Did you KNOW THIS??

About 6 months ago, the writer was watching a news program on oil and one of the Forbes Bros. was the guest.. The host said to Forbes, "I am going to ask you a direct question and I would like a direct answer; how much oil does the U.S. have in the ground?" Forbes did not miss a beat, he said, "more than all the Middle East put together." Please read below.




The U. S. Geological Service issued a report in April 2008 that only scientists and oil men knew was coming, but man was it big. It was a revised report (hadn't been updated since 1995) on how much oil was in this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota, western South Dakota, and extreme eastern Montana ..... check THIS out:




The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska 's Prudhoe Bay , and has the potential to eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable... at $107 a barrel, we're looking at a resource base worth more than $5..3 trillion.




"When I first briefed legislators on this, you could practically see their jaws hit the floor. They had no idea.." says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial analyst.





"This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in the past 56 years," reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette. It's a formation known as the Williston Basin , but is more commonly referred to as the 'Bakken.' It stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada . For years, U. S. oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the 'Big Oil' companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's massive reserves..... and we now have access of up to 500 billion barrels. And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL!





That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 2041 years straight. And if THAT didn't throw you on the floor, then this next one should - because it's from 2006!


U. S. Oil Discovery- Largest Reserve in the World




Stansberry Report Online - 4/20/2006




Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the largest untapped oil reserve in the world. It is more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005 President Bush mandated its extraction. In three and a half years of high oil prices none has been extracted. With this motherload of oil why are we still fighting over off-shore drilling?




They reported this stunning news: We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth.. Here are the official estimates:



- 8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia




- 18-times as much oil as Iraq




-21-times as much oil as Kuwait




- 22-times as much oil as Iran




- 500-times as much oil as Yemen




- and it's all right here in the Western United States .




HOW can this BE? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this? Because the environmentalists and others have blocked all efforts to help America become independent of foreign oil! Again, we are letting a small group of people dictate our lives and our economy.....WHY?



James Bartis, lead researcher with the study says we've got more oil in this very compact area than the entire Middle East -more than 2 TRILLION barrels untapped. That's more than all the proven oil reserves of crude oil in the world today, reports The Denver Post.

Don't think 'OPEC' will drop its price - even with this find? Think again! It's all about the competitive marketplace, - it has to. Think OPEC just might be funding the environmentalists?




Got your attention yet? Now, while you're thinking about it, do this:




Pass this along. If you don't take a little time to do this, then you should stifle yourself the next time you complain about gas prices - by doing NOTHING, you forfeit your right to complain.




Now I just wonder what would happen in this country if every one of you sent this to every one in your address book.



By the way...this is all true. Check it out at the link below!!!

GOOGLE it, or follow this link. It will blow your mind.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

WHY IS OUR ECONOMY SO BAD???

WHY ARE WE BANKRUPT?

Informative, and mind boggling!

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this: Boy, was I confused. I have been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq war and the war on terror that is bankrupting us. I now find that to be RIDICULOUS.



I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I also have included the URL's for verification of all the following facts.



1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.



Verify at: http://tinyurl.com/zob77




2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANscriptS/0604/01/ldt.0.html

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANscriptS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/%20TRANscriptS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANscriptS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.

Verify at: http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html

9. $200 Billion dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSC%20RI%20PTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANscriptS/0606/12/ldt.01.html



11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border.

Verify at: Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

12. The National policy Institute, estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.'

Verify at: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances to their countries of origin.

Verify at: http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm



14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One million sex crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States .'

Verify at: http://www.drdsk.com/articles.html

The total cost is a whopping $ 338..3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR AND IF YOU'RE LIKE ME HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY; IT IS $338,300,000,000.00 WHICH WOULD BE ENOUGH TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY.


Are we THAT stupid? YES, FOR LETTING THOSE IN THE U.S. CONGRESS GET AWAY WITH LETTING THIS HAPPEN YEAR AFTER YEAR!!!!!



If this doesn't bother you then just delete the message. If, on the other hand, it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, I hope you forward it to every legal resident

Here It Is!

The registration document, made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiskus Assisi school in
Jakarta, Indonesia, shows the registration of Barack Obama under the name
Barry Soetoro made by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro.

Name: Barry Soetoro
Religion: Islam
Nationality: Indonesian


How did this little INDONESIAN Muslim child - Barry Soetoro, (A.K.A. Barack Obama) get around the issue of nationality to become President of the United States of America ?

PART 2:

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 ..

The transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a
foreign student from Indonesia while an undergraduate at the school. 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 this scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

This document provides the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking -
that he is NOT a natural-born citizen of the United States - necessary to be President of these
United States . Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya , here we see that there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship..

