Archive for the ‘Corruption’ Category

After months on the sidelines, major liberal donors including the financier George Soros are preparing to inject up to $100 million into independent groups to aid Democrats’ chances this fall. But instead of going head to head with the conservative “super PACs” and outside groups that have flooded the presidential and Congressional campaigns with negative advertising, the donors are focusing on grass-roots organizing, voter registration and Democratic turnout.

The financier George Soros is expected to contribute $1 million each to a rights group and a research “super PAC.”

The departure from the conservatives’ approach, which helped Republicans wrest control of the House in 2010, partly reflects liberal donors’ objections to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which paved the way for super PACs and unbridled campaign spending.

But in interviews, donors and strategists involved in the effort said they also did not believe they could match advertising spending by leading conservative groups likeAmerican Crossroads and Americans for Prosperity, and instead wanted to exploit what they see as the Democrats’ advantage in grass-roots organizing.

“Super PACs are critically important,” said Rob Stein, the founder of the Democracy Alliance, a group of liberal donors who will convene near Miami this week to discuss where to steer their money this year. But the liberal groups, he said, believe that local efforts and outreach through social media “can have an enormous impact in battleground states in 2012.”

In a move likely to draw in other major donors, Mr. Soros will contribute $1 million each to America Votes, a group that coordinates political activity for left-leaning environmental, abortion rights and civil rights groups, and American Bridge 21st Century, a super PAC that focuses on election-oriented research. The donations will be Mr. Soros’s first major contributions of the 2012 election cycle.

“George Soros believes the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates to special interests’ paying for political ads,” said Michael Vachon, a spokesman for Mr. Soros. “There is no way those concerned with the public interest can compete with them. Soros has always focused his political giving on grass-roots organizing and holding conservatives accountable for the flawed policies they promote. His support of these groups is consistent with those views.”

On Monday, in an indication that he does not expect significant advertising spending from Democratic-leaning outside groups at this stage, President Obama unveiled a $25 million ad campaign against Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee.

A super PAC founded by two former Obama aides, Priorities USA Action, has struggled to raise money against better-financed conservative groups like American Crossroads, which expects to spend $300 million on the presidential, House and Senate elections.

Those difficulties stem in part from Mr. Obama’s past opposition to spending by outside groups, which has dampened donor enthusiasm despite his about-face this year. But it also reflects how major liberal donors and independent groups have focused since 2004 on creating a permanent infrastructure of liberal research and voter-outreach groups. That year, liberal groups spent more than $200 million on advertising and grass-roots activity in a failed bid to deprive President George W. Bush of a second term.

Conservative independent groups, including super PACs that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on election ads, dominated the advertising wars in 2010, helping Republicans make major gains in Congress, and their money has had a similar impact so far in this cycle.

“The idea that we’re going to engage in an arms race on advertising with the Republicans is not appealing to many liberal donors,” said David Brock, the founder of American Bridge 21st Century.

The advertising-oriented Democratic super PACs, including Priorities USA and two groups founded to back Democrats in Congress, remain on the list of organizations that the Democracy Alliance recommends to its members. Robert McKay, who is the chairman of the Democracy Alliance and sits on the board of Priorities USA, said the $100 million expected to be spent this year by alliance members would include some money for election ads, but would most likely favor grass-roots organizing and research groups.

“There is a bias towards funding infrastructure as it relates to the elections,” Mr. McKay said. “That means get-out-the-vote efforts” directed toward young voters, single women, black voters and Latinos, he said.

Organizations likely to be a part of the effort include Catalist, which creates voter lists for allied liberal groups; ProgressNow, a network of state-based Web sites for liberal opinion and activism; and the Latino Engagement Fund, a new group that works to register and turn out Latino voters for Democrats. Conservative independent groups are financing similar outreach to Latino voters: the American Action Network, which spent $26 million against Democratic candidates in 2010, last year unveiled the Hispanic Leadership Network, which will seek to mobilize center-right Latino voters.

Liberals outside the Democracy Alliance are also likely to make significant contributions, as are labor unions, which plan to spend up to $400 million on state, local and federal races, and advocacy groups like the Sierra Club.

Some groups will pay for both advertising and organizing. PAC+, a super PAC founded by the San Francisco philanthropist Steve Phillips, a member of the Democracy Alliance, expects to spend about $10 million on Latino voters in six states, with a heavy emphasis on Arizona, which the Obama campaign is seeking to turn into a battleground. Half of PAC+ spending will go to enrollment and half to advertising.

“You can dump 10 or 20 million in TV ads in Ohio and try to reach the persuadable swing voters there, or you can up voter turnout among Latinos in Colorado and Arizona and win that way,” Mr. Phillips said. “It’s much cheaper.”

A senior Obama administration official defended the efficacy of “class warfare” on his personal blog Monday by quoting the political philosopher and communist theorist Karl Marx.

Rick Bookstaber, who currently serves on the Financial Stability Oversight Council, the federal body established under the Dodd-Frank Act to “ensure the stability of our nation’s financial system,” took issue with conservative commentator Tucker Carlson’s accusations that liberals were engaging in “class warfare” by seeking to blame the nation’s fiscal problems on a small number of wealthy individuals.

“There is little that matches the artfulness of the rich in waving off criticism of the widening income gap as ‘class warfare,’” Bookstaber wrote. “And there is little that matches the gullibility of the rest in following along.”

“I am not picking sides in this war,” he added, “but I believe such a war is justifiable, and indeed ultimately inevitable.”

Bookstaber explained further, citing Marx:

During the industrial revolution class warfare centered on the length of the working day. A tightly defined working day only appeared with the advent of the industrial revolution. Before then laborers worked when they needed money, and then quit for a time once they fulfilled their needs. But regimentation and a dependable workforce became necessary once there was machinery to run and capital invested, and so with industrialization came the an enforced workday. So it is not surprising that Marx stated the central battle of class warfare at the time in terms of the working day:

The capitalist maintains his rights as a purchaser when he tries to make the working-day as long as possible, and to make, whenever possible, two working-days out of one. On the other hand, the peculiar nature of the commodity sold implies a limit to its consumption by the purchaser, and the laborer maintains his right as seller when he wishes to reduce the working-day to one of definite normal duration. There is here, therefore, an antinomy, right against right, both equally bearing the seal of the law of exchanges. Between equal rights force decides. Hence is it that in the history of capitalist production, the determination of what is a working-day, presents itself as the result of a struggle, a struggle between collective capital, i.e., the class of capitalists, and collective labour, i.e., the working-class. – Marx, Das Kapital

Marx’s work was widely appropriated throughout the 20th century by countries such as China and the former Soviet Union. Tens of millions of people were slaughtered under those regimes.

