Archive for the ‘PTSD’ Category

Question: Could it be true that the Obama Administration is targeting military for pay reductions while our military members are charged with fighting two wars abroad to uphold our freedom that sadly so many in our country take for granted?

This article and/or blog post reveals the disgusting answer to this question-You Decide:

Outrage: Obama Administration Targets Military for Pay ReductionsPosted on NewsMax.com-On May 9, 2010:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

President Barack Obama — who came to power with the help of government employee unions across the nation and has lavished on them hundreds of billions in stimulus funds to keep them on federal, state and local payrolls with no strings attached — is moving to cut spending on salaries for military personnel.

This weekend The Washington Post headlined story, “Pentagon Asking Congress to Hold Back on Generous Increases in Troop Pay,” disclosed that the Obama administration is “pleading” with Congress to give military personnel a much smaller increase in pay than lawmakers have proposed.

The Pentagon contends that Congress simply has been too generous with troops during the past decade. 

In fact, lawmakers have lavished so much money on troops, according to the Post, that service members are now better compensated than workers in the private sector with similar experience and education levels.

For example, the military brass claims that an average sergeant in the Army with four years of service and one dependent would receive $52,589 in annual compensation, according to the paper. This figure includes basic pay, housing, and subsistence allowances, as well as tax benefits.

Meanwhile, a U.S. postal letter carrier, with no supervisory or hazardous duty, makes approximately $80,000 a year when all benefits are factored in.

Critics of the Obama administration’s efforts to cut soldier’s pay say America’s security has been strengthened by higher pay rates, as qualified veterans are re-enlisting at record rates, reversing the problem the military witnessed just a few years ago. “Any attempt to link rising military personnel costs with shrinking military readiness is total nonsense,” said Thomas J. Tradewell Sr., who leads the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the largest and oldest major combat veterans organization.

“If the Defense Department needs a larger budget for personnel programs, then let the VFW carry that message to Congress. Just don’t pin the budget blame on service members and military retirees.”

Tradewell’s ire was targeted this past week at Clifford L. Stanley, the Defense undersecretary of personnel and readiness, who said during recent testimony before the personnel subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee:

“Rising personnel costs could dramatically affect the readiness of the department.”

“What’s hurtful,” said Tradewell, a combat-wounded Vietnam veteran from Sussex, Wis., “is a continuing perception that DoD is more concerned about the budget than they are about recruiting and retaining a professional volunteer force that’s been at war now for more than eight years.”

According to Stanley, last year was the military’s most successful recruiting year since the establishment of the all-volunteer force in 1973.

Although advocates for military families argue that the decade-long spending spree reverses severe cuts that the military suffered in the 1990s, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and other military brass fear that the spending will threaten security in the years to come. That will mean less money to buy weapons and maintain aging equipment.

On Saturday, Gates told reporters that massive deficits can impact how the president and policy makers confront emerging threats like Iran.

Lawmakers consistently have overruled the Pentagon and mandated more-generous pay raises than requested by both the Bush and Obama administrations. Congress has also rejected attempts by the Pentagon to slow soaring healthcare costs, which Gates told reporters are “eating us alive,” by raising co-pays or premiums.

The military admits the improving compensation for troops is helping retention.

For example, improvements in pay and benefits have made it more likely that sailors will stick around longer, Vice Adm. Mark E. Ferguson III, the chief of naval personnel, told the Post.

A Navy survey last year found that about 60 percent of spouses wanted their sailors to make a career of Navy life, meaning a stint of at least 20 years. In 2005, only about 20 percent of spouses felt the same way.

“I think pay was previously a concern, but it’s started to change,” Ferguson said. Congress had been “extremely generous” but rising personnel costs were already influencing what the Navy spends to operate, maintain and modernize its fleet, he added.

The Pentagon wants a pay raise of 1.4 percent for service members next year, an increase based on the Employment Cost Index, which the Labor Department uses to measure private-sector salary increases.

Congress, as it has for the past several years, has indicated it favors a slightly bigger bump, of 1.9 percent.

Although that extra half of a percent may not seem like much, one expert told the Post that it would accrue annually and cost about $3.5 billion over the next decade.

But congressional supporters of the men and women in the Armed Services are questioning why they are being singled out for future pay cutbacks when other government agencies and unions are not.

The U.S. Postal Service, for example, is slated to give letter carriers an increase of 1.9 percent this coming year.

And postal employees are considered to be grossly overpaid compared with their private counterparts. A postal supervisor, for example, can make $70,000 or year or more, plus significant benefits.

Last year, Congress had to help fill a $3.8 billion deficit at the federally backed agency, but there has been no discussion of salary cuts for postal employees. Instead, postal officials have focused on reducing service, including Saturday delivery.”

Note:   These recent articles and videos relate to and/or support the above article and/or blog post-You Decide:

Obama Administration Wants To Cut Troop Pay!Posted on Canada Free Press-By Move America Forward-On May 27, 2011:


Push for Pentagon cuts tops Panetta’s agendaPosted on Idaho Stateswman-By DONNA CASSATA – Associated Press-On April 27, 2011:


Loree Sutton on Military FamiliesPosted on C-Span Video Library-On April 30, 2010:


Military Families Fight to Make Ends MeetPosted on WRAL.com-On November 10, 1998:


More Troops Relying on Food Stamps-Posted on Military.com-By Bryan Mitchell-On July 22, 2009:


A Third of All U.S. Casualties in Eight-Year Afghan War Have Occurred Since Obama Ordered EscalationPosed on CNSNews.com-By Edwin Mora-On February 24, 2010:


An American Veteran — Who Eddie Livingston Was, a Decorated War Hero with PTSDPosted on HealingCombatTruama.com-On May 11, 2010:


Palin Cites Newsmax: Give Troops Good PayPosted on NewsMax.com-By Jim Meyers-On May12, 2010:


War Memorial Torn Down by Vandals!Posted on BostonBizJournals.com-On May 11, 2010:


Don’t Tear Me DownPosted on donttearmedown.com:


The ACLU’s real agenda in the Mojave DesertPosted on OneNewsNow.com-By Robert Knight, Guest Columnist-On October 7, 2010:


Pentagon chief takes aim at bloated bureaucracy, seeks savings to sustain a wartime militaryPosted on The Washington Examiner-By ROBERT BURNS, Associated Press-On May 8, 2010:


Note:  The above articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to and/or support my following blog posts-You Decide:

Veterans and members of our Armed Forces under attack!


The Military Pays the Price for Obama’s Agenda!


Rules of Engagement Killing Marines and U.S. Soldiers!


Kagan spit in the eye of America’s Armed Forces!


American Flag Clothing Sparks New Protest!


Are Obama’s Fingerprints On Franklin Graham Dis-Invitation?


Where Is America Today?


Is it time to call for Obama’s resignation!