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 on-going but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder.

Mr. Holder has refused comment on this matter.

This has got to be the best quote of the year

"As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given
the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his
name, but that America gave him the White House based on
the same credentials."


**Newt Gingrich**

The LA Times great quote of the week

"Frankly, I don't know what it is about California, but we seem to
have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women to high office.
I'm not bragging, you understand, but no other state even comes close.

When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington, we're
number one. There's no getting around the fact that the last time
anyone saw the likes of Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein and Nancy
Pelosi, they were stirring a cauldron when the curtain went up on
'Macbeth'.

The three of them are like jackasses who happen to possess the gift
of speech. You don't know if you should condemn them for their
stupidity or simply marvel at their ability to form words."

-- a columnist from the LA Times

Saturday, February 28. 2009
By John in Oregon

I keep hearing about that other depression. The catastrophe only the government can save us from. So being of the Rocky and Bullwinkle generation, I got to wondering what it must have been like back then. I remembered the phrase return with us now to the thrilling days of yesteryear as Mr. Peabody turned the dial of the Wayback machine. POOF

I stepped out on the street filled with horses, Tin Lizzies, milk wagons and the pall of coal smoke, cough, cough. On the corner, EXTRA EXTRA, READ ALL ABOUT IT. COMMERCE SECRETARY DENOUNCES PRESIDENT, EXTRA. Having no "old money" I wondered into the library to read up from the local yellow newspapers.

It’s a few years after the war and things are dire indeed. US farm export sales crashed as European farms returned to production after WW1. The beginning of depression was extraordinarily sharp: the U.S. price level declined by over 40% in 6 months and 56% for the year. The highest decline ever in the whole history of the United States. The gross national product plunged 24 percent.

As the depression grew the President began to dismantle the huge federal bureaucracies built up during WW1. The Presidents slogan was "less government in business" as he opposed excessive governmental interference in the private sector of the economy and worked to control $25 billion of Federal debt. After taking office the President had said that government ought to "strike the shackles from industry .. We need vastly more freedom than we do regulation."

Cities and church charities opened soup kitchens. As industrial output fell unemployment rocketed to 12%. The States passed bonus bills as the President did nothing while the unemployed wondered the streets looking for work. Any work.

The relationship with congress deteriorated as the President asked the Senate to cut spending. Congress wanted government intervention and the President said no, insisting that relief measures were a local responsibility. While the President pushed through tax and spending cuts his relationship with Congress became severely strained.

But the complete break with Congress came after a group of powerful Senators passed a bonus bill. When the President vetoed that bill in an election year, both Republicans and Democrats were enraged. As the President lost the support of Congress, the Secretary of Commerce spoke out against the President in support of the people on main street.

Then in 1923 the great depression ended when unemployment fell from the 1921 high of 11.9% to the pre 1920 levels of 3.2%. About now you are thinking I don’t remember the depression of 1920. Well neither did I, and now I know why.

The 1921 loss of half the value and price of all goods was horrendous. For comparison the loss of housing value in the last year is around 18%, lower in many areas and a bit higher in others. Even though it was worse than 1930 we don’t remember the 1920 depression because the President didn’t tinker with the economy and built the groundwork to allow quick recovery without wide spread damage.

That President? That was Warren G Harding. Harding "embraced the advice of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon and called for tax cuts in his first message to Congress on April 12, 1921. The highest taxes, on corporate revenues and "excess" profits, were to be cut. Personal income taxes were to be left as is, with a top rate of 8 percent of incomes above $4,000. Harding recognized the crucial importance of encouraging the investment that is essential for growth and jobs, something that FDR never did."

Under Harding, GNP rebounded to $74.1 billion in 1922. The number of unemployed fell to 2.8 million, s reported 6.7 percent in 1922. Then fell again in 1923. So, just a year and a half after Harding became president, the Roaring Twenties were underway.

The Secretary of Commerce? That was Herbert Hoover who wanted government intervention in the economy … which as president he was to pursue a decade later when he transformed the second Great Depression into the beginning of a disaster.

Like all good TV shows this tale requires a moral of the story:
When any politician says only Government can fix a problem ask your self? With all due respect Mr(s) Politician, is it not better to do nothing that it is to do the wrong thing?

The Great Depression of 1920

Never heard of it? That's not surprising - it didn't last long. The 20's were roaring, not greatly depressing. Yet virtually none of the American population knows that the nation's economy actually took a worse hit in 1920 than it did at any point during the Great Depression. Consider these wiki-nuggets of wiki-knowledge:
The recession in the United States was brief relative to the Great Depression later that decade, but it included a very sharp price deflation. The decline in the GNP price deflator from 1920 to 1921 is the largest one-year percentage decline in the series in the more than 120 years covered....

