Your Subtitle text

CONSTITUTION / GOVERNMENT

BORN IN THE USA?
State GOP leaders grab issue of Obama eligibility
Republican lawmakers, governors poised to demand documentation

Posted: November 18, 2010
9:45 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

U.S. President Barack Obama greets the media as he walks on the South Lawn of the White House upon his return to Washington, November 14, 2010. President Obama is back in Washington after a 10-day trip to Asia. UPI/Yuri Gripas/Pool Photo via Newscom

The GOP members of Congress who booted Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi from the speaker's seat when they took the majority in the U.S. House this month may be the least of President Barack Obama's concerns as the 2012 presidential campaign assembles.

That's because in Pennsylvania, and in at least a couple of other states, there are Republican-controlled Houses, Senates and governors' offices where being developed right now are plans to use state law to demand proof of constitutional eligibility from presidential candidates before they would be allowed on the state ballot.

Get the free, in-depth special report on eligibility that could bring an end to Obama's presidency

From Pennsylvania, Georgia and Texas there already is confirmation of such plans. Arizona is likely to have the same plan, and other states are expected to be in the works as legislatures approach the dates when they will convene.

Pennsylvania

In Pennsylvania, there was excitement over the GOP majority of both houses of the state legislature as well as the governor's office.

Assemblyman Daryl Metcalfe told WND he is preparing to circulate a memo among his fellow GOP lawmakers for cosponsors for his proposal that would demand documentation of constitutional eligibility.

"We aren't sworn in until Jan. 4," he said. "Once we're sworn in we'll be introducing the legislation that would require presidential candidates to prove their natural born citizenship before they are allowed to file petitions to have their name on the state ballot."

He described it as a "problem" that there has been no established procedure for making sure that presidential candidates meet the Constitution's requirements for age, residency and being a "natural born citizen."

"We hope we would be able to pass this legislation and put it into law before the next session," he said.

He said any one of the states imposing such a requirement would be effective in solving his concerns.

"I think the public relations nightmare that would ensue if any candidate would thumb their noses at a single state would torpedo their campaign," he told WND.

Georgia

Another state that will be in play on the issue is Georgia, where Rep. Mark Hatfield confirmed to WND that he will have a similar proposal pending.

He had introduced the legislation at the end of last year's session to put fellow lawmakers on alert that the issue was coming.

"I do plan to reintroduce the bill," he told WND today. "We'll move forward with trying to get it before a committee."

In Georgia, Republicans hold majorities in both house of the legislature as well as "every constitutional statewide office," he noted.

"I would be optimistic that we can [adopt the legislation]," he said.

Hatfield said if only one or two states adopt such requirements, it readily will be apparent whether a candidate has issues with eligibility documentation or not. And while he noted a president could win a race without support from a specific state, a failure to qualify on the ballot "would give voters in other states pause, about whether or not a candidate is in fact qualified," he said.

"My goal is to make sure any person that aspires to be president meets the constitutional requirements," he said. "This is a first step in that direction."

Arizona

It was last session when the Arizona House of Representatives adopted a provision that would have required documentation of eligibility from presidential candidates, but the measure died through the inaction of the state Senate in the closing days of the session.

Sponsor Rep. Judy Burges told WND at the time that her plan would be renewed this session.

Texas

WND reported just days ago on a bill prefiled for the Texas Legislature by Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, that would require such documentation.

His effort was the first wave of a surging tide of developing questions that could be a hurdle to a second term for Obama, who escaped such demands last year when the Arizona Senate failed to act on a similar plan after the House approved it.

Berman's legislation, House Bill 295, is brief and simple:

It would add to the state election code the provision: "The secretary of state may not certify the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented the candidate's original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen."

It includes an effective date of Sept. 1, 2011, in time for 2012 presidential campaigning.

State Rep. Leo Berman

Berman told WND he's seen neither evidence nor indication that Obama qualifies under the Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural-born citizen," a requirement not imposed on most other federal officers.

"If the federal government is not going to vet these people, like they vetted John McCain, we'll do it in our state," he said.

He noted the Senate's investigation into McCain because of the Republican senator's birth in Panama to military parents.

Berman also said there will be pressure on any lawmaker who opposes the bill, since voters would wonder why they wouldn't want such basic data about a president revealed. And he said even if one state adopts the requirement, there will be national implications, because other states would be alerted to a possible problem.

"If Obama is going to run for re-election in 2012, he'll have to show our secretary of state his birth certificate and prove he's a natural-born citizen," he said. "This is going to be significant."

