Holding The Line In Texas Blogging Adventures Of A Proud Conservative Texan

My good friend RogerThat has written, what I would say, epitomizes the mood of the American political atmosphere in the general population. Those of us that Identify with the Tea Party (even a little) know that we don't always agree on everything. But, when it comes down to it,  the things that we believe to be the best ideas to save our country, those simple things, we agree on... Smaller government, fair taxes, and free markets. This movement truly is a "Minds and Hearts Revolution!"

Carry on... RogerThat!

Written by: RogerThat

The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations... this radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.
~ John Adams - 1

My conservative political philosophy and willingness to talk about politics has often triggered the question, "Are you a member of the Tea Party?" to which I always respond "No!" That answer usually evokes looks of skepticism. But the fact remains that I do not hold "Tea Party" membership card. No such organization asks me to pay dues. I don't know if such a group has meetings or even a place to meet. Although I don't really know what it means to "belong" to "The Tea Party," there are certainly a lot of people and organizations that want to classify me as a "tea partier."

I must admit that I'm honestly confused about what "The Tea Party" is because the phrase is used in several different contexts. Some commentators act as if it is an actual political party like the Republicans or Democrats, but it obviously isn't -- it has no functional organization, no formal leaders, and no universally accepted platform. I hear the media refer to "The Tea Party" as a group of out-of-control individuals, unsophisticated in the ways of politics, who are throwing a temper tantrum against the government. Perhaps this comes closer to the truth, but I still don't think it is accurate. Don't get me wrong. I'm not unaware of the various "Tea Party" groups that have established an organizational structure. But they are small, fragmented, inconsistent, and have differing ideals and motivations.

During the recent debt debates some pundits were claiming that "The Tea Party" helped to elect a bunch of Republican congressmen during the last election. That is an offensive assertion. "The Tea Party" did no such thing, and they should not get the credit. Rather, it was a powerful, yet unorganized group of motivated grassroots American voters that rocked the 2010 election. Were these voters driven by a Boston Tea Party mentality? Perhaps. Did many of them attend "Tea Party" gatherings and rallies? I'm sure they did. (I didn't.) But, my suspicion is that they were not motivated to action by something called "The Tea Party." It seems that "The Tea Party" was simply a theme that some people used to describe their grassroots efforts. Then the media latched onto this name in an attempt to understand and explain what was going on. 2

The above quote from John Adams provides a much better explanation about what is really going on. We are participating in a conservative revolution. But it is not a "Revolutionary War." We are part of an awakening, a new understanding, a restoration in the "minds and hearts" of We the People. This modern revolution has permanently awakened conservative Americans -- Americans from the heartland (known in D.C. as "flyover country"). We are the normal Americans living outside of the D.C. beltway bubble who spend our days working with our hands and our minds, raising families, going to church, serving in our communities, and living honest and upright lives to the best of our abilities.

In our "minds and hearts" we have come to recognize that our federal government is off track. We see a government that is addicted to spending. We see a government with out-of-control entitlement programs run by bureaucratic institutions. But above all, we see a government that has become a threat to our liberty, our dreams, our futures, and, most ominously, our children's futures. We have decided to take a stand, to raise our voices, and to find a way to restore the values and principles upon which the United States of America was founded.

We understand what is at stake. We have decided that we won't again be silenced by the media, the establishment political parties, or the individuals who hold temporary elected office. We will be heard, our influence will be felt, and we will ultimately prevail. Like the founding revolutionaries, we have once again resolved to devote our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to this cause – the cause of government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

1 John Adams to Hezekiah Niles, Feb. 13, 1818. Cited in The Works of John Adams, vol. 10, p. 282.

2 For a contrary opinion, see "Tea Party and the Myth of a Grassroots Movement."

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Activism, Article, Common Sense, Editorial, Free Speech Friday, Inspirational, Michael Berry, RogerThat!, Tea Party, U.S. Constitution Common Sense, Politics, Tea Party, U.S. Constitution

It's about perspective!

This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. This story is completely neutral, neither anti-democrat or republican. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assure responsibility for the judgements made that impact each one of us every day.

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both democrats and republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

• You and I don't propose a federal budget, the President does.
• You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations, the House of representatives does.
• You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
• You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
• You and i don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.

In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all of the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a President to do one cotton~picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician one million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House now? He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted, by present facts, of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

• If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
• If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
• If the Army and Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's because they want them there.
• If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy", "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

What you do with this story, now that you have read it...is up to you.

