Unitied States Worried over Hedge Funds, Timothy Geithner Statements

EU pushes past US, UK concerns on hedge fund rules


May 21, 2010



By Aoife White - AP News

Copyright AP News





Brussels, Belgium -

European Union governments overrode British objections - and U.S. worries - by agreeing Tuesday to tighten rules for freewheeling hedge funds, a move some fear will block American funds from the region and cause the lucrative industry to flee London's financial district. The decision reflects Europe's newfound resolve to strengthen its regulatory grip on financial markets and crack down on what officials call speculation, which some blame for worsening the financial crisis. .... Some 80 percent of European funds are based in Britain - which failed to muster support for its call to give a foreign fund the automatic right to market itself anywhere in the 27-nation bloc once it is cleared to do business in one country. France and others fear that Britain's softer regulatory touch could allow risky and unsupervised foreign funds free access to the rest of Europe........U.S. Treasury chief Tim Geithner has complained that this was a "protectionist" move that could shut American funds out of the EU. These funds manage some euro250 billion ($311 billion) in assets in Europe.



Instructions:



Click here to find the remainder of the article

http://www.thesunnews.com/2010/05/18/1481322/eu-nations-override-uk-on-hedge.html

Is Obama Really A Citizen According to Consitution

http://www.weofthepeople.com/Natural-Born-Citizen.php


Barack Obama’s birth has been the subject of some controversy since the election campaign, given the Constitution’s requirement that the president be a “natural born citizen".






What is a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.?

Synopsis

by John Greschak

john@greschak.com



In the essay titled What is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States?, I have put forward an interpretation and definition of the phrase natural born Citizen as it is used in the United States Constitution. To that end, I have used the original manuscript of a letter from John Jay to George Washington, along with a draft for that letter, and two essays written by Jay, to deduce both intent and meaning.



I have put forward the following intent of the United States constitutional requirement that the President of the United States be a natural born Citizen of the United States:



Intent. The intent of the United States constitutional requirement that the President of the United States be a natural born Citizen of the United States is: (1) to reduce the likelihood that a President of the United States would have a former, or present, attachment to a foreign country (because such an attachment could influence one to make decisions that would not promote the interests of the United States); and (2) to increase the likelihood that the interests of any President of the United States will coincide with those of the United States.

I have considered the implications of the fact that Jay wrote (in his letter to Washington) "natural born Citizen" with no hyphen and the word born underlined as shown here:













I have examined Merriam-Webster's Dictionary and Noah Webster's An American Dictionary of the English Language (published in 1828) in an attempt to establish the most likely meanings of the words natural, born and Citizen in this context. Here, I believe born means "from birth", natural means "having a normal or usual character" and Citizen means "a person domiciled in the United States, for whom rights, privileges and immunities are set forth in the United States Constitution." I have carefully considered the synonym study for the words regular, normal, typical and natural, which states that these words "mean being of the sort or kind that is expected as usual, ordinary, or average" and "Natural applies to what conforms to a thing's essential nature, function, or mode of being ." From this, I have put forward the following interpretation of the phrase natural born Citizen of the United States:



Interpretation. The natural born Citizens of the United States are the born Citizens (of the United States) of the particular expectable kind that is considered by the United States as belonging to the United States to a maximal degree, where here expectations are in accord with the essential nature of the United States.

Of the factors that have been used in the United States to determine the degree to which one belongs to the United States, I have found the following six factors for which there is a basis in the United States Constitution:



Factors employed (explicitly or implicitly) in the United States Constitution to gauge the degree to which one belongs to the United States:



1.Whether or not one was born in the United States.

2.Whether or not one is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

3.The number of years one has been a Citizen of the United States.

4.Whether or not one's place of domicile is in the United States.

5.The total number of years one has lived in the United States.

6.Whether or not one is a member of a specified category of Citizens.



From this interpretation and these factors, I have established the following necessary and sufficient conditions for one to be a natural born Citizen of the United States:



Necessary and Sufficient Conditions. A given person is a natural born Citizen of the United States if and only if:



1.The person was born in the United States,

2.Both parents of the person were Citizens of the United States when that person was born, and

3.The person has been a Citizen of the United States, since birth.



(Note: Here, and in the United States Constitution, the phrase Citizen of the United States means a person domiciled in the United States, for whom rights, privileges and immunities are set forth in the United States Constitution.)

I have put forward the following definition of the phrases Citizen of the United States, native born Citizen of the United States, natural born Citizen of the United States, and naturalized Citizen of the United States:



Definition. A Citizen of the United States is a person domiciled in the United States, for whom rights, privileges and immunities are set forth in the United States Constitution. A native born Citizen of the United States is a person who was born in the United States, and has been, since birth, a Citizen of the United States. A natural born Citizen of the United States is a native born Citizen of the United States, born exclusively of Citizens of the United States. A naturalized Citizen of the United States is a Citizen of the United States who is not a natural born Citizen of the United States.

Finally, I have put forward the idea that this definition be added to the United States Constitution in the form of the following Natural Born Citizen Amendment:



Proposed Natural Born Citizen Amendment to the United States Constitution.



No person shall be a Citizen of the United States who is not domiciled, either by choice or dependency, in the United States. A native born Citizen of the United States is a person who was born in the United States, and has been, since birth, a Citizen of the United States. A natural born Citizen of the United States is a native born Citizen of the United States, born exclusively of Citizens of the United States. A naturalized Citizen of the United States is a Citizen of the United States who is not a natural born Citizen of the United States. ~ John Greschak







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is a Natural Born Citizen



The founders, in the writing of the Constitution, were clear with their intent to separate the parentage and allegiance of any citizen who would serve the office of President Of The United States Of America.



History is all telling of their reason for this contingency, as a protector of their hard won freedom and liberty heir to decedents.