Various estimates show that one-year deflation figures were 18 percent, 13.0 percent, and 14.8 percent, respectively. The closest comparator is the 11.5 percent deflation recorded for 1931-32, the third year of the Great Depression. Wholesale prices declined by 36.8 percent for 1920-21, the largest one-year decline on record, going back at least to the American Revolutionary War period. The 1921 deflation contains another striking feature. Not only was it sharp, it was large relative to the accompanying decline in real product. The ratio of the percentage decline in the GNP deflator for 1920-21 to the percentage decline in real GNP is 2.6 using the Department of Commerce figures. By contrast, during 1929-30, the first year of the Great Depression, the GNP deflator declined by 2.7 percent and real GNP by 9.4 percent, for a ratio of 0.3. The ratios of the percentage decline in GNP prices to the percentage decline in real GNP for 1930-31, 1931-32, 1932-33, and 1937-38, the other Great Depression years in which real GNP declined, were 1.0, 0.9, 1.2, and 0.3, respectively, all well below the 1920-21 figures.

In other words, if Jim Cramer were alive in 1920, he would have actually committed suicide on air. So why did Al Capone spend the next decade walking around in pinstripe suits instead of rags stolen from orphans and the recently deceased? Because rather than the massive government intervention that took place in the 30's, in 1920 and 1921, the feds hardly did anything at all:
Federal spending was cut from $6.3 billion in 1920 to $5 billion in 1921 and $3.2 billion in 1922. Federal taxes fell from $6.6 billion in 1920 to $5.5 billion in 1921 and $4 billion in 1922. Harding's policies started a trend. The low point for federal taxes was reached in 1924; for federal spending, in1925. The federal government paid off debt, which had been $24.2 billion in 1920, and it continued to decline until 1930.

With Harding's tax and spending cuts and relatively non-interventionist economic policy, GNP rebounded to $74.1 billion in 1922. The number of unemployed fell to 2.8 million— a reported 6.7 percent of the labor force— in 1922. So, just a year and a half after Harding became president, the Roaring Twenties were underway. The unemployment rate continued to decline, reaching an extraordinary low of 1.8 percent in 1926. Since then, the unemployment rate has been lower only once in wartime (1944), and never in peacetime.

The worst economic crash since we started keeping most relevant records didn't happen during the Great Depression. It happened in 1920. Yet America was back on its feet in less than two years, while the next crunch was dragged out for a decade. The free markets have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they grow faster than planned economies - why on earth wouldn't they fix themselves faster, too?

Funnies that may offend liberals

The liberals are asking us to give Obama time.
We agree and think 25 to life would be appropriate.



America needs Obama Care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.




Q: Have you heard about McDonald's new Obama Value Meal?

A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.




Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?


A: A fund raiser.




Q: What's the difference between Obama's cabinet and a penitentiary?

A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.




Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?


A: America !





Q: What's the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?


A: Bo has papers.

Obama's version of financial responsibility? Cut $15 billion then spend $1.4 trillion we don't have. We think somebody at the White House should spen

President Obama, after spending hundreds of billions his first year, now is seeking a partial three-year federal spending freeze that would reduce budgets by less than 1 percent.

The drop-in-the-bucket nature of the president's proposal was underscored Tuesday by a Congressional Budget Office estimate projecting the 2010 federal deficit to hit $1.35 trillion -- Obama's spending freeze would be expected to save up to $15 billion the first year.

The president will propose the congressional freeze on "non-security" spending in his State of the Union address Wednesday night, senior administration officials said. The freeze, which would apply to annual spending on day-to-day government, appears to be an attempt to answer widespread voter concern about rising deficits and debt.

But the scope of Obama's proposal is being met with skepticism on Capitol Hill, as Republicans say that any freeze will be small in the context of federal spending under Obama's watch.

"Given Washington Democrats' unprecedented spending binge, this is like announcing you're going on a diet after winning a pie-eating contest," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner.
related links

*

Obama Expected to Recast Presidency at State of the Union

Republicans note the catch-all spending bill Obama signed in March that included leftover budgets from President Bush boosted spending by 8 percent, and the catch-all spending bill he signed in December increased non-defense spending by 12 percent.

The latest proposal is not across the board. It would exempt the costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, all other Pentagon spending, as well as foreign aid and the budgets of the Veterans Administration and Department of Homeland Security.

It also would not impact mandatory spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Spending on these three programs alone this year is projected to equal 8.7 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, or 59 percent of all federal spending.

But even this pared-back proposal for a freeze is expected to meet resistance from Democrats on the Hill, something the administration appears to be bracing for.

"Do I think this is going to win us lots of kudos among some on Capitol Hill?" said one official. "No."

Administration officials said Obama will use his State of the Union address to urge Congress to impose the spending freeze for the next three budget years. If Congress follows suit, taxpayers would save $250 billion over 10 years under the proposal. That figure represents what would be spent, in part to keep up with inflation, without a freeze on "non-security" programs. Inflation may be starting to tick back up. IHS Global Insight has forecast inflation to grow this month at a rate of 0.3 percent from last month and 2.8 percent from last January.

Next year, a "non-security" spending freeze would save between $10 billion to $15 billion -- a fraction of the current $3.5 trillion budget. In comparison, the "security" spending items exempted from the freeze are as follows: $663 billion for defense, $56 billion for veterans, $43 billion for homeland security and $53 billion for foreign aid.

"We're not here to tell you we've solved the deficit," one official said, conceding this move would leave a sizable deficit behind. "You have to take steps."

Obama has embarked on several deficit-reducing "steps" since taking office, none of which would do much to reverse the rising national debt -- which has topped $12 trillion.

Shortly after his inauguration, the president announced he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his term. Such a pledge, though, means his administration would still rack up trillions in deficits over the course of his term, only adding to the debt.

Obama later called on his department to cut $100 million from their budgets. And most recently, he's backed a bipartisan task force to focus on ways to cut the deficit -- a proposal the Senate rejected Tuesday.

Karl Rove, former adviser to former President George W. Bush, called the proposal for a spending freeze worthwhile, but a clearly political response to the Democrats' loss in the Massachusetts Senate special election a week ago.

"It's a gimmick," Rove said. "This is a start, but it's only a start."

The "non-security" spending Obama wants to target for a freeze totaled $447 billion in the 2010 budget. Senior officials said Obama will ask Congress not to dole out more on "non-security" spending than $447 billion in the budget years 2011, 2012 and 2013.

The officials said Obama will seek increases in some spending on unspecified priorities such as education and the environment.

"Some agencies will be up, some agencies will be down," a senior official said.

Administration officials said if Congress follows Obama's lead, it will have reduced non-security spending to below allocations in 2008.

To achieve some of these savings, Obama will propose a raft of spending cuts, including terminating and drastically cutting some federal programs. Obama proposed $11.5 billion in these reductions in his first budget. Congress approved 60 percent of them, according to White House officials.

"At some point, you do have to draw a line and say, 'We have to re-orient what you are doing' and that's what is occurring," an official said.

"The president made these decisions the way a family would sitting around the dinner table," another official said. "It can't spend more money than it has and it has to make some decisions about what is vital. You can't afford to do everything you might have wanted to do."

How much does it cost us to fly Pelosi home on her Air Force party jet? $28,201 each way. In the last two years, she's billed taxpayers over $2.1 mill

Judicial Watch Uncovers New Documents Detailing Pelosi’s Use of Air Force Aircraft

Last year, Judicial Watch made big news by exposing Nancy Pelosi’s boorish demands for military travel. According to the internal DOD correspondence we uncovered the Speaker has been treating the U.S. Air Force as her own personal airline. And not only was her staff demanding, arrogant and rude, but the Speaker cost taxpayers a lot of money by making last minute cancellations and changes to the itinerary.

This week, Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Air Force that shed a bit more light on this ugly story.

According to the documents, which we obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Speaker’s military travel cost the Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period — $101,429.14 for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol. (Lots and lots of alcohol.) The following are highlights from the recent release of about 2,000 documents, which you can read here:

* Speaker Pelosi used Air Force aircraft to travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,210.51 per flight. The average cost of an international congressional delegation (CODEL) is $228,563.33. Of the 103 Pelosi-led CODELs, 31 trips included members of the House Speaker’s family.
* One CODEL traveling from Washington, D.C. through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq from May 15-20, 2008, “to discuss matters of mutual concern with government leaders” included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. Purchases for the CODEL included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.
* According to a “Memo for Record” from a CODEL March 29 – April 7, 2007, that involved a stop in Israel, “CODEL could only bring Kosher items into the Hotel. Kosher alcohol for mixing beverages in the Delegation room was purchased on the local economy i.e. Bourbon, Whiskey, Scotch, Vodka, Gin, Triple Sec, Tequila, etc.”
* The Department of Defense advanced a CODEL of 56 members of Congress and staff $60,000 to travel to Louisiana and Mississippi July 19-22, 2008, to “view flood relief advances from Hurricane Katrina.” The three-day trip cost the U.S. Air Force $65,505.46, exceeding authorized funding by $5,505.46.

If you have a moment, take a look at the documents for yourself. And pay special attention to the receipts, noting the large quantities of food and alcohol purchased at taxpayer expense. Doesn’t it seem as if the Speaker’s congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else? It certainly seems that way to me.

At the heart of the issue of corruption, is a sense of entitlement on the part of our elected officials. Nancy Pelosi clearly believes she deserves special treatment at taxpayer expense. This message comes across loud and clear in the disrespect she has demonstrated towards the U.S. Air Force and the American taxpayer.

First, Gore claims credit for creating the internet. Now, Biden claims credit for the success we've had in Iraq. Some things never change...

As senators, Barack Obama and Joe Biden both opposed the troop surge in Iraq -- and Biden even wanted to divide the country into three sections.

But as vice president, Biden is taking credit for success in Iraq.

"I am very optimistic about Iraq," he said. "I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration."

But Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, a member of the Armed Services Committee, said you cannot oppose the surge and then claim it for your legacy.

"When Joe Biden was in the Senate and Obama was in the Senate, they authored and were the chief architect of the resolution opposing the surge," he said.

The vice president also took credit for the troop drawdown.

"You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer," he said. "You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government."

But the drawdown was negotiated in the Status of Forces Agreement before the Obama administration took office.

"The reduction in U.S. forces that is under way right now is in fact important and it's largely the continuation of the policy that President Bush had set in place when he negotiated the drawdown schedule with Prime Minister Maliki at the end of 2008," Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution told Fox News.

In fact, the agreement called for having U.S. troops out of Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. combat troops out by the end of 2011.

"The timetable for withdrawing those troops had been worked on for a long time, way preceding this administration coming into power, and that timetable really centered on success in Iraq," said Col. Bill Cowan, a Fox News contributor. "That success starting really after the surge that was implemented by the previous administration."

At the White House, the day after the vice president's remarks, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked how the administration could take credit for Iraq.

"Well, putting what was broken back together and getting our troops home, which we intend to do in August of this year," he said, adding that Obama helped provide critical "political pressure" on Iraq policy before taking office.

Experts, noting a peaceful transfer of power is a key step for a young democracy, suggest another major test for Iraq is coming up March 7, when provincial elections are scheduled to be held.

Class shows up...

The doctor had his TV on in his office when the news of the military base shootings came on. The husband of one of his employees was stationed there.
He called her into his office and as he told her what had happened, she got a text message from her husband saying, "I am okay." Her cell phone rang right after she read the message. It was an ER nurse,” I’m the one who just sent you a text, not your husband. I thought it would be comforting but I was mistaken in doing so. I am sorry to tell you this, but your husband has been shot 4 times and he is in surgery."

The soldier's wife left Southern Clinic in Dothan and drove all night to Ft.Hood. When she arrived, she found out her husband was out of surgery and would be OK. She rushed to his room and found that he already had visitors there to comfort him. He was just waking up and found his wife and the visitors by his side. The nurse took a picture.





What? No news crews and cameras? This is how people with class respond and pay respect to those in uniform.

I sent my cousin in Fayetteville, N.C. (Retired from Special Forces) that picture of Geo. W. visiting the wounded at Ft. Hood. I got this reply:

What is even better is the fact George W. Bush heard about Fort Hood, got in his car without any escort, apparently they did not have time to react, and drove to Fort Hood. He was stopped at the gate and the guard could not believe who he had just stopped. Bush only asks for directions to the hospital then drove on. The gate guard called that "The president is on Fort Hood and driving to the hospital." The base went bananas looking for Obama. When they found it was Bush they immediately offered escort and Bush simply told them to shut up and let him visit the wounded and the dependents of the dead. He stayed at Fort Hood for over six hours and was finally asked to leave by a message from the White House. Obama flew in days later and held a "photo" session in a gym and did not even go to the hospital. All this I picked up from two soldiers here who happened to be at Fort Hood when it happened.

This Busy/Obama/Ft.Hood story is something that should be sent to every voter in the US.

Defend the Constitution

To regain our freedoms we must reject the Greek religious worldview that matter and private property is the source of evil and that the state must step in to define man's rights and protect him from his evil environment. this false Greek religious worldview has been the source of Marxist and the progressive/socialist worldview.

We must reinstate the Creationist worldview of the founding fathers that the Creator who gave us our rights, made a good world but man by his act of rebellion introduced evil into society. Hence matter and private property are not inherently evil or the source of evil.

This Creationist worldview of the Declaration of Independence, will end socialism by revealing the religious error it is based on.

It will reintroduce limited government and end the progressive taxation scheme that was introduced by the socialists in 1913 to pay for their nanny state.

It will reform our criminal justice system by holding that man is responsible for his actions and is not the victim of his environment.

It will end the insane gun laws which hold the gun and not the criminal responsible for crime.

It will likewise end the abuses of the welfare system by making everyone responsible for his own welfare because they are not victims of their economic environment.

It will end the abuses of healthcare by emphasizing
that everyone by their obedience or disobedience to the Creator's laws of health is responsible for their own health and should not expect the rest of society to pay for the drug management of their diseases.

You see worldviews do matter. The worldview of our founding fathers established laws and institutions based on individual accountable and freedom of choice. The neo- Marxist worldview establishes laws and institutions based on the state's responsibility for the well being of the individual. These two worldviews
are poles apart and lead to laws and institutions that are poles apart.

How then can conservatives compromise withe neo- Marxist/Socialist on anything- let alone on health care legislation?

The only solution to the crisis of government we face today is to throw the Socialist- Marxist out of office and reset the legislative clock to 1912. We must undo the freedom destroying legislation and judicial opinions of the last century to recover our lost rights and freedoms.

Jim Henderson, Esq. Author of Indicted! The People vs. The Medical and Drug Cartel. Www.indicted.us

The Top Ten Liberal Lies by Deric Lewis

1. The banning of partial birth abortions is an assault on a woman's privacy and right to choose.

A partial birth abortion is the termination of a life as a child is being born; hence the term partial birth abortion. The great divide on this issue rests with the circumstance that this procedure should be allowed. Liberals believe it should be allowed when the mother's health is in danger. Conservatives believe the procedure should only be allowed when the mother's life is in danger. Well established law states that deadly force can only be used to meet deadly force. This means that you can only use deadly force when you believe your life is in danger. If someone with the flu coughs on you, your health is danger. If someone berates you, your mental health may be in danger. If your neighbor doesn't take care of their property, it will cause you great aggravation and stress. However, there is no legal cause to use deadly force in any of these circumstances. However, liberals will allow children as they are being born to have their lives ended for the broad definition of health. Republicans tried to pass a bans on partial birth abortions with the exception of when the mother's life was in danger. However, Bill Clinton vetoed their efforts keeping in place the standard that if the health of the mother was in danger the procedure could take place. Another liberal lie with children's life as the casualty.

2. There is a vast right wing conspiracy-

There is a far right wing in the Republican Party, but it is a small fringe element. However, there is a far left wing in this country and it is a large part of the main stream of the Democratic party. Remember when Hillary Clinton went on the Today Show and responded to the allegation of an affair between her husband (President Clinton) and an intern (Monica Lewinsky) as untrue and blamed it on a Right Wing Conspiracy? Over the past ten years Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Mario Cuomo, Richard Gephardt and Jesse Jackson have been the loudest and most influential voices in the Democratic party. Are any of these people Moderates? Also please note, there is a liberal bias in the media. You might make the argument that there is a vast left wing conspiracy.

3. There is no liberal bias in the media-

For close to 50 years the news in America was controlled by ABC, NBC and CBS. In the last 20 years CNN came on to the scene. This is pretty much comparable to the BBC in Europe and AL Jazzera in the Arab world today. It was in the last 6 years when Fox News and other cable news networks were born to give a more balanced approach to news analysis. However, if you look at the major networks today, they are still run by the left. Tim Russert, the President of NBC News, at one time worked for Mario Cuomo. The top players at ABC News are Peter Jennings, George Stephanopolous, Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts- hardly conservatives. Lets not forget the statement the President of ABC News made after September 11th. CBS News has Dan Rather and Bob Schieffer- more non-conservatives. All you have to say about CNN is that it was created by Ted Turner. In print media there is the Los Angeles Times in California, The New York Times in New York and The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Georgia. These have been the major newspapers in our most populous cities for many years and their reporting has a liberal bias.

4. I support the military-

It has been well documented that when it comes to voting for military funding- liberals would much rather spend money on social programs.
First you must understand their rational. Approximately 10% of the population in the United States is poor, which is about 30 million Americans. There are approximately one million Americans serving in the military. If only 1 in 5 of the poor vote, that equals about six million votes as compared to one million votes from the military. There are two relevant questions here. What percent of the poor vote Republican? How close was the 2000 Presidential Election? This leads directly to the answer of why would liberals rather appropriate money to social programs than to the defense of our country. Please note, the defense of our country is a primary, if not the primary responsibility of our government. If we don't protect the country, we may not have a country or our freedom.


