Category Archives: white house

Princeton professor Harvey Rosen Obama misrepresents study of Romney tax plan, Romney plan can be revenue neutral, More Obama lies exposed

Princeton professor Harvey Rosen Obama misrepresents study of Romney tax plan, Romney plan can be revenue neutral, More Obama lies exposed

“It is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters. The financial crisis of 2008 stemmed from a variety of complex factors, in particular the bubble in housing prices and the rise of exotic financial instruments. Deregulation was certainly an important factor, but as the government commission concluded, the blame for that lies across administrations, not just in the last Republican one.
In any case, the Bush tax cuts belong at the bottom of the list — if at all. Moreover, it is rather strange for the campaign to cite as its source an article that, according to the author, does not support this assertion.”…Washington Post October 1, 2012

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

“Propaganda must not serve the truth, especially not insofar
as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent.”
Adolf Hitler

From the Weekly Standard October 8, 2012.

“Princeton Economist: Obama Campaign Is Misrepresenting My Study on Romney’s Tax Plan”

“Last night, the Obama campaign blasted out another email claiming that Mitt Romney’s tax plan would either require raising taxes on the middle class or blowing a hole in the deficit. “Even the studies that Romney has cited to claim his plan adds up still show he would need to raise middle-class taxes,” said the Obama campaign press release. “In fact, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein and Princeton economist Harvey Rosen both concede that paying for Romney’s tax cuts would require large tax increases on families making between $100,000 and $200,000.”

But that’s not true. Princeton professor Harvey Rosen tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD in an email that the Obama campaign is misrepresenting his paper on Romney’s tax plan:

I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work.  It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal.  The main conclusion of my study is that  under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same.  That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.

You can check the math that shows Romney’s plan is mathematically possible here.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton-economist-obama-campaign-misrepresenting-my-study-romneys-tax-plan_653917.html

Washington Post and Labor Dept. facts expose Obama lies, Bush Tax cuts, Employment data, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, Playbook of Goebbels Orwell

Washington Post and Labor Dept. facts expose Obama lies, Bush Tax cuts, Employment data, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, Playbook of Goebbels Orwell

“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012

“Obama energy policy: Pander to the left, lie to the poor and working class and enrich his friends.”…Citizen Wells

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

 
In a recent campaign ad video, Barack Obama makes the usual litany of false claims about the Bush tax cuts, the employment situation that he inherited and what he will do to stimulate the economy.

“When I took office we were losing nearly 800,000 jobs a month and were mired in Iraq. Today I believe that as a nation we are moving forward again. But we have much more to do to get folks back to work and make the middle class secure again.

Now, Governor Romney believes that with that even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy and fewer regulations on Wall Street all of us will prosper. In other words he’d double down on the same trickle down policies that led to the crisis in the first place. So what’s my plan?

First, we create a million new manufacturing jobs and help businesses double their exports. Give tax breaks to companies that invest in America, not that ship jobs overseas.

Second, we cut our oil imports in half and produce more American-made energy, oil, clean-coal, natural gas, and new resources like wind, solar and bio-fuels—all while doubling the fuel efficiencies of cars and trucks.

Third, we insure that we maintain the best workforce in the world by preparing 100,000 additional math and science teachers. Training 2 million Americans with the job skills they need at our community colleges. Cutting the growth of tuition in half and expanding student aid so more Americans can afford it.

Fourth, a balanced plan to reduce our deficit by four trillion dollars over the next decade on top of the trillion in spending we’ve already cut, I’d ask the wealthy to pay a little more. And as we end the war in Afghanistan let’s apply half the savings to pay down our debt and use the rest for some nation building right here at home.”

Obama has consistently blamed George Bush for our economic woes, but the truth is that the Democrats controlled both houses of congress the last 2 years of the Bush Administration and they, combined with Obama, have caused the most harm.

From the Washington Post October 1, 2012.

“Obama’s claim that the Bush tax cuts led to the economic crisis”

“Now Governor Romney believes that with even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy, and fewer regulations on Wall Street, all of us will prosper. In other words, he’d double down on the same trickle-down policies that led to the crisis in the first place.”

— President Obama, in a new two-minute television ad released Sept. 27, 2012

“This election to me is about which candidate is more likely to return us to full employment. This is a clear choice. The Republican plan is to cut more taxes on upper income people and go back to deregulation. That is what got us into trouble in the first place.”

— Former president Bill Clinton, in an Obama campaign ad running since August

When two different people give virtually the same message in two different ads, it’s a good bet that the language has been carefully poll-tested. Both President Obama and former president Bill Clinton assert that Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes for the wealthy and cut financial regulations — which they suggest is a recipe for another economic crisis.

The name “George W. Bush” is never mentioned but is certainly implied. This leads to the question: Did the Bush tax cuts cause the economic crisis?

We’ve been interested in the Clinton comments for some time and never quite got a satisfactory response from the Obama campaign. But Clinton used the vague word “trouble,” which could be broadly defined as also meaning higher deficits. (Clinton’s staff did not respond to queries about what he meant.) Certainly the Bush tax cuts did play some role in higher deficits, though, as we have noted, increased spending played a bigger role.

But Obama is not vague at all. He highlights the tax cuts and then says the “same trickle-down policies” — Democratic code for tax cuts for the wealthy — led to the “crisis.” The campaign’s back-up material labels that as “economic crisis,” thus leaving no ambiguity about his reference.”

The Pinocchio Test

It is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters. The financial crisis of 2008 stemmed from a variety of complex factors, in particular the bubble in housing prices and the rise of exotic financial instruments. Deregulation was certainly an important factor, but as the government commission concluded, the blame for that lies across administrations, not just in the last Republican one.

In any case, the Bush tax cuts belong at the bottom of the list — if at all. Moreover, it is rather strange for the campaign to cite as its source an article that, according to the author, does not support this assertion.

We nearly made this Four Pinocchios but ultimately decided that citing deregulation in conjunction with tax cuts kept this line out of the “whopper” category. Still, in his effort to portray Romney as an echo of Bush, the president really stretches the limits here.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-that-the-bush-tax-cuts-led-to-the-economic-crisis/2012/09/30/06e8f578-0a6e-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

Thanks to the Washington Post for clearing up the big lie.

I will address the rest of the false claims.