Berman said he's convinced there are problems with Obama's eligibility, or else his handlers would not be so persistent in keeping the information concealed.

A year ago, polls indicated that roughly half of American voters were aware of a dispute over Obama's eligibility. Recent polls, however, by organizations including CNN, show that roughly six in 10 American voters hold serious doubts that Obama is eligible under the Constitution's demands.

The Texas House is expected to be dominated by the GOP, with a roughly 2-1 margin, and Republicans will hold probably 19 of the 31 seats in the state Senate. The governor's office is Republican.

Other state plans also might be in the works but unannounced yet. Officials with the Denver-based National Conference of State Legislatures said they were not tracking bills in development, or "prefiled" bills.

Their monitoring will begin after the proposals formally are submitted, they said.

Last year, several other states listened to proposals that could have had an impact on eligibility documentation. In New Hampshire, officials wanted to require candidates to meet the "qualifications contained in the U.S. Constitution." In Oklahoma, lawmakers heard a plan to let voters decide the issue, and in South Carolina, the plan was to prevent candidates from being on the ballot unless "that person shows conclusive evidence that he is a legal citizen of the United States."

Further, several other states discussed requirements for candidates, but they did not specifically address the Article 2, Section 1 constitutional compliance, so it's unclear whether they would have addressed Obama's situation.

There also is Rep. Bill Posey's bill at the federal level.

Posey's H.R. 1503 states:

    "To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution."

The bill also provides:

    "Congress finds that under … the Constitution of the United States, in order to be eligible to serve as President, an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 35 years and has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years."

The sponsors' goal is for the bill to become effective for the 2012 presidential election. The legislation now is pending in a House committee and has more than a dozen co-sponsors.

Officials today told WND the bill is pending, and plans are that it will be acted on through the committee process in the U.S. House.

Join tens of thousands of others who already have signed a petition to state lawmakers asking them to make sure the next president of the United States qualifies under the Constitution's eligibility requirements.

There have been dozens of lawsuits and challenges over the fact that Obama's eligibility never has been documented. The "Certification of Live Birth" his campaign posted online is a document that Hawaii is a document that has made available to those not born in the state.

The controversy stems from the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

The challenges to Obama's eligibility allege he does not qualify because he was not born in Hawaii in 1961 as he claims, or that he fails to qualify because he was a dual citizen, through his father, of the U.S. and the United Kingdom when he was born and the framers of the Constitution specifically excluded dual citizens from eligibility.

Complicating the issue is the fact that besides Obama's actual birth documentation, he has kept from the public documentation including his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, baptism records and his adoption records.

There are several cases still pending before the courts over Obama's eligibility, including two that are scheduled to be discussed by the members of the U.S. Supreme Court. Others remain pending at the appellate level.

Those cases, however, almost all have been facing hurdles created by the courts' interpretation of "standing," meaning someone who is being or could be harmed by the situation. The courts have decided almost unanimously that an individual taxpayer faces no damages different from other taxpayers, therefore doesn't have standing. Judges even have ruled that other presidential candidates are in that position.

The result is that none of the court cases to date has reached the level of discovery, through which Obama's birth documentation could be brought into court.

A petition that has been launched by WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah asks that state lawmakers do their duty in making sure the next presidential election will feature candidates whose eligibility has been documented.

Tens of thousands already have signed on.

"What we need are hundreds of thousands of Americans endorsing this strategy on the petition – encouraging more action by state officials before the 2012 election. Imagine if just one or two states adopt such measures before 2012. Obama will be forced to comply with those state regulations or forgo any effort to get on the ballot for re-election. Can Obama run and win without getting on all 50 state ballots? I don't think so," he said.

An earlier petition had been directed at all controlling legal authorities at the federal level to address the concerns expressed by Americans, and it attracted moreo than half a million names.

For 18 months, Farah has been one of the few national figures who has steadfastly pushed the issue of eligibility, despite ridicule, name-calling and ostracism at the hands of most of his colleagues. To date, in addition to the earlier petition, he has:

Farah says all those campaigns are continuing.

"Obama may be able to continue showing contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law for the next two years, as he has demonstrated his willingness to do in his first year in office," he wrote in a column. "However, a day of reckoning is coming. Even if only one significant state, with a sizable Electoral College count, decides a candidate for election or re-election has failed to prove his or her eligibility, that makes it nearly impossible for the candidate to win. It doesn't take all 50 states complying with the law to be effective."

If you are a member of the media and would like to interview Joseph Farah about this campaign, e-mail WND.

Cloward-Piven Government

November 23, 2009
By James Simpson

It is time to cast aside all remaining doubt. President Obama is not trying to lead America forward to recovery, prosperity and strength. Quite the opposite, in fact.

In September of last year, American Thinker published my article, Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis. Part of a series, it connected then-presidential candidate Barack Obama to individuals and organizations practicing a malevolent strategy for destroying our economy and our system of government. Since then, the story of that strategy has found its way across the blogosphere, onto the airwaves of radio stations across the country, the Glenn Beck television show, Bill O'Reilly, and now Mark Levin.

The methodology is known as the Cloward-Piven Strategy, and we can all be grateful to David Horowitz and his Discover the Networks for originally exposing and explaining it to us. He describes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis.The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven were two lifelong members of Democratic Socialists of America who taught sociology at Columbia University (Piven later went on to City University of New York). In a May 1966 Nation magazine article titled "The Weight of the Poor," they outlined their strategy, proposing to use grassroots radical organizations to push ever more strident demands for public services at all levels of government.

The result, they predicted, would be "a profound financial and political crisis" that would unleash "powerful forces ... for major economic reform at the national level."

They implemented the strategy by creating a succession of radical organizations, most notable among them the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), with the help of veteran organizer Wade Rathke. Their crowning achievement was the "Motor Voter" act, signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1993 with Cloward and Piven standing behind him.

As we now know, ACORN was one of the chief drivers of high-risk mortgage lending that eventually led to the financial crisis. But the Motor Voter law was another com

ponent of the strategy. It created vast vulnerabilities in our electoral system, which ACORN then exploited.
ACORN's vote registration scandals throughout the U.S. are predictable fallout.

The Motor Voter law has also been used to open another vulnerability in the system: the registration of vast numbers of illegal aliens, who then reliably vote Democrat. Herein lies the real reason Democrats are so anxious for open borders, security be damned.

It should be clear to anyone with a mind and two eyes that this president and this Congress do not have our interests at heart. They are implementing this strategy on an unprecedented scale by flooding America with a tidal wave of poisonous initiatives, orders, regulations, and laws. As Rahm Emmanuel said, "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste."

The real goal of "health care" legislation, the real goal of "cap-and-trade," and the real goal of the "stimulus" is to rip the guts out of our private economy and transfer wide swaths of it over to the government to control. Do not be deluded by the propaganda. These initiatives are vehicles for change. They are not goals in and of themselves except in their ability to deliver power. They and will make matters much worse, for that is their design.

This time, in addition to overwhelming the government with demands for services, Obama and the Democrats are overwhelming political opposition to their plans with a flood of apocalyptic legislation. Their ultimate goal is to leave us so discouraged, demoralized, and exhausted that we throw our hands up in defeat. As Charles Rangel* said, "the middle class will be too distracted to fight."

These people are our enemies. They don't use guns, yet, but they are just as dangerous, determined, and duplicitous as the communists we faced in the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, and bush wars across the globe, and the Nazis we faced in World War II.

It is time we fully internalized and digested this fact, with all its ugly ramifications. These people have violated countless laws and could be prosecuted, had we the political power. Not only are their policies unconstitutional, but deliberately so -- the goal being to make the Constitution irrelevant. Their spending is off the charts and will drive us into hyperinflation, but it could be rescinded, had we the political power. These policies are toxic, but they could be stopped and reversed, had we the political power. Their ideologies are poisonous, but they could be exposed for what they are, with long jail sentences as an object lesson, had we the political power.

Every single citizen who cares about this country should be spending every minute of his or her spare time lobbying, organizing, writing, and planning. Fight every initiative they launch. It is all destructive. If we are to root out this evil, it is critical that in 2010 we elect competent, principled leaders willing to defend our Constitution and our country. Otherwise, the malevolent cabal that occupies the government today will become too entrenched.

After that, all bets are off.

Businessman and Examiner.com columnist Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst. You may read more of his articles on his blog, Truth and Consequences.

*corrected; originally misattributed to Barney Frank.

The Thinker
September 18, 2010

_______________________________________________

bu·reau·crat
[byoo
r-uh-krat]
Show IPA
–noun
1. an official of a bureaucracy.
2. an official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment.

_____________________________________________________

Barney Frank Comes Home to the Facts

A Commentary By Lawrence Kudlow

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Can you teach an old dog new tricks? In politics, the answer is usually no. Most elected officials cling to their ideological biases, despite the real-world facts that disprove their theories time and again. Most have no common sense, and most never acknowledge that they were wrong.

But one huge exception to this rule is Democrat Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
For years, Frank was a staunch supporter of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant government housing agencies that played such an enormous role in the financial meltdown that thrust the economy into the Great Recession. But in a recent CNBC interview, Frank told me that he was ready to say goodbye to Fannie and Freddie.

"I hope by next year we'll have abolished Fannie and Freddie," he said. Remarkable. And he went on to say that "it was a great mistake to push lower-income people into housing they couldn't afford and couldn't really handle once they had it." He then added, "I had been too sanguine about Fannie and Freddie."

When I asked Frank about a long-term phase-out plan that would shrink Fannie and Freddie portfolios and mortgage-purchase limits, and merge the agencies into the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) for a separate low-income program that would get government out of middle-income housing subsidies, he replied, "Larry, that, I think, is exactly what we should be doing."

Frank also said that any federal housing guarantees should be transparently priced and put on budget. But he added that the private sector must be encouraged to re-enter housing finance just as the government gradually withdraws from it.
Some would say Frank's mea culpa is politically motivated in advance of an election where bailout nation and big government are public enemies No. 1 and 2. Of course, poll after poll shows that the $150 billion Fan-Fred bailout, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates could rise to $400 billion , is detested by voters and taxpayers everywhere.
In fact, these failed government agencies are in such bad shape that they can't even pay Uncle Sam the dividends owed under the conservatorship deal reached two years ago. That's right. In order to pay a $1.8 billion dividend on Treasury department stock, Fan and Fred had to borrow $1.5 billion from -- you guessed it -- the Treasury.
Then there's this head-scratching detail: In an absolutely outrageous move last Christmas Eve, President Obama signed off on $42 million in bonuses for the top 12 Fannie and Freddie executives, including $6 million apiece for the two CEOs. (Hat tip to attorney Stephen B. Meister.)

Voters are on to all this. So politics may indeed be motivating Barney Frank's turnaround. But I'm going to credit him with more than that.

I think Chairman Frank watched these government behemoths descend into hell and then witnessed the financial catastrophe that ensued. And I think he has come to realize that the whole system of federal affordable-housing mandates that was central to the real-estate collapse -- including the mandates on Fannie and Freddie and the myriad bad decisions made by private banks and other lenders in response to the government's overreach -- simply needs to be abolished.

Noteworthy is the fact that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has come to a similar conclusion. Geithner told a recent Washington conference on the future of housing finance that the system needs fundamental change. He said, "We will not support a return to the system where private gains are subsidized by taxpayer losses."
Of course, the withdrawal of housing markets from government programs, and the onset of a reinvigorated private sector for providing mortgages, must be done gradually over a period of years. But it is possible that the federal mortgage madness is coming to an end.

We will have to see if Congress really does say goodbye to Fan and Fred, as Republicans like Jeb Hensarling are advocating. Equally important, we will have to see if the federal affordable-housing mandates created by Congress and implemented by HUD and banking regulators are similarly repealed.

And then we will have to see if reformed federally guaranteed housing insurance includes larger down payments, stricter underwriting standards and greater reliance on private capital markets, lenders and insurers. In other words, we need to see if housing will be restored to a market-based system and removed from the government-backed system that has proved so disastrous.

The broader lesson here is that government planning doesn't work. And if left to their own devices, market processes will work. I don't know if President Obama gets this. But my hat goes off to a man who does, Chairman Barney Frank.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

_______________________________________________

“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

“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

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

How Did Tyranny Come to America?

One of the great goals of education is to initiate the young into the conversation of their ancestors, to enable them to understand the language of that conversation, in all its subtlety, and maybe even, in their maturity, to add to it some wisdom of their own. The modern American educational system no longer teaches us the political language of our ancestors. In fact our schooling helps widen the gulf of time between our ancestors and ourselves, because much of what we are taught in the name of civics, political science, or American history is really modern liberal propaganda. Sometimes this is deliberate. Worse yet, sometimes it isn’t.

( read more )

_______________________________________________________________________

So what have we learned in 2,065 years??

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." ?

Cicero - 55 BC

______________________________________________________________________

OBAMA AND THE CONSTITUTION

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Obama on Redistribution and the Constitution - Are We Ready for Change?

Taken from Mark Levine's radio show before the 2008 election.