This clear and embolden standard of not only the birth place to be on American soil; but also the sole allegiance to and citizenry of America by both birth parents is not to be over looked.



Both parents of any President of the United States shall be American citizens with no other allegiance. This fact is reality and proof in the Constitution.



No "Race Baited Birther" tripe. There is pride in knowing we live in a country where Americans have proven race neutrality in the political arena repeatedly; since black republicans Rhodes Revels served as a U.S. Republican Senator form 1870 - 1871 and Blanche Bruce Hiram from 1875-1881.



There is shame is observing the ongoing cloaking of presidential history, to what end. Would a presidential library honoring Barack Obama reflect only the charismatic and highly emotional digitalized rhetoric that swept the nation with no light of whom the man is and how he came to stand above all others in America?



The Constitution is the law of this land and protector of your freedom by restricting what the government can do to you. There are a few who cry with all insistence and at every opportunity that the Constitution is a document they should change to suit their will. But, what is their will? They wish to change the Constitution that afford Americans as freemen and has from it's birth. The same document that has protected these same few, their freedom and liberty to be able to publicly challenge it's existence. Would this change of the Constitution be "Change we could believe in" too?



There are a few attorneys who will voice, to close friends, the truth of case law, as it dilutes the fire of the Constitution to suit a will or need. This sharing comes almost as a confession after a lifelong successful law practice; to the one person who would never divulge their identity; soiling a sterling reputation. Don't misunderstand me here; none of the barristers I call friend would ever damage their carrier potential or practice by publicly proclaiming the political whoring in the practice of case law with a wink and a nod and political fundraising and campaign contributions to the right candidate. But what damage over the years, to the law of the land - The Constitution, have they knowingly and unknowingly participated in?



Case Law, while far from perfect is still the best the world offers a citizen, is the fluid ever changing law in practice based on opinion upon opinion upon opinion; thus diluting the fire of the Constitutional law root. There, comes the real threat to our Constitution as Law. Just as a spoiled child will demand more and expect their will bent to; Case law uses a history of law opinions some good and some questionable to offer judgment upon the citizen's issue. Depending on the case law opinions that are presented for consideration; two citizens of the same issue may be rendered very different judgment. In our taste for and spoiled child expectations of, getting things done to our will; the application of law has become interpretive and to a degree dependant on the political persuasion at the core of decision.



The Constitution, clear with intent to separate the parentage and allegiance of any citizen who would serve the office of President, serves to protect the citizen and preserve Constitutional Law. If there ever could ascend a citizen to serve the office of the President of the United States of America who did not meet the birthright of "natural born citizen", there would exist the real potential for the office powers and influence to initiate changes in the Constitutional Law that protects the citizen from an oppressive government and secures your freedom and liberty.



The Office Of President bears entrusted rights and privilege unique. Protecting the Constitution and your safety and freedom of is paramount. Thus, the selection of a Supreme Court Justice is the lifeline of the Constitution to serve equal and just law for the people. While the Supreme Court Justice collective offers a balance in duty; the replacement of an aging bench with extreme left liberals, socialist sympathizing or those who envy the political hand of Justices to the final word of law and justice could not only dilute the fire of Constitutional Law; it could extinguish the light of liberty and freedom as we have know it.



Our Founding Fathers, understanding this threat, narrowed the field of those who could serve The Office Of President to only those who would have no misplaced sense of belonging to misplaced allegiance, by their birth, to any another interest other than the United States of America.



With the clarity of the Constitution, why is there still concern about the legitimacy of any citizen to serve The Office Of The President? Simply put, the answer is "Change".



With the calming of the highly emotional and charismatic wave, the people have watched the "Change" with wide eyed amazement, as monumental legislation was passed clearly against the will of the people and clearly outside of Constitutional law that protects the people, No matter how many times Congress has made practice of this travesty. Political whores strolled the camera spotlight unashamed of the tarnish on their armor. There defenders of the people, now deal making, perk seeking and deaf eared to the voice of the people.



What the people heard for their government was "Shut up citizen and pay my bills, while I tax and regulate my will and separate myself as being above the common citizen and entitled to special privilege.



Why have none, who are in a position to correct an injustice to the people, not stood as statesmen in defense of the Constitution they swore to uphold and the citizens they serve?



Could self preservation be out weighing the importance of Constitutional Law to those who held their certification of assurance in the face of the people knowing they could unfold the race card to silence nay sawyers?



The founding fathers have protected our freedom for almost 223 years with the Constitution. Will citizens now insist that their Congress protect the Constitution?



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:



British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.



In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC. Not a natural born citizen.



~ a Mom



British Nationality Act, 1948





;







Sponsors

Add Sponsor Link

Add Sponsor Link

Contact us to sponsor





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Fairness Doctrine

Will Silence

Your Voice!



Freedom of Speech Our 1st Amendment Our Sacred Right

By JFK

Listen



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





















Copyrights @ WE OF THE PEOPLE 2006. All rights reserved

Reports on Korea Bombing Oil Rig? Whats your thoughts?

http://howcanpeoplebesostupid.com/?p=2150

Obama story about tension

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100502/ap_on_re_us/us_obama

Fred Thompson About Obama's Financial Reform Bill

April 21, 2010


Audio - Fred Says: Flim-Flam Artistry



Fred's got a different name for Obama's financial reform bill [full audio clip here (running time 1:29)]:

I don't know how to describe this. Greatest flim-flam artistry that I have seen in a long, long time. I keep saying that, but they keep exceeding expectations in flim-flammery in this town. You have a financial reform bill, the President wants to cram this through, says he wants to get tough on Wall Street. Which is an absolute fraud and farce. The bill does NOT get tough on Wall Street. It's like jiu-jitsu, you use your enemy's strength to your advantage and his disadvantage.



