more info on aarp

Following the money trail
According to the AARP website, the group promises seniors it will be a "voice in Washington and in your state, representing you on issues like Medicare, Social Security and consumer safety."
But the majority of the money AARP collects doesn't come from its annual $16 membership dues.
AARP 2008 revenues (in thousands)
AARP's 2008 consolidated financial statements reveal the organization earns far more income from selling supplementary insurance to members than it takes in from yearly member fees.
The group received nearly $653 million in royalties from private insurance companies that sold products referred by AARP in 2008. It also received an additional $120 million for the ads placed in its publications.

By contrast, AARP collected $249 million in membership dues last year.
While the organization claims to represent almost 40 million Americans over age 50 – nearly as many members as the U.S. Roman Catholic Church – the group has been accused of inflating that number by automatically giving spouses and "domestic partners" free memberships. In reality, $249 million in annual dues would indicate members who actually sought and paid for memberships in 2008 may have numbered closer to 15.6 million.

AARP's federal funding
AARP is a private, nonprofit group, but the AARP 2008 annual report shows that of the $1.1 billion in revenue AARP received last year $90 million came from a variety of grants, including a substantial amount of federal aid. Its two largest grant programs offer tax counseling for the elderly and job training for low-income seniors.
According to a National Legal and Policy Center report titled, "How the Federal Government Subsidizes AARP," written by NLPC Director of Policy John Carlisle, AARP administers the federal funds through its the AARP Foundation, a 501(c)3 charity, because AARP is designated as a 501(c)4 that's ineligible for federal funds.

"The AARP Foundation is a legally distinct organization that theoretically operates independently of AARP," Carlisle explained. "It has its own board of directors and staff and can engage in fundraising activities to advance its particular public policy agenda. However, the foundation works so closely with AARP that the two entities are barely indistinguishable."
According to the report, the AARP Foundation is located in the same building as AARP, where employees work "practically side-by-side with lobbying staff" – and the AARP Foundation's second largest source of income is AARP.

In a March 2001 letter to the Department of Health and Human Services on federal aid, the AARP Foundation reported receiving money from the Department of Labor, the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice, according to NLPC.

A 2008 donor list includes mention of "institutional support" from the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Labor.
"[I]t's outrageous that taxpayers are being used to advance [AARP's] liberal agenda to expand government and thwart Social Security reform," Carlisle contends. "Ending federal subsidies to AARP would put an end to the unjust practice of publicly funding a highly partisan and controversial interest group."

Left-leaning activism and campaign contributions
Former President George W. Bush attempted to reform Social Security through the use of private retirement accounts in 2005. His plan sought to permit workers to redirect 4 percent of their Social Security payroll taxes into private accounts that would invest in mutual funds and other securities.

But AARP reacted to Bush's proposal by slamming its members with mass mailings and spending $5 million on full-page advertisements in 50 newspapers and an additional $5 million on print ads opposing Bush's plan.
With its nearly 3,000 chapters, AARP attended congressional town-hall meetings to counter Bush's proposal. The group also targeted seniors in its magazine and official bulletin, delivering it to 22 million U.S. households.
Only three months after beginning the lobbying campaign, AARP reported that 535 members of Congress were blasted with at least 460,000 calls in opposition to Bush's plan.
"AARP won the battle," Carlisle wrote. "Due largely to its multi-million dollar effort as well as considerable legislative lobbying, AARP succeeded in undermining support for private accounts in just a few months."

But AARP's Left-leaning activism didn't end there.
According to NLPC, AARP combated tax cuts during the Reagan and Bush administrations. It also fought the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991 and helped the Clinton administration defeat a balanced budget amendment in 1995.
A 2006 AARP Impact Award goes to Harry Belafonte
In 2006, AARP honored singer and activist Harry Belafonte with its Impact Award for doing "something extraordinary to make the world a better place." Shortly afterward, Belafonte, a Hugo Chavez supporter, called President George W. Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world."
While AARP bills itself as a nonpartisan group that does not support, oppose or contribute to any candidates or political parties, AARP's executives and employees overwhelmingly support Democrats.

President Obama with AARP CEO A. Barry Rand (left) and AARP President Jennie Chin Hansen (left) during AARP's July 28 tele-town hall on health care (White House photo by Pete Souza)
AARP CEO Barry Rand, is a strong supporter of President Obama, and federal records show he contributed $8,900 to Obama's campaign committees in 2008. According to Federal Election Commission databases, Rand has given $15,900 to Democratic campaign committees since 1995.
Likewise, AARP executive John Killpack gave $1,000 to the Democratic National Committee and $4,350 to Obama's campaign. AARP strategy consultant Joseph Liu gave $2,300 to Obama's campaign and an additional $2,300 to Obama's victory fund.
A search of campaign contributions by AARP executives and employees reveals they overwhelmingly gave to Obama's campaign and Democrats during the 2008 election cycle – by a ratio of 14 workers to one.
According to those records, the following are recipients of reported contributions exceeding $200 from 75 AARP executives and employees during the 2008 election cycle:
Democratic Party and/or Democrats for Congress: $15,600
John Edwards: $250
Hillary Clinton: $7,350
Barack Obama: $36,556
Fred Thompson: $1,000
Republican Party: $871
Rudy Giuliani: $1,150
John McCain: $1,550

In its March/April 2003 magazine, AARP honored billionaire George Soros as one of its 50 "top innovators" in a "Fearless 50" article. Robert Knight of Concerned Women for America reported that while the list featured a few conservatives, it was "top heavy with liberal luminaries."
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, blasted AARP in an interview with the Hill just days ago. "AARP is one of the most liberal organizations in Washington, D.C.," Boehner said. "Obviously, most seniors aren't aware of that."

Gun-control advocacy
Some opponents claim AARP supports gun control. AARP declared in its 2007 policy book, "Congress should eliminate gaps in and strengthen enforcement of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and other federal gun laws."
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act required federal background checks on purchasers of handguns.
AARP 2007 policy book promotes strengthened enforcement of federal gun laws
In a 2001 letter to a constituent from AARP legislation and public policy Director John Rother, AARP outlined its pro-gun control position (Page 1, Page 2, Page 3).
Also, in a Dec. 10, 2004, press release, AARP stated:
"AARP believes in the Constitutional right to bear arms. But to make the nation safer, we must do what we can to keep guns out of hands of children and criminals. AARP supported the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which went into law in 1994 with bi-partisan support, but was allowed to expire this year."

Immigration and migrant workers
AARP also supports entitlements for "migrant workers." In the same Dec. 10, 2004, press release, AARP stated:
"Migrant workers are among the most poorly paid and ill-housed workers in the nation. They often do not qualify for Social Security or income assistance programs. AARP supports efforts to meet the needs, particularly of older and disabled workers, including making them aware of low income assistance programs for which they may be eligible."
In 2004, the Arizona arm of the influential seniors group announced its opposition to Proposition 200, a measure to deny state welfare benefits to illegal aliens. The measure also required state agencies to report illegals to the federal government and voters to show U.S. identification.
In 2008, AARP International hosted a series in which three "experts" in the fields of immigration and aging addressed the topic "Immigration: Challenges, Trends and the Impact on the U.S. Labor Force."
The first speaker, Robert Suro of the School of Journalism at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication, was introduced as an expert in the field of immigration. He discussed U.S. demographic trends.
"Immigration is increasingly becoming a function of who we import to fill holes in our labor market," he explained.
The next speaker, Alejandro Garcia, regional representative of the AARP National Policy Council, said an estimated one in six illegal immigrants are employed in long-term care settings.
"Garcia expressed concern about the treatment and welfare of undocumented workers, which are often invisible and unacknowledged," the AARP International executive summary stated. "In his view, we must challenge the notion that they are parasites living off of the wealth of America without contributing; these individuals provide the cheap labor and products that American society demands, including much-needed relief to the shortage of long-term care workers. Many of them pay taxes for services they are not eligible to receive. In spite of their contributions, we have been reluctant to integrate them into society. According to Garcia, this fact has been reflected in the rise in ethnicity-motivated violence against Hispanics and the proliferation of nativist-extremist groups in recent years."
Finally, the last speaker, John Rother, AARP group executive officer of policy and strategy, advocated providing education and "taking advantage of the younger, immigrant workforce."
The AARP International executive summary stated, "AARP has for the most part been a proponent of a universal approach to social issues and public policy, which holds that everybody, regardless of origin, should have the same access to education, opportunities, and laws protecting them from discrimination."
In 2004, AARP partnered with the National Council of La Raza – a group that has promoted driver's licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs and no immigration law enforcement by state and local police – to "educate elderly Hispanics and their families" on the Medicare prescription drug program.

