With the national economy in a nose dive and another stimulus package in the works, not to mention talk of numerous bailouts for every dead-beat company in America, the US Senate proposes that the White House look for ways to eliminate poverty globally.

Senate bill 2433, entitled “Global Poverty Act of 2007,” orders the President of the United States to develop a strategy to “further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.”

     It’s hard not to notice that those in charge seem to be working toward an agenda of bankruptcy. First they wrongly convince everyone that “globalization” will be good for our economy. Can you imagine anyone falling for that one? Then they pay US-based manufacturers to set up subsidiaries in third-world nations, then allowing them to pull up stakes and move off shore. If that’s not enough, they then do all they can to further the waning dollar bill by inventing ways to move more and more cash out of this country, which is bound to cause inflation to increase and the general economic condition of the nation to degrade. A good way to do that is to allow the trade disparity to continue unchecked.

     To add insult to injury, they then create an expensive stimulus package which eventually culminates into a bail-out package suitable for a king. From my desk, it appears that the fox is now inside the hen house and he’s slowly but surely destroying this economy.

     Why would anyone do this, no less a Congressman? One thing is certain, they’re not playing by the same rules that the people of this nation do.

     Yours, Albert

     P.S.
Here’s the Senate bill for you to agonize over just like I am:

———-

Global Poverty Act of 2007 (Reported in Senate)

S 2433 RS

Calendar No. 718110th CONGRESS2d SessionS. 2433[Report No. 110-331]To require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

December 7, 2007

Mr. OBAMA (for himself, Mr. HAGEL, Ms. CANTWELL, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. DODD, Mr. FEINGOLD, Ms. SNOWE, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. SMITH, and Mr. KERRY) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

April 24, 2008

Reported by Mr. BIDEN, with amendments and an amendment to the title

[Omit the part struck through and insert the part printed in italic]

---

A BILLTo require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Global Poverty Act of 2007′.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:

•  
  (1) More than 1,000,000,000 people worldwide live on less than $1 per day, and another 1,600,000,000 people struggle to survive on less than $2 per day, according to the World Bank.

•  
  (2) At the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000, the United States joined more than 180 other countries in committing to work toward goals to improve life for the world’s poorest people by 2015.

•  
  (3) The year 2007 marks the mid-point to the Millennium Development Goals deadline of 2015.

•  
  (4) The [Struck out->] United Nations [<-Struck out] Millennium Development Goals include the goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, that live on less than $1 per day, cutting in half the proportion of people suffering from hunger and unable to access safe drinking water and sanitation, reducing child mortality by two-thirds, ensuring basic education for all children, and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS and malaria, while sustaining the environment upon which human life depends.

•  
  (5) On March 22, 2002, President George W. [Struck out->] Bush stated [<-Struck out] Bush participated in the International Conference on Finance for Development and endorsed the Monterey Consensus, stating: `We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror. We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it. We fight against poverty with a growing conviction that major progress is within our reach.’.

•  
  (6) The 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `[A] world where some live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human race lives on less than $2 per day, is neither just nor stable. Including all of the world’s poor in an expanding circle of development and opportunity is a moral imperative and one of the top priorities of U.S. international policy.’.

•  
  (7) The 2006 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `America’s national interests and moral values drive us in the same direction: to assist the world’s poor citizens and least developed nations and help integrate them into the global economy.’.

•  
  (8) The bipartisan Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States released in 2004 recommends: `A comprehensive United States strategy to counter terrorism should include economic policies that encourage development, more open societies, and opportunities for people to improve the lives of their families and enhance prospects for their children.’.

•  
  (9) At the summit of the Group of Eight (G-8) nations in July 2005, leaders from all eight participating countries committed to increase aid to Africa from the current $25,000,000,000 annually to $50,000,000,000 by 2010, and to cancel 100 percent of the debt obligations owed to the World Bank, African Development Bank, and International Monetary Fund by 18 of the world’s poorest nations.

•  
  (10) At the United Nations World Summit in September 2005, the United States joined more than 180 other governments in reiterating their commitment to achieve the [Struck out->] United Nations [<-Struck out] Millennium Development Goals by 2015.

•  
  (11) The United States has recognized the need for increased financial and technical assistance to countries burdened by extreme poverty, as well as the need for strengthened economic and trade opportunities for those countries, through significant initiatives in recent years, including the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601 et seq.), the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative, and trade preference programs for developing countries, such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.).

