Saturday, February 28, 2009

Out Of Work, Lost Savings, Etc.? Get Help Here!

For those who have been most grievously affected by the liberal agendas that seeded the housing and financial market crisis, those of you who have lost your job, had your income cut and your savings and retirement funds gutted, help is just a click away.

Visit the Federal Election Commission's campaign finance disclosure page, and under the map, select the search criterion menu "Donor's Name" and change that criterion to "Zip Code." Enter your zip code and click "Go." (This search may take up to a minute, so be patient.)

Once the search is complete, select the column to search by "Candidate Name," and scroll down to see all the donors in your neighborhood who supported Obama.

Since they enabled Obama to redistribute your wealth, surely they would be willing to share some of their own to cover your expenses until Obama's recovery plan has restored your job, your income, your savings and your retirement fund.

(Heck, you might even find, as I did, that one of your neighbors far exceeded the legal giving limits to Obama's campaign.)

Read the rest of the article here: ObamaNation -- The USSA

Thanks to

Friday, February 27, 2009

Supreme Excuses for Failure in Luzerne County

The Philadelphia Daily News's John Baer this week reported a conversation with PA Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Castille about the injustice inflicted by the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas on thousands of children. Click here for a link to Baer's column, which says a lot more about Castille and the court than the chief justice intended. For more about the Luzerne County scandal, click here for last week's DR News.

Two judges have pleaded guilty to taking $2.6 million in kickbacks for placing children in certain juvenile detention facilities at a rate two-and-a-half times the state average, and for denying children counsel at a rate 10 times the state average. So the lingering questions are:

  • Why did the PA Supreme Court, responsible for all of PA's courts, remain silent for nine months after the Juvenile Law Center, the Attorney General's Office and the Department of Public Welfare presented the court with these facts?
  • When it finally ruled, why did the Supreme Court refuse to investigate the Luzerne County Court?
  • Why did it refuse to explain officially either what took so long or why it wouldn't intervene?
  • Does it matter that one of the owners of the juvenile detention centers is the son of a former PA Supreme Court chief justice?

About the delay, Castille said that since one of the guilty judges had changed the court's policy about the right to counsel, he didn't think there was still a problem. Castille apparently was unconcerned about the thousands of children whose rights already had been violated, some of whom were still wrongly sitting in juvenile jails. ... 

About the statistics, Castille said, "Well, you know statistics... There are lies, damn lies and statistics." He further told Baer, "They weren't our statistics." In fact, they are the Supreme Court's statistics. They are PA's official statistics, compiled under law by the Juvenile Court Judges Commission . It's an odd position for Castille to take since he recommends people to the governor for appointment to the JCJC.

About the investigation, Castille said, "We are not an investigative agency." First, Castille appears to admit that any kind of illegality can occur in Pennsylvania's courts and the head of the court system can't look into it. Does anyone believe this? Second, even if that were true, why didn't he refer the allegations to someone who could investigate such as an already-concerned attorney general? That's when he claimed, "They weren't our statistics."

Flipping the Presumption, or Flipping the Bird?

Amid great fanfare, lawmakers told us last year that the new open records law finally "flipped the presumption." Instead of presuming that government records were secret, PA's law henceforth would presume that government records were open.

While that may be true in the executive branch, for the legislature the rhetoric about flipping the presumption turned into flipping taxpayers the bird this week. AP's Mark Scolforo reported that both the House and Senate have refused to release emails and other communications between legislative leaders and lobbyists. Click here for the story.

Senate Secretary Mark Corrigan explained, "Nowhere in (the) list of accessible legislative records is found the mention of correspondence between members of the Senate and registered lobbyists." ... "It would seem clear and unambiguous that it was not the intention of the General Assembly to make such a general class of records into accessible legislative records."

In other words, citizens still have to prove that records should be open rather than lawmakers having to prove that they should be secret.

A Tale of Two Branches

For decades, Pennsylvania's executive branch has distinguished itself by having fewer state employees per 100,000 citizens than any other state.

Now, thanks to John Baer again, we learn that Pennsylvania's legislative branch has disgraced itself (further) by having the largest number of full-time staff of any legislature in America. Click here for Baer's column on the subject.

Two guesses, though, as to which branch of government is laying off staff, and which branch is adding staff during this recession. Even New York's legislature, previously the most bloated, is cutting back. But not our General Assembly.

Perhaps they're trying to spend our $200 million surplus on themselves before they have to give it back.

Or perhaps they need it for more Bibles and other holy books. The Philadelphia Inquirer's Mario Cattabiani reports that taxpayers paid $13,700 for these swearing-in hand-rests for 220 of 253 lawmakers. Click here for the story. Note especially Rep. Chris Ross, R-Chester, and ask yourself, "Has he heard of libraries? Or book stores?"

Maybe he could visit the $28,200 personal library Rep. Mark Cohen, D-Phila, charged to taxpayers a few years ago.

Spread the word and help us grow the Local Eyes network.
Click here for more.

P.O. Box 618, Carlisle, PA 17013

, , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Military Officer Oath Analysis - Defender of Constitution

This is written by one of our MIL Plaintiffs:

There is a huge difference between the military enlisted oath and the officer oath of office.

The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

Enlisted Oath

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Officer Oath -

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

As you can see, the officer does not swear to obey the orders of the President. We only have an obligation to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic (for example, a Presidential Usurper). (My bold emphasis. ---Al)

Our forefathers were so brilliant to foresee a situation like we find ourselves in now. The officer oath is a safeguard to protect the Constitution against a corrupt elected government. Officers only have an obligation to defend the Constitution. Military officers have a lot of legal clout when it comes to Constitutional matters. The officer oath does not mention following the UCMJ laws as does the enlisted oath.

Let's see if SCOTUS runs and hides again. They failed to live up to their oaths by ignoring the prior cases. I pray they will wise up very soon and honor their oath to defend the Constitution.

Thank you for your service! Not only is Dr. Taitz and her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation behind you; but it seems you have some extremely impressive support too:

Open Letter from Brigadier General Charles Jones

Major General Commanding General Carroll D. Childers Joins Military Suit

Col. Riley former division chief national security agency joins our action

Officer Easterling, Active military officer deployed with the US military in Iraq

  • No Image

Lt Col. David A. Earl-Graef

  • No Image

SSgt Brian A Keith USMC Joins Military Action

Major Cannon former Marine Corps. joins our action

Lt Col. Chuck Miller, USAF (Ret) is honored to be a Plainftiff in Military Action

Officer Grimes joins the Military Action

Their bravery and leadership has inspired others to step up too. They are the leaders. And we thank them all for their service!

Read All Critically Important Articles at
"To defend the rights and freedoms that exist for all citizens in the United States"

Read Pat Dollard's: “Ineligible Imposter”: First Soldier Refuses Obama’s Orders
Expanding Mutiny Against “Ineligible Imposter”: Second U.S. Soldier Refuses Obama’s Orders

revolutionarywarpeople150 cannononthemove200

See previous posts: Are We Slaves Or Do We American Citizens Have Constitutional Rights? By Ed
By Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Obama Channels Chavez, Markets Crash

WASHINGTON (SR) - In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Barack Obama sought to soothe America's financial concerns, pledging to borrow hundreds of billions more for liberal social programs, and adding free college educations and health care to the mix.

"We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before - think Cuba without the frills," Obama said to thunderous Democratic applause.

In response to the President's upbeat speech, the markets today dropped faster than Bill Clinton's pants at a sorority mixer, leading many to question the brilliance of electing a socialist ex-crackhead community organizer to the nation's highest office.

"What was I thinking," asked Kashanda Johnson of Cleveland, Ohio. "My pimp handles money better than Barack. We're screwed."


President Obama Addresses joint session

Read More Satire at

Monday, February 23, 2009

CBO Says Recession Will Continue - NewsBusted 2-40

By NB Staff

Topics in today's show: The Congressional Budget Office says recession will continue through the year, Democrat Diane Feinstein compromises our national security, the US postal service raises its prices, New Jersey becomes the only state without an official song.

Starring: Jodi Miller
Director: Bruce Roundtower
Executive Producer: Matthew Sheffield

See and Read more Quality Material at

Love the show? Then help spread the word by embeding it on your blog or telling your friends on Myspace and Facebook.

Think you're funny? Send your (short) jokes to newsbusted at If we use them, we'll pay you USD $50 for each one.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Pelosi Meets Pope, All Hell Breaks Loose!

VATICAN CITY (SR) - Pope Benedict XVI met today with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic who supports abortion, in what observers called a "clash of good versus evil."

According to witnesses, Pelosi attempted to "school" the Pontiff on "what the Bible really means" concerning murder, prompting the Catholic leader to produce a vial of holy water and a large crucifix and driving the snarling and cursing Pelosi back against a wall.

According to witnesses, the Pope then unsuccessfully attempted to exorcise Pelosi, finally abandoning his efforts in the face of "overwhelming Godless liberalism."

After the meeting Speaker Pelosi had no comments for reporters as she hurried to her next stop, a gay rights celebration in downtown Rome.


Speaker of the House Pelosi departs meeting with Pope Benedict XVI

Read More Satire from

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Obama "Public Will Have 5 Days To Look At Every Bill That Lands On My Desk" - Video

Video: “I’m Going To Make It Impossible For Lawmakers To Slip Pork Into Bills And The Public Will Have 5 Days To Review Every Bill. That’s A Commitment I Make As President. :-O


7 Broken Promises:

1. Make Government Open and Transparent
2. Make it “Impossible” for Congressmen to slip in Pork Barrel Projects
3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public (Republicans shut out)
4. No more secrecy
5. Public will have 5 days to look at a Bill
6. You’ll know what’s in it (No one knew what was in it because no one was allowed time to read the bill before voting)
7. We will put every pork barrel project online

Well, let's see ... With this that's 1,268 times OBAMA has LIED since he started his campaign. That's a lot even for the ANTI-CHRIST!

H/T Pat Dollard

H/T Free Republic

Saturday, February 14, 2009

D.C. Woman Gives Birth to 798 Pound Baby

The News Leader of the Known Universe

After months of build-up and difficulty, a Washington, D.C., woman has given birth to a 798-pound baby boy, setting a new world record for its excess.

Anya Reed successfully gave birth in a grotesque public display where doctors from around the country argued about just how to deliver the baby and where to put all of his girth post-delivery.

Specialists from the country's most respected clinics lent a hand to Reed in her nine-month effort to craft what will prove to be the most difficult baby to maintain and feed.

"It cost us thousands and thousands of dollars to have this baby," said Reed, "But it was worth it. Our little boy is big enough to hold this entire country on his back."

Controversy quickly followed the birth when it was discovered that Reed, a single mother, lacked the funds to pay for all the doctors who helped her conceive this baby and had no income to care for it in the long term.

"It's true, I'm unemployed," said Reed, "But this great country has always come through for underdogs like myself. Yes, the baby has already caused me to mortgage my house, pawn my valuables, and donate more blood than I actually have, but I'm sure someone will help me pick up the tab. We really need this baby. He's going to be a valuable contributor to society."

Reed even received a supportive phone call from President Barack Obama.

"I called Ms. Reed to let her know that she's right," said the President, "Nothing is more valuable to this country than an obese, expensive, sweaty, formula-puking, 3-ton-diaper-filling, Goodyear blimp of a baby. He's like a 798-pound beacon of hope."

Many doctors were involved in the controversial birth up until the last second, arguing all the way.

"I was insistent that we make sure and cut the umbilical cord so that it's an 'innie' once the baby's born," said Dr. Sam Oliphant of the Minnesota Pre-Natal Center, "My colleague from Massachusetts continued to insist upon an 'outtie' and we could not perform the birth until this was resolved. Thankfully, we got it resolved the night before."

Other controversial issues with the birth included an argument over whether or not to clip the baby's fingernails and toenails in-vitro in order to cut his weight down a little. Doctors from New York were no more willing to do that than they were to pick his nose in-vitro. In the end, the baby's weight was reduced in a compromise that included the in-vitro removal of a small build-up of toe-cheese.

Crowds gathered at local bars to watch the birth live on air winced as the mammoth bundle of jiggling joy slid from his very uncomfortable mother's body.