Pro-homosexual agenda
Focus on the Family's Steve Kipp published a 2-page analysis on AARP and what he considers a pro-homosexual agenda.
He notes that by 2004, AARP was openly referring to multiple homosexual activist organizations, referencing a "web exclusive" AARP article written by Randy Hecht, titled "No straight answers."
Kipp wrote that Hecht's article promoted gay sensitivity training sessions that essentially served as "re-education" sessions. A sidebar titled "Sites to see: Organizations and resources for older gays, lesbians" offered the five referred links on AARP's website:
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
Human Rights Campaign, or HRC. AARP also links to some of HRC's publications and directly links both to the "marriage section" of Human Rights Campaign as well as its elections and members of Congress section.
PFLAG, or Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays
SAGE, or Senior Action in a Gay Environment
LGAIN, or Lesbian and Gay Aging Issues Network
AARP hosted a New York gay pride event in 2001 and invited SAGE, or Services and Advocacy for GLBT Elders, to host an exhibit, Kipp wrote.
AARP website banner declares, "Pride comes in all ages."

He also reported the following:
AARP's Andrus Foundation provided a matching-funds grant to SAGE in 2002
AARP featured gay pride month on its 2001 and 2002 online calendars.
The group invited homosexual "anti-homophobia" groups to its national annual meeting in Chicago in 2003
AARP Prime Time Radio featured a segment on gay history and segments on "two daddies," and AARP began profiling gay couples in its My Generation magazine
In 2003, AARP openly united with the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, or LCCR, established a major "Voices of Civil Rights" multi-media campaign that included a bus tour and website collaboration. The website classifies homosexuality as a "civil rights issue." LCCR was the most prominent signer of a March 1, 2004, open letter to Congress opposing the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Kipp wrote that AARP's polling data reveal its differences with its constituency. According to the report, AARP members who are 70 and older are highly conservative on social issues, especially on issues like same-sex marriage.
In 2008, AARP sponsored the SAGE's National Conference on LGBT Aging, declaring that "AARP is paying attention to LGBT needs to minimize discrimination and to ensure equality as people age in America."

Shredding the AARP membership card
According to news reports, at least 60,000 AARP members canceled their memberships from July to August of this year amid anger over the group's position on health care. AARP said the members represented a small percentage of its total membership and that during the same time period, 400,000 people joined AARP and 1.5 million renewed their memberships.
Some members destroyed their AARP cards and switched to the American Seniors Association, the New York Times reported. The alternative organization is offering former AARP members a year of free membership if they send in their torn AARP cards. YES I DID!!!!!
AARP has recently announced its endorsement of the Affordable Health Care for America Act, or H.R. 3962, and the accompanying Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act, HR 3961.
Several WND readers have indicated that they will cancel their memberships due to AARP's support of the health-care bill.

The following are some comments received in recent days:
The AARP hasn't been my "voice" in a long time.
If anyone has AARP, it's time to find something else.
I called AARP this morning to cancel my membership. It took several tries before I got anything but a busy signal, and then I was on hold for several minutes. As soon as I told the young man I wanted to cancel, he asked if it was because of the health-care issue. I told him it was. I wonder how many other people they lost today.

AARP has sold out its members by endorsing a health-care plan that will only result in higher taxes, worse coverage and more government control over our lives. It's time to draw the line and cut the cord. Hit them in the pocketbook for their disservice to members. They were supposed to have our best interests at heart – not their own. Their conflict of interest deserves to be repaid.
As WND reported, the American Family Association, or AFA, warned in August that AARP launched a "huge and costly" television ad campaign in support of the health-care plan proposed by President Obama.
Now AFA has renewed its call for AARP constituents to cancel their memberships due to the group's endorsement of the Democrats' health "reform," claiming the organization no longer represents the best interests of the elderly. American Family Association, or AFA,
"The AARP claims to be all about representing the interests of seniors," AFA said in a statement, "but when it comes to health care reform, they are selling seniors down the river to line their own pockets."

Frank P
Better to Die On Your Feet
Than Live On Your Knees!!!

Don't give up the fight !

Subject: House Passes Bill: Here is what will happen next.

Will the health-care bill become law?
Here is how the process works...


Dear Pro-life Friend.

We can be very glad that the Stupak Amendment passed, which would effectively ban the use of our money at any level in this health care bill from being used to pay for the murder of children, unless those children had the grave misfortune of being conceived by rape or incest. Then, they can be murdered with our money.

That being stated, this battle is far from over. I make no bones about it: I want to kill this bill. I hate Socialism.

However, I also understand that ethically there is a huge difference between someone robbing me in order to pay for his daughter to have her appendix removed and someone robbing me to pay for the murder of his daughter. One theft involves pursuing life, the other involves pursuing murder.

Now, for the any who are unfamiliar with the process of how bills become laws, let me explain to you some of what lies ahead.

The next focal point in this battle will be the United States Senate.

Republicans have already indicated they intend to filibuster this bill. But, in order to sustain a filibuster, they need 41 votes, and they only have 40 members in the Senate. So, will a Democrat defect from evil, and vote for freedom and life? Will an independent like Lieberman filibuster with the Republicans? We will have to see.

Anyway, before any bill becomes law a bill must pass in the Senate.

Then, because the Senate bill and the House bill have different language, they have to take the bill to what is called a "conference committee."

The C-SPAN Congressional glossary defines conference committee thus: "A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE is a temporary panel of House and Senate negotiators. A conference committee is created to resolve differences between versions of similar House and Senate bills."

The conference committee -- made up of Senators and members of the House of Representatives -- will take the words of both bills and hammer them out so that the words in the bill are exactly identical.

The conference committee is dangerous water for the Stupak amendment. It could be thrown out in committee. There are many amendments that pass in the House or the Senate which get thrown overboard in conference committee.

After the bill is hammered out in committee, it must go back to both chambers -- the U.S. House, and the U.S. Senate -- to be voted on again in its entirety. There have been bills that passed both houses, but when the bill was returned from conference committee it was defeated in one of the chambers because the changes made in committee were unacceptable to the majority of that chamber.

So, if the Stupak amendment gets thrown out in committee, the pro-life House Members who voted for it could kill the bill the next time it comes up for a vote.

If the bill passes in both houses (Senate and House) after the conference committee changes, it goes to the President of the United States, who has 10 days to sign it into becoming law. Obviously, President Obama will sign whatever health care bill reaches him.