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


Note:  I personally believe that our nation must do a better job of supporting the men and women who have contributed their time, their sanity, their health, and their lives to the service of their country-You Decide.

A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our Troops Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

American Eagle-Mine

Question: When did being an empathetic liberal minority become the primary eligibility prerequisite for appointment as a Justice to the Supreme Court, the highest court in our country, over other more critical qualifications (e.g., court work experience requirements, etc.), along with the content of their character and their appropriate interpretation of the U.S. Constitution?

Supreme Court-Sotomayor’s Autobiography Whitewashes Radical College Years

These articles lay out Sonia Sotomayor’s controversial background experiences as a Private Practice Attorney and an Appeals Court Judge, along with revealing that she:

  • does not believe that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to individuals.
  • believes that judges make policy;
  • believes that Latinas are better than a white male who hasn’t lived that life (Best case scenario for reverse discrimination law suit?);
  • believes that she can substitute her own policy preferences for what the law really is;
  • believes that international law and policy should be considered in some court decisions; and,
  • has been known to have a temperament on the bench which has been that of a “bully”, who is “abusive” to lawyers. (Guess this meets the empathetic requirement for appointment?)-You Decide:

Supreme Court-Sotomayor believes 2nd Amendment not for Individuals

Sotomayor Believes 2nd Amendment Not For Individuals!-Posted on ExposeObama.com-On May 26, 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“Today President Barack Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court to fill the seat of retiring Justice David Souter. If confirmed, Sotomayor would become the first Hispanic and third woman to serve on the High Court.

Sotomayor is a graduate of Princeton and obtained her law degree from Yale. She served in private practice and as Assistant District Attorney in New York County and was nominated to the Second Circuit federal Court of Appeals by President George H. W. Bush in 1991.

Despite 17 years on the bench, Sotomayor has never directly decided whether a law regulating abortion is constitutional.

In Center for Reproductive Law & Policy v. Bush, she wrote an opinion that upheld the Mexico City Policy prohibiting federal funding of overseas abortions.

Sotomayor does not believe that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to individuals.

While on a panel discussion at Duke Law School, she argued that the “Court of Appeals is where policy is made.” Judge Sotomayor has had 5 decisions reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, 3 of which have been reversed.

She has carried 11 of 44 possible votes during those cases. In Knight v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Chief Justice Roberts stated that her method of reading the statute in question “flies in the face of the statutory language.”

She has written in support of Affirmative Action, upheld the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and in Amandola v. Town of Babylon, she wrote that denying use of a town hall annex for their worship services violated the First Amendment.

She has written a book called “The International Judge,” which suggests that international law and policy should be considered in some court decisions.

Some have described her temperament on the bench as a “bully” and “abusive” to lawyers.”

Newsmax Logo (2)

Sotomayor Video: Judges Make Policy, Latinas Better Than Whites: Posted on NewsMax.Com-By: Kenneth D. Williams-On May 26, 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s pick to become the newest Supreme Court justice, is on the record with some controversial remarks about ‘diversity,’ ‘judicial activism’ and female judges vs. male judges.

For example, the New York Times reported that in 2001, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture, Sotomayor had this to say:

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said later, regarding non-white, female judges, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”

Also, there is a 2005 video of Sotomayor, speaking with potential law clerks, saying that a court of appeals is where policy is made. She added: “And I know ok I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it …”

Regarding Sotomayor’s chances to avoid a filibuster of her nomination, Senator Orrin Hatch told Politico, I’ll tell you one thing, I’m not very happy about judges who will substitute their own policy preferences for what the law really is; who think that they can run the country from the bench when they actually have a limited role. And that role is to interpret the laws made by those who have to stand for reelection.”

Despite Hatch’s misgivings, Democratic Senators Charles E. Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York sent a personal letter to President Barack Obama asking him to appoint a Latino to fill the next vacancy on the United States Supreme Court Back in April.

It’s long overdue that a Latino sit on the United States Supreme Court. Sonia Sotomayor and Ken Salazar are two candidates who would make outstanding justices. They have top-notch legal minds, years of experience, moderate approaches to the law, and would make history by being the first Latino on the court. Senator Schumer said.

“We are fortunate in New York State to have jurists of the caliber and intellect that Judge Sotomayor has exhibited during a lifelong career of service to the bench. As an accomplished jurist, as a woman, and as a Latina, she would bring to the United States Supreme Court a much needed voice. We must be committed to diversity on our nation’s highest bench. These candidates will restore the balance that we so desperately need on the Court, Senator Gillibrand said.”

WND-Joe Kovacs

Sonia Sotomayor ‘La Raza member’-American Bar Association lists Obama choice as part of group: Posted on WND-By Joe Kovacs-On May 27. 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“As President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee comes under heavy fire for allegedly being a “racist,” Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, a group that’s promoted driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police.

According the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the NCLR, which bills itself as the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S. Meaning “the Race,” La Raza also has connections to groups that advocate the separation of several southwestern states from the rest of America.

Over the past two days, Sotomayor has been heavily criticized for her racially charged statement: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” The remark was actually made during a 2001 speech at the University of California’s Berkeley School of Law. The lecture was published the following year in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal.

Could Mexico retake the southwestern United States? Get the DVD that says the invasion is already happening!

The comment is being zeroed in on by voices from the political right.
”I’m not saying she’s a racist, but the statement sure is,” columnist Ann Coulter said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

“Imagine a judicial nominee said ‘my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman,'” blogged former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.

“Wouldn’t they have to withdraw? New racism is no better than old racism. A white man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw.”

Radio’s Rush Limbaugh noted, “And the libs of course say that minorities cannot be racists because they don’t have the power to implement their racism. Well, those days are gone because reverse racists certainly do have the power to implement their power. Obama is the greatest living example of a reverse racist, and now he’s appointed one. …”

But others are suggesting Sotomayor’s racial views will have little impact on her confirmation to the bench.

“She’s gonna get confirmed. Get out of the way of the truck,” political analyst Dick Morris said tonight on Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor.”

Host Bill O’Reilly responded, “The core conservative person … does not understand that the GOP is shrinking and needs to expand.”

The NCLR is applauding the Obama for his selection of Sotomayor.

”Today is a monumental day for Latinos. Finally, we see ourselves represented on the highest court in the land,” said Janet Murguia, NCLR’s president and CEO.

La Raza also praised former President George W. Bush for nominating Alberto Gonzales to succeed John Ashcroft as attorney general.

As WND previously reported, La Raza was condemned in 2007 by former U.S. Rep. Charles Norwood, R-Ga., as a radical “pro-illegal immigration lobbying organization that supports racist groups calling for the secession of the western United States as a Hispanic-only homeland.”

Norwood urged La Raza to renounce its support of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan – which sees “the Race” as part of an ethnic group that one day will reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.”