This might be funny if it weren't so true.

Tax his land, Tax his bed
Tax the table at which he's fed.

Tax his tractor, Tax his mule
Teach him Taxes are the rule.

Tax his work, Tax his pay
He works for peanuts anyway.

Tax his cow, Tax his goat
Tax his pants, Tax his coat.

Tax his ties, Tax his shirt
Tax his work, Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink
Tax him if he tries to think.

Tax his cigars, Tax his beers
If he cries Tax his tears.

Tax his car, Tax his gas
Find other ways to Tax his ass.

Tax all he has then let him know
That you won't be done till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers, then Tax him some more
Tax him till He's good and sore.

Then Tax his coffin, Tax his grave
Tax the sod in which he's laid.

Put these words upon his tomb
Taxes drove me to my doom.

When he's gone, do not relax
It's time to apply the Inheritance Tax.

• Accounts receivable tax,
• Building permit Tax,
• CDL license Tax,
• Cigarette Tax,
• Corporate Income Tax,
• Dog license Tax,
• Excise Taxes,
• Federal Income Tax,
• Federal Un-Employment Tax (FUTA),
• Fishing license Tax,
• Food license Tax,
• Fuel Permit Tax,
• Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon),
• Gross receipts Tax,
• Hunting license Tax,
• Inheritance Tax,
• Inventory Tax,
• IRS Interest charges,
• IRS penalties (Tax on top of Tax),
• Liquor Tax,
• Luxury Tax,
• Marriage license Tax,
• Medicare Tax,
• Personal property Tax,
• Property Tax,
• Real Estate Tax,
• Service charge Tax,
• Social Security Tax,
• Road Usage Tax,
• Recreational Vehicle Tax,
• Sales Tax,
• School Tax,
• State income Tax,
• State Un-Employment Tax (SUTA),
• Telephone Federal Excise Tax,
• Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax,
• Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharges Tax
• Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax,
• Telephone Recurring and Non-Recurring Charges Tax,
• Telephone State and Local Tax,
• Telephone Usage Charge Tax,
• Utility Tax,
• Vehicle License Registration Tax,
• Vehicle Sales Tax,
• Watercraft Registration Tax,
• Well Permit Tax,
• Workers Compensation Tax,

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom, if agreed, stayed home to raise the kids. What in the heck happened?

Can you spell "Politicians"?

And once again, Thanks for your ear,
HTLIT

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Activism, Article, Common Sense, Politics, Super Tuesday, Taxes, Tea Party, U.S. Constitution Common Sense, Taxes, Tea Party, Responsibilty, U.S. Constitution

Written by: RogerThat

The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations... this radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.
~ John Adams - 1

My conservative political philosophy and willingness to talk about politics has often triggered the question, "Are you a member of the Tea Party?" to which I always respond "No!" That answer usually evokes looks of skepticism. But the fact remains that I do not hold "Tea Party" membership card. No such organization asks me to pay dues. I don't know if such a group has meetings or even a place to meet. Although I don't really know what it means to "belong" to "The Tea Party," there are certainly a lot of people and organizations that want to classify me as a "tea partier."

I must admit that I'm honestly confused about what "The Tea Party" is because the phrase is used in several different contexts. Some commentators act as if it is an actual political party like the Republicans or Democrats, but it obviously isn't -- it has no functional organization, no formal leaders, and no universally accepted platform. I hear the media refer to "The Tea Party" as a group of out-of-control individuals, unsophisticated in the ways of politics, who are throwing a temper tantrum against the government. Perhaps this comes closer to the truth, but I still don't think it is accurate. Don't get me wrong. I'm not unaware of the various "Tea Party" groups that have established an organizational structure. But they are small, fragmented, inconsistent, and have differing ideals and motivations.

During the recent debt debates some pundits were claiming that "The Tea Party" helped to elect a bunch of Republican congressmen during the last election. That is an offensive assertion. "The Tea Party" did no such thing, and they should not get the credit. Rather, it was a powerful, yet unorganized group of motivated grassroots American voters that rocked the 2010 election. Were these voters driven by a Boston Tea Party mentality? Perhaps. Did many of them attend "Tea Party" gatherings and rallies? I'm sure they did. (I didn't.) But, my suspicion is that they were not motivated to action by something called "The Tea Party." It seems that "The Tea Party" was simply a theme that some people used to describe their grassroots efforts. Then the media latched onto this name in an attempt to understand and explain what was going on. 2

The above quote from John Adams provides a much better explanation about what is really going on. We are participating in a conservative revolution. But it is not a "Revolutionary War." We are part of an awakening, a new understanding, a restoration in the "minds and hearts" of We the People. This modern revolution has permanently awakened conservative Americans -- Americans from the heartland (known in D.C. as "flyover country"). We are the normal Americans living outside of the D.C. beltway bubble who spend our days working with our hands and our minds, raising families, going to church, serving in our communities, and living honest and upright lives to the best of our abilities.