•  
  [Struck out->] (12) In January 2006, United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice initiated a restructuring of the United States foreign assistance program, including the creation of a Director of Foreign Assistance, who maintains authority over Department of State and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) foreign assistance funding and programs. [<-Struck out]

•  
  [Struck out->] (13) [<-Struck out] (12) In January 2007, the Department of State’s Office of the Director of Foreign Assistance added poverty reduction as an explicit, central component of the overall goal of United States foreign assistance. The official goal of United States foreign assistance is: `To help build and sustain democratic, well-governed states that respond to the needs of their people, reduce widespread poverty and conduct themselves responsibly in the international system.’.

•  
  [Struck out->] (14) Economic growth and poverty reduction are more successful in countries that invest in the people, rule justly, and promote economic freedom. These principles have become the core of several development programs of the United States Government, such as the Millennium Challenge Account. [<-Struck out]

SEC. 3. DECLARATION OF POLICY.

It is the policy of the United States to promote the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people [Struck out->] worldwide [<-Struck out] , between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

SEC. 4. REQUIREMENT TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY.

(a) Strategy- The President, acting through the Secretary of State, and in consultation with the heads of other appropriate departments and agencies of the United States Government, international organizations, international financial institutions, the governments of developing and developed countries, United States and international nongovernmental organizations, civil society organizations, and other appropriate entities, shall develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people [Struck out->] worldwide [<-Struck out] , between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

(b) Content- The strategy required by subsection (a) shall include specific and measurable goals, efforts to be undertaken, benchmarks, and timetables to achieve the objectives described in subsection (a).

(c) Components- The strategy required by subsection (a) should include the following components:

•  
  (1) Continued investment or involvement in existing United States initiatives related to international poverty reduction, such as the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601 et seq.), the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), and trade preference programs for developing countries, such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.).

•  
  (2) Improving the effectiveness of development assistance and making available additional overall United States assistance levels as appropriate.

•  
  (3) Enhancing and expanding debt relief as appropriate.

•  
  (4) Leveraging United States trade policy where possible to enhance economic development prospects for developing countries.

•  
  (5) Coordinating efforts and working in cooperation with developed and developing countries, international organizations, and international financial institutions.

•  
  (6) Mobilizing and leveraging the participation of businesses, United States and international nongovernmental organizations, civil society, and public-private partnerships.

•  
  (7) Coordinating the goal of poverty reduction [Struck out->] with other development goals, such as combating the spread of preventable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, increasing access to potable water and basic sanitation, reducing hunger and malnutrition, and improving access to and quality of education at all levels regardless of gender. [<-Struck out] with the other internationally recognized Millennium Development Goals, including eradicating extreme hunger and reducing hunger and malnutrition, achieving universal education, promoting gender equality and empowering women, reducing child mortality, improving maternal health, combating the spread of preventable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, increasing access to potable water and basic sanitation, ensuring environmental sustainability, and achieving significant improvement in the lives of at least 100,000,000 slum dwellers.

•  
  (8) Integrating principles of sustainable development and entrepreneurship into policies and programs.

(d) Reports-

•  
  (1) INITIAL REPORT-

•  
  •  
    (A) IN GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President, acting through the Secretary of State, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the strategy required under subsection (a).

•  
  •  
    (B) CONTENT- The report required under subparagraph (A) shall include the following elements:

•  
  •  
    •  
      (i) A description of the strategy required under subsection (a).

•  
  •  
    •  
      (ii) An evaluation, to the extent possible, both proportionate and absolute, of the contributions provided by the United States and other national and international actors in achieving the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

•  
  •  
    •  
      (iii) An assessment of the overall progress toward achieving the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

•  
  (2) SUBSEQUENT REPORTS- Not later than December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2015, the President shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees reports on the status of the implementation of the strategy, progress made in achieving the global poverty reduction objectives described in subsection (a), and any changes to the strategy since the date of the submission of the last report.

(e) Coordinator- The Secretary of State shall designate a coordinator who will have primary responsibility for overseeing and drafting the initial report under paragraph (1) of subsection (d) and subsequent reports under paragraph (2) of such subsection, in coordination with relevant Federal agencies, as well as responsibility for helping to implement recommendations contained in the reports.

SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

•  
  (1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES- The term `appropriate congressional committees’ means–

•  
  •  
    (A) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and

•  
  •  
    (B) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

•  
  (2) EXTREME GLOBAL POVERTY- The term `extreme global poverty’ refers to the conditions in which individuals live on less than $1 per day, adjusted for purchasing power parity in 1993 United States dollars, according to World Bank statistics.