_______________________________________________________________________

OBAMACARE AND OBAMANATION

A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very interesting statistics from a survey by the “United Nations International Health Organization”.
•   Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
U.S.              65%
England       46%
Canada        42%
•   Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S.              93%
England     15%
Canada        43%
•   Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S.              90%
England       15%
Canada        43%
•   Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S.              77%
England        40%
Canada         43%

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S.               71
England        14
Canada         18
•   Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
U.S.              12%
England         2%
Canada          6%
I don't know about you, but I don't want "Universal Healthcare" comparable to England or Canada .
Moreover, it was Sen. Harry Reid who said, "Elderly Americans must learn to accept the inconveniences of old age."
SHIP HIS ASS TO CANADA OR ENGLAND !
He is "elderly" himself but be sure to remember his health insurance is different from yours as Congress has their own high-end coverage! He will never have to learn to accept "inconveniences"!!!

AND THE WINNER IS VERY INTERESTING
The percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet. You know what the private business sector is... a real life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages.

T. Roosevelt .......... 38%
Taft ....................... 40%
Wilson ................... 52%
Harding ................. 49%
Coolidge ................ 48%
Hoover .................. 42%
F.D. Roosevelt ...... 50%
Truman .................. 50%
Eisenhower .......... 57%
Kennedy ............... 30%
Johnson ................. 47%
Nixon ..................... 53%
Ford ...................... 42%
Carter .................... 32%
Reagan ................... 56%
GH Bush ..........;..... 51%
Clinton ................. 39%
GW Bush ................ 55%
           And the winner of the Chicken Dinner is:
Obama ……….       8% !!!

Yep! That's right! Only 8%, the least by far of the last 19 presidents!! And these people are trying to tell our big corporations how to run their business? They know what's best for GM... Chrysler... Wall Street... and you and me?
How can the president of a major nation and society... the one with the most successful economic system in world history... stand and talk about business when he's never worked for one or about jobs when he has never really had one?!   And neither has 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers! They've spent most of their time in academia, government and/or non-profit jobs... or as "community organizers" when they should have been in an employment line.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CEO APPRAISAL OF BARACK OBAMA

The most astute appraisal of Barack Obama that I’ve seen. One of Bob Oster’s CEO friends wrote this. Bob respects him highly.

(For those on this list who don’t know Bob: he was CFO of Oracle when it went public, also CFO of Syntex, and holds a

Ph.D. in economics from Berkeley. Since 1987, he has been an angel investor and private VC. He is on the Board of Overseers

at the Hoover Institution.)

( READ MORE )

________________________________________________________________________________________

OBITUARY

Born 1776, Died 2008

(It does not hurt to read this several times.)

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning last November's Presidential election:

Number of States won by:          Obama: 19      McCain: 29

Square miles of land won by:     Obama: 580,000   McCain:   2,427,000

Population of counties won by:   Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2   McCain: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.

Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the  USA in fewer than five years.

    If you are in favor of this, then by all means, forget this message.

   If you are not, tell everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

"88 CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS ARE SELF PROCLAIMED SOCIALISTS, COMMUNISTS OR SOCIALIST SYMPATHIZERS"

Did you know that there are over 80 members of Congress who are SELF- PROCLAIMED Socialists, Communists or Socialist Sympathizers?

Did you know that 70 of these members of Congress actually hold (or have held) membership in the Democratic Socialists of America... the American arm of Socialists International?

Did you know that 11 of the 20 standing committees in the House of Representatives are chaired by members of this radical group?

Did you know that up until the time she assumed the Office of Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi was the chairman of this group?

And did you know that, up until the time he assumed (some say usurped) the office of President of the United States, Barack Obama was a member of this radical group?

It's not a conspiracy theory... in fact, it's not even an open secret. The plain and simple fact of the matter is that this radical group of Representatives and Senators have caucused openly in the United States Congress since 1991... but the Mainstream Media has never bothered to tell you about this group.

It's a story that has gone untold for far too long and that's why we've just produced a shocking 16-page report that gives you all the details... we give you the history of this group... we expose the stated and radical agenda of this group... and we name names.

And we'd like you to be among the first to see this ground-breaking exclusive report.

And when you make your tax-deductible donation to The Western Center for Journalism, please accept, as a token of our gratitude, our Exclusive 16-page report, "Who Are The Socialists In Congress." We give you all the details... we name names... and we will make this report available to you via immediate download when you make your tax-deductible donation to The Western Center for Journalism. http://www.westernjournalism.com

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________