Barack Obama: Worse On Iran Than Jimmy Carter?

1215 world oengineer full 600 Barack Obama: Worse on Iran than Jimmy Carter?
Iran became a major issue at last night’s Republican debate. But no matter how you believe it should be solved, everyone should agree the mess is here in the first place because of two people: Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.

Jimmy Carter’s weakness allowed the Ayatollah to topple the Shah and hold Americans in shameful conditions for 444 days, mocking a great superpower before all the world.

Barack Obama’s decision to hit the Persian version of the “reset button” paid its dividends this week. Iran emerged in front of the world with pictures of a downed U.S. spy drone, which it will use to gain new scientific insights it would never have otherwise enjoyed. Iranian scientists may have hacked the drone’s system to force it down. At the same time, Iran threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, the watery highway that conducts 17 percent of the world’s oil Westward.

The Washington Times reports Iranian and Venezuelan officials may be plotting a cyber-attack on U.S. nuclear facilities, similar to the ones we and/or the Israelis have been launching against them. In October, the Obama administration floated a highly implausible theory that some members of the Iranian government may or may not have planned to assassinate a Saudi official in Washington, D.C., and the president of Iran may or may not have known about this alleged plot, perhaps.

Under Jimmy Carter, the mullahs gained control of a nation. Under Barack Obama, they may develop a nuclear weapon.

In Iranian policy as on so many other fronts, Obama has finally given Jimmy Carter someone to look down on.

 

Sheriff Joe To Obama: I’ll Keep Doing My Job

7699 300x214 Sheriff Joe to Obama: Ill keep doing my job

Sheriff Joe Arpaio told WND today he intends to fight Justice Department allegations that his office violated federal civil rights laws in enforcing immigration laws in Maricopa County, Arizona.

He further affirmed that his office will proceed with the Cold Case Posse investigation into the authenticity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate and his eligibility to be president, which is scheduled to release preliminary findings in February.

In the Obama eligibility investigation, Arpaio’s investigative team has amassed hundreds of pages of documentation and taken testimony from dozens of experts in preparation for a final phase of field investigation.

“President Obama has just put a welcome sign on the U.S. border with Mexico,” Arpaio told WND in response to the Justice Department complaint.

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division issued the complaint against the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office at the conclusion of a three-year investigation.

 Read More at WND By Jerome R. Corsi, WorldNetDaily

Alabama Man Files Lawsuit To Keep Obama Off Ballot For Eligibility Issues

mark kennedy 201x300 Alabama Man Files Lawsuit to Keep Obama Off Ballot For Eligibility Issues

Mark Kennedy, Defendant

A man from Birmingham, Alabama is filing a lawsuit in the Jefferson County Circuit Court to keep Barack Hussein Obama off of the Alabama ballot, citing problems with Obama’s birth certificate.

According to the affidavit, Albert E. Hendershot, Jr is requesting that there be an “evidentiary hearing and production of the original long form birth certificate and microfiche copy of such original birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama to be presented at the hearing.”

The lawsuit also requests that there be an injunction issued against Mark Kennedy, Chairman of Alabama Democratic Party,  to keep Obama off the ballot. In addition, it requests that Alabama modify the “rules/ regulations for candidate eligibility verification/authentication, in order to stop elections fraud and forgery and assure the citizens of Alabama integrity of the elections process.”

Albert E. Hendershot, Jr backs up the affidavit with an appeal to Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution: “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…” In addition, Mr. Hendershot appeals to Minor v. Happersett, a lawsuit from 1875 concerning women’s suffrage,  which is cited in federal court to define citizenship and defines a citizen as “being born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States.” Hendershot states that “Obama is not eligible to be POTUS as his father, Barack Obama Sr., was a British Subject at the time of his birth and  not a citizen of the United States.

Hendershot goes on to argue that Mr. Obama does not have a valid Social Security number having a “fraudulently obtained Social Security number from the State of Connecticut”.

Watch Investigator Susan Daniels Explain her take on Obama’s Connecticut Social Security Number.

According to his Facebook Page, Albert Hendershot is owner and president of Innovative Portfolio Recovery Inc., “ a Debt Collection and Skip Tracing Firm, located in Birmingham, Alabama.”

The Obama Birth Certificate issue refuses to go away, with some experts calling the April 11th Long Form Birth Certificate displayed by the Obama administration a fake. 

This week, WND.com paid to fly a banner over a NFL game between the Dallas Cowboys and the New York Giants, asking, “Where’s the Real Birth Certificate?”

Time will tell whether this new challenge to the eligilibity of Barack Obama will stand. This issue is not going away, however, and Barack Obama can expect many more of these types of legal challenges in the year running up to the 2012 election.

Comment below and let us know what you think about this new lawsuit in Alabama.


Vote with our new social poll: Is this new lawsuit from Albert E. Hendershot a good thing?


Yes, Obama should be kept off the ballot in Alabama.

No, The Obama Eligibility Movement Distracts From Real Issues.


Affidavit

Albert E. Hendershot, Jr.
Plaintiff

V.

Mark Kennedy, Chairman of Alabama Democratic Party
Defendant


MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
IN THE 10TH Judicial Circuit Court of Jefferson County, State of Alabama

I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action, and I make this motion for a preliminary injunction against Mark Kennedy, Chairman of the Alabama Democratic Party and the motion is as follows.

1.   Plaintiff is seeking a preliminary injunction against Mark Kennedy, Chairman of the Alabama Democratic Party to prevent certification of Mr. Obama for 2012 Alabama ballot access pending final hearing based on factual evidentiary findings.

2.   Plaintiff is seeking an evidentiary hearing and production of the original long form birth certificate and microfiche copy of such original birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama to be presented at the hearing.

3.   Original application to Connecticut SSN 042-68-4425, which Mr. Obama is using on his tax returns and is not assigned to him according to E-Verify.

4.   Modification of rules/ regulations for candidate eligibility verification/authentication, in order to stop elections fraud and forgery and assure the citizens of Alabama integrity of the elections process.

Read the rest below…

Al Hendershot v. Alabama Democratic Party – Motion for Preliminary Injunction – Obama Ballot Access – 12/14…

Obama Endorses ‘Homeland,’ The Tale Of A Secretly Muslim Political Candidate

8436 300x183 Obama Endorses Homeland, the Tale of a Secretly Muslim Political Candidate

Obama listed his favorite shows and there is a surprise there for those who know what it’s about

From The Wrap:

One of Barack Obama’s favorite shows is about a secret Muslim who runs for office with a possible eye toward harming America from within — which is exactly what some of the president’s critics accuse him of being.

But that, apparently, hasn’t diminshed his appreciation of “Homeland,” one of several shows he listed as his favorites in a year-end chat with People.

Update: Claire Danes one of the star’s shows, in explaining why Obama might like the show said, ”He’s in the opening credits, so maybe that’s why!”

Obama appears in the show’s title sequence voicing a line from a speech he made following the death of Osama Bin Laden: “We must, and we will, remain vigilant at home and abroad.”

 

AP-GFK Poll: Obama Re-Election Odds Roughly 50-50

barack obama6488 300x300 AP GFK Poll: Obama Re Election Odds Roughly 50 50

Entering 2012, President Barack Obama’s re-election prospects are essentially a 50-50 proposition, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll. It found that most Americans say the president deserves to be voted out of office even though they have concerns about the Republican alternatives.

Obama’s overall standing in the poll suggests he could be in jeopardy of losing re-election even as the survey showed that public’s outlook on the economy appears to be improving. For the first time since spring, more people said the economy got better in the past month than said it got worse. The president’s approval rating on unemployment shifted upward — from 40 percent in October to 45 percent in the latest poll — as the jobless rate fell to 8.6 percent last month, its lowest level since March 2009.

But Obama’s approval rating on his handling of the economy overall remains stagnant: Thirty-nine percent approve and 60 percent disapprove.

Heading into his re-election campaign, the president faces a conflicted public. It does not support his steering of the economy, the most dominant issue for Americans, or his overhaul of health care, one of his signature accomplishments, but it also is grappling with whether to replace him with Republican contenders Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich.

The poll found Americans were evenly divided over whether they expect Obama to be re-elected next year.

Read More at OfficialWire By Jennifer Agiesta and Ken Thomas, AP and OfficialWire

A Look At Key Exchanges In The GOP Debate

romney 0868 300x191 A Look At Key Exchanges In The GOP Debate

PERRY TURNS TO TEBOW

The gaffe-prone Rick Perry sought strength from an unlikely source Thursday night: Tim Tebow.

The young Denver Broncos quarterback has captured the admiration of football fans across the country after a string of unlikely victories.

“There are a lot of folks that said Tim Tebow wasn’t going to be a very good NFL quarterback. There are people that stood up and said, ‘Well, he doesn’t have the right throwing mechanisms,’ or he doesn’t — you know, he is not playing the game right,” Perry said. “Am I ready for the next level? Let me tell you, I hope I am the Tim Tebow of the Iowa caucuses.”

___

ROMNEY LINKS GINGRICH ATTACK TO OBAMA

Newt Gingrich jabbed at Mitt Romney’s sometimes-controversial business career to score political points last week. But Romney was ready with an answer — and a knock on President Barack Obama — when asked about Gingrich’s criticism that he shuttered American companies and laid off employees to make money in the private sector.

“I think the president is going to level the same attack,” Romney said. “In the real world that the president has not lived in, I actually think he doesn’t understand that not every business succeeds.”

Read More at OfficialWire By Beth Fouhy and Steve Peoples, OfficialWire

Census: Half Of America Is Poor In Obama’s “New Normal”

The White House Watch

hopeless Census: Half of America is Poor in Obama’s “New Normal”
If your family is struggling with poverty, cannot put food on its table, or sees its income slowly shrinking away, you’re running about average in Barack Obama’s America. According to a new story from the Associated Press, census data show almost half of Americans are poor or low-income.

The data show that 49.1 million Americans are below the poverty line. Adding those whose income falls between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, and “146.4 million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population” have fallen on hard times.

That’s 48 percent of Americans, nearly half.

There are more heartbreaking disclosures in the story. In real, inflation-adjusted dollars, the average low-income paycheck has fallen by nearly $1,700 since 1979, and the number of Americans at or just above the poverty level has increased every year for three years. Moreover, AP notes, “Mayors in 29 cities say more than 1 in 4 people needing emergency food assistance did not receive it.”

It adds, “States in the South and West had the highest shares of low-income families.”

The study builds on a growing number of media revelations about just how economically debased America has become under the Obama maladminstration. A recent study by Rutgers University and New York Times found fully 69 percent of all Americans have been economically “downsized, devastated, or totally wrecked” under Obama. That is, their circumstances have dramatically shifted for the worse, or have changed in ways they believe are permanent and irreparable.

These mainstream media reports show America is so bad off, not even the media can cover for Obama anymore.

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, Americans will go back to work when one more man loses his job next November (or sooner).

The Good, The Bad, And The Bogus Balanced Budget Amendment

Obama BurnsMoney The Good, the Bad, and the Bogus Balanced Budget Amendment
As part of the deal that gave President Barack Obama the increase in the federal debt ceiling he so desperately wanted, both houses of Congress are required to hold a vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The House of Representatives has already acted but failed to achieve the two-thirds support necessary for it to pass. Now it’s the Senate’s turn.

There are actually three different versions of the amendment under consideration. The good, or strong, version sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) not only requires that federal outlays match revenues but also makes it harder to raise taxes by requiring a two-thirds super-majority of both houses to do so. It also pegs total federal spending to an historic proportion of the total U.S. economy and prevents the courts from being able to order a tax increase to achieve balance should the Congress pass a budget in which spending exceeds revenues. It is a balanced budget amendment with teeth. All 47 Republicans senators have co-sponsored this approach, and it will be voted on this week.

The bad version, the one the House voted on but failed to pass, simply requires that expenditures be equal to income. Critics of this approach say it is bad because it would be far less helpful in the effort to hold total federal spending down, and could actually be counter-productive, if the courts were to mandate a tax increase to achieve balance. Some call it the tax-increase balanced budget amendment.

The bogus version, which the Senate is also expected to take up this week, is being proposed by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) and is presumed to have the active support of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). To say that it has so many holes in it that it resembles a piece of Swiss cheese is unfair to the Swiss. It is much worse than merely bad. It’s downright deceitful, in that it masquerades as a balanced budget amendment, when in fact it is no such thing.

Under Udall’s Amendment:

  • A 60 percent supermajority of Congress could vote at any time to waive the requirement that the books must balance.
  • The amendment would be fully suspended not only in a time of declared war, but also in the event of a minor military action supported by a Congressional resolution. It does not exempt just the costs of the military action from the balance requirement – it exempts the entire budget.
  • It exempts Social Security revenues and outlays from the balance calculation, while at the same time “Constitutionalizing” Social Security as an entitlement.
  • It would prohibit Congress “from providing income tax breaks for people earning over $1,000,000 a year, unless we are running surpluses (those surpluses must also not be eliminated, if such a tax break were enacted).” That provision is socially divisive, profoundly partisan, and almost certainly in conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Udall Amendment is not a serious effort to address a serious problem, but rather an exercise in the worst kind of political cynicism: a vote purely to provide political cover to senators who are in tough fights for re-election next November and who want to be able to claim that they voted for a balanced budget amendment. They want to pretend to be in favor of a concept that the public overwhelmingly supports, while all along knowing that the Udall amendment will fail because it is so fundamentally fraudulent that no senator who really wants to balance the budget would ever vote for it.

There are effective ways to balance the budget, ineffective ways, and bogus ways. Udall’s proposal is a bogus balanced budget amendment that should be exposed for the act of political deceit that it is. Anyone who wants a balanced budget amendment with teeth should be for the Hatch-Lee strong version — and only that good version.

Colin A. Hanna is President of Let Freedom Ring USA, Inc., a non-profit public policy organization committed to promoting Constitutional government, free enterprise and traditional values. Email Colin at colin@lfrusa.com.

Victory: Republicans Block Obama’s Ambassador With Possible Spy Connection

RTXSP9L opt Victory: Republicans Block Obama’s Ambassador with Possible Spy Connection
Last August as Barack Obama was about to head out for vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, he named a woman accused of spying for Cuba as our ambassador to El Salvador. The recess appointment of Maria (or “Mari”) del Carmen Aponte side-stepped the Congress but could only hold for one year.

Time has run out. On Monday, on their first chance to weigh in on the matter, Senate Republicans blocked her nomination.

This author sounded the alarms on this website last year. President Bill Clinton nominated Aponte to be ambassador to the Dominican Republic lived with Roberto Tamayo, whom Clinton administration officials described as an agent of the Cuban intelligence agency Dirección General de Inteligencia (DGI). In 1993, a Cuban defector named Florentino Aspillaga said Tamayo tried to recruit Aponte on behalf of the Castro regime. Aponte refused to take a polygraph test and withdrew her nomination.

Although her defenders insist she was “cleared” by the FBI, the 1999 Miami Herald article they cite quotes only Bob Nash, a Clinton administration official who went on to serve as vice chairman of ShoreBank before becoming Hillary Clinton’s deputy campaign manager in 2007. He offered no specifics about her allegedly being cleared, and the article that Media Matters uses to vindicate Aponte concludes, “Whether or not there was ever a Cuban attempt to recruit Aponte remains unclear.”

Her actions since that time have raised concerns yet higher. She served on the board of directors of the National Council of La Raza and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), which is now known as LatinoJustice PRLDEF. That group, which was long headed by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, once issued a press release calling Puerto Rican FALN terrorists “fighters for freedom and justice, for liberation.” Of course, La Raza is the nation’s most outspoken Open Borders ethnocentric lobby.

As ambassador, Aponte wrote an op-ed in the El Salvadoran newspaper La Prensa Grafica lecturing the mostly Catholic nation that it does not do enough to support gay rights. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-SC, who has waged a courageous fight to get full documentation of Aponte’s background, excerpted it in a recent article for Human Events:

“Homophobia” is “often based on lack of understanding about what it truly means to be gay or transgender” the Ambassador wrote in . She went on to say that everyone has a responsibility to “inform our neighbors and friends about what it means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.”

El Salvadorans responded to her progressive meddling with a simple message: butt out. A large coalition of regional leaders replied, “Not accepting the legitimacy of ‘sexual diversity’ does not mean we are violating any human rights.”

Thanks to tough-minded leaders like Sen. DeMint, Aponte should be homeward bound.

Ironically, Obama accused the GOP of playing “politics with America’s national interests” for sending the Hispanic racist and potential Cuban spy back home.

Hispanic left-wingers have decided to — wait for it! — play the race card. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-IL, complained, “Between Mari Carmen Aponte and Sonia Sotomayor, there seems to be something amiss over in the Senate with Republicans refusing to confirm strong, smart Puerto Rican women for important positions for which they are eminently qualified.”

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-FL, who opposed the nomination, is also feeling the heat from the Sunshine State’s amnesty lobby.

There is no telling whether Aponte will feel the one-year ambassadorship was worth her investment in the Democratic Party. Aponte has donated $49,910 in campaign cash exclusively to Democrats, including Ted Kennedy, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Hilda Solis — and $2,300 to Barack Obama in 2008.

The president did all he could. Thank goodness it was too little.

Is Congess About To Give Obama The “Internet Kill Switch”?

kill switch 300x300 Is Congess About to Give Obama the “Internet Kill Switch”?

A bill pending before Congress may make it illegal for websites to link to content the government says is illegal. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) seeks to protect U.S. businesses from (mostly Chinese) copyright infringement by criminalizing forms of online piracy — but the strictures are so severe some say they amount to an “internet kill switch.”

Ironically, China’s bid to smother the internet is being held up as a model for America’s future. Former Senator Chris Dodd, formerly mired in the housing scandal and who now heads the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA),said, “When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn’t do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites.” That’s not a big concern, unless one of the President Obama’s closest advisers is publicly stating China is a superior model to the United States.

Bill Wilson of Americans for Limited Government sketched out the bill’s Orwellian overtones in The Hill:

Under the so-called “Stop Online Piracy Act” (SOPA) the federal government – which is prohibited constitutionally from abridging free speech or depriving its citizens of their property without due process – would engage in both practices on an unprecedented scale. And in establishing the precursor to a taxpayer-funded “thought police,” it would dramatically curtail technology investment and innovation – wreaking havoc on our economy.

Consider this: Under the proposed legislation all that’s required for government to shutdown a specific website is the mere accusation that the site unlawfully featured copyrighted content. Such an accusation need not be proven – or even accompanied by probable cause. All that an accuser (or competitor) needs to do in order to obtain injunctive relief is point the finger at a website.

Additionally, SOPA would grant regulators the ability to choke off revenue to the owners of these newly classified “rogue” websites by accusing their online advertisers and payment providers as co-conspirators in the alleged “piracy.” Again, no finding of fact would be required – the mere allegation of impropriety is all that’s needed to cut the website’s purse strings.

Wikipedia may shut down for a day in protest.

Surely Barack Obama would like nothing more than to take down his chief source of grief. And if that can’t motivate you, KOMO News warns the bill could mean the end of the funny cats at “I Can Haz Cheez Burger.”

The increasingly lethargic American public cannot stand up to elected officials to save the Constitution, but they may do it for the cats.

The White House Watch.