•  
  (3) GLOBAL POVERTY- The term `global poverty’ refers to the conditions in which individuals live on less than $2 per day, adjusted for purchasing power parity in 1993 United States dollars, according to World Bank statistics.

•  
  (4) MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS- The term `Millennium Development Goals’ means the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

Amend the title so as to read: `An Act to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.’.

Calendar No. 718

110th CONGRESS2d SessionS. 2433[Report No. 110-331]A BILLTo require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

---

April 24, 2008

Reported with amendments and an amendment to the title

The Council on Foreign Relations and Tacks’ Tackle Shop

By John W. Wallace - New York Campaign for Liberty (24/11/08)

When I was growing up in the Inwood section of upper Manhattan, I remember when I was about 12 or 13 years old I had my first contact with discovering what a “front” was for another business. It was called Tack’s Tackle Shop. When it first opened, it looked like just another business. The guy in the store, Tack, was selling fishing rods, live bait and an array of fishing equipment. It didn’t take long before the kids in the neighborhood figured out that perhaps there was something else going on. The live bait in the window wasn’t alive anymore and local hoods and gangster type people seemed to be going in and out, particularly in the evenings and none of them looked like fishermen. It wasn’t long before the place was raided by the NYCPD and my friends and I all watched from across the street on Sherman Avenue as “Tack” came out in handcuffs along with a bunch of other men. We were later told that Tack’s Tackle Shop had actually been a front for an illegal gambling operation.

A “front group” can be any entity that is set up to appear to be a legitimate independent organization, like Tack’s Tackle Shop, when it is actually controlled from behind the scenes by another organization or group of individuals. These front groups are often legitimate businesses, social or political organizations, professional groups, advocacy groups, research organizations, etc. Organized crime has used legitimate front organizations for many decades to launder their income from various illegal activities. Pharmaceutical companies have used front organizations to advocate for the drugs they manufacture. International terrorist organizations have their front groups here in the United States and as the evidence clearly shows, so do the international bankers.

I, Albert, am not an expert in the area of front groups, nor am I an expert on the Int’l banking community, but what the author of this piece says makes perfect sense. A friend of mine has a saying, one that makes sense: “Who do you think really owns the mafia?” If there is a conspiracy to control the world, it could certainly be conceived and orchestrated by International Bankers. After all, they’re the ones that own the money we borrow as a nation and as a people (which should be one and the same but unfortunately isn’t anymore).

Let’s take a quick look at some of the news titles on the UN website when you do a search using the term: “IMF”.

International Monetary Fund approves $2.1 billion loan for hard-hit Iceland

International Monetary Fund approves $7.6 billion package for Pakistan

International Monetary Fund approves package of nearly $16 billion for Hungary

International Monetary Fund agrees to provide $16 billion to assist Ukraine

The organization behind this, according Wallace, the author of The Council on Foreign Relations and Tacks’ Tackle Shop, is the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He provides a listing of individuals chosen by Presidential Elect Obama to serve on his cabinet. Most of them are CFR.

Susan E. Rice - (CFR) former State Department Asst Secretary for African Affairs; Anthony Lake (CFR) - Bill Clinton’s first national Security advisor; Zbigniew Brzezinski - (CFR) and Trilateral Commission - Brzezinski is widely seen as the man who created Al Qaeda, and was involved in the Carter Administration plan to give arms, funding and training to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan; Richard Clarke (CFR) - Former chief counter-terrorism adviser on the U.S. National Security Council under Bush; Robert W. Kagan (CFR) argues that interventionism is a bipartisan affair that should be undertaken with the approval of our democratic allies; Dennis B. Ross (CFR) and Trilateral Commission - Served as the director for policy planning in the State Department under President George H. W. Bush and special Middle East coordinator under President Bill Clinton; Lawrence J. Korb (CFR) - Director of National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Has criticized manor of the invasion of Iraq but has detailed plans to increase the manpower of the United States Army to fight the war on terror and to “spread liberal democratic values throughout the Middle East”; Bruce Reidel (CFR) - Former CIA analyst who wishes to expand the war on terror to fight Al Qaeda across the globe. Considered to be the reason behind Barack Obama’s Hawkish views on Pakistan and his Pro India leanings on Kashmir; Stephen E. Flynn (CFR) - Has been attributed with the idea for Obama’s much vaunted “Civilian Security Force”. Flynn has written: “The United States should roughly replicate the Federal Reserve model by creating a Federal Security Reserve System (FSRS) with a national board of governors, 10 regional Homeland Security Districts, and 92 local branches called Metropolitan Anti-Terrorism Committees”; and Madeline Albright (CFR) and Brookings - Currently serves on the Council on Foreign Relations Board of directors and was Former Secretary of State and US Ambassador to the United Nations under Clinton.

