Archive | February, 2011
28 Feb

Utah Senator Robles holds simultaneous Utah and Mexican Government Offices

Often referred to as a “political newcomer”, Utah Democratic Senator Luz Robles (UT-1) is described by legislative intern Drew Martinez as “an immigrant from Mexico” who “came here in 1996 to attend the University of Utah, where she earned a bachelor’s degree in business marketing and a master’s in public administration…

” Martinez’s January 15, 2009 blog post continues to detail an impressive list of local affiliations and boards served on by Senator Robles. The blog also concludes “[S]he [Robles] really is an exceptional public servant. She’s not your typical Utah legislator.

She’s first off a woman. Also she is a minority in both race and political party…” Mr. Martinez leaves out some other facts that by all accounts, were also unknown by voters during the election that pushed Senator Robles in the political arena.

Indeed, Senator Robles is not a political newcomer at all. In fact the Senator is a seasoned veteran, having previously held elected as well as appointed offices, in the Mexican government.

It is important to note that Senator Robles is a naturalized United States citizen and part of that process entails taking an oath of allegance to the United States, the text of which is:

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.” source

A chronology of Senator Robles’ relevant political affiliations and career in the United States is:

* Senator Robles was appointed as the interim Director of the Utah Office of Ethnic Affairs from July, 2005 to November, 2005;

* Senator Robles was appointed as the Director of the Utah Office of Ethnic Affairs in November, 2005 where she served until September, 2007, when she resigned to accept a position with Zion’s Bank;

* 2008 Senator Robles becomes the Democratic candidate for Utah Senate District 1 and participates in the conventions and process in the Spring;

* November 4, 2008 Senator Robles is elected to the Utah State Senate;

* January, 2009 Senator Robles is sworn into office; and,

* February 6, 2009 Senator Robles’ “Conflict of Interest and Renumeration” statement is received by the Utah Secretary of State and lists only Zions Bank as a potential conflict;

What has not previously been reported or disclosed is the following chronology of Senator Robles’ political career with the Mexican government:

* In September, 2005 Ms. Robles was elected through an electoral process conducted by the Consulate of Mexico to a three year term in the “Consejo Consultivo Del Instituto De Los Mexicanos En El Exterior” (CCIME). The CCIME was an advisory commission created by Mexican President Vincente Fox and placed in within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Mexican Government. source;

* Ms. Robles held her elected position from 2006 through 2008;

* During her tenure with the CCIME, Ms. Robles attended at least seven (7) conferences and served as the Coordinator for CCIME the Legal Affairs Commission for three (3) conferences and as a member on the Political Affairs Commission for three (3) conferences; source
* Ms. Robles attended her 6th conference after having won election to the Utah Senate and her 7th as an observer after being sworn into the Senate in Utah;

* Three of the conferences attened by Ms. Robles were held at the Presidential Residence in Mexico;

* During the November, 2007 CCIME conference, Ms. Robles was the featured speaker.

* At the November 10-11, 2008 CCIME conference, Ms. Robles was the moderator for the “Estados Emergentes” meeting, which was also attended by MALDEF (The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund). link

A review of the CCIME website and documents is replete with references to Senator Robles attending and participating in meetings, policy decisions and other official functions both while she was the Director of the Utah Office of Ethnic Affairs and after she had won election to the Utah Senate. link

This is a case where the existence of impropriety cries out for an investigation by the Utah Senate Ethics Committee and possibly the Utah Attorney General. The next time Senator Robles takes the floor of the Senate to debate SB 60, Utahans will have to ask, “exactly which constituents is Senator Robles speaking for, Utahans or those in the CCIME?

WRITTEN BY By Dan Baltes,director of Americans Against Immigration Amnesty,SOURCE Salt Lake City Immigration Policy Examiner


Just where does this womens Allegiance stand?

With America or does she still have ties with the Mexican Government?


28 Feb


All 50 states are beginning to get wise to Washington’s scheme of passing on regulatory requirements to the states without offering any funding mechanism whatsoever.

This is what we call “unfunded mandates.”

Let’s call them what they really are – unconstitutional power abuses by the federal government.

The Constitution lays out clearly, simply and succinctly the few powers vested in Congress. All others, it says, are reserved for the states and the people.

The incredible deficits run up by Washington and many state capitals are a direct result of Congress’ history of defying constitutional restraints on its power. This goes for the president, too, and the Supreme Court. But Congress is the biggest offender of all.

Except possibly this president, if you want to call him that – which I refuse to do.

Obama represents the biggest “unfunded mandate” in the history of the nation.

Here’s why:

* His election was a crock from the get-go.

He never satisfied the meager constitutional requirements of office.

He never established eligibility.

In fact, with all of the power centers and bureaucracies established in Washington to regulate virtually every facet of our lives, none of them ever vetted Obama’s eligibility for office. Isn’t that amazing? What’s even more shocking is that one of them, the U.S. Senate, actually did vet his opponent, John McCain.