Team Obama includes a self-identified “Muslim Palestinian-American” campaign fundraiser who has a history of blasting Israel in highly charged letters and newspaper articles about the Middle East conflict.

Hala Hijazi, a Jordanian native and current San Francisco city employee, has personally secured between $100,000 to $200,000 for Obama’s reelection effort, according to Federal Election Committee filings.

She also has gone on record accusing Israel of war crimes while castigating America for providing the Jewish state critical military aid—a long-term investment that has bolstered U.S. security interests.

Hijazi, who has cultivated pristine left-wing credentials during her government career, is another name on an ever lengthening list of Obama-affiliated donors and bundlers who are either entangled in legal woes or hail from controversial backgrounds.

A prominent Hillary Clinton supporter who has long been entrenched in San Francisco’s left-wing political machine, Hijazi appears to be tapping a list of high profile West Coast liberals in an attempt to replenish the president’s campaign coffers.

Her public writings on Israel—an issue that has plagued Obama since the start of his presidency—reveal a longstanding and deep-seated hostility towards the Jewish state.

“As Americans we cannot allow the humanitarian crisis in Gaza to continue,” Hijazi wrote in a 2009 letter to the New York Times as rockets rained down on Israel from the Gaza Strip, provoking the Israelis to respond in self-defense. “The death of children and mothers and the Gaza blockade lack any moral justification and humanity.”

Hijazi went on to lament the U.S.-Israel military alliance and accuse Israel of destroying Muslim holy places.

“As God-fearing Americans, we cannot sit still and continue being silent when our taxpayer dollars are financing a war that is causing the death of innocent civilians and is destroying places of worship and education,” said Hijazi, who identified herself as “a Muslim Palestinian-American.”

American support for Israel is perverting the country’s collective morality, Hijazi claimed.

“We are citizens of a morally just country who believe in those rights; and once we Americans accept the loss of those rights for anyone, we risk losing them for ourselves,” wrote Hijazi, who currently serves as a project manager in the San Francisco City Attorney’s office. “We cannot allow the world to believe that we do not value life.”

Hijazi also alleged that Israel’s leaders wantonly kill Palestinian children in a 2001 San Francisco Chronicle article.

The election of Israeli military hero Ariel Sharon as prime minister “is a sad day in Palestine and all over the Mideast,” Hijazi told the paper.

“There is no peace,” she claimed, adding that Sharon’s “version of peace is security for Israel, and for him one death of an Israeli solider equals a thousand Palestinian children.”

As former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown’s “Palestinian campaign assistant” in 1999, Hijazi brought the mayor to an Arab cultural center to bolster his support in the minority community.

During the reception, attendees convinced Brown to express interest in having Beirut serve as San Francisco’s official “Sister City.” Hijazi also helped recruit Arab volunteers “from the audience to walk districts of the city in order to increase voter turnout,” according to a dispatch in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.

One GOP operative blasted team Obama’s fundraising arm for what he described as its shameless associations with a cast of unsavory characters—among them Hijazi and a Persian-Jewish donor who stands accused of running a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme.

“This has the potential to make the Obama Super-PAC completely toxic to voters—not just Jews and supporters of Israel, but your everyday swing voter that has no warm and fuzzy feelings about radical Islamists and terrorism,” said the senior GOP communications aide, who closely tracks campaign donations. “Every time you see an Obama Super-PAC ad, you’ll have to think of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Americans blown up in Jerusalem pizza parlors.”

The aide recommended that Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod “disavow this woman as soon as possible.”

Hijazi is closely tied to San Francisco’s vast network of entrenched Democratic political figures.

“She’s clearly part of the machine,” said Stephen Schwartz, an author and former San Francisco Chronicle reporter. “It’s the radical left and she’s at the heart of it.”

Hijazi has positioned herself as “a representative of Arab interests in the San Francisco political machine,” and her views are “representative in the Bay Area of politically correct attitudes about the Middle East,” Schwartz added.

Hijazi’s status as an Obama bundler, Schwartz said, “is definitely a reflection of the support that the San Francisco machine gives to the national leadership group in the Democratic Party.”

Quds Forces, new terror units tasked with destabilizing present governments

By Reza Kahlili

The Revolutionary Guards and its Quds Forces, which run Iran’s terror networks worldwide, have created two special units to undermine the regimes in the Persian Gulf and push America out of the region.

The Guards are using Imam Ali mosques around the globe, including some in the U.S., as terror command centers.

Unit 110 and Unit of Madinah – named after the second holiest city in Islam, the burial place of the Prophet Mohammad – were established to remove the U.S from the Gulf, sources report.

Unit 110 gathers intelligence while Unit of Madinah is in charge of military operations. Both are stationed in the city of Shiraz in Fars Province, under the command of Gholam Hossein Gheib Parvar, according to sources.

Parvar, one of the regime’s most radical military commanders, is in charge of all Guard forces.

According to a former intelligence officer who served in that specific region, their orders are twofold: Incite uprisings within the Shiite minorities in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and other countries in the region, and prepare for military operations against those countries’ governmental facilities.

Bahrain’s monarchy faces daily protests and occasional terrorist attacks against its police forces and facilities. Protests are also taking place in Saudi Arabia within the minority Shiite population. Yemen is battling al-Qaida forces in addition to government protesters.

Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are key Gulf allies of the United States. Bahrain hosts the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet, and Saudi Arabia can help stabilize oil markets should a conflict develop with Iran.

The Guards’ intelligence office also runs operations out of mosques and Islamic centers around the world, according to sources. It finances the facilities, guides assets, recruits Muslims for reconnaissance of potential targets in host countries and forms alliances with other Islamic minorities such as Afghans, Pakistanis, Turks for terrorist operations.

In Afghanistan alone, the Guards have more than 1,000 terror cells that help fund the Taliban and al-Qaida and provide intelligence to attack NATO forces with the hope of pushing America out, according to a former intelligence officer.

The former officer, who defected to a country in Europe, revealed that all Imam Ali mosques worldwide are under the operation of the Guards’ intelligence office.

Noteworthy are the ones in Stockholm and Hamburg. Other mosques are in New Jersey, New York and Ohio, the former officer said.

Last June, Brig. Gen. Mohammad Naghdi, the commander of the Basij told the Guard forces: “Today we are in a full-scale war with our enemies … and you all have managed to infiltrate into the heart of the enemy’s nest, where even in the streets of New York and London, mourning and prayers for Ashura (the anniversary of the martyrdom of the Shiites’ third imam, Hossein) are observed. This is what it means to penetrate into the enemy camp.”