5. Trickle down economics does not work-

Money in the hands of people stimulates the economy, whether they are rich or poor. The problem- how to you put money in the hands of the poor? Transfer of more wealth from the rich to the poor each year? This would only create greater dependency on entitlements and give lessen the incentive to achieve. Give the poor greater tax cuts? You can only cut the taxes for the poor by so much, because they don't pay much in taxes. When Tom Daschle said that the result of a proposed Bush tax cut would mean that a rich person would be able to buy a new car, without realizing it, he proved the theory of Trickle Down Economics. The person selling that car would generate income that he would otherwise not have had. Please note that if that person sells enough cars, he will gain wealth. If tax rates in this county were at 75% what would happen to the economy? The answer is that no one would have money to spend on anything except housing and food. The result would be that businesses everywhere would fail, because no one would have money to buy clothes, electronics, entertainment, repairs for their homes or cars, go on vacation..... If they did buy such things, they would have to go in to debt to do so. How would this help the working class or the poor? Please note the average taxpayer, pays roughly 50% of their income in taxes. After the attack on September 11th, Hillary Clinton said, "come to New York and spend money." She knew if people stopped coming to New York and spending money, businesses would fail and the economy in New York would suffer a great downturn, which would hurt the average working family. This is interesting considering that liberals are for tax hikes and against tax cuts. The only thing that helps the working class is a strong economy. It gives the average worker more freedom and more bargaining power. When the financial sector was booming from 1987 through 1989, workers were getting bonuses, overtime and stock options. When the financial sector suffered a downturn in 1990, it trickled down. There were no more bonuses, overtime, stock options and their were layoffs.


6. I am against the death penalty, because an innocent person may be executed. However, I am for paroling convicted felons in order to give them a second chance.


Liberals say they are against the death penalty, because they fear that an innocent person may be executed. However, they argue for paroling convicted violent criminals in order to give them a second chance. There has yet to be a case where a person was given the death penalty and later found to be innocent. However- argue with a liberal and they will come up with one case. OK- so give them that one. Please be advised that there are thousands of documented cases of convicted violent criminals that were given numerous chances and then murdered innocent women and children. Cases such as Polly Klaas and most recently Carlie Brucia. Remember the 1988 election and Willie Horton? He was convicted of murder and given a life sentence without parole. However, only eleven years later, he was given a weekend pass from prison via a furlough program supported by then Democratic Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. In 1976 Governor Dukakis vetoed a bill that would have banned the furloughs for first-degree murderers. On the weekend that Horton was released, he broke into the home of Clifford Barnes. He beat Mr. Barnes, cut him 22 times and then savagely raped his fiancee twice. Call liberals soft on crime, that they care more about criminals rights than victim rights and they will call you a cold hearted right wing extremist. Is this backward thinking? If liberals truly cared about saving lives, they would not be fighting for the parole and early release of convicted violent criminals.

7. Democrats are for working class families-

As Democrats are opposed to every tax reduction this statement is almost ludicrous. The largest obstacle to gaining wealth is taxes. The single biggest issue affecting middle class families on a daily basis is taxes. The middle class taxpayer pays close to 50% of their income in taxes. Please consider the following: federal income tax, state income tax, state sales tax, property tax, gas tax, tolls, taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, utility taxes, automobile registration fees, county surtaxes. Democrats are not for the middle class and break down their support into groups. They get funds and count on votes from women by being pro-choice, minorities for supporting affirmative action, gays for supporting gay rights, unions for not supporting school vouchers, and environmentalists supporting things such as not drilling for oil in Alaska. On the those who don't pay close attention to the issues they use spin

8. This is a tax break for the rich-

This is class warfare at it's finest. If a person earning $40,000 a year gets a 10% tax reduction and a person earning $1,000,000 per year gets a 1% tax reduction- the person earning $1,000,000 will get a much greater tax break. Tom Daschle and Richard Gephardt once stood next to a car in front of the Capital Building holding up a muffler. They made a statement that a proposed George Bush tax cut would allow the rich to buy a new car and the average American to buy a muffler. This is a strategy Democrats use on every Republican proposed tax cut. They stop everyone from getting a reduction in their taxes by using class warfare. Please note, tax reductions are not an entitlement program.