They're claiming that the Republicans are trying to protect Wall Street, and they're really wanting to get tough on Wall Street. Why is it that Wall Street is FOR this thing? I mean, they're FOR what the President is trying to do, at the same time that they're showering the Democrats with money, and always have. They institutionalize "too big to fail", they give bureaucrats the authority for these companies to live or die - and I say companies loosely, because that's what it is, it's not just banks, it's any kind of a financial institution, it's anything related - and anyway it covers all manner of things. It gives them authority to regulate lending practices in this country. It sets up a whole new bureaucracy within the Federal Reserve System, for some reason, to do that.



So, they're trying to cram this down, they're trying to get another notch in their belt. They're trying to achieve another victory. They're trying to - while they're demonizing the Tea Partiers - they're trying to placate the Tea Partiers and the rest of America - who they hope doesn't pay much attention - by passing this financial reform bill.

Huckabee The battle for your life

United States Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens announced that he will retire this summer at the end of the Court’s current term. Because Justice Stevens was one of the more liberal members of the Court, he and I differ on most issues, but I do thank him for his service and wish him well.

President Obama and many Congressional Democrats have already begun floating names of potential replacements. In fact, many abortion advocates are already working to ensure President Obama nominates a person to the Supreme Court who is pro-choice.

News reports show Congressional Republicans promise a ‘whale of a fight’ if the President’s choice is too liberal – but sadly, I don’t believe Republican’s have the ability to stop an abortion advocate being appointed to the bench. My distrust is based on the track record and methods imposed by the Obama Administration, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats.

In the face of strong and vocal Republican opposition:

• President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats refused to listen to the American people and rammed a hugely unpopular health care bill rammed down our throats;



• President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats excluded Republicans when writing the bill and then refused to compromise with Republican amendments;



• President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats twisted the financial impact of Obamacare to ensure its passage – saddling future generations with massive debt; and



• President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats openly mocked Americans who disagreed with them.



If President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats will employ these tactics with a clearly unpopular Healthcare bill that forces you and me to pay for abortions, they will for sure do the same with a Supreme Court nominee who advocates abortion.



What of the “pro-life Democrats”? Well . . . we saw how “principled” they were. A little pressure from the Administration and their principles went up in smoke. This “conservative” wing of the Democrat Party is non-existent. Based on the health care vote, it seems clear to me these Democrats value their jobs more than their principles.



Don’t forget what a hugely partisan battle we had when President George W. Bush had two vacancies on the Court during his two terms in office. In the face of stiff Democratic opposition, President George W. Bush nominated and confirmed two pro-life judges to the Supreme Court – Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. Like, love or hate President Bush’s presidency, he stood firm on his principles of life with those two nominations.



We had to fight the Democrats harder than ever with a Pro-life advocate in the White House. Imagine the fight ahead with the Obama Administration.



Folks, the battle for life begins now.



We must be prepared to fight hard to ensure that any nominee selected by President Obama believes in the sanctity of life.



I am hopeful that the President will select a person who is committed to deciding cases impartially based on the rule of law, not based on personal politics or preferences. I do expect Senate Republicans to make a sustained and vigorous case for judicial restraint – but we CANNOT rely on their efforts alone.



We must be engaged early. We have to begin the battle now if we are to have an impact.

I am counting on each of you to stand with me as we fight to ensure that the sanctity of life is respected and protected.



Will you make a donation of $5 or more to join our Pro-Life Action Team?



When the Senate confirmation fight begins, we will mobilize this team and grassroots volunteers nationwide to make calls and apply pressure. Our goal is to have 5,000 team members in place by the beginning of June to make calls.



Now is the time to prepare for this fight. We need these next few weeks to identify team members, organize a phone campaign to fight for Life in the Supreme Court. We will also use member donations to elect more congressional Republicans.



Let me be clear: Huck PAC only supports pro-Life Republicans.



Please help us fight for life. Join our Action Team today. Let’s make certain Democrats in the Senate know that we will only accept a pro-Life Justice.



Sincerely,







Mike Huckabee

Get The Facts on HC, Taxes they are going to empose Obama

Get the Facts Before You Speak;Taxes, HC, FCC

The Mistake, Evidence Obama is not constitional president

The Mistake, The Evidence, Obama is NOT a constitutional president

The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie

By J.B. Williams

September 10, 2009

See: The Theory is Now a ConspiracyÑI
See: The Theory is Now a Conspiracy -- III -Please read update at bottom of article
Though we live in an era when all undesirable facts are often blindly labeled "conspiracy theories" by political operatives with an agenda at risk, a very real conspiracy unfolds every now and then.
While it is indeed true that not all theories are actual conspiracies, like when Hillary Clinton developed an imaginary "right-wing conspiracy" out to get her husband, when in fact, the semen stained dress provided all the necessary (but unfriendly) facts and a perfectly logical explanation for all of those nasty rumors Ð it is also true that some conspiracies are much more than just crackpot theory.
To be a bonafide conspiracy, two or more individuals must knowingly conspire, plot or plan an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious act. In politics or law, an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act, is a "conspiracy." Not in theory, but in reality.
Such is the case today!
A political national committee, the Chair of the Party convention, the Secretary of the Party, Party offices in each of fifty states, and maybe many Ð many more, have knowingly and wantonly defrauded the American election system and more than 300 million American citizens.
They plotted and planned an act of evil, unlawful, treacherous fraud in a blind quest for unbridled political power, and they hoped that you would never catch it. They almost got away with it too...
They snuck it past fifty state election commissions, congress, the US Supreme Court and Justice Department, the Federal Elections Commission and countless members of the Electoral College nationwide. Not a single member of the, as Limbaugh says, "drive-by media" caught it either, or if they did, they decided to become complicit for their own political reasons.
But as is always the case with liars, cheats and thieves, they slip up Ð make a silly mistake Ð overplay their hand Ð leave evidence lying around that they had forgotten about. And as with all chronic liars, they eventually get caught in their own web of lies.
Then, one day, someone stumbles into that evidence, and the house of cards comes crashing down around them. It's almost poetic...

