Mom4Truth

President Obama just completed his annual 90 minute physical and his physicians noted that he was fine health but made two recommendations: one, that he quit smoking, and two, that he "moderate" his "alcohol intake."

Huh? The leader of the free world is smoking and boozing? Can carousing be far behind?

People handle stress in different ways. Some people sleep a lot, others have insomnia. Some people overeat, others stop eating. Some develop tics or rashes. Some exercise all the time, other become catatonic couch potatoes. Some develop heart conditions, other respiratory illnesses. And some people develop bad habits. The Bama seems to have fallen into that last category, although he did already smoke and drink before he became president. One wonders if those habits have gotten worse since assume the responsibility of the office.

Obama has repeatedly said he's trying to quit the smokes. He's been on the nicotine patch and tried some other therapies. It's another reminder of the addictive power of nicotine that a man of such steel will on such things a HEALTH CARE cannot quit smoking. Wasn't he all about "preventive" care (ie. smoking cessation) last week during the health care fandango? Seems to me he should be setting a better example.

And what's with the drinking? If doctors are telling you to "moderate" your alcohol intake, you're having more than a glass or so of merlot with dinner every night.

Is he out of control? I don't think so. But it would be nice to know exactly what the president is doing behind closed doors and if it might effect his judgment.

Do you ever wonder why Obama seems to spend a good deal of time at Camp David and an inordinate amount of time playing golf? Because that's where he can smoke away from the prying eyes of the press. He can't smoke in the White House because smoking is banned there. And who instituted the ban?

Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 1990s. Maybe it was because of Bill's fondness for cigars.

Rodham strikes again, back from the future. http://monicamemo.typepad.com/weblog/

In a generous gesture, a move befitting of all liberals, the Obama's donated a whopping $15,000 today to relief efforts in Haiti, saying they were inspired by the generosity of the American people in such difficult economic times.

Wow.

A man whose bank account overfloweth, who was so graciously (and absurdly) awarded a $1 MILLION Peace Prize for his heart-felt dedication to his hatred of America and his international apology tour on behalf of America's sovereignity manages 15 grand. Breathtaking, I'm sure.

Sandra Bullock rushed to donate $1 million. Bill Gates, Brad Pitt, and Angelina Jolie individually donated over $1 million. And these are the few we know of.

Now, why would our peace-loving president not sign over his bless-ed check from the USA-haters that are the Nobel Commission-if, in fact, he is a lover of peace and tranquility, wouldn't it be appropos to donate funds for peace to a nation so torn and savaged?

No, no, no- that's not the liberal way. They are factually the party of greed.

Don Willett, a justice of the Texas state Supreme court, explains, "The belief that liberals care more about the poor may scratch a partisan or ideological itch, but the facts are hostile witnesses."

When Syracuse University Professor, Arthur C. Brooks, an independent, authored a study on the topic, he was suprised to learn that:

-Although liberal families incomes average 6% higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, give 30% more to charity than the average liberal-headed household

-People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition

-"In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average of donating households." -George Will, Wash Post

The Biden's "generously" donated 0.2 % of their family income over the last decade, while the Obama's donated 1% in 2007.

In stark contrast, President Bush donated close to 10% in 2007 while the Mccain's donated about 25% in 2006 and 2007.

But, Mr. Obama has had no problem in promising $100 million dollars of tax-payer funds to Haiti, while American personal, compassionate donations to the calamity-torn nation leave me breathless.

Obama LOVES to spread the wealth around… just not his wealth. 

A post from a fellow blogging patriot:

"Let the Declaration go forward! From Boston Harbor, to the Heartland of America, to the Purple Mountains Majesty, to the crumbling Liberal California Coast!

Nancy Pelosi declared war on us, We the People. She said, "It is going to get bloody."

Let it be known that hers was the first to spill on this day, the first day of the Second Revolution of the United States of America.

All those who follow the False Prophet and his Socialist Soldiers, lay down your deceit and stop your attack on our country.

Long live the Republic and our fellow Patriots of the State of Massachusetts.

Our prayers have been heard."

Amen.

In his characteristically smug, frog-faced tone, Robert the Gibbs, famed dunce of the White House Press Office, attempted to explain away the Democrat's impending doom in the typically very blue Massachusetts.

Would this senate election of Republican Scott Brown over Democrat Martha Coakley prove to be an angry referendum on this very radical president and his liberal court of jesters?

Can progressives in a progressive state, led by progressives for the last 50 years, reject radical liberalism when enough is enough?

The answer to both is a resounding YES! But not according to Gibbs who side-swiped the reporter's questioning of how this vote reflects upon this administration saying, "The anger from the people existed long before the 2008 elections." Or, in typical Obama fashion, "It's Bush's fault!"

Yes, Gibbs, that makes sense. To really stick it to the former Bush (a Republican) administration, liberal voters in a blue state will officially elect the first Republican to the US Senate in nearly 50 years! That'll show em'!

Take that, George Bush!

Thanks to biggovernment.com for this post!

In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money. During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During the same workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?” The unbelievable audio clip is posted here. Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings is the founder of GLSEN. He was paid $273,573.96 as its executive director in 2007. Jennings was the keynote speaker at the 2000 GLSEN conference.

Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” was the keynote speaker at the GLSEN/Boston Conference at Tufts University in 2000. High school students at the conference learned about fisting and watersports from the GLSEN activists. Jennings is seen here holding the conference program. (Via Mass Resistance)

Unfortunately for GLSEN, undercover journalists with Mass Resistance recorded these outrageous sessions at Tufts University. The audio was later leaked to a local radio station. This created such an uproar that GLSEN leaders were forced to apologize for their disgusting behavior.

Despite the controversy, Barack Obama’s Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings and his GLSEN organization did nothing to clean up their act. In fact in 2001 activists handed out “fisting kits” to the children and teachers who attended the GLSEN conference.

But that’s not all. The children who attended Kevin Jennnings’ 2005 GLSEN Conference also left with their own “Little Black Book – Queer in the 21st Century”.

This book exposes the young teens to–
Rimming – Fisting – Water Sports (Pi$$ Play) – Toys
It’s what every teen needs to know…

And in case any of the teens got bored, GLSEN was also kind enough to include a list of the local gay bars in the booklet distributed to high school students.

Because of his excellent work with children Kevin Jennings was promoted by Barack Obama to be his Safe Schools Czar. Today he’s running the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools in the US Department of Education.
Do you feel safe now?

Writing for World Net Daily, Dr. Jerome Corsi states,

"A former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says the real purpose of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Dec. 7-18 is to use global warming hype as a pretext to lay the foundation for a one-world government."

Corsi quotes Lord Christopher Monckton as telling a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience at Bethel University in St. Paul,

"Your president will sign it. Most of the Third World countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regimes from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it."

Corsi quotes Monckton as also saying,

"I read that treaty and what it says is this: that a world government is going to be created. The word ‘government’ actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity." (Thatcher adviser: Copenhagen goal is 1-world government – WND)

Plus, here is a later Fox Business interview with Lord Monckton, in which he further expands his thoughts: http://tinyurl.com/foxbusiness-monckton

Did Lord Monckton exaggerate?

My research of the Climate Change document that Monckton references found the following: it is a 181-page working document that does not mention the words "ballot," "elected official," or "vote" anywhere in it. In my opinion, Lord Monckton did not exaggerate; if anything, he may have understated the situation. The document does indeed appear to be the institutional framework for an unelected supreme communist-style world government.

By signing this document, the United States (and other industrial nations) will forever take responsibility for the ills of backwards and third world countries. And, according to Lord Monckton, this would include China and India, along with the countries of Africa. Notice:

• Page 6, "PP.15 Further acknowledging that developed countries have a historical responsibility for their disproportionate contribution to the causes and consequences of climate change, reflecting their disproportionate historical use of a shared global carbon space since 1850 as well as their proposed continuing disproportional use of the remaining global carbon space . . . Warming of the climate system, as a consequence of human activity, is unequivocal."
• Page 38, "28. The adverse effects of climate change and response measures, due to the historical cumulative GHG emissions of developed countries, constitute an additional burden on all developing country Parties (particularly low-lying and other small island countries, countries with low-lying coastal, arid and semi-arid areas or areas liable to floods, drought and desertification, and developing countries with fragile mountainous ecosystems) in reducing poverty, developing strategies to address social vulnerabilities and attaining sustainable development and a threat to achieving the United Nations Millenium Development Goals." 
• Page 122, "17. (a) Compensate for damage to the LDC’s economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity . . ."

  "(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses . . ."

By signing and being party to this document, we are accepting legal financial responsibility to support non-developed countries FOREVER.

• Page 27, "(b) Particularly vulnerable populations, groups and communities, [or] All vulnerable groups whose adaptive capacity is low, [or] Groups requiring special protection . . ."
• Page 43, "41. (a) Assessed contributions of at least 0.7% of annual GDP of developed country Parties."

These funds will go directly to governments and "community organizations."

• Page 39, "33. [The financial burden] must be at least USD 67 billion (in the range of USD 70-140 billion) per year."

The commitments of the developed countries are "economy wide."

• Page 58, "7. (a) Mitigation commitments by all developed countries are legally binding economy wide and absolute quantified emission reduction commitments."

  "(b) Mitigation actions by developing countries are VOLUNTARY . . ." (Emphasis added.)

The system appears to be loaded to ensure that the world body overseeing this document is granted total control for the enforcement of the requirements of this document throughout all developed countries. Penalties for non-compliance by developed countries are scattered throughout the document.

It appears that what a U.S. President and Congress (Republican or Democratic) could not do through the constitutional legislative process, they are attempting to do through international treaty. Therefore, it is my studied opinion that Lord Monckton’s assessment that this upcoming Climate Change Convention in Copenhagen is a "pretext" for the establishment of one world government is "spot-on."

It does seem to be getting clearer and clearer that if the elected civil magistrates in Washington, D.C., do not quickly grow some backbone and develop some sagacity as to the direction these globalists are taking our country, resistance will be forced (in one way or another) upon the States and the People, because it is not possible for the policies and financial burden that are – and will be – levied upon the backs of the American people to be sustained without the surrender of independence, the abridgment of constitutional government, and the loss of liberty.

Stay tuned.- As Posted by Chuck Baldwin

WND- "A "hate crimes" bill opponents claim will be used to crack down on Christian speech, even the reading of the Bible, was signed into law today by President Obama.

The Senate approved the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act by a vote of 68-29 on Oct. 22 after Democrats strategically attached it to a "must-pass" $680 billion defense appropriations plan.

Most Republicans, although normally strong supporters of the U.S. military, opposed the bill because it hands out federal money to states and local governments in pursuit of "preventing" hate crimes. The bill creates federal protections and privileges for homosexuals and other alternative lifestyles but denies those protections to other groups of citizens.

Obama signed the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act at a White House ceremony today. Prior to signing the act into law, Obama spoke briefly of the hate crimes bill.

"After more than a decade, we’ve passed inclusive hate-crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray or who they are," he said. "I promised Judy Shepard when she saw me in the Oval Office that this day would come, and I’m glad that she and her husband, Dennis, could join us for this event. I’m also honored to have the family of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy who fought so hard for this legislation. I just want you all to know how proud we are of the work that Ted did to help make this day possible."

American Family Association President Tim Wildmon warned that the new law "creates a kind of caste system in law enforcement, where the perverse thing is that people who engage in non-normative sexual behavior will have more legal protection than heterosexuals. This kind of inequality before the law is simply un-American."

Wildmon said the legislation creates possible situations where pastors may be arrested if their sermons on sexuality can be linked in even the remotest way to acts of violence.

"It threatens free speech and freedom of religion and is totally unacceptable," he said.

As WND reported, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder admitted a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister’s sermon about homosexuality would be protected by the proposed federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn’t be.

Dick Luger (R-IN) DC Office: (202)224-4814

George Voinovich (R-OH) DC Office: (202)224-3353

Olympia Snowe (R-ME) DC Office: (202)224-5344

Susan Collins (R-ME) DC Office: (202)224-2523

I say we call and express our no-thank-you sentiments!

I’m going to attempt a post on race relations. I say attempt because I hold contempt at the PC route this country has taken in regards to discussing racism in America. Rest assured it is alive and well. I think, unfortunately, the mouths of white people have been taped and closed from being able to talk about this very subject for fear of being labeled a "racist". The white population, and now the right-wing conservatives in this country, have effectively been silenced from discussing their political disdain for Barack Obama or any other politically active black figure, barred from any right to an opinion solely based on the claim of racism.

The conservative movement has been accused of racism since our Marxist President took office- our exception to him cannot possibly be because we vehemently disagree with his radical policies? Nor because we believe in the conservative principles that made this country great? No. And the left has found the perfect, indefensible way to silence us- claim it is racism! And the good white and/or conservative Americans have allowed themselves the gag order! Racism- the last, "great" argument for the ignorant elite, threatened by a right-wing power, unanticipated.

Equally as startling, however, is the way that the left has guilt-tripped some black Americans into accepting socialist policies or risk being labled a race-traitor. There is a brilliant, conservative, black political commentator (her name escapes me at the moment!), who is often times a contributer on Fox News, who wrote a wonderful article on this very subject. She convicted on the necessity of holding true, first, to our conservative values rather than our many unecessary allegiances, including race allegiance.

I realize this to be sensitive subject matter, but I have had it up to here with being called a racist because I believe in small government, low taxes, am staunchly pro-life, pro-Israel, pro-capitalism, pro-Jesus, and pro-America being the shining city on the hill. And I know many black Americans who feel the exact same way- in fact, I have been privledged enough to stand with them at tea parties and out on the corner on election day.

Not a one of us is motivated by race- we are motivated by righteous principles and a disdain for the liberal infection that is disolving our great country.

It’s time to remove the gag order and call this president what he really is- Hitler! And Hitler was white! Does that also make me racist against whites? Welcome to 30’s Germany- WAKE UP, AMERICA!

After 9 months of our new Marxist President, I am evaluating a post I entered about a year ago. It was on the topic of how to catch wild pigs.

After a period of time of instituting a sort of pig socialism, the hunters simply place an enlosure around said pigs, permanently trapping them in a pig prison. The pigs make little fuss after sniffing out their surroundings, perfectly fat, dumb, and happy with their new "hand-out" lifestyle. Wild pigs go from wild to dead pigs.

What they don’t know is- this means dooms-day. Are these hunters providing this food and "comfort" for companionship and charity? No way! First chance they get, the hunters will gore these idiot pigs and feast upon them.

And Nancy Pelosi’s looking hungry.

I, for one, refuse to be a pig. And they will not imprison me without a squealing good fight. We’re in the trenches, America. It’s nowhere our armed service-men/women haven’t already been and it IS somewhere we can navigate ourselves out of.

Refuse to be silent! Refuse to back down! And keep looking up- our redemption draweth nigh!

http://www.mom4truth.com/how-to-catch-wild-pigs/

The war rhetoric is getting very serious now with North Korea. Do not be fooled with rhetoric that North Korea could be easily defeated. This nation has been preparing since 1953 for this day. It is primitive by our standards, but they have a massive army with HUGE numbers of weapons. They could inflict incredible damage.

The talk now is about North Korea’s nuclear weapons, but they have enormous stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. For the US to defeat Korea, it might take an all out effort or tactical nuclear weapons. Every military analysts that I have read about the war said the US could not defeat North Korea without using nuclear weapons. It is just impossible to stop an all out assault by a one million man army in such a small area.

The speculation is that North Korea will fire a missile on July 4 toward Hawaii. The US has no idea how advanced the Korean missile and nuclear programs are. The US may attempt to shoot it down which would get a reaction from North Korea. This situation now is extremely tense and could explode at any time. North Korea will now not back down.

I keep thinking about Israel just a week or so back preparing its population for a missile attack. And, now a missile from a hostile nation is about to be fired toward America. This is all happening at the same time Secretary of State Clinton is trying to bully Israel to divide the land! John McTernan