – if they are found to be at risk of cyber attack. The working copy of the bill, however, does not define what constitutes a cybersecurity emergency, and apparently leaves the question to the discretion of the president. Second, the bill establishes the Department of Commerce as "the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information," including the monitoring of private information networks deemed a part of the "critical infrastructure." Third, the legislation proposes implementation of a professional licensing program for certifying who can serve as a cybersecurity professional. According to Granick, granting the Department of Commerce oversight of the "critical" networks, such as banking records, would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information obtained without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution's prohibition against unlawful search and seizure.

Universal Healthcare, Unhealthy?

We have all heard the talk about how everybody deserves healthcare. No, not everybody deserves healthcare, it is a privilege. If you work you pay for your coverage and your families coverage under the health insurance your employer provides. Under universal healthcare the government provides this service for you and they get the money to pay for this from, you guessed it, you and me the tax payers. If you look at Canada or any other country that has universal healthcare you will see that you will be very limited in the service you need. In Europe there is a waiting list for the waiting list. Some people go weeks, months and even years waiting to have surgery for whatever illness they have and some end up dying in the process. If you remember just not long ago Natasha Richardson died from a blow to the head from a skiing accident. Although she refused treatment at the scene she complained of headaches not long after and was rushed to the hospital, but the drive took 2 hours. They had to drive because Canada did not have enough money to buy the helicopter needed for such a transport. When they arrived at the hospital they found out the hospital did not have the equipment to run the appropriate tests so they had to drive to another hospital. If she was here in the United States more than likely she would not have died. So, I ask you, do you think universal healthcare is a good idea?

Government Motors

General Motors name could be changing to Government Motors. Since being bailed out GM has said goodbye to it's CEO on the request, or demand, of the government. How many more companies will be under government rule? If the government giveth the government can taketh away. The Pres. announced that all warranties will be covered but he didn't tell the people that they would be paying for it. Since the government has no money, except what they tax, print or borrow, then how can they cover the warranties? You and me that's how. The bailout is said to be an investment, using tax payer money, so why don't they just give out free cars to everybody? We are never going to get a return on this so called investment. The government has proved time and time again that they cannot manage anything. Look at our debt. Since it takes gov. so long to get anything done, does it make you feel any better knowing that gov. employees will now be working on your car, if you own a GM? I suggest that nobody buy from GM. Hopefully this will send a message to gov. that they need to let businesses fail when they fail to operate there business properly.

Should Muslims be in the White House?

How would you feel if Muslims were staffed in the White House? This could be a reality. Now all Muslims are not radicals waiting for the day of jihad but, some are. How would you know the difference? If they were asked would they be honest? Would you take the chance? These are questions that should seriously be considered. Barack Obama is conducting his own affirmative action program to get more Muslims in the White House. So far, 45 Ivy League grads, Fortune 500 executives and government officials have been submitted for consideration. J. Saleh Williams, program coordinator for the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association, sifted through more than 300 names as part of the search. "It was mostly under the radar," Williams said. "We thought it would put (the president) in a precarious position. We didn't know how closely he wanted to appear to be working with the Muslim American community." The move began with Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn, who took his oath of office with a hand on the Quran, to solicit the resume of what he considered to be the nation's most qualified adherents of Islam. In 1991, Mohamed Akram wrote a memo for the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood that explained its work in America as "a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." As previously stated all Muslims are not out to destroy America but what if lets say 5 out of the 45 Ivy League grads are and they are now working in the White House. Is this a good idea? You don't have to think too long about this one, the answer is NO! So why is the Pres. entertaining this insane idea? Is America safe anymore?

National Civilian Security Force?

On the campaign trail President Obama suggested forming a National Civilian Security Force, see video. He says it should be just as well funded as our military and that we should not only rely on our military. Where are these these people going to come from? Would you believe that he is wanting your children to fulfill this role? In H.R. 1388 the word "mandatory" was used to say that your children would have to perform 50 hours of community service at a camp. The wording was changed in H.R. 1388 but in another bil, H.R. 144, the word "mandatory" shows up again. Now why is this "mandatory"? When this was first introduced it was said to be "voluntarily", but why the sudden change? The newest plan says the aim is "to establish the Congressional Commission on Civic Service to study methods of improving and promoting volunteerism and national service, and for other purposes." It would be directed to identify how issues that deter volunteerism "and national service" can be overcome, determine what role should government have "in overcoming" those issues, evaluate the "existing databases" for linking "would-be volunteers and service providers," and referred to the "workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement." Like the provisions in the earlier bill, it also includes children down to primary school, requiring a review of "the means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding and promoting service options for primary and secondary school students and by raising awareness of existing incentives." The plan in the earlier bill generated this concern from Resistnet.com: "This is the equivalent of brown shirts." If you do not know what a brown shirt is just think of Hitler's army. What is behing all this? If we look into Pres. Obama's history in 1983 he became a community organizer in the Chicago-based Developing Communities Project, an organization that operated according to principles articulated by Saul Alinsky, whose 1971 book "Rules for Radicals" articulated a socialist strategy for gaining political power to redistribute wealth from the "haves" to the "have-nots." Alinsky was a socialist/communist, and now Pres. Obama is starting to implement these tactics to destroy America.

Another Court Helps Obama Hide Truth:Is He A Natural-Born Citizen?

Barack Obama's attorneys have taken another step toward destroying the Constitution of the United States—this time in a California State Court. Those attorneys, working with liberal California State Attorney General Jerry Brown, convinced the Judge at a March 13, 2009 hearing to rule that only Members of Congress can challenge the qualifications of Mr. Obama to serve as President. The Judge further ruled that a challenge can only be made on the 6th day of January following the meeting of the Presidential electors, at the session of Congress where the vote of the Electoral College is counted and the results announced. To use the Judge's words, this is "the exclusive means for challenges to the qualifications of President..." Further, the Court blocked a subpoena for the college records of Mr, Obama! These vital records could have proven whether Barack Hussein Obama is eligible to serve as President of the United States, or whether he is a USURPER, a FRAUD, sitting in the oval office without any legal authority to do so! The problem is we just do not know whether Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.We do know that Barack Obama's maternal step-grandmother has proclaimed that she was was present at his birth in Mombasa, in what is now Kenya! We do know that a fake birth certificate showed up on Obama's website! We do know that Mr. Obama's legal team is doing everything that it can, in every case filed over this issue; to make sure that no one has access to his birth certificate! This is part of an email I received from USJF(United States Justice Foundation). As you can tell there is a battle going over the citizenship of Pres. Obama. I would encourage you to visit USJF's site and donate or to educate yourself on this important matter, our Constitution depends on it.