Hassan Rahimpour Azghodi, a close adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in a speech on Iranian TV boasted: “Our forces are present all across the globe. … We must get ready for a global operation and an international jihad.”

According to the source, the Guards, in collaboration with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, are working on overthrowing the military junta and creating another front against Israel and America. Days ago, Iranian cleric Ahmad Mobaleghi stated that if Iran and Egypt become one, the future of the Islamic world will be guaranteed.

The Guards are also active in other African countries, where they train and arm Islamic militias and fund mosques and Islamic centers.

As reported recently, the Guards’ grand plan, “Time for The Collapse,” includes trafficking in arms, counterfeit money and illegal drugs not only to fund their worldwide terror networks but to destabilize the West through terror and drugs.

In a recent speech, Khamenei stated: “In light of the realization of the divine promise by almighty God, the Zionists and the Great Satan (America) will soon be defeated. Allah’s promise will be delivered, and Islam will be victorious.”
The edit and translation is by Reza Kahlili (Copyright: Reza Kahlili) – (The original Farsi version is over one hour long and the makers have stated specifically that there are no restrictions on copying said video. They have also asked the public to distribute the video).For more information about this movie and on the book “A Time to Betray”,

Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for a former CIA operative in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and the author of the award-winning book, A Time to Betray. He is a senior Fellow with EMPact America, a member of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security and teaches at the U.S. Department of Defense’s Joint Counterintelligence Training Academy (JCITA).

May 4, 2012 by Chip Wood
Al Armendariz was appointed as an Environmental Protection Agency official by President Barack Obama in November 2009.
Well, hot diggity dog. At least one mean-spirited, overzealous Washington regulator got what was coming to him this week. Al Armendariz, a regional director of the Environmental Protection Agency, was forced to quit his job when some of his intemperate remarks got publicized. It would be great if the same thing happened to a few thousand of his fellow bureaucrats.
Armendariz was in charge of enforcing EPA regulations in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and New Mexico. He was appointed to his post in November 2009 by President Barack Obama and quickly demonstrated a zeal for the job. He was infamous for his office’s harsh prosecution — many would say persecution — of any company that fell afoul of EPA regulations.
In a lecture two years ago, Armendariz explained his “philosophy of enforcement” to the audience:
It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw, and they’d crucify them. And then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.
That’s a pretty chilling and cold-blooded attitude, wouldn’t you say? Notice that guilt or innocence has nothing to do with Armendariz’s methodology. All he’s concerned about is how quickly and how ruthlessly he can intimidate his subjects.
How would you like to have someone with this philosophy determining the future of the company you work for? Or founded? Or any private enterprise in this country, for that matter? Well, the sad truth is, there are thousands of petty tyrants like Armendariz working for your government — and being paid by your tax dollars — in hundreds of Federal bureaucracies. The only unique thing about Armendariz is that he got caught.
Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) deserves a tip of the hat for shining a spotlight on this particular cockroach. It happened because Inhofe decided to investigate an EPA vendetta against Range Resources, a drilling company the EPA accused of contaminating local water supplies. A lengthy investigation exonerated the firm, but not until Armendariz and his staff had done as much damage as they could to the company. As you probably know, the only energy producers the Administration of President Barack Obama likes are the wind and solar ones that need millions of dollars in Federal subsidies to survive. In the case of Solyndra Inc., $500 million in subsidies couldn’t keep it going.
But if you’re a for-profit producer of coal or oil or natural gas, forget it. You’ve got a big, bright bull’s eye painted on the middle of your back. And it was put there by Obama and his environmentalist buddies.
The Wall Street Journal recently published a lengthy opinion piece by Bob McDonnell, in which the Virginia Governor lamented how the Obama Administration pulled the rug out of from under plans to develop his State’s offshore oil and gas resources. He explained, “In 2010, Virginia was poised to become the first state on the East Coast permitted to produce oil and natural gas offshore.”
But the plans were nixed by Washington “with little explanation and even less regard for the strong bipartisan and public support for the offshore initiative.” Three months later, the Administration added insult to injury when it announced plans to subsidize wind-power development in Virginia’s waters.
And the same thing is happening from the Gulf Coast to Alaska. Profit-making (and tax-paying) private companies that want to develop our oil and gas resources are told “no way, Jose.” One project in Alaska that McDonnell cites could have created 55,000 new jobs annually — not to mention $145 billion in new payroll and $193 billion in additional government revenue. In case after case, it was a government bureaucrat — not the marketplace — that put the kibosh on the project.
And don’t get me started about the Keystone XL pipeline. Thanks to the Administration’s intransigence, thousands of jobs — and billions of barrels of oil — that could have been flowing from Canada to Texas and Oklahoma may now be going to China.
By the way, it’s not just Federal regulators who can promulgate some crazy rules. So can State and local governments, as many homeowners can testify. Just ask Joseph Pomares, who was recently cited for having “standing water” in a birdbath he added to a rental home he owns in Astoria, N.Y. A new regulation to the health code there makes landlords responsible for any infractions found on their property that could lead to the “breeding or harborage” of mosquitoes. It seems regulators there take their responsibilities to prevent West Nile virus very seriously. The citation he received advised Pomares that he was in violation of Article 151 of the city’s health code and could face a $2,000 fine if the situation was not remedied at once.
No doubt I could fill 100 more pages with similar injustices and outrages across this country. I was going to say that it was no doubt impossible to estimate the cost of complying with all the rules and regulations that have been inflicted on us by a Big Nanny government run amuck.
But if I said that, I’d be wrong. It turns out that the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a pro-free market think tank in Washington, has undertaken precisely such a study. And CEI says the total cost to our economy of government regulation amounts to a staggering $1.75 trillion a year.
To help put that price tag in perspective, CEI reports “Regulatory costs exceed all 2008 corporate pretax profits of $1.463 trillion.” How many jobs has it cost us? It’s impossible to know for certain, but the number is likely in the millions.
Speaking of unemployment, permit me to repeat something I pointed out in a Chip Shots item last week. Administration officials have pointed with pride to the latest unemployment figure, which allegedly has fallen to 8.2 percent. This is based on claims that 120,000 new jobs were added to the economy in March.
But buried deep in the report is the news that far more Americans who got new jobs dropped out of the labor force that month. The “no longer looking for work” numbers swelled by 164,000.
Just think about it: If every unemployed person stopped looking for work, our unemployment rate would be 0. That’s the sort of “recovery” this administration is giving us.
In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson said that King George had “erected a Multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”
Frankly, compared to what this Administration has done to us, our rebellious forefathers had it easy. Don’t you agree?
Until next time, keep some powder dry.
–Chip Wood

A COMPLETE SLAP IN THE FACE TO ISRAEL
by Tad Cronn

Nazi collaborator and American artist Gertrude Stein was among Jewish Americans praised in a White House announcement yesterday proclaiming Jewish Heritage Month.