The Mistake

Aware of the fact that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II Ð Section I constitutional requirements for the office of President, what well-seasoned professional politician would be stupid enough to sign their name and stake their personal career upon certifying Obama as eligible?
Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates are nominated at their respective Party Conventions.
Believe it or not, each Party is assigned the duty of vetting and certifying the legal eligibility of their own candidates. I know, like asking the fox to guard the henhouse, right. But hey, we are talking about a country which still thinks there is a separation of powers between the High Court and the Executive branch, which seats that court by way of political appointment, confirmed by congress, which wants a piece of the judge and expects a few political favors too.

The Evidence

In this case, the Democrat Party was responsible for vetting and certifying Barack Hussein Obama as legally eligible to seek the Oval Office. The U.S. Constitution has only three very specific requirements for the job. The proper legal text used on the DNC Party "Official Certification of Nomination" document reads as follows, and I quote;

"THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."

Obama assinations

Assination by Obama

Change we may be getting Thanks Obama

http://obxsun.com/Change-We-May-Be-Getting.php

Finally the Truth about Obama not being a real citizen

The Mistake, The Evidence, Obama is NOT a constitutional president

The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie

By J.B. Williams

September 10, 2009

See: The Theory is Now a ConspiracyÑI
See: The Theory is Now a Conspiracy -- III -Please read update at bottom of article
Though we live in an era when all undesirable facts are often blindly labeled "conspiracy theories" by political operatives with an agenda at risk, a very real conspiracy unfolds every now and then.
While it is indeed true that not all theories are actual conspiracies, like when Hillary Clinton developed an imaginary "right-wing conspiracy" out to get her husband, when in fact, the semen stained dress provided all the necessary (but unfriendly) facts and a perfectly logical explanation for all of those nasty rumors Ð it is also true that some conspiracies are much more than just crackpot theory.
To be a bonafide conspiracy, two or more individuals must knowingly conspire, plot or plan an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious act. In politics or law, an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act, is a "conspiracy." Not in theory, but in reality.
Such is the case today!
A political national committee, the Chair of the Party convention, the Secretary of the Party, Party offices in each of fifty states, and maybe many Ð many more, have knowingly and wantonly defrauded the American election system and more than 300 million American citizens.
They plotted and planned an act of evil, unlawful, treacherous fraud in a blind quest for unbridled political power, and they hoped that you would never catch it. They almost got away with it too...
They snuck it past fifty state election commissions, congress, the US Supreme Court and Justice Department, the Federal Elections Commission and countless members of the Electoral College nationwide. Not a single member of the, as Limbaugh says, "drive-by media" caught it either, or if they did, they decided to become complicit for their own political reasons.
But as is always the case with liars, cheats and thieves, they slip up Ð make a silly mistake Ð overplay their hand Ð leave evidence lying around that they had forgotten about. And as with all chronic liars, they eventually get caught in their own web of lies.
Then, one day, someone stumbles into that evidence, and the house of cards comes crashing down around them. It's almost poetic...

The Mistake

Aware of the fact that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II Ð Section I constitutional requirements for the office of President, what well-seasoned professional politician would be stupid enough to sign their name and stake their personal career upon certifying Obama as eligible?
Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates are nominated at their respective Party Conventions.
Believe it or not, each Party is assigned the duty of vetting and certifying the legal eligibility of their own candidates. I know, like asking the fox to guard the henhouse, right. But hey, we are talking about a country which still thinks there is a separation of powers between the High Court and the Executive branch, which seats that court by way of political appointment, confirmed by congress, which wants a piece of the judge and expects a few political favors too.

The Evidence

In this case, the Democrat Party was responsible for vetting and certifying Barack Hussein Obama as legally eligible to seek the Oval Office. The U.S. Constitution has only three very specific requirements for the job. The proper legal text used on the DNC Party "Official Certification of Nomination" document reads as follows, and I quote;

"THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."

Tea Party Should Use This Theme Song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyTJqn7GT5s

A Real Patriot Song for Tea Party

Sunshine go away today


I don't feel much like dancing


Some man's gone, he's tried to run my life


Don't know what he's asking






He tells me I'd better get in line


Can't hear what he's saying


When I grow up I'm going to make it mine


But these aren't dues I been paying






(Chorus)


How much does it cost, I'll buy it

The time is all we've lost, I'll try it

But he can't even run his own life

I'll be damned if he'll run mine, Sunshine



Sunshine go away today

I don't feel much like dancing

Some man's gone he's tried to run my life

Don't know what he's asking



Working starts to make me wonder where

The fruits of what I do are going

He says in love and war all is fair

But he's got cards he ain't showing



(Chorus)



Sunshine come on back another day

I promise you I'll be singing

This old world, she's gonna turn around

Brand new bells'll be ringing

The Few the Brave the Proud; Arlington

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB76cYS8Ehw


Every American should watch this video and remember the few, the proud the chosen ones who fought and still fight for our freedom.

Don't Miss Hillsdale College Free Lesson on our Constitution. This town hall will discuss how those principles have been undermined, and how they can be recovered.”

By: Paul Quincy






Did you say free? Yes, I said free. Hillsdale College is a great higher education facility. Four out of Five Students each year graduate with a 4.0 avg. That is 80%. Yes, you heard me right, 80%. It is one of our higher educational facilities that understand the rights of the American people and how slowly they are being taken away. One of the few higher educational facilities that are far from left. Great people come from this school with 4.0 avgs. The students do not get that grade for being far left or far right. It is from being well educated on our basic conservative standards and rights.