Probably the biggest of the many lies that Obama has told about the economy has to do with job creation and what he inherited. Without fail, all of the historical data from the Labor Dept. reveal that the job losses and economic calamity began when the Democrats controlled Congress and in many cases worsened with Obama in office.

Recently I explained how the jobs situation worsened even though the “unemployment rate” dropped. The Labor Dept. counts part time workers the same as full time for employment numbers. In September the number of people who could only get part time employment skyrocketed. So, the unemployment rate dropped but the jobs situation worsened.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/7-8-percent-unemployment-rate-truth-obama-wont-admit-citizen-wells-analysis-of-facts-part-time-workers-counted-as-employed-obama-and-democrats-worsen-job-opportunities/

Obama stated:

“When I took office we were losing nearly 800,000 jobs a month”

The job losses were high and the Democrats controlled both houses. Approximately 4 million fewer people were employed from the time that the Democrats took control of both houses until Obama took office.

The employment population ratio was 63.3 percent in January 2007, 60.6 in January 2009 and 58.7 in September 2012. A significant drop during Obama’s tenure.

The Labor Force Participation Rate was 66.4 percent in January 2007, 65.7 in January 2009 and 63.6 in September 2012. Another significant drop during Obama’s tenure.

Obama stated:

“First, we create a million new manufacturing jobs”

Obviously, Obama’s record on creating jobs as indicated by labor Dept. data dispels that lie. Without Obama in office the statement works.

Obama stated:

“Second, we cut our oil imports in half and produce more American-made energy, oil, clean-coal”

Oh really?

“if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them”…Barack Obama

And Obama stated:

“Fourth, a balanced plan to reduce our deficit by four trillion dollars over the next decade on top of the trillion in spending we’ve already cut”

Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

Obama raises $ 181 million in September 2012, Suspicions raised again, Obama for America 2008 audit and fine, Robert Bauer, 98% of contributions under reporting threshold

Obama raises $ 181 million in September 2012, Suspicions raised again, Obama for America 2008 audit and fine, Robert Bauer, 98% of contributions under  reporting threshold

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“Why was Democrat Ellen L. Weintraub, a former Perkins Coie employee, allowed to remain at the FEC , long after her scheduled tenure, by Barack Obama?”…Citizen Wells

“In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party
candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.”…Barack Obama

From Breitbart News October 6, 2012.

“WINDFALL: OBAMA RAISES $181 MILLION, ONLY AROUND 2% OF DONATIONS REPORTABLE”

“The Obama campaign dropped a bombshell this morning. It announced that, combined with the DNC, the campaign raised a staggering $181 million in September. The windfall is a huge increase over July and August, when the campaign raised around $100 million, although it is slightly down from the $193 million it raised in September 2008. The news should raise eyebrows.

The campaign said that just over 1.8 million people made donations to the campaign last month. According to the campaign, over 500k of these were brand-new donors, having neither given in 2008 nor 2012. 98% of contributions were under the reporting threshold of $250. Of these, the average contribution was $53.

Its really a tale of two worlds. 35k people gave an average of $2,600, while just over 1.7 million people gave an average of $53. Half the campaign’s haul came from people giving around the maximum amount and half from people who don’t have to be disclosed. Seems a bit odd.

The average of $53 from small donors is particularly noteworthy. Contributions under $200 don’t have to be disclosed, but the campaign still has to keep track of the donor’s name, in case subsequent donations push their contribution over the reporting threshold.

For contributions under $50, however, the campaign doesn’t even have to keep track of the donor’s name. It is effectively considered a “petty cash” donation. A person could theoretically make 10 $49 donations and never be reported, even though their total contributions are above the FEC’s reporting threshold.

With an average donation of $53 from small donors, Obama has A LOT of donors who will never be disclosed and whose names aren’t even known to the campaign. Tens of millions of dollars worth.

Today’s report certainly adds a great deal of interest to this news story from last week.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/06/windfall-obama-raises-181-million-only-2-reportable

From Citizen Wells April 20, 2012.

From the FEC April 19, 2012.

Weekly Digest

Week of April 16 – 20
AUDITS

“Final Audit Report on Obama for America. On April 19, the Commission made public the Final Audit Report of the Commission on Obama for America (OFA) covering campaign finance activity between January 16, 2007 and December 31, 2008. The Commission approved a finding that OFA failed to file required 48-hour notices totaling $1,972,266 received in 2008.”

http://www.fec.gov/press/press2012/20120420digest.shtml

From the audit.

“Final Audit Report of the
Commission on
Obama for America
(January 16, 2007 – December 31, 2008)”

“Part I
Background
Authority for Audit

This report is based on an audit of Obama for America (OFA), undertaken by the Audit Division ofthe Federal Election Commission (the Commission) in accordance with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the Act). The Audit Division conducted the audit pursuant to 2 U.S.C. §438(b), which permits the Commission to conduct audits and field investigations of any political committee that is required to file a report imder 2 U.S.C. §434. Prior to conducting any audit under this subsection, the Commission must perform an intemal review of reports filed by selected committees to determine if the reports filed by a particular committee meet the threshold requirements
for substantial compliance with the Act. 2 U.S.C. §438(b).

Scope of Audit

Following Commission-approved procedures, the Audit staff evaluated various risk factors and as a result, this audit examined:
1. the receipt of excessive contributions;
2. the receipt of contributions from prohibited sources;
3. the disclosure of contributions received;
4. the disclosure of individual contributors’ occupation and name of employer;
5. the consistency between reported figures and bank records;
6. the completeness of records; and
7. other committee operations necessary to the review.

Audit Hearing

Obama for America declined the opportunity for an audit hearing before the Commission on the matter presented in this report.”

“• Treasurer During Period Covered by Audit Robert R. Bauer January 16,2007 – May 9,2007, Martin H. Nesbit May 10,2007 – Present”

“Part III

Summary

Commission Finding

Failure to File 48-Hour Notices
Based on audit fieldwork, OFA did not file required 48-hour notices for 1,312
contributions, totaling $1,972,266, that were received prior to the general election. OFA provided no further information regarding this matter in response to the Interim Audit.

Report recommendation.