Supreme Court-Debate over who Sotomayor is a sensitive one

Debate over who Sotomayor is a sensitive one: Posted on Yahoo! News-By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writer-On May 29, 2009:



These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“WASHINGTON – There are two sides to Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor: a Latina from a blue-collar family and a wealthy member of America’s power elite.

The White House portrays Sotomayor as a living image of the American dream, though its telling of the rags-to-riches story emphasizes the rags, a more politically appealing narrative, and plays down the riches.

Branding a complex person in a simplistic way can backfire in the highly charged environment surrounding her coming Senate hearing.

Discussions about Sotomayor and her ethnicity, gender and tax bracket carry risks for supporters and detractors. Inartful criticism by Republicans risks offending voters they’d like to win. Democrats, likewise, need to be cautious about how they conduct the debate in a nation uncomfortable talking about matters of race and gender.

On ethnicity, Sotomayor herself has recognized — and contributed to — the dichotomy. She proudly highlights her Puerto Rican roots but hasn’t always liked it when others have. She once took issue with a prospective employer who singled her out as a Latina with questions she viewed as offensive yet has shown a keen ethnic consciousness herself.

In a California speech in 2002 now under renewed scrutiny, she remarked that, on a court, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

In that same speech, “A Latina Judge’s Voice,” Sotomayor drew attention to cultural differences between Mexican-Americans and Puerto Rican-Americans, and she narrowed her ethnicity beyond American, Hispanic and Puerto Rican to “Newyorkrican.”

“For those of you on the West Coast who do not know what that term means: I am a born and bred New Yorker of Puerto Rican-born parents who came to the states during World War II,” she explained.

Yet years ago, during a recruiting dinner in law school at Yale, Sotomayor objected when a law firm partner asked whether she would have been admitted to the school if she weren’t Puerto Rican, and whether law firms did a disservice by hiring minority students the firms know are unqualified and will ultimately be fired.

Afterward, Sotomayor confronted the partner about the questions, rejected his insistence that he meant no harm and turned down his invitation for further job interviews. She filed a discrimination complaint against the firm with the university, which could have barred the firm from recruiting on campus. She won a formal apology from the firm.

In speeches, Sotomayor has harkened back to her and her brother’s beginnings in a poor Bronx neighborhood, roots that President Barack Obama highlighted in introducing her this week.

“Born in the South Bronx, she was raised in a housing project,” Obama said. “And even as she has accomplished so much in her life, she has never forgotten where she began, never lost touch with the community that supported her.”

Yet Sotomayor did not live her entire childhood in a housing project in the South Bronx — she spent most of her teenage years in a middle-class neighborhood, attending private school and winning scholarships to Princeton and then Yale.

And Sotomayor’s life and lifestyle after law school largely resemble the background of many lawyers who rise to powerful positions in Washington.

She climbed her way up through New York’s Democratic power structure boosted by its ultimate brokers over those years — Gov. Mario Cuomo, Mayor Ed Koch, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan and District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. That’s the access of a partner in a corporate law firm, not a kid from the South Bronx.

She now earns more than $200,000 a year and owns a condominium in Greenwich Village, a neighborhood of million-dollar-plus homes. Her brother, Dr. Juan Sotomayor, is a physician in North Syracuse, N.Y., whose practice doesn’t accept Medicaid or Medicare — programs for the poor and elderly — according to its Web site.

Her ethnic consciousness was apparent in the earliest days of her career, in the New York City prosecutor’s office.

“What I am finding, both statistically and emotionally, is that the worst victims of crimes are not general society — i.e., white folks — but minorities themselves,” she told The New York Times in 1983. “The violence, the sorrow are perpetrated by minorities on minorities.”

The “riches” part of Sotomayor’s rags-to-riches story began when she left her low-paying job in that prosecutor’s office and joined the Pavia & Harcourt law firm. Her clients included Fendi, maker of luxury purses that she was unlikely to have seen as a child in the Bronx.

Still, she kept her hand in the Puerto Rican community — possibly to the point of a conflict of interest.

She served simultaneously on New York’s campaign finance board and the board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, an advocacy group that took legal action in 1991 to fight what it considered discriminatory redistricting. Sotomayor didn’t recuse herself from a finance board discussion of the redistricting battle, despite the involvement of her own advocacy group.

Also during this time, Sotomayor served on the state board that makes mortgages available to low- and middle-income New Yorkers. She missed nearly a third of the board’s meetings during three of those years but apparently still left a mark.Cuomo said Sotomayor’s respect for the law, her “life story” and her integrity were deciding factors in his decision to name her to the agency.

And when she left in 1992, the agency’s board adopted a resolution praising her for defending “the rights and needs of the disadvantaged to attain, maintain, and secure affordable housing appropriate to their need.” It went on: “Ms. Sotomayor also served as the conscience of the Board concerning the negative effects of gentrification which can harm communities and create hopelessness and homelessness if individuals and families are displaced.”

Republicans are scrutinizing her full record and background, but carefully. The White House warned as much earlier this week.

“It is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they’ve decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

With Hispanics a growing voting bloc, and ethnic sensitivities high, few are willing to be as blunt as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said of her comment that a Latina woman would rule more wisely than a white man: “New racism is no better than old racism.”

Associated Press writers Cal Woodward in Washington, Sara Kugler in New York and Jessica M. Pasko in Albany, N.Y., contributed to this report.”

Supreme Court-GOP divided over tone of Sotomayor debate

GOP divided over tone of Sotomayor debate: Posted on Yahoo! News-By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer- On May 30, 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“WASHINGTON – Republicans are divided over how aggressively to go after federal judge Sonia Sotomayor, a family feud about the tone of the coming debate over confirming the Supreme Court’s first Hispanic.

A growing chorus of GOP lawmakers and conservative strategists are voicing concern over the strident rhetoric some prominent Republicans have used to describe Sotomayor, and some are denouncing right-wing groups for swiftly launching negative advertisements against her.

The spat reflects a vexing question facing the GOP as it confronts President Barack Obama’s first high court nominee: They can’t defeat Sotomayor or block a final vote to seat her on the court, so what should they do instead?

The answer, according to high-profile Republicans like radio host Rush Limbaugh and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia is to harshly criticize Sotomayor. They both branded the federal judge — the daughter of Puerto Rican parents who was born and raised in New York — a “racist” this week for past remarks about how her ethnicity affected her judging. On Friday, Limbaugh likened picking Sotomayor to nominating former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke for the job.

But other leading Republicans, cognizant of the political risks for their party of opposing the first Hispanic woman to be named to the court, are struggling to change the terms of the debate. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, the head of his party’s Senate campaign committee, sharply criticized Limbaugh and Gingrich for their words.