On January 30, 2010 this once in a lifetime experience will come your way!!!!! I urge you as fellow Americans not to miss out on this event. This seminar will be a hosted online, teaching all WE THE PEOPLE what we should know and learn about our Constitutional Rights as Americans.



These students of Hillsdale College pay big bucks for their learning. Now YOU have that same chance to learn about our Constitution for free. Understand how our rights are being violated and taking away to move this country to a socialist one.



You will be able to understand what this crazy, unable to touch the American People Congress has been doing.



Go to: www.hillsdaletownhall.com and register to be in this spectacular event. Don’t miss out. Rush Limbaugh recommends it highly too.
 
 
Below is more informaton;

Hillsdale College to Host Constitution Town Hall

Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship, located in Washington D.C., will host “Reviving The Constitution,” a Constitution Town Hall, in Chantilly, Virginia, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. EST on January 30, 2010. The event will also be available online.

“At a time when the Constitution is largely ignored in Washington, it is vital for citizens to remember its enduring principles,” said Hillsdale College President Dr. Larry P. Arnn. “This town hall will discuss how those principles have been undermined, and how they can be recovered.”



The town hall will consist of a panel of constitutional scholars making brief presentations, followed by questions from both present and online participants. Topics to be covered include:



• The Declaration of Independence and the Principles of Free Government

• The American Constitution

• The Constitution and the Civil War

• The Progressive Attack on the Constitution

• American Government Today and What Citizens Can Do to Revive the Constitution



“The Constitution is not just the domain of judges and lawyers,” said Kirby Center Director Dr. David J. Bobb. “It is the responsibility of all Americans to understand and uphold it, and our aim with this town hall is to help equip citizens to do so.”



This event is open to the media. Further information and registration instructions can be found at constitutiontownhall.com.



Hillsdale College Town Hall Meeting

Saturday, January 30, 2010

9 a.m. - 3 p.m. EST

TV Worldwide Studios

4206-F Technology Court

Chantilly, VA 20151



Hillsdale College was founded in 1844 and has built a national reputation through its maintenance of a classical core curriculum and its principled refusal to accept any federal or state taxpayer subsidies. It also conducts a large outreach effort that promotes civil and religious liberty, including a monthly speech digest, Imprimis, with a current circulation of 1.8 million.



MEDIA CONTACT: Joseph Cella

703-286-9677

jcella@hillsdale.edu

Martin Luther KIng a Republican?

By: Paul Quincy

Martin Luther King, Jr, his father and grandfather were all Republicans.  That's right, Republicans. It was not until he was jailed as stated in the bio of this great man below,  that his wife Corretta King struck a deal with the Kennedy's in order for them to gain more black support to win in thier campaigns.  Mrs. King wanted her husband released from jail and that the Civil Rights Act be put into law.  It was not until Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, accepted this to be released from jail that he became a "de-facto" Democrate, but still held Republican views.  This may surprise a lot of you but it is the truth.  Listed below is his bio: Take time to read and celebrate the vision this man had.

Martin Luther King, Jr., (January 15, 1929-April 4, 1968) was born Michael Luther King, Jr., but later had his name changed to Martin. His grandfather began the family's long tenure as pastors of the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, serving from 1914 to 1931; his father has served from then until the present, and from 1960 until his death Martin Luther acted as co-pastor. Martin Luther attended segregated public schools in Georgia, graduating from high school at the age of fifteen; he received the B. A. degree in 1948 from Morehouse College, a distinguished Negro institution of Atlanta from which both his father and grandfather had graduated. After three years of theological study at Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania where he was elected president of a predominantly white senior class, he was awarded the B.D. in 1951. With a fellowship won at Crozer, he enrolled in graduate studies at Boston University, completing his residence for the doctorate in 1953 and receiving the degree in 1955. In Boston he met and married Coretta Scott, a young woman of uncommon intellectual and artistic attainments. Two sons and two daughters were born into the family.


In 1954, Martin Luther King became pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. Always a strong worker for civil rights for members of his race, King was, by this time, a member of the executive committee of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the leading organization of its kind in the nation. He was ready, then, early in December, 1955, to accept the leadership of the first great Negro nonviolent demonstration of contemporary times in the United States, the bus boycott described by Gunnar Jahn in his presentation speech in honor of the laureate. The boycott lasted 382 days. On December 21, 1956, after the Supreme Court of the United States had declared unconstitutional the laws requiring segregation on buses, Negroes and whites rode the buses as equals. During these days of boycott, King was arrested, his home was bombed, he was subjected to personal abuse, but at the same time he emerged as a Negro leader of the first rank.

In 1957 he was elected president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization formed to provide new leadership for the now burgeoning civil rights movement. The ideals for this organization he took from Christianity; its operational techniques from Gandhi. In the eleven-year period between 1957 and 1968, King traveled over six million miles and spoke over twenty-five hundred times, appearing wherever there was injustice, protest, and action; and meanwhile he wrote five books as well as numerous articles. In these years, he led a massive protest in Birmingham, Alabama, that caught the attention of the entire world, providing what he called a coalition of conscience. and inspiring his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail", a manifesto of the Negro revolution; he planned the drives in Alabama for the registration of Negroes as voters; he directed the peaceful march on Washington, D.C., of 250,000 people to whom he delivered his address, "l Have a Dream", he conferred with President John F. Kennedy and campaigned for President Lyndon B. Johnson; he was arrested upwards of twenty times and assaulted at least four times; he was awarded five honorary degrees; was named Man of the Year by Time magazine in 1963; and became not only the symbolic leader of American blacks but also a world figure.

At the age of thirty-five, Martin Luther King, Jr., was the youngest man to have received the Nobel Peace Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to the furtherance of the civil rights movement.