In our "minds and hearts" we have come to recognize that our federal government is off track. We see a government that is addicted to spending. We see a government with out-of-control entitlement programs run by bureaucratic institutions. But above all, we see a government that has become a threat to our liberty, our dreams, our futures, and, most ominously, our children's futures. We have decided to take a stand, to raise our voices, and to find a way to restore the values and principles upon which the United States of America was founded.

We understand what is at stake. We have decided that we won't again be silenced by the media, the establishment political parties, or the individuals who hold temporary elected office. We will be heard, our influence will be felt, and we will ultimately prevail. Like the founding revolutionaries, we have once again resolved to devote our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to this cause – the cause of government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

1 John Adams to Hezekiah Niles, Feb. 13, 1818. Cited in The Works of John Adams, vol. 10, p. 282.

2 For a contrary opinion, see "Tea Party and the Myth of a Grassroots Movement."

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Activism, Article, Common Sense, Editorial, Politics, Tea Party Politics, Editorial, Tea Party

This is a contact I received from the blog today... Pretty cool, at least I think so... Thanks to the Michael Berry show to extend the offer for an opportunity to contribute!...

My name is ---- ---- and I am Michael Berry's research assistant. Michael is a talk radio host in Houston, Texas. He is currently writing a book to serve as a manual for civic activism and is looking for some additional advice from bloggers... across the nation and the world. I am hoping you could share what you've learned with me, so I can pass it on to Michael for his book. Encouraging everyday Americans to get more involved should include a how-to to make it easier and this project is meant to do that.

Please note that by responding you are consenting to being included in Michael's book, unless you note otherwise. You may feel free to reply to me or directly to Michael at MichaelBerry@clearchannel.com The following is a list of questions that will help with the input that Michael is looking for. If you can answer them and forward your answers to me at your earliest convenience, I would sincerely appreciate it.

1. Why did you start writing a blog? What was the purpose?
2. When did you start your blog?
3. What were your goals at that time, if any?
4. Describe any memorable moments that have occurred because of your blog
(e.g., response by readers, coverage in other media).
5. Have you found the experience to be rewarding, and if so, in what way?
6. If someone wants to make a difference, and has considered either a
blog or some format by which to express their opinions, what advice would
you give them?
7. What do you wish you had known when you started your blog?
8. Is there a blog that you read regularly that I should contact? If so, please send me that person's email address and I will reach out to them. Or better yet, if you'll forward this email with your suggestion they reply, that may help.

Finally, do you have any additional suggestions for his book? If you were writing a how-to for civic activism, what would be important to you? Any additional information about Michael can be found at his website www.MichaelBerry.com or I can assist in answering any questions that you may have.

Thank you,
----- --------

I have much respect for Mr. Berry, he is an upstanding guy and I appreciate all he does for Houston, the state of Texas and our great USA. I am amazed that they found my little website, and I will be participating in this offer. Whether my feedback is used, or not, I am glad to have some input. Thanks for the support to those that follow me. I think I have found some new inspiration to continue my quest. Peace my friends, and thanks to Michael Berry and his staff for the hat tip!

Nothing wrong with a little ego boost!

--------

UPDATE 4/5/2011:  No, Thank You Michael!

Dear Erik,

Michael came across your blog this morning and immediately requested that I send out a sincere thank you to you for your kind words.  As you can imagine, there is quite a bit on his plate right now, however he wanted to make sure you knew how appreciative he was for the post. 

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

UPDATE 7/19/2011:  I think I'll take him up on this...

Dear Erik,

I'm not sure if you remember me. I contacted you several months ago to help with research for Michael's book. I'm emailing now because I wanted to encourage you (if you'd like) to submit some of your posts to him as a guest blogger. I'm not sure if you realized he published guest bloggers on his website, but he does. I like your perspectives and I think that your points are well written. If you're interested, I think he'd publish your work.