Whether they came to the right conclusion or did an adequate job, I will reserve judgment since he lost the election anyway. Furthermore, not one of the 50 states charged with conducting federal elections did anything to establish Obama’s constitutional eligibility, either. Now we find ourselves in a predicament with significantly more than half the country doubting whether the man in the White House is even legit.

* Now there’s an effort under way in at least a dozen states to ensure a debacle like 2008 is never repeated. And all we hear from the watchdogs in the Big Media is that somehow the states are exceeding their authority. What? Show me inthe Constitution where it prohibits the states from doing anything they want to do.

* Meanwhile, Obama is spending money without any accountability to the Constitution or the people.

He is racking up the biggest deficits in history.

He is borrowing against the credit of Americans yet unborn without their having the slightest say in what is spent and how. He is demagoging his way through by threatening not to send out Social Security checks to elderly folks and by forcing default on America’s loan obligations unless Congress increases the debt limit.

That’s the old con game played by politicians everywhere: We’ll stop doing what we’re obliged to do to punish anyone who stops us from doing what we want to do. All Washington needs to do to remain solvent is to cut the budget by $700 billion. I could do it with a pencil and a napkin – just zero out useless, unconstitutional departments and agencies that would never be missed by Americans other than the paper-pushers they currently employ.

Columnist John Stossel has done this in admirable fashion. I can’t argue with anything he came up with to put Washington in the black, and I know I can come up with billions more in cuts. It’s easy! It’s constitutional! And it’s fun!

So do you see why I say the biggest unfunded mandate in Washington is actually Barack Hussein Obama?

written by Joseph Farah CEO of WND


FOLKS –Here is something interesting The U.S. Senate DID NOT Vet Brack Hussein Obama Jr (sometimes called Barry)-but-wait here it comes———–they DID VET JOHN McCAIN-HOW ABOUT THAT FOLKS-DOEN,T THAT JUST MAKE YOUR DAY?

AND HOW ABOUT THIS–I KNOW THIS IS GOING TO MAKE YOU WARM AND FUZZY ALL OVER--Not one of the 50 states charged with conducting federal elections did anything to establish Obama’s constitutional eligibility

Patriots, do you smell a rat here? Congress running up to the 2008 national elections did NOT vet Brack Hussein Obama Jr—WHY WHY WHY that is the sixty four thousand dollar question.

Was this all set up? Remember the Democrats are liars,sneaks,haters of the constitution, so nothing I mean nothings is beyond what these SOB’S will do to get and retain power.

Obama and the Democrats have spent our money borrowed money by the billions from China, they have one goal and that is destroy this country and rebuild it as a Socialist state, where people like those protesting in Wisconsin will be right at home-after all they are all Marxist/Socialist packaged as Patriots, lovers of freedom but in reality what could be further from the truth.

27 Feb

Obama to Declare Constitution Unconstitutional?

We right-wingers sometimes have difficulty grasping the deep, elusive logic of intellectual elitists on the left like Barack Obama when it comes to great and serious questions concerning the U.S. Constitution.

For example, we find it difficult to understand how it is that man who invented ObamaCare, which has been ruled unconstitutional by two separate courts, feels qualified to unilaterally decide that the Defense of Marriage Act, law of the land for 15 years, is suddenly unconstitutional, thereby freeing himself from the responsibility to defend said law in fulfillment of his Oath of Office.

What next, Mr. President?

According to unreliable sources, it appears that President Obama will make a major announcement that will CHANGE everything in America.

The gist of that announcement: The U.S. Constitution is unconstitutional because women and racial, sexual preference, and religious minorities were all under represented in 1776.

Indeed, without any openly gay men or transgender people involved in the crafting of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, all such documents must be declared null and void.

Other excluded minorities include women, terrorists, and illegal aliens. Without factoring in the wishes and needs of terrorists and illegal aliens how in the world can our democracy function?
The answer, of course, is that it cannot, which is why Obama will soon declare the Constitution itself unconstitutional! Of course, if Obama really gave a tinker’s damn about the Constitution, he would scrap his outrageous law suit against the state of Arizona for protecting its citizens from invaders.
He would move to scrap ObamaCare, which was rammed down the throats of unwilling Americans with legislative sleight of hands and bribery when the votes were not there to follow the rules.
He would understand that forcing citizens to purchase health care insurance, or face the ravages of the IRS, is barbaric and unconstitutional.
He would understand that the Constitution is very specific when it comes to the eligibility of any person to serve as president. Thus, he would make every effort to be completely honest and transparent with the American people concerning questions about his own eligibility.

He would understand that the Constitution sets forth provisions for separation of powers, meant to assure that the Executive Branch is accountable to the people through the oversight function performed by Congress.
He would understand that installation of stealth Czars in order to circumvent Congressional oversight is a repudiation of the Constitution.

He would understand that voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party is not acceptable simply because the intimidated are not people of color.

He would understand that actions taken to grant rights reserved for citizens to terrorists are anti-American acts of treason.

He would understand that the Constitution requires the president to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws so as to protect the American people.
He would understand that it is the president’s Constitutional obligation to serve as America’s Commander-in-Chief, which requires him to use war powers prudently to defend the American people, rather than using those powers as political footballs.
Above all else, if he were genuine, President Obama would understand that the will of the people should be the first priority for any political entity wishing to govern, and that that applies to taxes, illegal invasions, health care, terrorists, and all major issues of the day.