On the evening of April 4, 1968, while standing on the balcony of his motel room in Memphis, Tennessee, where he was to lead a protest march in sympathy with striking garbage workers of that city, he was assassinated.

Fort Hood and Political Correctness, Radical Terrorist Should Be Called Out Without Fear From Thier Superiors

By: Paul Quincy

In an interview published on Al Jazeera's Web site, radical Muslim cleric Anwar al Awlaki says that Maj. Nidal Hasan, charged with killing 13 in last month's Fort Hood massacre, asked for guidance about killing American military personnel in his very first e-mail.

Awlaki claims that Hasan initiated the e-mail correspondence with a message on Dec. 17, 2008. "He was asking about killing U.S. soldiers and officers," says Awlaki. "His question was is it legitimate [under Islamic law]."

The Al Jazeera questioner asks for confirmation that Hasan forwarded this query nearly a year before the shooting

Yes," responds Awlaki. "I am astonished. Where was American intelligence that claimed once that it can read any car plate number anywhere in the world?"

Today, January 17, 2010, Congressman, John Carter from Texas on Fox News informed us that he was unhappy with the the report that came from the Pentagon.

An independant report from the Chief of Navel Operations states that there is something obvisiously wrong in the report from the Pentagon when two important words are left out.  "Radicial Islamic." 

Congressman John Carter (R) states that this report shows that Political Correctness has gone to far. 
He also stated that thier should be a whistlerblower act to cover our soldiers.  He is correct.  The fear of being court marshalled, punished or not being promoted due to Polictial Correctness runs amuk in the military. 

The Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates only did a 50 page report! Although it may be somewhat accurate the two little words Radical Islamic" was not mentioned at all. 

If someone regardless of race, or religion starts showing signs in our military of being a radical and go unreported due to be called a racist, then we are in sorry shape.

This is just another sign of how our Administration does not take terrorism seriously.  Wake up America.  We the People want to be protected.  Our government has failed us with this issue.  We can not shake and bow and kiss the rings of Leaders around the world who hate us.  When will this Admisitration wake up and smell the coffee?  They are completely out of touch with We the People.

Do You Want a Person Who Allows Child Molesters Go and State There Are No Terrorist?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXEXkUHN-w0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esYSKv0gcz8

By: Paul Quincy






Massachusetts is two days away from either stunning the country with one of the biggest upsets in political history or electing the presumed Democratic successor to the late Edward Kennedy's long-held seat in the U.S. Senate.

The sudden ascent of Republican state Sen. Scott Brown in the polls has thrust the Senate race into the national spotlight due to its potential impact on the national health care legislation pending in Congress and for what a Republican victory in such an overwhelmingly liberal state could portend for Congressional Democrats at the start of a midterm election year

It seems that Martha Coakley covered for the brutal rape of a 23 month old baby, a toddler, with a hot curling iron. The Massachusetts police officer, Keith Winfield, allegedly had an ally to help cover up this heinous crime, Martha Coakley. If Coakley would not act in the best interest of the public on such a crucial issue because she owes political favors, she has failed. Shouldn't Coakley be voted against, and shouldn't Coakley be criminally prosecuted for acting in a conspiracy to try and cover up felonies?

I don't know anything about Coakley's rival in the special Massachusetts election, Jan. 19, 2010, for US Senator, Scott Brown. So, I don't think it should be a question of Republican or Democrat rhetoric, it should be about not knowingly electing a publicly corrupt official. I am asking Massachusetts voters to vote for Scott Brown, a vote against Martha Coakley.

Eric Holder Dismisses the Black Panther Party from Voter's Intimidation Suit

By Paul Quincy

This article first will explain what the Black Panther Party Stands for.  It is documented below.  Then we will get into the dicussion about how Eric Holder dismisses the criminal complaint against the Black Panthers, who on November 4, 2008, in Philidelphia intimated voters.

The Black Panther: [off-site link] Articles from 1968-69

In October of 1967, the police arrest the Defense Minister of the Panthers, Huey Newton, for killing an Oakland cop. Panther Eldridge Cleaver begins the movement to "Free Huey", a struggle the Panthers would devote a great deal of their attention to in the coming years, while the party spreads its roots further into the political spectrum, forming coalitions with various revolutionary parties. Stokely Carmichael,

the former chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and a nationally known proponent of Black Power, is recruited into the party through this struggle, and soon becomes the party's Prime Minister in February, 1968. Carmichael is adamantly against allowing whites into the black liberation movement, explaining whites cannot relate to the black experience and have an intimidating effect on blacks; a position that stirs opposition within the Panthers. Carmichael explains: "Whites who come into the black community with ideas of change seem to want to absolve the power structure of its responsibility for what it is doing, and say that change can only come through black unity, which is the worst kind of paternalism..... If we are to proceed toward true liberation, we must cut ourselves off from white people..... [otherwise] we will find ourselves entwined in the tentacles of the white power complex that controls this country

Eric Holder is seen above being sworn in to Protect the legal rights of our citizens.  On November 4, 2008 elections 3 Black Panthers were outside a voting poll with a weapon, swinging it and intimdating voters, mainly white voters or anyone who was not going to vote for President Obama.  They directly violated Fedreal Law of Voters Rights of the Voter Right Act. 

They were charged accordingly during the Bush administation.  Now yesterday a panal of 15 Democrates along with our Attorney General just dismissed this important case.  Thier were 14 Republican's against dropping this suit.  They asked for all documents pertaining to this Federal Violation.  They were dismissed again by Eric Holder and the 15 Democrates.  They were not allowed to even read the complaint. 

He is compelled to pursue legal action against all who violate Federal Law, especially when it comes down to having Black Panthers with weapons intimadating "We the People."

There were over 208 complaints filed with regards to voter intimidation and/or Voter fraud. 