“I think it’s terrible. This is not the kind of tone that any of us want to set when it comes to performing our constitutional responsibilities of advise and consent,” Cornyn told NPR. “Neither one of these men are elected Republican officials. I just don’t think it’s appropriate. I certainly don’t endorse it. I think it’s wrong.”

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, GOP strategist Peggy Noonan urged her party to “play grown-up,” and dismissed as “idiots” conservatives who were out to attack or brand Sotomayor.

The criticism comes as some conservatives are quietly expressing dismay at the tactics of outside interest groups that are engaged in an intense public-relations offensive against Sotomayor that includes a daily drumbeat of negative statements about her.

A leading organization on the right, the Judicial Confirmation Network, launched an advertising campaign the day Obama named Sotomayor that bashes her record and concludes that “America deserves better.”

“These things just taint the debate because it causes (people) to become callous toward our message. It becomes a ‘cry wolf’ situation,” said Manuel Miranda, chairman of the Third Branch Conference, a conservative group, and a former senior Senate GOP aide. “They’re just out to bash the nominee. This isn’t about bashing the nominee; it’s about engaging on issues.”

Miranda said he is concerned that Senate leaders — knowing that they don’t have the votes to beat Sotomayor and worried about the political consequences of a prolonged effort to do so — will pass up the opportunity to have a drawn-out debate about her record and the two parties’ dueling philosophies about the role of a judge.

“These fissures are very real, and they’re not settled,” Miranda said. “I am afraid that (Senate Republicans) will miss an opportunity.”

GOP leaders are pushing back against that notion. They circulated a document late Friday titled“It’s Going To Take Time,” filled with quotes from senior Democrats who said following the selections of the last two Supreme Court justices to be confirmed, GOP nominees John Roberts and Samuel Alito, that the Senate should take its time considering the nominations.

Republicans face competing pressures in the debate over Sotomayor and the Supreme Court. Opposing her nomination is important to their core supporters, comprised in large part of social conservatives who regard the courts as a key battleground. But the party also is struggling to reach beyond that base and draw more diversity — a goal that could be frustrated with a bitterly partisan fight, especially given Sotomayor’s background.

Gary Marx, the executive director of the Judicial Confirmation Network, said the divisions were more about style and tone than substance. He said conservatives agree that Sotomayor is a“judicial activist” — someone who puts her own views above the law — regardless of how they express themselves.

“Our ads are focused on highlighting her published writing and her own words, making sure those are raised because we feel they speak to the issue of judicial activism,” Marx said. “We can have a healthy debate when we focus on her own writings, her published writings and spoken words.”

Sotomayor’s nomination has caused some angst on the left as well, although Democrats have remained united in public in support of her selection. Still, pro-abortion rights groups are withholding their endorsements until they can learn more about her stance on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that established a woman’s right to end a pregnancy.

The White House fielded calls this week from some concerned groups. Few of the organizations have taken much solace from Sotomayor’s past rulings — which have not touched on the issues underlying Roe — or from the White House’s claim that neither Obama nor any other official ascertained her views on it.”

Supreme Court-Sotomayor’s Autobiography Whitewashes Radical College Years

Sotomayor’s Autobiography Whitewashes Radical College Years!-Posted on Western Journalism-By B. CHRISTOPHER AGEE-On February 1, 2013:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article and/or blog post:

“People in general – and leftists specifically – have a tendency to view their own past achievements through rose-colored glasses, and many go as far as to completely rewrite history.

Bill Clinton’s autobiography all but ignored the Monica Lewinsky scandal that triggered the downfall of a morally bankrupt president. Al Gore, in addition to his steady stream of lies concerning the environment, infamously took credit for the creation of the Internet.

In the continuous orgy of self-congratulation that is American politics, an autobiography might be the only place to find a more sickening whitewash of history than accounts from sycophants in the media.

Such is the case with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s recently released tome.

Instead of the familiar “tell-all” book, Sotomayor apparently wrote a “tell-all-she-wants-us-to-know” book leaving out key experiences during her college years.

To be clear, she wrote in great lengths about her time at Princeton University; but her association with openly racist organizations and other left-wing fringe movements are conveniently absent.

She does describe her involvement in groups such as Puerto Rican organization Accion Puertorriquena and the civil rights association the Third World Center.

What the book fails to reveal, however, are the radical policies and ideologies espoused by members of those two organizations.

As co-chair of Accion Puertorriquena, Sotomayor pushed relentlessly for racial quotas in her quest for affirmative action.

Accusing Princeton of “an attempt … to relegate an important cultural sector of the population to oblivion,” she stoked backlash from campus newspaper “The Daily Princetonian”‘s editorial staff.

“Affirmative action should not mean positive efforts to reverse a historical pattern of minority under-representation at the expense of traditional standards of excellence,” the paper published at the time. [Emphasis in original.]

Her pro-minority bias seemed to morph into an anti-white bias with her involvement in the Third World Center at Princeton.

In addition to a radical agenda put forth in the group’s founding documents, Sotomayor added her own leftist fingerprint by inviting speakers such as Manuel Maldonado-Denis, who reported that the “only solution” to the U.S. “exploiting” Puerto Rico is “through the establishment of national liberation and the establishment of socialism.”

If this was her inspiration back then, is there any wonder Barack Obama chose her to sit on the highest court in the land – possessing the power to change public policy without worrying about re-election?

Perhaps most relevant to her current position of power, Sotomayor showed partiality toward minorities as a student judge in college.

After inappropriately disparaging eight students who broke into the dorm room of two gay individuals in a letter to the Daily Princetonian, Sotomayor heard the case and demanded those involved be expelled, sources familiar with the incident report.

In the end, the eight students were given two years of probation and were stigmatized with a permanent mark on their records.

Even the victims of the break-in said at the time the punishment was too severe.

While I certainly want a Supreme Court sensitive to injustice, Sotomayor’s past seems to indicate she is receptive to only the suffering of her favorite minority groups.”

American Eagle-Mine

Note:  This is an article by Mychal Massie, chairman of the Project 21 black leadership network, who is urging senators to take a very close look at her record before commenting on her fitness for the job, which I believe is pertinent and relates to this issue-You Decide:

Black Leader Urges Senate Scrutiny for Sotomayor Supreme Court Nomination: “No Rubber Stamp for Controversial Nominee”: Press Release Posted on The National Center For Public Policy Research-Posted By Mychal Massie-On May 26, 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

Washington, D.C. – With President Obama’s nomination of U.S. Circuit Court judge Sonia Sotomayor to the vacancy being created by U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s impending retirement, Mychal Massie, chairman of the Project 21 black leadership network, is urging senators to take a very close look at her record before commenting on her fitness for the job.

“Of all the possible nominees suggested over the past few weeks, it appears Obama selected the most radical one,” said Massie.

“The U.S. Senate has a duty to scrutinize Judge Sotomayor’s record to ensure she has the demeanor and aptitude to be elevated to such a solemn post.”

