Saturday, June 27, 2009


June 27, 2009 - "BORN IN THE USA? Farah's $10,000 birth certificate challengeEditor encourages readers to help him up the ante"

WND Editor and chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah is offering a $10,000 reward to anyone who can prove he or she was present at the birth of Barack Obama – and he's asking Americans to donate to the cause in hopes of raising the bounty to an irresistible amount.

"Barack Obama claims to have been born in Honolulu Aug. 4, 1961," explains Farah. "His entire constitutional claim to the presidency rests on this premise. Yet, he refuses to release a copy of his long-form birth certificate – the only document that could possibly corroborate his claim.

Therefore, in the interest of truth, justice and the Constitution, I am making the extraordinary offer to entice someone to come forward with the facts of his birth – whether it took place in Hawaii or elsewhere."

Obama has steadfastly refused to release evidence of that Hawaiian birth – a valid, long-form birth certificate that would show details of the birth, such as the hospital and the attending physician. Because the certification of live birth" he released to select news organization was at least sometimes issued for foreign births on the basis of an affidavit by one parent, it proves nothing as far as constitutional eligibility – and, in fact, raises suspicions about a foreign birth.

To date, no hospital in Hawaii has come forward to claim this historic birth.

No doctor or nurse has come forward to say they were present for that historic birth.

No witness of any kind has come forward to say they have first-hand knowledge or involvement in that historic birth – at least in Hawaii.

Obama's paternal grandmother, Sarah Obama, claims to have been present for the birth in Mombassa, Kenya.

"It is clear now that Obama will never willingly release his birth certificate," said Farah. "It's time for Americans who still value the Constitution to step up and force the issue. It's time for us to learn the truth of where Obama was born. We may find he was born in Hawaii. We may find he was born elsewhere. I have no pre-conceived ideas. But this issue has haunted the American people long enough. It's time for some truth and transparency."

To collect the reward, the subject must:

1. Agree to an interview with WND journalists;
2. Provide persuasive evidence, such as pictures, documents or verifiable details;
3. Agree to a polygraph test.

"I think it's disgraceful that Americans should be forced to go to such lengths by the intransigence of public officials toward accountability," said Farah. "But that is what it has come to in 2009 with our current president. He prefers to dodge and weave, while his apologists in government and media viciously attack citizens for attempting to see that the Constitution is observed."

Farah launched a petition drive earlier this year that has accumulated nearly 400,000 signatures demanding that all controlling legal authorities pursue proof of Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." That petition campaign is still on-going.

More recently, he launched a billboard campaign raising the simple question, "Where's the birth certificate?" That campaign has raised $85,000 so far. Farah says there are plenty of billboards available, despite a ban on the campaign by several major outdoor advertising companies. But donations have dried up because of an apparent misperception among readers that billboards are not available due to the bans imposed by a few companies.

In addition, Farah points out those interested in backing his latest campaign can also raise visibility for the issue by purchasing magnetic bumper stickers, tea party rally signs and yard signs that raise the same simple question, "Where's the birth certificate?"

All funds not used specifically for a reward will go toward the purchase of more billboard space. If you would like to raise the reward, WND is accepting contributions in any amount. Donations can be made online, by phone and credit card or checks can be mailed to:

WNDPO Box 1627Medford, Or 97501

Checks should be clearly marked as to purpose.

If you would like to arrange a credit card contribution by phone, call 1.800.4WND.COM

Here is an actual Hawaiian birth certificate from 1963 (the same era as Obama's birth), which while redacted includes detailed information documenting a birth, including the name of the birth hospital and the attending physician.

Here is the "Certification of Live Birth" presented by Obama:

Friday, June 26, 2009

We Support the Iran Protesters

June 26, 2009 - "We Support the Iran Protesters" By Joseph Parish

Currently as Americans we appreciate and know the true value of being able to protest. Notice my friends that I said currently as considering the present regime which is occupying the White House at this time that freedom experienced by all Americans may unexpectedly come to an abrupt halt in the not so distant future. This in that case would place us in a similar situation as the Iranian students.

As you are presently reading this article these students that are half way around the world are being subjected to various forms of inhuman treatment and in many cases they are out and out being killed, and why? They are being abused simply because they wanted an unhampered, free election and not one which is preset by the Iranian Supreme leader. They only desired the same courtesies as we ourselves would expect, an election that supports the premise of one person, one vote.

We as a freedom loving people must express our views to our leaders and request that they not recognize the current government of Iran. Here at Delmarva Survival Training we have many people from various locations around the world that visit our web site. In that respect, I thank them and hope that they have learned some useful and valued information that may assist them in their current predicament. We are certainly behind you 100 percent. In fact, I would like to extend an invitation to the student leaders that in the event that they need some additional technical type information, please let me know and I will try as I may to help you out. I realize that your funds are limited and your logistics are minor at best but feel free to ask for the information.