The Commission approved a finding that OFA failed to file required 48-hour notices in 2008. (For more detail, see page 4)”

“Facts and Analysis

A. Facts

During fieldwork. Audit staff compared OFA’s 48-hour notices with contributions of $1,000 or more that had been reported as received during the 48-hour notice filing period.’ This review identified 1,312 contributions, totaling $1,972,266, for which OFA failed to file the required notices. A majority of the missing 48-hour notices arose from a transfer reported on October 24,2008 from the Obama Victory Fund (OVF), a joint fundraising committee composed of OFA and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). In order to verify whether the contributions in question had been received between October 16 and October 23, Audit staff traced contributions attributed to the October 24 transfer to the disclosure reports filed by OVF.”

“Commission Conclusion

On March 8,2012, the Commission considered the Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum, in which the Audit Division recommended that the Commission adopt a finding that OFA failed to file required 48-hour notices in 2008.
The Commission approved the Audit staffs recommendation.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/fec-audit-reveals-obama-for-america-failed-to-file-notice-of-nearly-2-million-dollars-in-contributions-in-2008-1312-contributions-prohibited-sources/

From Citizen Wells May 25, 2012.

From the FEC  May 25, 2012.
“ENFORCEMENT”

“MUR 6524

RESPONDENTS: Biden for President, Inc.; and Melvyn Monzack, in his official capacity as treasurer
COMPLAINANT: FEC-Initiated
SUBJECT: In the normal course of carrying out its supervisory responsibilities, the Commission found that Biden for President, Inc. (the Committee) and Monzack, in his official capacity as treasurer, did not retain adequate records to document the notification of contributors of the Committee’s presumptive redesignation of $1,092,899 in excessive contributions. Biden was a 2008 primary candidate for president.

DISPOSITION: The Commission entered into a conciliation agreement whereby Biden for President, Inc. and Monzack, in his official capacity as treasurer, agreed to pay a civil penalty of $50,000.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/biden-for-president-fined-50000-by-fec-2008-inadequate-records-over-one-million-dollars-excessive-contributions-melvyn-monzack-treasurer-breaking-news/

From Citizen Wells January 23, 2012.

“Robert Bauer, of Perkins Coie, on February 1, 2007 requested an advisory opinion to keep Obama’s option for matching funds open. Bauer knew full well that Obama, not being a natural born citizen, was not eligible for matching funds. The FEC advisory opinion from March 1, 2007 responded in the affirmative.Ellen L. Weintraub, former staff member at Perkins Coie, was a Democrat appointee of the FEC at that time. She remained well beyond her scheduled tenure with the help of Barack Obama.
Obama, Robert Bauer, Democrats interaction with FEC timeline.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/obama-ga-ballot-challenge-natural-born-citizen-status-judge-michael-malihi-why-did-obama-refuse-matching-funds-in-2008-part-4-obama-attorneys-democrats-control-fec/

7.8 percent unemployment rate truth Obama won’t admit, Citizen Wells analysis of facts, Part time workers counted as employed, Obama and Democrats worsen job opportunities

7.8 percent unemployment rate truth Obama won’t admit, Citizen Wells analysis of facts, Part time workers counted as employed, Obama and Democrats worsen job opportunities

“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012

“Since the Democrats took control of both houses of congress in January 2007, the number of people who could only find part time work has gone up 215 percent”…Citizen Wells

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

I began life as a math major, spent over 30 years in Information Technology, taught college level Computer Science, was an officer in a company and had my own small consulting company for years. I know numbers and business. I have been watching and reporting on the employment data. Others such as Jack Welch smelled the stench as well.

Earlier today at Citizen Wells you were informed that an increase in part time workers was a big reason for the .3 percent drop in he unemployment rate.

“Total employment rose by 873,000 in September, following 3 months of little
change. The employment-population ratio increased by 0.4 percentage point to
58.7 percent, after edging down in the prior 2 months. The overall trend in
the employment-population ratio for this year has been flat. The civilian labor
force rose by 418,000 to 155.1 million in September, while the labor force
participation rate was little changed at 63.6 percent. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes
referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose from 8.0 million in August
to 8.6 million in September. These individuals were working part time because
their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time
job.”

Part time workers included in employed category.

“Household survey. The sample is selected to reflect the entire
civilian noninstitutional population. Based on responses to a series
of questions on work and job search activities, each person 16 years
and over in a sample household is classified as employed, unemployed,
or not in the labor force.

People are classified as employed if they did any work at all as paid
employees during the reference week; worked in their own business,
profession, or on their own farm; or worked without pay at least 15
hours in a family business or farm. People are also counted as employed
if they were temporarily absent from their jobs because of illness, bad
weather, vacation, labor-management disputes, or personal reasons.”
“Establishment survey. The sample establishments are drawn from private
nonfarm businesses such as factories, offices, and stores, as well as
from federal, state, and local government entities. Employees on nonfarm
payrolls are those who received pay for any part of the reference pay
period, including persons on paid leave.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/employment-rate-drop-caused-by-600000-new-part-time-workers-unemployment-rate-3-percent-drop-real-jobs-added-114000-involuntary-part-time-workers-not-good-news/

Here is what Obama is not telling you for good reason.

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics historical data.

Employment Level – Part-Time for Economic Reasons, Could Only Find Part-Time Work, All Industries

January 2001 George Bush took office.

924,000

January 2007 Democrats took both houses of congress.

1,197,000

January 2009 Barack Obama took office.

1,679,000

September 2012.

2,572,000

Numbers don’t lie.

Obama does.

Employment rate drop caused by 600000 new part time workers, Unemployment rate .3 percent drop, Real jobs added 114000, Involuntary part time workers not good news

Employment rate drop caused by 600000 new part time workers, Unemployment rate .3 percent drop, Real jobs added 114000, Involuntary part time workers not good news

“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012

“People leaving the labor force were a big reason that North Carolina’s unemployment rate dropped to 9.4 percent in April, a month when only 1,400 more people got jobs.”…WRAL May 18, 2012

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O’Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

Here is the answer to the .3 percent unemployment rate drop from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September.

From the US Labor Department October 5, 2012.

“Total employment rose by 873,000 in September, following 3 months of little
change. The employment-population ratio increased by 0.4 percentage point to
58.7 percent, after edging down in the prior 2 months. The overall trend in
the employment-population ratio for this year has been flat. The civilian labor
force rose by 418,000 to 155.1 million in September, while the labor force
participation rate was little changed at 63.6 percent. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes
referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose from 8.0 million in August
to 8.6 million in September. These individuals were working part time because
their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time
job.”

