Glenn Beck Destroys Obama's Kansas Speech "He's a Liar!" - AUDIO -

Glenn Beck on Wednesday  made a valiant effort and successfully  kept his head from exploding while listening to the Presidents Kansas speech.


 Beck sets the record strait in this audioof Wednesday's GBTV.com show.  If you want to go where the truth lives, that's the place.  Republican, Democrat, Martian, or Ewok, Beck doesn't pull any punches.   Why?  Because the TRUTH has no agenda.


This audio picks up with Beck talking about his head spontaneously exploding due to Obama's fairy-tales about history, class warfare and income equality - all adding up to the fundamental transformation of America.

Here's the Audio:

Gene Simmons Slams Obama

Obama’s top 10 constitutional violations

The following is from http://dailycaller.com.  I feel so strongly about  exposing Obama that I took the liberty of posting some of dailycallers content.  Please continue on to their site and read the rest of this.  (I put a link to this story on the bottom of this post).


Then, do as I did:  Share the dailycaller story  to all your friends on twitter/facebook.  We can't trust the media to tell the truth anymore, so we have to do it ourselves.  

Here's the story:


"It’s a good thing that Americans are taking their founding document seriously. After all, the Constitution is the font of all federal power. Its carefully crafted structural provisions that we learned about in grade school, such as the separation of powers and checks and balances, are not merely an application of political theory.

“Federalism is more than an exercise in setting the boundary between different institutions of government for their own integrity,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for a unanimous Supreme Court earlier this year. “By denying any one government complete jurisdiction over all the concerns of public life,” Kennedy continued, “federalism protects the liberty of the individual from arbitrary power.” If the federal government acts outside the scope of its delegated and carefully enumerated powers, then it’s no better than an armed mob.

The Obama administration and its allies in Congress have perpetrated more than their share of such mob-like actions. While it’s hard to narrow them down, here’s my stab at the government’s top 10 constitutional violations since President Obama took office.

1. The individual mandate

No list of President Obama’s constitutional violations would be complete without including the requirement that every American purchase health insurance, on penalty of civil fine. The individual mandate is unprecedented and exceeds Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce. If it is allowed to stand, Congress will be able to impose any kind of economic mandate as part of any kind of national regulatory scheme. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has a chance to strike this down during its current term.

2. Medicaid coercion

The Court will also be taking up Obamacare’s massive intrusion on federal-state relations in the form of a coercive Medicaid expansion. The law compels states to drastically increase their Medicaid expenditures and reorganize their health care bureaucracies, on penalty of losing all (not just additional) Medicaid funds. No state contemplated such a program when it signed onto Medicaid — Arizona was the last to join, in 1982 — and now no state can afford to withdraw. Indeed, even if some withdrawal mechanism existed, withdrawn states’ taxpayers would still be funding complying states’ Medicaid programs. As the Supreme Court held in South Dakota v. Dole, there comes a point when “the financial inducement offered by Congress might be so coercive as to pass the point at which pressure turns into compulsion.”

3. The Independent Payment Advisory Board (a.k.a. “The Death Panel”)

IPAB is the group of 15 presidential appointees who, beginning in 2014, are tasked with reducing Medicare spending. Any decisions IPAB makes automatically become law that can only be overridden by a three-fifths majority vote in the Senate. Unlike other federal agencies, IPAB is subject to no external review — no public notification in advance of proposed rules or opportunity for comment, no administrative guidelines and no judicial review. Medicare comprises about 13 percent of the federal budget, so that’s an awesome amount of power for Congress to delegate to unelected executive-branch bureaucrats. Indeed, it’s so basic a violation of traditional separation of powers that there’s no historical analog. The Goldwater Institute has filed a strong lawsuit challenging this (yet another) unprecedented aspect of Obamacare, which will continue wending its way through the lower courts regardless of how the Supreme Court rules on the individual mandate and Medicaid-coercion issues.

4. The Chrysler bailout

Building on the Bush administration’s illegal use of TARP funds to bail out the auto industry, the Obama administration bullied Chrysler’s secured creditors — who were entitled to “absolute priority” — into accepting 30 cents on the dollar, while junior creditors such as labor unions received much more. This subversion of creditor rights violates not just bankruptcy law but also the Constitution’s Takings and Due Process Clauses. This blatant crony capitalism — government-directed industrial policy to help political insiders — discourages investors and generally undermines confidence in American rule of law.

FIND THE REST OF OBAMA'S VIOLATIONS HERE AT DAILYCALLER.COM

Obama - The Anti-Israel President

If you're not watching GBTV, you don't know what's going on. Trouble is coming and you have to prepare for really bad times.


This isn't a Democrat/Republican thing.  This is about good versus evil.  That said, which side are you on?



This video aired on GBTV Dec 5, 2011.

New Christmas Carol for Politically Correct Businesses - Lets all Follow this Plan

If they would rather say, "happy holiday, more power to them. I'll choose not to shop there. How about you?


Merry Christmas!

Republican Primary Candidates - Conservablogger Revised Opinions

Okay,  we've got just a few candidates left in the Republican Primary  that I would be comfortable voting for.

Here are  my opinions of the candidates:

Romney is out because he's a RINO who has no solid convictions.  He seems to tell folks what they want to hear, flip-flopping like a landed trout.  He's also the one we are being force-fed by the traditional Republican machine.

Perry is out because of his lack of conviction on illegal immigration... that illegals (undocumented residents) should not get preferential treatment or  tuition breaks. He's another candidate we were being spoon-fed by the traditional Republican  machine.

Cain is out because he is actually out.

Gingrich is out because he 'sat in a tree with Palosi' singing kumbiyah over bullcrap climate science.  Too bad too.  I actually like his knowledge on subjects important to the person who occupies  the presidency.

Ron Paul is out because he, sadly, has some views of foreign policy regarding Israel, that I can't support.  If not for that, I'd probably support this guy.

Huntsman, I never considered him because he's an Obama appointee who was the Amabssador to China.  That's not to say he has done anything - I know of - to discount him, but Obama wouldn't have selected him if he weren't a yes man.  That means he's a RINO too. (in my sad opinion).

Who does that leave?  Bachman and Santorum.

I think Michele Bachman knows the gravity of the upcoming election the most, and she's the only one stressing its importance.  Additionally, she seems to know better than anyone what it's going to take to save our Republic.  She also has good foreign policy experience being on an important cabinet position as Congresswoman.

Rick Santorum?  So far, he hasn't messed up in a way that's made the news.  To be honest, I don't actually know enought about him to formulat an accurate opinion. I do know he is a true conservative and lots of conservatives appreciate his convictions.

So, up to this point, If I were voting tomorrow I would vote for Bachman. 


Then the question arises, could Michele Bachman beat Obama in the November election?  I think once she can devote her resources to exposing Obama's failed policies, she'll do great.

The media who, backed by unions and government, will be doing everything in its vast sphere of influence to re-elect Obama, but if Bachman clearly and passionately explains how her policies  are better for America, she'll still win. 

Obama union stooge: time to "crack the whip"‏

The following was in my e-mail this evening.  I thought I'd pass it along to you.  By all means, feel free to e-mail and/or share on twitter/facebook.

Dear Daniel,

Obama's top union stooge at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed this week he will be "cracking the whip" to ram through one more major Big Labor power-grab by the end of the year.

And American workers will bear the brunt of the damage when NLRB Chairman Mark Pearce, a former union lawyer, crams through yet another backdoor payoff to the union bosses.

You see, just a few months ago, the NLRB proposed a radical change to union certification election procedures that would open up workers across the country to harassment and intimidation by aggressive union organizers.

Under the proposed rules, union organizers would ambush workers with quick-snap elections.

The scheme denies employees sufficient time to counter union-boss propaganda, educate themselves and coworkers about the effects of unionization, and organize in opposition to the union.

In addition to your National Right to Work Foundation's formal comments, Right to Work supporters and other concerned citizens sprung into action during the public comment period.

Over 65,000 comments poured in -- the vast majority against the proposed scheme.

In fact, after only 17,000 comments had been filed, one former Board member told the press that he hasn't seen the public turn up the heat on the NLRB like this in almost 40 years.

But despite the strong public outcry, the two former union lawyers on the NLRB are desperate to advance ambush elections by the end of the year.

With the 2012 elections less than a year away, the unelected bureaucrats in the Obama Administration know they are running out of time to pay back the Big Labor bosses who spent over a Billion Dollars in 2008 on politicking.

But there's another reason Mark Pearce is "cracking the whip" right now.

On December 31, the term of NLRB Member Craig Becker expires, leaving the board with only two members -- short of the three the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year the Board needs to make rules and issue decisions.

As you may know, former SEIU and AFL-CIO union lawyer Becker infamously called secret ballot elections "profoundly undemocratic," and grassroots opposition to his appointment stalled his nomination in the U.S. Senate.

After President Obama installed Becker as a recess appointee, Becker has made a mockery out of the Obama White House's toothless ethics policy by refusing to recuse himself from cases in which he has clear conflicts of interest.

Notably, Becker has participated in cases involving SEIU affiliates and local unions.

But as the Wall Street Journal pointed out, "No one understands better than Mr. Becker the deep organizational and financial ties between the SEIU and its locals, having been the attorney who crafted national legal strategies for use by SEIU locals everywhere."

Now before Becker's term expires, Pearce and Becker are pushing to speed one more job-killing Big Labor payoff through the Board.

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have opposed ambush elections and other power-grabs at the NLRB every step of the way.

Your continued support allows the Foundation to devote the resources we need to expose these behind-the-scenes maneuvers in the press and challenge them in court.

Thank you for your partnership in these trying times.

Sincerely,

Conservablogger Comment:

These people make me sick.  If their actions by the NLRB don't scream, "MARXISM", no actions ever have!  We used to tell our children when they were defiant of our authority that they were, "too big for their britches".  I think this characterization applies to our government.  Don't you?