In the meantime I urge all my visitors to help how they can in this endeavor. If you are residing near an Iranian embassy please organize a band of peaceful protesters and express your opposition towards the tricksters who are currently in office and the way that the Iranian government is treating the students. Secondly, request that your country, where ever it may be, officially not recognize the Iranian leaders at this time. During the commission of any sort of coup around the world those leaders which have organized and initiated the take over always have one major idea in mind. That concept is to be recognized as the official leader of the country by all the foreign nations. Hopefully we can prevent this from occurring. In conclusion I wish the Iranian protesters and students all the luck in the world and for the worlds sake I hope they success.

Copyright 2009 Joseph Parish

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Why Obama Scares Me, Too

June 23 - "Why Obama Scares Me, Too" by Chuck Norris

The New York Times passed on the opportunity to publish a great op-ed letter to President Barack Obama from Lou Pritchett, a former vice president of Procter & Gamble. Pritchett worked for that company for 36 years, until his retirement in 1989.

Confirmed by the Internet watchdog Snopes, here's a sample of what Pritchett wrote:

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. …

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll. …

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves. …

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals. …

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Reillys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

Thank you, Mr. Pritchett, for your love for America, honesty and willingness to risk your reputation by speaking up to this administration.

Now let me add a few of my own fears to yours:

President Obama:

You scare me because so many amazing corporate and American leaders, such as Lou Pritchett, are saying you scare them.

You scare me because after you initiate more government borrowing and bailouts than all presidents combined, you then require Congress to follow a system that is "pay-as-you-go."

You scare me because you really do believe that going into massive amounts of debt can remedy our economy in the long run.

You scare me because your actions don't reflect the federal governmental constraints and fiscally prudent principles of our Founding Fathers and Constitution.

You scare me because you repeatedly still play the blame game with the Bush administration but never blame the Clinton administration, even though it was responsible for the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac subprime fiasco via the proliferation of loans to unqualified borrowers.

You scare me because you buy and run the banking, automobile and (soon) health industries with taxpayers' money but refuse to call it socialism.

You scare me because you claim to be a fighter for minorities and the promises of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness yet do not defend the unborn. What greater minority is there than those in the womb, against whom you already have enacted more pro-abortion laws than anyone since the Roe v. Wade decision?

You scare me because you promise to defend the U.S. against all potential enemies yet pacify those harboring terrorists, fight for the rights of combative detainees, and enable the enemies of Israel.

You scare me because you deny America's Judeo-Christian heritage before other countries of the world, espousing "the promise of a secular nation" during an age in which religious revisionism is on the rise. (Thank God for Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., and others like him, who even now are trying to preserve America's religious history by proposing the passage of a bill that would create "America's Spiritual Heritage Week." Call or write your representative today to support it.)

You scare me because your media team (including the mainstream media) seeks to label as radical, quarantine socially or in some way penalize any opposing conservative voices (such as conservative talk show hosts, news agencies, columnists and actors, such as Jon Voight).

You scare me because your media team does not address or diminish in any way your deification before the world, epitomized by the editor of Newsweek who stated this past week on Chris Matthews' MSNBC show: "In a way, Obama's standing above the country, above the world. He's sort of God." (How much scarier can it get than representative statements like that in a republic that once stood for a balance among political powers and a government "by the people, for the people"?)


Chuck Norris

Monday, June 22, 2009

The Obamacare Horror Story You Won't Hear

June 22, 2009 - "The Obamacare Horror Story You Won't Hear" by Michelle Malkin

The White House, Democrats and MoveOn liberals are spreading health care sob stories to sell a government takeover. But there's one health care policy nightmare you won't hear the Obamas hyping. It's a tale of poor minority patient-dumping in Chicago -- with first lady Michelle Obama's fingerprints all over it.

Both Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Democratic Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois have raised red flags about the outsourcing program run by the University of Chicago Medical Center. The hospital has nonprofit status and receives lucrative tax breaks in exchange for providing charity care.

Yet, in fiscal year 2007, when Mrs. Obama was employed there, it spent a measly $10 million on charity care for the poor -- 1.3 percent of its total hospital expenses, according to an analysis performed for The Washington Post by the nonpartisan Center for Tax and Budget Accountability.

The figure is below the 2.1 percent average for nonprofit hospitals in surrounding Cook County.

Rep. Rush called for a House investigation last week in response to months of patient-dumping complaints, noting: "Congress has a duty to expend its power to mitigate and prevent this despicable practice from continuing in centers that receive federal funds."

Don't expect the president to support a probe. While a top executive at the hospital, Mrs. Obama helped engineer the plan to offload low-income patients with non-urgent health needs. Under the Orwellian banner of an "Urban Health Initiative," Mrs. Obama sold the scheme to outsource low-income care to other facilities as a way to "dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents."

In truth, it was old-fashioned cost-cutting and favor-trading repackaged as minority aid. Clearing out the poor freed up room for insured (i.e., more lucrative) patients. If a Republican had proposed the very same program and recruited black civic leaders to front it, Michelle Obama and her grievance-mongering friends would be screaming "RAAAAAAAAACISM!" at the top of their lungs.

Joe Stephens of The Washington Post wrote, "To ensure community support, Michelle Obama and others in late 2006 recommended that the hospital hire the firm of David Axelrod, who a few months later became the chief strategist for Barack Obama's presidential campaign. Axelrod's firm (ASK Public Strategies) recommended an aggressive promotional effort modeled on a political campaign -- appoint a campaign manager, conduct focus groups, target messages to specific constituencies, then recruit religious leaders and other third-party 'validators.' They, in turn, would write and submit opinion pieces to Chicago publications."

Some health care experts saw through Mrs. Obama and PR man Axelrod -- yes, the same Axelrod who is now President Obama's senior adviser. But the University of Chicago Medical Center hired ASK Public Strategies to promote Mrs. Obama's initiative. Axelrod had the blessing of Chicago political guru Valerie Jarrett -- now a White House senior adviser.

Axelrod's great contribution: re-branding! His firm recommended renaming the initiative after "internal and external respondents expressed the opinion that the word 'urban' is code for 'black' or 'black and poor.'...Based on the research, consideration should be given to re-branding the initiative." Axelrod and the Obama campaign refused to disclose how much his firm received for its genius re-branding services.

In February 2009, outrage in the Obamas' community exploded upon learning that a young boy covered by Medicaid had been turned away from the University of Chicago Medical Center. Dontae Adams' mother, Angela, had sought emergency treatment for him after a pit bull tore off his upper lip. Mrs. Obama's hospital gave the boy a tetanus shot, antibiotics and Tylenol, and shoved him out the door. The mother and son took an hour-long bus ride to another hospital for surgery.

I'll guarantee you this: You'll never see the Adams family featured at an Obama policy summit or seated next to the first lady at a joint session of Congress to illustrate the failures of the health care system.

Following the Adams incident, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) blasted Mrs. Obama and Axelrod's grand plan. The group released a statement expressing "grave concerns that the University of Chicago's policy toward emergency patients is dangerously close to 'patient dumping,' a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA)" -- signed by President Reagan, by the way -- "and reflected an effort to 'cherry pick' wealthy patients over poor."

Rewarding political cronies at the expense of the poor while posing as guardians of the downtrodden? Welcome to Obamacare.

Original at:

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Obama Job Approval Slips to 58% for First Time

June 21, 2009 "Obama Job Approval Slips to 58% for First Time - Lowest reading for Obama thus far in Gallup Poll Daily tracking" by Lydia Saad

President Barack Obama's job approval rating fell to 58% in Gallup Poll Daily tracking from June 16-18 -- a new low for Obama in Gallup tracking, although not dissimilar to the 59% he has received on four other occasions.

Thirty-three percent of Americans now disapprove of the job Obama is doing as president, just one point shy of his record-high 34% disapproval score from early June.

Since Obama took office in January, his approval rating in Gallup tracking has averaged 63%, and most of his three-day ratings have registered above 60%. Approval of Obama did fall to 59% in individual readings in February, March, April, and early June; however, in each case, the rating lasted only a day before rebounding to at least 60%.

The latest decline in Obama's approval score, to 58%, results from a drop in approval among political independents as well as among Republicans. Democrats remain as highly supportive of the president as ever.

Obama's approval rating was 60% from June 13-15, at which time 88% of Democrats, 60% of independents, and 25% of Republicans approved of the job he was doing. In the June 16-18 polling, Democrats' approval of him stands at 92% -- up slightly -- whereas approval is down among both independents (by seven points) and Republicans (by four points).

Bottom Line

Since February, Obama's weekly approval ratings from Republicans have consistently averaged close to 30% and from independents, close to 60%. With Republican approval now down to 21% and independent approval down to 53%, Obama's overall job approval has dipped to a new low for his presidency.

It is not clear what's behind the decline, but two issues have received considerable play in the news this week, and could be contributing factors. On Monday, the president received bad news on healthcare reform from the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimate of the cost of one reform plan caused sticker shock on Capitol Hill. This may be feeding into public concerns about the administration's deficit spending. At the same time, the disputed Iranian presidential election has been front-page news. Obama's cautious response has sparked sharp criticism from Republican Sen. John McCain and many on the political right who are eager for him to declare the election a "fraud," and to show more solidarity with the Iranian protestors.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,504 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted June 16-18, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

Thursday, June 18, 2009

ABC Turns Programming over to Obama

June 18, 2009 - "ABC Turns Programming over to Obama; News to be anchored from inside White House"

On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda:

ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.

The Director of Communications at the White House Office of Health Reform is Linda Douglass, who worked as a reporter for ABC News from 1998-2006.

Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff

ABCNEWS Senior Vice President Kerry Smith on Tuesday responded to the RNC complaint, saying it contained 'false premises':

"ABCNEWS prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers -- of all political persuasions -- even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum. ABCNEWS is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue.

"ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience."

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

The Emergence of President Obama's Muslim Roots

June 16, 2009 - "The Emergence of President Obama's Muslim Roots" by Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller.

The other day we heard a comment from a White House aide that never would have been uttered during the primaries or general election campaign.

During a conference call in preparation for President Obama's trip to Cairo, Egypt, where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said "the President himself experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before he's been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim Americans (are) a key part of Illinois and Chicago."

Given widespread unease and prejudice against Muslims among Americans, especially in the wake of 9/11, the Obama campaign was perhaps understandably very sensitive during the primaries and general election to downplay the candidate's Muslim roots.

The candidate was even offended when referred to by his initials "BHO," because he considered the use of his middle name, "Hussein," an attempt to frighten voters.

With insane rumors suggesting he was some sort of Muslim Manchurian candidate, then-Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and his campaign did everything they could to emphasize his Christianity and de-emphasize the fact that his father, Barack Obama Sr., was born Muslim.

The candidate's comment at a Boca Raton, Florida, town hall meeting on May 22, 2008, was typical: "My father was basically agnostic, as far as I can tell, and I didn't know him," he said.

In September 2008, candidate Obama told a Pennsylvania crowd, "I know that I'm not your typical presidential candidate and I just want to be honest with you. I know that the temptation is to say, 'You know what? The guy hasn't been there that long in Washington. You know, he's got a funny name. You know, we're not sure about him.' And that's what the Republicans when they say this isn't about issues, it's about personalities, what they're really saying is, 'We're going to try to scare people about Barack. So we're going to say that, you know, maybe he's got Muslim connections.'...Just making stuff up."

Back then, the campaign's "Fight the Smears" website addressed the candidate's faith without mentioning his father's religion:

"Barack Obama is a committed Christian. He was sworn into the Senate on his family Bible. He has regularly attended church with his wife and daughters for years. But shameful, shadowy attackers have been lying about Barack’s religion, claiming he is a Muslim instead of a committed Christian. When people fabricate stories about someone’s faith to denigrate them politically, that’s an attack on people of all faiths. Make sure everyone you know is aware of this deception."

The website also provided quotes from the Boston Globe and Newsweek mentioning his father's roots.

Since the election, however, with the threat of the rumors at least somewhat abated, the White House has been increasingly forthcoming about the president's roots. Especially when reaching out to the Muslim world.

In his April 6 address to the Turkish Parliament, President Obama referenced how many "Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim majority country. I know, because I am one of them."

Obama says Iran's energy concerns legitimate

June 16, 2009 - "Obama says Iran's energy concerns legitimate" By Nancy Zuckerbrod. President Barack Obama reiterated that Iran may have some right to nuclear energy _ provided it takes steps to prove its aspirations are peaceful.

In a BBC interview broadcast Tuesday, Obama also restated plans to pursue direct diplomacy with Tehran to encourage it to set aside any ambitions for nuclear weapons it might harbor.

Iran has insisted its nuclear program is aimed at generating electricity. But the U.S. and other Western governments accuse Tehran of seeking atomic weapons.

"Without going into specifics, what I do believe is that Iran has legitimate energy concerns, legitimate aspirations. On the other hand, the international community has a very real interest in preventing a nuclear arms race in the region," Obama said.

The comments echo remarks Obama made in Prague last month in which he said his administration would "support Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy with rigorous inspections" if Iran proves it is no longer a nuclear threat.

Iranian state television described the news as Obama recognizing the "rights of the Iranian nation," a phrase typically used to refer to Iran's nuclear program.

The president has indicated a willingness to seek deeper international sanctions against Tehran if it does not respond positively to U.S. attempts to open negotiations on its nuclear program.

Obama has said Tehran has until the end of the year to show it wants to engage.

"Although I don't want to put artificial time tables on that process, we do want to make sure that, by the end of this year, we've actually seen a serious process move forward. And I think that we can measure whether or not the Iranians are serious," Obama said.

Obama's interview offered a preview of a speech he is to deliver in Egypt this week, saying he hoped the address would warm relations between Americans and Muslims abroad.

"What we want to do is open a dialogue," Obama told the BBC. "You know, there are misapprehensions about the West, on the part of the Muslim world. And, obviously, there are some big misapprehensions about the Muslim world when it comes to those of us in the West."
Obama leaves Tuesday evening on a trip to Egypt and Saudi Arabia aimed at reaching out to the world's 1.5 billion Muslims. He is due to make his speech in Cairo on Thursday.

Obama sounded an optimistic note about making progress toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, although he offered no new ideas for how he might try to secure a freeze on new building of Israeli settlements. The United States has called for a freeze, but Israeli leaders have rejected that.

Asked what he would say during his visit about human rights abuses, including the detention of political prisoners in Egypt, Obama indicated no stern lecture would be forthcoming.

He said he hoped to deliver the message that democratic values are principles that "they can embrace and affirm."

Obama added that there is a danger "when the United States, or any country, thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture."

Thursday, June 11, 2009

U.S. Targets Excessive Pay

June 11, 2009 - U.S. Targets Excessive Pay for Top Executives Compensation Czar To Oversee Firms At Heart of Crisis By David Cho, Zachary A. Goldfarb and Tomoeh Murakami Tse

The Obama administration named a "compensation czar" yesterday to set salaries and bonuses at some of the biggest firms at the heart of the economic crisis, as part of a broader government campaign to reshape pay practices across corporate America.

Senior officials said they will install Washington attorney Kenneth R. Feinberg with the power to determine compensation, including retirement packages, of senior executives at seven firms that have received massive federal bailouts, such as Citigroup chief executive Vikram S. Pandit, Bank of America's Kenneth D. Lewis and Fritz Henderson of General Motors.

The initiative reflects public uproar over executive compensation, which has been stoked by the financial crisis. Lawmakers who approved the government's $700 billion bailout for the financial system last fall worried that taxpayers would end up financing the lavish lifestyles of top Wall Street executives. Then, controversy erupted in March when the Obama administration revealed that insurance giant American International Group, a recipient of a $180 billion rescue package, had decided to pay $165 million in bonuses to its most troubled financial unit.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said yesterday that the administration is not interested in "capping pay" or "setting forth precise prescriptions for how companies should set compensation." Instead, he said, the government wants to rein in pay practices that motivated executives to take excessive risks in pursuit of profit.

But with the spotlight now on executive pay practices, senior administration officials are moving to address concerns at firms well beyond those implicated in the crisis. Yesterday, officials proposed two pieces of legislation that separately empower shareholders and the Securities and Exchange Commission to exercise more oversight over executive compensation at all publicly traded firms.

The first measure would give shareholders more say on what companies pay executives. Traditionally, stockholders have had limited influence and the authority only to elect a small number of members who sit on a company's board of directors.

The second measure would expand the SEC's power to ensure that the corporate committees responsible for deciding compensation act independently of the top executives whose pay they set. Most large corporations have such committees, and their record in rewarding risky management has at times been troubling. Conflicts of interest between committee members and executives are common.

These efforts reflect the administration's conclusion that companies cannot police themselves on matters of pay.

"This financial crisis had many significant causes, but executive compensation practices were a contributing factor," Geithner said yesterday.

And more initiatives to address these practices are coming. The Federal Reserve is examining how regulators can oversee pay at all banks. Geithner and senior White House officials, meanwhile, plan to make executive pay a focus of their efforts to overhaul financial regulation, which officials say will be detailed next week.

The administration is giving Feinberg authority to influence pay at scores of companies. Feinberg, who previously managed the government's efforts to compensate the families of those killed in the Sept. 11 attacks, will control compensation at seven firms that have received large federal bailouts, including Citigroup, Bank of America, American International Group, General Motors, Chrysler as well as Chrysler Financial and GMAC, which provide loans to auto customers. He will be able to determine salaries, bonuses and retirement packages for all executive officers and the 100 most highly paid employees at each company.

He will also have the authority to set overall compensation, but not precise salary levels, for firms that have received smaller bailouts. The goal, officials said, is to curb the practice of tying pay to performance in a way that induces traders and executives to take big risks. Feinberg can also decide whether executives who have received what he considers excessive compensation should return some of that money.

For months companies have awaited clarification of the compensation restrictions imposed on recipients of bailout money. In February, the administration said it planned to limit salaries to $500,000 at banks that have taken "exceptional assistance." In addition, any bonuses would have to be paid in stock and could not be cashed in until after the government was repaid.

Later that month, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) wrote legislation that trumped those efforts and capped bonuses at one-third of executives' salaries. The new law applied only to firms that took bailout funds after Feb. 11.

Dodd's maneuver upset some Obama officials because his amendment and the administration's earlier guidance together curbed pay more than the White House intended. The officials began to worry that firms would drop out of government rescue programs or lose talented employees.

As a result, the administration announced yesterday that most firms receiving federal bailouts will face a limit on bonuses but not on salaries. For companies that accepted less than $500 million, the restriction would apply only to top executives. For those receiving more, the limit would also apply to 20 other top earners at each firm.

The response yesterday from industry and business experts varied widely. Some faulted the government for meddling in the private sector while others said the proposed changes were needed but may not prompt real reform. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who leads the House Financial Services Committee, said the measures did not go far enough and plans to introduce legislation directing the SEC to outline guidelines for how compensation committees should determine pay.

Under the Obama plan, members of these committees would not be able to accept fees from their respective firms other than what they make for serving on the panels. Attorneys or consultants that help members in their work must be hired by and report to the committee rather than a chief executive.

Administration officials said they also hoped their efforts would pressure firms to rein in lavish pay by giving shareholders the right to vote on an executive's overall compensation package. This proposal, know as say-on-pay, would be nonbinding.

Some analysts warned that the vote wouldn't be taken seriously by companies because it is only advisory. About two dozen firms allow say-on-pay, and in no case has a proposed pay package been rejected by shareholders. "Will companies treat this as a compliance exercise they're being forced to do or will they embrace the process? It's an open question," said Patrick McGurn, a compensation expert at RiskMetrics, which advises big investors. "We hope it goes into the direction of an annual constructive dialogue on pay issues."

The proposal could give could give large investors such as mutual funds, pension funds and labor union retirement funds greater influence in expressing opinions on compensation. Administration officials said they hope companies will consult investors in designing pay packages.

President Obama proposed legislation to advance say-on-pay when he was in the Senate in 2007, but the bill stalled after facing stiff opposition from the Bush administration and big corporations.

The Obama administration cited Britain's say-on-pay legislation, enacted in 2002, as a model yesterday. A Harvard Business School study of the initiative found this year that it failed to curb pay among top executives at companies but succeeded at pressuring companies to scale back severance packages for executives whose companies fared poorly, according to Fabrizio Ferri, the professor who conducted the study.

Blog owner note: Has no one ever informed Obama that in America the government does not place a cap on wages. Mr. Obama it is called capitalism. JP

America's First Muslim Pressident?

June 11, 2009 - America's first Muslim president? Obama aligns with the policies of Shariah-adherents By Frank J. Gaffney Jr.

During his White House years, William Jefferson Clinton -- someone Judge Sonia Sotomayor might call a "white male" -- was dubbed "America's first black president" by a black admirer. Applying the standard of identity politics and pandering to a special interest that earned Mr. Clinton that distinction, Barack Hussein Obama would have to be considered America's first Muslim president.

This is not to say, necessarily, that Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim any more than Mr. Clinton actually is black. After his five months in office, and most especially after his just-concluded visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, however, a stunning conclusion seems increasingly plausible: The man now happy to have his Islamic-rooted middle name featured prominently has engaged in the most consequential bait-and-switch since Adolf Hitler duped Neville Chamberlain over Czechoslovakia at Munich.

What little we know about Mr. Obama's youth certainly suggests that he not only had a Kenyan father who was Muslim, but spent his early, formative years as one in Indonesia. As the president likes to say, "much has been made" -- in this case by him and his campaign handlers -- of the fact that he became a Christian as an adult in Chicago, under the now-notorious Pastor Jeremiah A. Wright.

With Mr. Obama's unbelievably ballyhooed address in Cairo Thursday to what he calls "the Muslim world" (hereafter known as "the Speech"), there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself. Consider the following indicators:

• Mr. Obama referred four times in his speech to "the Holy Koran." Non-Muslims -- even pandering ones -- generally don't use that Islamic formulation.

• Mr. Obama established his firsthand knowledge of Islam (albeit without mentioning his reported upbringing in the faith) with the statement, "I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed." Again, "revealed" is a depiction Muslims use to reflect their conviction that the Koran is the word of God, as dictated to Muhammad.

• Then the president made a statement no believing Christian -- certainly not one versed, as he professes to be, in the ways of Islam -- would ever make. In the context of what he euphemistically called the "situation between Israelis, Palestinians and Arabs," Mr. Obama said he looked forward to the day ". . . when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer."

Now, the term "peace be upon them" is invoked by Muslims as a way of blessing deceased holy men. According to Islam, that is what all three were - dead prophets. Of course, for Christians, Jesus is the living and immortal Son of God.

In the final analysis, it may be beside the point whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim. In the Speech and elsewhere, he has aligned himself with adherents to what authoritative Islam calls Shariah -- notably, the dangerous global movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood -- to a degree that makes Mr. Clinton's fabled affinity for blacks pale by comparison.

For example, Mr. Obama has -- from literally his inaugural address onward -- inflated the numbers and, in that way and others, exaggerated the contemporary and historical importance of Muslim-Americans in the United States. In the Speech, he used the Brotherhood's estimates of "nearly 7 million Muslims" in this country, at least twice the estimates from other, more reputable sources. (Who knows? By the time Mr. Obama's friends in the radical Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) perpetrate their trademark books-cooking as deputy 2010 census takers, the official count may well claim considerably more than 7 million Muslims are living here.)

Even more troubling were the commitments the president made in Cairo to promote Islam in America. For instance, he declared: "I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." He vowed to ensure that women can cover their heads, including, presumably, when having their photographs taken for passports, driver's licenses or other identification purposes. He also pledged to enable Muslims to engage in zakat, their faith's requirement for tithing, even though four of the eight types of charity called for by Shariah can be associated with terrorism. Not surprisingly, a number of Islamic "charities" in this country have been convicted of providing material support for terrorism.

Particularly worrying is the realignment Mr. Obama has announced in U.S. policy toward Israel. While he pays lip service to the "unbreakable" bond between America and the Jewish state, the president has unmistakably signaled that he intends to compel the Israelis to make territorial and other strategic concessions to Palestinians to achieve the hallowed two-state solution. In doing so, he ignores the inconvenient fact that both the Brotherhood's Hamas and Abu Mazen's Fatah remain determined to achieve a one-state solution, whereby the Jews will be driven "into the sea."

Whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim or simply plays one in the presidency may, in the end, be irrelevant. What is alarming is that in aligning himself and his policies with those of Shariah-adherents such as the Muslim Brotherhood, the president will greatly intensify the already enormous pressure on peaceful, tolerant American Muslims to submit to such forces - and heighten expectations, here and abroad, that the rest of us will do so as well.

Original at:

Voight Calls Obama Good Actor

Voight calls Obama 'good actor' Hollywood star sees administration as 'slick, relentless' By Jennifer Harper

Jon Voight is a silver-screen conservative who considers the final speech of George Washington bedside reading. He is much moved by American mettle, military veterans, historical moments, Old Glory and youthful spirit.

And he's fierce about the state of his country. Very fierce.

"Democracy is an extraordinary adventure. It's difficult, full of daring and risk and danger. But it's the greatest gift we have," the Academy Award-winning actor said Tuesday during a visit to The Washington Times newsroom.

"The people who voted for President Obama are just beginning to wake up to exactly what they brought in. The 'change' they envisioned is not the 'change' they have gotten." Mr. Voight said.

He likens the Obama administration to a Hollywood script, rife with technique and craft, very compelling but not necessarily real.

"It is a very, very slick, relentless campaign to build Obama as the answer to all our needs. They know what people want and they give it in a package that can be read off a teleprompter. That's not what our country is based upon," Mr. Voight said.

He offered a terse review of the principal player.

"Obama is a very good actor. He knows how to play it. And he is very adept at creating this 'Obama' - this character who is there whenever the world needs something," he said.

Mr. Voight knows about acting - he's been a Hollywood icon for decades, first breaking through to audiences and grabbing an Oscar nomination for his role in 1969's "Midnight Cowboy."

He won the Academy Award as best actor for his role in the 1978 film "Coming Home" (ironically, liberal icon Jane Fonda won for best actress in the same film). His other famous 1970s roles include "Deliverance" and "The Champ." More recently, his turns in "Runaway Train" and as broadcaster Howard Cosell in "Ali" brought him his third and fourth Oscar nominations.

But Mr. Voight is no curmudgeon railing against change and pining for the old days.

To current audiences, he may be best known as the father of Oscar-winning actress Angelina Jolie. But he has raised his profile, not just politically, with a major small-screen role as Jonas Hodges in the current season of Fox's "24."

And The Times interview was the second occasion in two days that the actor has gone after Mr. Obama. On Monday, he stood before the National Republican Congressional Committee and delivered a speech to rally the party: 2012 beckons.

He delivered a fiery speech, in which he called Mr. Obama a "false prophet" and dubbed his administration the "Obama oppression" that would lead to the "downfall" of the country. "We are becoming a weak nation," he said in a speech that had his audience cheering and won praise afterward from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

At 70, the actor still strides through life with pronounced opinion, boundless emotion and strong faith. There is not much artifice about him. The slim star dresses in black his gaze is direct and inquisitive. His speech before appreciative Republicans was written on plain white paper, and in his own hand.

Mr. Voight admires Mr. Gingrich and praises his intellect, political convictions and down-to-earth demeanor. He frets about the safety of Israel. Leading conservative talk radio hosts and cultural observers who espouse traditional values with a modicum of optimism earn his gratitude.

"Let's give thanks to them for not giving up," he said.

His advice to his fellow Americans? Read up on the lives of the nation's founders, and understand that the founding of the nation was "an amazing moment in time," he said.

"I have at my bedside George Washington's final address to the American people, which was never delivered. But it was later published in newspapers throughout the country. His thoughts, his words - they are as relevant right now as they were when they were written. His warnings give us insight into what is going on right now," Mr. Voight said.

He has a personal stake in the first president. In sleek colonial uniform and white wig, Mr. Voight played George Washington in "An American Carol," a 2008 film that parodied such film industry liberals as Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell, among others.
And he's still playing the senior officer.

Mr. Voight is also a general in the burgeoning army of Hollywood conservatives who intend to support America, and buff up the American image for its own people, and an audience abroad. The battalion includes actors Gary Sinise, Kelsey Grammer, Patricia Heaton, Dennis Hopper and Pat Boone.

"The last time we all met, there were over a thousand people. Think about that. Hollywood conservatives, all of them different people, but all on the same path. It was very heartening," Mr. Voight recalled.

And like a good general, Mr. Voight knows his foes, and he has a simple strategy. He can rattle off a list of those who annoy him, from financier George Soros to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. And let's not forget the press.

"The news media has lied itself out of the business. Now, real accountability journalism. That says it all. That's what's been missing so long," he said.

He is vexed by bureaucracy, big government and soft-peddling by political correctness.

"This lie of political correctness is bringing this country down. You just want to break through it all."

Original at:

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

HR1444 Obama’s mandatory Volunteer Bill

June 10, 2009 - "HR1444 Obama’s mandatory Volunteer Bill" By Joseph Parish.

Just as many survivalist predicted Obama is about to initiate many changes that Americans around the world have fought and died to prevent. The House of Representatives has already passed HR 1388 known as the GIVE Act. This bill authorizes the creation of Obama’s voluntary youth corp. This particular program will be promoted within the American public school system across the entire continent. School children will be issued an official government sponsored uniform and will be sent to various camps where it is expected that they will learn the necessary basics needed for performing social service for the state and the federal government. This legislation was quietly passed by the House of Representatives on the 18th of March. This bill was only the initial Phase of Obama’s total plan. Now before the law makers is another bill that moves the presidents plans into stage II where it will more then likely receive the same wide spread support as the previous bill. Upon acceptance by the Senate Obama will officially sign the bill into law.