Massie continued: “During the Bush Administration, it was common for liberal senators to demand a consensus nominee with broad political appeal.  By selecting an avowed liberal in Sotomayor, it would appear Obama is not following the stipulation he and his former colleagues sought to impose upon his predecessor.  This should open up the nomination to the scrutiny it justly deserves.”

The Sotomayor nomination, Massie notes, is the perfect catalyst to begin a national debate on the appropriateness of “judicial activism” – when judges essentially cut lawmakers out of the legislative process and try to rule from the bench.

For example, in a 2001 speech at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law, Sotomayor said it was appropriate for a judge such as herself to use her “experiences as women and people of color” to “affect our decisions.”

In 2005, she told a crowd at the Duke University Law School that the “Court of Appeals is where policy is made” – rather than by lawmakers beholden to voters.

Massie commented: “Considering Justice Souter’s record, Sotomayor will not change the balance of the Supreme Court.  But she will likely dramatically alter the temperament of the Court and the way in which it operates.  Senators must keep this in mind as they take on the very solemn process of vetting her fitness.”

Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992.  For more information, contact David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org, or visit Project 21’s website at:  http://www.project21.org/P21Index.html

For Release: May 26, 2009 Contact: David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or 
or dalmasi@nationalcenter.org

American Eagle-Mine

Note: This magazine article reveals President Obama’s planned attacked on the courts, which I believe is pertinent to this issue-You Decide:

Obama’s Coming Attack on the Courts: Alert Posted on Recently Published News Max Magazine:


These are pertinent excerpts from the review of this alarming magazine article:

“More than any of his recent predecessors, President Barack Obama will have an opportunity to dangerously realign America’s courts with activist judges.

With one-time law professor Obama in the White House and a Democratic majority in Congress, the ruling party stands ready to launch the biggest assault on conservative jurisprudence since the Earl Warren Court with the appointment of federal judges.

Will Republicans be able to stave off what could be seen as the legal rollback of the Reagan Revolution?

Newsmax magazine’s special report “Judges Are Not Our Rulers: Obama’s Coming Plan to Liberalize America’s Courts” examines what is likely in store for the courts under the administration of the first president who, as a senator, participated in the filibuster of Bush judicial appointments.

This exclusive Newsmax report explores:

  • The biggest fear among conservative legal activists
  • The key cases that could soon test federal courts’ political stance
  • Why Obama’s judicial philosophy shocked leading GOP senators
  • The “greatest hits” in outrageous Democrat-sponsored jurisprudence
  • How the “blue slip” rule can torpedo judicial appointments
  • The real agenda for legalizing same-sex marriage
  • The “conservative nightmare scenario” regarding the courts
  • Why Obama wants judges to employ “empathy” in dealing with cases
  • The legal moves that most threaten religious organizations
  • The “Shangri-La” of judicial conservatism
  • How Republicans can inflict political costs for judicial nominees
  • The study assessing Democratic and Republican courts and its surprising result
  • Obama’s point man on judicial appointments
  • The pending bill that will federalize the abortion issue
  • Why federal judges wield tremendous power
  • What Obama’s appointees tell about the future of the courts
  • The lesson Obama has learned from Ronald Reagan
  • How a political maneuver will bolster Democrats’ control of the courts
  • How the district courts and appellate courts interact
  • Why the “Gang of 14” angered conservatives
  • The best hope for reappointment among Bush’s judicial candidates
  • How court decisions could imperil national security

And much more.”

American Eagle-Mine

NoteThese articles and/or blog posts relate to and/or support this issue-You Decide:

36 STATES DID NOT RATIFY 17TH AMENDMENT – WHAT WILL STATES DO?-Posted on News With Views-By Devvy, NewsWithViews.com-On
January 16, 2012: 


Obama’s Judicial Nominees Deemed “Unqualified” by ABA!-Posted on American for Constitutional Government Reform–On January 7, 2012:


Ratings Shrink President’s List for Judgeships!Posted on The New York Times-By CHARLIE SAVAGE-On November 22, 2011:


American Eagle-Mine

Note: These blog posts relate to and/or support this issue-You Decide:

NYC Police: Terror Suspects Wanted to Commit Jihad!

This blog post contains an article that should put some chills down each American’s spine because, it proves that our biggest terrorist threat here at home is from our own “home grown terrorists”, the likes of Bill Ayers and his 1960’s Weather Underground cronies, who set the example for others to follow without retributionYou Decide:


Do Alinsky’s Rules Define This Administration’s Governing Style?

This blog post contains articles that revel that we are witnessing the ramped use of Alinky’s Rules by this President, his administration and/or individuals/organizations connected to them-You Decide:


Another Imminent Homeland & National Security Issue!

This blog post reveals that I, as a Veteran, believe that some deplorable and hap-hazard actions taken by this President and his administration, along with the Democratic majority in Congress, not only threaten our Homeland and National Security, but are systematically eroding our Constitution and will ultimately destroy this great country of ours-You Decide:

These are just a few examples of what I believe to be their deplorable actions:

  • DHS Extremist Alert Report Targeting Veterans, President apologizing to the world, to include our enemies here at home and abroad, for this country’s alleged arrogance;
  • Trying and convicting members of our Armed Forces for killing their enemies and, in the heat of battle, allegedly other innocent civilian by-standers; and
  • Are open to investigating, and possibly prosecuting, officials and lawyers involved in the drafting of the allegedly harsh water-boarding interrogation techniques, although there is credible evidence that shows that the application of these procedures are credited with keeping us safe from other terrorist attacks.


It’s Getting Very Serious Now!

This blog post contains an article that reveals that the MIAC profiled certain people as being potential violence-prone “militia members”: including people who supported Presidential candidates Ron Paul, and Bob Barr. In addition, anyone who opposed one or more of the following were also included in the list: the New World Order, the U.N., gun control, the violation of Posse Comitatus, the Federal Reserve, the Income Tax, the Ammunition Accountability Act, a possible Constitutional Convention, the North American Union, the Universal Service Program, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), abortion on demand, or illegal immigration-You Decide:


Comment:  As a Latino I adamantly disagree with and literally deplore the President’s reasoning behind his appointment of a supposedly empathetic minority (AKA: Radical Liberal) Supreme Court Justice, while disregarding what I would consider to be other more critical qualifications, along with pertinent court experience requirements, to include the content of their character and interpretation of the Constitution.

Regardless of my ethnic background and somewhat overwhelming life adversities, upon enlisting into the U.S. Marine Corps and during my twenty year tenure I was systematically promoted from the enlisted rank of Private to the Commissioned Officer rank of Captain based solely on my performance and merits and not on my ethnic background, race or life adversities.

And I honestly wouldn’t have it any other way.  I am who I am today because  of my twenty year tenure in the Marine Corps where I learned and honestly believe that adversities multiply the end benefit, build character and make you a better person.