The inclusion, noted by Algemeiner.com, in its original released form read, “Their history of unbroken perseverance and their belief in tomorrow’s promise offers a lesson not only to Jewish Americans, but to all Americans. From Aaron Copland to Albert Einstein, Gertrude Stein to Justice Louis Brandeis.”

Stein was a supporter and collaborator with the Nazis’ Vichy regime in France, according to Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has criticized a current Stein art exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.

According to Barbara Will, author of “Unlikely Collaboration: Gertrude Stein, Bernard Fay and the Vichy Dilemma,” Stein survived the Vichy regime because she was a strong supporter of the Nazis, publicly proclaiming her support of Adolf Hitler and proposing him for a Nobel Peace Prize in the mid-1930s.

She considered Gen. Phillipe Petain, the Nazi puppet who deported thousands of Jews, to be a French hero, and she volunteered to write an introduction to an English translation of his speeches so Americans could see the virtues of the Vichy government.

Dershowitz adds, “Stein’s closest friend, and a man who greatly influenced her turn toward fascism was Bernard Fay, who the Vichy government put in charge of hunting down Masons, Jews and other perceived enemies of the State. … After the war, when the horrendous results were known to all, Gertrude wrote in support of Fay when he was placed on trial for his Nazi war crimes.”

A White House official said the proclamation issued yesterday was an early draft that was mistakenly released. That was replaced with a new version that does not mention Stein, but the original remained on the White House website for several hours.

It’s hard to fathom how even a “draft” of a proclamation for Jewish Heritage Month includes a Nazi collaborator in the first place. It’s as if the White House press staff just opened up a book of famous Jewish names at random and said let’s take this one, without even reading the most basic biographical information about the person.

Or is this another example of the White House’s blind eye?

In a regime strongly sponsored by George Soros, whose first job was delivering eviction notices to Jews for the Nazis, it would not be surprising. According to the Ottawa Sun, as a teen Soros worked for the Judenrat, the Jewish council set up by the Nazis to round up Jews for the trains to the concentration camps. Asked by Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” if he had any regrets about those activities, Soros replied, “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there. If I wasn’t doing it, somebody else would be taking it away anyhow. Whether I was there or not. So I had no sense of guilt.”

Then there is the matter of the commander-in-chief’s decades-long acquaintance with the racist pastor Jeremiah Wright, during which President Obama claims to have noticed nothing unusual about Wright’s opinions. After Obama publicly distanced himself from Wright, the pastor said in an interview, “Them Jews ain’t going to let him talk to me.”

Since taking office, President Obama has often been notably cold toward Israel and openly sympathetic toward the Palestinians and other Muslim groups that would see Israel wiped off the Earth if they had their druthers.

Perhaps the proclamation praising Stein was just a mistake, or perhaps it was a case of “trickle-down” racism.

No more training future soldiers about who the enemy is and why they want to kill us. Now, West Point cadets visit a NJ city with a large enemy Muslim population to witness the cultural diversity they will encounter overseas. (In other words, to brainwash them into believing that the so-called culture of 7th Century savages is just as good as ours)
Washington Post(H/T Robin H) The men and women in crisp U.S. military uniforms walked in close formation through the bustling, traffic-choked streets, passing women in full Muslim hijab, sari-clad Indian mothers pushing strollers, worshippers heading to an Egyptian Coptic church, and small shops with signs in Arabic, Hindi, Korean and a dozen other languages. (But notice in the photo below, female academy cadets are wearing Muslim headbags, no Indian saris or Korean attire. And in the photos and videos below, they only show the cadets at Islamic centers where the speakers are all Muslims)

The cadets are visiting as part of a class at West Point on peacekeeping and reconstruction called “Winning the Peace.” The class ends in a three-day crash course designed to make the future officers _ and, ultimately, the soldiers under their command _ more sensitive to cultural differences.
Senior Megan Kelty (L) and junior Jordan Reilly (2nd L), wear headbags out of dhimmi submission, as they sit with other cadets from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., during a presentation at the Islamic Center of Jersey City

DHIMMI A BRIEF OVERVIEW
7th-21st century. The notion of Dhimmitude, originating in the 7th century, still applies today to non-Muslims under Islamic rule—whether Jews or Christians, whether in Saudi Arabia or in Sudan. Dhimmitude began in 628 CE when Mohammed and his forces conquered the Jewish oasis at Khaybar. They massacred many of the Jews and forced the rest to accept a pact (“Dhimma”) which rendered them inferiror to their Muslim conquerors. Over the centuries, the ideology of Dhimmitude expanded into a formal system of religious apartheid.

No legal rights. Jews may not testify in court against a Muslim and have no legal right to dispute or challenge anything done to them by Muslims. There is no such thing as a Muslim raping a Jewish woman; there is no such thing as a Muslim murdering a Jew (at most, it can be manslaughter). In contrast, a Jew who strikes a Muslim is killed.

Humiliation and vulnerability. Jews and Christians had to walk around with badges or veils identifying them as Jews or Christians. The yellow star that Jews had wear in Nazi Germany did not originate in Europe. It was borrowed from the Muslim world where it was part of the apartheid system of Dhimmitude.

It wasn’t a tour of duty overseas, but a field trip to Jersey City, just 60 miles down the Hudson River from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

The city of 250,000 is one of the most ethnically and religiously diverse places in America, and the West Point cadets are visiting as part of a class at the academy on peacekeeping and reconstruction called “Winning the Peace.” The class ends in a three-day crash course designed to make the future officers — and, ultimately, the soldiers under their command — more sensitive to cultural differences.

All the speakers appear to have been Muslims
The program has taken on new urgency as the Army deals with the fallout from a string of embarrassing episodes in Afghanistan, including reports of U.S. soldiers posing with the bloody remains of suicide bombers, urinating on Afghan corpses and burning Muslim holy books.

During the visit to Jersey City, the 23 cadets in the class stay overnight at a mosque and attend Islamic prayers. They also go to an Egyptian Coptic Christian church, a synagogue and a Hindu religious service, and sample the foods of the cultures they encounter. (Funny, how all the videos only show the mosque visits)

At the Islamic Center of Jersey City, where the cadets stay, program organizer Ahmed Shedeed said the visit to the city is an eye-opener for some students.

I guess the only ‘Koreans’ (woman in middle) the cadets met were Muslims, too?
“Some of these soldiers have never seen anybody different. Some have never seen a black person or eaten Chinese food, and they come to a place like Jersey City and they understand they’re not the only ones in the world, that there are civilizations and cultures that came before theirs,” he said.

