To: Secretaries of State, Attorneys General, Governors, Legislatures, Election Officials and all other controlling legal authorities of elections in the 50 states:

Whereas, by requirement of the United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, no one can be sworn into office as president of the United States without being a natural born citizen;

Whereas, there is sufficient controversy within the citizenry of the United?States as to whether presidential election winner Barack Obama was actually?born in Hawaii as he claims;

Whereas, Barack Obama has claimed to be the son of a Kenyan national and a subject of the United Kingdom at birth;

Whereas, Barack Obama was apparently adopted by an Indonesian national stepfather as a child, potentially abrogating his "natural born citizen" status;

Whereas, Barack Obama has refused repeated requests for the release of documents, such as his school records, college records, travel records, passport records, Selective Service records and health records, that might shed light on his citizenship status;

Whereas, Barack Obama has even refused repeated calls to release publicly his entire Hawaiian birth certificate, which would include the actual hospital that performed the delivery;
Whereas, lawsuits filed in several states seeking only proof of the basic minimal standard of eligibility have been rebuffed;

Whereas, this constitutional cloud over the commander-in-chief creates an exceedingly heavy burden on the nation's armed forces, some members of which, at great personal risk to themselves and their careers, are publicly calling for Barack Obama to prove his eligibility;

Whereas, Hawaii at the time of Obama's birth allowed births that took place in foreign countries to be registered in Hawaii;

Whereas, growing concerns that our governments and election officials are not taking this constitutional question seriously will result in diminished confidence in our system of free and fair elections:

_______________________________________________

A Commentary by Tony Blankley

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Not long after the tea party sprang into being in the spring of 2009, America's elites started vilifying the movement. In an article worthy of a class-action libel suit, The New York Review of Books depicted the tea party's first march on Washington as a parade of bigots.

Ex-president Jimmy Carter spit venom at tea partiers by saying they resented an African-American president -- a baseless charge of racism willingly echoed by the media.

When they weren't being defamed as racists, tea party supporters were described as irrational, enraged, seething, and livid. Constituents at town hall meetings who rejected the superficial Democratic Party talking points and demanded answers instead of political spin were portrayed as mobs on the verge of riot. At the very time that real Muslim terrorists were planning a record number of attacks inside the U.S. right under their noses, political apparatchiks in the Department of Homeland Security warned ominously of imaginary right-wing violence as the nation's newest terrorist threat.

When the elites weren't depicting their fellow Americans as out-of-control racists and anti-government zealots, they tried to downplay their social and political importance. They did so with a demographic attempt at marginalization; the tea partiers, they said, were too old, too white, too middle class to matter in contemporary America, and thus could be safely ignored.

This liberal critique of the tea partiers -- a dangerous mob, but of marginal importance in post-racial America -- is a curious paradox. Why fear and loathe a movement said to be narrow in its views and scope?
The answer was given to us in a remarkably prescient book, Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy," posthumously published in 1995. The noted historian, whose intellectual journey carried him from the left in the '60s to the populist right by the '90s, would have been giddy over the tea party.
Lasch believed the only hope for American democracy lay in a revival of the middle class, particularly what were once known as middle-class virtues. The book title is an explicit ironic commentary on Jose Ortega y Gasset's 1932 (first English translation) classic: "The Revolt of the Masses."

Ortega famously argued that a materialistic mass population had no self-restraint, only takes from its civilization -- in contrast to the elites who still sacrificed for the greater good. Lasch's point -- and mine -- is that roles are now reversed. It is the elites who are the materialists and the tea party/middle-class American who is prepared to sacrifice for our grandchildren's freedom and prosperity.

The very idea of virtue, and other absolutes, has fallen into disfavor with the elites.
Lasch described the emergence of elites who "...control the international flow of money and information, preside over philanthropic foundations and institutions of higher learning, manage the instruments of cultural production and thus set the terms of public debate." These elites would undermine American democracy in order to fulfill their insatiable desire for wealth and power and to perpetuate their social and political advantages. Middle-class values, Lasch warned, would be hollowed out by a value-neutral educational system preaching multiculturalism. Their replacement would be narcissistic values based on self-gratification and worshipful of fame and celebrity as the ultimate values in a world devoid of deeper meaning. Sound familiar, Paris Hilton?