These men stood at voting booths waving thier night sticks and it has been recorded which is in direct violation of Fedreal Law.  What does our Attorney General do? Drop the suit!!!!!!! 

Now lets compare this great decsion again our Democrates and Attorney General have made.  I once informed all that there are three branches of government.  Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, and Judical Branch.  When they sleep together there are no more checks and balances.  This has been shown throughout this Admistration.   

I would dare to say if the KKK stood outside a Voting Booth, or White Supremist Group,  they would be hauled off and the left wing news medial would make a spectial of this.  Not to mention they would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  There would be FBI, ATF, all gathering evidence against those who intimidated those who wanted to vote and broke Fedreal Law.

But our Attorney General dismisses this suit? He states by dismissing this important Federal Case that  it is ok to intimidate people as long as the vote goes thier way.  Don't worry you will not be prosecuted. 

This is what we have running our country.  I am not racist by any means.  But compare the two and come to your own conclusions.

We the People need to vote these people out of office and ensure midterm elections are held without intimidation.  YOU and only YOU can make a difference on how this country is going to be runned.  I feel ashamed that all this back door, shaking hand deals are going on right under our noses. WE THE PEOPLE need this to stop and your voice needs to be heard.

The Campaign Against Harry Reid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fimP4gufUxI

A Message from One US Senator who works for the people

Dear Friends,



Thank you to those of you who’ve signed my petition against the Democrats’ health care bill.



I am leading the Republican charge to open health care reform negotiations to public scrutiny and challenging Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to allow C-SPAN to televise the closed-door negotiations going on between Senate and House Democrats and the White House.



During the presidential campaign in 2008 President Obama said of health care reform, “… we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies.”



Yet, that is not what has happened. Instead, the Democrats are negotiating this 2,000 + page bill among themselves and locking Republicans and the American people out.



I’m working to change that. Read the letter my Republican colleagues and I sent to Senator Harry Reid.



Meanwhile, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has called into question the savings Democrats claim would result from their bill and has pointed out that health care costs under the bill will actually increase by more than $200 billion.



Of the purported “savings” in the bill, the report uses terms like “unrealistic”, “doubtful”, and “difficult to obtain,” as well as saying that the bill could lead to “price increases, cost-shifting, and/or changes in providers’ willingness to treat patients with low-reimbursement health coverage.”



That’s why I will continue to oppose the bill and will do all I can to see it defeated, along with all 39 of my Republican colleagues in the Senate.



If you want to know what you can do to help, in addition to contacting your elected representatives again, there’s only one additional thing I know of we can do: help deny the Democrats their 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.



One week from today Massachusetts will elect a new Senator in a special election. Like me, Republican State Senator Scott Brown vehemently opposes the Democrats’ health care legislation and will vote to stop it, work to send it back to the drawing board and try to enact real reform that will lower costs without spending trillions of dollars and raising billions in new taxes we can’t afford.



Please help us defeat this bill by visiting Scott Brown’s website and making an online donation to his campaign today. I have sent a contribution to him, and I hope you will consider doing the same.



The polls have shown the race in a dead heat. The Wall Street Journal says of him, “Mr. Brown … has been running against Washington’s blowout spending and has called for a freeze on the wages of federal employees.” And, “The mere fact that Democrats have to fight so hard to save Ted Kennedy’s seat shows how badly they have misjudged America by governing so far to the left.”



In an editorial the Boston Herald noted, “… if you’re not happy with the status quo, if you think the way business is being conducted on Capitol Hill today is a disgrace and an affront to taxpayers, then you probably agree it’s time for a change. Scott Brown can single-handedly deliver on that kind of change and the Herald is pleased to endorse his candidacy in the race for U.S. Senate.”



I couldn’t agree more, and I hope that you do also.



Thank you again for getting involved and helping us make a difference. I sincerely appreciate your interest and support.



Sincerely,







John Thune

U.S. Senator

Windfall Tax and Double Standards

By: Paul Quincy




Do you remember the windfall tax and how the democrat’s preached that extra wealth from the “bad rich oil guys” profits should be taken? Remember? On February 2, 2007 Hillary Clinton was calling for the 45.2 Billion profit the oil companies made should be taxed on that profit.



Obama on April 10, 2007, and his other socialist companions stated the same throughout the election process. All we kept hearing is those bad rich oil boys need to pay a windfall tax. They have been known to say people are suffering, we need to tax that windfall and spread it around.



Well to our surprise, the Federal Reserve made 52.1 Billion dollars. Not out of fuel but from the tax payers. But yet no one dares threaten the Feds. No complaints heard about their windfall. Double standards?



At least Exxon Mobile and other oil companies did their jobs, or the people who worked for them got paid for doing their job to pay for their mortgages, food, heat, clothes, etc.



What has the Feds done? Nothing but spend our money foolishly on programs that have been proven not to work. I don’t see Hillary or Obama taken windfall taxes from the Feds and spreading it around. Why? Because it effects them directly.



The Feds got us into this mess with home foreclosures in real estate. If you are AIG or Bank of America you did not escape this real estate bubble. Yes, there were bail outs, but not like Fannie and Freddie who the Feds just loved to bail out.



Charlie Reingald who has 50 employees in the Whitehouse along with Senator Dobbs and others do not pay taxes. Charlie Reingald owes 812, 917.00 in taxes. Were is the yelling and holding the feet to the fire on these guys? Robert Crumum another friend of Washington does not have to pay his taxes owed. Want to know why? Because it has been stated by Whitehouse he helps the poor.



We have become a nation of law not men. When this happens we are a doomed nation. Our forefathers fought hard for these corrupt, double standards not to happen. What do you think? Think hard, fast, and get these people out of office. We the People come first. When our leaders do not listen to the voice of the people we are a land of lost.

