What is at Stake in the 2018 elections

Here is a list of who’s at stake in the upcoming 2018 mid term elections

U.S. Senate– 35 of 100 Senate seats are up for grabs

U.S. House of Representatives– All 435 House seats are up for grabs

Governors– 36 of 50 States

State Legislators- 82% of positions, totaling 6,070 seats in 67 legislative chambers.

City Governments-Mayors of 26 of America’s 100 largest cities.

State Judges Nearly 300 state appellate judges, including 71 state supreme court justices

Thomas Jefferson and Interesting facts

April 18th, 2013

I have decided to look at some Presidents and list some facts about them that most of us may not have known. The first United States President that I will look at will be Thomas Jefferson.

Thomas Jefferson was born on April 13, 1743, in Virginia and Died on July 4trh, 1826 on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson is best known for his role in writing of the declaration of independence, for his two terms as President and for his face on the nickel.

Here are some fact about Thomas Jefferson that you may not have known

#9 Jefferson the Musician. Thomas Jefferson took violin lessons as a child. He even, courted his future wife, Martha Skelton.

#8 Jefferson the Astronomer. Thomas Jefferson loved the stars as he did reading. He even made sure astronomy was taught at the University of Virginia, and he designated what may have been the first observatory in the United States.

#7 Jefferson the Architect. He designed the rotunda for the University of Virginia and for his own home in Monticello and for the Virginia State Capitol in Richmond.

#6 Jefferson and Wine Thomas Jefferson brought his love of fine wine back to America. He had two vineyards at Monticello, which he apparently used to experiment with. Acknowledged as a great wine expert of early America, he sought to promote wine as an alternative to whiskey and cider.

#5 Thomas Jefferson as a writer. Jefferson was a prolific writer during his lifetime, with authorships of the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. The Thomas Jefferson Papers at the Library of Congress includes about 27,000 documents, including his extensive correspondence with key historical figures.

#4 Jefferson was the only President who never vetoed a bill. Thomas Jefferson was the first two term president who never veto any bills.

#3 Jefferson was very religious. Jefferson was a religious man but his beliefs caused much controversy. He was raised as an Anglican, but grew up to be an opponent of all organized religion.
#2 Jefferson and economist. He believed in the free market polices and opposed bank notes as currency.

#1 Jefferson and his love of books. After he left office as president, he sold his library of 6,500 volumes to the Library of Congress after it was ransacked by the British. He needed the cash to pay off debts, but started to buy more books.

I will be posting more information on more United States President.

United States Supreme Court says government can be sued over guards’ actions

March 30, 2013

The United States Supreme court ruled unanimously that the federal government can be sued for abuse claims against prison guards.

The high court ruled for Kim Lee Millbrook, a prisoner at the federal prison in Lewisburg, Pa. who had accused prison guards of sexually assaulting him in May 2010. Prison officials said Millbrook’s claim was unsubstantiated.

The court accepted his appeal and appointed him a lawyer-Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court that the lawsuit can move forward.

The Federal Torts Claim Act waives the United States immunity against lawsuits for civil wrongs intentionally caused by federal representatives, including federal law enforcement officers. But the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said immunity is only waived when the law enforcement officer is executing a search, seizing evidence or making an arrest.

Thomas said those terms describe what federal law enforcement officers can do, not what they can be sued for.

The exception waiving immunity from lawsuits against the government “extended to acts or omissions of law enforcement officers that arise within the scope of their employment, regardless of whether the officers are engaged in investigative or law enforcement activity, or are executing a search, seizing evidence or making an arrest,” Thomas said

You can read more on this case at Millbrook v. United States 11-10362

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASES TO LOOK OUT FOR IN 2011-2012

BY FRANK OSEKOWSKY

July 22, 2011

FEDERAL COMMUNICATION COMMISSION V. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC

 The United States Supreme Court will rule on whether the FCC current indecency enforcement regime violates the First or Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Court Circuit ruled last year that the FCC’s indecency policy, which places restrictions on profanity and nudity during television broadcasting, is unconstitutionally vague.

Indecency issues have been raised in two separate broadcasts.  One in which a nudity scene appeared in a television crime show during prime-time hours, and the other involving celebrities using expletives during live broadcasting events. 

UNITED STATES V. JONES

The Court will decide whether the warrantless use of a GPS tracking devices on respondent’s vehicle to monitor its movements on public streets violated the Fourth Amendment and whether the government violated respondent’s Fourth Amendment rights by installing the GPS tracking device on his vehicle without a valid warrant and without his consent. The federal government sought Supreme Court review after the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled last year that prolonged use of GPS to monitor suspects’ vehicles violates the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

MESSERSCHMIDT V.,MILLENDER

The Supreme Court will consider whether police officers are entitled to qualified immunity where they execute search warrants later determined invalid. The 9^th Circuit Court ruled that the officers in this case were not entitled to qualified immunity.  In United States v. Leon these officers were entitled to qualified immunity, and evidence obtained should not be suppressed, so long as the warrant is not “so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.

MARTEL V. CLAIR

The United States Supreme Court will determine whether a condemned state prisoner in federal habeas corpus proceedings is entitled to replace his court appointed counsel with another court-appointed lawyer just because he expresses dissatisfaction and alleges that his counsel was failing to pursue potentially important evidence. The district court denied respondent Kenneth Clair’s position for habeas corpus and refused to allow him to replace his lawyer, but the 9^th circuit court reversed ruling that the district court abused its discretion.

KNOX. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 100

The Supreme Court will decide whether a state, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments may condition employment on the payment of a special union assessment intended solely for political and ideological expenditures without first providing notice that includes information about that assessment and provides an opportunity to object to its exaction.  The 9^th Circuit held that no second notice was required under the Supreme Court’s opinion in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson. The court will also determine whether a state, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, may condition continued public employment on the payment of union agency fees for purposes of financing political expenditures for ballot measures.

MIMS V. ARROW FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC

The court will consider whether Congress divested the federal district courts of their federal question jurisdiction over private actions brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.  The US Court of Appeals for the 11^th Circuit held that federal courts lack jurisdiction over private actions under the Act.

U.S. Supreme Court To Review Case on Medi-Cal Payment Cuts

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review whether health care providers and patients have the right to sue California over cuts to Medi-Cal reimbursements.

The case that the high court will review consolidates three legal challenges to California’s previously proposed reimbursement cuts. The three cases are:

• Maxwell-Jolly v. California Pharmacists;
• Maxwell-Jolly v. Independent Living Center; and
• Maxwell-Jolly v. Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital (Vesely, Modern Healthcare, 1/18).

Background

In 2008, the California Legislature approved a 10% reduction in Medi-Cal reimbursements for dentists, health clinics, pharmacies, physicians and other medical providers (McClatchy/Sacramento Bee, 1/19).

Health care provider groups filed lawsuits against the state, arguing that the lower payment rates would negatively affect Medi-Cal beneficiaries’ access to care and conflict with the federal Medicaid Act.

After federal courts blocked the Medi-Cal cuts from taking effect, California appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court (Savage/Goldmacher, Los Angeles Times, 1/19).

Attorneys for the state say the proposed Medi-Cal cuts did not violate the law. They also argue that only the federal government has the authority to enforce Medicaid regulations and that health care providers and patients do not have the right to sue a state for allegedly violating federal Medicaid rules (Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle, 1/19).

Implications for California, Other States

The Supreme Court’s ruling on the case could have major implications for efforts to address California’s budget deficit. Last week, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) released a budget proposal that would reduce Medi-Cal payments to health care providers by 10% to cut program spending by about $719 million in fiscal year 2011-2012.

In addition, the case could have implications for other states seeking to address budget deficits by cutting Medicaid payments. Twenty-two states have joined California in appealing the issue to the Supreme Court (Los Angeles Times, 1/19).

Timeline

The court is expected to hear oral arguments in the case next fall. A decision is expected in late 2011 or early 2012 (Robertson, Sacramento Business Journal, 1/18).

 

Supreme Court to weigh churches’ employment rights

The Supreme Court agreed to consider whether a teacher who was fired from a religious school is subject to a “ministerial exception” that can bar suits against religious organizations.

The case involves an employment dispute between a Michigan school and a teacher who is defended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Lawyers for the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School in Redford, Mich., argue that courts have long recognized the First Amendment doctrine that often prevents employees who perform religious functions from suing religious organizations.

They asked the court to determine whether it extends to teachers at a religious school who teach a secular curriculum but also teach religion classes and lead students in prayer.

A lower court sided with the school and against fired teacher Cheryl Perich, citing the ministerial exception. But last March, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, saying it did not apply because Perich spends most of her time teaching secular topics.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing the school, said federal appeals courts are divided on the limits of the ministerial exception and the Supreme Court’s consideration is groundbreaking.

“If `separation of church and state’ means anything, it means the government doesn’t get to pick religious teachers,” said Luke Goodrich, deputy national litigation director at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

The EEOC has expressed concern that a ruling against Perich could lead to religious organizations being shielded from all suits filed by staffers “simply by characterizing all of their duties as religious.”

Reasons why President Obama has failed as a Leader

July 2, 2011

Frank Osekowsky

Here are just a few example of Obama’ leadership failures:

President Obama has spent the first two year of his presidency on such issues as ObamaCare and has pushed through a government centric solution that the majority of Americans do not want.

Since taking office, Obama has added $5 trillion dollars to the national debt.

Obama’s stimulus program has failed, instead of the stimulus program lowering the unemployment rate it has done nothing but raised it.

Obama follows right behind France and the Arab League into the United Nations-approved military intervention in Libya.  Obama is unable or unwilling to clearly define the mission and criteria for success that will allow the United States to cease its active military involvement.

United States Foreign policy is an embarrassing mess under Obama-Since Obama has become President America’s global power has weakened.  The United States has surrender to Moscow on Missile site defenses, has failed to aggressively stand up to Iran’s nuclear program. And he has decided to side with the ousted Marxists leader in Honduras.

America has lost its greatness under Obama- Since taking office Obama has traveled the world to apologize to world leaders for the actions of the United States in the past for invading other nations. 

So what has Obama done for the past two years.  He has done nothing but bring this county down.  President Obama has been busy taking over the Banking industry, the Insurance industry, the Automobile industry and is busy trying to get illegal immigrants amnesty.

President Obama has always stated that he is for the middle class.  If we look at his record this is far from the truth.  He wants to tax the middle class to death so that we can pay more for his socialist programs.

He wants to control everything.  He wants the citizens of the United States to be dependent on the government for all of their needs.

President Obama has no idea what he is doing.

President Obama was right when he promised changed if he was elected President of the United States.  He has changed the United States of America from a democracy nation to a socialist nation.

In 2012, our voices will be heard loud and clear in Washington and throughout the nation.

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS

 Frank Osekowsky

The Republican party was born in the early 1850’s  by Individuals who believed that government should grant western lands to settlers free of charge.

The Republican party not the Democratic party was the party that led the movement to free the slaves.

In 1896, Republicans were the first major party to argue for securing the right to vote for women. When the 19^th Amendment was finally added to the Constitution, 26 of 36 state legislatures that had voted to ratify it were under Republican control.  The first woman elected to Congress was a Republican. Jeanette Rankin from Montana in 1917.

 

Which Do You Believe?

Republicans believe…	Democrats believe…
…that the United States were founded on the fundamental principle that individuals have certain rights and freedoms which cannot be infringed upon and may be restricted only to the degree necessary to preserve the rights of others.	…that our Founding Fathers did not really mean what they said when they guaranteed certain constitutional rights such as the right to freedom of religious expression, the right to keep and bear arms, and the right to retain the use of private property.
…the money you earn is yours and that government in a free society has the right to take only as much as is needed to perform those limited functions, which are appropriate to it.	…government has a right to use your money as it sees fit to redistribute wealth, establish new spending programs in times of budget surpluses, and to return to you only that portion of your money which is politically expedient.
…the traditional family and the values it fosters are the foundation of American society and their preservation is essential to our Nation’s continued success.	…American society must redefine its values and the role of the family to fit new lifestyle concepts, which have resulted from the 60ís counter-culture movement and an attitude that promotes an abrogation of individual responsibility.
…parents have the right to determine the values with which their children will be raised and to have the widest possible choice among public, private and religious schools and that competition will improve public education.	…the federal government has the right to determine the values which will be taught in public schools and parentsí choice of schools must be limited to avoid exposing public schools to competitive forces which would encourage reform and increase accountability.
…that the free enterprise system is the most effective engine of economic progress.	…that government regulation and federal control of economic activity can better distribute wealth and services to the American people.
…high taxes, runaway government spending, and over-regulation of business and farming punish initiative and stifle economic growth.	…penalizing achievement with higher taxes and increased government bureaucracy and spending will not stifle economic growth but instead guarantee prosperity for everyone.
…that with freedom comes responsibility and that individuals must take personal responsibility for their own actions and our criminal justice system must be based on this idea.	…individual behavior, including criminal behavior, can be blamed on “society” and that spending on social welfare programs and improvements in prison living conditions can combat crime.
…that your property is yours and you have the basic right to make use of it without unreasonable government restrictions.	…the government has the right to regulate the use of private property in accordance with narrow special interests without giving just compensation to owners.
…the preservation of our rights and freedoms must be entrusted to a strong national defense and of the ability of the United States to negotiate with other nations from a position of strength.	…we can afford to drastically weaken our military despite the threats present in an unstable, post-Cold War international environment and the United States must subjugate its interests to those of the United Nations.
…it is imperative today to re-affirm the traditional freedoms and values of America to preserve our great Republic.	…that America must adopt a politically correct, multi-cultural set of values which denies common American heritage and will further divide American society.
…there can be differences of opinion and that such differences such result in opponents, not enemies.	…that all whom oppose them are to be treated as enemies.
…that all of America’s citizens can enjoy the rights and freedoms of our country without diminishing the rights of others.	…that some must give up a portion of their rights and freedoms that others may enjoy those same rights and freedoms.
…that public servants, particularly those whom we elect to office, must be held accountable to the highest standards of ethical conduct.  “If a man cannot be trusted with the government of himself, can he be trusted with the government of others?” [Thomas Jefferson]	…that loyalty to a discredited leader is a virtue and if other office holders have committed indiscretions, a sitting office holder should not be criticized for failing to uphold the highest standards of ethical conduct.