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Part time workers included in employed category.

“Household survey. The sample is selected to reflect the entire
civilian noninstitutional population. Based on responses to a series
of questions on work and job search activities, each person 16 years
and over in a sample household is classified as employed, unemployed,
or not in the labor force.

People are classified as employed if they did any work at all as paid
employees during the reference week; worked in their own business,
profession, or on their own farm; or worked without pay at least 15
hours in a family business or farm. People are also counted as employed
if they were temporarily absent from their jobs because of illness, bad
weather, vacation, labor-management disputes, or personal reasons.”
“Establishment survey. The sample establishments are drawn from private
nonfarm businesses such as factories, offices, and stores, as well as
from federal, state, and local government entities. Employees on nonfarm
payrolls are those who received pay for any part of the reference pay
period, including persons on paid leave.”

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm

600,000 new part time jobs in September.

But this is why:

“These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”

Where I come from, this is not good news.

Obviously there are more components of this voodoo mathematics.

Here are some interesting facts:

 
                                                                                    Sept 2011                            Sept 2012
 
Labor force participation rate                            64.1 %                                 63.6 %
 
Persons who currently want a job                6,240,000                             6,727,000
 
Not in labor force                                               86,067,000                          88,710,000      
 
Employment-population ratio                            58.4                                     58.7   
This big jump in “part time” workers begs more research.

White House cleaning, Congress flushing, Remove Obama and congressmen ignoring US Constitution, Obama eligibility and Justice Department oversight, Senator Coburn

White House cleaning, Congress flushing, Remove Obama and congressmen ignoring US Constitution, Obama eligibility and Justice Department oversight, Senator Coburn

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, including Tony West, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Now, I don’t get upset when foreign and national journalists fail to mention Tony Rezko, or the Daley boys, or how the Chicago machine plans to staff the Department of Justice, and the new Department of Homeland Casinos.”…John Kass, Chicago Tribune July 30, 2008

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

I have a younger friend who is a PHD candidate in history, In a recent conversation she brought up the disturbing fact that we have lost our checks and balances. Of course I readily agreed.

Recently at Citizen Wells you were informed that Obama nominated Tony West for a permanent position as the number three person in the US Justice Department. West is a friend of Obama, finance co chair of Obama’s California campaign in 2008, but wait, it get’s better. Tony West was at the top of the list of Justice Dept. attorneys in a response to a lawsuit filed by retired Naval Commander Charles Kerchner on January 21, 2009, challenging Obama’s eligibility.

Then, on June 24, 2010, Tony West represented the Justice Department and ultimately Obama, in a question and answer session before the House Judiciary committee. For example:

“The Civil Division is vigorously defending the Affordable Care Act health care reform statute against multiple lawsuits brought on constitutional and other grounds.””The President has pledged to make this Administration the most open and transparent in history, and the department is doing its part to make that pledge a reality.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/obama-corrupts-us-justice-department-chicago-style-tony-west-promotion-classic-obama-pay-to-play-west-and-usdoj-complicit-with-obama-hiding-records-and-eligibility/

Where in the hell is the House Judiciary Committee? What is Congressman Howard Coble of NC doing about this?

Here is another, in a long string of congressmen, failing to do their constitutional duty, providing lip service to their constituents, and maintaining status quo.

From WND October 4, 2012.

“SEN. COBURN DUCKS ON BIRTH CERTIFICATE PROMISE
Arpaio investigator says lawmaker didn’t want to see evidence”

“Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., appears to dodging a campaign promise he made to look into evidence President Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.

In a letter to a constituent dated Oct. 2, Coburn said his staff had reached out to the office of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Phoenix after making a promise to tea-party activist Miki Booth at an Aug. 7 town hall appearance in Claremore, Okla. At the campaign event, Booth was seen on video confronting the senator about a letter she had written to him.

“My staff has reached out to Sheriff Arpaio’s office,” Coburn wrote in the constituent letter. “However, I have yet to be presented any credible evidence to demonstrate President Obama was not born in Hawaii.”

From there, Coburn cited Obama being placed on state ballots for president as proof Obama’s birth certificate is genuine.

“Furthermore, all 50 states saw fit to put Mr. Obama on their ballots in 2008 and again in 2012,” Coburn wrote. “This includes Arizona, which was recently provided verification of President Obama’s birth by Hawaii. I remain open to hearing and reviewing any supporting evidence.”

However, Mike Zullo, lead investigator for Sheriff Arpaio’s law enforcement investigation into Obama’s eligibility, insists Coburn has yet to see the evidence his team has uncovered indicating the document the White House posted as Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.

“I was initially contacted by Ken Ashton, an aide to Sen. Coburn in Sen. Coburn’s Washington office, on Sept. 4,” Zullo explained to WND. “I provided Ashton at his request, an overview of the sheriff’s investigation, focusing on the document fraud.”

Coburn’s office has not replied to WND’s request for comment.

Zullo told WND he emphasized to Ashton the sheriff was not investigating the president but the long-form birth certificate released by the White House April 27, 2011, to determine if that document was legitimate.

“I told Ashton that it would be appropriate for Sen. Coburn to contact Sheriff Arpaio directly to fulfill the commitment Coburn had made to his constituents,” Zullo said. “I explained Sheriff Arpaio was prepared and looking forward to answering any questions Coburn might have.”

Zullo documented his discussion with Ashton in an internal memo sent to Arpaio’s office Sept. 4. Zullo told Arpaio that he expected Coburn would contact the sheriff to request access to the evidence after Ashton and Coburn had an opportunity to study the overview.

Two weeks later, Zullo received a second phone call from Ashton in which Ashton seemed intent to emphasize the fact that he had called Arpaio’s office Sept. 4 in his capacity as an investigative aide to Coburn.

“I told Ashton that Coburn should speak directly to Sheriff Arpaio, because the sheriff had to make the decision to release evidence from the investigation,” Zullo recalled.

“I specifically pointed out to Ashton he would not be able to use his phone call to me as a substitute for Sen. Coburn talking directly to Sheriff Arpaio.”

Zullo told WND he felt Ashton’s second phone call was disingenuous, almost as if Ashton wanted Zullo to agree to a cover story.

