Thirty One Articles of Impeachment against Obama
By PETER PATON
There is a growing groundswell within American Republican and Tea Party ranks that impeachment proceedings should be initiated against President Obama on a whole list of violations of the Constitution and the War Powers Act
Congressmen Allen West of Florida (R-Florida) and Darrell Issa (R- California) have consistently and loudly criticized the president for overstepping the political mark and bypassing Congress’s approval on a whole range of dubious policies and issues:and the recent Obama attack on the Supreme Court of Justice and the Russian ” Open Mic ” gaffe on National Security, leads to one question: Is Barack Obama making his own case for impeachment? Obama did not become the Democratic nominee for President without the help of several leaders of the Democratic Party who knew that he was not eligible for office
Listed below are the Thirty One Articles of Impeachment.
1. Appointment of a “shadow government” of some 35+ individuals termed “czars” who are not confirmed by the Senate and respond only to the president, yet have overarching regulatory powers – a clear violation of the separation of powers concept.
2. No congressional support for Libyan action (violation of the War Powers Act ).
3. Betraying of allies ( Israel and Great Britain. Obama has placed the security of our most trusted ally in the Middle East, Israel, in danger while increasing funding to the Palestinian Authority (Fatah, just another Islamic terrorist group) whilst they have enjoined a reconciliation pact with long-standing terrorist group Hamas and the disclosure of British nuclear secrets to the Russians in the Start Treaty.
4. Backdoor implementation of the DREAM Act which would grant 22 million illegals amnesty.
5. Telegraphing troop reductions to enemies – against the consult of his experienced field commanders – while embracing negotiations with our enemy, the Taliban, and recognizing another, the Muslim Brotherhood.
6. Betrayal of Arizona. Obama brought a federal lawsuit against a sovereign state, Arizona, seeking to protect its citizens from this threat of mass illegal immigration
7. Obama’s Failure to enforce U.S. law, the Defense of Marriage Act. He’s stripped America of its moral base by his support for homosexuality and the attack on marriage between a man and a women
8. Support of an inept and incompetent attorney general who has failed to prosecute voter intimidation cases (New Black Panther Party), initiated a dangerous gun-smuggling program (Operation Fast and Furious) – which resulted in deaths to one of our own law enforcement agents.
9. Increasing the regulatory burden on American business through bypassing the legislative process with his executive branch agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration.
Some of the main tactics used by the mainstream media and Obama to mislead the masses are as follows:
Lie Big, Retract Quietly: Mainstream media sources (especially newspapers) are notorious for reporting flagrantly dishonest and unsupported news stories on the front page, then quietly retracting those stories on the very back page when they are caught. In this case, the point is to railroad the lie into the collective consciousness. Once the lie is finally exposed, it is already too late, and a large portion of the population will not notice or care when the truth comes out.
Unconfirmed or Controlled Sources As Fact: Cable news venues often cite information from “unnamed” sources, government sources that have an obvious bias or agenda, or “expert” sources without providing an alternative “expert” view. The information provided by these sources is usually backed by nothing more than blind faith.
Calculated Omission: Otherwise known as “cherry picking” data. One simple piece of information or root item of truth can derail an entire disinformation news story, so instead of trying to gloss over it, they simply pretend as if it doesn’t exist. When the fact is omitted, the lie can appear entirely rational. This tactic is also used extensively when disinformation agents and crooked journalists engage in open debate.
Distraction and the Manufacture of Relevance: Sometimes the truth wells up into the public awareness regardless of what the media does to bury it. When this occurs their only recourse is to attempt to change the public’s focus and thereby distract them from the truth they were so close to grasping. The media accomplishes this by “over-reporting” on a subject that has nothing to do with the more important issues at hand. Ironically, the media can take an unimportant story, and by reporting on it ad nauseum, cause many Americans to assume that because the media won’t shut-up about it, it must be important!
Dishonest Debate Tactics: Sometimes, men who actually are concerned with the average American’s pursuit of honesty and legitimate fact-driven information break through and appear on TV. However, rarely are they allowed to share their views or insights without having to fight through a wall of carefully crafted deceit and propaganda. Because the media know they will lose credibility if they do not allow guests with opposing viewpoints every once in a while, they set up and choreograph specialized TV. debates in highly restrictive environments which put the guest on the defensive, and make it difficult for them to clearly convey their ideas or facts. Sometimes this is called “Fair and Balanced.”
TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called “Alinsky Tactics.” Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist, and champion of the lie as a tool for the “greater good”; essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His “Rules for Radicals” were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one’s political opposition. But is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies, and by sacrificing one’s ethics? In reality, his strategies are the perfect format for corrupt institutions and governments to dissuade dissent from the masses. Today, Alinsky’s rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition.
Alinsky’s Strategy: Win At Any Cost, Even If You Have To Lie
Alinsky’s tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world, but they are most visible
Please pass this around
We meet in a Banquet room, if you want to eat you need to come early and eat at the restaurant next door. We will have coffee and a few sweet treats.
We will have a few speakers and this time we’ll have a question and answer time.
