Saturday, June 30, 2012

Unexpected turn in eligibility case: 'Put it on record!'

The attorney in a publicized challenge to Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president told WND the Florida case took an unexpected turn in court yesterday, one he says “pulled the rug out” from Obama’s lawyers and should force a quick answer from the judge.
Attorney Larry Klayman told WND he had expected an “uneventful” hearing in the ongoing case, which returned before Judge Terry Lewis yesterday, but instead found a legal tangle that he believes means Lewis will “have to make a decision, have to put it on record.”  Read More

Catholic Bishops Reject Supreme Court’s Obamacare Ruling

America’s Catholic Bishops rejected the Supreme Court’s ruling that Obamacare is constitutional, saying the court did not resolve the question of the law’s violation of religious rights.
The bishops earlier in June led 43 Catholic institutions to file lawsuits against the Obama Administration, which under Obamacare is forcing Catholic and other religious institutions to provide health insurance to employees that covers contraceptives, sterilizations and abortion-inducing drugs against the Church’s moral teachings.
  Cont Reading

General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress

Dear friends,

On Thursday, the House found Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress by a vote of 255-67 for refusing to produce documentation related to the Operation Fast and Furious scandal.

Operation Fast and Furious involved a coalition of federal agencies facilitating the sale of more than 2,000 firearms to known Mexican drug cartel straw purchasers. At times, federal agents ran interference for cartel weapon smugglers, thwarting local law enforcement. The operation collapsed when a number of agents came forward as whistleblowers following the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on Dec. 15, 2010. Agent Terry died following a shootout with a cartel group led by an FBI informant.

PJ Media has been reporting Operation Fast and Furious (also referred to as "Gunwalker") since early 2011. You can see a collection of stories that present the key facts about the scandal by clicking here.

In cases of corruption, we're often told to follow the money. On PJTV, Bill Whittle's latest Afterburner video follows the ideological motives behind Fast and Furious. He concisely explains the scandal and sums it up by calling it "Watergate with 300 dead bodies."

Neal Boortz said this video is one you don't want to miss, and that he's in complete agreement with Bill's viewpoint.

On, Ed Morrissey writes, "Bill castigates the media outlets that have ignored Operation Fast and Furious, scolding them with the famous exhortation, 'Have you no shame?'"

Twitter also has been abuzz with tweets about the video:

  • @OffACough: "@PJTV's Bill Whittle unchained. Always a favorite, his most important video yet."
  • @shepherd_book: "Bill Whittle is not happy about Fast and Furious, or its tepid coverage in the media. Good for you, Mr. W!"
  • @joepalive: "MUST WATCH: Another brilliant commentary by @PJTV's @BillWhittle. It's indeed all about ideology with @barackobama."

This story has been ignored by the mainstream media for too long. Americans need to know and understand what happened. That's why we have been reporting on it for more than a year.

Click here to watch Bill Whittle's video now, and be sure to share it with your friends.


Roger L. Simon

Barry's Katrina?

      Obama and the Colorado Wildfires

RUSH: Is Obama flying over the fire in Colorado today or is he going out there? Remember during Hurricane Katrina Bush was excoriated for flying over Katrina, but not landing? And much later it was learned that Bush didn't land because he didn't want to be a distraction and he didn't want people on the ground to have to stop what they were doing in order to provide security. You know, when a president shows up, everything shuts down. And Bush said, "I don't want to do that." But he got creamed for not caring. Just flew over, gave the wings a couple of dips, and then headed back to Washington.

Obama is going to go out there to Colorado. He wasn't going to go. Somebody shamed him into going. They're having trouble putting out the fires because Obama and the defense budget cut a bunch of tankers that fly over these fires and drop chemicals. If he lands it's gong to take resources away from fighting the fires to handle him. If all he does fly over and look, do you think anybody would say, "Wow, how insensitive. He didn't care. He just flew over," like they did with Bush? I doubt it. They'd talk about how thoughtful he was and selfless.
"He could have landed and seen it first hand, but no, no! He put everybody else first."
That's what they'll say.

Letter to the United States Senate: From a Patriot

TO: The Following Members Of The United States Senate: The Hon. Lamar Alexander, The Hon. Kelly Ayotte, The Hon. Scott Brown, The Hon. Thad Cochran, The Hon. Susan Collins, The Hon. Bob Corker, The Hon. Michael Enzi, The Hon. Lindsey Graham, The Hon. Charles Grassley, The Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison, The Hon. Johnny Isakson, The Hon. Mike Johanns, The Hon. Mark Kirk, The Hon. Richard Lugar, The Hon. John McCain, The Hon. Mitch McConnell, The Hon. Lisa Murkowski, The Hon. Rob Portman, The Hon. Olympia Snowe and The Hon. Patrick Toomey

charles williams
812 N. Kansas
Roswell, NM 88201

RE: Sign Senator DeMint's Letter Opposing The Law Of The Sea Treaty. Do It Today!

Words cannot express my disgust! Why have you not yet signed Senator Jim DeMint's letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowing to oppose ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST)? Why could you not bring yourself to sign a letter opposing a tyrannical United Nations inspired scam that would compel us to pay a global tax to a made-up international body of America-haters for the privilege of using the world's oceans and seas?

Have you taken leave of your senses, or do you simply believe that the American people are stupid? LOST was intentionally designed to erode our sovereignty, promote the redistribution of wealth on a global scale, cripple the ability of the United States Navy to protect this great country, oblige us to share intelligence and proprietary technology with unfriendly nations; and it will further cripple our economy in a time of recession.

Senate DeMint wrote that LOST "reflects political, economic, and ideological assumptions which are inconsistent with American values and sovereignty." He put it mildly. LOST is unconstitutional, it is tyrannical, and it is un-American.

Our sovereignty is not for sale. The people of the United States do not kneel and pay homage to third-world, America-hating despots, and we will not tolerate any betrayals on something as basic as compromising our God-given freedoms. Put a stop to this insanity and sign Senator DeMint's letter opposing the Law of the Sea Treaty. Do it today. If not, you can kiss this great country and your political careers good-bye!


charles williams

Malia (Obama's Daughter) on Break in Mexico

My Mother used to tell me "Money does not grow on trees" something Obama's mother never told him.