"I honestly wasn't sure what to do after I saw that," said Washington D.C. bartender Joe Stevens, "Cut people off from drinking or give away free drinks. Either way they're going to have to save their money to help feed this kid. The question is, would it be better if they got really, really drunk first."

Read more Satire at

Friday, February 13, 2009

ACT NOW ALERT! "stimulus" Bill - SENATE may vote TODAY!

This Porkulus Bill passed the House (as expected) but needs 60 votes to pass the Senate. It got 61 votes originally.

Call, Fax or email your Senator both Democrat and Republican!

This is Your LAST CHANCE to save Our Country and Our Economy from this Devastating PORK Bill - ACT NOW!


Our U.S. Senate May Vote On This Bill today.

The U.S. House is racing through this bill right now. Many families aren't even aware this is going on because of the President's Day holiday weekend.

Nancy Pelosi is scheduled to fly out of the United States today for a trip to Europe.

The Bill is now over 1000 pages. One Senator Predicts None of His Colleagues 'Will Have the Chance' to Read Final Stimulus Bill Before Vote

Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) are helping to make this a bipartisan effort.

If one of these change their minds, Senator Reid could end up with a loss, and Speaker Pelosi would have to go back to the drawing board. Americans would have more time to understand what this bill is all about and more time to share their feedback to their elected reps.


Call the Senate Switchboard NOW ! (202) 224-3121

Additional Senate Contact Information for individual senators and their staff members: Click Here

Congress' Leaders... Break Promise To Post Stimulus Bill Online For 48-Hour Public Airing...

From Obama Campaign Website:

Sunlight Before Signing

Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.

Our Children.....Our Future.....


U.S. Senate Contact Information:


DC PHONE: (202) 224-2523
DC FAX: (202) 224-2693
AUGUSTA PHONE: (207) 622-8414
AUGUSTA FAX: (207) 622-5884


DC PHONE: (202) 224-5344
DC FAX: (202) 224-1946
BOSTON PHONE: (207) 622-8292
BOSTON FAX: (207) 622-7295


DC PHONE: (202) 224-4254
DC FAX: (202) 228-1229
HARRISBURG PHONE: (717) 782-3951
HARRISBURG FAX: (717) 782-4920

Don't forget to call your Democratic Senator and tell him or her to vote against this PORK Bill.

Over the years the only thing that ever Stimulated the Economy was TAX CUTS! Tax Cuts cause an increase in jobs, improves the Economy and increases the Tax revenue.

Almost 60% of Americans have serious misgivings about this legislation!


Post this to your blog. Copy the entire page as is and it will conform to the width of your Blog.

Read more excellent articles from

President Obama,

I am one of those people whom you wish to help with this stimulus package. I have a wife and three children, I made quite a bit less last year than in 2007. Tough times. Economic hardships are a very personal and poignant reality. This is no one else’s fault but my own, I claim my mistakes.

This new tone that you have brought to Washington leaves me just a little puzzled. A few years ago our nation rushed to war after only six months and two congressional affirmations of the President’s policy. That was clearly a bi-partisan issue. The fiscal policies of the last two decades are as bi-partisan as can possibly be. However the present circumstance is the result of eight years of President Bush’s failed economic policy.

Dissent IS Patriotic. I recall that being quite the rally point on the left in 2003 and all through out the war in Iraq. Now however the situation is so dire that no opposition can be brooked, any debate is delay and the cost of inaction is to terrible to contemplate.

Why can’t we wait six days to pass this package? Not six months, not six days. Because you know that this is not the change that the American People want. If you were confident in our support for this very important legislation you wouldn’t be opposed to giving us six days to look it over.

Not only are you quick to judge us incapable of comprehending the pressing necessity and brilliance of your stimulus package but there are calls for opposing voices to be silenced, with the fairness doctrine. Your policies will have to stand up to public critique sooner or later, unless you plan on censoring other forms of media as well.

“Buy American,” wasn’t so popular with our European Allies. That was quickly pulled from this legislation, when did their opinion become so much more important than the 46% of Americans who voted for the other guy. If 46% is too small a percentage for you to listen to, how about the nearly 60% of Americans who have serious misgivings about this legislation?

Six days, is that too much to ask?


Nathan A. Steeves