Saturday, March 31, 2012

Obamas Inner Lenin Invoked In Desperate Re-Election Strategy
Monty Pelerin ~ EconomicNoise.com
It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master. Ayn Rand 
Perhaps the forces that now menace freedom are too strong to be resisted for very long. It is still our duty to do whatever we can to resist them. Aldous Huxley

Matters are becoming especially nasty in US politics as we approach a seminal election.

The country is irreconcilably divided between hard-core liberals and conservatives. Fortunately, there are enough independents that neither hard-core can muster a majority without modifying, to various degrees, their views. At least that is the way that elections worked before this one.

President Obama sees within his reach his dream of transforming the country. Unfortunately for Obama, his failures are apparent to growing numbers of citizens, many of whom supported him the first time around and are now suffering “buyers remorse.”

He is so close to what he planned, yet it is slipping away and his desperation is showing. Apparently in an effort to prevent this from happening, he is willing to employ his community organizer skills on a national level. These Marxist-Leninist-Alinsky tools were not planned to be unveiled until after his re-election. Now that this occurrence is at risk, he appears to be willing to use them as tools for re-election. This strategy reflects either desperation or misjudgment.

What do I mean by Marxist-Leninist-Alinsky tools? Quite simply, they are practical tools designed to accomplish an objective without regard to the legality or morality of the means. Obama has committed all out to an “ends justifies the means” campaign. Here, for example, are instructions from Lenin on power:
Comrades! The insurrection of five kulak districts should be pitilessly suppressed. …
1. Hang (and make sure that the hanging takes place in full view of the people) no fewer than one hundred known landlords, rich men, bloodsuckers.
2. Publish their names.
3. Seize all their grain from them.
4. Designate hostages in accordance with yesterday’s telegram.
Do it in such a fashion that for hundreds of kilometres around the people might see, tremble, know, shout: “they are strangling, and will strangle to death, the bloodsucking kulaks”.
Telegraph receipt and implementation.
Yours, Lenin.
This telegraph appeared in an article by James Lewis on American Thinker. Mr. Lewis in his article likens current Democrat behavior to that of Lenin. He does not suggest that hanging is a part of that strategy, although other thug-like behavior is. When one’s pedigree includes the likes of Marx, Alinsky, Ayers and others of that ilk, thug behavior as a part of politics is the norm.
The bizarre and nearly unprecedented recent political behavior on the part of the Obama Administration results from the recognition that the election is slipping away. Some of the headwinds Mr. Obama faces are the following:
  • The economy is not improving (nor will it before the election).
  • Government stimulus is increasingly seen as political favoritism and a waste of taxpayer money.
  • Government continues to spend money that it doesn’t have, leading the nation closer to bankruptcy.
  • Voters understand that this spending has mortgaged the future of their children and grandchildren and may destroy the country.
  • The centerpiece of Obama’s economic program, green energy initiatives, produced no new energy and a track record of failing companies. It was nothing more than political payoffs to Democrat supporters.
  • Gas prices are at record levels and expected to soar upward from here while Obama plays politics with an important pipeline.
  • President Obama’s Democrat-controlled Senate refused to pass his requested tax hikes on oil companies.
  • The Supreme Court has exposed Obama’s crowning domestic achievement, ObamaCare, for its legal absurdities (which does not mean they will overrule it). The CBO estimates have more than doubled, casting doubt on the integrity of the President’s cost estimates.
  • President Obama’s proposed budget did not garner one Democrat vote in the House.
Mr. Obama has no achievement to run on and many negatives to overcome. Furthermore, his once perceived mystical qualities are no more. Most of what he has done has been a failure. Everything he has touched has become worse.

There is no way to intellectually defend his failed policies, but then that holds for much of liberalism in general. Liberalism is not based on reason but on “caring.” If you are not liberal, then you must be mean and uncaring. But what happens when you have been in charge and gotten all of your programs put in place and they don’t work? Under such circumstances it is hard to blame others for the problems. That is precisely the quandary in which Obama finds himself.