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

And once again, thanks for your ear,
HTLIT

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Article, Free Speech Friday, Inspirational, Michael Berry, Politics, Texas Michael BerryFriends, Michael Berry, Politics

* NEW HTLIT Blog Contributor - RogerThat
(We will have a new blog format coming soon. We will have multiple contributers and an all new format in the coming weeks and months leading up to the 2012 elections and beyond. A great big THANK YOU goes out to RogerThat!)

--Written by: RogerThat
About RogerThat!

On July 7, 2011, Texas executed Humberto Leal Garcia, a Mexican national* who brutally tortured and murdered a 16-year-old girl. Garcia was properly tried and convicted under the laws of Texas, and sat on death row for over 16 years while multiple lawyers tried to get his death sentence overturned.

In a very unusual move, Obama administration lawyers intervened in Leal Garcia’s case to ask the United States Supreme Court to delay the execution. They argued that Texas had violated Garcia’s rights under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations  because he was not informed of his right to seek legal assistance from the Mexican consulate. The Convention requires that the member countries give foreign nationals access to diplomatic advisers from their own countries if they are arrested in the United States.

The Obama lawyers asked the Court to grant a stay in order to allow Congress to have more time to consider legislation being put forth by Senator Patrick Leahy which would make the Convention binding law in the United States. Unsurprisingly, the motion was supported by the usual suspects: the United Nations, the Justice Department, the State Department, the Mexican Government, other foreign governments, and, somewhat strangely, advisors from Ex-President George W. Bush’s administration.

In a 5-4 opinion along the typical ideological lines, Justice Alito rebuffed the President, stating:

“We are doubtful that it is ever appropriate to stay a lower court judgment in light of unenacted legislation. Our  task is to rule on what the law is, not what it might eventually be… We have no authority to stay an execution in light of an “appeal of the President,” presenting free-ranging assertions of foreign  policy consequences,  when those assertions come unaccompanied by a persuasive legal claim.”

The dissenting Justices took the position that it would be acceptable to defer to the President and his constitutional authority over foreign relations and grant a stay. Justice Breyer’s dissent stated:

“The Court has long  recognized the President’s special constitutionally based authority in matters of foreign relations.  And it has ordinarily given his views significant weight in such matters.  It should do so here.”

In other words, the liberal wing of the Court felt that a stay should be granted simply because the President asked for it.

The Obama Request was Illogical on its Face

These actions by the Obama administration were illogical for three reasons:

First, the purpose of the Convention’s provision was to ensure that foreign nationals receive proper due process (i.e., proper legal representation) during their prosecution. During his almost seventeen years on death row, Garcia had assistance from more than 10 different lawyers and had four different appeals reach the Supreme Court. To say that there is even an argument that he received inadequate due process is beyond the realm of believability. (A complete and very extensive judicial history of Garcia’s case is documented by Texas Attorney General Abbott here). One federal district court judge called his case “one of the most procedurally convoluted and complex habeas corpus proceedings” he has ever witnessed.

Second, the Supreme Court addressed this exact same issue three years ago in another practically identical case (which I will discuss in Part 2). In that case, the Supreme Court held that the Vienna Convention was not a self-executing treaty, and that in order for the Convention to be binding upon the states, Congress must enact legislation to implement its provisions. In other words, the Court had already addressed this exact same situation and had told Congress what it had to do to make the Convention binding law in the United States. The Supreme Court pointed out that, “It has now been ..three years since our decision… If a statute …had genuinely been a priority for the  political branches, it would have been enacted by now.” It made no legal sense to ask the Supreme Court to take a different position on a situation that it had previously addressed.

Third, Garcia was obviously guilty of the charges against him. Indeed, none of the objections to his execution even challenged his guilt. His final words verified his guilt. "I have hurt a lot of people. ... I take full blame for everything. I am sorry for what I did," he said in the death chamber.  "One more thing," he said as the drugs began taking effect, "Viva Mexico!, Viva Mexico!"

So, since Garcia’s guilt was not in question, and given that he had received more than adequate due process, and considering that the Congress had failed to act on implementing the Convention, what explains the administration’s actions?