Here’s the list of possible cabinet positions in the new administration: James B. Steinberg - CFR and the Trilateral Commission; Chuck Hagel (R) - (CFR); Robert M Gates - (CFR), Hillary Clinton - Husband Bill is a CFR member; Bill Richardson (CFR); Sen John Kerry (D) (CFR); Susan Rice (CFR); Robert Rubin (CFR); Lawrence Summers (CFR); Timothy Geithner (CFR); Paul A. Volcker (CFR); David L. Boren (CFR); Thomas H. Kean (CFR); Gary Hart (CFR), and Jane Harman (CFR) - Defense Department Special Counsel (1979).

     There are plenty of questions as to the validity of presidential hopeful Barack Obama. Allegations have been put out on the table that Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen, in which case it’s against the law for him to be President. From my understanding of this, it’s not against the law for him to run, but it is against the law for him to BE President.

     His past has been shrouded in secrecy right along and so there are many unanswered questions. This blog entry will involve some of these allegations and some of the talk that surround them.

     One of the allegations is that Obama is not a Christian at all, that he’s actually a Muslim as his father was a Muslim. That in and of itself is not a bad thing, but what is bad is that if it’s true, Obama has lied to the American people. If he lied this time, how many other times has he lied?

     Someone has made the allegation that he’s going to change more than just the way the federal gov’t does business. See for yourself:I had heard there was a lawsuit against Obama in Pennsylvania and one of our readers, actually a friend of the owner of Tpromo, sent the following in for your review…

Judge tosses lawsuit challenging Obama citizenship

Oct 25, 3:37 PM (ET)

PHILADELPHIA (AP) - A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s qualifications to be president.

U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick on Friday night rejected the suit by attorney Philip J. Berg, who alleged that Obama was not a U.S. citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency. Berg claimed that Obama is either a citizen of his father’s native Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia after he moved there as a boy.

Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother and a Kenyan father. His parents divorced and his mother married an Indonesian man.

Internet-fueled conspiracy theories question whether Obama is a “natural-born citizen” as required by the Constitution for a presidential candidate and whether he lost his citizenship while living abroad.

Surrick ruled that Berg lacked standing to bring the case, saying any harm from an allegedly ineligible candidate was “too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters.”

From one of our readers:

Did you notice that the Judge said that Berg lacked standing to bring the case… (read the last sentence) and did not say there was insufficient evidence. Obama’s Presidency, of course, affects each and every one of us. Besides, the Constitution says that the President must be and U.S. citizen and born in this country. What part of the Constitution does this idiot of a judge not understand? This tells me that he is in collusion with the Obama takeover of this country. America is in dire straits!

     The issue of legitimacy or the lack thereof surrounding Barack Obama’s election as President of the United States continues to haunt the back halls of Congress and the dark recesses of the Obama camp. In the shadows of truth lerks the answer to the question, “Is Barack Obama eligible to be President of the United States of America?”

     There are those who believe that Obama is not a native born citizen of the US. Comrad Citizen Wells of www.citizenwells.wordpress.com is one of those truth seekers who are willing to stand up and be counted on this issue:

     ”Barack Obama is not eligible to be president. He was born in Kenya and became an Indonesian citizen. Obama is still Indonesian and is an illegal alien. There is ample proof of this and more is being revealed. Obama has failed to repudiate these facts.”

     Evidently there is plenty of doubt to go round as a number of individuals from a collection of backgrounds are working on the legal front to stop him from taking office in January, 2009.

‘Constitutional crisis’ looming over Obama’s birth location

     The California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.

     The legal action today is just the latest is a series of challenges, some of which have gone as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, over the issue of Obama’s status as a “natural-born citizen,” a requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.

     WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi even traveled to Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama’s birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

     The biggest question is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists, simply hasn’t ordered it made available to settle the rumors.