“At the conclusion of the phone call, I felt Coburn’s office was attempting to use Ashton’s phone call as evidence that Coburn contacted the sheriff’s office,” Zullo said, “when the truth is Coburn never contacted Sheriff Arpaio, and Coburn never requested any evidence be provided to him for his inspection.”

Zullo said the episode was typical of the repeated frustrations the sheriff has experienced trying to get Congress to look at the birth certificate evidence.

“Ashton was trying to create the illusion that somehow the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office had not provided Sen. Coburn with any credible evidentiary information, even though Ashton never requested to see the evidence,” Zullo said.

“Even if Ashton had requested to see the evidence, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office would not blindly send out the evidence without first requiring Sen. Coburn to talk with the sheriff so the sheriff could make a determination whether or not it was appropriate to release the evidence to the senator’s office.”

Zullo’s final conclusion was that Coburn’s office was just engaging in politicking, and Ashton only wanted to create “the illusion the evidence had been examined.”

“The truth appears to be that Sen. Coburn has no serious interest in conducting an honest evaluation of whether or not Obama’s birth certificate is genuine, or the computer-generated forgery we have concluded the document is,” Zullo said.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/sen-coburn-ducks-on-birth-certificate-promise/

Mr. Coburn, I have seen no credible evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. In fact, the bulk of circumstantial evidence prior to 2008 strongly indicates that Obama was not born there. If you wish to compare credentials, I am available.

“Mr. Smith goes to Washington” airs on Turner Classic Movies tonight. I will watch it again. Perhaps all of those in office should as well.

Obama gay down low life revisited, WND investigation, Reverend Jeremiah Wright Down Low Club, The program, Larry Sinclair allegations substantiated, Donald Young murder

Obama gay down low life revisited, WND investigation, Reverend Jeremiah Wright Down Low Club, The program, Larry Sinclair allegations substantiated, Donald Young murder

“Why was Barack Obama absent from the opening session of the IL Senate on November 4, 1999?”…Citizen Wells

“I spent the last two years of high school in a daze, locking away the questions that life seemed insistent on imposing. I kept playing basketball, attended
classes sparingly, drank beer heavily, and tried drugs enthusiastically.”…Barack Obama

“In both conversations with Obama for America and AKP Message & Media, I explained that on November 6, 1999, I had been introduced to Barack Obama by a friend and that Obama had, in fact, sold me an eight-ball of cocaine and had himself engaged in smoking crack cocaine in my limo on that date and again in my hotel room the following day.”…Larry Sinclair, “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder”

Barack Obama’s gay side, his down low activity, has been extensively covered at Citizen Wells beginning early in 2008 with the Larry Sinclair allegations of a drug sex encounter with Obama in 1999. Obama’s long time drug use is well documented too.

From WND October 2, 2012.

“TRINITY CHURCH MEMBERS REVEAL OBAMA SHOCKER!

‘Matchmaker’ Rev. Jeremiah Wright ‘provided cover for gays'”

“Ten years ago, the New York Times reported on a growing underground subculture in the black community known as Down Low, comprised largely of men who secretly engage in homosexual activity while living “straight” lives in public.

It’s within that subtext that opposition researchers for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign began investigating rumors that Rev. Jeremiah Wright was running a “matchmaking service” for members of his Trinity United Church of Christ known as the Down Low Club, which included Barack Obama.

Over the past several months, WND investigators have interviewed a number of members of the church who claim the president benefited from Wright’s efforts to help black men who engage in homosexual activity appear respectable in black society by finding them a wife.

The 2003 New York Times story, “Double Lives on the Down Low,” said that though many black men reject “a gay culture they perceive as white and effeminate,” they “have settled on a new identity, with its own vocabulary and customs and its own name: Down Low.”

The Times said that while “there are black men who are openly gay, it seems that the majority of those having sex with men still lead secret lives, products of a black culture that deems masculinity and fatherhood as a black man’s primary responsibility – and homosexuality as a white man’s perversion.”

The Down Low Club at Trinity “doesn’t have meetings, and it isn’t like the Rotary Club,” a source identified for this article as “Carolyn” explained to a WND investigator in Chicago.

“It was more that Wright served as a matchmaker,” said Carolyn, a 20-year member of Trinity who has played a role in church administration and knows the Obamas personally.

“He kept his eye on the young guys coming up in Trinity,” she said, “and if he spotted someone that acted or looked gay, then Wright would give them kind of a guidance counselor-type direction on how to keep down low – how to do the things they wanted to do, but then also getting married and looking ‘respectable’ – being part of black society.”

To Trinity insiders, the Down Low Club was simply known as “the program.”

“That’s the terminology. At Trinity, you’re urged to ‘get with the program,’” explained a male beneficiary of the Down Low Club. “What that means is it’s OK to go ahead and have sex with men, just as long as you ‘get with the program’ and marry a woman, somebody no straight guy would want to marry.”

The wife, the Down Low Club member explained, is “your ‘beard,’ your cover – so you can look like you’re living a straight life, even thought your not.”

The male source was a “computer consultant” who claims not to know “scratch” about computers. But “getting with the program” at Trinity meant he could keep living a “gay” life and receive lots of computer consulting work thrown his way by Trinity, as long as he was willing to marry an unattractive woman who otherwise might have ended up a lonely spinster with no means to provide for living.

Carolyn explained that for many black families, attending Trinity was a way out of poverty.

“Trinity was a chance to network,” she said. “The stuff preached was hateful, but about 70 percent of those who go there ignore the radical rhetoric and just trying to get ahead.”

Carolyn said Trinity “helped a lot of blacks get successful and connected.”

“That’s what Wright did for Obama,” she claimed. “He connected Obama in the community, and he helped Obama hide his homosexuality.”

Openly homosexual author and commentator Keith Boykin, a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, mentions Obama’s former pastor, Wright, on pages 264-265 of his 2005 book “Beyond the Down Low: Sex, Lies, and Denial in Black America.” While Boykin doesn’t refer to the Down Low Club by name, he regards Wright as among a small group of ministers who are “coming to grips with sexuality and opening up a dialogue with heterosexuals, homosexuals, and bisexuals in the pews.”

Chicago-based author, businessman, speaker and HIV/AIDS activist J.L. King wrote a controversial book in 2005 called “On the Down Low: A Journey into the Lives of ‘Straight’ Black Men who Sleep with Men.”

He was a guest on Oprah Winfrey’s Chicago-based TV show in 2004, which described him this way: “J.L. King had a life most would envy. He married his high school sweetheart, had two healthy children and was on the fast track to success. But, unbeknownst to his family and friends, he had a dark secret—he was living on the down low.”

Carolyn and the other members of Trinity who provided statements corroborating her testimony were insistent that WND conceal their identities as a condition of being interviewed.

“I’m still scared to discuss any of this,” Carolyn said.

“At Trinity, if you even hint at talking about Obama being gay, you are reminded of our dear departed choir director,” she said. “He was killed, and it wasn’t a robbery. The Christmas presents weren’t touched. The TV was not taken, nothing in the apartment was missing.”

Carolyn’s reference was to Donald Young, the 47-year-old homosexual choirmaster at Trinity who died of multiple gunshot wounds in his Chicago apartment Dec. 24, 2007.

Young’s murder was preceded Nov. 17, 2007, with the execution-style murder of 25-year-old Larry Bland, another black gay member of Trinity United. He also was murdered in his home, dying of multiple gunshot wounds, according to his death certificate.

Just two days after the murder of Young, a third openly “gay” member of Wright’s church, Nate Spencer, reportedly died of septicemia, pneumonia and AIDS.

Sensational charges

As WND reported last month, a prominent member of Chicago’s homosexual community claims Obama’s participation in the “gay” bar and bathhouse scene was so well known that many who were aware of his lifestyle were shocked when he ran for president and finally won the White House.

In April, WND reported a federal judge dismissed a libel case against Larry Sinclair, a homosexual who claimed Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign had paid to rig a polygraph test regarding Sinclair’s sensational charge that he had sex and used cocaine twice with Obama while Obama was an Illinois state senator. Sinclair tells his story in “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder.”

WND also reported former radical activist John Drew has said that when he met Obama when Obama was a student at Occidental College, he thought Obama and his then-Pakistani roommate were “gay” lovers.

In addition, rumors have swirled around Obama’s relationship with his personal aide and former “body man,” Reggie Love, who resurfaced on the eve of the Republican National Convention to support his old boss. Love resigned from the White House in November 2011 after compromising photographs of him as a college student received wide circulation.

WND also has documented in two separate articles, here and here, that Obama wore a gold band on his wedding ring finger from the time he attended Occidental College through his student days at Harvard Law School.

Shocking phone call

Sinclair gave an affidavit to the Chicago Police Department regarding contacts he says he had with Young just prior to Young’s murder.

According to Sinclair’s affidavit, published in its entirety beginning on page 56 of his book, he contacted Obama’s presidential campaign in September 2007. Sinclair says he requested that Obama correct claims he made about when he stopped abusing drugs to reflect use of crack cocaine during their sex encounters in November 1999.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama had stated famously he stopped using marijuana and cocaine in college, implying his drug abuse ended when he had completed his first two years of college at Occidental in Los Angeles.

Sinclair explained that when he made contact with the Obama campaign in September 2007, he provided callback numbers, in case the campaign wanted to get in touch with him.

Then, in late September or early October 2007, as Sinclair stated in his affidavit, he received a call from a male identifying himself as “Mr. Young,” who stated he was responding to calls Sinclair had made to the Obama campaign.

“This first call shocked me in that this ‘Mr. Young’ asked me why I had not asked Senator Obama to disclose sexual encounters I had with Mr. Obama in 1999,” Sinclair’s affidavit reads. “I was shocked as I had never mentioned to the campaign or anyone working for the campaign any sexual encounters. The call ended with Mr. Young stating I would hear from someone in a few days.”

Sinclair claims it was in a second call from “Mr. Young” that he began to suspect the man had been sexually intimate with Obama. Sinclair said he drew that conclusion “by the tone of the conversation” and by its “sexual nature.”

In late October 2007, Sinclair received a text message from “Mr. Young” stating Young “was intimately involved with Senator Obama and that Obama was discussing with him and his pastor how to publicly acknowledge Senator Obama’s drug use in 1999.”

The text message also indicated Obama wanted to make sure Sinclair had not discussed the sexual encounters or drug use with any media at that time.

In November 2007, Sinclair received a second text message from “Mr. Young,” advising him that Obama would publicly correct his statement as to the last time he used drugs and that Sinclair did not need to concern himself with publicly disclosing it.

Then, in early December 2007, Sinclair received his last contact with “Mr. Young,” with Young making it clear Obama had no intention of acknowledging publicly his use of crack cocaine in 1999.

After Young was murdered, Sinclair had several contacts with Young’s family.

“In several telephone conversations with his sisters, brothers, nieces and others, I was reassured that the family of Donald Young believed he was murdered to protect Barack Obama,” Sinclair wrote. “It also became clear, right from the start that members of the Young family were truly fearful of speaking out publicly, to this day, they fear for their own personal, physical safety.”

On July 17, 2010, the supermarket tabloid The Globe published an interview with Norma Jean Young, the 76-year-old mother of the slain choirmaster, in which she expressed fear that her son was murdered to protect Obama.

“What was the cause of my son’s death?” Norma Jean Young asked in the Globe interview. “I’m very suspicious that it may have been related to Obama. Donald and Obama were very close friends. Whatever went on with this is very private. I am suspicious of a cover-up!”

She insisted there is “more to the story,” calling on Chicago police to ramp up their investigation.

“I do believe they are shielding somebody or protecting somebody,” she told The Globe.

Asked who would benefit from a cover-up, Norma Jean Young said, “It could be anyone, including Obama.”

Shortly after the Globe interview was published, Norma Jean Young left Chicago and lived for a while in Peoria, Ill. Her current residence is unknown.