The fact is that Barack Obama views the Constitution as an impediment to his Marxist agenda.

He MUST be stopped.

written by John Lillpop

27 Feb


What do you mean by “NEA” and what do you mean by “politics?”

Therein lies the main difficulty with placing an indisputable figure on the cash amount. One man’s “politics” is another man’s “member communication.” Some think “political spending” is limited to donations to candidates. Others think it’s every dollar not directly related to bargaining contracts for local teachers.

I’ll do my best to work you through it – from the broadest interpretation to the narrowest and from national to local – with examples from the current election cycle. Fair warning, though: The results are nuanced and overlapping.

The first thing we have to do is to divide NEA into its three components – national, state and local. Though money is extracted from members’ paychecks in one lump sum, its division and destination depend on federal and state laws. NEA’s national headquarters expects to bring in $358 million in 2010-11.

Because unions cannot charge non-members for political spending, each year NEA must compute what portion of its spending is related to collective bargaining and services, and what portion is not. This percentage varies year-to-year, but by NEA’s own computation the non-chargeable portion is around 40 percent. So the broadest interpretation of NEA’s “political” spending would be $143 million annually.

State affiliates must perform a similar computation. Their non-chargeable percentage varies from state to state, but here in California it has traditionally been about 30 percent. The California Teachers Association’s budget is around $201 million, so its “political” spending would be about $60 million. If you were to perform similar calculations on all of NEA’s state affiliates, your grand total would run about $275 million.

NEA has more than 10,000 local affiliates, but relatively few spend money on politics. The ones that do tend to be large, like those in Los Angeles and San Diego. I couldn’t even estimate what a grand total would be, but I feel confident that all political spending, at all levels, under the broadest interpretation, would amount to something under $450 million annually.

But how that money is categorized is a different story entirely, because the lion’s share of it never ends up in the war chests of either political candidates or campaigns. Most of it is used to deliver a political message to members, and is therefore not subject to any campaign finance restrictions. So the question of whether a particular expense is political depends not only on the substance of the message, but to whom it is being disseminated. If NEA sends a mailer to a member calling for the election of Candidate X, or the passage of Measure Y, it is probably not a campaign expenditure. But if NEA sends the same mailer to me, it is.

What NEA spends to influence politicians and the public is reported in political finance public records. What it spends to influence its own members shows up only in its comprehensive financial reporting, gathered by the IRS and the Department of Labor. So when NEA says it plans to spend $40 million on the 2010 election, it isn’t entirely clear whether the union includes member communication in that total. Unfortunately, even when we disregard members the political spending picture can still be very cloudy.

First, there are lobbying expenditures. In the 2009-10 election cycle, NEA has so far spent about $4.4 million on lobbying. Naturally, NEA lobbies Congress and the executive branch. State affiliates lobby governors and state legislatures and report those expenditures individually. You can check each state’s top lobbyists and see where each NEA affiliate ranks, and then total it up. Let me know what you end up with.

Next are PAC contributions. These cause the most confusion because the union is fond of telling objecting members, “We don’t spend dues money on political candidates.” This is true. It is against the law to do so. But this is the narrowest interpretation of political spending – direct contributions to candidates. NEA must collect voluntary contributions for its PAC, and only from members. Most of the fundraising comes during annual events and assemblies, such as the NEA convention each July. It might surprise you to know that NEA’s $1.2 million in PAC spending in the 2010 cycle doesn’t rank in the top 20 Democratic PAC contributors (AFT is sixth).

So we move on to those political expenditures for which you can use dues money: independent expenditures, issue campaigns and ballot initiatives. According to the Federal Election Commission, NEA had more than $3.4 million in independent expenditures for the period from Sept. 1 to Oct. 14. But that’s far from all. As EIA readers well know, NEA collects $10 annually from each member for its Ballot Measures/Legislative Crises Fund. Money that isn’t disbursed carries over to the following year, often leaving NEA with $20 million to spend on national or state campaigns.

The union no longer issues a memo detailing those expenditures, but EIA has reported on the $3 million granted to Oklahoma and $500,000 to Washington. EIA has also learned that NEA will end up contributing almost $4.3 million to California’s ballot initiative campaigns. All these national contributions are in addition to whatever the state affiliate raises and spends on its own. It can get tricky keeping track of these, since an NEA donation could go directly to an initiative campaign, or it could go to the state affiliate, which then gives it to the initiative campaign. There is both a danger of missing a significant donation, or double-counting a single one.

The National Institute on Money in State Politics does yeoman work trying to keep it all straight, but it is limited by the relative transparency of each state’s laws. Nonetheless, it reports $28.8 million in political spending from NEA and its state affiliates during the 2009-10 election cycle (so far). Almost $12.8 million of that is being spent in California. And as we zoom in on California, we can see just how complex this all can get.