Emad Attaalaa of St. George’s Egyptian Coptic Church, where the cadets spent an afternoon learning about the history of the church and enjoyed a Middle Eastern-style lunch, said the program has mutual benefits, getting young people from his largely Egyptian congregation interested in the military or a career in law enforcement. “Kids in the church come and ask me after meeting the cadets, ‘What do you think about joining the Army?’” he said. (Gee, I bet they didn’t hear that from anyone in the Islamic center?)

At the Islamic Center, congregants explained to the cadets the importance of removing their shoes in prayer areas, and the female cadets were shown the proper way to cover themselves with Muslim headscarves out of respect.

Nothing about cultural difference in this video, all about the Prophet Mohammed:

Jersey City sits across the Hudson River from New York. Nearly 40 percent of the population is foreign-born, and more than half its residents speak a language other than English at home, according to census figures. It has a large Muslim population. Some of the plotters of the deadly 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center attended a mosque there.

Col. Cindy Jebb, a social sciences professor at West Point who has taught course on cultural anthropology as well as terrorism and counterterrorism, said the academy is fortunate to have such a melting pot close by.

“When you start to learn about other cultures, it makes you very self-aware, helps create a more adaptable thinker, and it develops empathy,” she said. (Empathy is the last thing you need for people who are trying to kill you)

But they don’t learn about culture, only religion:

Although this year’s visit focused on the Arab Spring uprisings across the Middle East, she said the controversies that have hurt U.S. efforts to gain the trust of Afghans are also discussed with cadets.

“We always use such incidents as a learning opportunity,” Jebb said. “Looking at it in the larger context of understanding that these actions of a few do not reflect the entire military, we discuss why these actions are so detrimental, and how you go about building a tone within a unit of cultural understanding.”

At dinner with the cadets, Muslim women were segregated from men. Only female cadets in headbags were allowed to dine with the male cadets. Muslims were offended.

OBAMA’S RESCUE OF CHRYSLER AND GENERAL MOTORS UNPOPULAR WITH VOTERS, CREDITORS, AND GM MANAGEMENT

BY: Bill McMorris – April 30, 2012 5:00 am

President Barack Obama has made the auto bailout a centerpiece of his reelection campaign, using it to bash Republican nominee Mitt Romney. But the tactic may backfire as the general election heats up, public opinion surveys suggest.

Recent polling from Rasmussen indicates that 59 percent view the bailouts as a “failure” and only 44 percent think the bailouts were “good for America.”

The administration has already written off $7 billion in taxpayer losses in the American takeover of Chrysler and General Motors; those losses are expected to climb as high as $23 billion—27 percent of the $85 billion spent on the bailout.

While the bailout is widely credited with saving the two companies, increasing taxpayer losses have made it nearly as unpopular in 2012 as it was when Obama was elected. More than half of Americans still disapprove of the auto bailout compared with 61 percent in 2008.

That has not stopped Obama from using the bailout as a bludgeon against Romney, who backed bankruptcy measures, in a number of campaign speeches.

“We could have just kicked the problem down the road. The other option was to do absolutely nothing and let these companies fail,” Obama told the United Automobile Workers union in February. “And you will recall there were some politicians who said we should do that. Some even said we should ‘let Detroit go bankrupt.’”

The line drew a chorus of boos from the crowd and Obama has used the talking point often in his recent campaign addresses. He has deployed the line in a number of speeches in front of friendly crowds, despite the surprising lack of enthusiasm among Democrats for the bailout.

Obama’s job approval ratings among Democrats remain at nearly 85 percent, according to RealClearPolitics.

That is 20 points higher than the 63 percent of Democrats who support the auto bailout.

Obama is using the talking point as a targeted message to interest groups, rather than a broad appeal to his overall base, bailout experts say.

“The reason Obama likes it is because labor likes it,” one bankruptcy expert said. “The administration went in and took UAW and pulled them up.”

The administration handed $85 billion to GM and Chrysler and guided them through reorganization. Obama took on the role of bankruptcy court and bumped the unions to the front of the line, handing them control of Chrysler, while preserving pay and benefits at General Motors.

“They came in and forced these companies into pre-packaged bankruptcy where unions were made whole and creditors were squeezed out,” the expert said. “In normal bankruptcy they don’t rearrange stakeholders rights willy-nilly…there’s no way those union contracts would have been untouched.”

Labor is not the only constituency to which Obama has tried to appeal by championing the bailout. “After three decades of inaction, we’re gradually putting in place the toughest fuel economy standards in history for our cars and pickups,” Obama said in the same February speech. “That means the cars you build will average nearly 55 miles per gallon by the middle of the next decade—almost double what they get today.”

Obama tied the bailouts to strict environmental standards that have led to increasingly efficient cars, an achievement he has used to woo green advocates. The move has affected more than just the environment, establishing “dangerous” legal precedents, according to some legal experts.

The fuel-mileage regulations are expected to drive up vehicle prices by $3,200 and keep consumers out of car lots, according to the National Auto Dealers Association, which sued to block the regulations. A Washington D.C. Appeals Court tossed the suit, ruling that only manufacturers could sue for damages associated with the expensive rules.

“This is a great incentive for cronyism,” an attorney familiar with the regulations said. “The manufacturers colluded with the feds and they pushed these costs onto car dealers and consumers; the government had its first taste of cronyism and learned that if they can bully enough stakeholders and companies, they can get away with it.”

Auto executives hailed the bailout as a lifesaver in 2008, but are increasingly uneasy about the government’s ownership in the two companies. While the government liquidated a number of its shares in GM during its record-setting stock offering in 2010, it has retained partial control of the company.

“GM’s executives have wanted the government out for a while now … it’s a huge PR liability for them—they hate the ‘Government Motors’ stigma,” said Edward Niedermeyer, editor-at-large of TheTruthAboutCars.com. “The government can’t get out now, they don’t want to take an even bigger loss on the bailout.”

GM’s stock price has dropped about $10 per share since its IPO, meaning any sale would increase the taxpayer’s multi-billion dollar losses in the bailout.

Niedermeyer said the administration might wind up its involvement in GM even if it means higher losses. Timing, he added, will play a key role in that decision.

“They’ll wait until after the election before they act,” he said.

In 2008, candidate Obama called Bill Ayers an “English Professor” who he knows and runs into in his neighborhood. He condemned “despicable acts” Ayers committed when Obama was “eight years old

In 2008, candidate Obama called Bill Ayers an “English Professor” who he knows and runs into in his neighborhood. He condemned “despicable acts” Ayers committed when Obama was “eight years old.”

In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has Released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College …

Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate.