The murders of Donald Young and Larry Bland remain today open cases of unsolved homicide.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/trinity-church-members-reveal-obama-shocker/

2013 huge tax increases loom, Typical middle income family $2000 increase, Bush tax cuts not just for wealthy, Obama lies exposed, 90 percent of households tax increase

2013 huge tax increases loom, Typical middle income family $2000 increase, Bush tax cuts not just for wealthy, Obama lies exposed, 90 percent of households tax increase

“I would not increase taxes for middle class Americans and in fact I want to….provide a tax cut for people who are making $75,000 a year or less,” “For those folks, I want an offset on the payroll tax that would be worth as much as $1,000 for a family.”…Barack Obama March 27, 2008

“Obama’s completely disingenuous dodge on whether he would raise taxes during a time of economic slowdown is belied by his vote earlier this month,” “Obama’s claims to the contrary, his votes to raise taxes on people earning as little as $31,850 are straight from the Democrats’ tax-and-spend playbook.”…Alex Conant, RNC spokesman March 27, 2008

“It is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters. The financial crisis of 2008 stemmed from a variety of complex factors, in particular the bubble in housing prices and the rise of exotic financial instruments. Deregulation was certainly an important factor, but as the government commission concluded, the blame for that lies across administrations, not just in the last Republican one.
In any case, the Bush tax cuts belong at the bottom of the list — if at all. Moreover, it is rather strange for the campaign to cite as its source an article that, according to the author, does not support this assertion.”…Washington Post October 1, 2012

First of all, I would like to thank and congratulate the Washington Post for awarding Obama 3 Pinochios for blaming the Bush Tax Cuts for the economic crisis.

Second. As you will see below, the Bush tax cuts were not just for the wealthy.

From the Telegraph Herald October 2, 2012.

“Tax increase looms at year-end ‘fiscal cliff’

A typical family could see its taxes go up by $2,000 next year if lawmakers fail to renew cuts set to expire at the end of the year.”

“A typical middle-income family making $40,000 to $64,000 per year could see its taxes go up by $2,000 next year if lawmakers fail to renew a lengthy roster of tax cuts set to expire at the end of the year, according to a new report Monday

Taxpayers across the income spectrum would be hit with large tax hikes, the Tax Policy Center said in its study, with households in the top 1 percent income range seeing an average tax increase of more than $120,000, while a family making between $110,000 to $140,000 could see a tax hike in the $6,000 range.

Taxpayers across the income spectrum will get slammed with increases totaling more than $500 billion — a more than 20 percent increase — with nine out of 10 households being affected by the expiration of tax cuts enacted under both President Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush.

The expiring provisions include Bush-era cuts on wage and investment income and cuts for married couples and families with children, among others. Also expiring is a 2 percentage point temporary payroll tax cut championed by Obama.

The looming expiration of the large roster of tax cuts is one of the issues confronting voters in November, with the chief difference between Obama and GOP candidate Mitt Romney being the tax treatment of wealthier earners. Obama is calling for permitting rates on individual income exceeding $200,000 and family incoming over $250,000 to go back to Clinton-era rates of as much as 39.6 percent.

Both candidates call for rewriting the tax code next year, but any such effort promises to be difficult and could take considerable time.

Monday’s study, by the independent Tax Policy Center, deals with the immediate increases set to slap taxpayers in January under the existing framework of the tax code.

Few are talking of renewing Obama’s payroll tax cut, even though that would mean a tax increase for working people. Working families with modest incomes would be hit hard as the child tax credit would shrink from a maximum of $1,000 per child to $500.

As a result, a married couple earning $50,000 with three dependent children that currently receives an almost $1,500 income tax refund largely due to the child tax credit would see their fortunes reversed by more than $3,000 next year and pay more than $1,500 in income taxes while seeing their payroll taxes go up by $1,000 if the full menu of tax cuts expire.

Economists warn that the looming tax hikes, combined with $109 billion in automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect in January, could throw the fragile economy back into recession if Washington doesn’t act. The automatic spending cuts are coming due because of the failure of last year’s deficit “supercommittee” to strike a bargain.

The combination of the sharp tax hikes and spending cuts has been dubbed a “fiscal cliff.”

“The fiscal cliff threatens an unprecedented tax increase at year end,” says the report. “Taxes would rise by more than $500 billion in 2013 — an average of almost $3,500 per household — as almost every tax cuts enacted since 2001 would expire.”

Cumulatively, the country would see a 5 percentage point jump in its average tax rate, which works out to taxes on the top 1 percent jumping by more than 7 percentage points and about 4 percentage points for most people earning below $100,000 per year.

Put another way, people in the $40,000-$64,000 income range would see their average federal tax rate jump from 14 percent to 17.8 percent — or an increase in their overall federal bill of 27 percent.

All told, almost 90 percent of all households would face a tax increase, though the top 20 percent of earners would bear 60 percent of the overall cost. Across all households the tax increases would average almost $3,500.

The expiration of cuts on capital gains and stock dividends is a key reason why wealthier people would see a higher increase in their tax burdens.

Republicans controlling the House have also called for the expiration of Obama-backed tax cuts for the working poor, including expansions of the earned income and child tax credits.

But all sides are calling for the renewal of Bush-era tax rates for everyone else. Without a renewal of those rates, a married couple would pay a 28 percent rate on taxable income exceeding $72,300 instead of the 25 percent rate they now pay. And the 10 percent rate paid on the first $8,900 of income would jump to 15 percent.

The new top rate of 39.6 percent would kick in for income over $397,000. The current top rate is 35 percent rate.

The Tax Policy Center is a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution.”

http://www.thonline.com/news/national_world/article_19fc291b-ce3c-5667-ad9b-875019eeac09.html

Obamacare and Catholic Church, Religious liberty and health care, Dr. Grattan Brown, Natural Law as the Foundation of Religious Liberty, Belmont Abbey College

Obamacare and Catholic Church, Religious liberty and health care, Dr. Grattan Brown, Natural Law as the Foundation of Religious Liberty, Belmont Abbey College

“Führer, my Führer, give me by God. Protect and preserve my life for long. You saved Germany in time of need. I thank you for my daily bread. Be with me for a long time, do not leave me, Führer, my Führer, my faith, my light, Hail to my Führer!”…Recited by Hitler youth

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”…Barack Obama

“First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out – because I was not a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me –
and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.”…Pastor Martin Niemoller

From Saint Pius X Church in NC.
“Saint Pius X to Host Lecture on Religious Liberty & the HHS Mandate

Dr. Grattan Brown, STD, a professor at Belmont Abbey College, will deliver a lecture,

“Natural Law Foundations of Religious Liberty & the HHS Mandate,”

in the church on Saturday, October 6, at 7 p.m. Dr. Brown is a former researcher in religion and public policy at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC and former professor at Saint Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philadelphia.

A reception will precede the event at 6 p.m.