So, to recap: there are at least three votes left on this bill before any law could reach President Obama's desk for his signature. first, a vote in the Senate. If 41 senators agree to filibuster, it could be defeated there. The Democrats could avoid the process of filibuster by putting the health care bill in the form of a "reconciliation" bill. You may have heard this bantered about as the "Nuclear Option." The rules of filibuster do not apply to a "reconciliation" bill, so the Dems would only need a simple majority of 51 votes.

If the bill passes the Senate, it must go to a conference committee. Once hammered out there, it goes back to both houses for another vote.

So...we must now turn our full attention to the Senate.

I will be writing soon, to give you some ideas as to what you can do in your area, or here in DC.

If you want to send a personal letter by fax (from you) to every US Senator, you can do so for only 17 1/2 cents each - $17.50 - for all 100 Senators.

Go to http://www.overturnroe.com/obamacare/allsenate.htm to write to all Senators.

And by the way - the video of the sit-in our friends did at Nancy Pelosi's office already has about 34,000 views. If you have not seen it, I urge you to go to www.Youtube.com/randallterry and watch the two videos on the sit-in. I promise you will be inspired.

We have a lot of planning and fighting to do. Please keep us in your prayers.

Randall Terry

aarp

When the American Association of Retired Persons – one of the wealthiest advocacy groups in the U.S. – began backing the $1.2 trillion House health bill despite concerns about Medicare cuts, death panels and assisted suicide, many members shredded their membership cards, saying the organization no longer represents their interests – but AARP's history of left-leaning activism on a host of issues may surprise its constituents.
AARP's Nov. 5 health bill endorsement left many seniors wondering why the powerful group that claims to represent their interests would call for an estimated $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, a system many seniors have indicated that they would like to preserve.

"After carefully monitoring developments in Washington and studying the various legislative proposals, AARP's all-volunteer Board of Directors – made up of working and retired doctors, nurses, business people, and teachers – has decided to endorse the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962/H.R. 3961) because it delivers on key priorities we've been fighting for," an AARP announcement stated.

Why the AARP health 'reform' endorsement?

AARP collects royalties on "Medigap insurance," a privately purchased insurance coverage that helps pay some of the health-care costs that Medicare doesn't cover. However, seniors have the option of joining Medicare Advantage plans, allowing them to use Medicare funds to purchase private insurance plans that offer extra benefits and lower copayments than the Original Medicare Plan.

An estimated 10.2 million seniors have enrolled in Medicare Advantage.
When seniors enroll in Medicare Advantage plans, they often drop Medigap policies because Medigap plans won't pay deductibles, copayments or other cost-sharing under the Medicare health plan. The switch slashes Medigap revenues – and, simultaneously impacts AARP royalties from Medigap insurance.

However, Sec. 1161 of the House bill would slash payments to Medicare Advantage health plans used by 20 percent of seniors and cause them to lose some benefits, including vision and dental coverage. Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, one of the leading health-care policy organizations in the country, told WND's Radio America AARP saw that it would lose revenue if it didn't stop the Medicare Advantage programs.

"The House bill would dramatically cut money out of Medicare Advantage programs, forcing people to need the Medigap policies that are such a big cash cow for the AARP," she said.
"Seniors are going to have higher costs in Medicare. Because of the cuts in Medicare, they are going to have ever more need for these Medigap policies. So the AARP, therefore, will be able to make even more money off of us," Turner explained. "The legislation both kills competition that the AARP has with these Medicare Advantage programs, and it boosts the number of people who need the Medigap insurance because Medicare is going to become an even more deficient program than it is now if you take half a trillion dollars out of it."

Could happen...

You're sound asleep when you hear
a thump outside your bedroom door.
Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear,
you hear muffled whispers.
At least two people have broken into your
house and are moving your way.
With your heart pumping, you reach down
beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.
You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch
toward the door and open it.
In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar.
When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike,
you raise the shotgun and fire.
The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.
One writhes and screams while the second
man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.
As you pick up the telephone to call police,
you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years
before, and the few that are privately owned
are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.
Yours was never registered.
Police arrive and inform you
that the second burglar has died.
They arrest you for First Degree Murder
and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.
When you talk to your attorney, he tells
you not to worry: authorities will probably
plea the case down to manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years,"
he replies, as if that's nothing.
"Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead
story in the local newspaper.
Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric
vigilante while the two men you shot
are represented as choirboys.
Their friends and relatives can't find
an unkind word to say about them.
Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.
But the next day's headline says it all:
"Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."
The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters.
As the days wear on, the story takes wings.
The national media picks it up,
then the international media.
The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing
to sue you, and he'll probably win.
The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack
of effort in apprehending the suspects.
After the last break-in, you told your neighbor
that you would be prepared next time.
The District Attorney uses this to allege
that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial.
The charges haven't been reduced,
as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.
When you take the stand, your anger at
the injustice of it all works against you.
Prosecutors paint a picture of you
as a mean, vengeful man.
It doesn't take long for the jury to convict
you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.
In April, 2000, he was convicted
and is now serving a life term.

How did it become a crime to defend one's
own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.
This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns.

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.
When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.
Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.
Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns?
The guns had been registered and licensed.
Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

"..It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."

--Samuel Adams

If you think this is important,
please forward to everyone you know.
Your new White House
resident is going to do this very same thing
in the US if he can get it done.
And there are stupid people in congress and
on the street that will go right along with him.

Rules

Preached on "Three Lumps of Clay" today. Outline on TLBC website front page. click here

Archived articles surface, refer to "Kenyan-born Obama"
A June 2004 article from the archives of the East African Standard referred to then Senator Barack Obama as “Kenyan-born,” while an article published in the Oct. 11, 2009 edition refers to Obama becoming President of the United States “via a sleepy village in Kenya called Nyang’oma K’Ogelo.”
Source: http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2009/091021/FrntPgObama.html

BO may be the resident in the White House but he is NOT the President if he is not Constitutionally qualified for the office as a native born American.


The Man Rules
At last a guy has taken the time to write this all down

Finally , the guys' side of the story.( I must admit, it's pretty good.) We always hear " the rules " From the female side. Now here are the rules from the male side.
These are our rules!Please note.. these are all numbered "1 " ON PURPOSE!

1.. Men are NOT mind readers.
1. Learn to work the toilet seat.You're a big girl. If it's up, put it down. We need it up, you need it down.You don't hear us complaining about you leaving it down.
1. Sunday sports: It's like the full moon or the changing of the tides.Let it be.
1. Crying is blackmail.
1. Ask for what you want. Let us be clear on this one: Subtle hints do not work!Strong hints do not work!Obvious hints do not work! Just say it!
1. Yes and No are perfectly acceptable answers to almost every question..
1. Come to us with a problem only if you want help solving it. That's what we do.Sympathy is what your girlfriends are for.
1. Anything we said 6 months ago is inad missible in an argument. In fact, all comments become Null and void after 7 Days.
1. If you think you're fat, you probably are.Don't ask us.
1. If something we said can be interpreted two ways and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, we meant the other one. 1. You can either ask us to do somethingOr tell us how you want it done. Not both.If you already know best how to do it, just do it yourself.
1. Whenever possible, Please say whatever you have to say during commercials...
1. Christopher Columbus did NOT need directions and neither do we.
1. ALL men see in only 16 colors, like Windows default settings. Peach, for example, is a fruit, not A color. Pumpkin is also a fruit. We have no idea what mauve is.
1. If it itches, it will be scratched.We do that.
1. If we ask what is wrong and you say "nothing," We will act like nothing's wrong. We know you are lying, but it is just not worth the hassle.
1. If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, Expect an answer you don't want to hear.
1. When we have to go somewhere, absolutely anything you wear is fine... Really .
1. Don't ask us what we're thinking about unless you are prepared to discuss such topics as baseball or golf.1.. You have enough clothes.
1. You have too many shoes.
1. I am in shape. Round IS a shape!
1. Thank you for reading this.
Yes, I know, I have to sleep on the couch tonight; But did you know men really don't mind that? It's like camping. Pass this to as many men as you can -to give them a laugh. Pass this to as many women as you can - to give them a bigger laugh..

R U Following the HC Debate?

Are you following the Health Care debate in DC? I guess they are going to try and force their plan through today. If you have mailed in letters or signed petitions on this subject be advised that they are being diverted to a holding room for 14 days and will not be seen by your representative until after the vote. I personally called my Congressman but he did not answer his phone and his voice mail box was full and would not take my message. Below is an email that I sent to him today.

Dear Congressman,
If PelosiCare passes, I hope you will also pass the Bill that forces ALL elected Federal officials and their staff to cancel what they have for Health Insurance and take PelosiCare instead.
James Madison, in Federalist, number 57, has some words highly relevant to the Pelosi health care reform bill:

"If it be asked, what is to restrain the house of representatives from making legal discriminations in favour of themselves, and a particular class of society? I answer, the genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and, above all, the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America; a spirit which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it. If this spirit ever be so far debased, as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate any thing but liberty."

Given the fact that the currently pending health care reform bill does not obligate the members of Congress to have their medical well-being covered by it, it is as if Madison himself is rising from the grave and is pointing his finger at us accusingly and asking us whether we will meekly and timidly allow the liberty which he, the Founding Fathers and all our other ancestors worked so hard to secure to be taken from us quietly and seamlessly in a simple vote on the floor of the House of Representatives?

Emergency Alert !!

This is one site I would recommend that you go to and research the history and voting record of your political representatives. http://votesmart.org/index.htm

You will also find information on contacting your rep in his district offices in your state. Starting NOW and all the way up to the vote we must call and /or fax our reps and let them know how we want them to vote on Health Care. Do you know WHY?

EMERGENCY ALERT!!

WE MUST CONTACT OUR REPRESENTATIVES THROUGH PHONE AND FAX REGARDING THEIR VOTE ON THE HEALTH CARE BILL BECAUSE...

DELIVERY OF PETITIONS AND MAIL ARE BEING DIVERTED TO ANTHRAX HOLDING WHICH WILL TAKE A MINIMUM OF 14 DAYS SO THAT THEY WILL NOT HIT OUR REPS UNTIL AFTER PELOSI FORCES THE VOTE. WATCH BELOW!

Earlier this week a Grassfire and Resistnet Team went to DC to deliver petitions and were shut out! To hear first hand, go to Resistnet Radio and listen to the last show or check out the 2 videos with their updates in DC. http://www.resistnet.com/group/resistnetradioshow

Videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPXTZ0ZVNUE&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKtYi3brEuI&feature=player_embedded

The Cross

My sermon today was "The Cross Still Stands Today" and the outline can be seen on our TLBC website front page click here. For the latest on the Obama Birth Certificate controversy, see below.

From The Desk Of Gary G. Kreep

Dear Friend of the Constitution,

This is an email that I hoped and prayed that I’d never have to write. You see, United States District Court Judge David O. Carter just ruled in favor of the Obama Justice Department -- and against the United States Justice Foundation -- in one of the most critical court cases to ever be filed in the history of our nation. With the stroke of his pen, Judge Carter granted the taxpayer-paid Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss our case which sought to discover the truth behind Barack Obama’s hidden birth certificate. What we thought would be perhaps America’s best chance at protecting the Constitution by exposing Mr. Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve as President, has suddenly been rendered dead in the water.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

Does this mean that USJF is throwing in the towel and meekly accepting the occupation of the White House by a man who, according to the mounting evidence, appears to be a foreign-born non-citizen? Certainly not! In fact, not only will we appeal this case, up to the United States Supreme Court, if necessary, but our campaign to protect the United States Constitution is proceeding on multiple fronts, but only with your help.

With this recent court ruling against USJF, we realize that we must redouble our efforts in all our legal challenges to Barack Obama. For the sake of America’s future . . . we must win! To be frank, your continued financial support is absolutely vital at this time.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

The Obama juggernaut thinks it has us on the ropes. They think that we’re ready to call it quits, to give up and to let the Constitutional crisis of an apparent non-citizen at the helm of the United States government continue unchallenged. Well, let me say this loud and clear:

THEY ARE WRONG!

That’s right. With your faithful support, in addition to filing an appeal, USJF is continuing the legal and public relations battles that it’ll take to drive the “pretender to the throne” from the White House! Together, you and USJF can achieve victory! And here are some of the challenges to the apparently illegitimate Obama administration that the United States Justice Foundation has already undertaken or has in the works:

Petitioning state Attorneys General across the country to investigate Barack Obama for perjury by knowingly filing false nomination papers, claiming that he is eligible to serve as President of the United States;

Calling upon the Federal Election Commission to investigate Mr. Obama for allegedly receiving millions of dollars in illegal foreign contributions during his 2008 campaign;

Challenging each and every action he takes -- issuing executive orders, naming court appointees, signing legislation -- until he proves once and for all whether he is a natural born citizen;

Funding lawsuits and assisting local attorneys and plaintiffs who are taking on Barack Obama all across the country on this issue, including three lawsuits being handled by Phil Berg, and lawsuits in Hawaii, Mississippi, and Ohio;

Petitioning federal judges in every state to convene citizen grand juries to investigate whether or not Mr. Obama is a natural born citizen and, thus, eligible to serve as President;

Filing a class action suit that will see ordinary citizens -- like you -- challenging Barack Obama’s tenure in Washington, and forcing him to prove his citizenship or vacate that office;

Encouraging American citizens to visit their United States Representative or Senator with a copy of their own birth certificate, and insist that their elected officials demand to see Mr. Obama’s birth certificate;

Sending a flood of post cards to talk radio host Sean Hannity, asking him to publicly call upon Barack Obama to stop the stonewalling, and release his original birth certificate immediately;

Petitioning U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader John Boehner, and Republican Party leader Michael Steele to demand from the floor of the Senate, from the floor of the House of Representatives, and from the “bully pulpit” of the Republican Party that Barack Obama be removed from office if he continues to turn a deaf ear to the American people by refusing to produce his birth certificate;

And airing a half-hour long television exposé of Barack Obama’s outrageous cover-up! The work that USJF is doing to oppose Barack Obama, and his socialist agenda for America, is indispensible. The fact is, we are the one conservative legal group in the country that is taking on “Resident” Obama in order to save the Constitution! I thank God that you have chosen to partner with the United States Justice Foundation to enable us to fight this fight. Thank you so much! Right now, please, use the link below after you pray about what size gift you can send today to help USJF save the United States from this Constitutional crisis.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

I know that you have already done so much. But even though Judge Carter struck down our case -- after months of research, preparation, and litigation -- I see the glass as half full. Whether or not our appeal is successful, USJF’s other current and pending legal actions, along with our television program -- that has been mocked by activist lesbian MSNBC talk show host Rachel Maddow -- can and will serve America by shining the light of truth on Barack Obama. Please, send the best possible gift that you can afford, and please send it today. Whatever amount you can send -- whether $50 or $50,000 -- will enable the United States Justice Foundation, your conservative voice in the courts since 1979, to do what it does best . . . defend America in court and out from the continuous attacks of those who want to see our nation destroyed. Frankly, if we fail to stop Barack Obama and his socialist plans, America will likely never recover. Are you willing to take that risk? Are you willing to see your children and grandchildren grow up in a European-style socialist America? I need your help today in stopping Barack Obama from getting away with stealing the United States Presidency. I pray that I will hear from you today.

Sincerely,Gary Kreep, Executive DirectorUnited States Justice Foundation

P.S. Please don’t underestimate the “half full” glass. The “half empty” folks are wringing their hands, convinced that Barack Obama has won and there’s nothing that we can do. But the half full folks know that USJF’s legal challenges -- coupled with our appeal of this decision by Judge Carter and your prayers and financial support -- present a great opportunity for us, you, and the American people to be the victors! Please send your best gift today. God bless you for your commitment.
HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

To donate by check, please mail to:United States Justice FoundationNational Processing CenterPO Box 131657Dept Code 3165Houston, TX 77219-1637 The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a non-profit organization, whose tax-exempt status under IRS section 501(c)(3) has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service. Your contributions are tax deductible. Corporate contributions may be accepted.

The Latest Health Care Bill

In order to assist interested parties seeking to read and review the health “reform” legislation (H.R. 3962) introduced by House Democrats, the Republican Conference has compiled a list of important page numbers and provisions in the 1,990-page “Affordable Health Care for America Act:”

The entire 1990 page HR bill can be found at: http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

Page 94—Section 202(c) prohibits the sale of private individual health insurance policies, beginning in 2013, forcing individuals to purchase coverage through the federal government

Page 110—Section 222(e) requires the use of federal dollars to fund abortions through the government-run health plan—and, if the Hyde Amendment were ever not renewed, would require the plan to fund elective abortions

Page 111—Section 223 establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee”) to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase—and would likely require all Americans to subsidize and purchase plans that cover any abortion

Page 211—Section 321 establishes a new government-run health plan that, according to non-partisan actuaries at the HULewin GroupUH, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage

Page 225—Section 330 permits—but does not require—Members of Congress to enroll in government-run health care

Page 255—Section 345 includes language requiring verification of income for individuals wishing to receive federal health care subsidies under the bill—while the bill includes a requirement for applicants to verify their citizenship, it does not include a similar requirement to verify applicants’ identity, thus encouraging identity fraud for undocumented immigrants and others wishing to receive taxpayer-subsidized health benefits

Page 297—Section 501 imposes a 2.5 percent tax on all individuals who do not purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health insurance—the tax would apply on individuals with incomes under $250,000, thus breaking a central HUpromiseUH of then-Senator Obama’s presidential campaign

Page 313—Section 512 imposes an 8 percent “tax on jobs” for firms that cannot afford to purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health coverage; according to an HUanalysisUH by Harvard Professor Kate Baicker, such a tax would place millions “at substantial risk of unemployment”—Uwith minority workers losing their jobs at twice the rate of their white counterparts

Page 336—Section 551 imposes additional job-killing taxes, in the form of a half-trillion dollar “surcharge,” more than half of which will hit small businesses; according to a model developed by President Obama’s senior economic advisor, such taxes could cost up to 5.5 million jobs

Page 520—Section 1161 cuts more than $150 billion from Medicare Advantage plans, potentially jeopardizing millions of seniors’ existing coverage

Page 733—Section 1401 establishes a new Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research; the bill includes no provisions preventing the government-run health plan from using such research to deny access to life-saving treatments on cost grounds, similar to Britain’s National Health Service, which denies patient treatments costing more than £35,000

Page 1174—Section 1802(b) includes provisions entitled “TAXES ON CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICIES” to fund comparative effectiveness research, breaking Speaker Pelosi’s promise that “We will not be taxing [health] benefits in any bill that passes the House,” and the President’s promise not to raise taxes on families with incomes under $250,000.

The House Republican Conference • GOP.gov1420 Longworth HOB • (202) 225-5107

PDF file of this doc can be found at:
http://files.meetup.com/1395436/Pelosi%20HC%20Bill%20Reading%20Guide%20102909-3.pdf
-- NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may read this Blog and emails like this without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. We in this country have no recourse or protection. Everything we type may be used against us to detain us in a secret prison, where we will be held without right of habeas corpus or right to trial by jury.

Sneaky Politics

Department of Defense Authorization, FY 2010

How did YOUR Congressman vote?

An amendment was added to the Defense funding bill that included "hate crimes" language 10/08/2009 House Roll Call No. 770111th Congress, 1st SessionPassed: 281-146 (see complete tally)

The House agreed to the conference report to accompany H.R. 2647, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense. In a devious maneuver by Democrats, a "Hate Crimes" amendment was attached to this bill. Though we support adequate funding for the military, this attachment is a poison pill that makes the bill unacceptable. Our military deserved a stand-alone vote on funding.

1955

Many were missing from church today. Too bad. I preached on "Seasonal Service". Outline is on front page of TLBC website click here. Marion and I traveled over to Naples, Idaho Friday and attended the Ordination Service of Paul Sandelin at the Bible Believers Baptist Church there. I was privileged to preach the charge to the the newly ordained Elder. It was a wonderful time of fellowship and the Lord blessed with traveling mercy over and back.

Comments made in the year 1955!

That's only 54 years ago!

'I'll tell you one thing, if things keep going the way they are, it's going to be impossible to buy a week's groceries for $20.00.'

'Have you seen the new cars coming out next year? It won't be long before
$2, 000.00 will only buy a used one.'

'If cigarettes keep going up in price, I'm going to quit. A quarter a pack is ridiculous.

'Did you hear the post office is thinking about charging a dime just to mail a letter?'

'If they raise the minimum wage to $1.00, nobody will be able to hire outside help at the store.'

'When I first started driving, who would have thought gas would someday cost 29 cents a gallon. We'd be better off leaving the car in the garage.'

'I read the other day where some scientist thinks it's possible to put a man on the moon by the end of the century. They even have some fellows they call astronauts preparing for it down in Texas.'

'Did you see where some baseball player just signed a contract for $75,000 a year just to play ball? It wouldn't surprise me if someday they'll be making more than the President.'

'I never thought I'd see the day all our kitchen appliances would be electric. They are even making electric typewriters now.'

'It's too bad things are so tough nowadays. I see where a few married women are having to work to make ends meet. It won't be long before young couples are going to have to hire someone to watch their kids so they can both work.'

'I'm afraid to send my kids to the movies any more. Ever since they let Clark Gable get by with saying DAMN in GONE WITH THE WIND, it seems every new movie has either HELL of DAMN in it.'

'I'm afraid the Volkswagen car is going to open the door to a whole lot of foreign business.'

'Thank goodness I won't live to see the day when the Government takes half our income in taxes. I sometimes wonder if we are electing the best people to congress.'

'The drive-in restaurant is convenient in nice weather, but I seriously doubt they will ever catch on.'

'There is no sense going to Lincoln or Omaha anymore for a weekend, it costs nearly $15.00 a night to stay in a hotel.'

'No one can afford to be sick anymore, at $35.00 a day in the hospital it's too rich for my blood.'

'If they think I'll pay 50 cents for a hair cut, forget it.'

A glimmer of HOPE!

From: Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA
Date: Thurday 22oct09 1 p.m. EDT

Pews protest gets attention of leaders -- 75% of National Assn. of Evangelical churches nix amnesty

FRIENDS, LET'S DECLARE A LITTLE VICTORY I think all of us will want to thank the approximately one-third of our NumbersUSA members who are evangelicals. They have done a huge amount of faxing and phone calling the last two weeks to stop their denominations from helping Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) build a new coalition to pass an amnesty. The results are that they have helped crumble a major pillar of Schumer's plans to pass an amnesty this winter. After looking like they were backing the amnesty, most of the evangelical denominations are now refusing to sign an endorsement. Hooray!

Read this blog for the details of the overall fight and the victory thus far.

(We still have the problem that most Mainline Protestant, Catholic and Jewish national groups continue to endorse amnesty. If you are a member of any of those and want to challenge them -- or if you are an evangelical and want to make sure this current victory stays in the win column -- please be sure you have taken this short Religion Survey. That will allow you to see special faxing opportunities.)

OVERWHELMING EVANGELICAL ENDORSEMENT WAS KEY TO SCHUMER'S AMNESTY PLAN When the late Sen. Ted Kennedy had to give up his 45-year Senate leadership on immigration, Schumer took over. He immediately revealed that he was going to do three things differently than Kennedy in order to pass the amnesty that Kennedy had failed to pass the last 8 years. Read my blog for Schumer's first two changes.

But the third change was to enlist the elites of the evangelical Christian movement to be an entirely new face for amnesty. Earlier this month, it looked like Schumer had pulled off a miracle. He assembled a Senate hearing panel of big-name evangelicals, including the president of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) to endorse his plan to legalize most illegal aliens and to greatly increase the number of foreign workers allowed in the future. The NAE, with 42 member denominations, is the most conspicuous evangelical presence on Capitol Hill.

The NAE president told Schumer that the NAE's endorsement of legalization and increased foreign worker importation was "without dissent." We put that out to all NumbersUSA activists who are members of those 42 denominations and let them notify their national leaders how they felt about their decision to manipulate theology to make a case to favor illegal aliens over unemployed Americans. Denominations immediately began to post disclaimers on their websites and distance themselves from the NAE. Some of them provided some pretty strong biblical and theological reasons AGAINST amnesty. So far, only 11 of the 42 member denominations have been willing to sign onto the NAE pro-amnesty document. What a victory. Nobody can even contemplate attempting to claim evangelical support for amnesty in the future. Click here to see the list of 11 evangelical denominations that are lobbying for amnesty and more foreign workers (and also the list of the 31 evangelical denominations which resisted being pulled onto the amnesty bandwagon). We are continually posting new actions on your NumbersUSA Action Board. Please check to see if you have done all you can do this week. THANKS,

Amnesty Bill

Small group at TLBC Prayer meeting last night. Praying for trip to Idaho this weekend and for Brother Turner with his news about a spot of cancer in his colon.


EVERYONE--PLEASE TAKE TIME TO LISTEN TO THIS
--IT TELLS ABOUT THE BILL GOING THRU CONGRESS
RIGHT NOW REGARDING IMMIGRATION.
EVEN CNN IS GETTING UPSET ABOUT THIS!!!!!!!!!!

Be CAREFUL boys, you may wind up being BLACK BALLED by the White house too.

Pass this on after you watch it.
NOTICE THAT THIS IS FROM CNN, NOT FOX!!!
This from CNN news:
http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/17260182/1610997888/name/ftc-vi26.wmv

This 2-minute video should be mandatory viewing for every US citizen. If you have never passed anything on before, pass this on! Every American should be outraged!

BO Deposition

Barack Hussein Obama is not happy! When his taxpayer paid U. S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") attorneys walked into court on October 5, 2009, expecting United States Federal District Court Judge David Carter to immediately dismiss the birth certificate case, he did not get his way!

Their legal arguments were hollow and unconvincing. and after hearing hours of argument, Judge Carter took the matter under submission. He has still not issued a ruling, 14 days later! According to the DOJ Attorneys: The President Above Is Law and the Courts! The DOJ attorneys told the Judge that no Court in the United States had the right to rule on whether Barack Hussein Obama was eligible to serve as President of the United States! In their view, he could only be impeached and/or disqualified from the Office of President under the 25th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

THIS IS NOT TRUE!

As USJF pointed out to the Court, both in our pleadings and in our oral presentation at the hearing, both the impeachment statutes, and the 25th Amendment require a sitting President. However, if Mr. Obama is not eligible to serve as President, he could not be, and never was, a sitting President, so those options for removal could not apply. Therefore the courts would have jurisdiction.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

Monday, October 5, 2009, , at 8:30 a.m., in California, was a critical milestone for our entire legal and public relations effort to force Barack Obama to produce his birth certificate, as well as other documents, to prove whether he is eligible to serve as President of the United States. And with your support USJF was able to be there to argue the case. This case has an excellent chance to survive the Department of Justice ("DOJ") motion to dismiss, and it what has proven to be the best chance for America to have a hearing on the merits on this critical Constitutional issue. What happened that day in Court? It's very simple, the DOJ attorneys brought up every argument that they could to try to persuade the Court to dismiss this case and USJF provided sound legal arguments against all of the DOJ legal theories, and we were the only ones to do so; otherwise the whole case could have been over right then and there! The USJF oral arguments at the hearing may well be the difference between this case surviving or being dismissed.

The Judge raised issues critical to our case: 1. Did U.S. Senators question the eligibility of Mr. Obama? (Only USJF was able to tell the Court that Senators Coburn and Shelby and a number of House of Representative members had done so.) 2. Were objections made by Members of Congress when the vote of the Electoral College was certified? (Only USJF was able to tell the Court that NO, then Vice-President Cheney had not performed his required duty of asking for objections, so there could have been none raised.) DOJ attorneys also argued that only Congress, and/or the Electoral College, could decide on the eligibility of Mr. Obama.

Fortunately, the USJF legal team, and only the USJF legal team, filed pleadings pointing out that the DOJ legal arguments in this regard WERE WRONG! And, I was there to argue against those false claims. People at the hearing and those who have found out what happened there since have been contacting USJF, thanking us for standing up for the truth! But the fight is not over yet! We expect a ruling from the Court any day now. If we defeat the dismissal motion, then we're immediately filing pleadings ("discovery") seeking Mr. Obama's birth certificate, his college records, and much, much more. AND, we'll be seeking to depose Mr. Obama ASAP! And if the Court grants the motion to dismiss, we'll be immediately filing an appeal of the decision!

But we can only do this if we have your financial support! Judge Carter has set a trial date of January 26, 2010 in this case. To keep that date, we need to defeat the DOJ dismissal motion, and then, IMMEDIATELY, move right into the discovery phase discussed above.

BUT THAT WILL BE VERY EXPENSIVE, AS WE WILL NEED TO:
Retain attorneys in Washington, D. C., to take the Obama deposition.
Retain attorneys in Hawaii to take the deposition of those in control of the Obama birth records and school records. Take the deposition of Occidental, College officials to obtain Obama school records Retain attorneys in Massachusetts to take the deposition of Harvard. Law School officials to obtain Obama school records there. Pay the cost of the court reporters for all of these depositions. Plus, Pay the cost of serving the subpoenas on the various witnesses.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

We expect the DOJ, as well as Mr. Obama's private attorneys, to fight us every step of the way! Mr. Obama's attorneys will file motions to block the depositions in each and every state, and the District of Columbia, trying to block us from obtaining the truth at every turn ! WE WILL NEED MORE HELP TO:
Question the issue of the passport files of Mr. Obama! We're going after the records of how he traveled abroad without a United States Passport in the 1980's, as he admits doing.
Question the issue of his alleged adoption by his step-father in Indonesia! We'll be seeking records about that also!
Resolve questions about his Selective Service files! We'll be seeking records concerning that also! But, first, we have to get past the DOJ dismissal motion! The DOJ's motion to dismiss also claims that our clients have no "standing," and that the matter is "political." But, if we as citizens of the United States have no "standing" to verify the citizenship of the man occupying the White House, who does? If our Federal Courts have no jurisdiction to hear this case, who does? It's not a "political" question, it's a CONSTITUTIONAL question! Last November, people said we were crazy to pursue this issue. Now, we've been shown to be right in our pursuit of the truth. It's not just the original birth certificate that they're refusing to release. Barack Obama's legal team has spent, according to published reports, over $1.4 million dollars so far to STOP anyone from seeing ANY of his actual identification documents, and many other documents. WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide? WHAT is he afraid of? WHY doesn't he just release these documents to prove if he is a natural-born citizen and therefore qualified to be president -- especially his actual birth certificate?

When Barack Obama officially entered the office of President, he became, in essence, apparently, a "pretender to the throne." According to the Constitution, only a "natural born citizen" can occupy the presidency. Even though he was sworn in on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama is NOT legally the President of the United States, unless he can prove that he is a "natural born citizen." What's more, every action taken by him while he occupies the White House may be invalid. If he cannot legally be President, every law passed by Congress will be null and void because the Constitution clearly requires that all laws be signed by the President... and, without a legally elected and sworn in President in office, that becomes an impossibility. This Constitutional crisis must be ended! And it must be ended NOW!

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE WHETHER HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

And that's just what we're fighting to do. The United States Justice Foundation is spearheading a campaign to protect the United States Constitution... and your liberty. We have to press our case to stop Barack Obama from, apparently, illegally holding the Presidency, despite the ongoing threats against us. We are speaking of filing additional lawsuits and administrative actions, over and above the dozens already filed, if you will help us today. Are you willing to see the Constitution shredded by the Left? Will you sit back and do nothing while a foreign-born person may be illegally occupying the White House as President of the United States? Our country is on the fast track to disaster... but you can help us keep the situation from getting worse. I pray that I'll hear from you today.

Sincerely,Gary Kreep, Executive Director United States Justice Foundation

P.S. This is the biggest political cover-up in American history! It would be so simple to release the documents to PROVE Obama is a natural-born citizen IF THEY HAD THE DOCUMENTS! America has never before faced such a threat. Everything we hold dear is at risk with Barack Obama sitting as President without him releasing his actual birth certificate, plus the dozens of other documents that he refuses to produce. Please remember that we are fighting in the California Appellate Court system. Barack Hussein Obama thinks he can get away with DUPING the American people and DESTROYING the U.S. Constitution. DON'T LET HIM DO IT! Please, make your best possible contribution to USJF today: HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE IF HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!
To donate by check, please mail to:United States Justice FoundationNational Processing CenterPO Box 131637Dept Code 3118Houston, TX 77219-1637

The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a non-profit organization, whose tax-exempt status under IRS section 501(c)(3) has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service. Your contributions are tax deductible. Corporate contributions may be accepted.

Soc Sec COLA

Obama recently approved a 2% salary increase for all federal employees effective January 1, 2010. Members of the executive, legislative and judicial branch are due for an automatic pay increase in January as well. All this on the backs of seniors who will not incur any COLA increases for several years.

For the first time in history, the Congress will not allow an increase in the social security COLA (cost of living adjustment). In fact, The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation predicts there may not be any COLA for the next three years.

However, the per person monthly Medicare insurance premium will be increased from the 2009 premium of $96.40 to $104.20 in 2010 and to $ 120.20 for the year 2011. Why should seniors vote to put people with this kind of poor judgment back in office?

One Simple Question

In reading my emails today I ran across a question that was asked
by Paul Hollrah at UTFSM that might just settle a lot of controversy
on the deal about whether or not Obama is a natural born US citizen
and constitutionally qualified to hold the office of President or not.  

As you can see from the post earlier today on TACWASH Blog
down below, the verdict is still out on this question in the
Supreme Court.  What if the issue could be resolved by
answering this ONE SIMPLE QUESTION?   

I’ll get to the question in a moment but first, who is Paul
Hollrah at UTFSM?  I did a quick “google” and all I could
find on UTFSM was a Technical University in Chile. 
Paul is apparently connected with UTFSM in some way but
lives in Missouri and is a very outspoken right-wing writer
of political commentary. He is portrayed as a “Kook” by
the learned left-wing folks who believe what is written in
TIME magazine as the gospel truth.  Be that as it may, I wish
this question could be answered with iron clad veracity.    

What passport did Obama use when he was shuttling between 
New York, Jakarta, and  Karachi in June of 1981?
What passport was he offering when he passed
through Customs and Immigration? 

The American people deserve an answer to this question.

Paul says, “Let’s make the debate over Obama's citizenship
a rather short and simple one.” 

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20? 

A : Yes, by his own admission.  (Verification needed)

Q: What passport did he travel under? 

A: There are only three possibilities. 

1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport, 

2) He traveled with a British passport, for Kenya or 

3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport. 

Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981? 

A:  No. According to Paul, it is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S.
State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.
(Online sources say that this is a fabrication presented by “Birthers”
to build their case.  Verification needed)

Conclusion:
IF  Pakistan was indeed on the US no travel list when Obama went
to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport
or an Indonesian passport.

If he were traveling with a British passport, that would support the allegation
that he was born in    Kenya on August 4, 1961 according to certain documents and
testimony, not in   Hawaii on August 8, 1961 as he claims. 

If he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove he
relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American,
in conjunction with being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967. 

If he made the trip without a US passport, the American people need
to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American
citizen between 1981 and 2008.  

Patriot Update

We had about 14 in our worship services today at TLBC. I preached on "Are Ye Able" and the outline is on the front page of our church website click here.

From The Desk Of Gary G. Kreep

Dear Concerned Friend,

Barack Obama is sweating it out after his Department of Justice (“DOJ”) attorneys walked into court expecting United States Federal District Court Judge David Carter to dismiss the birth certificate case. Why you ask? Simply because they “think” Obama is President. Their arguments were hollow and unconvincing. and after hearing hours of argument, the Judge Carter “took the matter under submission.” He has still not issued a ruling, 10 days later!

Is The President Above The Law and the Courts?

DOJ attorneys tried to explain to the Judge that no Court in the United States had the jurisdiction to rule on whether Barack Hussein Obama was eligible to serve as President of the United States? In their view he could only be impeached and/or disqualified from the Office of President under the 25th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

NOT TRUE! USJF pointed out to the Court that both the impeachment statutes, and the 25th Amendment required a sitting President, but if Mr. Obama is not eligible to serve as President, he could not be, and never was, a sitting President, so those options for removal could not apply. Therefore the courts would have jurisdiction.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE IF HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

Monday, October 5, 2009, , at 8:30 a.m., in California, was a critical milestone for our entire legal and public relations effort to force Barack Obama to produce his birth certificate and to prove whether he is eligible to serve as President of the United States. And with your support USJF was able to be there to argue the case.

The case has an excellent chance to survive the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) motion to dismiss what has proven to be the best chance for America to have a hearing on the merits of this critical Constitutional issue.

What happened that day in Court? It’s very simple—the DOJ attorneys brought up every argument that they could to try to persuade the Court to dismiss this case

USJF provided sound legal arguments against the DOJ legal theories; otherwise the whole case could have been over right then and there! The USJF oral arguments will be the difference between this case surviving or being dismissed.

The Judge raised issues critical to our case:

1. Did Senators question the eligibility of Mr. Obama? (Only Senators Coburn and Shelby and a number of House members.)

2. Were objections made by Members of Congress when the vote of the Electoral College was certified? (NO, then Vice-President Cheney had not performed his required duty of asking for objections, so there could have been none raised.)

DOJ attorneys argued that only Congress, and/or the Electoral College, could decide on the eligibility of Mr. Obama. Fortunately, the USJF legal team filed pleadings pointing out that the DOJ legal arguments in this regard WERE WRONG! And, I was there to argue against those claims.

People at the hearing and those who have found out what happened there since have been contacting USJF, thanking us for standing up for the truth!

But the fight is not over yet! We expect a ruling from the Court any day now. If we defeat the dismissal motion, then we’re immediately filing pleadings (“discovery”) seeking Mr. Obama’s birth certificate, his college records, and so much more. AND, we’ll be seeking to depose Mr. Obama ASAP!

And if the Court grants the motion to dismiss, we’ll be immediately filing an appeal of the decision!

But we can only do this if we have your financial support!

Judge Carter has set a trial date of January 26, 2010 in this case. To keep that date, we need to defeat the DOJ dismissal motion, and then, IMMEDIATELY, move right into the discovery phase discussed above. BUT THAT WILL BE VERY EXPENSIVE AND WE WILL NEED TO:

• Retain attorneys in Washington, D. C., to take the Obama deposition.
• Retain attorneys in Hawaii to take the deposition of those in control of the Obama birth records and school records.
• Take the deposition of Occidental, College officials to obtain Obama school records
• We will have to retain attorneys in Massachusetts to take the deposition of Harvard. Law School officials to obtain Obama school records.
• Pay the cost of the court reporters for all of these depositions. Plus,
• Pay the cost of serving the subpoenas on the various witnesses.

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE IF HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

We expect the DOJ, as well as Mr. Obama’s private attorneys, to fight us every step of the way! Obama attorneys will file motions to block the depositions in each and every state, and the District of Columbia by the Obama defense team!

WE WILL NEED MORE HELP TO:

• Question the issue of the passport files of Mr. Obama! We’re going to be going after the records of how he traveled abroad without a United States Passport in the 1980’s, as he admits doing.
• Question the issue of his alleged adoption by his step-father in Indonesia! We’ll be seeking records about that also!
• Resolve questions about his Selective Service files! We’ll be seeking records concerning that also!

But, first, we have to get past the DOJ dismissal motion!

The DOJ’s motion to dismiss also claims that our clients have no “standing,” that the Federal Court does not have “jurisdiction” to hear this case, and that the matter is “political.”

But, if we as citizens of the United States have no “standing” to verify the citizenship of the man occupying the White House, who does? If our Federal Courts have no jurisdiction to hear this case, who does? It’s not a “political” question, it’s a CONSTITUTIONAL question!

Last November, people said we were crazy to pursue this issue. Now, we’ve been shown to be right in our pursuit of the truth. It’s not just the original birth certificate that they’re refusing to release. Barack Obama’s legal team has spent, according to published reports, over $1.4 million dollars so far to STOP anyone from seeing ANY of his actual identification documents, and many other documents.

WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide? WHAT is he afraid of? WHY doesn’t he just release these documents to prove he is a natural-born citizen and therefore qualified to be president -- especially his actual birth certificate?

When Barack Obama officially entered the office of President, he became, in essence, a "pretender to the throne." According to the Constitution, only a "natural born citizen" can occupy the presidency.

Even though he was sworn in on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama is NOT legally the President of the United States, unless he can prove that he is a "natural born citizen."

What's more, every action taken by him while he occupies the White House may be invalid. If he cannot legally be President, every law passed by Congress will be null and void because the Constitution clearly requires that all laws be signed by the President... and, without a legally elected and sworn in President in office, that becomes an impossibility.

This crisis must be ended! And it must be ended NOW!

HELP US MAKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA PROVE IF HE IS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CLICK HERE NOW!

And that's just what we're fighting to do. The United States Justice Foundation is spearheading a campaign to protect the United States Constitution... and your liberty.

We have to press our case to stop Barack Obama from, apparently, illegally holding the Presidency, despite the ongoing threats against us. We are speaking of filing additional lawsuits and administrative actions, over and above the dozens already filed, if you will help us today.

Are you willing to see the Constitution shredded by the Left? Will you sit back and do nothing while a foreign-born person may be illegally occupying the White House as President of the United States?

Our country is on the fast track to disaster... but you can help us keep the situation from getting worse. I pray that I'll hear from you today.

Sincerely,

Gary Kreep, Executive Director
United States Justice Foundation

Jesus Loves Me Senior Edition

'Senior version of Jesus Loves Me' Here is a new version just for us who have white hair or no hair at all. For us over middle age (or even those almost there) and all you others check out this newest version of Jesus Loves Me.

JESUS LOVES ME

Jesus loves me, this I know, Though my hair is white as snow Though my sight is growing dim, Still He bids me trust in Him.
(CHORUS) YES, JESUS LOVES ME.. YES, JESUS LOVES ME.. YES, JESUS LOVES ME FOR THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO.

Though my steps are oh, so slow, With my hand in His I'll go On through life, let come what may, He'll be there to lead the way.
(CHORUS)

When the nights are dark and long, In my heart He puts a song. Telling me in words so clear, 'Have no fear, for I am near.'
(CHORUS)

When my work on earth is done, And life's victories have been won. He will take me home above, Then I'll understand His love
(CHORUS)

I love Jesus, does He know? Have I ever told Him so? Jesus loves to hear me say, That I love Him every day.
(CHORUS)

If you think this is neat, please pass it on to your friends. If you do not pass it on , nothing bad will happen, but you will have missed an opportunity to 'Reach out and Touch' a friend or a loved one. God Bless Us All !!! See TLBC website click here

Tulsa

Well, the trip to Tulsa went fine. The Grace Missionary Baptist Church and Pastor David Oneal treated me with wonderful Christian Hospitality. The Bible Conference was good.



Nathaniel Hille - This World is not my Home


Leroy Pack - Perseverance


Larry Killion - The Glory of the Lord


Frank James - The Vital Principle of Faith


Vernon Buttress - Covetousness


Leroy Pack - Practical Church Truth


Frank James - Fishers of Men


Larry Killion - Free Agency

***

Marion and I celebrated our 44th Anniversary yesterday. We went out for dinner at Johnnys Dock Restauraunt and Marina. I took a picture of the boats on my cell phone. We couldn't believe what happened. The waiter came up and asked us if we were celebrating our anniversary. We said yes. He said is it your 44th anniversary? We said yes, how did you know? He said someone told me and smiled. Momentarily, the manager came over to our table and wished us a very happy 44th anniversary. The waiter came back again and said you must be good friends with Tom Baker. I said yes, he is our Ameriprise Financial Advisor. The waiter said well he has paid for your dinner tonight and so, when your are finished, you are free to go any time you want and everything is taken care of. WOW! Thank you Tom!

BO care

What is the most insidious DANGER of the entire ObamaCare scheme? The unprecedented and unconstitutional INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. Here's why...

+ + The Individual Mandate is UNPRECEDENTED...
According to the Congressional Budget Office:

"A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States."

Never before in U.S. History has such a federal mandate been imposed on the people of the United States! Why? Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional.

+ + The Individual Mandate IS Government Takeover

With or without the so-called "public option", the Individual Mandate means ObamaCare is a government takeover of healthcare. That's because the individual mandate gives government control over the healthcare system by giving the government the authority to FORCE you to comply!

In fact, if you don't pay the Individual Mandate TAX, you can face up to a $25,000 fine or even ONE YEAR IN JAIL!

There is no escaping the government-run ObamaCare system. This is the definition of a government takeover of healthcare!

Here's what CATO Institute says about the Individual Mandate:

"Simply making health insurance compulsory gives government as much control over healthcare as would a compulsory government program."

Action Item -- Fax Your Senators and the Committee Now and tell them, "WE SAY NO!"

Even if you have done so already, we are urging all readers to schedule faxes to their two senators and the key members of the Senate Finance Committee TODAY.

Go here to schedule your faxes:
http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?U=21786&CID=122&RID=21561478