Let’s begin with the eight initiatives set for the November ballot. The state’s Fair Political Practices Commission reported on the large contributors in each campaign. The California Teachers Association contributed more than $100,000 to five of them (for what each measure would do, check this page):

– $304,240 to No on 22

– $200,000 to No on 23

– $6,449,894 to Yes on 24

– $1,204,240 to Yes on 25

– $254,240 to No on 26

But CTA’s political spending extends far beyond these initiatives. The union has a candidate PAC, an issues PAC, and two independent expenditure committees. Let’s take them in turn.

The candidate PAC is especially tricky, because CTA, like NEA, has to collect voluntary contributions for it. Except the definition of voluntary is slightly different in California from what it is at the federal level. When one becomes a CTA member, one must check a box refusing to donate to the PAC. Leave it blank, and you’ll be contributing $26.30 a year to the PAC for as long as you remain a member.

This year, the CTA candidate PAC sent relatively small amounts to candidates and Democratic Party committees, but directed $1.5 million to one independent expenditure committee and $5 million to the other. The first committee sent all of its funding to the state superintendent of public instruction campaign of Tom Torlakson. The second committee has so far spent $1.5 million on Torlakson, $1 million on Jerry Brown for governor, and $250,000 to the Alliance for a Better California, a coalition of public employee unions that has given the bulk of its money to Jerry Brown and the Yes on 24 and 25 campaigns.

This brings us, at last, to the issues PAC, which in addition to the ballot initiative spending noted above, also gave $2 million to the California Democratic Party

Written and researched by Mike Antonucci

The National Education Association has never supported on Republican candidate running for office at any level

27 Feb


MOST AMERICANS never heard of Saul Alinsky. Yet his Marxist ideology cast a shadow on the 2008 election. Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both worship at the altar of Alinskyism.

Wisconsin,Indiana,Ohio, the whole damn country is turning their backs on American HOW DID WE ARRIVE AT THIS POINT ,what got us here,why are so many Americans embracing SOCIALISM?

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both worship at the altar of Alinskyism.

In a 1971 book called Rules for Radicals, Alinsky scolded the Sixties Left for scaring off potential converts in Middle America. True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.

Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties.

In his native Chicago, Alinsky courted power wherever he found it. His alliance with prominent Catholic clerics, such as Bishop Bernard Sheil, gave him respectability. His friendship with crime bosses such as Frank Nitti – Al Capone’s second-in-command – gave Alinsky clout on the street.

He excelled at wooing wealthy funders. Start-up money for his Industrial Areas Foundation – a training school for radical organizers – came from department-store mogul Marshall Field III, Sears Roebuck heiress Adele Rosenwald Levy, and Gardiner Howland Shaw, an assistant secretary of state for Franklin Roosevelt.

Alinsky once boasted, “I feel confident that I could persuade a millionaire on a Friday to subsidize a revolution for Saturday out of which he would make a huge profit on Sunday even though he was certain to be executed on Monday.”

One Alinsky benefactor was Wall Street investment banker Eugene Meyer, who served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1930 to 1933. Meyer and his wife Agnes co-owned The Washington Post. They used their newspaper to promote Alinsky.

Agnes Meyer personally wrote a six-part series in 1945, praising Alinsky’s work in Chicago slums. Her series, called “The Orderly Revolution”, made Alinsky famous. President Truman ordered 100 reprints of it.

During the Sixties, Alinsky wielded tremendous power behind the scenes.

When President Johnson launched his War on Poverty in 1964, Alinsky allies infiltrated the program, steering federal money into Alinsky projects.

In 1966, Senator Robert Kennedy allied himself with union leader Cesar Chavez, an Alinsky disciple. Chavez had worked ten years for Alinsky, beginning in 1952. Kennedy soon drifted into Alinsky’s circle.

After race riots shook Rochester, New York, Alinsky descended on the city and began pressuring Eastman-Kodak to hire more blacks. Kennedy supported Alinsky’s shakedown. The two men had an “understanding”, Alinsky later wrote.

Alinsky’s crowning achievement was his recruitment of a young high school student named Hillary Rodham. She met Alinsky through a radical church group. Hillary wrote an analysis of Alinsky’s methods for her senior thesis at Wellesley College. They remained friends until Alinsky’s death in 1972.

Alinsky tried to hire Hillary as a community organizer, but she chose instead to attend Yale Law School. Nonetheless, Alinsky’s network continued guiding Hillary’s career.

Fresh out of law school at age 26, Hillary received a prestigious appointment to the House Judiciary Committee’s Watergate investigative team in 1974. She got the job on the recommendation of Peter and Marian Wright Edelman.

The Edelmans have been trusted mentors of Hillary since 1969. New Republic editor Martin Peretz called Marian “Hillary’s closest sister and ideological soulmate”. Marian Wright Edelman also happens to be an Alinskyite, having served on the Board of Trustees of Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation.

Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power.

Barack Obama is also an Alinskyite. Trained by Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation, Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky method. In 1985 he began a four-year stint as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project. Later, he worked with ACORN and its offshoot Project Vote, both creations of the Alinsky network.