Against this relativistic tide, Lasch found the middle class's antiquated values -- hard work, family, faith, community -- a possible bulwark. He did fear the middle-class squeeze, both in a cultural and economic sense. Had he lived, he would no doubt have been a severe critic of globalism, the 21st century's logical extension of multiculturalism and the economic damage it has done the middle class.

The German philosopher Hegel saw history as a progression of culturally dominant ideas. An original thesis, Hegel says, is followed by its antithesis, and that in turn evolves into a synthesis of both.
Applying Hegel to Lasch, I would argue that the tea party movement constitutes such an historic moment. Make no mistake. What we are witnessing is the antithesis of elite-driven greedy self-serving government debt creation, multiculturalism and soulless globalism.

The tea party movement will assert middle-class values, economic nationalism, patriotism and other concepts derided by post-modern elitists. The movement's central tenets -- small government, decentralization of power and end to profligate spending -- are precisely what Lasch prescribed to restore American democracy.
The elite's fear and loathing of the tea party movement is rooted in the recognition that the real change is only now coming. They are right to be fearful, for the ultimate outcome of the tea party's triumph will be to constrain the elite's economic and cultural hegemony. This reversal of fortune, with power flowing from the elites back to the middle class, will take time to fully manifest itself. But an inexorable movement has begun.

If Lasch were alive, he could write a new book, "The Revolt of the Middle Class and the Rebirth of Democracy." Among its observations might be this: The Obama presidency is both the high watermark, and the beginning of the end, for elite multicultural materialism in America.

Tony Blankley is executive vice president of Edelman public relations in Washington.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
___________________________________

WHY MICHELLE CAME HOME -- INTERESTING!

Sheppard Smith, Fox News.


"If you check President Obama's last trip over-seas, his wife left just after
their visit to France . She has yet to accompany him to any Arab country. Think
about it. Why is Michelle returning to the states when 'official' trips to foreign
countries generally include the First Lady."

Here's one thought on the matter.

While in a Blockbuster renting videos I came across a video called "Obama". There
were two men standing next to me and we talked about President Obama.
These guys were Arabs, so I asked them why they thought Michele Obama headed
home following the President's recent visit to France instead of traveling
On to Saudi Arabia and Turkey with her husband. They told me she could not go
to Saudi Arabia , Turkey or Iraq . I said "Why not,(?) Laura Bush went to Saudi
Arabia , Turkey and Dubai ." They said that Obama is a Muslim and therefore he is
not allowed to bring his wife into countries that adhere to Sharia Law. Two points
of interest here:


1) I thought it interesting that two American Arabs
at Blockbuster believe that our President is a Muslim,


2) who follows a strict Islamic creed.
They also said that's the reason he bowed to the King
of Saudi Arabia. Â It was a signal to the Muslim world, Acknowledging his religion.

For further consideration, here is a response from Dr. Jim Murk, a Middle  Eastern
Scholar and expert on Islam. This is his explanation of what the Arab American's
were saying.

"An orthodox Muslim man would never take his wife on a politically oriented trip
to any nation which practices Sharia law, particularly Saudi Arabia where the Wahhabi
sect is dominant. This is true and it is why Obama left Michelle in Europe . She
will stay home when he visits Arab countries. He knows Muslim protocol; this includes,
bowing to the Saudi King. Obama is regarded as a Muslim in the Arab world, because
he was born to a Muslim father; he acknowledged his Muslim faith with George Stephanopoulus.
Note that he downplays his involvement with Christianity, by not publicly joining
A Christian church in D.C. And occasionally attending the chapel for services
at Camp David . He also played down the fact that America is a Christian country
and said, unbelievably, that it was one of the largest
Muslim nations in the world, which is nonsense. He has publicly taken the side
of the Palestinians in the conflict with Israel and he ignored the National Day
of Prayer, something no other President has ever done.


He is bad news! He conceals his true faith to the detriment
of the American people." ---

Jim Murk, Doctor of Philosophy in Middle Eastern Culture & Religion.

ACTIONS speak louder than words.

Another interesting item regarding Sharia Law..

Why has Barack Hussein Obama insisted that the U.S. Attorney General hold the
trials of the 911 Muslim Terrorists in Civilian Courts as Common Criminals instead
of as Terrorists who attacked the United States of America ?


If the Muslim Terrorists are tried in Military Tribunals, convicted and sentenced
to death, by LAW, Barack Hussein Obama, as President of the United States , would
be required to sign their Death Warrants. He would not be required to sign the death
warrants if they are sentenced to death by a Civilian Court . Recently, Muslim Jihadist,
Army Major Hassan slaughtered non-Muslim, soldiers at Ft. Hood , Texas rather than
go to Afghanistan and be a part of anything that could lead to the deaths of fellow
Muslims. He stated that Muslims 'could not and should not kill fellow Muslims.'


Is the motive for Barack Hussein Obama's insistence
on civilian trials, to make sure he doesn't have to sign the death warrants for
the Muslim Terrorists? Why would he, as President of the United States , not sign
the death warrants for Muslim Terrorists who attacked the United States and murdered
over 3,000 U. S. Citizens on 9/11? Could it be that he is FORBIDDEN by his RELIGION
to authorize the execution of Muslims?

Think about that! Open your eyes, ears and mind to who the President is, how
he behaves and what he is doing.

____________________________________________________

The Case for Impeachment: Why Barack Hussein Obama Should be Impeached to Save America - (Special Report) 

By Steven Baldwin
Product Description

The Founding Fathers enshrined the impeachment clause into the United States Constitution because they feared that a president intent on subverting the very principles the American experiment was built on would someday rise to power.
Despite all the checks and balances and obstacles they put in place, the Founders knew a determined cabal could still gain control of all three branches of government and wield this consolidation of power to dismantle our cherished Constitutional principles, and eradicate the freedoms that generations of Americans sacri?ced their lives to preserve.

MAKE NO MISTAKE: THAT DAY IS NOW UPON US.

"The Case For Impeachment" is an insightful summary of how President Barack Hussein Obama’s purposeful actions have jeopardized America’s ability to defend herself, and undermined our free enterprise system, corrupted our democratic institutions, and transferred massive amounts of power and wealth from American citizens to extremist special interest groups whose loyalty lies not with our Constitution, but with a global socialist movement. This is the beginning of the end for the United States unless the people exercise their precious remaining liberties and stand and demand that their elected representatives impeach this president before further mortal damage is in?icted upon America.
If the silent majority can summon the indignation, willpower and energy to make their voices heard, there is still a chance our country may survive.

____________________________________________________

Obama has lost eligibility issue

Posted: August 10, 2010
1:00 am Eastern
© 2010

Just as Richard Nixon lost the battle of Watergate because of coverup and stonewalling, Barack Obama has lost the battle over his constitutional eligibility for the same sins.
With the latest CNN poll showing only 42 percent of Americans definitively persuaded that he was born in the U.S., those who claimed this wasn't a "winning issue" have been proven wrong.
Not only is it a winning issue, it is the only issue that can effectively undo the nightmare of the Obama era in one fell swoop.

There would be no need for repealing Obamacare if it turns out his presidency was a sham from the beginning.
There would be no need to wait until Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan retire or die to see them replaced on the Supreme Court if it turns out his presidency was a sham from the beginning.
New strategy unveiled on answering Obama's eligibility questions. See how you can help.
There would be no need to wring our hands in hopes that future congresses and future presidents might roll back all of the damage Obama has inflicted on America if it turns out his presidency was sham from the beginning.
There would be no need to wait until 2011 in hopes that a new Republican majority might impeach Obama if it turns out his presidency was a sham from the beginning.
There would be no need to wait until 2012 for another chance to replace Obama if it turns out his presidency was a sham from the beginning.

That's why this issue is so important.
I've had many confidential conversations with influential people whose names you would know well – people sitting on the fence on this issue for too long. They began explaining to me a year or two ago why they didn't challenge Obama on this issue more aggressively. They were afraid of going out on a limb that Obama could saw off at any moment by producing his birth certificate that would clear up all the questions.
It should be quite clear to anyone by now that is never going to happen.
First of all, Obama is never going to produce that document. I don't know why he won't, except that it will reveal something extraordinarily embarrassing – something completely at odds with his official narrative. There are just too many other personal documents being concealed by Obama – student records, travel records, passport records, medical records, etc. Even his mother's passport records reportedly have been destroyed!
Second, even in the extremely unlikely event that Obama were to produce a birth certificate that affirmed his birth story, it will merely serve to refocus the debate on eligibility. The best-selling new book "Manchurian President" devotes an entire chapter to exploring whether Obama could be constitutionally eligible as the son of a Kenyan father. The clear conclusion is no – he can't be. There is no way that a foreigner could confer natural-born citizenship on a son no matter where that son was born.
In other words, this is a win-win issue for those of us who don't want to live any longer in the Obama Nation – not now, not next year, not the year after.
A year ago, I was a lonely voice crying in the wilderness on this issue. No longer. So-called "birthers" now represent a majority of the American public.
             