I also believe that the President’s decision has little to do with him historically appointing the first Latina to the Supreme Court, but more to do with him covertly attempting to further his own radical agenda of continuing to erode our “Constitution” and destroying our country, knowing very well that if anyone dares to disagree with his appointment and/or attempts to block his appointment, they will be labeled as a “racist” and we now know that we are a nation of cowards when it comes to dealing with racism, as our illustrious U.S. Attorney General eloquently informed us during his acceptance speech, along with being “cold hearted” because they are not sympathetic to the historical appointment of a minority woman with overwhelming life adversities to the Supreme Court.

An action that I also believe will further divide our country by pitting individuals of differing ethnic backgrounds against Latinos, which seems to be just fine with the President as evidenced by his other numerous deplorable actions, which I believe are permanently dividing our country to a point of no return. And, if he continues without restraint, his actions will more than likely cause civil unrest and/or an uprising, which may be his ultimate goal because it would allow him to declare Marshal Law” as a means of doing away with our “Constitutional Rights” and take over as our country’s life-long dictator-You Decide.

American Eagle-Mine

Note:  The above articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to and/or support my following blog posts-You Decide:

Is Obama looking for empathy by another name in his supreme court nominee?


President and DOJ have contributed to the racial mess in our country!


The Racial Mess!


Obama is fomenting a race war?


Obama’s Arizona Immigration Law Hypocritical Lie!


Game Change’:  New Book Reveals 2008 Campaigns’ Messy Moments-To Include Racism!


Were We Forewarned About What to Expect If President Obama Got Elected?


What we haven’t been told about the President’s background!


Where Is America Today?


Is it time to call for Obama’s resignation!


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!


Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question: What are the Russians saying about what’s going on in America today?

This article  from the Russian newspaper Pravda reveals the Russian’s view of what has been happening in America.  If this article dosen’t put chills down your spine, then it confirms what the Russians are saying about Americans being a passive, hapless sheeple-You Decide:

American Capitalism Gone With A Whimper!-Posted on Pravada.Ru-By Stanislav Mishim-On April 27, 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.

True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years.The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was.

But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.

Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.

First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their “right” to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights.

Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our “democracy”.  Pride blind the foolish.

Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different “branches and denominations” were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the “winning” side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another.

Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the “winning” side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama.

His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive.His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America’s short history, but in the world.

If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all.

First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison.

Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?

These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters.

Then came Barack Obama’s command that GM’s (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of “pure” free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.

So it should be no surprise that the American president has followed this up with a “bold” move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too.

Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK’s Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster.Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians so let our“wise”Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.

Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper…but a “freeman” whimper.

So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set “fair” maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses?

Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.

The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.

The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.

Stanislav Mishin”

Note:   This is another article that was found in the Russian Pravada newspaper by Mark S. McGrew McGrewMX@aol.com:

“This is what a Soviet newspaper writes about Obama. Its funny how clear Russian’s see the follies of Obama while American’s have become blinded enough to over look our constitution in order to co-operate!

I’m sending you folks materials that Obama and his terrorist, revolutionary, communist and liberal buddies most likely know about. Obama said, he’s going to change the world.

I’m a military brat therefore moving fifty times within my life has taken place.

My observations & experiences are being reflected in the materials I’m providing you folks. Don’t expect others to be fair, play by the rules or even be legal, moral, ethical and biblical.”

The Mysterious Shadow: Code Name Obama!-Posted on Pravda.RuBy Mark S. McGrew-On December 18, 2008:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“This document (http://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=960653960) alone raises a big question.

It is his registration in the State of Illinois for his license to practice Law.

The document has a space to list any other names that have been used. Even though he has used other names, this shows, “None”. The other names he has used, that we currently know are: Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham and Barry Dunham.

During the Presidential debates with Senator John McCain, Obama never once addressed his opponent as “Senator McCain” or “Mr. McCain”.

Most people, who have any common courtesy at all, when speaking to their elders, or a senator, would address that person with some degree of respect and use his proper title.

Senator McCain has more experience than Obama, is older, has risked his life for his country and does address other people, whatever their position, with respect. Obama, with a look of contempt, addressed Senator McCain as “John this” or “John that”.

Not once did he show any basic courtesy or manners to a war veteran, a 25 year member of the United States Senate, a man 25 years his senior. John McCain was a Senator before Obama even knew what name to call himself.

Obama was sued in Federal Court to produce his birth certificate. He refused and instead hired two legal firms to make up reasons why he shouldn’t have to. The case was taken to the United States Supreme Court and they also asked him to respond. Again, he refused.

Obama took an oath to defend the Constitution. Instead he speaks of changing it.

There are other lawsuits that Obama is not responding to. In this photograph, we see Obama refusing to Salute the American flagand say the pledge of Allegiance as everyone else on the stage was doing.

He doesn’t respect American citizens asking to see if he is eligible to be President.

He doesn’t respect the United States Federal Court or the United States Supreme Court or the United States Constitution.

And if he was smoking pot and using cocaine as he says in is book, he doesn’t even respect himself.

This document, a Certification of Life Birth states Obama’s place of birth as Hawaii, but is also says at the bottom, “any alterations invalidate this certificate” and at the top right, the certificate number is blacked out.

This officially invalidates the document and you or I could not use this to get a driver’s license, but Obama expects to get the White House with it.

Obama’s own web site, FightTheSmearts.com does not say that he is a “natural born” citizen. Instead they admit: “The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America.”

And it goes on to admit further that he is not a “Natural Born” citizen when they say: “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire.

As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”

In order to be a Natural Born citizen, one parent can not be a foreign citizen, and Obama’s web site discloses that his father was a British subject. If Obama or Soetoro or Dunham had been born on the floor of the Oval Office, he is not eligible to be President.

Barack Obama is no longer an attorney as he is “voluntarily inactive and not authorized to practice law” as of 2008.

His wife, Michelle Obama has not been an attorney since 1993, and the Illinois registration says: “Voluntarily inactive and not authorized to practice law” and “attorney is on court ordered inactive status”, long before her children were born. She was an attorney for only four years, having quit 15 years ago.

The amount of speculation into Obama’s past is absolutely stunning.

Trying to trace his past is like climbing a tree. As soon as you start up the trunk, there are alternate branches, and the branches have branches and then more branches.

It may be impossible to obtain correct information on his life. As some people have said, it is like trying to prove Sequatchie, UFOs or ghosts exist. There is evidence to suggest he is “here” but no verifiable proof that he has the past that he claims. Or the present.

There is no proof that his grandmother died on the day his campaign said she did. The only announcement of her death that can be found is from his campaign people.

But, who told them?

There is no record. I absolutely defy anyone to prove that his grandmother, Madelyn Payne Lee Dunham died in Hawaii on November 2nd or 3rd of the year 2008.