9. This is a Bush recession-

Liberals blame George Bush for the weak economy and say his tax cut has only made the economy worse. They point to jobs lost, the level of unemployment, the level of the financial markets and slow growth since he took office. The economy was beginning to turn around leading up to September 11, 2001. After the attack on September 11, everything changed. People did stop flying, hurting the airline industry, which in turn hurt hotels, restaurants, theme parks and tourism. There were some businesses that closed for an entire week and some in New York that never reopened. The financial markets were closed for more than a week and the financial services industry was devastated. September 11th hurt all sectors of the economy, which resulted in tens of thousands of layoffs. So how is George Bush is responsible for the poor economy? Liberals would have you forget that the attack on September 11th took place and we must never forget. George Bush is trying to revive the economy by lowering taxes. The irony here, the liberals who accuse him of hurting the economy oppose his tax cuts.


10. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky-

We all know the truth here. There is nothing to be added- except that it was not a vast right wing conspiracy.

Israelis Baffled by News of Defenseless US Soldiers

I CAN ONLY SAY AMEN!!! it is truly PEOPLE, NOT GUNS that kill...

Many Israelis want to know: why didn't the soldiers attacked by a U.S. Army major-turned-terrorist return fire?

When a Muslim goes, well, Muslim in Israel he is typically shot to death by someone--say, a reserve soldier--within seconds of screaming "Allah Akbar."

In contrast with the Israeli experience, it took 10 minutes before a civilian police officer at Fort Hood was able to shoot and stop Muslim fanatic Nidal Malik Hasan.

How could that happen? How could so many people trained in the strategies and tactics of modern warfare be so defenseless?

The answer--and this may astonish many Americans--is that the victims were unarmed. U.S. soldiers are not allowed to carry guns for personal protection, even on a 340-acre base quartering more than 50,000 troops.

So it goes in brain-dead, liberal America .

Fort Hood is a "gun free" zone, thanks to regulations adopted in one of the very first acts signed into law by anti-gun President Bill Clinton in March, 1993. Click here for the file.

Contrary to President Obama's crocodile tears, his administration is bent on further disarming the U.S. military, and all Americans. Obama and his people will not rest until every American is a sitting duck..


Post Script: Israeli teachers, from kindergarten on up, are also armed; so, a Virginia Tech-type slaughter is highly unlikely at an Israeli university.

Israelis, who have had to combat terrorism all their lives, are not afraid of guns. They are an armed people, ready, willing, and able to defend themselves and their country.

Unlike indoctrinated Americans, paralyzed by fear and political correctness, Israelis understand that people, not guns, kill people.

The Obama Shrine

Normally when a President decorates the Oval Office and the White House, it's filled with pictures that tell the story of the building of America. Presidents like to be reminded of where we came from and who we are. That trend appears to have come to an abrupt halt. President Obama must like to be reminded of himself because apparently that's about the only pictures you can find in the White House today.

Bring Back HUAC

PART 1MANY PEOPLE ALIVE TODAY DON’T REMEMBER WHAT THE HOUSE ON UNAMERICAN ACTIVITIES WAS. HUAC WAS AN INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT LOOKED INTO SUBVERSION OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.

IT INVESTIGATED THOSE ACCUSED OF BEING COMMUNISTS WITHIN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. IT INVESTIGATED THOSE ACCUSED OF BEING COMMUNISTS WITHIN THE U.S. MEDIA, ESPECIALLY IN HOLLYWOOD. AND TO A LARGE EXTENT, IT WAS SUCCESSFUL IN EXPOSING COMMUNIST INFILTRATION. IT ROOTED OUT COMMUNIST OPERATIVE ALGER HISS. IT REVEALED THE EXTENT OF COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF THE FILM INDUSTRY. IT SERVED AMERICA AND PROTECTED IT FROM WHAT WAS THEN THE MOST SERIOUS THREAT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – COMMUNISM. BUT AFTER THE 1950S, A GENERATION OF LEFTISTS AND FELLOW TRAVELLERS IN ACADEMIA AND THE MEDIA CLAIMED THAT THE EFFORTS OF HUAC AND JOSEPH MCCARTHY IN THE SENATE HAD BEEN NOTHING MORE THAN A WITCH HUNT. THEY CLAIMED THAT IT HAD DESTROYED PEOPLES’ LIVES WHO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH COMMUNISM.

BUT THEN, IN THE 1990S, THE VENONA TRANSCRIPTS OF INTELLIGENCE INTERCEPTS FROM THE FORMER SOVIET UNION PROVED THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT HUAC HAD BEEN INVESTIGATING HAD BEEN INVOLVED WITH COMMUNIST GROUPS AND MANY HAD ACTIVELY SPIED ON THE U.S. FOR THE SOVIET UNION. THE OLD LEFTIES STILL CLAIM THAT HUAC WAS JUST A BUNCH OF RIGHT-WING KNUCKLE-DRAGGERS, BUT THE TRUTH IS EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.