I predict these polls will embolden politicians across the country – in spite of the ridicule and vitriol inflicted on them by the press establishment. I predict next year you will see more than one or two state legislatures approve bills that require presidential candidates to prove eligibility before getting on the ballot. I predict you will see more House and Senate members speak out on this issue in 2011, as the Congress takes on a new look.
I even predict a few other members of the media might open their eyes on this key constitutional question before too long.

After all, ultimately it's about the integrity of the Constitution. Obama has made it clear he has no respect for the law of the land. He has no respect for what the Constitution actually says and means. He does not believe in limited government. He does not believe in the rule of law. He believes in the rule of men – men like himself.
And that's why so many of us want to see America freed of his leadership at the earliest possible moment and as completely as possible.

You tell me if there's a better way to achieve that objective than an uprising that demands he prove what he should have been required to prove in 2008.

____________________________________________________

WHY WE NEED TO LET STATES GO BROKE
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN?
Published in the New York Post on August 10, 2010

Federal Band-Aids won't cover the fiscal problems of such states as New York, California, Michigan and Connecticut forever. State bankruptcy and fundamental restructuring of state and local finance -- and labor relations -- is at hand.?
Take Connecticut. In the current fiscal year, $2 billion in federal subsidies have helped tide it over the recession -- a hefty share of its $15 billion budget. But these infusions are one-shot grants, renewed only if Congress acts affirmatively to do so.
Other states depend on similar manifestations of federal largess.??In Washington, the House is set to pass a $26 billion aid package this week -- fresh federal aid amounting to about 2 percent of state and local spending. But if the Republicans win control of Congress this fall, it is hard to see any legislative willingness to renew these subsidies.??Instead, GOP lawmakers will point to the examples of New Jersey, Virginia and Indiana -- where conservative governors have slashed spending to avoid tax hikes. In Virginia, Gov. Bob McDonnell has reduced spending to pre-2006 levels.??
If Congress fails to renew its subsidies, the more profligate states will face cash shortfalls in the current fiscal year. They'll threaten school closures, prison releases and all manner of mayhem if their subsidies aren't renewed. But the Republicans in Washington are likely to refuse -- asking why the responsible states should bail out the spendthrifts in Albany, Sacramento, Lansing and Hartford.??

At that point, the bond markets will start eyeing state (and local) balance sheets more critically -- demanding higher rates or even refusing to lend. California won't be the only one trying to get by on IOUs.??But beyond this tale of woe lies a golden opportunity to reform state governments and redress the imbalance of power between elected officials and public-employee unions.??

Absent endless federal subsidies, states will simply no longer be able to afford to give the unions everything that they want.  And governors -- many of them newly elected Republicans -- will realize that they can't even afford to honor agreements their big-spending predecessors OK'd.?The GOP Congress should then amend the federal bankruptcy law to provide for a way -- now absent -- for states to declare bankruptcy. (Municipalities can do so under current law, but states have no such relief.)??

Here's the key: The reforms must require that states abrogate their public-employee union agreements in the bankruptcy process, just as private corporations like Delta and Chrysler have done. The wage hikes, the work rules, the pension plans all go out the window.??Few states will have the starch to cut benefits for those now receiving them. But most will cut pensions for current workers and all will slice them for future employees. Even the threat will be a powerful bargaining tool.??And beyond the fiscal adjustments, the power of the municipal- and public-employee unions will be broken.??Voters throughout America will loudly applaud if Congress tells the profligate states, "Work it out on your own. Don't look to us for a bailout."??