The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California.

The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program.

To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama’s detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama’s legitimacy and qualification to serve as President article titled, “Obama Eligibility Questioned,” leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama’s first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama’s legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey . This lawsuit claims Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president.. Donofrio’s case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama’s citizenship or qualification to serve as president.

Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama’s campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter…

LET OTHER FOLKS KNOW THIS NEWS, THE MEDIA WON’T!

Subject: RE: Issue of Passport?

While I’ve little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?

So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?

And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?

The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.

Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities.

1) He traveled with a U.S. … Passport,
2) He traveled with a British passport, or
3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.

Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. .. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.

Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims.. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.

Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008.

Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.

If you Don’t care that Your President is not a natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete this, and then lower your American Flag to half-staff, because the U.S. Constitution is already on life-support, and won’t survive much longer.

If you do care then Forward this to as many patriotic Americans as you can, because our country is being looted and ransacked!
The Plot Thickens

An intensive investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose Social Security number (SSN) is being used by President Obama: Jean Paul Ludwig, who was born in France in 1890, immigrated to the United States in 1924, and was assigned SSN 042-68-4425 (Obama’s current SSN) on or about March 1977.
Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut . Because of that, his SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among only a select few reserved for Connecticut residents.
Obama never lived or worked in that state! Therefore, there is no reason on earth for his SSN to start with the digits 042. None whatsoever!

Now comes the best part! Ludwig spent the final months of his life in Hawaii, where he died.
Conveniently, Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, worked part-time in the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse, and therefore had access to the SSNs of deceased individuals.
The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig’s death, and because he never received Social Security benefits there were no benefits to stop and therefore, no questions were ever raised.
The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a U.S. Citizen, either because he was born in Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesiaupon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro simply scoured the probate records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social Security benefits, and selected Mr. Ludwigs Connecticut SSN for Obama.
Just wait until Trump gets past the birth certificate and onto the issue of Barry O’s use of a stolen SSN. You will see leftist heads exploding, because they will have no way of defending Obama. Although many Americans do not understand the meaning of the term “natural born” there are few who do not understand that if you are using someone else’s SSN it is a clear indication of fraud.

According to Frances Fox Piven’s predictions last September:

Professor Piven Predictions: Half true…for now.
The government would begin to “force” higher taxation on the rich
The government will “force” strict regulation on finance
Workers will unite to make “New Deal” style “strikes.”
The strikes should be “massive” and involve millions of non-Union workers.
Unions should lead these strikes, because they have overcome “racism & sexism.”
In a first-time address to the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Union, radical professor Frances Fox Piven made some startling, yet predictable calls for unions to engage in social unrest. In light of the George Soros Occupy movement and legislation such as the Buffett Rule, this might seem to be old news. However, the speech was given last September, before any of these radical social ideas collided with the mainstream. What’s left is an apt prediction for things that did happen (demonetization of the rich, violent class warfare) and a dark foreshadowing of what the future may hold (crippling strikes, a workers revolution).

The controversial NYU professor began by pinning down Voter ID laws as discriminatory.

“Thirty state legislators – legislatures – the states that were lost in the election of 2010 are now considering legislation to make it harder to vote for poorer people, for younger people, for minority people. They want to require photo ID cards for registration, voter registration, for actually casting the vote.”

The Occupy enthusiast continued by demanding that unions begin to “force” governments into an arch-progressive agenda.

“Poverty is really expanding very, very rapidly and unions, union membership, and treasuries continue to decline. So the question that confronts us, everyone in this room – me too, I’m a union member – is how to halt and reverse this assault. How to force government to become a job creating engine, how to force government to restore taxation on the rich – they should pay their share – how to force government to invest in infrastructure, how force government to re-regulate finance, and how to restore the slices that have been taken from the social programs.”

Hi, my name is Kristi Lacroix. I’m a teacher in Kenosha. I’d like to share with you my perspective as a public school teacher who is taking a stand for reform and greater accountability for myself and my colleagues. I hope you will share this email with your friends.

The day before Spring Break is usually pretty exciting when you are a teacher. The kids are filled with Spring fever, travel plans are set and the weather is usually nice enough to take the time to do some much needed yard work. Last Friday started that way for me; that is, until I went to make copies and found a teacher in the hallway with tears streaming down her face. It turns out that layoff notices went out this morning. Really? The day before break?

Yes, the school district decided that today would be the best day to let teachers know that they will no longer have a job teaching students. I would like to say that I only found one teacher in tears; however, in my small school of 18 educators, 7 received layoff notices today. The worst were those handed out to a married couple who just had their first child.

So, who should I be angry with? I know that as a teacher, my union — WEAC — tells me I am supposed to blame Scott Walker, but I feel I must take a closer look at how my district got to this point.

See, my district did not use Act 10 and Gov. Scott Walker’s budget reforms. We are stuck with the union contract until June of 2013 and it would take the Jaws of Life to get us free from it. Although there were numerous meetings between the district and the union, no union concessions were ever made and the district is faced with a $30+ million structural deficit. With no union concessions, layoffs become necessary and students pay the price.

I was never asked if I wanted to make concessions, nor was I ever consulted by my union about Act 10. As always, union leaders made decisions that were best for them and then claimed they were representing the teachers. Make no mistake, though, their decisions are based solely on the desire to maintain forced unionism.

Who is representing the teachers that received layoff notices this morning? Will the union return the dues that were supposed to be used to HELP the teachers? Will the union give a refund of dues to the laid off teachers to help them pay their mortgage, put food on the table, or find a new job? I am guessing the answer is “no.”

Here is the Kenosha Education Association’s comment about the lay-offs:

Published on Mar 28, 2012
Written by Joe Kiriaki, Executive Director-KEA

This will be our last issue of GLUE for the next two weeks. The only latest news on layoffs is that we continue to do our best to work with the District to assure the process is completed correctly. Beyond that, after at least three meetings with the District, we’re not any closer to having a complete picture of layoffs at all levels; however, if any new information would become available to us during the next two weeks, we will pass it on to you through bulk emails or by posting on the KEA website, www.keanow.com. We appreciate your patience and understanding as we attempt to do our best to protect your rights under the contract.

We hope you all have a great and well-deserved spring recess!

If you get a chance during the break to help with recall efforts, please do all you can.

As you can see, they are putting all of their eggs into the recall basket. I wonder if they plan on sharing any of these eggs to help feed the teachers who no longer have a job.

I am a part of a growing number of teachers who are standing for freedom from teachers’ unions and for measures that will bring more accountability and professionalism to what we view as a very serious and honorable profession.

I hope you will stand with me as Wisconsin undergoes a transformation that puts our students first.