Do You Value Your Rights? Who is Paying?

By: Paul Quincy


Do you as an American value your rights? Well, in this transparent administration, the "first” to called and sworn to transparency is however, not. It seems to this blogger that our rights as Americans are being traded behind close doors of the White House. This is also confirmed by News and other new media and organization sources other than mine. One for example is the www.thenationalrightto work.com. This organization is headed by Mark Mix from the state of Virginia, which is a right to work state. You say what are you getting at? It is about the everyday deals made behind the close doors of “our transparent government” that promised you the world. In fact, what they promise is deception, corruption and unconstitutional . The deception continues and shows no signs of stopping soon. Which leads me to this first article on Health Care and Unions.


What day is Union day at the White house? Everyday is Union day at the Whitehouse. Not to mention all the deals being made about your health care among other things without your knowledge or ignoring our call as citizens of this once great county. Don't get me wrong, it still is the best country in the world but, not for long. Let me explain below on what I am trying to inform, warn and educate you on.


Pretend in your mind, a pie. Now out of that pie certain people are taxed by their wealth.

Now we are going to cut up that pie and try to show you in a step by step way to understand what the Whitehouse and Unions are doing about our health care.


The top 1% pay 40% of taxes out of that pie in taxes (bad rich people);

The top 2%-10% pay about 55% of taxes out of that pie;

The next 50% pay one eighth of taxes out of that pie;

The bottom people of that pie pay about 3% of taxes out of that pie.


Now Michele Obama was quoted as stating but put into a paraphrase that:

“ In order for more social programs and health care to be ascertained people would have to give up a piece of the pie.”


Well lets say the top 1% want to give their piece of pie to charity. Or any other pieces of that pie want to give it donate it to charity. It is a flat NO from the government,. Why you ask? First everyone has to have a piece of the pie even though it is not cut fairly and cannot sustain what the President and other far left are doing and because in order for them to continue on this path of spending they have to get funds to pay back those that were already spent. Your tax dollars. They the government wants your piece of the pie to pay for the social plans and health care that the government is shoving down our throats. CHARITY DOES NOT WORK NOR WILL BE EXCEPTED. Those who are going to pay more taxes are the “bad guys” the top 1% for this health care. But yes we all are going to pay more down the line one way or another. The system can not and will not work as the Democrat’s seem to think it is going to. They already proven they can’t even make pie at this point and divide equally so each one pays the same. It cant work the way President Obama wants you to believe it can. Deceit, Deception and Corruption is the game that is being played with our lives.

 The redistribution of wealth and progressives are shoving health care down the throats of all americans.  How are they going to deal with the poor? Not enough pie to go around ya know.  It is a lie they are feeding us.  That is why it is Union day is everyday at the Whitehouse.  To make deals behind close doors and to sleep with each other so We the People will be hit by corrupt unions and pay for for this health care bill while they are exempt from paying at all.  Fair? You decide.  John Sweeny who is a Union Leader, socialist has been quoted as stating "Take from the Rich and Give to the Poor." Meanwhile his union is not effected.  This is class warfare. 


  If you are a union you will be protected under this health care bill, even if your not working but still in the union.  If not you will be hit with 40% tax increase to pay.  Look at who most of those Union Leaders are.  They are democrates and secular progressives who want to make this country a social if not communist one. 


We have people who don’t want to be part of the pie. They have their own health care or are satisfied with what they have. But yet, the Whitehouse refuses along with “Prince Harry” and “Princess Pelosi” to listen to reason and the American people.

Now you ask what does the Unions have to do with this? Well there are 6 unions right now who have struck deals with their managers, Unions and Whitehouse to exempt them from the 40% tax YOU will have to pay on health care for them, those Cadillac plans we hear about. The Unions like GM who got into bed with the Feds is one example. Let me explain this one too.

Pretend and close your eyes and see a plate of doughnuts on the table. Those doughnuts represent cars.

Now for every car sold, the employees of those unions get 2 extra cars and the unions get one half of the two cars. Now we know this system cannot sustain itself since we already have seen the car companies asking for bail out money. But it continues to go on without anymore funds or cars available. Nothing, caput. Those working or not working for these companies but are retired are still getting those Cadillac health plans that run about 23,000 for a family of four. But guess what? They are exempt from paying the 40% tax due on the health care plan to all of us due to the back door deals made with this President. Unions date back to the Big Deal of the 1930’s. However, from 1930 to present the gap between separate enterprise and the everyday citizen remained left a a big gap between government in our lives. Every since the 1930 it has slowly progressed to the gap closing and now more government in our lives at this specific date and time. Were not even showing what is to come. When Unions get into bed to ensure government gave them the deals they want and exempt them from paying for their own health care and put the burden upon us we should be asking questions. Just like Thomas Jefferson did! He quoted “Ask questions boldly.” Now can you see who is paying for this ridiculous health care nightmare? WE THE PEOPLE. This is only one example of this ridiculous health care reform.

The government can’t even bake pies or doughnuts right as stated above. Do you trust them with your health and telling us, We the People what is good or bad for us? Don't allow this to continue, inform and educate and the most important thing is to vote these people out of office. 

WHEN OUR FORFATHERS CAME TOGETHER, THIER INTENTIONS WERE 3 BRANCHES OF OFFICE.  EXECUTIVE BRANCH, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND JUDICIAL BRANCH.  WHEN WE HAVE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCH SLEEPING TOGETHER WE HAVE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES IN OUR SYSTEM.  THAT IS WHY HEALTH CARE IS BEING RAMMED DOWN OUR THROATS.  EACH BRANCH MUST SLEEP ALONE.   THIS IS NO MORE THAN HAVING A PREMIER, IN OTHER WORDS A DICTATORSHIP, NOT FREEDOM AND LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.