President Obama could veto the bankruptcy reforms -- but a Republican Congress need do nothing to assist states in their plight until he relents. All of the political and financial leverage will be on Congress' side.?The result could be the greatest revolution in state and local governance since public-employee unions came on the scene. The public and the voters would get their local governments back, and the grip of public unions will be weakened. It would be the state and local equivalent of President Ronald Reagan's tough stand against the air-traffic controllers' strike.??
Politically, the unions that fund and fuel the Democratic Party would be emasculated, dramatically shifting the national balance of power.??Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's prediction about socialism will have come true for America's states: "Sooner or later, they run out of other peoples' money."

____________________________________________________

GM and Chrysler -Thought you should know!



Do you know this story?  Why don't we hear about it?  ASK!  These are real criminals we are dealing with here.

This could be a scandal of epic proportions and one that makes Nixon's Watergate or Clinton 's Monica Lewinsky affair pale by comparison. Why was there neither rhyme nor reason as to which dealerships of the Chrysler Corporation were to be closed.

Roll the clock back to the weeks just before Chrysler declared bankruptcy.

Chrysler, like GM, was in dire financial straits and federal government "graciously" offered to "buy the company" and keep them out of bankruptcy and "save jobs."

Chrysler was, in the words of Obama and his administration, "Too big to fail," same story with GM.

The feds organized their "Automotive Task Force" to fix Chrysler and GM.  Obama, in an act that is 100% unconstitutional, appointed a guy named Steve Rattner to be the White House's official Car Czar - literally, that's what his title is.

Rattner is the liaison between Obama, Chrysler, and GM.

Initially, the national media reported that Chrysler 'had made this list of dealerships' to be closed.   Not true!

The Washington Examiner, Newsmax, Fox News and a host of other news agencies discovered that the list of dealerships was put together by the "Automotive Task Force" headed by no one other than Mr. Steve Rattner.

Now the plot thickens.

Remember earlier we said that there was neither rhyme nor reason why certain dealerships were closed?

Actually there's a very interesting pattern as to who was closed down.

Again, on May 27, 2009, The Washington Examiner and Newsmax exposed the connection.

Amazingly, of the 789 dealerships closed by the federal government, 788 had donated money exclusively to Republican political causes, while contributing nothing to Democratic political causes. The only "Democratic" dealership on the list  was found to have donated $7,700 to Hillary's campaign, and a bit over $2,000  to John Edwards. This same dealership, reportedly, also gave $200.00 to Obama's campaign.

Does that seem a little odd to you? 

Steve Rattner is the guy who put the list together. Well, he happens to be married to a Maureen White.  Maureen happens to be the former national finance chairman of the Democratic National Committee. As such, she has access to campaign donation records from everyone in the nation - Republican or Democrat.  Is this just a wacky "coincidence”. Thinkl!

Then comes another really wacky "coincidence."

On that list of dealerships being closed down, a weird thing happened in Arkansas , North Louisiana, and Southern Missouri .  It seems that Bill Clinton's former White House Chief of Staff, Mack McClarty, owns a chain of dealership in that region, partnered with a fellow by the name of Robert Johnson.

Johnson happens to be a founder of Black Entertainment Television and was a huge Obama supporter and financier.

These guys own a half dozen Chrysler stores under the company title of RLJ-McClarty-Landers. Interestingly, none of their dealerships were ordered closed - not one! While all of their competing Chrysler/Dodge and Jeep dealership were!

Eight dealerships located near the dealerships owned by McClarty and Johnson were ordered shut down. Thus, by pure luck, these two major Obama supporters now have a virtual monopoly on Chrysler sales in their zone.  Isn’t that amazing?

Go look in The Washington Examiner; the story's there, and it's in a dozen or so other web-based news organizations; this isn't being made up.  Now if you thought Chrysler was owned by Fiat, you are mistaken.

Under the federal court ruling, 65% of Chrysler is now owned by the federal government and the United Auto Workers union!

Fiat owns 20%.  The other 15% is still privately owned and presumably will be traded on the stock market. Obama smiles and says he doesn't want to run the auto industry.

As horrifying as this is to comprehend, and being as how this used to be the United States of America , it would appear that the president has the power to destroy private businesses and eliminate upwards of 100,000 jobs just because they don't agree with his political agenda.

This is happening right here, right now, in our back yard.

There are voices in Washington demanding an explanation, but the "Automotive Task Force" has released no information to the public or to any of the senators demanding answers for what has been done.

Keep your ear to the ground for more on this story. If you've ever wanted to make a  difference about anything in your life, get on the phone to your national senator or representative in the House and demand an investigation into  this.