He cannot be re-elected running on his pitiful record. There is no way to defend it theoretically or empirically. “Caring” is not an asset when incompetence overrides prevails. The only strategy left is the Leninist-Marxist politics of destruction and coercion. Hence, we see the beginnings of classic mob politics, madness passing off as idealist causes or movements. We saw it when Obama tacitly or overtly (take your pick) approved of the Occupy Wall Street mobs. Before that we saw the antagonism surface when Obama inserted himself on the side of Henry Louis Gates against the Boston Police Department even when he had no knowledge of what had transpired. Now we a similar insertion into the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin shooting.

The facts of this case were not known when the great ambulance chasers of the race industry (Sharpton and Jackson) began to spin their version of what had happened. (As more information leaks out, this duo appears to be as unreliable as ever.) That President Obama involved himself and encouraged this racial unrest is downright shameful and dangerous. He jumped in despite any knowledge of what had happened yet he remained conspicuously silent when the Black Panthers placed a bounty on Zimmerman, the alleged shooter.

Race-baiting by the country’s premier race pimps who pose as reverends is bad enough. It is disgusting and dangerous when the similar taking of sides occurs from the highest office in the land. The President is expected to adhere to the law and not encourage what appears to be misguided vigilante justice.

The position of President Obama is unprecedented. It demonstrates extreme misjudgment or an attempt to capitalize politically by pandering to a set of his constituents. Regardless, it is not a good sign for the country. Doug Ross offers the best advice for the country:
All Americans — citizens of every race, creed, religion and color — should reject the Democrat Party and its vicious marketing of racial hatred.
Protein Wisdom opines on Obama’s blatant practice of identity politics:
That our President and members of his party have not only allowed the racial demagoguery to continue, but have in fact participated in it (and intend to extend its rhetorical reach), should be a chilling reminder that — even in the most sophisticated societies, under the stewardship of the most enlightened laws — the controls we place on government are, in the end, merely words. Once an anti-foundationalist ideological movement like the progressive left has decided it no longer has to abide by legal restraints should the context arise where they are “morally bound” to “resist” laws — that is, once they declare that law is man-made and thus contingent and not binding in particular contexts of their choosing — there is nothing left but force and the will to power, which become the de facto ruling conditions of society (albeit, these will be disguised and qualified with propaganda attempts to hide their baser imulses under the rubric of “social justice” and “civil disobedience, ” etc.).
The President’s re-election effort, despite compliant support from the media and the Federal Reserve, appears to be in serious trouble. To most, the re-election is all he is interested in and he will stop at nothing in that pursuit. This situation is increasingly recognized by Democrats who see him as willing to sacrifice his own party to achieve his personal objectives. Look for more Democrats to decide the best way to protect their own careers is to distance themselves from this failed president.

It appears as though mob tactics may be the only viable strategy for this President. When one is unable to defend one’s record either theoretically or empirically, what else is left? You can try to buy votes by playing Santa Claus but the government is out of money and that would only anger the electorate more. In this position, you either recognize that you have failed or you resort to guerrilla politics. President Obama’s ego and arrogance does not allow the former, so brace yourself for a “scorched earth” election unlike anything seen in our lifetimes.
Protein Wisdom describes the point at which the country has reached:
We either fight back or we don’t. But the days of sitting quiet and hoping it all blows over are no longer a legitimate option. Because that maneuver has led to a kind of tacit complicity, and we have, as a nation, reached the tipping point where, if we don’t push back now, we will find ourselves living in democratic despotism — without the recourse of a stable set of laws to save us from the will of a political consensus born of propaganda, misinformation, intellectual laziness, and the deconstruction of every last tenet of classical liberalism institutionalized at our founding and framing.
This election will likely be a preview of what it will be like to live in a Banana Republic with no Rule of Law.

A View From Israel: The end game

Palestinian Land Day has little to do with Palestinian land.

Child throws stone during Land Day protest
Photo by: Marc Israel Sellem
 
To Palestinians everywhere and their supporters, Palestinian Land Day is marked on March 30 in commemoration of the same date in 1976 when Israeli forces shot and killed Palestinians protesting against what they considered to be Israel’s theft of Palestinian land in the Galilee.

A Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) global day of action is also taking place around the world today as anti-Israel activists seek to delegitimize the state.

Another event, the Global March to Al-Quds, is taking place today as activists in other countries “approach” Jerusalem.

On Monday, Said Yakin, one of the organizers of the march, ridiculously told The Jerusalem Post, “We believe that the international community has failed as it has not managed to force Israel to stop the Judaization of Jerusalem, the settlements and the separation fence.”

It is unfortunate that the path the Palestinians have taken to advance their cause is by attacking Israel. They should have adopted a positive approach, such as demonstrating how their future state could contribute to the global community.

PRO-PALESTINIAN supporters have clearly been duped into thinking they are fighting to free Palestinians from the chains of Israeli oppression. They naively believe a Palestinian state would act as a moral beacon for the rights of women and gays and for basic freedoms.

It appears to have never occurred to the thousands of activists marching on Israel’s borders that a Palestinian state would represent an absolute threat to those who today enjoy basic freedoms and quality of life thanks to Israel.

Arabs in Israel have more freedom than Arabs have in Arab countries.

And for those who believe that Palestinians never had a chance to determine their own fate, a mere glance at historical records would reveal numerous instances of Arab refusal to establish a Palestinian state.

Palestinians and their supporters continue to reject the Jewish historic link to the land, believing that the West Bank has always been strictly Palestinian.

In reality, much of the land had been the property of the Turkish government until it was passed on to the British Mandate government.

The Palestinian rejection of numerous overtures to establish a state on even part of the land they claim as theirs weakens their argument.

A nation so desperate to have a state of its own would surely accept whatever is available and use it as a means to further its aspirations.

Instead, years of Palestinian rejectionism has resulted in a political and diplomatic deadlock for which there appears to be no immediate solution.

Most Israelis and Jews worldwide continue to maintain that there exists a Jewish historic connection to the land, yet the focus today is on the future rather than the past.

In contrast, the Palestinians and their supporters focus on the Nakba, an annual day of commemoration of Arab displacement that followed the Israeli Declaration of Independence in 1948, and the Naksa, the annual day of commemoration for the Palestinian people of the displacement that accompanied Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six Day War. Their focus is on the past and its associated grievances.

An important point conveniently ignored by Palestinians is the fact that many Jewish refugees from Arab lands were stripped of their property and possessions in the countries from which they were forced to flee.

The Palestinian approach in fighting for their cause and building statehood does nothing to promote coexistence and understanding.

Today the Palestinians are preparing the next generation for war – not peaceful relations with Jews.

FOR YEARS, Jews have experienced terror as a result of anti-Semitism, hatred and radical indoctrination.

Ten years ago, Binyamin Netanyahu penned an article on the front page of the Post in response to the Passover Massacre that took place when a suicide bomber blew himself up in Netanya’s Park Hotel dining room, killing 30 Jews who were conducting their Seder.

He wrote, “What is absolutely clear is that we cannot continue, even for one more day, on a path of indecision, without a goal or a policy. We must do what any nation in our position would do: stop bickering among ourselves, fight the war that has been forced upon us, and vanquish an enemy who is determined to annihilate us.”

Palestinian Land Day has less to do with Palestinian land than it does with the intent to erase the Jewish presence on land that always held historical significance to the Jewish people.

By  


Prosectors are shifting their focus to warrantless cell-tower locational tracking of suspects in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling that law enforcement should acquire probable-cause warrants from judges to affix GPS devices to vehicles and monitor their every move, according to court records.

The change of strategy comes in the case the justices decided in January, when it reversed the life sentence of a District of Columbia area drug dealer, Antoine Jones, who was the subject of 28 days of warrantless GPS surveillance via a device the FBI secretly attached to his vehicle without a warrant. In the wake of Jones’ decision, the FBI has pulled the plug on 3,000 GPS tracking devices.

In a Friday filing in pre-trial proceedings of Jones retrial, Jones attorney’ said the government has five months worth of a different kind of locational tracking information on his client: So-called cell-site information, obtained without a warrant, chronicling where Jones was when he made and received mobile phone calls in 2005.

“In this case, the government seeks to do with cell site data what it cannot do with the suppressed GPS data,” attorney Eduardo Balarezo wrote (.pdf) U.S. District Judge Ellen Huvelle.