Bradlee Dean will be one of our speakers
John H. Cox will also be speaking about removing special interest from California politics
Stay tuned We are also working on a few others….
6:30 – 8:30
Andres Restaurant 1235 Morena Blvd, San Diego, CA
Parking has been approved at the lot across the street, as long as its after 6 and not in marked “Reserved” spaces. See pic below:
By: Ann Coulter
8/15/2012 05:11 PM
My smash best seller “Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America” has just come out in paperback — and not a moment too soon! Democrats always become especially mob-like during presidential election campaigns.
The “root cause” of the Democrats’ wild allegations against Republicans, their fear of change, their slogans and insane metaphors, are all explained by mass psychology, diagnosed more than a century ago by the French psychologist Gustave Le Bon, on whose work much of my own book is based.
Le Bon’s 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was carefully read by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini in order to learn how to incite mobs. Our liberals could have been Le Bon’s study subjects.
With the country drowning in debt and Medicare and Social Security on high-speed bullet trains to bankruptcy, the entire Democratic Party refuses to acknowledge mathematical facts. Instead, they incite the Democratic mob to hate Republicans by accusing them of wanting to kill old people.
According to a 2009 report — before Obama added another $5 trillion to the national debt — Obama’s own treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, stated that in less than 10 years, spending on major entitlement programs, plus interest payments on the national debt, would consume 92 cents of every dollar in federal revenue. Continue reading
In 1980, when President Reagan asked Americans, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago”, it was still possible to campaign on a theme as simple as the job performance of the other guy. But now, 32 years later, the campaign hinges on a much more fundamental split among the voting population.
Romney appeals to voters who are dissatisfied with the last four years. Obama appeals to voters who are dissatisfied with America.
This basic gap was obscured in the 2008 campaign by the window trappings of inspiration. Among all the plastic pillars and stolen quotes from poets who stole them from sermons, it was harder to see that the underlying theme of the campaign was dissatisfaction with America. But in 2012, Obama can no longer run as a reformer or an optimist.
The coalition that he committed to last year is a coalition of those who are unhappy with America, not in the last four years, but in the last two-hundred years. Its core is composed of groups that fear democracy and distrust the will of the people. There is no optimism here, but a deeply rooted pessimism about human nature and the country as a whole. It is the Democratic Party’s coalition against democracy.
After 2010, the numbers were crunched, and it was clear that Obama and the Democrats could not win a mainstream campaign. Instead, they targeted narrow groups, stirred up conflicts over issues aimed at that group, whether it was union pensions, racism or birth control. There was no more pretense of a national election, only a frenzied rush to polarize as many groups as possible and join them together into an acrimonious coalition, not so much for anything, as against Republicans.
There isn’t any inspiration here. Just paranoia over everything from gay marriage to abortion to racial profiling to illegal immigration. A dozen illegal benefits being handed out with the explicit threat that they will be lost if Romney wins. A dozen mini-civil wars being stirred up to divide Americans and set them at each other’s throats for the benefit of the Obama campaign.
From Occupy Wall Street to Wisconsin, from Trayvon Martin to Chick-fil-A, the goal of these manufactured conflicts has been to divide and conquer the electorate by emphasizing group rights over individual economic welfare.
Obama can’t win on the economy. He can’t win on foreign policy. He can’t win on any aspect of his administration
Obama can’t win on the economy. He can’t win on foreign policy. He can’t win on any aspect of his administration. All he can do is stir up violence and then promise to heal the country in his second term while winking to all the representatives of the grievance groups. It’s not a new game, but the Democratic Party has never played it quite this baldly in a national election. And if it succeeds, then national politics will have finally been reduced to the level of a Chicago election.
What happened to THEM paying their “Fair Share”
Posted 01/26/2012 08:18 AM ET
How embarrassing this must be for President Obama, whose major speech theme so far this campaign season has been that every single American, no matter how rich, should pay their “fair share” of taxes.
Because how unfair — indeed, un-American — it is for an office worker like, say, Warren Buffet’s secretary to dutifully pay her taxes, while some well-to-do people with better educations and higher incomes end up paying a much smaller tax rate.
Or, worse, skipping their taxes altogether.
A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama’s executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for Mr. Fair Share apparently haven’t paid any share, let alone their fair share.
Previous reports have shown how well-paid Obama’s White House staff is, with 457 aides pulling down more than $37 million last year. That’s up seven workers and nearly $4 million from the Bush administration’s last year.
Nearly one-third of Obama’s aides make more than $100,000 with 21 being paid the top White House salary of $172,200, each.
The IRS’ 2010 delinquent tax revelations come as part of a required annual agency report on federal employees’ tax compliance. Turns out, an awful lot of folks being paid by taxpayers are not paying their own income taxes.
The report finds that thousands of federal employees owe the country more than $3.4 billion in back taxes. That’s up 3% in the past year.
That scale of delinquency could annoy voters, hard-pressed by their own costs, fears and stubbornly high unemployment despite Joe Biden’s many promises.
STEALING THE ELECTION OF 2012
By: Roger Hedgecock
Americans take the integrity of our elections for granted. Every citizen has an equal right to vote, and every vote cast is counted. Rubbish.
