Weathermen for Obama (updated with video)

Weathermen for Obama (updated with video)

Clarice Feldman
Doug Ross of Director Blue notes,

At least four top leaders of the Weathermen terrorist organization have signed on as members of a “grassroots effort” to support the election of Barack Obama. [….]
Progressives for Obama signatories include Weathermen Howard Machtinger, Jeff Jones, Steve Tappis and Mark Rudd. Machtinger helped author the the mission statement of the Weathermen that called for revolutionaries within the United States to wage a ‘people’s war’ and attack from within. The government would fall and ‘world communism’ eventually would be instituted.


There is much, much more. Read about what these people so accepted by key Democrats today, did.

Update: an interview with someone Ayers tried to kill:

Hat tip: D. Phistry

The Media Discovers the Obama-Ayers Relationship

Crossed paths

October 4, 2008 – by Richard Fernandez

The [1] New York Times looks at the relationship between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers. It concludes that Obama may have downplayed his relationship with Ayers, but believes the relationship between the two was not close.

A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that Mr. Obama, 47, has played down his contacts with Mr. Ayers, 63. But the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.”

[2] Stanley Kurtz, a National Review writer who has extensively researched Barack Obama’s working relationship with Ayers in connection with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an educational foundation based in Chicago, vehemently disagrees.

Read the rest of this entry »

Attorney Philip J. Berg Prepared to go to Supreme Court

Attorney Philip J. Berg Prepared to go to Supreme Court        October 4, 2008

UPDATEOn Monday Sept. 29, 2008, Philip J. Berg filed a Response to the DNC’s & Obama’s Motions to Dismiss the lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility to be President.  As of Friday, Oct. 3, the Court had not ruled on the motions. Berg’s Response included a draft “Order” for the judge to sign.


If the judge were to sign the Order as drafted by Berg, Obama would have 3 days to produce the following:


1) Certified copy of his original long-version Birth Certificate

2) Certified copy of his Certification of Citizenship

3) Certified copy of his Oath of Allegiance.






DNC steps in to silence lawsuit over Obama birth certificate
Democrat suing his own party says it’s ‘like they’re in cahoots’
October 04, 2008       By Drew Zahn

The man suing Sen. Barack Obama & the Democratic National Committee for proof of Obama’s American citizenship is outraged that his own party – rather than just providing the birth certificate he seeks – would step in to silence him by filing a motion to dismiss his lawsuit.

As WND reported, prominent Pennsylvania Democrat & attorney Philip J. Berg filed suit in U.S. District Court 2 months ago claiming Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen & therefore not eligible to be elected president.  Berg has since challenged Obama publicly that if the candidate will simply produce authorized proof of citizenship, he’ll drop the suit.

. . . .the longer the DNC tries to ignore his lawsuit or make it go away – instead of just providing the documents – the more convinced he is that his accusations are correct.

Despite assertions by the Washington Post, and other organizations that Obama has produced a certified Hawaiian birth certificate, Berg told WND he remains “99.99%” that the certificate is a fake & he wants a court, not a website, to determine its validity.

Earlier last week, lawyers for Obama & the DNC filed a joint motion to dismiss Berg’s lawsuit. The fact that the DNC joined in the dismissal request has Berg fuming, believing his party’s leaders have ignored his pleas for proof in order to favor their chosen candidate over a rank-and-file constituent.

“I think it’s outrageous,” Berg said. “The Democratic National Committee should be ensuring the Democratic Party & the public that they have a qualified candidate up there. To file a joint motion is like they’re in cahoots.

“Since then, I have asked by way of press release that Howard Dean resign, because (the DNC members) are not fulfilling their duties,” Berg said.

“The DNC has a responsibility to all Democrats in this country to make sure that all of their candidates are properly vetted & properly qualified,” Berg added. “I think it’s really an outrage to the 18-plus million people who voted for Obama & the people who donated more than $425 million to him under false pretenses.”

Berg is frustrated, not only with his own party’s leadership for allegedly not investigating Obama’s background, but also with the major news outlets for failing as well.

“I should also be suing the national media & their disgrace for not properly vetting, inspecting or checking on Barack Obama.

“Look what they’re doing to Governor Palin: They’re opening up her closet doors, they’re going through everything personal, but no one has ever gone after Obama. It doesn’t make sense,” Berg said.

Obama’s website counters Berg’s claims with links to articles that affirm the validity of his citizenship & an image of a Hawaiian birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama, born in Honolulu, Aug. 4, 1961. The webpage is part of the Obama campaign website’s “Fight the Smears” section, an effort to prevent reports that Obama claims are false from disseminating as damaging rumors.

Berg acknowledges that as long as his lawsuit remains outstanding, the public will talk & he told WND he wants Obama to quickly prove him wrong or the court to quickly prove him right.

“I’ve been on about 50 radio shows around the country,” Berg said, “and on every one I’ve put out a challenge: Barack Obama, if I’m wrong, just come forth with certified copies of these documents & I’ll close down the case.”

Berg told WND, “I’ve had 19 million hits on my website. …Those people talk to other people, now we’re up to 20, 30, 40 million people who are aware of this controversy & it’s going to drastically affect the entire election.”

When asked what he would do if the DNC succeeded in getting his case dismissed, Berg said he would “immediately file an appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals & if we don’t get a fair ruling there, immediately to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“We’re dealing with the U.S. Constitution & it must be followed,” Berg explained. “I want the Constitution enforced; that’s my main reason for doing this.

“The real outrage is that there’s nothing in our system that provides that a candidate must provide that his qualifications are true & correct before he or she runs & that safeguard should be put into our system by law,” Berg said.

Bailout Saga Proves that Elites Don’t Care What We Think

Bailout Saga Proves that Elites Don’t Care What We Think

October 4, 2008 – by Tom Blumer

In mid-September, when it became clear to Hank Paulson, Ben Bernanke, and George Bush that extraordinary measures were needed to address the mess that had built up in the financial markets during the past decade or so, their first instincts should have been to say:

  • “We need to have a complete plan to deal with this.”
  • “We need to make a case to Congress and the American people that our plan will work.”

They did neither of these things; nor did they even seem to consider whether what they wanted was even constitutional.

Instead, they in essence demanded that Congress and the American people give them a blank check, saying, “Do this, or else.” Last Sunday, I [1] called it blackmail. I stand by that.

Of course, a large plurality of Congressmen and Senators, along with a majority of the American people, were repulsed. The wonder is that everyone wasn’t.

Among the repulsed were well over 150 economists from across the political spectrum, including three Nobel laureates, [2] who signed a letter of protest (also [3] carried here; bolds are mine):

As economists, we want to express to Congress our great concern for the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Paulson to deal with the financial crisis. We are well aware of the difficulty of the current financial situation and we agree with the need for bold action to ensure that the financial system continues to function. We see three fatal pitfalls in the currently proposed plan:

1) Its fairness. The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayersÕ expense. Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses. Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise.

2) Its ambiguity. Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear. If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards.

3) Its long-term effects. If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, America’s dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.

For these reasons we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.

The monstrosity that became law yesterday (PDF-formatted first 250 pages [4] here) does not begin to adequately address the group’s three key concerns.

Fairness? Let’s talk about fairness to taxpayers and future generations. What assurances do we have, if any, that monies recovered when purchased assets are resold will go towards reducing the just-increased national debt? I fear it will instead be diverted to Uncle Sam’s day-to-day operations, enabling Congress and future presidents to further cover up an already over-the-top annual structural deficit. If you don’t think this can happen, just remember how Social Security has been [5] stripped bare for four decades.

Ambiguity? You can’t get much more ambiguous than what a Treasury official [6] told Forbes Magazine on September 23 (bolds are mine):

….. some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.”

Again: Blackmail.

Oh, and do you think that even the made-up $700 billion now enshrined into law is any kind of real limit? Think again.

The supposedly limiting language in Section 115 of the bill has to do with “the authority of the Secretary to purchase troubled assets” to certain amounts “outstanding at any one time.” Treasury’s authority starts at $250 billion; Congress can increase that authorization to as much as $700 billion.

With this language, under its “Troubled Assets Relief Program” (TARP) authorization, Treasury can initially purchase $250 billion in “troubled” loans. If it auctions off $50 billion of that amount, there will then be only $200 billion “outstanding.” Treasury can then go out and purchase another $50 billion. This can go on and on and on.

As far as I can tell, there is nothing that would prevent Treasury from continually buying, reselling, and replacing loans, thereby busting the supposed “limits” by hundreds of billions, if not trillions.

Given the billions that financial firms [7] appear poised to make in managing the largely outsourced program, Wall Street has the ability, and every incentive, to turn TARP into a fee-generating perpetual-motion machine while it is in place (theoretically, until the end of 2009).

Long-term effects? Heck, we’re already seeing proof of the long-term effects in the short-term. California’s Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose state has a welfare dependency rate that [8] is 2-1/2 times that of the rest of the nation, is making noises about getting [9] his own $7 billion bailout. The auto industry [10] is getting what was unthinkable even two years ago: $25 billion in loan guarantees, and with barely a whimper of objection.

[11] As I wrote yesterday:

….. what possible response, other than “okey-dokey,” is there to anyone who says, “Well, if you could handle $700 billion for the financial-services industry, how can you not provide $_____ (fill in the blank) for _________ (fill in the blank)?”

When the problem became clear, a mature Washington political culture would have done something close to the following:

  • Bush, Bernanke, and Paulson would have consulted with some of the aforementioned economists to craft a plan that would meet the three concerns they were forced to raise after the fact.
  • Bush would have called a joint session of the Senate and House to give Bernanke, Paulson and economists the chance to make their case to Congress and the nation.
  • Bush would have insisted that any changes to what they proposed would have to be germane to the plan (i.e., no pork, and nothing else extraneous).

Instead, what was three pages turned into 451. What was a bill with a made-up $700 billion price tag became a pork-laden bill with a made-up $850 billion price tag chock full of unrelated and dangerous provisions too numerous to mention here.

The just-enacted legislation will likely haunt the economy, and the nation, for years.

That we have a nearly incorrigible and immature Washington political culture has never been more clear.

Article printed from Pajamas Media:

INTERESTING…………….. You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this:




You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much?  Read this:

Boy am I confused.  I have been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq war and the war on terror that is bankrupting us.

I now find that to be RIDICULOUS.

I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them.  I have included the URL’s for verification of all the following facts.

1.  $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year.
     Verify at:

2.  $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school  

     Lunches for illegal aliens.
     Verify at:

3.  $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
     Verify at:

4.  $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they

     Cannot speak a word of English!
     Verify at:

5.  $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor

     Verify at

6.  $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
     Verify at:

7.  30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.
     Verify at:

8.  $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
     Verify at:

9.  $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
     Verify at:

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens.  

      In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US
      Verify at:

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as  

      19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries.  Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed  

      Into the U. S from the Southern border.
      Verify at: Homeland Security Report:

12. The National Policy Institute, ‘estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion

      Or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.’
      Verify at:

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.
      Verify at:

14. ‘The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United

        States ‘
        Verify at:

The total cost is a whopping $338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.  Are we THAT stupid?

If this doesn’t bother you then just delete the message.  If, on the other hand, if it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, I hope you forward it to every legal resident in the country including every representative in Washington, D.C. – five times a week for as long as it takes to restore some semblance of intelligence in our policies and enforcement thereof. 



Semper If,



Militant Obama youth march to ‘Alpha, Omega’ chant Remember Germany 1939

Teen boys in uniform drill, shout, profess, ‘Yes we can’

Obama’s letters for Rezko


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers