Supreme Court of the United States to Hold Conference on Eligibility of Obama…

Chief Justice John Roberts Schedules A Case Regarding Obamas Forged IDs to be Heard in Conference Before the Full Supreme Court.

The case titled Noonan, Judd, MacLeran, Taitz v Bowen provides a mountain of evidence of Barack Obama using a last name not legally his, forged Selective Service application, forged long form and short form birth certificate and a Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425 which was never assigned to him according to E-Verify and SSNVS. Additionally, this case provides evidence of around one and a half million invalid voter registrations in the state of California alone.

More from Huffington Post: Taitz’s case argues that Obama is using false identification, a fake last name, a false Social Security number and forged birth certificates, and Selective Service applications to run for president. She originally filed the lawsuit against California Secretary of State Debra Bowen (D) in her attempt to prevent California’s electoral votes from being counted and to prevent Vice President Joe Biden from counting the electoral votes earlier this month.

A federal judge in California dismissed this case last week. Taitz likened her current case to Watergate.
“Please, keep in mind, Richard Nixon was reelected and sworn in, but later was forced to resign as a result of Watergate. over 30 high ranking officials of Nixon administration including Attorney General of the United States and White House Counsel were indicted, convicted and went to prison,” Taitz wrote on her website.
“ObamaForgery gate is a hundred times bigger then Watergate. More corrupt high ranking officials, US Attorneys, AGs and judges were complicit, committed high treason by allowing a citizen of Indonesia and possibly still a citizen of Kenya Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barack (Barry) Soebarkah, aka Barack (Barry) Soetoro to usurp the U.S. Presidency by use of forged IDs and a stolen Social security number.”

http://gopthedailydose.com/2013/01/13/alert-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-to-hold-conference-on-eligibility-of-obama-2/

Obama Signs Law Giving Himself Armed Guards for Life

President Obama has signed a law that will give himself and all presidents Secret Service protection for life, reversing a law passed during the Clinton administration that gave former presidents a security detail for only 10 years after leaving office.

The new law signed on Wednesday also gives former first ladies lifetime security details (unless they divorce their former presidential spouse). It also affords all presidential children a security detail until they are 16 years of age.

The now nullified law passed in 1994 was originally presented as a way to save millions of dollars to the federal treasury. It was postulated that former presidents would have enough money of their own to hire private security services. Former President Nixon did this when he decided to forego his government-supplied Secret Service detail in his post presidential years. The 1994 law was to take effect for all presidents elected after 1997, so of the surviving presidents only George W. Bush and Barack Obama would have been affected.

The new law sailed through both houses of Congress and had massive bi-partisan support.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/12/Obama-Signs-Law-Giving-Himself-Armed-Guards-for-Life

The Spoiled-Brat Syndrome

The "spoiled brat syndrome" is my way of describing the current endpoint of decades of various forms of progressive thinking in the molding of current culture. Some of this behavior can be detected in the recent fiscal-cliff-stand-off theater.

In the 1920s and 1930s, John Dewey championed the concept that the formal educational system needed to provide children more than just rote learning. The traditional family-oriented life style of the rural farm was being replaced by the industrial workplace and family separation. The State was being relegated the role of universal educator and absent daytime parent. Dewey argued for making the child an interactive member in the educational process and recognizing the variety of individual emotional and intellectual talents amongst children. They were to be prompted to want to learn, and to learn in the interactive environment of other children. Children were to be educated to become functioning members of society and government, and not just robotlike factory workers. It all sounded quite reasonable.

So far so good, but eventually it was not good enough for progressivism. Over the ensuing decades, progressives further fine-tuned the original concept to focus more and more on the child as the center about which all educational efforts were to be expended. The child became the star of the show, rather than a participant, and the child was made aware of his star status. The original intent to make the educational process more enjoyable for the child so that he/she would eventually become a thinking participant in the democratic process of self-governance became blurred. The child-star was now to be protected and shielded from the "real world" out there, and from other competing child-stars.

The education behemoth chose to sacrifice acquisition of knowledge and reasoning skills as primary goals. Gradually, the notion of individual self-esteem and inner feelings of worth became the new ruling concern. It would be better not to expose the child to the realities of possible failures in life, only to perpetual successes, no matter the task or goal. Dewey's original concept of group learning and socialization was hyperinflated and became dominant. As long as the group could solve a problem, everyone won, no matter the individual contribution, or not. In the cloistered environs of kindergarten and grammar school (now fashionably known as K-12), this charade of real life could be drawn out, for a while.

This protective cocoon of the school, where just as in Garrison Keillor land "everyone is above average," has a definite shelf-life, as the arrow-of-time eventually produces a graduate. How shall this graduate view the outside world once pushed out of the nest of safety?

Such a view is filtered through an "I am special" and "I can do anything I set my heart to," (but not necessarily very well or as well as others can) emotional background. The young adult discovers that it is a scary world "out there." High school years provide some of the knocks and bruises, emotional and physical, that serve to bring a touch of reality to the former idyllic life. College years are even more scary, more so for some than others, as individual personalities become evident. Thus comes the advent of the helicopter parent, just an electronic touch pad away, if not in the next room. The natural parental instinct of concern for the physical and mental wellbeing of the child morphs into never being able to set the child free into its own destiny in life. Indeed, the child has been conditioned to expect this continual parenting, either from natural parents or from the ersatz parent-State.

Where is this somewhat caricatured view of the progressive education process leading? It leads to remembering the book by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D.: The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. Dr. Rossiter notes that:

Under the creed of modern liberalism, the individual citizen is not called to maturity but is instead invited to begin a second childhood. Like the child at play, he is given, or at least promised, ultimate economic, social and political security without having to assume responsibility for himself...

Further:

The modern state has taken on the role of an apparently benign, generous, omnipotent and god-like parent, who serves as custodian, manager, provider and caretaker, all to the detriment of the people. We have, in effect, parentified our governments in the belief that we will be better off if they take care of us than if we take care of ourselves...

Thank you, Dr. Rossiter, as you have provided the insight into why some individuals, products of a very modern liberal education, display certain behavioral traits, often noted in the media. They never learned how to grow up, or were never given the opportunity to do so. How often do we read about individuals being poor losers, having a temper tantrum over losing a game, exhibiting "my way or the highway" non-negotiating tactics?

Looking back up towards the edge of the recent fiscal-cliff, can you see such traits in the participants, and more so in one than in others? Never having to say "I was wrong.' Not overtly working to effect a compromise for the common good and not being willing to share some power with opponents. Becoming known as the leader unwilling to bargain, but only to threaten, and known for engaging multifaceted political cat-skinning to thwart the political opposition. All this recalls the "spoiled brat," or worse, "the school bully." The media keeps count of the number of times the self-referential "I" is used in any given speech, and new count records are set. The image becomes complete with a presidential podium festooned with a spray of narcissus blooms and Teleprompters.

The 1967 film King of Hearts depicts the plight of a lone Scottish soldier sent to a small French village to defuse a bomb set to destroy the town, courtesy of retreating German troops. In the confusion of war, the inmates of the local insane asylum had all escaped, were the only remaining village inhabitants, and were ostensibly running the town. It might be unkind to draw parallels with the current political environment in Washington, DC; however, Washington is not a kind place. The political battles there have left a haze of confusion over those ostensibly in charge, and the nominal leader is prone to uninhibited temper tantrums.

Where is that "Scottish soldier" equivalent of yore who will come into Washington, and defuse the nation's explosive political and governance instability? The insanity of current fiscal recklessness, self-destructive energy policies, and assorted cafeteria menu fights amongst the inmates await such a leader. The remaining sane citizens will need to do better job at the ballot box next time, lest the whole place finally does blow up or melt down.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/the_spoiledbrat_syndrome.html

It's the Waste, Stupid!

Conservatives are forgetting their most important lever: Voters logically must support raising taxes if they believe that every dollar of Federal spending is needed. But if some spending is unnecessary, cutting spending is correct. America is divided by assumptions about whether the Federal budget includes a lot of lard or is completely necessary.

Conservatives need to return to what built the conservative movement, to return to what works. We need to stop talking as if helping rich people become richer is our main priority. Despite years of effort in the past, conservatives must now explain all over again to today's generation of voters how their tax dollars are being thrown away.

Could we save money without harming anyone? Recently, news broke once again -- this time in New York State -- about welfare program debit cards being used in ATM machines at strip clubs, bars, liquor stores, porn video shops, hookah parlors, and tobacco shops. There are two problems: welfare cash is being spent for optional extras, not survival. Also, ATM fees cost the welfare program millions of dollars per year for the cash advances. This is not an insult to those who need help. This is a "to do" list for improvements to do a better job.

Promoters of more spending are implying -- to hoodwink low information voters -- that every penny Washington spends is necessary and well spent. If we cut necessary spending, then people will starve and America will fall apart. Bridges will collapse. Our food will be poisoned. Planes will fall out of the sky. Public schools will be boarded up. Liberals are bankrupting the nation based on the lie that spending cannot be cut without harm.

Examples are easy to find. Every year, Citizens Against Government Waste releases "The Pig Book" -- a list of absurdly unnecessary spending in the Federal budget. Since 1993, CAGW has published "Prime Cuts" -- a precise list of cuts that won't be missed. CAGW has already identified easy savings of $391 billion per year, $1.7 trillion over five years.