Camouflage is key to Alinsky-style organizing. While trying to build coalitions of black churches in Chicago, Obama caught flak for not attending church himself. He became an instant churchgoer.

That Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama share an Alinskyite background tells us two things.

First, they are leftists, dedicated to overthrowing our Constitutional system.

Second, they will go to any length to conceal their radicalism from the public.

That is the Alinsky method. And that is today’s Democratic Party.

written by Richard Lawrence Poe

26 Feb

A number of sponsors for Saturday’s protests are noted at

How many unionized American workers consider the “American dream” to be a “future socialist society”?

On their website, the ISO states The International Socialist Organization has branches across the country. Our members are involved in helping to build a number of struggles: the movement to stop the war on Iraq, fights against racism and anti-immigrant scapegoating, the struggle for women’s rights like the right to choose abortion, opposing anti-gay bigotry, and standing up for workers’ rights. We are committed to building a left alternative to a world of war, racism and poverty.

A world free of exploitation–socialism–is not only possible but worth fighting for. The ISO stands

In the tradition of revolutionary socialists Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin and Leon Trotsky in the belief that workers themselves–the vast majority of the population–are the only force that can lead the fight to win a socialist society. Socialism can’t be brought about from above, but has to be won by workers themselves. …

We see our task as building an independent socialist organization with members organizing in our workplaces, our schools and our neighborhoods to bring socialist ideas to the struggles we are involved in today, and the vision of a socialist world in the future.

In addition to working with liberal activists and national labor unions behind the scenes, the ISO is just one of many socialist/Marxist/communist groups organizing their members to support Van Jones’ new “American dream” initiative.

The Daily Caller noted Friday that a number of radical groups — including the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, the Communist Party USA, Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party and the Democratic Socialists of America — are taking up the labor unions’ talking points and encouraging Egypt-like unrest in the United States.

The Socialist Workers Party has labeled Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker “an enemy of the people.”

“Egypt, whose revolution has been a constant source of inspiration here, reflected in signs and chants — and Walker’s new nickname, Gov. Mubarak,” an ISO article reads. In addition, the article labels the current budget debates in Wisconsin as “class war” and as an affront to “the standard of living of working people.”

“Using the deficit as a scare tactic, the right-wing corporate Republicans are on a fast track to defeat every initiative of the Obama administration, to destroy unions and public services at the federal, state and municipal level, and at the same time protect tax breaks for the richest few,” writes Joelle Fishman, chair of the Communist Party USA’s Political Action Commission. A “broad alliance of forces for social change (labor, racially oppressed, women, youth)” need to step forward to re-frame the nation’s political debate for the 2012 elections, she insists.

While many skeptics claim these radical leftist groups may agree with the unions on a number of issues, the fact that these groups are actually working in conjunction with unions to orchestrate the ongoing protests says a lot about American unions’ modern-day political orientation — far to the left and antithetical to the real American dream


What about Mr and Mrs America you the majority, you 70 plus percent, is this the tipping point, is this when we all take to the streets, or do we wait until these bastards completely destroy America.

Ladies and Gentlemen these people the Teacher Union the AFL-CIO, and all the other socialist organizations are telling you and me we that voted across the nation to put in place individuals that more represent mainstream America, we voted to take away power from the Socialist left, the Socialist Democrats, the party of Pelosi,Reid,Obama, we knew as a nation that the Socialist Democrat party was destroying our country.

But, the election of Nov 2010 as far as the left is concerned did not take place, they do NO recognize the new government, they do not recognize the constitution, they do not recognize our laws, they are telling us all to SHUT THE HELL UP THEY ARE STILL IN CHARGE

26 Feb


The Democratic National Committee wanted to honor Nancy Pelosi Thursday — but its praise wasn’t good enough for the House minority leader.

When the DNC’s Resolutions Committee brought up a resolution commemorating Pelosi’s years as speaker of the House, Pelosi’s daughter sought to alter the proposal at her mother’s behest, adding some of the accomplishments that the elder Pelosi felt the committee had overlooked.

“I have some friendly amendments,” said Christine Pelosi, a political strategist, at the committee’s session during the DNC Winter Meeting at the Marriott Wardman Park hotel Thursday afternoon. She is a member of the committee.

“You think I’m kidding,” Christine Pelosi added, to surprised laughter from the room. The proposed changes, she indicated, came out of a discussion with her mother.

First, Pelosi wanted to add a mention of her fight against HIV and AIDS, because it was “why she went to Congress.” Then, she wanted to insert a paragraph on her “accomplishments for equality,” mentioning the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” in December.

“Finally, since, as she said, ‘I’m not going anywhere,’ she wanted to add, in the final ‘whereas’ clause, ‘…and will continue the fight for America’s working families,'” Christine Pelosi said.

The committee applauded that point, and approved the amended resolution on a voice vote.

The Pelosi resolution, submitted by a roster of Democratic luminaries headed by DNC Chairman Tim Kaine, was one of dozens of ceremonial acts considered by the committee, on such topics as praising President Obama’s State of the Union address, honoring the victims of January’s Tucson shootings and memorializing Elizabeth Edwards. Most of the resolutions were approved without changes.

Comments by Gary Gatehouse,
The Insane one (Pelosi) has to be from another planet,this person is sickening, she needs to retire to her Northern California vineyards!


25 Feb

Alaska-North Dakota-Texas-Gulf States

Drill now-start drilling for Oil -Texas Tea-Black Gold

Americas can not stand by and watch our country our economy sink deeper into recession, with the situation in the Middle East and the cost of oil world wide increasing by the HOUR, we need to start drilling, we need to get going.

To hell with the environmentalist, the hell with Obama and the limp wristed left, I am pleading with United States oild producing states to start drilling, get your drilling machines up and running, start producing oil. I know it will be some time before we actually realize oil from the fields and states I mentioned but we have to start NOW.

Obama and the Federal government can go straight to hell, we are talking about Americans, we are talking about families, small business,we must get the Oil flowing as soon as possible!

Obama,Environmentalist,Democrats,Tree huggers,Green movement, United Nations-you have hamstrung America long enough, it is time for Patriots in oil producing states to stand up,call your congressmen,call your senators, tell them “the Hell with Obama we want our state to start DRILLING —




25 Feb




Who is behind behind Wisconsin protests?


One of the main groups organizing the Wisconsin union protests is a spinoff from an activist academy modeled after Marxist community organizer Saul Alinsky and described as teaching tactics of direct action, confrontation and intimidation.

President Obama once funded that academy – the radical Midwest Academy. He has been closely tied to the group’s founder, socialist activist Heather Booth.

Obama also is closely tied to scores of other radicals behind the Wisconsin opposition protesting Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal for most state workers to pay 12 percent of their health care premiums and 5.8 percent of their salary toward their own pensions.

Walker’s proposal reportedly would save $300 million in the next two years for a state that faces a financial crisis amid a $3.6 billion deficit..

A slew of radical groups and unions have been organizing the protests against Walker’s proposal as well as counter protests to a recent tea party rally in support of the governor’s plan.

Obama’s own political machine has aided in organizing protests in Wisconsin

Counter protests were led in part by radical groups like Veterans for Peace, Freedom Road Socialist Organization, and the Workers World Party.

One of the main organizers of the recent Wisconsin protests is a group called Moving Wisconsin Forward. An associated group, Citizen Action of Wisconsin, is part of the Moving Wisconsin Forward movement.

Robert Kraig, executive director of Citizen Action of Wisconsin, has been widely quoted in the media as a main protest organizer and opposition leader.

Citizen Action of Wisconsin, part of a larger national Citizen Action chain, sits in a coalition with Americans for Financial Reform, which is led by Midwest founder Booth.

Indeed, Citizen Action is a spinoff of Midwest Academy.

‘Redistribution of wealth and power’

Midwest founder Booth has stated building a ”progressive majority” would help for ”a fair distribution of wealth and power and opportunity.”

Booth founded Midwest in the 1970s with her husband, Paul Booth, a founder and the former national secretary of Students for a Democratic Society, the radical 1960s anti-war movement from which William Ayers’ domestic Weather Underground terrorist organization splintered.

The Woods Fund, a nonprofit on which Obama served as paid director from 1999 to December 2002, provided capital to the Midwest Academy. WND was first to report Obama sat on the Woods Fund board alongside Ayers.

In 1999, Booth’s Midwest Academy received $75,000 from the Woods Fund. In 2002, with Obama still serving on the Woods Fund, Midwest received another $23,500 for its Young Organizers Development Program.

Midwest describes itself as “one of the nation’s oldest and best-known schools for community organizations, citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social change.”

It later morphed into a national organizing institute for an emerging network of organizations known as Citizen Action.

Discover the Networks describes Midwest as “teach[ing] tactics of direct action, confrontation, and intimidation.”

Camp Obama

WND was first to report Jackie Kendall, executive director of the Midwest Academy, was on the team that developed and delivered the first Camp Obama training for volunteers aiding Obama’s campaign through the 2008 Iowa Caucuses.

Camp Obama was a two-to-four day intensive course run in conjunction with Obama’s campaign aimed at training volunteers to become activists to help Obama win the presidential election.

Earlier this week, Obama’s Organizing for America sent out a mass e-mail it will train a new team of summer organizers.

“The Summer Organizing Fellowship is a grassroots program that aims to put boots on the ground and help foster a new generation of leaders – not just to help win elections, but to strengthen our democracy in communities across the country,” the blast e-mail said.

Aside from helping to fund Midwest, Obama has been tied to Booth in other ways. In August 1998, Obama participated in a panel discussion following the opening performance in Chicago of the play “The Love Song of Saul Alinsky,” a work described by the Chicago Sun-Times as “bringing to life one of America’s greatest community organizers.”

Obama participated in the discussion alongside other Alinskyites, including Booth, political analyst Aaron Freeman, Don Turner of the Chicago Federation of Labor and Northwestern University history professor Charles Paine.

“Alinsky had so much fire burning within,” stated local actor Gary Houston, who portrayed Alinsky in the play. “There was a lot of complexity to him. Yet he was a really cool character.”

Booth herself is a notorious radical community activist and self-described dedicated disciple of Alinsky, of whom she says: “Alinsky is to community-organizing as Freud is to psychoanalysis.”

Booth’s vision of uniting various left-leaning organizations and factions also has been the subject of her two books, “Toward a Radical Movement and Citizen Action” and “The New American Populism.”

Other radicals behind Wisconsin rallies

The keynote speaker at last week’s “Moving Wisconsin Forward” rally was John Nichols, who identifies himself as a “progressive” writer.

Nichols co-authored four books and a number of major articles with Marxist activist Robert W. McChesney, founder of the George Soros-funded Free Press.

McChesney has called for the dismantlement “brick-by-brick” of the U.S. capitalist system, with America being rebuilt as a socialist society.

Free Press openly lobbies for move government control of the news media and Internet. It has been closely tied to the Obama administration.

As WND first reported Ben Scott, the State Department’s recently appointed policy adviser for innovation, was policy director at Free Press. Scott authored several articles with McChesney.

The board of Free Press has included a slew of radicals, such as Obama’s former “green jobs” czar Van Jones, who resigned after it was exposed he founded a communist organization.

Obama’s “Internet czar,” Susan P. Crawford, spoke at a Free Press’s May 14, 2009, “Changing Media” summit in Washington, D.C.

Crawford’s pet project, OneWebNow, lists as “participating organizations” Free Press and the controversial Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN.

Crawford and Kevin Werbach, who co-directed the Obama transition team’s Federal Communications Commission Review team, are advisory board members at Public Knowledge, a George Soros-funded public interest group.

In February 2009 McChesney wrote in a column, “In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick-by-brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.”

Communists into union protest organizer

Another main Wisconsin protest organizer has been the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union.

In November , Obama gave the presidential Medal of Freedom – the nation’s highest civilian honor – to John Sweeney, the AFL-CIO’s president emeritus who retired last year.

Sweeney is a socialist activist and a card-carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America, or DSA, the principal American affiliate of the Socialist International. The DSA has demonstrated a close relationship with Obama over the years.

Sweeney is a member of the DSA’s Boston chapter. He served as president of AFL-CIO from 1995 until his retirement last September.

He previously served for four terms as president of the controversial Service Employees International Union, or SEIU. During his administration, Sweeney famously aligned the SEIU with ACORN and other leftist groups.

Activist and author Joel Kotkin, a fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute, observed how Sweeney brought communists into his union leadership.

“The public-sector unions have pushed the entire labor movement to the left,” he said. “The [SEIU] has embraced organizations with a New Left origin, such as ACORN and Cleveland’s Nine to Five, and has even set up its own gay and lesbian caucus. … The rise of these unions led to the elevation of SEIU’s boss, John Sweeney, to head of the labor federation.

“No George Meaney-style bread-and-butter unionist, Sweeney is an advocate of European-style democratic socialism,” said Kotkin. “He has opened the AFL-CIO to participation by delegates openly linked to the Communist Party, which enthusiastically backed his ascent. The U.S. Communist Party [CPUSA] says it is now ‘in complete accord’ with the AFL-CIO’s program. ‘The radical shift in both leadership and policy is a very positive, even historic change,’ wrote CPUSA National Chairman Gus Hall in 1996 after the AFL-CIO convention.”

Upon assuming the office of the AFL-CIO in 1995, Sweeney was quick to rescind one of the union’s founding rules that banned Communist Party members and loyalists from leadership positions within the federation and its unions. Sweeney welcomed Communist Party delegates to positions of power in his federation.

Linda Chavez and Daniel Gray, in their book “Betrayal: How union bosses shake down their bosses and corporate America,” state Sweeney placed a number of DSA allies in his union office.

The DSA’s official website carries an endorsement from Sweeney: “I’m proud to a member of a movement for change that puts the cause of working people at the heart of the matter.”

written by:By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

Patriots, The Democrat party is so intertwined with Socialist/Marxist,Communist organizations it is mind boggling, if you go to the Communist Party USA web site you will find comments about Wisconsin protest, you will also find an Organization Democracy For America-sounds harmless right, well it’s not it is a Communist front organization that is set up to raise money,organize and recruit.

Another example,Young Communist League, this communist organization recruits in our schools,established communist clubs, it has a project going on right called “The Young Communist League, USA The students of the Red School-Bus Tour.

Patriots these are just two examples of hundreds if not thousands of left wing/socialist/Marxist/communist organizations that all back the Democrat Party, and Obama Hussein, all target the same agenda, the overthrow of America, and establishing a Socialist/Communist state.

Patriots, if this information does not scare the hell out of you I guess nothing will!!!


These organizations have been active for decades in our country


All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP)

Alliance Marxist-Leninist (North America)

American Indian Movement – Grand Governing Council (AIM-GGC)

American Indian Movement – International Federation of Autonomous Chapters (AIM-IFAC)

Barrio Union (Unión del Barrio)

Black Radical Congress (BRC)

Committee for a Unified Independent Party (CUIP)

Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS)

Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA)

Communist Voice Organization

Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)

For a Better World

Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Fight Back] (FRSO)

Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Freedom Road] (FRSO)

Freedom Socialist Party (FSP)

Green Party of the United States, mirror page, other page

Heatwave Communist-Anarchist Federation (Heatwave CAF)

Independent Progressive Politics Network (IPPN)

Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)

International Socialist Organization (ISO)

Internationalist Group

Internationalist Notes, other page, Los Angeles Workers Voice

Labor Party (LP)

Labor Standard, mirror page

Labor’s Militant Voice, mirror page

League for the Revolutionary Party (LRP)

League of Revolutionaries for a New America (LRNA)

Left Green Network

Left Party

Left Turn

Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM)

National Black United Front (NBUF)

New Democracy

New Liberty Party

New Party

New Union Party

News & Letters Committees

Organizing Committee for the Program of Permanent Revolution

Peace and Freedom Party (PFP), periodical Partisan Prairie Fire Organizing Committee (PFOC)

Progressive Labor Party (PLP), other page

Progressive ProAction Party

Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) periodical Revolutionary Worker

Revolutionary Workers League (RWL)

Social Democrats USA (SDUSA)

Socialist Action

Socialist Alternative

Socialist Equality Party (SEP)

Socialist Labor Party (SLP)

Socialist Organizer

Socialist Party USA (SPUSA)

Socialist Workers Organization (SWO) periodical Socialist Viewpoint

Socialist Workers’ Party (SWP) periodical Militant Solidarity, mirror page

The Greens/Green Party USA, mirror page

United People’s Party (La Raza Unida Party)

United States Pacifist Party (USPP)

Unity Organizing Committee (UOC) unofficial page

US Marxist-Leninist Organization (USMLO) periodical Voice of Revolution

Vermont Progressive Party

Workers Democracy Network

Workers International League (WIL), youth organization

Workers Party U.S.A.

Workers Solidarity Alliance (WSA)

Workers World Party (WWP)

Working Families Party (WFP)

World Socialist Party of the United States (WSP

24 Feb

Elderly ‘Teabaggers’ Not Dying ‘Fast Enough’ Laments Libtalker Mike Papantonio

Looks like yet another left-winger missed the meme on the New Civility.

Attorney and “Ring of Fire” radio show co-host Mike Papantonio, guest-hosting on Ed Schultz’s radio program yesterday, revealed two things — he hates old people and wants tea party retirees to hurry up and die.

Don’t take my word for it, listen to Papantonio’s remarks after a caller said he saw “one of these baggers” push a woman during dueling protests over the weekend in Madison, Wisc. (audio here)-

CALLER: And he pushed the woman and, you know, I don’t know what caused that or whatever but, two guys, you know, got on him and just grabbed him and took him out of the way and told him to go back to your area, you know, they didn’t …

PAPANTONIO: Go back to the old folks’ home.

CALLER: Well, exactly, you know.

PAPANTONIO: That’s what you have here. Look, here, let’s not miss this, this is a generational war.

You have students at universities that are showing up, you have these senile old boneheads that are ol-, I mean, check, look at the pictures, I don’t even have to say, look at the pictures, Rich. Run any film, who is there for the teabaggers?!

The people that are being paid for by the Koch brothers are there for the teabaggers, but take a look at the age discrepancy. They’ve used our school system. They’ve used our infrastructure. So the American Majority is busing these old feeble nuts to there and so they’re called, do you realize there’s, there’s a, calling our teachers pigs.

Calling our teachers pigs and the teachers take it and that’s OK, that’s what they oughta do because you know what? The more light you shine on these senile, look, you know (laughs) truthfully, they’re the last days of their lives, they really are, these old, fuddie-duddies or curmudgeons are at the last days of the lives and you have students there that are in the protest that say, well look, we want to have the same thing you have.

We would like to have infrastructure. We’d like to be able to educate our children. We’d like the same quality of life that we gave you. And unfortunately, you know, I guess the bad news is they’re not moving through fast enough because we can keep people alive a long time with good medication. But that’s who you have showing up as teabaggers.

Followed by Papantonio’s guest, Daily Beast reporter Rick Outzen, saying with a laugh, “Just a few funerals away from a good government.”

So much for the elderly as a respected constituency to liberals. More like elders who share their politics

Gary Gatehouse Comments

This left wing limp wristed so called talk show host Mike Papatonio, is in my own opinion a perfect illustration of what the National Education Association and our Socialist Indoctrination Clinics (Public Schools) have succeeded in doing,that being establishing socialism,disrespect,ignorance and hate into the minds of of those (not all) who attended Socialist indoctrination Clinics.

He is a true socialist,speaking in socialist tongues,using socialist buzz words, using deogatory remarks and terms to describe the “Tea Party Movement” (teabaggers is homosexual reference to a particular disgusting act homosexuals perform)

He has no respect for older individuals, he is a whiner,a complainer, but most of all he is a DAMN SOCIALIST!!!

Who has probably never done a damn thing to help his country,serve his country, in my opinion he is a sorry excuse for an American Citizen!