 

Here are some break down on the other issues

 

First the main thing is:

• Democrat- Liberal- Wants to change.
• Republican- Conservative- Follows established tradition more often.

Here are some common issues:

Military

• Democrat- Would like to decrease military spending, and strengthen organizations like NATO and the UN.
• Republican- Would rather have a strong military.

Gun Control

• Democrat- More gun laws are needed.
• Republican- Against new gun laws.

Gay Rights

• Democrat- Usually for gay rights and sees it as OK for some to be with who they choose.
• Republican- Usually hold the view that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Minimum Wage

• Democrat- Believes a living wage above the poverty line should be given.
• Republican- Believe that free market should determine wages.

Death Penalty

• Democrat- Does not believe a live should be taken as punishment.
• Republican- The death penalty can be necessary.

Taxes

• Democrat- The most taxes should go to those with the most money.
• Republican- Believes that taxes should stay low to benefit the economy and believes in tax cuts.

Flag Burning

• Democrat- It should be allowed due to freedom of speech.
• Republican- Should not be allowed as that is not what the constitution intended.

Abortion

• Democrat- It should be the woman’s choice.
• Republican- The government should protect the unborn child’s life.

So now after that article, maybe you will go out and vote for which party the president should be that will run this country.

FOUR (4) BIG MISTAKES BY OUR PRESIDENT

June 13th, 2011

Frank Osekowsky

 

BIG LIE #1

“OBAMA INHERIED THIS MESS”

“Bush created all of these problems.  We are trying to solve them but it is much worse than we thought and it will take years for our solutions to have an impact”.

 Fact #1

The number one, most important job of the House of Rep. every year is to create a Federal budget.  When Nancy Pelosi was speaker of the House, they did not create a federal budget. They didn’t even try.  All they did was spend money.

 Fact #2

President Obama increased spending and the size of government more than all previous Presidents (From George Washington to George Bush)-COMBINED.

 The liberal congress created that problem and they should own it.

 BIG LIE #2

“THERE’S NO WAY TO CUT ENOUGH SPENDING. SO WE MUST RAISE THE DEBT CEILING.”

“There’s no way to cut enough spending. So we must raise the debt ceiling. If we don’t raise itAmericawill not be able to pay back its creditors and the rest of the world will never trust us with money again.  It will be a disaster.

The truth is that the spending can be cut quickly and in a large enough amount to avoid blowing past the debt ceiling.

When President Clinton left office over 10 years ago the government was operating with a budget surplus.  The government was much better than it is now.

When President Bush was in office,, the Federal Budget spending climbed and climbed.  Government grew bigger and faster at a alarming rate.

While President Obama has been in office, the government has grown more then it did under all previous Presidents added together.

BIG LIE #3

Members of the Republican “leadership” will tell you this lie.

“Raising the debt ceiling is inevitable; and the democrats want it so badly they’re willing to give us some really great deals in order to get it.  We can take advantage of it and get some cool stuff in exchange for our votes.  It’ll be great!”

Raising the debt ceiling equals ME VOTING FOR YOUR OPPOENT IN THE PRIMARAY AND IN THE GENERAL ELECTION

Raising the debt ceiling is not good for American, no matter what deal you think you’re getting in exchange for it.

 If you want a balanced budget amendment, pass a balanced budget amendment and DON’T raise the debit ceiling.

 If you want big spending cuts, pass big spending cuts and DON’T raise the debt ceiling.

BIG LIE #4

“The intricate financial details of running the entire United States Government are so complicated that the average American just isn’t capable of understanding how it works.  It involves thousands upon thousands of Byzantine and interwoven variables that are so delicately balanced they can be easily disrupted by one false move, setting off a cataclysmic chain reaction of economic disasters that will cripple the world’s monetary system.  Handcuffing congress by not allowing us to raise the debt ceiling just shows how simplistic, unsophisticated, ill informed, and child-like.  Those of us in congress are far better equipped to make these kinds of decision.  So just go back to you daily lives and let us run the country.

Tea party patriots is working hard every day and night and weekend to fight socialism and promote the values of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets.  The liberals and the enemies of freedom are fighting just as hard to shut us down.

Tracking the Promises made so far by the GOP

May 9, 2011

Here are some of the promises that the GOP has kept so far to date:

REPEAL SMALL BUSINESS MANDATE

Will repeal mandate in the health care bill that requires small business to “report to the IRS any purchases that run more than $600.00

Status: On April 15^th, 2011 President Obama signed this bill into law.

CUT THE CONGRESS BUDGET

Will make Congress do more with less by significantly reducing the budget significantly.

Status: On 1/7/2001 the House approved by a 410-13 vote a binding resolution that would cut the operating budget of members and communities by 5% or about 35 million annually.

REQUIRES BILLS TO INCLUDE A CLAUSE CITING ITS AUTHORITY IN THE CONSTUTION

Will require each bill moving through Congress to include a clause citing the specific constitutional authority upon which the bill is just.

Status: In January 2011, the House Republicans adopted a rule requiring it for all bills.

The constitutional justification does not appear in the actual text of a bill, but it can be found in the congressional record after a bill has been introduced the way the rule is written, no bill can be considered unless it includes a justification. 

If a bill does not contain a statement citing the constitutional authority, the clerks office will send it back to the sponsoring members office with a request to add the citation.

OPPOSE “CHECK CARD”

Will “oppose” card check schemes that (make it easier to join union and ) putWashingtonunion bosses before individuals right to secret ballot.

Status: The Democratic couldn’t get their 60 votes in the Senate that they needed to pass this bill in 2010 with the Republicans in charge it is very highly unlikely this bill will pass.

I will keep you posted on other promises that the GOP keeps.

FLIP FLOPS MADE BY PRESIDENT OBAMA

 

April 17, 2011

 

1.                  CLOSING GUANTANAMO BAY PRISON

As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama had condemned President Bush for supposedly “running prisons which lock people away without telling them why they’re there or what they’re charged with”.  President Obama had signed an executive order shutting the facility down immediately upon taking office.  On March 11^th, 2011 President Obama announced that the prison would remain open.

 2.                  BRINGING BACK MILITARY TRIBUNALS FOR TEROR SUSPECTS

As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama was a firm opponent of the Bush administration’s military tribunals, which he said “failed to establish a legitimate legal framework and undermined our capacity to ensure swift and certain injustice.  In March of 2011, President Obama reversed his two-year old order halting new military  charges against detainees atGuantanamo Bay,Cuba, permitting military trials to resume with revamped procedures but implicitly admitting the failure of his pledge to close the prison camp.

 3.                  CONTINUING RENDITIONS OF TERROR SUSPECTS

In a 2007 article then Senator Obama gave a strong indication that he would end the Bush administration practice of rendition of terror suspects:

 “To build a better, freer world, we must first behave in ways that reflect the decency and aspirations of the American people… This means ending the practices of shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, of detaining thousands without charge or trial, of maintaining a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law”.

 4.                  ORDERING MILITARY ACTION IN LIBA WITHOUT SEEKING CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION

In 2007, then Senator Obama declared:

 “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.  In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent.  History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative Branch.  It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.”

However, in August of 2009, the Obama administration’s Interrogration and Transfer Task Force announced that it would retain renditions, but with what The Times referred to as “more oversight”.

5.                  DROPPING MISSILE DEFENSES IN ORDER TO APPEASE THE RUSSIANS

In 2009, President Obama pledged to move forward with the Bush-era plans for Third Site Missiles defenses inPolandand theCzechRepublic:

 President Obama stated: “Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses  a real threat, not just to theUnited States, but toIran’s neighbors and our allies.  TheCzechRepublicandPolandhave been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles.  As long as the threat fromIranpersists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.

Six months later however, the Obama administration gave in the Russians demands , and dramatically dropped plans for the Third Site. 

6.                  KILLING THE NASA MANNED SPACE PROGRAM

In August of 2008, Senator Obama announced a “detailed comprehensive space plan that includes $2 billion in new funding to reinvigorate NASA”.

 He stated: “As president, I’ll make our space program a priority again by devoting the attention and resources needed to not only inspire the world with feats of exploration but also improve life here on Earth.”

 In March of 2011, President Obama made a decision to kill NASA’s Constellation program, crafted during the Bush administration with an ambitious goal of putting astronauts back on the moon by 2010. 

 7.                  TOPPING A BRUTUAL DICTATOR IS A DUMB WAR

In 2002 then Senator Obama said that using  military force to topple a murderous dictator amounted to a “dumb war” and should be opposed.

 In 2002, while making a speech at a anti-war rally inChicago, he said “while Saddam was a brutal tyrant, that was not enough to justify using military force to remove him from power. Now let me be clear… I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein.  He is a brutal man.  A ruthless man.  A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.  He has repeatedly defined U.N. resolutions, thwarted U.N. inspections teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.  He’s a bad guy.  The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him”.

“Obama argued that deposing Saddam military was not necessary, becauseIraqposed no “direct threat” to theUnited States.

In March of 2011 President Obama made a statement on the need to attackLibya.  He stated: “ Quaddafi declared that he would show ‘no mercy’ to his own people.  “He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment.  In the past, we have seen him hang civilians in the streets, and kill over a thousand people in a single day.  President Obama has come to endorse the use of military power to enforce America’s responsibility as a global leader” arguing that the United States was “different” and therefore had no other choice but to attack Libya.

1. 8.                  Pledging to restore America’s standing in the world.

 

 During the presidential election campaign President Obama and VP Biden stated that they will restore America’s standing in the world by providing a new American leadership to meet the challenge of a new century:.

But as President he has done the complete opposite.  He has insulted key allies such asGreat Britain,IsraelandPoland.    No American president in modern history has invested less effort in maintaining US alliance than Barack Obama.  Whether its siding with Marxists inHondurasagainst pro-American forces, condemningIsrael, throwing the Poles and Czechs under the bus, or trashing the Anglo-American Special Relationship, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to kick its allies in the teeth while kowtowing to American’s enemies.

1. 9.                  LETTING SUDAN OFF THE HOOK FOR THE DARFUR GENOCIDE

 

In 2004, Senator Obama was a prominent support of a “humanitarian intervention” to halt state-sponsored mass killing inDarfur, declaring in a speech that “we cannot, in good conscience, stand by and let the genocide continue.” He advocated tough United Nations sanctions against the brutal regime of Omar Hassan al-Bashire, which “should freeze the assets of the Sudanese government, its leaders and business affiliates: outlaw arms sales and transfers toSudan; and prohibit the purchase of Chinese oil.

1. 10.              DUMPING MUBARK IN EGYPT AFTER CALLING HIM A “ALLY”

 

In an interview with the BBC’s Justin Webb in June of 2009, when asked if he viewed President Mubarak as an authoritarian ruler, President Obama declared:

No, I tend not to use labels for folks.  I haven’t met him; I’ve spoken to him on the phone.  He has been a stalwart ally, in many respects, to theUnited States.  He has sustained peace withIsrael, which is a very difficult  thing to do in that region, but he has never restored to unnecessary demagoguing of the issue and had tried to maintain that relationship.  So I think he has been a force for stability and good in the region.

20 months later, the White House emphatically called for Mubarak to go.

What does President Obama do all day at the White House-Nothing at All

I would like to know what President Obama does all day at the White House.

You hardly every hear about any meetings that the President has had with other officials.  You hardly hear of him having any meetings with leaders of other countries.  Why is this?  Is this President dislike this much throughout our nation and throughout the world?

The only time that you want President Obama is doing is when he is either having a party at the White House or when he is going on vacation. 

It also seems to me that this President has his priorities mix up.  It seems like he is more concerned with the pending NFL lockout then he is concerned with what is happening in the Middle East. 

Every time gas prices went up when President Bush was in office he was blamed for making the prices to go up so that his “Oil Buddies” could get rich.  How come now know one is blaming President Obama for the rising price of gasoline.  Why is he exempt?

Why is the media being so kind to President Obama.  Why are they not blaming him for the problems in the United States like they blamed President Bush?  I thought that the media is suppose to unbiased when reporting issues.