Obama's Jealousy

Tonight's State of the Union was a window into the soul of the current leader of the greatest country in the world (who often acts like the mere leader of a 3rd world state). Between his eloquent campaign utterances, and childish poking at the GOP, Obama revealed something I hadn't noticed before: He is Jealous of the Supreme Court.

After his battle on Health Care, where he has to cow-tow to spineless pikers in the Senate like Sens Ben Nelson and Mary Landreau, and where he has to personally inject Madame Pelosi with enough Botox to keep advancing the flag in the House, he may have finally realized that being President doesn't actually mean you can do what you want. Being America, this is a Representative Democracy, a Republic, where people are held accountable, and rules still apply. It is not a 3rd world dictatorship like Cuba or Venezuela. When Obama considers the recent decision on Campaign Finance Reform (AKA Free Speech) by the even-keeled Supreme Court, he is jealous of their ability to act without the opportunity for Filibuster, jaded at their extra-political decisiveness.

Obama was the first African-American President of the Harvard Law Review. (I cannot find evidence if Harry Reid endorsed him then, or if his being light-skinned with a lack of Negro dialect played a role in his election.) Whether or not Obama was as ineffectual in his first year as President of the Law Review as he has been as POTUS is unknown, since most of his scholastic records are not available. However, Politico.com did report on the one Harvard Law Review paper that could be discovered: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12705.html

In looking down at the Justices of the Supreme Court (different from when he looks down at all Americans on a daily basis only because they wear Black Robes, and Rahm told him they wouldn't fight back) Obama scoffed at the only individuals who are more powerful then him, wishing he could be them -or stop them when they disagree with his ideology. Think of some of the Justices, and their proven intelligence: Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts. Any one of them has more documented cognitive intelligence in any of their written opinions then Barack Obama has mustered in the complete documented record of his life, education, or rise to power (Bill Ayers embellishing of his autobiographies not withstanding). As a Community Organizer, he could lie, shill, rally, and achieve. As a Leader he has to listen, analyze, package, hope, intimidate and bribe others to help him pass his agenda.

After being POTUS for only a year, Obama now wishes he was smart enough, good enough, and worked hard enough to be a successful, quality attorney that could have somehow become a judge - a judge who, through years of reasoned, blind discretion, could rise to the top of the
world of enforcing and interpreting laws.. a Justice of the Supreme Court.

President Obama - you may have fooled enough voters to elect you as President, but you will never be a Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States of America. As long as reasoned Justices remain, the Constitution will Survive your failed Presidency.

Andrew Sullivan Speaks the Truth!

Amazing conversation coming from the wacko left these days:

JOY BEHAR, HOST: OK, Barak Obama may have been coy on the Oprah Show about his 2008 white house run. But new poll numbers show he`s a contender. Oy. (Laughter on the set). But while some are coming into the big tent, others are leaving. More and more are saying the left is wrong. Andrew Sullivan Senior Editor at the Atlantic. And author of the conservative sol is one of them. Ok, welcome to the show, Andrew.

ANDREW SULLIVAN, SENIOR EDITOR, THE ATLANTIC: Thanks Joy.

BEHAR: Do you think there are other skeletons in Barak Obama's closet?

SULLIVAN: Yes.

(LAUGHTER)

BEHAR: You do?

SULLIVAN: I do. I think that the story of Barak Obama has yet to be told.

BEHAR: The real story.

SULLIVAN: I think these books that he produced are essentially works of magical realism. I don`t think he has much relationship with reality. I don`t think he has much relationship with reality. And I think at some point, if journalists do their job and if brave people stand up and tell the truth, we will find out who Barak Obama really is. And we currently don`t know

BEHAR: Well his people are evil and nasty. They are not nice people. They send me nasty mail and everybody else who talks about it. Anything negative about Barak Obama, they get hit with this stuff. You know.

SULLIVAN: Well, he tried -- he wanted to imprison me for even asking questions. Factual questions. I`m not interested in whether he`s a good or bad person. I`m not interested in whether they are evil people around him. I`m interested in truth. What is the truth about this person who was put on the national ticket, having not been vetted in any way, and in which, the press was shut out from having real interaction with him during the campaign and who produced books which are not fact-checked, not vetted, full of obvious errors -

BEHAR: Why is that?

SULLIVAN: That Random House, a major publication has put out without any fact checking what so ever in order to make money. I find the whole thing just bizarre. I find the whole thing of a state senator voting "present" hundreds of times in his first term when he wants to have a career, bizarre. There are so many bizarre questions including this extraordinary story of sitting in Reverend Wright's pews for 20 years without knowing what was being said, which is, on a basis, extraordinarily hard to believe the way he`s told it. Maybe there is some truth there that we don`t know fully know. Or he`s confusing --

__________________________________________

The previous was adapted from a transcript of the original conversation obtained courtesy of Newsbusters.org (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/12/08/joy-behar-andrew-sullivan-trig-really-sarah-palins-baby)

Is the First Amendment any match for a Hate Crime?

I know there has been excellent insight conveyed recently from many wise and well-spoken voices regarding the current attempt to legislate the advancement of LGBT propaganda to the detriment of average Americans through so-called "Hate Crimes" legislation, so I'll try not to re-hash the entire topic.

Coming from the "son of a preacher man", I can only imagine what may happen if the ACLU is turned loose on the honest and well-intentioned religious institutions that may speak the Truth (or opinion for any skeptics) regarding God's position on certain carnal behavior of an alternative lifestyle. Given the recent shady-spending from our current administration, I wouldn't be surprised if groups like ACORN were tasked with monitoring so-called "hate crimes". They could begin sending "volunteers" into every church and synagogue in the country to look for instances of anti-LGBT speech (even if it should be protected by the 1st Amendment). Those reports would be recorded as opportunities for the ACLU to take the taxpayer's money to litigate against those very taxpayers right to free speech. I don't think you have to be in the dark side of Glenn Beck's conspiratorial mind to see how easily the various Liberal-activist slush funds could work together in an attempt to inflict serious damage to the moral institutions our nation's founders specifically protected in our constitution.

I don't know about your copy of our founding documents, but mine specifically states that the Congress shall make no law "...inhibiting the free exercise thereof" (of Religion). Of course, for those of us who went to Government Schools in the last 4o years, let me remind you that when the founders say the word "Religion", they did not mean that the Constitution should allow deference to Sharia law, but that's a conversation for another day. Either way, if Congress passes a law by which teaching God's Word constitutes "hate speech", that inhibits the free exercise of the predominant religion freely exercised in this great nation since its inception, and is yet another aggressive attack in the war on Freedom that the misguided (or often malicious) Left has launched on the free people of our country.

To that end, I sent the following communication to our Democrat Senator last week, upon hearing that the House was voting on HR 1913, and likely to pass it:

Senator X,
I realize the bill (HR 1913) has not yet reached the Senate; however the Liberal extremists in the House are catering to the LGBT lobby and are likely to pass HR 1913 today.
As you know, this bill is unnecessary, as sufficient hate crime legislation is already on the books. Regardless of the lies put forth by the LGBT lobby and its mis-guided proponents in the House, this new bill would open the door for pastors to be prosecuted for preaching from certain passages from the Bible, therefore infringing on both their freedom of speech, and freedom of religion, as explicitly outlined in the First Amendment.
We can debate the merits of general hate crime legislation at a later time; however I'm sure you can agree that a bill which would directly emasculate one of the founding provisions to the freedom of our country is dangerous to our republic, and not in line with the mainstream views of this country, let alone the overwhelming percentage of your constituency.

I appreciate your comments and look forward to your commitment to uphold the constitution and vote against the Senate version of this bill.

Thanks,
WheresMyUSA

To my dismay (although not to my surprise) the response I received was replete with common political platitudes and weak deflections based on incomplete information from what is likely a LGBT lobby-supplied fact sheet given to his staff. Coming from the Midwest, I'd say at least 70% of his constituency would vote against this legislation if they had the facts.

We cannot rest until the protection of Freedom is restored to this great nation. Pray that our foundations do not erode too much over the next 3+ years as we look to find a leader who understands the reason our great nation actually exists, and knows what is needed to restore it.

God Bless our USA!