Category Archives: In The News

Only One Applicant for SD US Attorney: Guess Who?

I have a hard time swallowing the fact that the “ONLY” applicant for the position of US Attorney for SD was none other than one Brendan V. Johnson, son of US Senator Tim Johnson.

Brendan Johnson, the son of Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson, is the only person to throw his hat into the ring to be named the state’s U.S. attorney.

Brendan’s qualifications are so minimal that they are almost non-existent, this just reeks of more political pay-to-play and Washington cronyism.

 But, what the hay, he has his contact priorities all filled out:

  • consulting offers
  • expertise requests
  • business deals
  • reference requests
  • getting back in touch
  • brendan johnson 1brendan johnson 2

     

     

    As SD’s Constant Conservative says:

    “Been a while in coming but not at all surprising. Welcome to Chicago South Dakota.”

    Just When You Thought it Couldn’t Get Any More Bizarre

    I still hold firm in the framers original intent that there is absolutely no birth certificate the could ever prove that Obama ever was an Article II natural born citizen, but this is just getting too bizarr-“O”.

    Since taking office as a state senator in Il, Obama had claimed Queen’s Medical Center as his place of birth, then right after the 1st of this year, that was changed to Kapi’olani Womens and Children’s Hospital. This week MSNBC African reporter calls Obama a Kenyan and the Ghana newspaper reports it is exciting to see Obama “return to the continent of his birth“.

    I reported on the beginning of the scrubbing the other day and now it seems they are digging themselves a deeper hole

    wnd wiki article page capture

     

    This isn’t going to go away until a one “Commander in Thief” coughs up his bona fides and then signs his resignation. It still amazes me that Congress as well as the mainstream media, while putting McCain through everything short of a proctology exam, they all just gave their so called communist messiah a pass.

    It will come back to bite them all. maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but the truth always has a way of coming out.

     

    To Win, Conservatives Have to be Willing to Fight and to Learn a Little History

    From  Dan Gainor – FOXNews.com w/ links added by L. Melin comes a challenge for all conservatives: “Are you armed with the tools to fight for what is true and right?”

     

    It’s Time for Obama to Meet His Waterloo

     

     Let’s take a lesson from history — One major victory and Obama’s momentum runs out of gas. 

    Nearly 200 years ago, emperor Napoleon came back from exile and re-conquered France without firing a shot. His conquest of Europe failed when Napoleon, in proper English terms, was soundly thrashed at Waterloo by the Duke of Wellington. 

    Napoleon might be long gone, but President Obama is doing his best to fill his boots. Sure, he’s taller. And instead of hiding his hand in his shirt, it’s either in our pockets or signing bills and spending money. But his aims are very similar — power and control. Just as the French army was Napoleon’s personal guard, Obama’s followers resemble more of a personality cult than a political party. If he wins, ordinary citizens lose and government grows ever larger.

    In the years since Napoleon lost at Waterloo, that battle has become the metaphor for epic defeat. Today, conservatives avoid the same kind of major confrontation with the popular Obama for fear of being crushed and sent into political exile. Rather than risk losing, phony conservatives are helping Obama by voting for his massive increases in government.

    That’s entirely the wrong strategy. If Waterloo was a major defeat, it was also a major victory. That battle should have taught us that even a man who conquered much of Europe can be defeated. For every Napoleon, there is a Wellington who goes down in history as an epic winner.

    This isn’t just one battle. The modern battlefield is really three political fronts — it’s health care or cap-and-tax or immigration. The issues change rapidly as the president tries to keep his opponents off balance, but the tactics remain the same. Every new campaign overlaps the last, dividing Obama’s enemies and their resources. Stimulus. Cap-and-tax. Healthcare. Attack, attack, attack.

    The strategy put forth by the White House may lack military precision, but it’s definitely more of a military campaign than a political one. The Obama strategy is one of using each “crisis” to his benefit. A quick search of the White House Web site finds 530 separate mentions of “crisis.” They’ve got an “economic crisis,” a “financial crisis,” a “home mortgage crisis,” a “flooding” crisis, an “international financial crisis,” a couple of “humanitarian” crises and even a “potential environmental crisis” in Australia.

    As Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has said, “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

    Rather than call Obama on his “crisis” management manipulating the news, the media use the term more than he does. In the past few months, journalists have added an air of immediacy to Obama’s every action by linking it to a perceived “crisis.”

    North Korea, Honduras, Pakistan, Iran, Israel and Zimbabwe all have some sort of “crisis” according to recent articles in The Washington Post. Countries don’t just have problems or disputes any more. That’s not sensational enough to give Obama the support he needs.

    It’s the same on the domestic front. Want to fix health care? Then lets watch NBC’s Dr. Nancy Snyderman talks about “America’s biggest health care crisis” on her new MSNBC show. Want support for another outlandish stimulus bill to fend off the “economic crisis?” Then let the networks promote pro-stimulus voices by a factor of more than 2-to-1. In all, The Post had more than 1,000 different Obama “crisis” stories since he took office just six months ago.

    It’s part of the mainstream media campaign to keep Obama strong and help the Democrats give away enough spoils to secure permanent power. They are leading the charge against a largely leaderless conservative movement and hoping to turn our defeat into a rout. The theory is activists and voters will turn away and give up without direction.

    It doesn’t have to be this way. Napoleon famously said, every soldier carries a marshal’s baton in his pack. In other words, if the movement needs leaders, leaders will emerge.

    Meanwhile, the Democrats are emboldened. They run the House and now have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate thanks to the addition of Sen. Al Franken (D-Looney Tunes) and Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Turncoat).

    The Republicans and conservative Democrats need to be just as bold. One major victory and Obama’s momentum runs out of gas. Stop government takeover of health care, as conservatives did with Clinton, and the whole uber-left campaign grinds to a halt. With no bogus health reform, the even more bogus cap-and-trade bill could fail. If they fail, conservatives could muster support to stop a sell-out on immigration.

    To win, conservatives have to be willing to fight and to learn a little history.

    Dan Gainor is The Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture. His column appears each week on The FOX Forum and he can be seen each Thursday on Foxnews.com’s “Strategy Room.”

     

     

    To Confirm or “NOT” to Confirm: Do You Know the Answer?

    I have already made my decision based on much research and study of Sotomayor’s background. How knowledgeable are you on this potential lifetime Supreme Court nominee by our Commander in Thief?

    Here is some weekend browsing for those wishing to learn more. You needn’t wait until the actual confirmation hearings begin on Monday. All the answers to the following questions can be found on-line in articles, bios and court opinions. What will be interesting during the hearings is if she actually stands by all her affirmations thus far or will she slickly try to divert as to get confirmed, then do a 180 as her appointee has done since moving into the white house.

    Daily Questions for Judge Sotomayor

    Confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor are scheduled to begin on July 13th. Senator  Cornyn is committed to giving her record a full and fair review. In an effort to ensure a transparent, comprehensive examination of her extensive record, Senator Cornyn, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a former Texas Supreme Court Justice, will pose a daily question raised by her record and her judicial opinions.

    Question 1: What is the proper role of foreign and international law in interpreting the United States Constitution?

    Question 2: What is the power of a federal court to interpret the law absent a “Case” or “Controversy”?

    Question 3: How much should courts defer to the judgment of Congress and the Executive Branch in the area of national security?

    Question 4: What is the role of statutory text in statutory interpretation?

    Question 5: Are there any limits to the power of Congress under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution?

    Question 6: What is the role of original intent and originial public meaning in constitutional interpretation?

    Question 7: How can a judge objectively apply the law if she believes there are multiple realities and multiple versions of the truth?

    Question 8: Does Judge Sotomayor believe that the firefighters’ claims in Ricci v. DeStefano are routine and not worthy of careful treatment?