Obama has spent an estimated $500,000 or more on legal fess to keep his birth certificate from being seen. For $25 or less, or probably no more than a phone call and a fax to Hawaii he can release his birth certificate and shut everybody up, once and for all. But he won’t do that.

Anyone can ask for their privacy to be respected, but in America, there is no such thing as a “Right” to privacy.

If a person were asking the citizens to allow him to be their President, it would be in that person’s interest for the public to know every thing there is to know about him. Unless there is some extremely bad news.

American’s have elected criminals of all sorts to public office. Felons and minor criminals serve our country. A person sitting in a Federal Penitentiary, with a life sentence is able to run for public office, including the Presidency.

If American’s will allow a person with a criminal past or present to hold office, what exactly does Obama have to fear in letting the public see him?

Other records that he refuses to release are:

Original, vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA

Obama/Dunham marriage license

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license

Soetoro adoption records

Punahou School records

Selective Service Registration(Released. But, is possibly an altered Document)

Occidental College records


Columbia College records

Columbia thesis

Harvard College records

Harvard Law Review articles(None (maybe 1, Not Signed)

University of Chicago scholarly articles(None)

Baptism certificate

Medical records

Law practice client list

Illinois State Senate records(None (Locked up to prohibit public view)

Illinois State Senate schedule(Lost (All other Illinois state senators’ records are intact)

With all of Obama’s different names, with his documented long term relations to convicted criminals, with his active efforts to prohibit us from knowing where he was born, with his active efforts to keep us from seeing his credentials, with his documented registration to practice law showing only one name, with his being an ex-attorney not authorized to practice law, but representing himself as such, with his non-existent

“Office of The President Elect”, with the dozen or so lawsuits against him to prove his citizenship, with the various promises he made to voters and has since reneged on, with his documented complete lack of respect to America, with his refusal to salute the American flag and refusal to say the Pledge of Allegiance with others on stage and his other disrespectful actions, with his many millions of dollars in campaign funds suspected to be from foreign sources, with campaign donations accepted from possible terrorists groups, with his planned first official act as President to make a speech to the Muslim world in a Muslim Capitol, Obama has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he can not in any way, shape or form be trusted.

With his association with William Ayers, a man who advocated and tried a violent overthrow of the US Government in which people did die, with his associations with Communist Party and Socialist Party organizations, with his financial support of Raila Odingo, a cousin in Kenya who, because elections didn’t turn out as he wanted them to, caused riots, the burning and destruction of several hundred Christian churches, several thousand deaths, rapes and hundreds of thousands of displaced citizens in Kenya, Obama has shown that he has no qualms about violence being used to effect “change”.

And especially, with the major news sources in America constant, steady, upbeat, relentless promotion of his unproven abilities and undocumented history, their absolute refusal to investigate or even question his eligibility to be President, with their constant attacks and insults against anyone who dares to question, with their subtle threats of riots or even civil war if Obama is not placed in the White House, there are serious concerns that Obama is not destined to be America’s President, but instead, won his votes from an incredibly mis-informed public, it is apparent that America is being forced to accept him.

Regardless of the conspiracy theories, suspicions, accusations and investigations about Obama, the simple questions that stand out above all others: Is anyone in our military, any Federal employee, our Congress, our Senate, our Federal law enforcement agencies, our Federal intelligence agencies willing to follow his orders?

Are they legally able to obey his orders?

If they do obey his orders, and he is later declared to be ineligible, will the people who followed his orders be subjected to Nuremberg type trials in an International Court?

Will a future administration be able to prosecute Obama and his followers, as Alberto Gonzales confirmed to President George Bush in regards to torturing prisoners?

There are various people and organizations in America going to incredible efforts to uncover the truth, any truth, about Obama. Lawsuits have been filed in State Courts. There are five lawsuits filed in the US Supreme Court with three of them pending now.

State Courts and Federal Courts have taken the position that citizens do not have a right to verify that a Presidential candidate is eligible. Under the logic they use, there is not an entity on Earth who can ask a candidate to prove he is qualified under the US Constitution.

Dr. Orly Taitz has filed two separate lawsuits in the US Supreme Court, but on December 17, 2008 Justice Kennedy denied one case, without giving a reason. Dr. Taitz will re-file with a different Justice soon.

There is one lawsuit that may be filed, that no one can deny that the plaintiffs have a Constitutional Right, a legal Right and a God given Right to verify the eligibility of a Presidential candidate: Military officers.

Military officers take an oath to defend the US Constitution against enemies, foreign and domestic.

But more importantly, they have an obligation and a duty to refuse any order that they determine to be illegal.

Any military service member who carries out an order that he should know is illegal, can and will be Court Marshaled. Penalties range from being released from service to imprisonment to being executed, depending on the event. Any military personnel who would like to be included in a lawsuit against Obama to prove he is legitimate should contact Orly Taitz or any number of other attorneys with lawsuits in process. Type in your search bar…Obama lawsuit…and you will find them.

Every American who is concerned about this situation needs to take some action today.

If you can’t join the fight, then find someone to support financially. Most of the people filing these lawsuits and their lawyers are doing so with their own money. Most of the people on the Internet, trying to get the truth out, are using their own money.

If you can’t take the time or don’t know what you can do, send money. Win or lose, you will at least know you were a part of history.

If Obama takes office and if Obama creates his civilian mandatory work program, forcing people to work for three months, as he and Rahm Emanuel have repeatedly said, and you did send somebody 10 bucks, at least you and your family are going to know you tried. Or, keep the ten dollars, buy stamps and you can keep in touch sending postcards from camp to camp to each other and no one will have any sympathy for you.

With the turmoil Americans are facing in the Obama Presidency, the World also will suffer.

International political, business and military affairs always have operated on a level of trust. Those levels vary with the wind, but can any World leader trust a man who has no past, no allegiance and no respect for the society that enabled him to run for public office?

If a person has no loyalty and no respect to the people and the Nation that enabled him to succeed, he is incapable of being loyal about anything, to any purpose or to any person.

Obama will have millions of soldiers and thousands of nuclear weapons at his disposal along with everything else in the arsenal of the American military. How can any country trust this man not to push the button?

Any Treaty or agreement of any kind can be rescinded by a future administration. Laws regarding international business can be rescinded.

The International Court can rescind anything Obama does.

This affair is the makings of a very well financed and influential group of criminal psychopaths. Obama is simply the mouthpiece.

According to Obama’s own words in his books, he is nothing but a pot smoking crack head street punk that some rich white guys found and made him take a shower and put on a tie.

Until Obama releases the records and accomplishments of his past, no one can prove otherwise. Hearsay is not admissible in Court and hearsay is all we have to listen to about Obama.