Political Motivations

I operate under a fundamental premise that absolutely everything this administration does is political. The issue was not about Garcia, and it wasn’t even about the law (except perhaps as an attempt to alter it by judicial activism). The actions of the administration are perfectly logical if looked at through the lens of politics and liberal ideology:

I propose that the following political and ideological motivations were in play:

1. The administration believes that the United States should defer to rulings of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the U.N. Human Rights Council. For another example of this principle, just look at how the administration is treating Arizona and its immigration law.
2. Texas stands for everything the administration opposes, and needs to be cut down to size. This attitude is evidenced by the administration’s efforts to impose further controls on Texas through environmental regulations. The Obama administration has serious contempt towards Texas, and will even hold the Texas economy hostage over a lizard.
3. A Rick Perry presidential candidacy is a threat to Obama’s reelection chances, and the administration will jump at every chance to gin up negative talking points against Perry.
4. The administration was pandering to Mexican voters. The Latino vote is critical to Obama’s election chances and political points need to be scored with Mexico after the Fast and Furious debacle.
5. The administration was pandering to its hard left base that is strictly opposed to the death penalty (at least for those who have already been born).
6. The executive branch would be much more powerful if it could leverage its authority over foreign relations and the treaty authority to override the restrictions imposed by the Constitution, and it would erode federalism by gaining more power over the states.

Constitutional Motivations

Aside from being a case study in politics, this situation is perfect for illustrating several constitutional issues about which conservatives should be very concerned:

1. Why would an international convention override a state’s authority to administer its criminal justice system?
2. Is the United States subject to decisions of the International Court of Justice?
3. To what degree should the Supreme Court defer to the President’s constitutional powers to govern foreign affairs?
4. What must the United States do to make an International Convention binding United States law?
5. If the Convention had been a treaty, would it have made a difference on all of the above questions?
6. How might the power of the president to nominate Supreme Court justices impact future Court decisions and change existing constitutional law?

I will explore these issues in later articles.

*Garcia had been residing in the United States since he was two years old.

Next: TexMexecution, Part 2 – the Prior Case of Medellin v. Texas

About the Author:
Roger S. Burke is employed as attorney at an international company. Constitutional law is his passion, but so far, an uncompensated activity.

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Activism, Article, Editorial, Obama, Politics, Texas, RogerThat!, U.S. Constitution, United Nations Editorial, Politics, Rick Perry, Texas Politics, Texas, Constitutional Law, U.S. Constitution

I would like to start this post by saying, I am very proud of this article. I did not write it, yet I have some close ties to it. The following was published by my Mother-in-Law, I take no credit, except for the repost. She is a highly educated woman who, as so happens, voted for our current president, one Barack Obama. She also happens to live in Michigan, one of the worst economies in this great nation, and quite possibly the poster child for Liberal failures. I will not speak for her, but I think there may be some buyers remorse. She says many things that need to be said, as well as things we have all thought of as conservatives. I love her candor and perspective and I appreciate the opportunity to publish this.

Enjoy! And thanks Mom!

I hadn't thought about this - but where are O's past girlfriends-- surely he had at least one? No past girl friends popping up anywhere? Strange - strange to the point of being downright weird!

OK, this is just plain old common sense, no political agendas for either side. Just common knowledge for citizens of a country, especially American citizens, who know every little tidbit about every other president (and their wives) that even know that Andrew Jackson's wife smoked a corn cob pipe and was accused of adultery, or that Lincoln never went to school or Kennedy wore a back brace or Truman played the piano.

We are Americans! Our Media vets these things out! We are known for our humanitarian interests and caring for our 'fellow man.' We care, but none of us know one single humanizing fact about the history of our own president.

Honestly, and this is a personal thing ... but it's bugged me for years that no one who ever dated him ever showed up. Taken his charisma, which caused the women to be drawn to him so obviously during his campaign, looks like some lady would not have missed the opportunity.... We all know about JFK's magnetism, McCain was no monk, Palin's courtship and even her athletic prowess were probed. Biden's aneurysms are no secret. Look at Cheney and Clinton- we all know about their heart problems. How could I have left out Wild Bill before or during the White House?

Nope... not one lady has stepped up and said, "He was soooo shy," or "What a great dancer!" Now look at the rest of what we know... no classmates, not even the recorder for the Columbia class notes ever heard of him.

Who was the best man at his wedding? Start there. Check for groomsmen. Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony. Has anyone talked to the professors? Isn't it odd that no one is bragging that they knew him or taught him or lived with him. When did he meet Michele and how? Are there photos? Every president provides the public with all their photos, etc. for their library.What has he released? Nada - other than what was in this so-called biography! And experts who study writing styles, etc. claim it was not O's own words or typical of his speech patterns, etc.

Does this make any of you wonder? Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from Obama's past, saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc. ? Not one person has ever come forward from his past.

This should really be a cause for great concern. Did you see the movie titled, The Manchurian Candidate?

Let's face it. As insignificant as we all are... someone whom we went to school with remembers our name or face... someone remembers we were the clown or the dork or the brain or the quiet one or the bully or something about us.