After driving the U.S. more deeply into debt than any other President,
this should make you shake your head.  If George Bush's daughters or
Bill Clinton's daughter had done this, it would have been all over the
news and the voter's would have been calling for heads to roll 24/7.
But with the chosen one, you hear nothing on the major media.

Want to know where Obama's 13 year-old daughter went with 12 friends?

On "spring break" in Oaxaca Mexico , on your dime.

She took two jets, 12 friends and 25 secret service men.

A thirteen year-old? What the?

Why haven't you heard about it?

The Obama Administration has had the Secret Service scouring the web
ordering that any website mentioning this be taken down because letting
the travel plans out could have endangered the president's daughter's

Nonsense, the "royal couple" just want to hide the way they are ripping
off the U.S. taxpayer. Only a few Canadian Web-sites still have it up.
(both below)

The Obama's are laughing at the "suckers" who are funding their
Imperial Lifestyle.

This trip cost more than most Americans make in their entire lifetimes

Are Feds Preparing for Martial Law? – Patriot Update

                                                  Are Feds Preparing for Martial Law? – Patriot Update

Serve Like Mother Teresa

From Pat dowling : I am a little pencil in the hand of a writing God who is sending a love letter to the world.

Blessed Mother Teresa

Benedictine College's Mother Teresa Nursing Center.
“If we don’t love the poor, and do all we can to improve their lot,” says Archbishop Charles Chaput, “we’re going to go to Hell.”
If that sounds like a harsh way to put it, reread the Last Judgment parable in the Gospel of Matthew, and try to see if Jesus left any wiggle room.
In his first encyclical upon becoming Pope, Deus Caritas Est (God Is Love), Pope Benedict summed up Christian duties this way: “The Church’s deepest nature is expressed in her three-fold responsibility: of proclaiming the word of God, celebrating the sacraments, and exercising the ministry of charity.”
So far we have recommended only two of those in our suggestions for promoting Catholic identity. Now for the third: serving others.
God sends saints to show the world how he wants us to behave. His message was crystal clear when he sent us Mother Teresa: Serve the poor. Here are several characteristics we should imitate in this great saint.
  1. Do the hard thing: Love.
We religious people care a lot about the Ten Commandments — if we steal something, our consciences won’t let us forget it. If we violate the sixth or ninth commandments, our consciences sting.
That’s good. But Jesus called two commandments the greatest — and those two are about love: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.” and “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
After all, even self-centered people like the Gospel of Luke’s “Rich Young Man” can fulfill those “thou shalt nots.” But it takes radical change to love like God wants. That radical change is absolutely necessary.
Pope Benedict XVI says it over and over again in his encyclical on charity. “Only if I serve my neighbor can my eyes be opened to what God does for me and how much he loves me,” he writes. “The saints — consider the example of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta — constantly renewed their capacity for love of neighbor from their encounter with the Eucharistic Lord, and conversely this encounter acquired its realism and depth in their service to others.” Four separate times in the encyclical e recommends imitating Mother Teresa.
In an age that hates hypocrisy, Mother Teresa had no trace of duplicity. She simply loved God above all and others as herself, even when it was hard.
  1. Do Something Today.
Service for us is often an isolated act, which is fine as far as it goes. The more such isolated acts, the better. But what Mother Teresa modeled was an attitude of service, which is very different.
After author Malcolm Muggeridge spent time with Mother Terasa he asked her what the title of his book about her should be. She told him to name it whatever he liked. He insisted that Mother should suggest a title. After a moment, she said, “Something Beautiful for God.”
She explained: “Every day on awaking, my desire and my enthusiasm is this: Today I must do something beautiful for God.”
That's a good attitude to ask God for. Throughout the day there are lots of opportunities to “do something beautiful for God” -- most of them very small. Remember Mother Teresa's "Gospel on Five Fingers" (the words of Jesus in Matthew's Last Judgement, one word per finger): "You did it to me."
  1. Don’t judge, just serve.
Mother Teresa famously said, “If you judge people, you have no time to love them.”
It’s a lesson my friends and I learned when we volunteered at Mother Teresa’s “Gift of Love” home in San Francisco in college. We spent our time there chatting (and smoking lots of cigarettes) with men who were dying of AIDS. We were pious Catholic college students — they were homosexual men active in the gay scene of San Francisco. They had a totally different worldview from ours, but they loved having someone to talk to.
They were startled by the Missionaries of Charity. “I don’t understand these women,” said one man. “They clean our vomit, they clean our [censored!], and they keep smiling. What is wrong with them?”
But at the time I helped out there, the sisters had never had a patient die in their house who hadn’t first asked for admittance to the Catholic Church. Loving service won them over in ways no harsh judgment ever would. My friend Jack Smith described that experience, that changed us as much as them, here.
  1. Be joyful.
Mother Teresa suffered spiritual desolation — the horrifying feeling that God had abandoned her— for an astonishing 50 years. Yet during that time she was known as the “Apostle of Joy.”
How did she do it? I think there are two aspects of her life that allowed her to endure that terrible trial.
First was the nature of her calling. In her private letters published after her death, she described the very personal experience of Jesus Christ she had when she was called to serve the poor in Calcutta. After she agreed, she had a months-long “real, close, intense union with Jesus in 1946 and 1947.” This is the kind of experience of God’s beauty and love that caused St. Thomas Aquinas to declare all his life’s work “straw” and stop writing. Mother Teresa’s months-long experience of intimate union with Christ, renewed throughout her life in Eucharistic adoration, was enough to sustain her for decades.
Second was the nature of her work. It is a paradox that the more human beings try to grab happiness for themselves, the more it slips through their grasp. But the more they freely try to provide happiness for others, the more joy they feel themselves. Mother Teresa, radically and completely, lived her life entirely for others, “giving until it hurts,” and that was enough to fill her with joy.
So, how is all of this relevant for the Fortnight for Religious Freedom?
Mother Teresa herself explained how. At the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast, she urged Americans to live up to our founding principles — by loving.
Not just by heroic love, but by ordinary love. By deciding that in America “no child will be unwanted, unloved, uncared for, or killed and thrown away.”
“Then,” she said, “you will really be true to what the founders of this country stood for.”