This is an important topic not just to Catholics, but to all Americans who cherish religious liberty. Much is heard about the issue in the news, but Dr. Brown will be able to help us understand the issue from the viewpoint of Catholic tradition and Church teaching.
This event is FREE and OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.”

http://www.stpiusxnc.com/

From Citizen Wells November 18, 2011.
“Belmont Abbey sues feds over birth control rule”
“Belmont Abbey College has filed a broad legal challenge to the part of President Barack Obama’s health care reforms that requires employer insurance plans to cover contraception and other birth control.
The Catholic college in Gaston County says the federal mandate forces religious institutions opposed to birth control to violate their beliefs or face penalties. The rule goes into effect next August.
The school has sued a number of federal agencies. The defendants include Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
Keith Maley, an HHS spokesman, said the agency doesn’t comment on pending litigation.
The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a nonprofit, public-interest law firm.”

Defense of the Faith: A Forum on “Religious Liberty” (Part 2 of 4 – Dr. Grattan Brown)

“Published on May 28, 2012 by StBenedictPressTAN
Defense of the Faith: A Forum on Religious Liberty (PART 2 OF 4)
Dr. Grattan Brown: “Natural Law as the Foundation of Religious Liberty”
PART 1: Introduction (http://youtu.be/9v3FQYZ_d9g)
PART 3: Mr. Kyle Duncan (http://youtu.be/o-qfS4Q7Z_w)
PART 4: Mrs. Nancy Matthews (http://youtu.be/tl91F_R6l2s)
On March 21, 2010, the United States House of Representatives voted on, and narrowly passed, a new national healthcare reform bill. Two days later, President Barack Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into federal law. On January 20, 2012, over repeated objections by the United States Catholic Bishops and other religious leaders, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services reaffirmed a rule mandating that virtually all private healthcare plans must cover sterilization, abortifacients and contraception by plan years beginning on or after August 1, 2012.
This action has been called by many religious leaders an egregious violation of the first amendment which states that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”
On Saturday, February 11, 2012, over one hundred attendees gathered for a forum on religious liberties hosted on the campus of Belmont Abbey College. The event was moderated by Dr. William Thierfelder, president of Belmont Abbey College. Three nationally-recognized speakers took the podium.
Dr. Grattan Brown, Associate Professor of Theology at Belmont Abbey College, opened the forum with his presentation on Natural Law as the foundation for religious liberty, addressing various contraceptive methods mandated under the new administrative guidelines, and their potential to function as abortifacients in violation of Natural Law.
Mr. Kyle Duncan, Senior Legal Counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm located in Washington, DC, spoke on the accelerating legal challenges to religious liberty in the United States.
Mrs. Nancy Matthews, recently retired Chancellor and General Counsel for the Diocese of Bridgeport, CT, closed the forum with a presentation on the goals and objectives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ ad hoc committee on religious liberty. Mrs. Matthews is currently a consultant to this committee.
It is our hope that this forum will help you to better understand these issues facing the Catholic Church and nearly all employers in America today and encourage you to take action to ensure the continued protection of religious freedom.”

Bishop E.W. Jackson Christians leave Democrat Party, Manipulated deceived and misled black community for a long time, Democrats only care about staying in power

Bishop E.W. Jackson Christians leave Democrat Party, Manipulated deceived and misled black community for a long time, Democrats only care about staying in power

After  breaking the Democrat filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act: “The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!”…Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”…Barack Obama

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”…Jesus, John 8:32

God bless Bishop E.W. Jackson.

From NE News Now.

“Calling on Christians to leave Democratic Party”

“A prominent black pastor, upset over the direction the Democrat Party has taken, is asking Christians to change political affiliations.

Bishop E.W. Jackson of S.T.A.N.D. (Staying True To America’s National Destiny) has launched a project called “Exodus Now,” which calls for a “mass exodus of Christians from the Democrat Part.”

“We believe that the Democrat Party has shown itself to be anti-Christian, anti-Bible, anti-family, anti-life and anti-God, and it’s time for Christians to come out,” Jackson explains. “We are focusing particularly — not exclusively, but particularly — on black Christians who in our view have been held captive by the Democrat Party with a tissue of lies.”

While S.T.A.N.D. is encouraging people to vote their conscience, the group’s founder asserts, “We have stayed away from either endorsing Mitt Romney or saying that this is a call to vote against President Obama and make it personal. But I will say this,” Jackson adds. “We’re calling people to come out of the Democrat Party and not support candidates who represent its values and the rebellion that it represents against God. That certainly would include President Barack Obama.”

Bishop Jackson notes that the Democrat Party has “manipulated, deceived and misled the black community” for a long time, and it’s time “to awaken them that they are being used in a power game by Democrats who could care less about the black community, only care about staying in power, and they will use the black community for as long as they will allow them to use them.””

http://onenewsnow.com//politics-govt/2012/09/24/calling-on-christians-to-leave-democratic-party

I have been saying this for years. The Democrats have been using blacks and others to stay in power. Barack Obama is the poster child for this bad behaviour.

From Citizen Wells, October 8, 2008 – Catholic Bishops report, 1997, ACORN corruption

“To be eligible to receive CHD funds, a program must be run by the poor, benefit the poor, and change social structures that harm the poor.” However, in light of the politically oriented thrust of ACORN’s activities, it is fair to ask whether the CHD subsidies to ACORN are advisable and commensurate with the purposes of CHD.”

“This commentary does not oppose CHD funding of genuine, grassroots community organizations, run and supported by individual members of a parish or diocese. There is potential value and virtue in the collective voice. However, when the CHD funds Alinsky-style, church-based community organizations as in the best interest of the poor and supports organizations which advance other agendas, it divests the poor of their right to an authentic voice. This process tends to treat the poor as exploited units of human capital, rather than as human beings created in the dignity of God’s image.”

Citizen Wells article

I attended a high school class reunion recently and one of the classmates I spoke with attends a large Baptist Church. He assured me that the majority of folks there were not Obama supporters. I said to him “I don’t see how anyone professing to be Christian can support Obama.”

From the Democrat Convention in Charlotte, NC.

During the Civil War, mountain men in NC, who were either Union supporters or not concerned with the war were conscripted by NC Democrats and forced to fight. That is why to this day, many of them are Republicans. My great great grandfather carried a minnie ball in his leg the rest of his life. I wonder if that is why my grandfather and father were Republicans.

And, of course, Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.