George Stephanopoulos, ABC News said the same thing during the 2008 campaign. Even George questions why no one has acknowledged that the president was in their classroom or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches on campus.

Stephanopoulos was a classmate of Obama at Columbia-class of 1984. He says he never had a single class with him. Since he is such a great orator, why doesn't anyone in Obama's college class remember him? And, why won't he allow Columbia to release his records? Do you like millions of others, simply assume all this is explainable- even though no one can?

NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA

Looking for evidence of Obama's past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but not one remembers him. For example,Wayne Allyn Root was (like Obama) a political science major at Columbia, who graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me. I don't have a single classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia ... EVER! Nobody recalls him.

Root adds that he was, "Class of '83 political science, pre-law" and says, "You don't get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him."

At our 20th class reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, 'the macha' who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him."

Obama's photograph does not appear in the school's yearbook, and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia. How can this be?

NOTE: Wayne Allyn Root can easily be verified. He graduated valedictorian from his high school, Thornton-Donovan School, then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a Political Science
major in the same '83 class in which Barack Hussein Obama states he was. Some other interesting questions.

Why was Obama's law license inactivated in 2002?

Why was Michelle's law license inactivated by court order?

According to the U.S. Census, there is only one Barack Obama – but 27 Social Security numbers and over 80 aliases.

WHAT!? The Social Security number he uses now originated in Connecticut where he is never reported to have lived. No wonder all his records are sealed!

Please continue sending this out to everyone. Somewhere, someone had to know him in school ... before he "reorganized" Chicago and burst upon the scene at the 2004 Democratic Convention and made us swoon with his charm, poise, and speaking pizzazz.

One of the biggest CONS this country has ever seen, and getting away with it. Go watch the movie The Manchurian Candidate, with Lawrence Harvey! Good movie!

America has awoken and is ready for REAL hope! Obama can keep the change!

Once again my friends, Thanks for your ear!
HTLIT

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Activism, Article, Common Sense, Editorial, Family, Obama, Politics Common Sense, Politics, Responsibilty, US News, Women In Politics

Three Percenters: Are You In The Minority?

I am not sure who wrote this originally. But the sentiment speaks for many, I feel... maybe more than 3%? Enjoy.

During the American Revolution, the active forces in the field against the King's tyranny never amounted to more than 3% of the colonists. They were in turn actively supported by perhaps 10% of the population. In addition to these revolutionaries were perhaps another 20% who favored their cause but did little or nothing to support it. Another one-third of the population sided with the King (by the end of the war there were actually more Americans fighting FOR the King than there were in the field against him) and the final third took no side, blew with the wind and took what came.

Three Percenters today do not claim that we represent 3% of the American people, although we might. That theory has not yet been tested. We DO claim that we represent at least 3% of American gun owners, which is still a healthy number somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million people. History, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities. We are one such minority. So too are the current enemies of the Founders' Republic. What remains, then, is the test of will and skill to determine who shall shape the future of our nation.

The Three Percent today are gun owners who will not disarm, will not compromise and will no longer back up at the passage of the next gun control act. Three Percenters say quite explicitly that we will not obey any further circumscription of our traditional liberties and will defend ourselves if attacked. We intend to maintain our God-given natural rights to liberty and property, and that means most especially the right to keep and bear arms. Thus, we are committed to the restoration of the Founders' Republic, and are willing to fight, die and, if forced by any would-be oppressor, to kill in the defense of ourselves and the Constitution that we all took an oath to uphold against enemies foreign and domestic.

We are the people that the collectivists who now control the government should leave alone if they wish to continue unfettered oxygen consumption. We are the Three Percent. Attempt to further oppress us at your peril.

To put it bluntly, leave us the hell alone.

Or, if you feel froggy, go ahead AND WATCH WHAT HAPPENS.

Here is their... my position...

The Three Percent are the folks the Founders counted on to save the Republic when everyone else abandoned it.

And we will.

There will be no more free Wacos and no more free Katrinas.

For we are the Three Percent.

We will not disarm.

You cannot convince us.

You cannot intimidate us.

You can try to kill us, if you think you can.

But remember, we’ll shoot back.

We are not going away.

We are not backing up another inch.

And there are THREE MILLION OF US.

Your move, Mr. Wannabe Tyrant.

Your move.

~ Author, Unkown.

Subcribe Now to receive updates on posts.

Activism, Article, Common Sense, Inspirational, Politics, Texas Common Sense, Politics