Balarezo added:
The government has produced material obtained through court orders for the relevant cellular telephone numbers. Upon information and belief, now that the illegally obtained GPS data cannot be used as evidence in this case, the government will seek to introduce cell site data in its place in an attempt to demonstrate Mr. Jones’ movements and whereabouts during relevant times. Mr. Jones submits that the government obtained the cell site data in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and therefore it must be suppressed.
Just as the lower courts were mixed on whether the police could secretly affix a GPS device on a suspect’s car without a warrant, the same is now true about whether a probable-cause warrant is required to obtain so-called cell-site data.

A lower court judge in the Jones case had authorized the five months of the cell-site data without probable cause, based on government assertions that the data was “relevant and material” to an investigation.

“Knowing the location of the trafficker when such telephone calls are made will assist law enforcement in discovering the location of the premises in which the trafficker maintains his supply narcotics, paraphernalia used in narcotics trafficking such as cutting and packaging materials, and other evident of illegal narcotics trafficking, including records and financial information,” the government wrote in 2005, when requesting Jones’ cell-site data.

That cell-site information was not introduced at trial, as the authorities used the GPS data for the same function.

The Supreme Court tossed that GPS data, along with Jones’ conviction, on January 23.

The justices agreed to decide Jones’ case in a bid to settle conflicting lower-court decisions — some of which ruled a warrant was necessary, while others found the government had unchecked GPS surveillance powers.

“We hold that the government’s installation of a GPS device on a target’s vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements, constitutes a ‘search,’” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the five-justice majority.

The government has maintained in a different case on appeal that cell-site data is distinguishable from GPS-derived data. District of Columbia prosecutors are expected to lodge their papers on the issue by April 6 in the Jones case.

Among other things, the government maintains Americans have no expectation of privacy of such cell-site records because they are “in the possession of a third party” (.pdf) — the mobile phone companies. What’s more, the authorities maintain that the cell site data is not as precise as GPS tracking and, “there is no trespass or physical intrusion on a customer’s cell phone when the government obtains historical cell-site records from a provider.”

In the Jones case, the Supreme Court agreed with an appeals court that Jones’ rights had been violated by the month-long warrantless attachment of a GPS device underneath his car. Scalia’s majority opinion, which was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor, said placing the device on the suspect’s car amounted to a search.

Petition calling for the immediate arrest of Barack Hussein Obama for TREASON !

http://www.change.org/petitions/to-the-house-and-senate-of-the-united-states-of-america-arrest-barack-hussein-obama-for-treason-now#

The Left’s Orwellian Censorship Campaign


George Orwell 2 SC The Left’s Orwellian Censorship Campaign
Liberal theologian William Ellery Channing once observed, “The cry has been that when war is declared, all opposition should be hushed. A sentiment more unworthy of a free country could hardly be propagated.”

War has indeed been declared. Channing’s contemporary liberal counterparts have declared a war for our culture. But while Channing presumably held to the oft-bandied supposition that “dissent is the highest form of patriotism,” today’s secular-progressive has no choice but to endeavor that “all opposition should be hushed.”

Liberals recognize that when arguing on the merits, they cannot prevail. Not only are their morally relative, redistributionist philosophies untenable and utopian, but they read the same polls demonstrating that reasonable people reject their ideas outright. In fact, Americans identify as conservative over liberal by a two-to-one margin. Even those who call themselves “moderate” lean conservative.

It makes sense. The “progressive” movement wars against natural law, pushes perpetually failed secular-socialist policies, and places — above constitutionally safeguarded individual liberty — thickheaded tenets of postmodern political correctness. Liberal elites demand tolerance for all things perverse and find intolerable all things righteous.

And so, the final, desperate act of the left-wing, lemon-hocking charlatan is to marginalize, smear, and ultimately shut down the competition. As a result, liberals obfuscate, propagandize, and strive to silence all dissent. They no longer even try to hide it.

The evidence of this calculated assault on free speech is overwhelming, but the most recent and high-profile examples include carefully orchestrated campaigns by three well-funded, interconnected, George Soros-linked organizations: Media Matters for America (MMFA); the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC); and the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD).

After years of trying to censor the conservative voice of Rush Limbaugh, for instance, the George Soros-funded Media Matters recently pulled out all the stops to get him booted from the airwaves.

The pretext was Limbaugh’s unfortunate word choice in describing Georgetown “reproductive justice” radical Sandra Fluke’s attempt to compel the Jesuit university to violate its own Catholic doctrine. Democrats held a mock hearing in the Capitol building wherein Fluke demanded that Georgetown underwrite her admitted fornication practices and fork out free birth control. Limbaugh said this made her sound like a “sl*t” and a “prostitute.”

The hard-left Media Matters pounced, rolling out a pre-packaged campaign against Limbaugh. It has targeted radio stations with ads and continues a floundering crusade to get Limbaugh’s radio sponsors to drop him. Ironically, this has resulted in a revenue increase for Limbaugh, and his already millions-strong listening audience has grown significantly.

Another example of this Orwellian censorship crusade involves the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center, an outfit that, until recent years, was viewed as a relatively credible civil rights organization.

Unfortunately, the SPLC has now cashed in most of its remaining political capital, taking the same cynical path as its fellow travelers over at Media Matters. The SPLC too has become little more than a mouthpiece for left-wing extremism.

In a “too cute by half” attempt to marginalize those who observe the traditional Judeo-Christian sexual ethic, or who embrace a constitutionalist view of government, the SPLC has moved from monitoring actual hate groups like the KKK and Neo-Nazis to slandering mainstream Christian and tea party organizations with that very same “SPLC-certified hate group” label. Indeed, in its promotional materials and on its website, the SPLC indiscriminately lumps well-respected, highly influential Christian organizations like the Family Research Council and the American Family Association together with domestic terrorist and white supremacist groups.

But the SPLC’s transparent guilt-by-false-association ploy has largely backfired. Whereas the strategy was intended to discourage media outlets from engaging these Christian groups, the scheme has, instead, had the unintended effect of significantly marginalizing the SPLC. You can only cry wolf so many times before people ignore you.

Finally, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has picked up where the SPLC left off. This radical homosexual pressure group recently ramped up its tried-and-true practice of employing the very outrage it purports to oppose: defamation.

One of the left’s favorite pejoratives is “McCarthyism,” yet liberals employ it — as they mean it — masterfully. In an effort to strong-arm mainstream media outlets — already sympathetic to their cause — into blacklisting, once and for all, conservative and Christian professionals who oppose liberal sexual identity politics, GLAAD has issued an enemies list of 36 top pro-family leaders and luminaries (a list upon which yours truly is most honored and humbled to be included).

Engaging a scheme eerily reminiscent of the former Soviet Union, GLAAD’s euphemistically and paradoxically tagged “Commentator Accountability Project” enlists fellow progressives to dutifully report on a designated website anytime a pundit identified on the blacklist appears in media.

Because “hate is not an expert opinion,” GLAAD then takes the reports and browbeats the offending media outlet into disengaging the “inappropriate” conservative pundit.

As feeble justification for its censorship efforts, GLAAD provides a list of out-of-context, cherry-picked quotes — some accurate, some not — the organization finds offensive. This is paint-by-numbers, Saul Alinsky style: Rule 12, “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.”

In their manuscript, “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the ’90s” (1989, Doubleday/Bantam), Harvard-educated marketing experts Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen meticulously laid out GLAAD’s approach — something they called “jamming.”

“Jamming” refers to the public smearing of Christians, traditionalists or anyone else who opposes left-wing sexual identity politics. “Jam homo-hatred [i.e., the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic] by linking it to Nazi horror,” wrote Kirk and Madsen (sound familiar, SPLC?). They go on to suggest that activists should try to associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of “Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered,” “hysterical backwoods preachers,” “menacing punks,” and “Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.’”

“In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector,” they wrote. “The purpose of victim imagery is to make straights feel very uncomfortable.”

George Orwell famously said: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” Today, conservative truth tellers are revolutionaries, fighting a guerilla war against an elitist establishment that blankets free speech with bunker-buster bombs.

Their motives are disgraceful, their tactics are cowardly, and their actions are un-American. But these things rank high among the progressive “book of virtues.”

Paraphrasing Voltaire, British author Evelyn Beatrice Hall wrote, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

It’s little wonder that today’s progressives reject this noble sentiment. The success of the left-wing socio-political agenda relies upon deliberate suppression of the reality-based conservative alternative.

Such is life for the pamphleteer of bad ideas.
Rush to judgment in Trayvon Martin case
By William J. Bennett, CNN Contributor
 
We should be guided by the facts when seeking justice, says William Bennett.
We should be guided by the facts when seeking justice, says William Bennett.
 
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • William Bennett: The death of Trayvon Martin is much more complex than first thought
  • Bennett: Some are not looking for justice, but are exploiting this terrible death
  • He says we don't know if Zimmerman is guilty or if racism was a motivating factor
  • Bennett: We should not rush to conclusions, and should be guided by the facts
(CNN) -- At first glance, the death of Trayvon Martin seemed to be a straightforward example of ugly, racial conflict resulting in the killing of an innocent black teenager by a white man, George Zimmerman. But now, as evidence continues to come forward, the facts seem much more complicated and the "obvious truth" premature.

At first, it was thought that Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain, was the aggressor because he followed Martin, got into a physical scuffle with him and shot him. But then, some witnesses claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman first, and the initial police report said that Zimmerman had blood on his nose and the back of his head after the incident. However, surveillance video footage that surfaced from the police station is leading to questions about the extent of Zimmerman's injuries.

To make matters more complex, we found out that in the past several months, Martin was suspended from school three times, once for the possession of drug paraphernalia.

The Miami Herald reported that in the gated community in which Zimmerman patrolled, there were eight burglaries, nine thefts and one shooting in the past year. Neighbors of Zimmerman described him as being passionate about security and credit him with thwarting and cracking some crimes. It was also revealed that Zimmerman identified himself as a Hispanic and was a registered Democrat.
William Bennett
William Bennett
 
The facts are confounding and inconclusive. But the tendency in the first days by some, including Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and an angry chorus of followers, was to rush to judgment with little regard for fairness, due process, or respect for the terrible death of a young man.
A mob mentality seems to be in the ascendancy.

The New Black Panther Party offered a bounty for Zimmerman's capture.

Jackson said that Martin's death shows how "blacks are under attack" and "targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business." Apart from the obvious incendiary nature of such comments, what in heaven's name could Jackson mean?

Spike Lee fueled the flames by tweeting Zimmerman's home address, which turned out to be the wrong address and resulted in an older couple fleeing from their home and fearing for their lives after threats and crowds outside their residence. Lee, realizing his folly, has since apologized to the couple.

These actions and words illustrate a problem in dealing with Martin's death: Many people are not on an impartial hunt for justice but are exploiting this crisis for personal or political gain and claiming that it is representative of larger societal problems.

MSNBC political analyst and Democratic fundraiser Karen Finney blamed Martin's death on Republicans. She said, "[Republican politicians] reinforce and validate old stereotypes that associate the poor and welfare as criminal behavior with African-Americans and people of color, calling us lazy, undeserving recipients of public assistance. In the case of Trayvon, those festering stereotypes had lethal consequences."

Martin's own mother, Sybrina Fulton, filed applications for trademarks on two of the popular phrases used at rallies for Martin, "I Am Trayvon" and "Justice for Trayvon." Democrats politicized the event with a hearing on Capitol Hill in which Martin's parents testified. Later, U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Illinois, wore a hoodie on the House floor.

It's clear that some of the people raising the most noise are trying to make this less about the horrible death of a young man and more about claims of racial resentment that may or may not exist.

The loudest voices should be particularly careful not to rush to conclusions. Remember the Duke lacrosse case, in which members of the team were accused of a gang rape. The public rushed to judgment long before the young men were eventually acquitted.

Zimmerman may or may not be guilty; there may or may not be racial motivations. We do not know yet. In the absence of complete evidence, inflammatory comments and belligerent reactions will not aid the search for justice. An angry crowd should not be in charge.

Lastly, why is there so much selective outrage on the part of so many?

The leading cause of death for black male teenagers is homicide, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Of all the black homicide victims, about 93% are killed by other black people. In 2011, nearly 85% of all people murdered in Philadelphia were black. Where are the marches and protests for these victims? Is it justice people seek or are they looking and even hoping for signs of white racism so they can exploit it?

In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, "Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust."

While we wait and respect due process of law, we should do our part to uplift human personality. We can do so by giving both Martin and Zimmerman a just weighing of the evidence, both in the court of law and public opinion. Let us not assume the worst of anybody but be guided by the facts.

WND EXCLUSIVE

High court justice: Obama birth certificate fishy

Says evidence raises 'serious questions about authenticity'

An Alabama State Supreme Court justice earlier this week agreed that findings suggesting Barack Obama presented a forged birth certificate to the nation “would raise serious questions about the [document's] authenticity” if presented as evidence in court.

Though the Alabama court denied a a petition filed by Hugh McInnish seeking to require an original copy of Obama’s birth certificate before the sitting president would be allowed on the state’s ballot in November, Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern.

Parker writes, “Mclnnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.”

The “certain documentation” Parker refers to is the findings of an investigation conducted by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

As WND reported, Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse announced there is probable cause indicating the documents released by the White House last April purported to be Obama’s original, long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration card are actually forgeries.

McInnus describes himself in his petition as “a person educated and experienced in … computer science,” and cites the work of Arpaio and WND articles repeatedly in his claim that the documents Obama has presented to public as proof of his eligibility to serve as president are “forgeries.”

In his concurrence, Parker describes McInnish’s petition as follows: “McInnish seeks from this court a writ of mandamus, directly ordering Beth Chapman, as secretary of state for the State of Alabama, ‘to demand that [President Barack Hussein] Obama cause a certified copy of his bona-fide birth certificate be delivered to her direct from the government official who is in charge of the record in which it is stored, and to make the receipt of such a prerequisite to his name being placed on the Alabama ballot for the … November 6, 2012, general election.’”

Parker, who also wrote a concurrence in another case arguing Roe v. Wade should be overturned, agreed that Arpaio’s findings were legitimate cause to question Obama’s presented documents, but nonetheless joined his fellow justices in denying McInnish’s petition.

“The Alabama Constitution implies that this court is without jurisdiction over McInnish’s original petition,” Parker explains. “The office of the secretary of state of Alabama is not a ‘court of inferior jurisdiction’ that this court may control through the issuance of a writ in response to a petition.”
Op-ed:
Patriots, it's petition time
By: Diane Sori

Barack Obama’s usurping of the presidency has reached new levels of treason after his exchange with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev was caught on tape, revealing a president who just needs to get through his "last election" before having the freedom to implement his real agenda.

This was the exchange:                                                                                                                                                 
Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.   Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…  Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.   Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

OMG, as if four years of lies, distortions, and deceptions weren't enough, now we have our President admitting that ELECTIONS are getting in the way of his real agenda.  But what's worse is that this exchange is taking place with the leader of a foreign nation, a nation America is still at odds with! 

FOX News’ Charles Krauthammer sees it this way:  "That's [Obama's] way of saying with a nod and a wink, 'Look, you guys have a free hand because you run a dictatorship, your elections are rigged. Well, ours aren't rigged, but once I get passed my last election, I'm unleashed. I can do anything I want."

Now of course we patriots all know that the lsm has placed a total BLACKOUT on NO-bama's admission that his real agenda will come AFTER the election, all the while trying to blindside us with stories on a contrived GOP "Etch-A-Sketch" controversy, keeping us occupied with the likes of ‘political whore’ Sandra Fluke, and even deliberately fueling the racial flames of the Trayon Martin case, as they ignore actual caught on tape statements made by our sitting president to a foreign leader that border on a fundamental betrayal of NO-bama's oath and duty as Commander-in-Chief…in other words TREASON!

If an incumbent Republican President had ever told a foreign ‘enemy’ leader to "give me space" until after the election because he will then have "more flexibility," the lsm would have called for his removal immediately!  Well guess what, as an American citizen, as an American patriot who honors and lives by our Constitution, it is my right to call for Barack Hussein Obama’s immediate arrest on the grounds of TREASON, for these acts is being committed by a usurping enemy combatant of a president who is aiding and abetting one of our nation’s enemies.  It’s on tape and it’s a fact.

I think we patriots through all our different groups, pages, sites, and blogs need to immediately co-ordinate together and start a nationwide petition to call for the arrest of Barack Hussein Obama on the grounds of TREASON….in fact, I think I will start to do just that with Ernest this weekend.