If Speaker John Boehner were serious, he would call an up-or-down vote on the outrageous examples already identified for Congress. How hard is that? Many of CAGW's recommendations won't please everyone, but CAGW is certainly not the only organization one can look to. CAGW should also organize "Former Government Employees Against Government Waste" to tell the public what is really going on inside the bureaucracy.

Ask our voters: should the government spend $1.7 billion a year on empty buildings? The Office of Management and Budget estimates that 55,000 properties are underutilized or entirely vacant. Maintenance on those properties costs taxpayers $1.7 billion annually. Selling unnecessary Federal property could raise $15 billion. The Federal Government owns 900,000 buildings and structures. Note that there is already a process for other agencies to call "dibs" on any building or property they can use. So this involves property no one needs. Note that "under-utilized" sometimes mean doing something with a building simply because it is sitting there empty, but it would not be missed if it were sold.

We need to ask voters if they want to help huge and rich corporations advertise overseas by borrowing $200 million a year of our children's money. Congress could stop corporate welfare under the Market Access Program, saving $1 billion over five years. Congress could save $1.2 billion over five years by selling the Southeastern Power Administration, which runs 23 hydro-electric projects, just like other private companies do.

Should the U.S. Government spend $2.3 billion to buy even more land over the next five years? The federal government currently owns roughly one-third of all U.S. land, including more than 80 percent of Nevada and Alaska and more than half of Idaho, Oregon, and Utah. The National Park Service already has a backlog of maintenance tasks totaling $5 billion.

According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), fraudulent or improper payments in Medicare amounted to $47.9 billion in 2010. Recommendations to fix this from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of the Inspector General and a March 2011 Government Accountability Office report have still not been implemented.

Should we borrow $8.8 billion per year from China for this? "The Rural Electrification Administration (REA) was established in 1935 to bring electricity to America's rural communities." That job is done, but in any event REA could easily be performed by a private company.

When I was in the Federal bureaucracy, fellow employees fumed that they could buy better computers for far less personally than the U.S. Department of Education was paying supposedly at bulk, negotiated prices. The General Services Administration should publish what it is paying even after a supply contract goes live. There should be a challenge procedure established by law for competing offers. (Part of the problem is that selling to the government is very difficult, so many potential vendors shy away.)

"Why are you charging so much for paint?" asked one Air Force unit while implementing Total Quality Management (TQM). "We make special custom batches of really bad paint to meet your obsolete specifications," the paint vendor explained. This example was formally presented in a government-wide TQM conference I worked in. So the Air Force upgraded its technical criteria to industry standards and saved money. (This was obviously for painting ordinary things like buildings.)

A sailor's family mentioned privately that the U.S. Navy pays $1 million each time an air craft carrier transits Egypt's Suez Canal. Meanwhile, Egypt receives billions of dollars of foreign aid. If true, I think I have an idea for cutting spending. Congress might verify that.

We need to make voters understand -- once again -- that government is chronically broken. Astonishingly, it took a solid year for the U.S. Department of Education to edit a memorandum... on improving productivity and efficiency! Ellory Pollock, a coworker in our Management Improvement Service, wrote a draft memorandum for signature by the Assistant Secretary for Management (later Under Secretary) explained the president's orders. The draft went up and down the chain of command with red-pen edits for a solid year.
Ronald Reagan had ordered all departments to implement the Productivity Improvement Program (PIP). They never did... Obeying the president is an optional thing in the government. So Ellory was given responsibility as the point person to shepherd this presidential directive throughout the department. Note that there was no discretion to redesign OMB's program. Yet even a directive on being more productive took a solid year in the bureaucracy.

Our nation will face bankruptcy, ruin, and disintegration unless fiscal conservatives persuade the voters, including those who pay little attention, that the Federal Government can take care of essential services at vastly lower cost. The argument -- and our nation's future -- will be won or lost not on debating how much rich people should be taxed but on pointing out how much taxpayer money the U.S. Government is wasting. That is how the conservative movement won in the past. But we forgot.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/its_the_waste_stupid.html

Also Read:

Chuck Hagel Has an Armenian Problem

"Nominee for Defense Secretary criticized for sweeping Armenian genocide under the rug"

Changing the Culture One Film at a Time: Baseball, Dennis and the French

"The language is extremely important for conveying the concepts behind conservatives' core principles. The challenge is to show the world that Republican principles are based on "maturity." That's a key word, because growing up and achieving things is positive. And as Dennis has said, liberalism is the cult of the child.

Conservatives must do a lot of very hard work now, to show that our policies are about empowerment, freeing you to do things, get things, and accomplish things, because you're grown up. Also, you must have ready a long list of the horrible results from Democratic policies, such as the Great Society's effects on the black family; the cutting off of funds in Vietnam, which resulted in the Killing Fields of Cambodia; the fact that no parental notification is needed for minors to abort their babies; and on and on."