White House to blacks: We reduced crack cocaine penalties

President Obama’s top aide, Valerie Jarrett, reportedly boasted to the black community that the administration sharply reduced the sentencing disparity for possession of crack cocaine instead of powder.
Jarrett made the remarks at a meeting of black journalists and columnists last weekend clearly aimed at Obama’s re-election efforts. Mainstream media outlets covering the event did not report on her comments regarding crack cocaine.
Cont. Reading

Thoughts to Ponder

Someone sent this to me in email so I’m not sure who to credit. If anyone knows let me know in the comments and I’ll add it. Anyway, I thought this one was good.

Welcome to La La Land ..

 Is this a true Republic or is our Republic merely an illusion?

“But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.” John Adams

I’m not talking about the terrorist attacks. Those are simply part of the final phase. The overthrow of America has been going on for decades. If someone tried to collapse the United States overnight, of course the American people would revolt. That’s why it had to be done slowly, quietly. It has been aided from both the outside and the inside. All the massive problems besetting your nation, all of the economic, political and social turmoil, hasn’t suddenly picked up speed by accident. It is all by design and it all has a singular, overriding purpose.[2]
… You don’t have to look for anything … [i]t’s already here. It’s all around you. You’ve been looking right at it for years without knowing. You still have your name. You still have your flag. You still believe you have your freedoms, though in reality they have been slowly siphoned away. You still believe you have a Republic when, day-by-day, what you are being left with is merely the illusion of a Republic. Your entire house, as it were, has been rebuilt one brick at a time and no one has even noticed. No one has done a single thing about it.[3]
When does fiction mimic reality? Or when does fiction speak the truth? I finished reading this “travel” book the night before SCOTUS rendered its decision, and I had an epiphany. HELLARE WOULD BE UPHELD. When I heard the actual news alert the next day, that knot in my stomach that started the night before, got bigger.
59 of 92 laws in hellcare have already been enacted. And even if the newly elected representatives have the balls to repeal this heinous law, will they repeal the insidious taxes contained therein and the laws that impact taxpaying citizens right now and then in the future? Again, methinks not. This is a parasitic relationship, and we the people are the host. Parasitism is defined by:
A ... relationship ... in which one organism, the parasite, lives off of another organism, the host, harming it and possibly causing death. The parasite lives on or in the body of the host.
... Usually, although parasites harm their hosts, it is in the parasite's best interest not to kill the host, because it relies on the host's body and body functions, such as digestion or blood circulation, to live.[4]
This government will bleed us dry and watch as we crawl and then wither. For what? For its survival and for CONTROL AND POWER.
I am here watching a socialist medical program up close and personal. A doctor refused to diagnose a child with a highly contagious disease. Why? Because of the paperwork associated with the correct diagnosis. “Come back in 5 days if the child is not better!” Of course they will be better in 5 days; that or he will be dead!
So quietly we continue to work within the system. Realistically, can we succeed? Is our Republic real? Or is it simply and illusion of a Republic we once knew?


Did Justice Roberts Help Romney


Did Justice Roberts Help Romney and Provide a Path to Repeal ObamaCare?

by Stephen Littau

Over at Red State, Erick Ericson theorizes that Chief Justice John Roberts joined the majority opinion as a way to put ObamaCare back into the hands of the political branches to decide the law’s fate:
The Democrats have been saying for a while that individual pieces of Obamacare are quite popular. With John Roberts’ opinion, the repeal fight takes place on GOP turf, not Democrat turf. The all or nothing repeal has always been better ground for the GOP and now John Roberts has forced everyone onto that ground. Oh, and as I mentioned earlier, because John Roberts concluded it [the individual mandate] was a tax, the Democrats cannot filibuster its repeal because of the same reconciliation procedure the Democrats used to pass it.
It seems very, very clear to me in reviewing John Roberts’ decision that he is playing a much longer game than us and can afford to with a life tenure. And he probably just handed Mitt Romney the White House.
Our own Doug Mataconis said he “would not be surprised to see it be a 6-3 decision” way back in April for the following reason:
Ordinarily, the most senior Justice in the majority gets to decide who writes the majority opinion. However, if the Chief Justice is in the majority he gets to make that decision. If Kennedy ends up voting to uphold the mandate then I could see Chief Justice Roberts joining him so that he can write the opinion himself and make the precedential value of the decision as limited as possible.
Erick Erickson also mentioned on his radio program that many conservatives and libertarians who aren’t thrilled with Romney as the nominee will put aside their objections and vote for him if it means repealing ObamaCare.
I hate to say it but I think Erickson has a point. ObamaCare being upheld is a game changer. Prior to this decision that was supposed to strike down all or part of ObamaCare, I was absolutely certain that I would enthusiastically vote for the Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson rather than settle for the lesser of the two evils. With ObamaCare being upheld, now I have to say I’m not so sure. I’m not normally a single issue voter but if ObamaCare isn’t stopped and soon, we will be stuck with it for at least a generation.
The problem is though, it might already be too late. Several things have to happen just right. First Romney must be elected and the GOP must take control of the Senate and hold the House. Second, we have to trust that Romney and the Republicans in congress will actually follow through. We’ve been disappointed before.

Will We Stand Idly By?

by Dr. Jeffrey ,June 30, 2012

This is an excellent letter to Mitt Romney from Jared Law, founder of expressing concerns of the American people who love the Constitution and still believe this document was crafted for us to remain a free people ... free to worship and live ... this is what our ancestors and Founding Fathers bled and died for ... this is what all of our soldiers and veterans (as well as our elected officials) swore an oath to protect and defend.
Will we sit idly by while our nation is being turned into a communistic state and the very tenants of our Constitution are now not being upheld by the highest court in the land?
I fear that another revolution is about to take place here in our America. The scriptures warn to "flee and escape" ... Those that escaped Germany when the warning signs were on the wall survived and went on to prosper. Those that refused to ignore the warnings went into captivity and millions of them died ... not just the Jews, but Christians and anyone who opposed the rule of Hitler.
We have some tough choices to make for ourselves and our families in the days that lie ahead. I would urge each of you to stay in prayer and fasting so that you will hear from the LORD and follow His leading.
May each of you be blessed this day and always.
Just me,

Tags: Communism, Constitution, Freedom, Hitler., Revolution, Romney, SCOTUS

If you would like to be a member of Constitutional Emergency click on link below

Join Constitutional Emergency


To view this as a web page, click here

Tea Party News

 BREAKING ALERT - Your immediate action requested
 Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

 People of America: “RISE UP AND REVOLT!”

Fellow Americans and Patriots,

We the People are in a dire situation. Today’s Supreme Court ruling sent shockwaves around the country. ObamaCare is being shoved down our throats, ruled constitutional today by the highest court in the land.

News flash to those dancing in the streets: There is such thing as a free lunch.

It is about as free as the mortgage O’Liar promised everyone when he took office. We all saw what happened there. Foreclosures rocketed. No one got a free ride. Those who drank the Kool-Aid bemoaned the lies perpetrated on them.

Make no mistake: this mandate WILL break the backs of hardworking Americans. It will KILL small business and consumers and businesses WILL see their insurance premiums soar.

Our taxes will blast out of sight. It will cost more than Obama ever told you it would. Trillions that we do not have.

If you thought 40 straight months of 8% or higher unemployment was bad, wait ‘til you see what’s coming. It is a day people will rue.

Someone has to pay for this and it will be you and me and your friends and family…and we will pay dearly.

Justice Roberts did America a grave injustice today, BETRAYING America and our Constitutional freedoms by going to the other side.

Yet, this is just MORE PROOF that Obama has deceived America. For years this fraud has been running around saying ObamaCare “is not a tax.” Guess what? The Supreme Court called it a tax.

And I quote—from CNN Politics no less—what Obama said in 2009:

  CNN - Obama: Requiring health insurance is not a tax increase

"For us to say you have to take responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase…nobody considers that a tax increase."
Barack “INSANE” Obama 9/30/09
  Barack Obama

BULLSH*T. This will prove to be the largest tax increase in American history!!!!

As Tea Partier, Sarah Palin said today:

“Obama promised the American people this wasn’t a tax and that he’d never raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000. We now see that this is the largest tax increase in history. It will slam every business owner and every one of the 50% of Americans who currently pay their taxes. The other 50% are being deceived if they think they’re going to get a free ride–because Medicaid is broke. Recipients of Obama’s “free health care” will have fewer choices and less accessibility. Trust me – this much more expensive health care WILL be rationed; to claim otherwise defies all economic and common sense…

It’s time, again, for patriotic Americans to rise up to protest this obvious infringement on our economic and personal freedom. November is just around the corner. Today, the Supreme Court issued their ruling on ObamaCare. In November, We the People will issue ours.”
This is NOT the end—this is just the beginning of the fight.

We WILL fight back.We WILL revolt.We WILL take to the streets.We WILL take back our country.We WILL NOT back down.Right now our teams are mobilizing, calling in every resource to fight this with all our might. We’re beyond mad as hell. We’re so DONE with this socialist pig in pinstripe and we are going to FIGHT harder than we have ever fought before.

This deadly and dangerous decision has ignited us in a whole new way. We’re fired up and ready to do battle with the enemy. He has shown his true face. It is evil. It is socialist. It is anti-American.

We are going to amp up our efforts times 1,000 or 100,000 if we have to. Are you with us? Can we count on you to help with a contribution that allows us to blitz America with our message to oust Obama and get Obamacare overturned?

WE WILL FIGHT THIS TO THE DEATH but we need your support.
Donate now

I don’t care what you can give—a donation that is small or large—but please give so we can push back with a fierce vengeance.

Take back America and take back our freedom! Donate today to support our efforts to rise up and revolt against these anti-American atrocities. Save We the People!

Steve Eichler

Donate now

Obamacare Largest Tax Increase in the History of the World?

RUSH: Hey, folks, have you seen the economic news today? Have you heard about the unemployment numbers today? (laughing) Gross domestic product, have you heard about any of that? Because I have it here, and it sucks. It’s a disaster. The economy of this country remains a disaster. And we, the American people, have just been deceived in ways that nobody contemplated. And what we now have is the biggest tax increase in the history of the world. What we have been told by the chief justice of the Supreme Court and four liberals on the court: Obamacare is just a massive tax increase. That’s all it is. Obama lied to us about that. The Democrats lied. “It wasn’t a tax. There was no way it was a tax.”  Cont. Reading


RUSH: Hey, folks, have you seen the economic news today? Have you heard about the unemployment numbers today? (laughing) Gross domestic product, have you heard about any of that? Because I have it here, and it sucks. It's a disaster. The economy of this country remains a disaster. An...
by Barbara Spindel Friedman

Romney, Rubio, McCain and Natural Born Citizen

By J.B. Williams
June 11, 2012

The recent release of my previous column titled Rubio Can Lock the Election for Obama resulted in numerous reader emails that demonstrate a continuing confusion over the indisputable definition and application of the term Natural Born Citizen. This follow up column is written to remove all confusion from the topic, once and for all.

Sadly, most of the people concerned with this topic believe they each know the truth, even though they do not agree on what the truth is. Most opinions are based upon second source or third hand information, most of it motivated by political agenda.

My objective is to establish through first source evidence the true meaning of the term Natural Born Citizen as used by our Founders in Article II of the Constitution, and spread the truth, no matter who it helps or harms in the political arena. I have written on this subject extensively and my only loyalty here is to the truth, no matter who it serves.
Cont. Reading


Requirements for the office of President/Vice president and whether the likes of Obama, Rubio et al truly meet them, I suggest you make time to read the following excellent recent article by JB Williams. And then widely share it as I'm doing, and add it to your archive of valuable reference material. If after reading this you aren’t angry enough to join together and act immediatel...y to force Obama off the 2012 ballot in every state and force his immediate resignation!
You and yours will truly deserve what will surely come from your continued inaction or your conscious complicity! Remember that “we the people’ forced Nixon out of office and sent multiple people to jail for a commonplace illegal political action. The Usurper Obama , his appointed horde, and his enablers are guilty of multiple acts of high treason! Shouldn’t our actions and their ultimate punishment be commensurate with their crimes!

Patriots Are Talking : About What they Like and Don't Like

Who would have ever guessed the Supreme Court would hold a fund raiser for Mitt Romney? 
I confess, Mitt was not my first choice. I wanted Cain or Gingrich, in that order. However, Mitt has come out to be the nominee and we need to rally around him - - - then hold his feet to the fire to keep the promises he makes to us. He ...can't walk on water and neither can any of us; however, I believe he loves America. We know he is not a Muslim, his birth certificate is authentic; he vacations on his money, not ours; and his wife dresses appropriately to be seen in the White House. I also don't believe other countries will laugh at him, nor will he apologize for America! 
 by Karen Holt

June 30, 2012

The Value of American Citizenship

By Kyle Becker

The Supreme Court's mostly adverse decision on Arizona's immigration law was stark in the latitude it granted to the federal government to neglect enforcement of immigration and naturalization law. As the case yielded discretion to the executive branch to discern when it is desirable to deport "illegal" immigrants (if there are such persons any longer), we have become less a nation of laws and more a nation of men.

June 30, 2012

A Surgeon Cuts to the Heart of the ObamaCare Nightmare

By Stella Paul

The day the Supreme Court ruled in favor of ObamaCare, a friend called me. He's an extremely dedicated, much-loved surgeon, and he was frustrated and livid in equal measure.
"I've actually had a lot of experience working in all different types of environments," he began. "I've worked in a government-run socialized medical care system, and I saw the waste and inefficiency.


What is Happening at Medjugorje?

                    What is Happening at Medjugorje?

 by Howard Kainz

Last week I received a mailing from Caritas of Birmingham, in Sterret, Alabama. It was an invitation to come to the four-storey Tabernacle of our Lady’s Messages at Caritas, where a visionary, Marija Pavlovic Lunetti, is slated to receive five messages and apparitions during the 2012 gathering from July 1 to July 5.

Caritas is a group devoted to the Medjugorje Marian apparitions in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is a continuation of international devotional interest in a phenomenon beginning on June 24, 1981, when six young people said they had received apparitions from the “Gospa” (Madonna). I’m not sure how we got on to their mailing list. Possibly a relative submitted our name and address.

The Caritas group, however, is considered schismatic by the visionaries and priests at the pilgrimage center, in a part of what used to be Yugoslavia. On the “official” Medjugorje website we are warned that Caritas of Birmingham is a cult, something like a religious business, not approved.

But one of the visionaries, Marija, still comes regularly to Caritas in Birmingham, contributing to a local, in-house schism of an international cult that bespeaks a larger and ongoing schism with orthodox Catholicism.

Numerous books have been written on Medjugorje, most of them favorable. But most of the pro-Medjugorje books ignore the early tapes made by Fr. Cuvalo and Fr. Zovko, on the days immediately following the apparitions, which began on June 24, 1981; they are based on interviews recorded over a year after the original visions, and incorporated in the 1985 book, A Thousand Encounters with the Blessed Virgin Mary in Medjugorje. And none of them take into account the first tape made by Fr. Cuvalo before Fr. Zovko took over the taping of interviews with the visionaries.

But Donal Foley’s book, Medjugorje Revisited: 30 years of Visions or Religious Fraud? does take into account early tapes as well as later sources, brings out some crucial differences in the early and later transcripts, and leads the reflective reader to serious doubts about what is really happening at this pilgrimage center.

Compared to approved apparitions of the Blessed Virgin, for example, at Lourdes and at Fatima, the alleged apparitions at Medjugorje contain numerous anomalous aspects:

In the initial appearances, the Gospa appears out of a cloud of light which gradually takes on the image of a young woman in her late teens. She has blue eyes and is wearing a gray dress. She looks like she is holding “something like a baby” in her arms, but none of the features of the baby can be seen. Her hands are shaking. She laughs. The visionaries are able to touch and kiss her, but her vestments are “steel to the touch.” When a lady doctor asked if she could touch her also, the Gospa agreed, but complained about “unbelieving Judases.”

Fr. René Laurentin, a supporter of Medjugorje, in his Chronological Corpus of the Messages, changed this obvious blooper to “doubting Thomases.”

In the first few years following the apparitions, around thirty different apparition places were chosen, with the Gospa appearing often as if “on cue.” Some of the messages, even in our open-minded era, would be categorized as not just heterodox, but heretical. We hear that all religions are equal (“Before God all the faiths are identical. God governs them like a king in his kingdom.”) All sufferings are equal in hell; and Mirjana quotes the Gospa as telling her that people begin feeling comfortable in hell. As regards the afterlife, those who go to heaven after death “are present with the soul and the body.” When the Madonna is asked about the title, “Mediatrix of all graces,” she replies, “I do not dispose of all graces.”

Although Medjugorje claims to be a continuation of Fatima and the “last appearance of Jesus or Mary on earth,” there is strangely no exhortation to the devotion of the Five First Saturdays, which Our Lady of Fatima asked for in reparation for the five kinds of offenses and blasphemies against the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Unlike the approved apparitions, the visionaries at Medjugorje have been consistently disobedient to local bishops.

  • December 19, 1981, Vicka in her Notebook writes that their bishop, Pavao Zanic, was “the more guilty party” in conflict with the Franciscans, and the Gospa defended the Franciscans who were disobeying the bishop’s order to share their parish with secular clergy.
  • June 21, 1983, in a letter the visionary Ivan said that the Gospa demanded the Bishop’s “immediate conversion” and that he should stop emphasizing the “negative side”– otherwise she and her Son would punish him.
  • February 3, 1985 the Gospa told three visionaries that Fr. Barbaric, whose removal was requested by the bishop, should stay.

According to the German theologian, Manfred Hauke, the Gospa urged disobedience thirteen times to Bishop Zanic, who had originally been inclined favorably to the apparitions.

Pilgrims to Medjugorje occasionally report signs, such as the appearance of a gold tint on the chains of their rosaries, and the phenomenon of a “dance of the sun,” in which the sun, seen by the naked eye without causing harm, proceeds up and down in a yo-yo manner, emitting various colors. The latter is obviously construed as a reenactment of the famous “miracle of the sun” at Fatima, on October 13, 1917. “Healing” miracles have been reported, but none have been tested by experts and verified.

On June 29, 1981, the Gospa announced that a four-year-old boy would be healed, but this never happened. A sign from heaven predicted by the visionaries for August 17, 1981, never materialized. Ivan, in a signed statement, on May 9, 1982, said that a sign would appear in six months – a “huge shrine in Medjugorje” in memory of the Gospa’s apparitions. But this also never materialized. In 1983 the visionaries said a “visible sign” would be left at Medjugorje in perpetuity. But this has not happened.

In September, 1981, the prophecy that “Germany and the U.S. will be destroyed,…the Pope will be exiled to Turkey,” never took place. Nor did peace for Yugoslavia predicted by the Gospa during the 80s. Yugoslavia broke up during the Bosnian war, 1992-95, leading to the violent separation of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina from Serbia.

The visionaries allege that they have received secrets from the Gospa. Jakov Colo, Ivan Dragicevic and Ivanka Ivankovic have each received nine, while the others have received all ten. Only one of the secrets has been revealed by the visionaries: Namely, the Gospa’s promise of a “visible sign,” mentioned above.

On June 30, 1981, the Gospa said that her appearances would end in three days, but they went on without interruption. As of 2004, over 33,000 messages had been delivered by the Gospa. The number now is around 40,000. Three of the visionaries, Ivan, Vicka and Marija, still have daily visions. We are dealing with a Madonna who, in contrast with the authorized apparitions, has become extremely talkative. If we weren’t referring to heavenly personages, the category of “personality change” would suggest itself.

Numerous attempts have been made to subject the visionaries to testing by experts. However, when experts came from various countries in 1984, 1987, 1988, 1992 and 1995, to test the visionaries, they either claimed to be sick, or that Our Lady had “paused” in her appearances, or they simply did not cooperate.

During the tests on October 6-7, 1984, of the visionaries during ecstasy, Dr. Philippot, an ophthalmologist, found that the pupil of the visionaries did react to light. Once, when the visionaries were being filmed during ecstasy, a skeptical pilgrim made movements with his two fingers towards the eyes of Vicka in ecstasy, and she reacted by moving her head back; later she explained that this was because she thought the Blessed Virgin was about to drop the baby Jesus, and she wanted to keep him from falling.

Both Pavao Zanic and Ratko Perić, the bishops who have had jurisdiction over Medjugorje since 1981, have concluded that the apparitions are not of supernatural origin. Nineteen out of 20 bishops in the Yugoslav Episcopal Conference in 1991 issued the Zadar declaration: “On the basis of investigation up till now, it cannot be established that one is dealing with supernatural apparitions and revelations.”

In 1884, Pope Leo XIII had a vision in which he listened to a dialogue taking place between God and Satan. Satan boasted that he could destroy the Church, if only God would remove some of the restraints on his power and give him a hundred years. God answered, “So be it,” causing the Pope, fearful for the coming trials of the Church, to compose the prayer for protection to St. Michael, recited at the end of Mass until 1964.

Is it conceivable that starting in 1981, the devil, looking over his victories and concerned that his time might be coming to an end, might look to subvert the Church with something like a pretend-Madonna? Jesus warned us (Mt. 24:24, Mk. 13:22) that in the final days prophets would arise with signs and wonders, and would be able to deceive even the elect.

For the Spirit of Evil, with no interest in goodness or holiness, it would have to be “out of character” to appear as the holy Woman whom he hates, and whose foot (Genesis 3:15) will finally crush his head. On the other hand, what a tremendous victory it would be to get the devotion of the faithful, drawing them in subtle ways to the devil’s own “religious reeducation” project.

Mistakes might be made, of course. For example, in 1982, one of Mirjana’s expected visions of the Gospa turned out to be the devil, until it changed into the Madonna, apologizing and telling her that this was just a trial. And on August 2, 1981, the Gospa allowed the people present to come and touch her, but turned black; Marija explained that this was because sinners were touching her, and they should go to confession.

Medjugorje is frequently touted as a continuation of Fatima. At Fatima, Our Lady promised that eventually, through the power of the rosary and fulfillment of her request of Mass attendance on five first Saturdays, her Immaculate Heart would eventually triumph and world peace would ensue. This might coincide with the end of the time given to the devil. From the devil’s viewpoint, might not a distraction be in order? Some traditional piety, with prayer and fasting, and a touch of “New Age” spirituality? If Medjugorje were approved officially by the Church, the devil’s feared triumph of Mary’s Immaculate Heart might be staved off indefinitely.

Jesus told us to judge trees by their “fruits.” In Medjugorje, numerous conversions have been reported, Catholics returning to the sacraments after many years, etc. But the main fruit, and the fruit closest to the heart of the devil, has been disobedience. Original sin came into the world not through lust or greed or murder, but through disobedience; and the redemption took place through the obedience of Jesus (Romans 5:19) and the fiat of his mother. In Medjugorje, we are confronted with the counterintuitive phenomenon of the Madonna encouraging disobedience to the successors of the Apostles, and disobedience of some Franciscans to Vatican directives.

Other “fruits” include the massacres and mutilations that took place from 1991 to 1992 when, because of the war, three groups involved in the pilgrimage trade, losing business, turned on each other, resulting in an estimated 80-140 deaths and 600 expulsions; and the revocation of faculties or laicization of Frs. Zovko and Vlasic, guides of the visionaries accused of sexual infractions. Nine Franciscans were also expelled from the order and a divinis. According to historian Michael Sells, religious nationalists in Medjugorje “cleansed” non-Catholics, destroying an Orthodox monastery and murdering priests and monks. Bishop Perić was kidnapped on April 2, 1994, in retaliation for his criticisms of unauthorized activities in Medjugorje, and released only when the Mayor of Mostar intervened with UN troops.

And so what are we to conclude? Bishop Perić’s statement in 1997 still seems to be the most relevant:

On the basis of the serious study of the case by 30 [academics], on my episcopal experience of five years in the Diocese, on the scandalous disobedience that surrounds the phenomenon, on the lies that are at times put into the mouth of the “Madonna,” on the unusual repetition of “messages” for over 16 years, on the strange way that the “spiritual directors”of the so-called “visionaries” accompany them throughout the world making propaganda of them, on the practice that the “Madonna” appears at the “fiat” (let her come!) of the “visionaries,” my conviction and position is not only non constat de supernaturalitate (“no evidence of the supernatural”) but also the other formula constat de non supernaturalitate (“evidence of the non-supernatural character”) of the apparitions or revelations of Medjugorje.

Faith + Works = Holiness

Faith + Works = Holiness

St. Irenaeus
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
St. Dominic Church, NOLA

Not everyone who says, “'Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of heaven.” Not everyone who attends daily Mass, recites the rosary, belongs to the altar guild, or serves as a communion minister will enter the Kingdom. Not everyone who wears a scapular, prays the Daily Office, gives lots of money to the Church, or wears a religious habit will enter the Kingdom. But Lord, didn't we follow the rules, keep our noses more or less clean, vote for the right politicians, and stayed awake during the Sunday homilies? But Lord, didn't we help out at the homeless shelter, pray in front of the abortion clinic, report liturgical abuses, and wash the altar linens? I solemnly declare to you, “I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers.” Evildoers?! OK, maybe we weren't the holiest Catholics in the parish. . .but we never did evil! How can you call us “evildoers”? Your good works were built on the sands of publicity not on the rock solid foundation of conversion, repentance, fraternal love, and a commitment to the pursuit of holiness. Even an evildoer will perform good works if he thinks that doing so will make him look good. What an evildoer will not do is turn to the Lord in love and beg to be transformed!
What we have in our gospel reading this evening is the classic problem of figuring out how to balance Works with Faith. Historically, Catholics have favored good works over faith, believing that good works can only come from a faithful soul. Protestants have tended to favor faith over good works, believing that a faithful soul will perform good works. Catholics want to see faith working in the world. Protestants want to see works grounded in faith. We know—as do our Protestant brothers and sisters—that ultimately both faith and works are required for holiness. Where we place the emphasis, however, very often determines how fervently we believe and how hard we work. What does Jesus want from us as his disciples? He wants both fervent faith and hard work. He wants it all; or rather, he wants all of us. All of each one of us. He wants us to cry out, “Lord, Lord!” and he wants us to care for the least of his among us. He wants us to love deeply, passionately, and without limits. And he wants that love to manifest in the world through our words, thought, deeds, and emotions. In other words, he wants us to come to him with a whole heart and a whole mind, undivided, and sharply focused on both speaking his Word and doing his Word. Faith without works is useless. Works without faith is empty

Our rock solid foundation for balancing faith and works is the prophetic witness of Christ himself, “Everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock.” We know the importance of a solid foundation! And maybe a few feet of elevation as well. When the hurricanes come, we want our homes to stand up to the might of the storm. Likewise with our pursuit of holiness. The stronger our foundation in faith, the tougher our witness will be when the storm hits. Good works performed for show are easily washed away. Faith kept hidden away will not be missed. So, the question is: why do we perform the good works we do? How do we show our faith? If we are working in the world for the greater glory of God, then our works naturally demonstrate a profound faith. However, a profound faith kept private can never be a proper witness. If you will give the Lord all that he wants, you will give him all you have and are—heart, mind, body, soul, everything that was first given to you.

Roberts Too Clever By Half

On Thursday morning, in the most anticipated Supreme Courtrulingin recent American history, Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the Court's four liberal Justices to uphold Obamacare's "individual mandate" as a tax, even while Roberts agreed with the four conservative members of the Court that the mandate would be unconstitutional if considered only based on the Commerce Clause.
The liberal mass media began immediate preening for their president, with the New York Times calling the ruling a "victory for Obama," the Washington Post proclaiming "a win for Obama today," and MSNBC announcing "a dramatic victory."
They may be right, but the decision may equally turn out to be a pyrrhic victory for President Obama, motivating conservatives across the country and pushing independent voters along with skeptical conservatives and libertarians fully into the arms of Mitt Romney.
Since the Court found the mandate constitutional (despite an embarrassing headline by CNN to the contrary), it rendered moot challenges to other important aspects of the Act, including guaranteed issue and community rating (requiring insurance companies to issue insurance to everyone regardless of pre-existing conditions and without considering most factors specific to a given applicant other than age and tobacco use).  Cont. Reading

Friday, June 29, 2012

Has the Supreme Court Opened Pandora’s Box With Individual Mandate Ruling?

As you all know by now, yesterday the United States Supreme Court voted 5-4 to uphold the individual mandate along with most of the rest of President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act. But I can’t help but wonder if their ruling hasn’t opened up Pandora’s Box for future government mandates.

The Obama administration had argued before the high court that the individual mandate was constitutional because they had the authority to control interstate commerce. The court disagreed with that argument, but did state that the individual mandate was constitutional because the fine for not having health insurance was being handled as a tax by the IRS and Congress does have the power to levy taxes on the people.
In other words, Congress can now force Americans to purchase or do practically anything they want by placing the penalty for failure to comply to be in the form of a tax collected by the IRS.
For example, Congress could mandate that everyone purchase American made vehicles and failure to comply will result in a vehicle penalty tax for every year you own the foreign made vehicle. Or they could mandate that anyone owning a firearm of any type will pay an annual firearms tax as long they own the weapon.  Cont. Reading

Nullified: Obama Says It’s Not a Tax Increase – Roberts Says It Is

Justice Roberts argued that the healthcare bill is constitutional if it operates as a tax. President Obama assured us that it “absolutely not a tax increase.” As a Supreme Justice, with a research staff at his disposal, why didn’t Justice Roberts mention this in his decision? It seems to me that the ruling of the court is nullified because they ruled on a non-existent bill, one that was NOT to be a tax increase.
On September 20th, 2009, George Stephanopoulos interviewed President Obama about the Health Care Reform Bill. Here’s how the questioning began: “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money and fining them if they don’t. How is that not a tax increase?”

  Cont. Reading

Justice Roberts May Have Done Us a Big Favor

The Roberts Opinion: It's Not All Bad

By Kate Kicks,

John Roberts is not a “traitor to his philosophy.” He is not a liberal. He is, above all else, a very strict originalist, and the Chief Justice of a Court that is acutely aware – and wary – of its role in politics. Understand that his opinion, though certainly not ideal for the Right, contains more good news for conservatives in its pages than it does on its face.
So let’s take a look at his surprising opinion – the controlling opinion, as it’s called, which sets precedent and “say[s] what the law is,” as Marshall said so long ago.
The Good News
First: let’s give credit where it’s due. Roberts made it abundantly clear that he’s not a fan of the actual policy. Moreover, he shifted responsibility for this policy back to the American people, and revealed his respect for the separation of powers:
Cont. Reading

Justice Roberts May Have Done Us a Big Favor

The following is excerpted from an article written by Kate Hicks

Over, and over, and over, President Obama assured us that this was not a tax. He was not raising taxes on the middle class (that’s what the Republicans were doing, remember?). Nope, . . you raised our taxes [and on the people who can’t afford it. You did it on the backs of the poor.] Politically, that’s going to prove troublesome for Obama this fall, and in a much more substantial way than having his “signature legislative accomplishment” overturned altogether.

For one, Roberts took away Obama’s ability to campaign against the Court. They upheld his law; he can’t do as he did after Citizens United and construe the ACA ruling as a massively political attack on the little guy and his uninsured plight. He has nothing to blame on the Justices. All they did was recharacterize the “penalty” as constitutional under the taxing power. Roberts robbed Obama of a scapegoat, and stuck Obama with an unpopular law in an election year. Ouch.  Cont. Reading

What Aaron Sorkin Gets Wrong About America

 Perhaps next time Mr. Sorkin looks up from his keyboard, he will pick up a newspaper and note that the U.S., even in times as trying as these, is still a nation that has time for the downtrodden, the dispossessed and the forsaken

Aaron Sorkin is something like the poet laureate of American television (though, in the debased world of American popular culture, that’s less of an honorific than it sounds). Sorkin, who has also scripted such films as A Few Good Men, The American President, The Social Network and Moneyball, is responsible for two of the most celebrated TV series of recent vintage, ABC’s critically acclaimed (but lightly viewed) Sports Night and NBC’s White House-centered megahit The West Wing.
There are two hallmarks to his style: lyrical, fast-paced, whip-smart dialogue and unapologetic, sometimes militant liberalism.
To Sorkin’s credit, his undeniable gifts as a writer have often been sufficient to make even conservative viewers tolerate the reflexive ideology that suffuses his work. Not so, however, in The Newsroom, his new series chronicling an anodyne television news anchor who decides mid-career to rebrand himself as a Keith Olbermann-style journalistic vigilante.

In the show’s pilot, which aired on HBO last weekend, anchor Will McAvoy (played by Jeff Daniels), has his moment of truth during a journalism panel at Northwestern University where, in rejecting the premise of a college student’s question about what makes America the greatest county on earth, he drops the aw shucks persona and responds with an anti-American rant punctuated by this aside to a conservative co-panelist:  Cont. Reading

ObamaCare Takeaway: A Net Win Constitutionally

Years from now, here is the proposition for which law students will study this week’s Supreme Court ObamaCare decision: Federal power is not unlimited under the commerce clause after all.
Granted, the United States Supreme Court engaged in a contortion worthy of Cirque de Soleil in upholding ObamaCare’s individual mandate as a “tax,” despite the fact that Obama himself denied it was a tax and Congress did not offer it as such.
In a September 20, 2009 interview with ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos, Barack Obama stubbornly and unequivocally denied that ObamaCare’s individual mandate was a “tax”:
George Stephanopoulos: That may be, but it’s still a tax increase.
Barack Obama: No. That’s not true, George. The – for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. Cont. Reading 

What next ???

ObamaCare Ruling: Pure Fraud and No Due Process

Led by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court decided that Americans have no right to due process. Indeed, the Court not only upheld a fraud perpetrated on the public — it became a willing participant.
The assessment charged for failure to comply with ObamaCare’s “individual mandate,” which requires Americans to purchase health insurance, was presented to the country by the administration and the Democratic Congress as a penalty assessed for lawlessness — i.e., for refusing to honor this new legal requirement. It was strenuously denied by proponents that they were raising taxes.
The Obama administration, in particular, was adamant that the assessment was a penalty, not a tax: the president himself indignantly objected to a suggestion to the contrary in an ABC News interview with George Stephanopoulos. Obama officials also vigorously maintained that there had been no violation of the president’s oft-repeated campaign pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. Moreover, as stingingly noted in the joint dissenting opinion of Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito, the Democratic majority in Congress rejected an earlier version of the bill that became ObamaCare precisely because it imposed a tax — lawmakers intentionally substituted a mandate with a penalty for failure to comply so they could continue to contend that no one’s taxes were being raised. Cont. Reading