The plan goes something like this.
1) Sign up illegal aliens to vote.
I walked door-to-door in 2010 canvassing for Republican congressional candidate Van Tran in the Anaheim, Calif.,-area district now represented by Democrat Loretta Sanchez. Our team ran across people who were listed as registered voters in rolls obtained from the county registrar who openly admitted they were illegal and stated they could not vote and had never voted.
How did the illegals get on the voter roll? The federal Motor Voter Law requires local welfare offices, social service agencies and motor vehicle departments to offer voter registration forms to everyone who comes in, no questions asked. ACORN-like groups have long practiced signing up new “voters” at places where illegals congregate.
In California, the voter registration card requires a check in the box stating you are a citizen of the U.S. The box is always checked and nobody ever questions it.
Does the illegal alien actually vote? Apparently not. Another box on the registration form requests a permanent mail-in ballot be sent to the “voter.” The mailing address is different from the “voter’s” residence address, meaning that the the illegal alien “voter” never receives a ballot and never votes. The mail-in ballots are sent to another location and someone else votes and mails back the ballot for the new “voter.”
Random checks of these mailing addresses show the same addresses over and over. This is election fraud on an organized level. It’s going on now in every state.
Any attempt to stop this corruption would cause Obama to go to court to defend the right of illegals to register to vote
The Obama administration is infamously suing Arizona for daring to enforce federal immigration laws that Obama will not enforce. One such Arizona law requires people registering to vote to provide proof of citizenship. The case of Gonzalez v. State of Arizona challenges the validity of that law.
Last week, the Obama Justice Department filed a late amicus brief in the Gonzalez case urging the court to find that Arizona may not require information to validate claims of citizenship made on a voter registration form.
2) Sign up felons to vote.
Following the 2000 showdown in Florida, the Democrats started a nationwide campaign to register felons to vote. A 2004 editorial in the New York Times, for example, criticized Florida for purging 47,000 felons from the voting rolls while admitting that Florida law barred felons from voting. The editorial castigated 35 states that likewise had some level of restriction on voting by felons.
In 2011, for example, the state of Ohio reported that 18,500 dead people were still listed as voters. Local registrars were requested to purge the rolls of dead people as required by Ohio law and apparently not consistently done.
A report from Houston, Tex., tells of 4,462 dead voters still on the rolls there, many still voting. Relatives of these dead voters expressed shock that their deceased loved ones were still so involved in politics.
Obama is an activist in this campaign to protect illegal, felon and dead Democrat voters.
A lesser-known provision of the federal Motor Voter law requires all states to make sure no ineligible persons (illegals, felons or dead people) get on the voter rolls. In November 2009, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandez (an Obama political appointee) told a stunned gathering of the Justice Department’s Voting Section that her office would no longer enforce that section of the law.
Fernandez’s exact quote was, “We have no interest in enforcing this provision of the law. It has nothing to do with increasing turnout, and we are just not going to do it.”
All over the country, legislation to require voters to present identification at the polling booth is opposed by Obama’s Justice Department.
By LIAM DILLON
- We’ll forgive you if you missed mayoral candidate Bob Filner’s performance during the City Council hearing on the future of Balboa Park Monday. The meeting lasted seven-and-a-half hours and Filner was just one of the 140 speakers who gave their point of view before the council voted in favor of philanthropist Irwin Jacobs’ plan to remake the park’s Plaza de Panama.
Filner opposed the project and headlined a rally against it before the council hearing.
His six-minute speech during the hearing was an absent-minded-professor moment mixed with hubris and humor.
We have the recording of Filner’s speech below, but here are some highlights:
• Filner referred to current Mayor Jerry Sanders, a project supporter, as “my predecessor as mayor.”
• He questioned the project’s financing by wondering what happen if the tech company Jacobs’ founded, Qualcomm, lost its value. Or what would happen if “Irwin dies.” After a beat Filner added, “Heaven forbid.”
Let’s talk about outsourcing
When it was built in 1936, the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge was a Depression-era project that put scores of Americans to work. When its $6.3 billion replacement opens in two years, it will be an international affair from the bottom up, an example of massive outsourcing that has drawn both praise and criticism.
Half a dozen countries contributed expertise or materials, none more so than China.
“China was immensely helpful to getting this project built,” says California Department of Transportation spokesman Bart Ney. “They were able to turn the steel around and work directly with our own inspectors to make sure we met the specifications of what this bridge required.”
Several thousand Chinese workers spent five years fabricating the steel used to construct the roadbeds, cable strands, and landmark tower for the single anchor suspension bridge set to open in 2013.
But the project is sparking outrage among groups who argue the work should have stayed here.
Huge deck segments were shipped overseas from Shanghai, contributing to pollution, say critics, and delivering another blow to California’s battered economy and 12 % unemployment rate.
Roger Ferch with the National Steel Bridge Alliance says “I saw one estimate of the fabrication man hours, the labor to construct this bridge in the fabrication shop of more than a million man hours. That’s a million man hours of work that should have been done in the US.”