And yet, another huge question, and most mysterious of all is, why him? Of all the thousands of eligible people in the Democratic and Republican parties, WHY would they present two people to become a future president, with both being accused of not being Natural Born citizens?

The most controversial choice of the two and the most disturbing to society is Obama, the man who has no more verifiable occurrences in his life than a comic book character. WHY, a man with so many secrets in his life, with so many gaping holes in his stories and so many mischievous, socially unacceptable characters in his life, why this one?

It must be considered that it is all a hoax and the intention has always been, since day one, to create a firestorm of opposition and chaos and confusion that produce some grand savior who will step in and declare a “mistrial” in the 2008 elections and keep the same people in the White House for another four years.

All these questions, all of the suspicions, all the missing links, all the investigations and lawsuits, all the rumors and all the theories, all of the mistrust and all of the little or big mistakes that Obama has made can disappear, just as if a thermonuclear explosion had vaporized them, if only Obama would produce a birth certificate that shows where and when he was born. What possible reason would any person have to not make a simple exchange like that?

Even children know, that a person who tells people over and over what he has done, but refuses to prove it, is called many names that are unfit to publish.

For me, somebody running around bragging, with nothing to back it up, is just a sissy and there is nothing more dangerous than a sissy with a gun.

Mark S. McGrew can be reached at McGrewMX@aol.com

Note:  These are articles and/or blog posts that were published in 2010 that reveal the Russian’s views relating to President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth (COLB)-You Decide:

No evidence of Hawaiian birth for AKA Obama. What about Kenya?Posted on PRAVADA-On September 19, 2010:


Pravda Does it Again; No evidence of Hawaiian birth for AKA Obama. What about Kenya?-Posted on BirtherReport.com-On September 19, 2010:


NoteWhat follows is a culmination of more than 100 years of negligence and disregard of the global Marxist infection contaminating the world, to include how the the destiny of America follows the steps of Russian Empire in its demise by Alexander Gofen-You Decide:

Comparative analysis of demise of the Russian Empire in 1917 and of the United States of America now!-By Alexander Gofen-On December 28, 2011:  


Note:  The following articles and/or blog posts relate to and/or support the above articles and/or blog posts and videos-You Decide:

Obama-Sheep Never Stalk The Tiger

Sheep Never Stalk The Tiger!Posted on Post & Email-By Sharon Rondeau-On February 23, 2014:


NWO-Americans – Like Nazi Germans – Don’t Notice that All of Our Rights Are Slipping Away

Americans – Like Nazi Germans – Don’t Notice that All of Our Rights Are Slipping Away (Part 20)!Posted on Tea Party Command Center-By Jake Martinez-On February 18, 2014:


Russian writer: ‘Obama’s fools, Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion’!-Posted on Examiner-By CHRISTOPHER COLLINS-On November 19, 2012:


Communist Party Leader: Obama Victory “Dawn of a New Era”!- Posted on TeaParty.org-By Jake Martinez-On November 9, 2012:


Obama’s Ultimate Cover-up!-Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On August 5, 2012:


Who ran cover for Obama’s Islamic background? ‘Tracing The Politics And The Money Behind Obama’s 2008 Campaign’!Posted on TeaParty.org-By Jake Martinez-On July 30, 2012:


Communists and Muslims: The Hidden Hand of the KGB!-Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On July 29, 2012:


White Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Weather Underground, Barack Obama, and the Fundamental Transformation of the United States!Posted on We The People USA- By Jake Martinez-On July 28, 2012:


The Vetting: ‘Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection’!Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez on July 24, 2012:


Letter to Congressman Allen West Regarding Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse Allegations!Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On July 28, 2012:


Follow-up Letter To NM U.S. Congressman Martin Heinrich Regarding My Request For Full-scale Investigation Into Allegations Made By Sheriff Arapio’s Cold Case Posse!Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On July 26, 2012:


Follow-up Letter To NM U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman Regarding My Request For Full-scale Investigation Into Allegations Made By Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse!Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On July 26, 2012:


Follow-up Letter to NM Governor Martinez Requesting The Removal of President Obama From The NM 2012 Presidential Election Ballot!Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez on July 26, 2012:


Follow-up Letter To NM U.S. Senator Udall Requesting Congressional Investigation Into Allegations Made By Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse!-Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On July 25, 2012:


The coming chaos from the Obama-Soertoro playbook!’Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez on April 24, 2012:


Follow-up Letter To NM U.S. Senator Udall Requesting Congressional Investigation Into Allegations Made By Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse!-Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On April 24, 2012:


Note:  The above articles and/or blog posts relate to and/or support my following blog posts-You Decide:

The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!


Was there a conspiracy to put Obama in the White House?


Why Obama is ineligible – regardless of his birthplace!


Hawaii Elections Clerk: Obama birth not here!


Congress report concedes Obama eligibility unvetted!


DC knows that Obama is ineligible for office!


Clearing the Smoke on Obama’s Eligibility!


What we haven’t been told about the President’s background!


Were We Forewarned About What to Expect If President Obama Got Elected?


Was the Economic Crisis Manufactured?


Who’s Behind the Financial Crisis?


Active complaint to the FEC over President Obama’s campaign finances!


Progressives and Communists Are Out of the Closet Together!


The Midterm Elections and the Communist Manifesto!


Progressive group maps out President Obama’s strategy for next 2 years!


Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?


The Wall Street Bailout Bill Threatens Our Bottom Line!


Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!


The Islamic Infiltration: Inside Our Government, Armed With Our Secrets!


Could Steps That Team Obama Has Taken Be Emboldening Terrorists?


Is Shariah Law A Danger To Our U.S. National Security?


White House Quietly Courts Muslims in U.S.!


Islam’s Child Martyrs in America!


Rising Muslim Hopes from Obama’s Outreach May Backfire!


FBI, Department of Homeland Security and Joint Terrorism Task Force Raid Militia Groups!


Subpoenas issued for Fort Hood Records!


Is President Obama’s Shameful Politics Harming The CIA?


Are Intelligence Personnel Empowered to Employ Their Ingenuity and Resourcefulness to Connect The Dots?


Why Should Terrorists Be Given The Extraordinary Protections That You and I Have As American Citizens?


Another Imminent Homeland & National Security Issue!


Obama and Holder’s Hidden Agenda!


Nuclear Summit Part of Obama Administration’s ‘Fantasy Foreign Policy’


President Obama says USA still working on its democracy!


The Reason for the Treason!


Obamacare Lawsuits!


Nearly 80 percent don’t trust the government!


How ABC, CBS and NBC Have Dismissed and Disparaged the Tea Party Movement!


Obamanites Get Violent in Support of the Agenda!


Restoring Honor In America!


Where Is America Today?


The Russian View of What Has Been Happening In America!


Is it time to call for Obama’s resignation!


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


Extensive Research Into Senator Obama’s Background Completed on November 3, 2008:


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »