Quantcast

Pages

Showing posts with label Sen. Lindsey Graham R-SC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sen. Lindsey Graham R-SC. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Lindsey Graham Supports Elena Kagan Doctoring Medical Opinions on Partial Birth Abortion

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was the lone Republican vote on the Senate Judiciary Committee to allow Elena Kagan to go forward in her confirmation hearings. Graham said Kagan would not be "his choice," but said he thought Obama "chose wisely." Now, understand that this woman actually convinced a task force of physicians to falsify their own statement which would be used to decide on the legality of partial birth abortions at the Supreme Court. How does Senator Graham think his vote is appropriate?

Elena Kagan
Lindsey Graham 

Because of this falsified statement, credited to a task force referred to as a "select panel" of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Nebraska's partial-birth abortion ban in 2000.

The falsified statement basically said, in the name of physicians, the partial-birth abortion "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman," which is not what the physicians said. Kagan replaced a medical judgement with a political agenda.

The ACOG said exactly the opposite. Unborn children have died because Elena Kagan lied:
The task force's initial draft statement did not include the statement that the controversial abortion procedure "might be" the best method "in a particular circumstance." 
Instead, it said that the select ACOG panel "could identify no circumstances under which this procedure...would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman."
ACOG, although said to be apolitical, gave their statement to the Clinton White House, where Elena Kagan lurked:
Miss Kagan, then a deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy, already knew ACOG’s stance as a result of a July 1996 meeting at the White House, at which ACOG representatives told administration officials — according to a Kagan memorandum [PDF] — that “in the vast majority of cases, selection of the partial birth procedure is not necessary to avert serious adverse consequences to a woman’s health.”
Kagan told the White House this statement "would be a disaster:"
Her notes, produced by the White House to the Senate Judiciary Committee, show that she herself drafted the critical language hedging ACOG’s position. On a document [PDF] captioned “Suggested Options” — which she apparently faxed to the legislative director at ACOG — Kagan proposed that ACOG include the following language: “An intact D&X [the medical term for the procedure], however, may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.
ACOG did exactly as she asked and added her statement, exactly as she wrote it, to their own. The statement went to the Supreme Court and her part in it was not disclosed to the Supreme Court Justices.

Slate writer William Saletan said Kagan was "only doing her job," but he did slam ACOG for so willingly and silently being a White House tool.

In Committee hearings, the note she wrote in her hand was identified by Kagan. She said she was "clarifying a position." How vile does one have to be to change medical science to allow a late term abortion, and how incredibly evil does Congress have to be to put this woman on the Supreme Court?

Saturday, July 3, 2010

RINO Lindsey Graham TEA Parties Not Sustainable: Senator Graham You Make TEA Parties Sustainable

RINO Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) says the TEA Party movement is unsustainable and will die out. Well, doesn't he wish? As long as Republicans like Graham infiltrate the House and Senate, we will continue to be drenched in their unconstitutional TEA (Taxed Too Much). Graham says the Movement has no vision for governing the country. If the U.S. Constitution isn't a vision, what is? Senator Graham is just one of a few reasons in the Nation's Capitol that will easily sustain the TEA Party Movement.

Lindsey Graham

Of course Graham doesn't want TEA Parties interfering in his dirty little moderate-left-leaning playground. The Lindsey Graham-types in the Senate and House have had their way far too long, and look what has happened. As Democrats moved farther and farther to the left under Welfare Queen, Nancy Pelosi, and Capitol-Crier-The-War-is-Lost, Harry Reid, RINOs moved along with them, and you hardly heard a gasp of surprise, until TEA Parties began showing up at Townhalls all over the country.

We want The Founder's vision, which does not include unbalanced budgets and spreading the wealth - or the social justice 'isms,' as in Socialism, Marxism and Communism. How hard is that? To the contrary Mr. Graham, we can sustain ourselves on your foolishly conceived legislation.

Oh, the TEA Parties have a vision and you are in our line of site.

TEA partiers don't want our healthcare records in a government database, but you do. Senator. TEA partiers don't want your RINO-derived Cap and Tax, and were horrified when you begged us to stop demonizing climate change. The GOP of your home state of South Carolina were also horrified and they censured you - twice in a three month period'.
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham has repeatedly demonstrated contempt and belligerence towards those members of the Republican Party who support freedom, a constitutional government and the Republican Party platform,” 

...the local Republican Party charged Graham with showing a “condescending attitude” toward the GOP’s grass roots.
We don't want you amnesty devised by his Gang of 2. No gangs of 14, or 3 or 4...unless designed to smack spending and keep the Supreme Court from being taken over by Progressives. Did I mention your National I.D. cards? We don't want those either.

Senator, your Gang of 14 decided that judicial nominees will be filibustered, "only under extraordinary circumstances." Remember Sonia Sotomayor, the LaRaza member you helped promote to the Court despite the harsh realities of her own words...and, again, she is a member of LaRaza. Show us what you're made of Sir. If Elena Kagan is not an "extraordinary" circumstance, who can possibly be, but I bet you cast your vote for her.

David Horowitz' NewsRealBlog says Graham can afford to "trash tea parties" because he isn't up for election until 2014, but warns that he doesn't know his history and doesn't know the power of crowds:
Nothing threatens the status quo like passionate, peaceful and spirited citizens coming together in solidarity. Does Poland 1980 ring a bell?
Senator, I do admire your very important support of our Military, but you need to dig your way out of that heap of Liberals you are so fond of after so many years in the Capitol. Get busy and Do Your Job as a Senator from South Carolina.

You, Senator Graham, are what makes a TEA Party sustainable.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Lindsey Graham Walks on Climate and Amnesty

Sen. Lindsey Graham has certainly been in the news this week. Republicans have been more than a little frustrated that the South Carolina senator has announced he is working with Democrats on Cap and Trade (Climate) and Immigration Reform (Amnesty for Illegal Aliens). The question has been: why would he do that, knowing that a majority of Republicans want neither?

Lindsey Graham                        John Kerry

Graham has been working behind the scenes on a Cap and Tax bill and Amnesty with Senators John Kerry and Chuck Schumer. A video made the rounds last week from ALIPAC president, William Gheen, saying that he believed Senator Graham was "compromised." His reasoning was unfortunate, but he intimates that Graham could be blackmailed (my word, not Gheens), and if that is the case, Graham needs to rethink a few things, and reassure the voters.

 Graham has walked on the bill and taken his "bipartisan" support with him. This is a real dilemma, but it just may get Graham out of a tough spot, in light of Gheen's statement. Democrats will not hold-up Immigration, so this can get Graham out of both Climate Change and Immigration, and make the South Carolina Republican Party happy (they have censured him twice in recent months) and make his fellow Republicans in the Senate ecstatic.
Graham's departure likely dooms any chance of passing a climate bill this year. He is the sole Republican working with Sens. John Kerry and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) on a compromise they had planned to unveil Monday.
Here is a portion of a letter Graham sent to the Cap and Tax Committee:
"I want to bring to your attention what appears to be a decision by the Obama Administration and Senate Democratic leadership to move immigration instead of energy. Unless their plan substantially changes this weekend, I will be unable to move forward on energy independence legislation at this time. I will not allow our hard work to be rolled out in a manner that has no chance of success." 
A curious response, but smart, because voters are increasingly unhappy with the perpetual loose-canon- ball-Senator Graham. If he scuttles back to his Party, which is desperately trying to reign-in the regime's "regulate the world" doctrine, he will do his country a huge service and probably be re-elected in 2012.

Linked by NetRightNation

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Lindsey Graham Ripe for Blackmail?

William Gheen, the president of American's for Legal Immigration (ALI PAC) says in the video below that Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is gay, everyone in Washington, D.C. knows it, and because he has not come out of the closet, he is vulnerable to pressure to support some decidely unRepublican positions, like Cap-and-Tax and Amnesty for illegal aliens.

Graham is not up for election this November but Gheen intimates that South Carolinians are planning to give him the boot from the Senate (and it has nothing to do with him being gay or not).

The comment about Graham comes at about 6 mins. into the video




Saturday, January 30, 2010

GOP Blocks Federal Funds for 9/11 Prosecutions in Civilian Courts?

Republicans are attempting to block the use of federal funds for 9/11 terrorist trials in US civil courts. The broader idea is to move these trials to the proper venue - military courts, but there is more to it than that. It's one of those "not in my backyard" situations: GOP legislators do not want these trials in Washington, DC. While I'm tempted to say the administrations deserves the inconvenience and the cost, that leaves everyone else suffering and Republicans have been against Civilian Federal trials of terrorists from the beginning.

According to The Hill, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA-10th) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) will introduce the legislation this week.

Earlier this week, Rep. Peter King (R-NY-3rd) introduced a similar bill that would prohibit the use of federal funds to try within U.S. civilian courts any detainee being kept in the Guantanamo Bay prison....

While there has been no official announcement as to where the trials would be held if the White House decided against New York City, several Republican aides said that the administration was considering the Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia areas, an unpopulated island near Manhattan or nearby military installations.
Democrat New York Governor David Paterson finally decided he didn't like the idea of trials a mere few blocks from the former site of the World Trade Towers. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is calling for the government provide all security costs, and Senator Dianne Feinstein is opposed to New York City trials.
Wolf raised objections several weeks ago to reports that the White House was considering hosting the trial of Riduan Isamuddin – an alleged close ally of Osama bin Laden’s -- and two other defendants in the Washington, D.C., region.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, Wolf said that there had been enough recent intelligence pointing to possible terrorists threats related to Isamuddin to deny him a trial in civilian courts in the D.C. area, suggesting that to do so would put the region in jeopardy.
Most of us know the issue is simple. It's only Obama and Holder that do not get it:
...a bipartisan contingent of senators wrote Holder and asked him to consider military trials for the alleged terrorists, saying, “The attacks of 9/11 were acts of war, and those who planned and carried out those attacks are war criminals.”

The letter was signed by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Jim Webb (D-Va.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine).
Read more of Republican action:
Orrin Hatch Declares War on Reconciliation: Permanent Damage to Parties

Rep. Marsha Blackburn Questions Obama at Baltimore Conference: Dems Impeding Republican Ideas?

Rep. Paul Ryan Questions Obama on Budget: Obama Runs for the Hills


Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Telegraphs Most Influential Conservatives In the Time of Obama

The Telegraph UK is releasing their list of the 100 most influential Conservatives, and the 100 most influential Liberals, while Barack Obama sat in the Oval Office - In the Time of Obama. The lists will be revealed, a few at a time, over the next few days, with the top 20 coming out on January 15th.

The Telegraphs says they view those chosen as "identifiably" conservative, although not "always self-described" as such (dittos Liberals).

These are not lists that rank ideological purity – the number one liberal will not necessarily be any more liberal than number 100 – but they will inevitably discriminate against centrists, technocrats, independents and fence-sitters.
The first Telegraph List covered 2007-2008. If the Conservative was on the previous list, I've put the ranking in parentheses.

The list of Top Conservatives revealed today covers Nos. 61 through 100. I've listed a few that interest me. See the Telegraph article.

Dang! Mark Sanford comes in at No. 100 (91).

Some commentary here - if Mark Sanford is still on this list, what a waste of space. How about Senator Jim Inhofe, who has been a true thorn in the side of Liberals and has thwarted many of their plans, mainly by speaking clearly to the press every opportunity he has. He should at the least be below the 50 mark. Of course, maybe he is. That list has not yet been released.

96) Liz Cheney (Liz is greatly underestimated at No. 96, in my opinion)
93) Charlie Crist, Governor of Florida and candidate for U.S. Senate
92) Clifford May
89) Fred Thompson
88) Patrick Ruffini - Political Strategist
87) Eric Odom - Tea Party organizer
85) Bill O'Reilly
84) Thomas Sowell
83) Lindsay Graham
82) (55) Jack Keane U.S. Army General
81) Marco Rubio - running against No. 93 - Charlie Crist for US Senate Florida
80) Michelle Bachmann - Congresswoman for Minnesota
79) Lou Dobbs

77) Joe Wilson - Congressman from S.C. - that's what speaking about Obama will do for ya' - get you on the right list!

76) (86) Jeb Bush
75) (26) James Dobson
74) (84) Ann Coulter
72) Tucker Carlson (who knew?)
70) (87) Michael Barone
69) Olympia Snowe - Senator from Maine. Dang!
67) Joe Scarborough (hardly conservative enough to be tagged a conservative)
66) (58) Victor Davis Hanson
65) (69) Erick Erickson from RedState.com
64) Chris Ruddy - founder and CEO of Newsmax.com
63) Jim DeMint - Senator South Carolina
63) (17) Frank Luntz



Some notes of interest: In the Telegraph's list of the most influential conservatives in 2007, which was published in October '07, Rudy Giuliani was No. 1, General Petraeus No. 2, Matt Drudge No. 3, Newt Gingrich No. 4, Rush Limbaugh No. 5, Dick Cheney No. 6, Robert Gates No. 7, Chief Justice John Roberts No. 8, John McCain No. 9 and Mitt Romney No. 10.





Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Eric Holder Lindsay Graham: Eric Holder Jon Kyle: Holder Senate Questioning on 9/11 Civil Trials

Attorney General Eric Holder spoke in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee today, saying he wanted to address his controversial decision to try the mastermind of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed in New York City. See a video below.


Eric Holder

Holder told the mother of a man who died aboard Flight 93 which crashed into a Pennsylvania field near Shanksville, PA that "there was evidence, not yet made public, that makes federal court the best place to try Mohammed."
I guess what I'm saying is trust me," the attorney general said quietly, as reporters and security staff crowded around the pair.

I will trust you. I will defer judgment," said Hoagland, though she added she still has serious doubts about his plan. 
Here are some of the "highlights" of Holder's appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee today:

(1) The 9/11 attacks were both an act of war and a violation of our federal criminal law

(2) There are more than 300 convicted international and domestic terrorist currently in Bureau of Prisons custody. Including those responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing in the attacks -- embassies in Africa.

(3) In fact I expect to direct prosecutors to seek the ultimate and most uncommon penalty.

(4) I know that we are at war. I know that we are at war with a vicious enemy who targets our soldiers on the battlefield in Afghanistan and our civilians in the streets here at home.

(5) Prosecuting -- 9/11 defendants in federal court does not represent some larger judgment about whether or not we are at war. We are at war. And we will use every instrument of national power civilian military.

(6) I'm not scared of what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has to say at trial, and no one else needs to be afraid, either,” Holder said.

(7) We need not cower in the face this enemy.

 No. 6 is pure elitist arrogance, bathed in contempt and disdain for the country and the citizens. The American people are not "scared," are not "afraid," of what KSM has to say. What the animal has to say is irrelevant. How much more demeaning of the American people can a public service get?
Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) asked Holder how a civil trial could be better when KSM had already tried to plead guilty before a military commission"
How can you be more likely to get a conviction in a (civilian) court than that?" pressed Kyl, to applause from some in the hearing room.
Holder's non-answer to a very direct question was that the decision to try KSM in New York was not based on the whims or the desires of KSM - "he will not select the prosecution venue. I will. And I have." The question was, why would you think a conviction in civil court will easier than in the military commission - where KSM wants to plead guilty?

Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) asked Holder to name one enemy combatant (now known legally as an "unprivileged enemy belligerent") captured on a battlefield and tried in a U.S. civil court. Holder could not name one, and Graham pointed out that there are none. Graham accused Holder of "making bad history," and said "I think you've made a fundamental mistake here."

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) said: "I believe this decision is dangerous. I believe it's misguided. I believe it is unnecessary." Holder boasted that 300 terrorists are currently held in U.S. prisons. Sessions asked for a list of those terrorists, and after a slight pause, Holder said he would get the list for the Senator.

In the meeting, Senator Jon Kyl mentioned a previous request from Senator Charles Grassley, who has asked Holder for list of DOJ attorneys who have previous ties to terrorists. Holder indicated he would think about it. Here is what Grassley says on his website:
I plan to ask the Attorney General about potential conflicts of interest within the department related to political appointees working on detainee issues.  Media reports have highlighted certain political appointees at the department and their prior advocacy on detainee issues.  I would like to know more about these appointees and the work they are currently doing at the department.  Any prior representation on the other side of these issues could raise potential conflicts of interest that should be fully disclosed as part of basic transparency and accountability at the department. 
The video below is excellent. Listen as Senator Lindsay Graham tells Holder, your actions "are a perversion of the justice system.




 
Eric Holder and Lindsay Graham (video)

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Eric Holder Thanks John McCain and Lindsay Graham: KSM comes to New York

 In Eric Holder's speech announcing that he was bringing Khalid Sheik Mohammed, and five other terrorists to New York City, New York City, (he said it twice) for criminal trials, he thanked Senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham for passing legislation to "strengthen" and "reform" the military commission system. See videos below.

Republican Senators receiving a thank you from Eric Holder is the stuff of nightmares. I can see Holder smugly inserting McCain and Graham into his text, knowing the conservative angst that would follow.

Carl Levin (D-MI) the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. John McCain (R-AZ) is the ranking Republican member. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) sits on the committee. I suppose that is why Holder was thanking these two men. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is also on the committee and I notice he received no thanks.

As explained by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in a letter to Levin and McCain dated July 23, 2009, the amendment would:

...establish a system for addressing classified information issues in
military commissions that is similar to the system provided by the Classified Information Procedures Act ("CIPA") for criminal cases prosecuted in Federal court.

The Levin-Graham-McCain amendment adapts CIPA to the military commissions context, with some modifications to reflect lessons learned from past terrorism prosecutions....

It sets substantive standards for providing the defense access to classified information in the discovery phase, and for the use of classified information at trial.

We believe the amendment will advance the President's objective of reforming the commissions and ensuring that they are a fair, legitimate, and effective forum for the prosecution of law of war offenses. 
Barack Obama signed it into law on October 28, 2009. This is the law, as laid out in the legislation:

Through a Sense of Congress, the preferred forum for the trial of alien unprivileged enemy belligerents is trial by military commission.


I  guess Eric Holder didn't get the memo.


Here's more:

(1) Changes "unlawful enemy combatant" to "unprivileged enemy belligerent,"

(2) Making an unprivileged enemy belligerent, who engaged in or supported hostilities against the United States, subject to military commissions. Obviously, trial by military commission cannot be interpreted as the same as a civil Federal court.

(3) Forbids the use of statements that were obtained "by the use of torture."

(4) Gives the accused the right to seek suppression of evidence that is not reliable or probative.

(5) Additional restrictions on the use of hearsay evidence.

(6) Specific procedures for the treatment and protection of classified information. The Military Commissions Act provides for this and meets the challenges of the Classified Information Protection Act. More on that below

(7) Unprivileged enemy belligerents will not be read Miranda rights, unless an "unappealable court order requires it.

(8) Allows the U.S. to take an interlocutory appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals (rather than, or in lieu of current law that allows such an appeal to the Court of Military Commission Review.

(9) Right of appeal with respect to classified information. This is already in the MCA's MRE 505 governing military tribunals.

(10) Adds contempt and perjury and obstruction of justice as triable offenses.

So this basically was about McCain tamping down "torture" and making it impossible to use any confessions or statements from that "torture," no matter the results.

There were obviously some good things out of this: no more mirandizing, and if I understand this correctly, perjury and contempt can be charged against the defendants. Terrorists are hard-core liars and contemptible by nature.

*****

If you are interested in DOJ's comments that this new legislation would provide the same protections in the Military Commissions Act as afforded by the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), as I looked at everything I could find, the protections afforded the accused in a military trial is virtually the same as that stipulated by CIPA.

I saw one possible difference, that being that the first responsibility of a military court is to protect national security, and the first responsibility of a civil Federal court is to protect the rights of the defendant. But the methods and way to do that are virtually the same.

Military courts are subject to the 6th Amendment's demand for the accused's right to a fair trial. Once the habeus corpus section of the MCA of 2006 was ruled unconsitutional, there is little that is different between Military courts and Federal courts.

The following are my notes on the CIPA and the Military's MRE 505:

The Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) is a tool to help courts decided whether or not sensitive information is a national security threat, before the trial begins.

The 1980 CIP Act through a formal written request pre-trial, notifies the prosecution that the defendant will be asking for X, Y and Z during the trial, giving the prosecution the opportunity to dismiss the case if the risk to national security is unacceptable. A civil judge decides what is admissable and what is not - always with the defendants right to a fair trial prevailing.

Once the trial begins, if additional sensitive information comes to light, another CIPA form must be submitted for prompt court conference.

If the court admits the sensitive material for trial, the DOJ can then enter a request to the court to substitute summaries or redacted documents in lieu of originals. The court may accept or reject such a request. At all times, if summaries or redacted information is admitted, it must guarantee the defendant the same degree of fairness that the original documents would provide.
The Attorney General then decides whether to appeal the court's ruling, or file a formal protest. If a formal protest is waged by the DOJ, the court can "require" the prosecution to dismiss the case, although the likelihood of that happening is insignificant. Once that is put to bed, the DOJ determines the degree of risk to national security if the trial goes forth. If the risk is unacceptable, the DOJ can dismiss the case. This is known as the "disclose or dismiss dilemma." That's it. That's the choice. A civilian court makes the determination about a prisoner of war.
At all times, the goal of CIPA is fairness to the defendant, and while CIPA has withstood Constitutional challenges:
...the judge in the Iran-Contra prosecutions has ruled that CIPA procedures must give way when they risk excessive exposure of the defendant's case.
 This was the case of Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, where the judge saw a risk to North's defense of "excessive exposure" of his case. The conclusion of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) report summary, is that it works best when when the classified information is only "marginally relevant or marginally sensitive." When sensitive information is at the "core" of the defendant's case, it is less likely that the case can be resolved in a manner that preserves the rights of the defendant - which means that national security is at jeopardy in such a trial, and so presumably, the DOJ would move to dismiss the case.

In a military court the guidelines are known as MRE 505. With MRE 505, CIPA is essentially flipped. National security is the greatest concern, not the defendant, but in all cases, the defendant's right to a fair trial is adhered to.

As far back as 2004, this exhaustive article written by Joshua E. Kastenberg, compares CIPA and the Military MRE 505. I noticed something that might not happen in a civil court, although I can't confirm that. In the case of a Marine embassy guard in Moscow, the military court ruled that the national security risk of allowing the public to hear testimony, warranted preventing public access to certain witnesses. Military courts have been been sensitive to how a trial under CIPA requirements, might change a defendant's outcome, from that in a Military court. In otherwords, the Military has, at times, used CIPA to "balance context between an accused's rights and the need to protect national security information."

In a military trial, the defendant has the right to civilian counsel, but if classified material is to be introduced into evidence, the civilian attorney must have the proper security clearances. The defendant's right to a speedy trial is likely compromised by this requirement. If the civilian counsel refuses the clearance procedure, but the defendant continues with the representation, the attorney will be excluded from some portions of the trial.

The first video below is Eric Holder announcing that the 9-11 terrorists will be brought to New York City for Federal criminal trial. The second video is Senator Barack Obama in September 2007 saying KSM would "get real military procedures...." As Scared Monkeys says,"Obama was for Military Commission tribunals before he was against them."





 
Eric Holder Civil Trials (video)
 









Barack Obama - KSM will get real military procedures (video)

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Lindsay Graham Glenn Beck Rush: Angry White Guys Obama Lite: Lindsay Graham Center-Lite

Lindsay Graham must drive the good conservative people of South Carolina crazy. What do conservatives do about Lindsay Graham? He is a loose cannon bouncing around the halls of Congress, leaving the evidence of "good-ole-boys networking" on the pristine walls of conservatism. See videos below.

How do South Carolinians get him out of the Senate with the GOP funding him? I do not vote in South Carolina, but we assume, just for a minute, that conservatives there would like to replace Lindsay Graham, how does a new voice get heard? I wish I knew the answer.

I give Lindsay Graham credit in many areas. He is strong on the defense of the country and the military, he protects the rights of the unborn, he is mixed on energy, he supported Rep. Joe Wilson in a magnificent way, but he wrong on growing the Republican party. He doesn't have a clue how most conservatives think about the core of the party.

The video is Glenn Beck's latest clip and commentary of Senator Grahamnesty. Keep in mind that Graham has bashed Beck and Limbaugh on Keith Olberman. Graham just doesn't understand how a man (Beck) can make so much money for simply "crying."









Lindsay Graham Angry White Guys
 
 

Friday, October 23, 2009

GOP Can you hear us now? GOP Poll Unchanged: GOP get the message: Get Conservative!

A Rasmussen poll still maintains that the GOP has lost touch with their base. The GOP doesn't get the message - "Get Conservative," and they still are not hearing us. See a video below - Glenn Beck says it well.



Rep. Marsha Blackburn Gets the Message


The telephone survey finds that "73% of Republicans believe their congresscritters have lost touch with GOP voters." After all the tea parties, three-fourths of Republicans believe they have no voice and no support for conservatism. The depressing news is, the same poll in April 2009 had the same findings. Nothing is changing.

I do not have a congressional problem in my state, but I see it everywhere across the map. The best example I can think of is the GOP-announced support and funding of Florida's Governor Charlie Crist for Florida's U.S. Senate seat, against a clear conservative, which Crist is not, over Marco Rubio. Very early on the GOP declared they were behind Crist, nevermind that he has a slobbering love affair with Barack Obama.

Polls are everywhere, asking who we want as our nominee in 2013. I never know which box to check. Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo and Marsha Blackburn are not on any polls - and few governors are promising. It is depressing!

* Romney doesn't have the fire to be an energetic candidate, although he is a conservative.

* Mike Huckabee is gaining in popularity but he falls off the wrong edge of conservative a bit too often. I admit that he seems to be getting more conservative on his television show.

* Newt and Sarah are now bookmongers.

* Newt's political mind is truly awesome until he wants to sell a book with John Kerry or his wife. He has a right to a life as an author, but he forges far too many friendships with hardline Liberals. A Gingrich presidency would be the same "good ol boy" networks of keeping each other in the House and Senate that we've see for so many years.

* Palin's announced Oprah appearance confirms my feeling that she doesn't have the maturity to be in the Oval Office. After Oprah REFUSED to let Sarah on her show during the elections, Oprah exhibits her wiliness by now inviting Sarah on, and Oprah won this one for Barack. I still have hopes that Palin will be a powerful conservative voice. We won't know until her book, Going Rogue comes out.

Rick Moran at American Thinker says this:
The scattershot strategy employed by national Republicans, as well as their inability to unite to block some of Obama's more radical agenda items has most of the rest of the party thinking they are not representing their interests.
I continue to give not a dime to the GOP. I support my local candidate because they are doing the hard lifting, and I support some others around the country when I can. I have nothing for the traitorous GOP.





 
Glenn Beck on Lindsay Graham - GOP Unchanged (video)

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Ben Smith Lindsay Graham: Politico Ben Smith Quotes Lindsay Graham Half Truth

Politico's Ben Smith had a moment of senility, or maybe memory loss, or - well, he probably printed exactly what he intended to print. Smith provided almost the complete transcript for Senator Lindsay Graham's response to President Obama's yet-another-health-care-speech last night. Smith quoted a half-truth, or maybe a quarter-truth is more accurate.

Senator Lindsay Graham

The first part of Senator Graham's comments were all quoted. Then when Graham was asked about Representative Joe Wilson's outburst during the televised joint session of Congress - you know, that one where Wilson yelled "you lie," Ben Smith said that Graham blamed Rep. Wilson for "partisan strife." What??? Watch the video and get the real story. Remarks about Wilson begin at about 2.22 minutes in and from 2:37 on, Smith ignored - all of which was a rousing endorsement of Joe Wilson with not a single claim of Wilson causing "political strife."




H/T to Hot Air for video Related: Joe Wilson, Greatest Living Statesman

Joe Wilson Greatest Living Statesman

Rep. Joe Wilson apologized for calling President Obama a liar. It's a shame he had too. Here was a man emotionally invested in our country who had the guts and the passion to tell the President that he just spoke a lie. I don't know about you, but to me - wow, it felt so good and so right. U.S. Representative Joe Wilson is America's greatest living statesman at this moment. I encourage others in the Republican party to try to snatch that honor from him.

Rep. Joe Wilson
So, in America the office of the President is revered and respected. The reverence comes from the fact that this nation is free as no people have ever been free in the history of the world. The respect comes from the fact that the people choose their leader, and OUR leader should be respected because WE are a mighty people. It was right for Joe Wilson to apologize for interrupting a presidential speech, but not for calling the President a liar, because Obama did lie. If you didn't catch the whole story, you'll hear in the second video below about the amendment offered by Republicans which would block illegal immigrants from receiving health care under the House or Senate Bills. In other words, the amendments were designed to make it clear that illegals could not be included. Democrats defeated that amendment, just as they have defeated other amendments designed to clarify murky issues. This means that illegal immigrants will receive health care courtesy of the American taxpayer. The President lied as he has become accustomed to doing. Let's face it, he can't get anything passed that he desires unless he lies about it - because Americans are appalled at his plans for this country.

On Friday, Democrats moved one step closer to giving free health insurance to the nation's estimated 12 million illegal aliens when they successfully defeated a Republican-backed amendment, offered by Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., that would have prevented illegal aliens from receiving government-subsidized health care under the proposed plan backed by House Democrats and President Barack Obama.

In health care reform, remember that Republicans have asked for clarification and guarantees more than once: (1) stipulate illegals will not receive health care through the reform bill, that (2) end of life counseling will be voluntary and never mandatory, and that (3) abortions will not be covered under any reform Bill. Democrats refused. What's up with that? I respect the "office" of the President and it is not an easy thing to acknowledge that my President is a "flim-flam man," who, in fact, seldom tells the truth, and certainly can never tell the the whole truth. Reports say that Rep. John Boehner and Rep. Eric Cantor asked Wilson to apologize on the House floor today. Boehner will not admit it and he will not deny it, so that means he did ask for the apology. Wilson was right to refuse to apologize beyond directly to the White House. Boehner and Cantor need to know that the "WE the people" are sick of the affected postures of the Republican leadership. This is war, and it's the people's war because our elected officials do not deal well with the Democrat shuck-and-jive. I encourage Rep. Wilson to stand strong, which is exactly what he did on Hannity tonight (second video below). The Democrats think they can bring him down. The estatic word from the Liberals is that Wilson's opponent raised $350,000 in the first blink of the eye after the speech. I believe that only if Soros handed over a check. When a lie is a lie, those speaking for us in Washington D.C. must call it a lie - not a "nuance," not an opinion, not "misspeaking." Message to Karl Rove: Obama didn't make "glaring misstatements or distortions." He lied, and you know it. Rahm Emanuel, the President's Chief of Staff said today no President has "ever been treated so disrespectfully." Remember when President Bush tried to reform Social Security, and in a State of the Union address, the Democrats booed him - more than once? Bush said SS would be bankrupt by 2042. They booed. Today, the Obama administration says Social Security will be bankrupt by 2025. Remember when Rep. Barney Franks and Maxine Waters and Senator Chris Dodd denied Bush's claims that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would bring down the country unless Congress reformed their operations - like right now? These three clowns might have called him a liar. I don't know, but I do know that they denied he was telling the truth about it. They said he was wrong. The Fannie-Freddie duo brought the country down. When it comes to disrespecting a President by Congress, Democrats take the honors for claiming George Bush lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. How many times was the "lied" word used - or something equally meaningful? Watch former First Lady and Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Chris Dodd, Senator John Kerry, CIA Director George Tenent, and President Bill Clinton in this video shift all of their own culpability, even through they received regular security briefings. These bastions of the Senate, over and over, accused Bush of lying to the Nation. Now that's disrespect. Come on Republicans. Grab that honor of "Greatest Living Statesman." If Wilson can do it, you can do it. Telling the truth is never the wrong thing to do unless you tell your mother-in-law that her apple pie is just the worst ever. That's a truth that must remain unsaid. Speaking of the truth, see how Politico's Ben Smith reported Senator Lindsay Graham's comments about his fellow-South Carolinian, Joe Wilson. (Ben Smith - you lie!)
George Bush Booed (video)
Joe Wilson Greatest Living Statesman (video)

Saturday, February 7, 2009

Senate Serving America Pork and Redistributed Beans Today

By Faultline USA

Stimulus Package

This Pic from the LA Times shows

Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, from left, Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson, and Republican Sens. Arlen Specter and Susan Collins arrive to talk to reporters about a deal being arranged on the economic stimulus bill. The compromise, negotiated behind the scenes, would slice some $110 billion from the bill, which had grown to $930 billion as amended on the Senate floor.

(Brendan Smialowski, Getty Images)

According to this morning's Chicago Tribune, a deal was hammered out Friday that will bring about the passage of this dreadful stimulus package, and Republicans may delay the vote until early next week, “but there was little doubt about the outcome.”

Senators said the legislation, which is a cornerstone of Obama's efforts to revive the economy, would carry a price tag of about $820 billion under the compromise deal, though the final figure was unclear. The bill is expected to cost about the same as the $819 billion approved by the House and far lower than the bill as amended on the Senate floor, which had grown to more than $930 billion.

The dirty so-called “Stimulus” deal is almost done with these turncoat Republican Senators we have to thank:

Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania

Three GOP moderates — Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania — quickly declared their support for the compromise. But two other GOP moderates — Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and George Voinovich of Ohio — said they would oppose it.

CBS Poll: Support For Stimulus Falls

According to a new CBS Poll nearly half of America is against the stimulus package because they do not believe it will shorten the recession.

(CBS) Slightly more than half the country approves of President Obama's $800 billion-plus stimulus package, a new CBS News poll finds. But support for the bill has fallen 12 points since January, and nearly half of those surveyed do not believe it will shorten the recession.

Contact your Senators today and tell them you don’t want this pork and redistributed beans package!

The Center for Individual Freedom will send out blast faxes to all of the Senators in your name for a price. Here’s what they say:

Tell them in no uncertain terms that the American people DON'T want them to "tinker" with this evil bill or to try to "fix" it. The American people do not want any "compromises" or "amendments" or ANY AMOUNT OF LIPSTICK PUT ON THIS PIG OF A BILL.

The American people want the Obama-Pelosi Theft Act of 2009 DEAD... A STAKE DRIVEN THROUGH ITS EVIL HEART! Tell them - to borrow a phrase from former First Lady Nancy Reagan - they just need to say "NO" and stop this liberal boondoggle!

We don't need compromises! We don't need fixes! We don't need alternative plans that will move America towards SOCIALISM!

Flood the following wavering and compromising Senators TODAY and their staff with your e-mails reminding them that if they vote Yes on this package their constituents will long remember!!!

SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER - REPUBLICAN

DC PHONE:  (202) 224-4254

DC FAX: (202) 228-1229

HARRISBURG PHONE: (717) 782-3951

HARRISBURG FAX: (717) 782-4920

EMAILS TO CONTACT:

Scott_Hoeflich@specter.senate.gov

Maria_Plakoudas@specter.senate.gov

Christopher_Bradish@specter.senate.gov

thomas_dower@specter.senate.gov

seema_singh@specter.senate.gov

corene_ashley@specter.senate.gov

regina_campbell@specter.senate.gov

gayle_mills@specter.senate.gov

SENATOR LINDSAY GRAHAM - REPUBLICAN

DC PHONE:  (202) 224-5972

DC FAX: (202) 224-3808

COLUMBIA PHONE: (803) 933-0112

COLUMBIA FAX: (803) 933-0957

EMAILS TO CONTACT:

Richard_Perry@lgraham.senate.gov

Lauren_Edwards@lgraham.senate.gov

jen_olson@lgraham.senate.gov

wes_hickman@lgraham.senate.gov

kevin_bishop@lgraham.senate.gov

Matt_Rimkunas@lGraham.senate.gov

Colin_Allen@LGraham.senate.gov

Laura_Bauld@lGraham.senate.gov

Adam_Brake@LGraham.senate.gov

Walt_Kuhn@LGraham.senate.gov

SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS - REPUBLICAN

DC PHONE:  (202) 224-2523

DC FAX: (202) 224-2693

AUGUSTA PHONE: (207) 622-8414

AUGUSTA FAX: (207) 622-5884

EMAILS TO CONTACT:

Steve_Abbott@collins.senate.gov

Holly_Nesbit@collins.senate.gov

SENATOR OLYMPIA SNOWE - REPUBLICAN

DC PHONE:  (202) 224-5344

DC FAX: (202) 224-1946

BOSTON PHONE: (207) 622-8292

BOSTON FAX: (207) 622-7295

EMAILS TO CONTACT:

John_Richter@snowe.senate.gov

Anna_Levin@snowe.senate.gov

SENATOR MITCH McCONNELL - REPUBLICAN

DC PHONE:  (202) 224-2541

DC FAX: (202) 224-2499

LOUISVILLE PHONE: (502) 582-6304

LOUISVILLE FAX: (502) 582-5326

EMAILS TO CONTACT:

Fred_Karem@mcconnell.senate.gov

Adam_Howard@mcconnell.senate.gov

Hannah_Benton@mcconnell.senate.gov

robert_steurer@mcconnell.senate.gov

julie_adams@mcconnell.senate.gov

scott_raab@mcconnell.senate.gov

allison_thompson@mcconnell.senate.gov

Reb_Brownell@mcconnell.senate.gov

leann_crosby@mcconnell.senate.gov

Moon_Sulfab@mcconnell.senate

SENATOR JOSEPH LIEBERMAN - INDEPENDENT

DC PHONE:  (202) 224-4041

DC FAX: (202) 224-9750

HARTFORD PHONE: (860) 549-8463

SAN FRANCISCO FAX: (860) 317-2242

EMAILS TO CONTACT:

vance_serchuk@lieberman.senate.gov

clarine_nardi_riddle@lieberman.senate.gov

frank_rowe@lieberman.senate.gov

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Here is documentation that irrefutably chains Barack Obama to the most odious leftist movements in the United States today. Furthermore, it presents conclusive evidence that Obama not only knows of, but has participated in promotion of the Left's apocalyptic strategy of destruction for the United States: the Cloward-Piven Strategy of manufactured crisis. Don't miss the flow chart!

Quote from Saul Alinsky - Rules for Radicals 1989: Make the enemy [Conservative thought] live up to their (sic) own book of rules," When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one.
Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis American Thinker, September 28, 2008 by Jim Simpson Published at the request of Jim Simpson Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst. His writings have been published in American Thinker, Washington Times, FrontPage Magazine, DefenseWatch, Soldier of Fortune and others. His blog is Truth and Consequences.. America waits with bated breath while Washington struggles to bring the U.S. economy back from the brink of disaster. But many of those same politicians caused the crisis, and if left to their own devices will do so again.
Despite the mass media news blackout, a series of books, talk radio and the blogosphere have managed to expose Barack Obama's connections to his radical mentors -- Weather Underground bombers William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis and others. David Horowitz and his Discover the Networks.org have also contributed a wealth of information and have noted Obama's radical connections since the beginning.
Yet, no one to my knowledge has yet connected all the dots between Barack Obama and the Radical Left. When seen together, the influences on Obama's life comprise a who's who of the radical leftist movement, and it becomes painfully apparent that not only is Obama a willing participant in that movement, he has spent most of his adult life deeply immersed in it.
But even this doesn't fully describe the extreme nature of this candidate. He can be tied directly to a malevolent overarching strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s.
The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis
In an earlier post, I noted the liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress - with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?
Why?
One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.
I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent - the failure is deliberate. Don't laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.
The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:
"Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)
Newsmax rounds out the picture:
Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation's wealth.
In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of "crisis" they were trying to create:
By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.
No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:
  1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
  2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
  3. The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.
Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their "rights." According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, "one person was on the welfare rolls... for every two working in the city's private economy."
According to another City Journal article titled "Compassion Gone Mad":
The movement's impact on New York City was jolting: welfare caseloads, already climbing 12 percent a year in the early sixties, rose by 50 percent during Lindsay's first two years; spending doubled... The city had 150,000 welfare cases in 1960; a decade later it had 1.5 million.
The vast expansion of welfare in New York City that came of the NWRO's Cloward-Piven tactics sent the city into bankruptcy in 1975. Rudy Giuliani cited Cloward and Piven by name as being responsible for "an effort at economic sabotage." He also credited Cloward-Piven with changing the cultural attitude toward welfare from that of a temporary expedient to a lifetime entitlement, an attitude which in-and-of-itself has caused perhaps the greatest damage of all.
Cloward and Piven looked at this strategy as a gold mine of opportunity. Within the newly organized groups, each offensive would find an ample pool of foot soldier recruits willing to advance its radical agenda at little or no pay, and expand its base of reliable voters, legal or otherwise. The radicals' threatening tactics also would accrue an intimidating reputation, providing a wealth of opportunities for extorting monetary and other concessions from the target organizations. In the meantime, successful offensives would create an ever increasing drag on society. As they gleefully observed:
Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous. Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely.
The next time you drive through one of the many blighted neighborhoods in our cities, or read of the astronomical crime, drug addiction, and out-of-wedlock birth rates, or consider the failed schools, strapped police and fire resources of every major city, remember Cloward and Piven's thrill that "...the drain on local resources persists indefinitely."
ACORN, the new tip of the Cloward-Piven spear
In 1970, one of George Wiley's protégés, Wade Rathke -- like Bill Ayers, a member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) -- was sent to found the Arkansas Community Organizations for Reform Now. While NWRO had made a good start, it alone couldn't accomplish the Cloward-Piven goals. Rathke's group broadened the offensive to include a wide array of low income "rights." Shortly thereafter they changed "Arkansas" to "Association of" and ACORN went nationwide.
Today ACORN is involved in a wide array of activities, including housing, voting rights, illegal immigration and other issues. According to ACORN's website: "ACORN is the nation's largest grassroots community organization of low-and moderate-income people with over 400,000 member families organized into more than 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 cities across the country," It is perhaps the largest radical group in the U.S. and has been cited for widespread criminal activity on many fronts.
Voting
On voting rights, ACORN and its voter mobilization subsidiary, Project Vote, have been involved nationwide in efforts to grant felons the vote and lobbied heavily for the Motor Voter Act of 1993, a law allowing people to register at motor vehicle departments, schools, libraries and other public places. That law had been sought by Cloward and Piven since the early1980s and they were present, standing behind President Clinton at the signing ceremony.
ACORN's voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:
  • 1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.
  • 2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.
  • 3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.
In this effort, ACORN sets up registration sites all over the country and has been frequently cited for turning in fraudulent registrations, as well as destroying republican applications. In the 2004-2006 election cycles alone, ACORN was accused of widespread voter fraud in 12 states. It may have swung the election for one state governor.
ACORN's website brags: "Since 2004, ACORN has helped more than 1.7 million low- and moderate-income and minority citizens apply to register to vote." Project vote boasts 4 million. I wonder how many of them are dead? For the 2008 cycle, ACORN and Project Vote have pulled out all the stops. Given their furious nationwide effort, it is not inconceivable that this presidential race could be decided by fraudulent votes alone.
Barack Obama ran ACORN's Project Vote in Chicago and his highly successful voter registration drive was credited with getting the disgraced former Senator Carol Moseley-Braun elected. Newsmax reiterates Cloward and Piven's aspirations for ACORN's voter registration efforts:
By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation's wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.
Illegal Immigration
As I have written elsewhere, the Radical Left's offensive to promote illegal immigration is "Cloward-Piven on steroids." ACORN is at the forefront of this movement as well, and was a leading organization among a broad coalition of radical groups, including Soros' Open Society Institute, the Service Employees International Union (ACORN founder Wade Rathke also runs a SEIU chapter), and others, that became the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. CCIR fortunately failed to gain passage for the 2007 illegal immigrant amnesty bill, but its goals have not changed.
The burden of illegal immigration on our already overstressed welfare system has been widely documented. Some towns in California have even been taken over by illegal immigrant drug cartels. The disease, crime and overcrowding brought by illegal immigrants places a heavy burden on every segment of society and every level of government, threatening to split this country apart at the seams. In the meantime, radical leftist efforts to grant illegal immigrants citizenship guarantee a huge pool of new democrat voters. With little border control, terrorists can also filter in.
Obama aided ACORN as their lead attorney in a successful suit he brought against the Illinois state government to implement the Motor Voter law there. The law had been resisted by Republican Governor Jim Edgars, who feared the law was an opening to widespread vote fraud.
His fears were warranted as the Motor Voter law has since been cited as a major opportunity for vote fraud, especially for illegal immigrants, even terrorists. According to the Wall Street Journal: "After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote..."
ACORN's dual offensives on voting and illegal immigration are handy complements. Both swell the voter rolls with reliable democrats while assaulting the country ACORN seeks to destroy with overwhelming new problems.
Mortgage Crisis
And now we have the mortgage crisis, which has sent a shock wave through Wall Street and panicked world financial markets like no other since the stock market crash of 1929. But this is a problem created in Washington long ago. It originated with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), signed into law in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The CRA was Carter's answer to a grassroots activist movement started in Chicago, and forced banks to make loans to low income, high risk customers. PhD economist and former Texas Senator Phil Gramm has called it: "a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks."
ACORN aggressively sought to expand loans to low income groups using the CRA as a whip. Economist Stan Leibowitz wrote in the New York Post:
In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining"-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.
In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications-but the overwhelming reason wasn't racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tend to have weaker finances.
ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining. Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.
As a New York Post article describes it:
A 1995 strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to find ways to provide mortgages to their poorer communities. It also let community activists intervene at yearly bank reviews, shaking the banks down for large pots of money.
Banks that got poor reviews were punished; some saw their merger plans frustrated; others faced direct legal challenges by the Justice Department.
Flexible lending programs expanded even though they had higher default rates than loans with traditional standards. On the Web, you can still find CRA loans available via ACORN with "100 percent financing . . . no credit scores . . . undocumented income . . . even if you don't report it on your tax returns." Credit counseling is required, of course.
Ironically, an enthusiastic Fannie Mae Foundation report singled out one paragon of nondiscriminatory lending, which worked with community activists and followed "the most flexible underwriting criteria permitted." That lender's $1 billion commitment to low-income loans in 1992 had grown to $80 billion by 1999 and $600 billion by early 2003.
The lender they were speaking of was Countrywide, which specialized in subprime lending and had a working relationship with ACORN.
The revisions also allowed for the first time the securitization of CRA-regulated loans containing subprime mortgages. The changes came as radical "housing rights" groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans. ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama. (Emphasis, mine.)
Since these loans were to be underwritten by the government sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the implicit government guarantee of those loans absolved lenders, mortgage bundlers and investors of any concern over the obvious risk. As Bloomberg reported: "It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit."
And if you think Washington policy makers cared about ACORN's negative influence, think again. Before this whole mess came down, a Democrat-sponsored bill on the table would have created an "Affordable Housing Trust Fund," granting ACORN access to approximately $500 million in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac revenues with little or no oversight.
Even now, unbelievably -- on the brink of national disaster -- Democrats have insisted ACORN benefit from bailout negotiations! Senator Lindsay Graham reported last night (9/25/08) in an interview with Greta Van Susteren of On the Record that Democrats want 20 percent of the bailout money to go to ACORN!
This entire fiasco represents perhaps the pinnacle of ACORN's efforts to advance the Cloward-Piven Strategy and is a stark demonstration of the power they wield in Washington.
Enter Barack Obama
In attempting to capture the significance of Barack Obama's Radical Left connections and his relation to the Cloward Piven strategy, I constructed the following flow chart. It is by no means complete. There are simply too many radical individuals and organizations to include them all here. But these are perhaps the most significant.
Cloward Piven Strategy
The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who's who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.
Saul Alinsky
Most people are unaware that Barack Obama received his training in "community organizing" from Saul Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. But he did. In and of itself that marks his heritage and training as that of a radical activist. One really needs go no further. But we have.
Bill Ayers
Obama objects to being associated with SDS bomber Bill Ayers, claiming he is being smeared with "guilt by association." But they worked together at the Woods Fund. The Wall Street Journal added substantially to our knowledge by describing in great detail Obama's work over five years with SDS bomber Bill Ayers on the board of a non-profit, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, to push a radical agenda on public school children. As Stanley Kurtz states:
"...the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago."
Also included in the mix is Theresa Heinz Kerry's favorite charity, the Tides Foundation. A partial list of Tides grants tells you all you need to know: ACLU, ACORN, Center for American Progress, Center for Constitutional Rights (a communist front,) CAIR, Earth Justice, Institute for Policy Studies (KGB spy nest), National Lawyers Guild (oldest communist front in U.S.), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and practically every other radical group there is. ACORN's Wade Rathke runs a Tides subsidiary, the Tides Center.
Carl Davidson and the New Party
We have heard about Bomber Bill, but we hear little about fellow SDS member Carl Davidson. According to Discover the Networks, Davidson was an early supporter of Barack Obama and a prominent member of Chicago's New Party, a synthesis of CPUSA members, Socialists, ACORN veterans and other radicals. Obama sought and received the New Party's endorsement, and they assisted with his campaign. The New Party also developed a strong relationship with ACORN. As an excellent article on the New Party observes: "Barack Obama knew what he was getting into and remains an ideal New Party candidate."
George Soros
The chart also suggests the reason for George Soros' fervent support of Obama. The President of his Open Society Institute is Aryeh Neier, founder of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). As mentioned above, three other former SDS members had extensive contact with Obama: Bill Ayers, Carl Davidson and Wade Rathke. Surely Aryeh Neier would have heard from his former colleagues of the promising new politician. More to the point, Neier is firmly committed to supporting the hugely successful radical organization, ACORN, and would be certain back their favored candidate, Barack Obama.
ACORN
Obama has spent a large portion of his professional life working for ACORN or its subsidiaries, representing ACORN as a lawyer on some of its most critical issues, and training ACORN leaders. Stanley Kurtz's excellent National Review article, "Inside Obama's Acorn." also describes Obama's ACORN connection in detail. But I can't improve on Obama's own words:
I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career (emphasis added). Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work. - Barack Obama, Speech to ACORN, November 2007 (Courtesy Newsmax.)
In another excellent article on Obama's ACORN connections, Newsmax asks a nagging question:
It would be telling to know if Obama, during his years at Columbia, had occasion to meet Cloward and study the Cloward-Piven Strategy.
I ask you, is it possible ACORN would train Obama to take leadership positions within ACORN without telling him what he was training for? Is it possible ACORN would put Obama in leadership positions without clueing him into what his purpose was?? Is it possible that this most radical of organizations would put someone in charge of training its trainers, without him knowing what it was he was training them for?
As a community activist for ACORN; as a leadership trainer for ACORN; as a lead organizer for ACORN's Project Vote; as an attorney representing ACORN's successful efforts to impose Motor Voter regulations in Illinois; as ACORN's representative in lobbying for the expansion of high risk housing loans through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that led to the current crisis; as a recipient of their assistance in his political campaigns -- both with money and campaign workers; it is doubtful that he was unaware of ACORN's true goals. It is doubtful he was unaware of the Cloward-Piven Strategy.
Fast-forward to 2005 when an obsequious, servile and scraping Daniel Mudd, CEO of Fannie Mae spoke at the Congressional Black Caucus swearing in ceremony for newly-elected Illinois Senator, Barack Obama. Mudd called, the Congressional Black Caucus "our family" and "the conscience of Fannie Mae."
In 2005, Republicans sought to rein in Fannie and Freddie. Senator John McCain was at the forefront of that effort. But it failed due to an intense lobbying effort put forward by Fannie and Freddie.
In his few years as a U.S. senator, Obama has received campaign contributions of $126,349, from Fannie and Freddie, second only to the $165,400 received by Senator Chris Dodd, who has been getting donations from them since 1988. What makes Obama so special?
His closest advisers are a dirty laundry list of individuals at the heart of the financial crisis: former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson; Former Fannie Mae CEO and former Clinton Budget Director Frank Raines; and billionaire failed Superior Bank of Chicago Board Chair Penny Pritzker.
Johnson had to step down as adviser on Obama's V.P. search after this gem came out:
An Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) report[1] from September 2004 found that, during Johnson's tenure as CEO, Fannie Mae had improperly deferred $200 million in expenses. This enabled top executives, including Johnson and his successor, Franklin Raines, to receive substantial bonuses in 1998.[2] A 2006 OFHEO report[3] found that Fannie Mae had substantially under-reported Johnson's compensation. Originally reported as $6-7 million, Johnson actually received approximately $21 million.
Obama denies ties to Raines but the Washington Post calls him a member of "Obama's political circle." Raines and Johnson were fined $3 million by the Office of Federal Housing Oversight for their manipulation of Fannie books. The fine is small change however, compared to the $50 million Raines was able to obtain in improper bonuses as a result of juggling the books.
Most significantly, Penny Pritzker, the current Finance Chairperson of Obama's presidential campaign helped develop the complicated investment bundling of subprime securities at the heart of the meltdown. She did so in her position as shareholder and board chair of Superior Bank. The Bank failed in 2001, one of the largest in recent history, wiping out $50 million in uninsured life savings of approximately 1,400 customers. She was named in a RICO class action law suit but doesn't seem to have come out of it too badly.
As a young attorney in the 1990s, Barack Obama represented ACORN in Washington in their successful efforts to expand Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) authority. In addition to making it easier for ACORN groups to force banks into making risky loans, this also paved the way for banks like Superior to package mortgages as investments, and for the Government Sponsored Enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite them. These changes created the conditions that ultimately lead to the current financial crisis.
Did they not know this would occur? Were these smart people, led by a Harvard graduate, unaware of the Econ 101 concept of moral hazard that would result from the government making implicit guarantees to underwrite private sector financial risk? They should have known that freeing the high-risk mortgage market of risk, calamity was sure to ensue. I think they did.
Barack Obama, the Cloward-Piven candidate, no matter how he describes himself, has been a radical activist for most of his political career. That activism has been in support of organizations and initiatives that at their heart seek to tear the pillars of this nation asunder in order to replace them with their demented socialist vision. Their influence has spread so far and so wide that despite their blatant culpability in the current financial crisis, they are able to manipulate Capital Hill politicians to cut them into $140 billion of the bailout pie!
God grant those few responsible yet remaining in Washington, DC the strength to prevent this massive fraud from occurring. God grant them the courage to stand up in the face of this Marxist tidal wave.

©2007-2012copyrightMaggie M. Thornton