This bill authorizes a report to be generated on exactly how his program can be made into a MANDATORY action for ALL OF AMERICA’S YOUTHS to be activated at some future point in time. This is the concept behind phase II. The bill is expected to establish an additional program for adults which will make mandatory public service work for a specific number of weeks each year. This will be the phase III portion of the plan.

It appears that the hypnotized democrats that are in Congress applauded this legislation as a great piece of legislation for which all Americans can participate in the American tradition of volunteering for social duties. Few of our representatives seem to recall how in the past this exact program was known by several different names. During the 1800’s the volunteer labor program was known as an act of slavery and was actually abolished by the 13th Amendment to our Constitution. With the proposed selection of Judge Sotomayor for Obama's choice on the Supreme Court and given the idea that she may be confirmed it is likely that any objections to this ruling as unconstitutional would quickly be shot down.

The moment that one makes mandatory participation in a voluntary situation the act no longer falls under a volunteer type nature. In addition, who gives the government the right to recruit our children for social work? The nearest that I can compare this to is Hitler’s famous Youth Corp during World War II.

We have to ask ourselves what the state will be up to next. Are we to relive the effects of the Nazi regime where our children will be wearing a government designed and issued uniform, attend state sponsored indoctrination camps and be brainwashed with government proposed propaganda? Will we see the same actions start to take place in America as they did in Europe with the Jews or the Gypsies or in this case more so the social conservatives such as the Catholics or other anti-obama groups. Will we as survivalist start to be hunted down as a danger to the proposed Obama way of life?

I see this as only a stepping stone for a far off military plan as Obama once remarked during his July 2008 campaign speech where he held no bones about making it very clear that a youthful military division is eventually to take place as a security force.

As with most of his plans that he has initiated it is obviously that this man who was elected to the office of president of the United States is certainly one of two things. First he is out to destroy America and all that we stand for and second he is simply off his rocker. To sum up Obama’s way of imitating Hitler’s Youth corp. he plans for the following actions.
* 100 volunteer hours per year for teenagers
* A three month mandatory boot camp for those young people between the ages of 18 and 25
* Three years of total voluntary service for all adults and senior citizens.
I have one statement to throw back to our great socialist leader - YES WE CAN! With the help of all concerned Americans and patriots YES WE CAN contact our representatives and YES WE CAN insist that they set things right. I have taken the liberty of enclosing a links to the PDF version of the actual HR 1444 bill. Click below to review this bill.

Copyright @2009 Joseph Parish
PDF Version of HR1444 Click here

Obama seeks fiscal responsibility mantle

June 10, 2009 - "Obama seeks fiscal responsibility mantle" - President Barack Obama sought on Tuesday to show he was serious about improving the U.S. budget picture as he called on Congress to pass new limits on tax cuts and spending programs to avoid adding to deficits.

Obama urged passage of so-called "pay-go" legislation that would require any new tax cut or automatic spending program to be paid for within the budget.

"The 'pay as you go' principle is very simple. Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere," Obama said in a speech at the White House attended by several Democratic members of Congress.

"Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for. They are not free," said Obama, who has been criticized by Republicans for proposing a hefty domestic agenda that includes overhauling the health care system, bolstering education and tackling global climate change.

The White House has forecast a budget deficit for this year of $1.84 trillion, or 12.9 percent of gross domestic product.

Republicans have warned that programs such as the proposed health care plan would add to the budget deficit for years to come and have also criticized Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan, which was passed by Congress in February.

Obama contends that much of the budget deficit was inherited from the Bush administration, which presided over a shift from record surpluses to huge increases in the deficit fueled by the financial crisis and spending for the Iraq war.

"The reckless fiscal policies of the past have left us in a very deep hole," Obama said. "Digging our way out will take time and patience and tough choices."

Obama, who has made the push to revamp healthcare a top domestic priority, has sought to allay the concerns of some Democrats about its impact on the deficit.

Surging deficits have also become an increasing concern for financial markets. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke last week issued a warning about risks to the economy of large deficits, which drive up long-term interest rates.

Statutory pay-go has received support from House Democratic leaders like Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but Obama's proposal was met with quick resistance from a key Senate Democrat who could make moving forward difficult since one senator can slow or block legislation.

"Pay-go can only do so much," said Senator Kent Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. "It can prevent the passage of new legislation that would worsen the deficit, but it does not address the deficits and debt projected under existing policy."

Rep. Eric Cantor, a Republican of Virginia, said Obama had undertaken "historic spending" during his first five months in office.

"So for us to sit here and listen to the White House say that 'We ought to be responsible, we ought to pay for what we're doing' I think lacks just a little bit of credibility," Cantor said.

Is He In Our Best Interests?

June 10, 2009 - Welcome to the "Is He in Our Best Interests blog". In the pages of this site we intend to continue to pound all the things that President elect Obama is doing that we see as unsafe for our country and un-American in nature. Come back often as we intend to update as much as possible. In fact, when we consider the vast number of un-patriotic acts which Mr. Obama accomplishes daily is we just may be updating every day.