Please feel free to contact me with ideas, people to add to my email list or any other feedback at free2teach@hotmail.com. Lastly, you can follow me or “Like” my Freedom From Teachers’ Union Facebook page.

Kristi Lacroix
Kenosha teacher
Forced WEAC fee payer
Kenosha Education Association – Home
www.keanow.com
The Kenosha Education Association is a member driven organization that consists of pre-kindergarten …

Obama Singles Out Private Citizens By Name For Donating To Romney, Accuses Them Of “Betting Against America”

This should send a chill down everyone’s spine. Imagine having the most powerful man on Earth singling you out by name then slandering you for donating to his opponent’s campaign?

Via WSJ:

Try this thought experiment: You decide to donate money to Mitt Romney. You want change in the Oval Office, so you engage in your democratic right to send a check.

Several days later, President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, singles you out by name. His campaign brands you a Romney donor, shames you for “betting against America,” and accuses you of having a “less-than-reputable” record. The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.

Are you worried?

Richard Nixon’s “enemies list” appalled the country for the simple reason that presidents hold a unique trust. Unlike senators or congressmen, presidents alone represent all Americans. Their powers – to jail, to fine, to bankrupt – are also so vast as to require restraint. Any president who targets a private citizen for his politics is de facto engaged in government intimidation and threats. This is why presidents since Nixon have carefully avoided the practice.

Save Mr. Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.”

These are people like Paul Schorr and Sam and Jeffrey Fox, investors who the site outed for the crime of having “outsourced” jobs. T. Martin Fiorentino is scored for his work for a firm that forecloses on homes. Louis Bacon (a hedge-fund manager), Kent Burton (a “lobbyist”) and Thomas O’Malley (an energy CEO) stand accused of profiting from oil. Frank VanderSloot, the CEO of a home-products firm, is slimed as a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”
These are wealthy individuals, to be sure, but private citizens nonetheless. Not one holds elected office. Not one is a criminal. Not one has the barest fraction of the position or the power of the U.S. leader who is publicly assaulting them.

“We don’t tolerate presidents or people of high power to do these things,” says Theodore Olson, the former U.S. solicitor general. “When you have the power of the presidency—the power of the IRS, the INS, the Justice Department, the DEA, the SEC—what you have effectively done is put these guys’ names up on ‘Wanted’ posters in government offices.” Mr. Olson knows these tactics, having demanded that the 44th president cease publicly targeting Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries, which he represents. He’s been ignored.

The real crime of the men, as the website tacitly acknowledges, is that they have given money to Mr. Romney. This fundraiser of a president has shown an acute appreciation for the power of money to win elections, and a cutthroat approach to intimidating those who might give to his opponents.

He’s targeted insurers, oil firms and Wall Street—letting it be known that those who oppose his policies might face political or legislative retribution. He lectured the Supreme Court for giving companies more free speech and (falsely) accused the Chamber of Commerce of using foreign money to bankroll U.S. elections. The White House even ginned up an executive order (yet to be released) to require companies to list political donations as a condition of bidding for government contracts. Companies could bid but lose out for donating to Republicans. Or they could quit donating to the GOP—Mr. Obama’s real aim.

The White House has couched its attacks in the language of “disclosure” and the argument that corporations should not have the same speech rights as individuals. But now, says Rory Cooper of the Heritage Foundation, “he’s doing the same at the individual level, for anyone who opposes his policies.” Any giver, at any level, risks reprisal from the president of the United States.

It’s getting worse because the money game is not going as Team Obama wants. Super PACs are helping the GOP to level the playing field against Democratic super-spenders. Prominent financial players are backing Mr. Romney. The White House’s new strategy is thus to delegitimize Mr. Romney (by attacking his donors) as it seeks to frighten others out of giving.

The Obama campaign has justified any action on the grounds that it has a right to “hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable,” but this is a dodge. Politics is rough, but a president has obligations that transcend those of a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that gives every American the right to partake in democracy, free of fear of government intimidation or disfavored treatment. If Mr. Obama isn’t going to act like a president, he bolsters the argument that he doesn’t deserve to be one.

by Gary DeMar

President Obama is trying to buy the votes of Millennials. He’s doing this by promising to keep the interest rates on student loans at 3.4 percent. Without congressional action the rates on the loans will double to 6.8 percent in July.

Here’s what President Obama said to students at the University of North Carolina:

“College education is one of the best investments America can make for our future. . . . This is important for all of us. We can’t price most Americans out of a college education. We can’t make higher education a luxury. It’s an economic imperative. Every American should be able to afford it. So that’s why I’m here.”

If lower interest rates are good for the economy, then why aren’t lower taxes? Any college student worth his or her salt should be asking this question. But they aren’t. They are like most people who believe that government should do more – more for them at the expense of someone else.

It’s unfortunate that most college students rarely get a free market approach to economics. This is by design. Colleges are dependent on tax dollars. Even private colleges are subsidized by students who bring money they got from the government in the form of guaranteed government loans and grants.

There’s another part to the story that is often missed. The rising cost of college is the direct result of government subsidizing education. When the government started paying women who had children out of wedlock through various programs (Wic, EBT, and ADC), more women had children out of wedlock and more men left after the children were born because the government was taking care of the mother and her illegitimate children. Think of the film The Blind Side.

Women trapped in these programs have little choice but to continue to vote for the political party that promises to maintain the programs. Republicans capitulate by going along with the Democrats so they won’t be vilified by the press and the always aggressive liberals.

A similar thing happens with college students. Their debt after graduation — now at $1 trillion and more than all credit card debt — makes them dependent on the State.

With nearly half of all college graduates either employed or underemployed, they have a decision to make. Do they want to be wards of the State or free men and women under God? How they vote in November will make all the difference in the world — literally. Again, it’s not all about the presidency. The House and Senate are equally, maybe even more, important.

“He’s got to run against who he is.” This was the verdict on Republican Senator Richard Lugar from one of the activists attending a Citizens for Global Solutions (CGS) national conference in Washington, D.C. last week. The group used to be known as the World Federalist Association but dropped the name because of the taint associated with promoting world government.

The incumbent Lugar, one of their favorites, is fighting for his political life in the Indiana Republican Senate primary against Richard Mourdock, Indiana’s State Treasurer, who has highlighted Lugar’s financial link to Democratic money bags George Soros. “Senator Lugar is one of the few Republicans ever supported by Soros,” Mourdock says.

The World Federalist Association had openly stated that a “world federation,” a euphemism for world government, can be achieved by advancing “step by step toward global governance” through establishing new U.N.-associated entities such as the International Criminal Court and by passing measures like the Law of the Sea Treaty. One of its main priorities is “To provide the U.N. with sustained and independent sources of funding.” That is, global taxes.