Benjamin Franklin had it right when he said, "All that's necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Car Czar  No More

An amazing thing happened as this story was going to press.

Obama's Car Czar, Steve Rattner, resigned on July 13 and was promptly replaced by former steel workers union boss Ron Bloom. According to CBS News, Rattner left "to return to private life and spend time with his family."

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said, "I hope that he takes another opportunity to bring his unique skills to government service in the future."

By the way, Rattner is under investigation for a multi-million dollar pay-to-play investment bank scandal in New York .

Uh-oh!

But, we're certain that had nothing to do with his resignation.

And, according to several news sources out there, there are rumours he's being investigated for what could be pay-to-play scandal involving the closing of Chrysler and GM dealerships.

Really?  Again, that couldn't have anything to with his resignation - that's ridiculous!  Like CBS said, this guy just wants to "spend more quality time with his family."

Obama has 32 personally appointed "czars" who answer to no one but him, all of whom are acting without any Constitutional authority.

But hey, we're sure they all have "unique skills,"......as Tim Geithner likes to say!

SOOOOO. HOW IS THE CHANGE WORKING OUT FOR YOU?

Check it out at the following websites.....

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot/..com/2009/05/hope-change-car-cz%20ar-behind-chrys ler.html

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obamas-auto-policy-%20All-in-the-Dem ocratic-family-44414452.html

This goes beyond corruption in high places - to gross criminal actions on the part of our government!

I hope you will spread this far and wide, and hopefully the taxpaying public will demand some of that transparency we were promised......followed by criminal prosecution of the perpetrators! 

What a crooked government we have!!!!!

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We have an opportunity

We have an opportunity to massively change the Washington DC size and culture over the next four years!  This is due to the awakening of a major portion of the American public, the SILENT MAJORITY.  I am working with others to;

1) ESTABLISH TERM LIMITS. Three terms for Representatives and two terms for Senators. 
This is essential!  (Senator Jim DeMint has spoken for this principle.)
    
2) ESTABLISH "SUNSET LAWS" OVER ALL FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS.  Each and every federal department and agency must be defunded and reestablished for its value and funding every six years.  This includes the defense department and the intelligence agencies.  This is a massive and complex endeavor but would utilize thousands of government workers that we currently do not need.  The findings must be published on the Internet and a special cable channel in detail.

3) LEGISLATE BALANCED BUDGETS with spending caps on the entire budget.  As a society becomes more self-sufficient it requires less government not more.

4) REDUCE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S SIZE BY 40%.  Our Founders knew from history that a centralized government would be the downfall of the country.  It leads to tyranny and is like a malignant tumor.  The individual states must be the greatest governmental force and will compete with each other to make a better society.

5) ESTABLISH FEDERALLY FINANCED ELECTIONS.  Campaign funds from corporations and wealthy individuals have corrupted the system.  Elected officials spend excessive time and effort in securing funds to be reelected.  Give each congressman $3 million and each senator $6 million and let them manage it to the best of their ability.

6) STRENGTHEN STATES RIGHTS and diminish the federal government's encroachment on the Constitutional powers of the States.  The lawsuits against the healthcare legislation are a beginning.

7) ESTABLISH A FLAT TAX.  The income tax always results in moving the tax up the income ladder until it destroys the wealthy and investment.  Capitalism is powerful and the reason for “American Exceptionalism”

8) CONSTITUTIONALLY OUTLAW GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE UNIONS.  Government employees have the government behind them as employees and there is no management function to stop the union from giving themselves more and more.  As in Europe and Argentina they will destroy the country.  

There is a revolution forming in the country and as Rahm Emanuel said "we do not want to waste a crisis".  He, Obama, Pelosi and George Soros are creating the crisis and we Tea Party members don't intend on wasting it.  We have an historical opportunity to show the world that a representative republican government of the people can rectify grievous wrongs established over a half century.

It has been my observation over my adult life that the American citizenry does not make major political changes until things get very bad.  They are very bad and will worsen.  When the American public receives the correct information they make very sound and responsible decisions.  For the past forty years they have been getting lies and devious information from their elected leaders, corporations, educators and the media.  FOX News and the Tea Party via television and the Internet have changed the information system forever. The truth always remains.

PS:   
“Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”- Abraham Lincoln

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________