    Question 9: Are judges supposed to update the law to reflect changing social policy?

    Question 10: What did Judge Sotomayor mean when she agreed that the Second Amendment does not protect a fundamental right?

    Question 11: How should courts measure the Government’s need to protect the public safety against the threat of terrorism?

    Question 12: Does Judge Sotomayor continue to believe that the city of New Haven should have been allowed to scrap the results of its firefighter exam on the basis of race?

    Question 13: Does the Takings Clause provide any limits on the power of the government to take private property?

    Question 14: Has the Supreme Court made any missteps in the last fifty years that might justify public skepticism about lawyers and the courts?Question 15: Is the Constitution color-blind?

    Question 16: Should the Constitution be interpreted to allow the death penalty, and if so, under what limitations?

    Question 17: Should constitutional interpretation resemble common law decisionmaking?

    Question 18: What limits does the First Amendment impose on campaign finance regulation?

    Question 19: What is the proper role of judges in defining marriage and the family?

     

     

    Happy Weekend…I’m off later to go enjoy the “Hot Harley Nights” parade and get a few new photos for the family album. 

    Guess Who Else Showed Up in Russia

    It seems we tax payers will be on the hook for additionalsecret service, motorcade and accommodations for a nanny while the Commander in Thief and his side kick MO are off trying to keep up their facade of a legitimate administration:

    yesterday in Moscow:

    MO and daughter malia and possibly mos mommy dearest

      <<<<<<<<now back track to January in DC: 

     robinson)Obama women and girls

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Looks like granny/nanny is living the “high life” on our tax payer dime also. And here we all thought she was wandering the halls of the White House all lonely and blue.

    For Constitutions Sake: UPDATED

    senate covering HondurasAs I reported yesterday, one by one, Senator after Senator stood up on the Senate floor to blast the administration for siding against the Honduran’s for constitutionally ousting a “Tyrant of a President”:

     (snips from Atlas Shrugs): The Honduran constitution, enacted in 1982, has 378 articles. 6 of these articles are “cast in stone”, meaning that they can NOT be changed. These 6 articles deal with defining the type of government, territory claims, and presidential term limits.

    – Article 42, Section 5 says that anyone who is found to “incite, promote, or aid in the continuation or re-election of the President” would face loss of citizenship.

    Any changes to the constitution have to be initiated by the legislative branch. The congress has to convene a constituent assembly. That’s basically a group of people selected by the congress to analyze any proposed changes and form those ideas into the new constitution. After the proposed changes are formulated, the congress would approve them to be put to a national referendum. The executive branch (the President) has nothing to do with that process. Zeyala didn’t think that the congress would go along with his ideas of staying in power so he decided he’d call his own referendum. He doesn’t have the authority to do that – remember that constitutional changes can only be done by the legislature AND the term limits are one of the articles cast in stone – but he goes ahead and calls one anyway.

    The Honduran Supreme Court says “Sorry Zeyala, you can’t do a rereferendum. That’s not within your power as president”. Damn those people on the Supreme Court! They figured out the ruse! They ruled unanimously that regardless of what you call it, if it acts like a rereferendum the president can’t do it. Zeyala continues to talk of doing the poll on June 28 regardless of the Supreme Court. The Congress looks at the poll that Zeyala wants to do and gives an opinion that the poll would be illegal and they will not support it. Zeyala’s own political party is in control of the congress.

    The Attorney General says that the President has committed treason and asks for him to be removed from office. The Congress created a commission to examine Zelaya’s actions and determines removal from office is appropriate.

    Once Zeyala had been removed, the President of the Congress (Roberto Micheletti) was sworn in as the new President of Honduras. This was exactly the person that is indicated by the constitution. It was a proper and legal succession of the presidency. The first thing that Micheletti did was confirm that the regularly scheduled elections would be held in November. His post is temporary until the new President was duly elected.

    Now, how dare those Honduran citizens and government officials be so brash as to follow their Constitution? How dare they?!!! According to our Commander in Thief, all those Hondurans in support of upholding their Constitution and Rule of Law are traitors to their country:

    THE WHITE HOUSE
    Office of the Press Secretary
    ____________________________________________________________________________

    For Immediate Release June 28, 2009

    Statement from President on the situation in Honduras

    “I am deeply concerned by reports coming out of Honduras regarding the detention and expulsion of President Mel Zelaya. As the Organization of American States did on Friday, I call on all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Any existing tensions and disputes must be resolved peacefully through dialogue free from any outside interference.”

    uh-huh Mr Commander in Thief, would you just verify for me which rule of law you are referring to here, the Honduras Constitution or the illegitimate laws of your dictator friends? For if it is the Rule of Law under the Honduran Constitution, I think we need to sit down and take a deeper look at that law degree you say is legit, because you seem to be confused as to what the definition of “rule of law” means. But then, maybe AT has a scenerio that explains your actions quite clearly for us:

    (now snips from AT): Take this hypothetical: imagine that Barack Obama announced that he was going to hold a referendum on legalizing a third term for himself. Imagine that even his attorney general, Eric Holder, advised him that it was illegal. Imagine that the Supreme Court ruled that holding the referendum was unconstitutional. In spite of that, let’s imagine that Obama coerced the FEC into holding the referendum anyway. Then – let’s further imagine — we found out that Venezuelan strongman Chávez (who has pulled off a similar power grab in his own country) was financing the referendum. What should the Joint Chiefs do in such a case? And if they removed Obama from office, would they be destroying the Constitution or preserving it?

    Actually, this is in play. Watch for another backdoor illegal change to the constitution much like the ones that formed the illegal fed reserve and the illegal income tax laws that Wilson apologized for:

    January 9, 2009 ~ 111th CONGRESS ~ H. J. RES. 5 ~ Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

    Kind of reminds me of that pesky “natural born citizen” requirement in Article II, Section I, Clause V of our Constitution that they have been trying to get rid of for the past 9 years:

    H.J.Res. 88: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to make eligible for the Office of President a person who has been a United States citizen for twenty years.

    It doesn’t take a college degree, let alone a law degree to know that there is substantial circumstantial evidence that we US citizens may be in for a “coup d’etat” of our own if the general public does not get with the program and take their heads out of the sand and start educating themselves about the threats already in place, threats that we may face right here at home.

    (again from AT): In a press conference on June 23, Obamasaid: “I’ve made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs.” He never called upon the Iranian mullahs to “respect democratic norms.” On the contrary, he ostentatiously refuses to “meddle” in Iran…

    (snip)

    On Tuesday, U.N. General Assembly piled on, condemning the “coup” in Honduras and demanding that Zelaya be returned to office. It passed – by acclamation – a resolution calling upon all member states not to recognize the new government.

    Obama and the U.N. passed up an opportunity to recognize the will of Honduran people and the sanctity of their Constitution. It has been widely reported in the Spanish-language press, but not here in the United States, that the anti-Zelaya demonstrations in Tegucigalpa are huge, demonstrating that the Honduran people support the actions of their Congress and Supreme Court in removing Zelaya from office. 

    The new president of Honduras, Roberto Micheletti, said Thursday: “I am concerned that President Obama – for whom we have a great deal of respect and admiration, as we do for his people – should shun us without having heard our explanation” for the removal of Zelaya. He added: “However, of Señor Chávez we can expect anything: he has already threatened to invade the country. This is a lack of respect.” Former U.S. diplomat and democracy advocate Martin Barillas noted that in an interview Thursday, “Micheletti said that 80 percent of his compatriots support his presidency, a claim that has been bolstered by the throngs of supporters appearing on the streets of Tegucigalpa, the capital city. Some protesters in the Honduran capital brandished placards telling President Obama, in English, that they too have a dream of democracy.”

    Obama, yet again, on the side of evil.

     While this may come as a surprise to many new readers, it is of absolutely “NO” surprise to me. Nothing this new administration does differs from any of the findings/facts of the background research I have been doing for nearly a year now. Facts I warned voters to consider before going to the ballot box last November.

    And thankfully, many who now have severe buyers remorse and are no longer calling me a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist and though I am as eager as ever to keep on educating those who still don’t quite “get it”, I’ve learned not to be so outspoken in bringing up politics at every chance. Instead I wait for the opening, then I “GO TO TOWN”!

    So, whileI have along way to go, if and when any of those fore mentioned resolutions comes out to alter our constitution and the qualifications and terms limits of our US Presidency, I will have already gained the respect of those who once naysayers and be able to help educate them so they make informed and constitutional votes at the ballot box from here on in.

    UPDATE: Here we go, the campaign to cover-up for the Commander in Thief’s agenda begins. It’s called “Get rid of the Evidence”:

    (just in this afternoon from Beckwith): Fight The Smears Disappears Barack Obamais now hiding his short form Certification of Live Birth It appears that Obama has taken down his “Fight the Smears” website. As the public groundswell surrounding Obama’s birth certificate grows, Obamahas removed his phony Certification of Live Birth from the Internet.  The one at the link in the “share the fact” box is also gone.  What’s really strange is the archived copies in the WayBackMachine, the Internet Archive, are also gone.  Removing those copies required additional steps to remove and should be beyond Obama’s reach — but I guess not.

     But guess what?  Obama’s published lies are in my cache.  I learned a long time ago that anything Obama sensitive has to be cached, because Obama and the Obots will take it down. What I never noticed before, is the damning statement in the window in the left column, under the legend, “Share the Facts Copy the text below and paste it into your email.”  It is also in the banner at the top of the page. The statement reads (cursor down), “The fact is Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America.” A “native born citizen” is not the same as a “natural born citizen.” A “native born citizen” is any person born in the mainland US. Anchor babies are “native born citizens.” A “natural born citizen” must be born in the mainland US and must have TWO US citizen parents.  Obama knows he had only one US parent.  The man knows he is occupying the Oval Office in violation of the requirements of the US Constitution and applicable Supreme Court caselaw.

    By the way, this page, at the bottom, also contains Obama’sadmission that he was, “at birth,” a citizen of Kenya and a British subject.

    Take notice also that the birth certification form shown here is the short form certification that has “NO” official Hawaiian state seal on it. It is the photo copy that all Senators and Congressman referred us to as proof of Obama’s eligibility, including none other than Senator Johnson’s office who ripped me for using the internet for my research:

    quoting from the letter of response I received from Sen Johnson office requesting that they investigate and urging the Senate “NOT” confirm the electoral votes, Sen Johnson’s office replies:

    Dated December 4, 2008: “Thank you for contacting me regarding internet rumors.”(I used information from long standing reputable international news sites such as the Times of London, etc)

    Sen Johnson then goes on to say: “Please be aware that I am prohibited from using my official Senate office to discuss political campaigns.” (Again, I remind you that this is a response to a letter I sent immediately AFTER the election)

    Now let’s get to the meat of this letter. Johnson( in all actuality, probably one of his progressive lib staffers) in ripping me for using the internet to research, closes by saying: “To address your particular allegations of forgery, it should be noted that Senator Obama has released the birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, showing he was born in that state. It has been widely available on the internet for months, and everyone and anyone who wants to review it can visit any number of websites, including http://www.newsweek.com/id/154599 or http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html.” 

    The most infuriating thing here is in my initial letter to Johnson’s office, I refer to the factcheck site and Obama’s admission of having dual citizenship at birth. I not only ask him to vote against Obama’s electoral votes, I also asked him to not confirm any for McCain. The copy of the reply letter I sent has mysteriously been scrubbed from SCRIBD. I will get it reloaded soon.

    Will anyone in Congress have the spine to finally address this issue? I won’t be holding my breath, but it never hurts to hold on to the faith that they might.

    OK, that was easy, hit it on the 1st try:

    BTW..I NEVER got a response to this letter from Johnson or Herseth-Sandlin, only Thune and his reply was just as lame as Johnson’s intitial one.

     

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________

    Independence Day Challenge

    Please help keep our health care independent of government control:

    ncpa_header4

    eagle_button_blue

    “Commander in Thief” Demoralizes Our Service Men and Women in Cairo speech; BUMP: “Honor Their Service” Thurs June 25th

    Folks, this is what the “FRAUD” in the White House is doing to our military and their families. Please help me to make this go viral over the internet and also mark your calendars for June 25th. A date that will no doubt be a very special and moving day for this country:

    please support: http://troopathon.com/

    Mr Commander in Thief, You couldn’t be more wrong about Americans. This is the TRUE America:

    and this is a how a TRUE Commander in Chief addresses his troops and his countrymen:

    and this is how he respects them. Pres Bush puts his own life at risk to make a surprise visit to Iraq to SERVE Thanksgiving dinner to the troops. He then leaves to eat his Thanksgiving dinner on Air Force 1:

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Let us pray for our brothers and sisters as they go forth with courage and determination to face the forces of violence, weapons of destruction and hearts filled with hate.

    RESPONSE: THROUGH THE DARKNESS BRING US TO THE LIGHT.

    we pray to the Lord:

    That the Lord may preserve the members of our Army, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard and Air Force from all harm;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That even in war, we may keep clearly before us the defense of all human rights, especially the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That the families, relatives and friends of our military members may be strengthened in this time of concern and anxiety;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That the Lord may help families with men and women in the armed forces to cope with daily challenges in the absence of their loved ones;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That our homeland will be preserved from violence and terrorism;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That the nations of the world will seek to work together in harmony and peace;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That the hearts of all men and women will be moved to pursue true peace and justice;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That violence may be overcome by peace; that weapons of destruction be transformed into tools of justice, and hate give way to true charity;

    we pray to the Lord:

    That grateful for and inspired by those veterans who have given their lives for our country we may bravely face the challenges ahead;

    we pray to the Lord:

    Lord God, Almighty Father,
    creator of mankind and author of peace,
    as we are ever mindful of the cost paid for the liberty we possess,
    we ask you to bless the members of our armed forces.
    Give them courage, hope and strength.
    May they ever experience your firm support, gentle love and compassionate healing.
    Be their power and protector, leading them from darkness to light.
    To you be all glory, honor and praise, now and forever.

    Amen.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    President Obama — the Alderman in Chief of America: UPDATED

    Let’s start out with a preface to the most current and blatant abuse from the White House; the illegal firing of an Inspector General who’s job it is to protect our tax dollars that pour into DC:

    6/12/2009 RedState: …clearly for political reasons, Barack Obama tried to fire AmeriCorps inspector general, Gerald Walpin. Not only is it for strictly political reasons (Short take: “the AmeriCorps IG accuses prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money. Prominent Obama supporter has to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money. Obama fires AmeriCorps IG.”) but Obama does not have the authority to summarily dismiss an IG as he tried to do last night.

    Not since the depression of the 30’s, have we had such an urgent need to have unbiased, ethical and non-partisian inspectors in place to safeguard from abuse of tax payer dollars allocated for economic recovery, but as I have always concluded: “Obama ain’t no FDR”:

    6/16/2009 American Thinker: ….FDR asked for vigilance from the American people to ensure the program and federal money was honestly run:

    There are chiselers in every walk of life. Every profession has its black sheep….The most effective means of preventing such evils in this work relief program will be the eternal vigilance of the American people themselves. I call upon my fellow citizens everywhere to cooperate with me in making this the most efficient and the cleanest example of public enterprise the world has ever seen…Feel free to criticize. Tell me of instances where work can be done better, or where improper practices prevail.

     

    Harry Hopkins, a close confidant of FDR’s, was placed in charge of the WPA. He worked indefatigably to ensure the program was free of the taint of partisanship, funds were spent-not for political gain in certain areas-but in ways calculated to have the most bang for the buck. Efficiency was a theme harped on throughout the program, both by FDR and Hopkins. They both took criticism to heart and responded when the occasion (relatively rare) required them to do so to uphold their principles. One may argue whether FDR’s program prolonged the Depression. I happen to think that they did. However, the WPA did spend money honestly and efficiently. Hopkins was always the target of politicians who wanted him fired for not going along with cronyism and corruption.

     

    Now we have a President who brought the ways of the Chicago Machine to the highest office of the land. He fires a non-partisan Inspector General who tried to fulfill his duties to the taxpayers of America to ensure their money is spent honestly and efficiently.

    When will just one of these elected officials find their spine and stand firm saying:  “enough is enough” from the “Chicago” white house and we’re not going to take it anymore”!

    When are our elected officials in DC going to wake up! When are our Governors going to wake up!

    We are all now prisoners of the “Chicago White House” and ACORN with “NO HOPE” of rescue anywhere in sight as we seem to have “NOT ONE” elected official, sitting US Attorney General, Federal Judge or Prosecutor willing to do the right thing for our country by upholding the Constitution and our laws.

    UPDATE:

    The most transparent administration ever(pass the barf bucket) is keeping “mum” about its internal investigation of Inspector General Walpin:

    At today’s meeting, Sen. Grassley’s staffers wanted to know more about the White House review.  “Unfortunately,” Grassley writes in a letter just sent to White House counsel Gregory Craig, “Mr. Eisen refused to answer several direct questions posed to him about the representations made in his letter.”  Grassley says that since Eisen refused to answer the questions in person, Grassley would submit a dozen of them in writing.  Here they are:

    1- Did the [Corporation for National and Community Service] Board communicate its concerns about Mr. Walpin to the White House in writing?

    2- Specifically, which CNCS Board members came forward with concerns about Mr. Walpin’s ability to serve as the Inspector General?

    3- Was the communication about the Board’s concerns on or about May 20, 2009 the first instance of any communications with White House personnel regarding the possibility of removing Mr. Walpin?

    4- Which witnesses were interviewed in the course of Mr. Eisen’s review?

    5- How many witnesses were interviewed?

    6- Were any employees of the Office of Inspector General, who may have had more frequent contact with Mr. Walpin than the Board members, interviewed?

    7- Was Mr. Walpin asked directly during Mr. Eisen’s review about the events of May 20, 2009?

    8- Was Mr. Walpin asked for his response to the allegations submitted to the Integrity Committee by Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown?

    9- What efforts were made during Mr. Eisen’s review to obtain both sides of the story or to afford the Office of Inspector General an opportunity to be heard?

    10- In addition to the claim that Mr. Walpin was “confused” and “disoriented,” the letter also says he exhibited “other behavior” that led to questions about his capacity. What other behavior was Mr. Eisen referencing?

    11- If the initial and primary concern had to do with Mr. Walpin’s capacity to serve for potential health reasons, why was he only given one hour to decide whether to resign or be fired?

    12- If Mr. Walpin’s telecommuting arrangements since the beginning of this year were a major concern, then why was Mr. Walpin not simply asked to stop telecommuting?

    Grassley asks the White House for a response in writing by Wednesday, June 24.

    Now, these seem like legitimate questions that the white house should have been able to answer immediately, well, that is if we are to think that the firing was actually legit.

    Obama, Acorn & the Firing of an Ethical Inspector General

    Yep, this guy is just senile..”NOT”. . . this is not only disgusting, it is white house politics in worst form since the founding of this nation:

    Vodpod videos no longer available.