“Lugar can’t use that part of who he is,” said a left-wing activist, discussing the race as people waited for Obama Administration officials to brief the participants on “genocide prevention.” He said the world government lobby had met with Lugar’s personnel to offer their help, but were told that any public expression of support for the liberal Republican senator would backfire because of mounting Republican suspicions that Lugar is a RINO—Republican In Name Only.

In this context, the release of the latest CGS Congressional Report Card cannot come as good news for the senator. The group gives Lugar a B minus, the highest for any Republican in the Senate except for liberal Susan Collins of Maine.

By comparison, the other Republican senator from Indiana, conservative Dan Coats, got an F.

The report card measures votes on global issues such as ratification of U.N. treaties, and funding for international institutions such as the U.N. and the International Monetary Fund.

As Lugar’s true colors as a globalist begin to be covered by the national media, another embarrassment has emerged. A local elections board has ruled that Lugar can’t vote for himself in the primary, scheduled for May 8, because he doesn’t live in the state.

Once known as then-Senator Barack Obama’s closest Republican friend in the Senate, he is now running as somebody opposed to the Obama agenda on issues such as the intervention in Libya.

The big question is whether his extreme makeover as an anti-Obama conservative Republican will work. The major media have been content to let Lugar remake his image, but alternative media such as Red State and Tea Party groups have been working hard to get the facts out to the voting public. The result is that although Lugar had been leading Mourdock by 20 points, the latest poll has him up by only six. This is making big news on a national and local basis, with one paper proclaiming, “Polls indicate gap in Indiana’s Senate primary closing.”

Lugar, a prominent backer of the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty, even has financial ties to the world government lobby, having accepted campaign contributions from the Citizens for Global Solutions political action committee and giving an interviewto the organization’s newsletter. One edition of its newsletter hailed Lugar as one of several “internationalist Senators” the group was working with. Another heralded Senators Obama and Lugar as “globally-minded leaders” supported by CGS. Lugar has been “a long-time advocate for internationalism,” it said.

Although it admires Lugar and other liberal Republicans, the CGS works hard to defeat conservative Republicans. In 2006 it attacked Pennsylvania Republican Senator Rick Santorum, who was running for re-election. Drew J. Asson, who ran the CGS political action committee trying to defeat Santorum, was quoted as saying that President Bush was a “fascist” and that Israel was guilty of “aggression” and “murder” in its campaign against terrorists. Asson’s PAC gave $5,000 to Santorum’s successful opponent, Bob Casey, who promised a “new direction” in foreign and domestic policy.

But shortly after an editorial in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review challenged Casey about the controversial donation from the group, Casey’s campaign returned the money.

Obviously aware of the sensitivity caused by a financial link to a world government group, the Lugar campaign website makes no mention of it and instead insists the senator is a “national security leader.” It emphasizes Lugar’s work with former Democratic Senator Sam Nunn on the Nunn-Lugar bill to eliminate nuclear weapons in Russia. However, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) revealed that some of the funds were used to destroy obsolete weapons that Moscow was going to replace with high-tech arms and provide salaries for Russian scientists.

The campaign website does not mention how Lugar had served as one of Obama’s mentors and had accompanied him on a 2005 trip to Russia, when Kremlin authorities briefly confiscated and reviewed Obama’s passport.

The Lugar-Obama relationship, now in the closet because of Lugar’s need for an extreme makeover, was once out in the open. “Old-school realist Richard Lugar, the five-term Republican senator from Indiana, has embraced new-school realist and rising star Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois,” noted the Washington Monthly back in September 2006 under the title, “Hoosier Daddy.”

It went on, “The relationship is admiring. ‘I very much feel like the novice and pupil,’ Obama has said of Lugar. And it’s warm. Lugar praises Obama’s ‘strong voice and creativity’ and calls him ‘my good friend.’ In short, the two agree on much and seem to genuinely like each other. Rather unusual in hyper-partisan Washington, these days.”

The “Republicans for Obama” website even features Lugar, noting in an article, “Republican Richard Lugar endorses Obama,” that the Senator had praised Obama’s foreign policy decision to engage America’s enemies

Read more: The Soros-funded Senator | The Soros Files http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2012/03/the-soros-funded-senator.html#ixzz1tFcOCV9w
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Share Alike

The Ted Cruz campaign has released a new video detailing the timeline of the Fast and Furious scandal:
I’m an avid news consumer, but the Cruz video really drove home to me just how deeply the Obama administration is in it in this scandal. Full transcript is below the fold. Here’s more from the campaign:

Shocking revelations keep coming in the “Fast and Furious” scandal. How deep was the corruption? Did Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano lie? Have the mainstream media been complicit in a cover up? Will Attorney General Holder and the Obama Administration ever come clean?

Transcript:

Anderson Cooper: Newly uncovered memos saying about the botched ATF operation we’ve been reporting called Fast & Furious.
Sharyl Attkisson: Fast & Furious allowed thousands of weapons to be sold to suspected traffickers.
Cooper: Instead of tracing them, the ATF lost track of them…
Attkisson: …and fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
Unidentified man: The gangs have the money and the weapons to fight back.
Cooper: We’re not talking about a dozen or even a couple hundred guns.
Sheriff Paul Babeu: 200+ people have been killed by them.
Cooper: We’re talking about 1000′s of weapons.
Bob Schieffer: It appears that Attorney General Eric Holder knew a lot more about it than he recently told Congress.
Attkisson: Attorney General Eric Holder was sent briefings on the controversial fast & furious operation…
Eric Holder (on May 3 2011): I probably heard about Fast & Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.
Attkisson: …as far back as July 2010.
Bill Hemmer: They think Holder is purposely misleading Congress.
Congressman Jason Chaffetz: At the very highest levels of the Department of Justice, they knew exactly what was happening.
Barack Obama: There…have been problems.
Ted Cruz: The Fast & Furious program we had our federal government selling firearms to violent criminals, firearms that were subsequently used to kill Americans. As someone who’s spent an awful lot of my adult life in law enforcement, I mean it’s just breathtaking. I called for us to investigate whether Eric Holder the Attorney General, what he knew and when he knew it. There needs to be accountability. If he deliberately lied to congress and if he did he should be removed from office and he should possibly face criminal prosecution. This is an administration that thinks it’s above the law, that it’s not bound by the law. And he will go around Congress and he will ignore the will of the people to force his agenda down our throats. And we have got to reign that in. We need strong conservative fighters in the senate. I am going to help lead this fight to stop the Obama agenda, to dramatically shrink the size and power of the federal government and restore our constitution. This is a fight for our country.