     

     I, Albert, believe that if these allegations are true and the courts allow Barack Obama to take office in January, there will be no hope for America. First and above all else, the courts who hear these cases and fail to act will lose all credibility in the eyes of all just and truthful citizens. Secondly, never more will anyone be able to trust American government to do what’s right under the law.

     This is where we’ll see what the US courts are truly made of.

     Yours, Albert

Fed refuses to identify who got $2 TRILLION in loans

     Defying the will of Congress that emergency loans be transparent, the federal reserve bank is refusing to identify who got almost two TRILLION dollars in loans and what security or collateral was put up to secure those loans.

     Two trillion dollars of US taxpayer money has gone out the door and no one but the fed knows who got it!

     I warned back in March of this year that the USA was going to have a financial meltdown in September and it happened. I also warned in March of this year that the federal government would financially collapse by February of 2009.

     With nonsense like this two trillion debacle making headlines, look for a US government financial collapse very soon. The world will not tolerate the printing of money and will, in short order, rebuke our currency.

Do you dare read more?
     How can you not?

     If you want my opinion, we’re in for one heck of a ride, and very soon. I, Albert, knew as soon as they “bailed out” the financial institutions that what they were really doing is working to attain a given result within a given time frame. The collapse of our economy in Sept. and the subsequent failure of our dollar in Feb 09 is not new info. I carried it on the Albertaclipper Blog some time ago.

     If you have any sense about you, you’ll listen to what Hal Turner has to say about the oncoming North American Union. How hungry will you get before you listen to what’s being told to you by people who know what the score is? How long will you continue to make fun of these people who constantly put their lives on the line to help you until you stop and listen? How many good men, women and children will die before you understand who the true enemny of freedom is?

     Listen to what’s ahead of us and ask yourself what you can do to stop it? Listen Now! It may very well be too late, but at least you’ll know what’s coming before it gets here!

     Yours, Albert

Palin denounces anonymous critics as ‘cowardly’

     ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin denounced anonymous criticisms leveled at her by former John McCain aides as lies, including allegations that Republican lawyers were traveling to Alaska to reclaim her high-priced wardrobe and that she didn’t know Africa was a continent.

     ”Those accounts are not true,” the former Republican vice presidential candidate said in her first public comments on the matter since the election Tuesday.

     Palin returned Friday to her Anchorage governor’s office and said she had no immediate plans to build on her newfound national name-recognition and popularity with the Republican base for a possible 2012 presidential run.

     We live in a country where we should know our accuser. Sarah is right on the money here, whom ever is making these totally ridiculous accusations is nothing but a coward. Some of the comments that the “popular” press has made regarding Palin is downright laughable, but they’re made at her expense.

     Frankly, Palin has integrity and class. If it’s McCain’s camp that is putting out these moronic comments, then it causes me to wonder if the “powers that be” own McCain as well as Obama. After all, they may have selected Palin because they expected her to faulter and fall, but she didn’t. In fact, I’m sure she shocked them into the realization that she could very well be a serious problem for them in 2012 if she should decide to run for President.

      Do you get the picture here? They’re trashing her now so you morons won’t think of her as a class act in 2010 when the 2012 election begins.
     The sad little men who sit in high places are obviously behind this, otherwise the media that they largely own would never stoop to this kind of tactic. The question is, are you morons who listen to this stuff smart enough to figure this out? I suggest you wake up and take a good look around you. Get your narrow little heads out of the TV for a change and stop listening and believing everything you’re told by the other morons who spout this nonsense.
     Yours, Albert

Calif. gay-marriage ban creates legal uncertainty

     SAN FRANCISCO – An estimated 1,000 protesters took to the streets over California’s new ban on gay marriage Thursday as the political turmoil and legal confusion over who should have the right to wed deepened.

     Legal experts said it is unclear whether an attempt by gay-rights activists to overturn the prohibition has any chance of success, and whether the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California over the past four months are in any danger.

You Gotta Read This Now!!

All I can say is these gay guys should go get a wife, I mean a life!

     It’s about time the people of this nation get back to the original design criteria that God, the Master Creator, instituted when time on Earth began. Bravo, Californians! About time!

     Yours, Albert

     Why doesn`t Obama provide his birth certificate? Is he a natural-born citizen, or not? Does he qualify to be President? Obama! Show us your birth certificate!     

Qualifications for the Office of President

     Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

     No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

     Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 – ratified February 27, 1951 

     No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. 
 

     Want to read more? Go to: http://comments.obamacrimes.com!

     I, Albert, will give you my two cents worth here… the “powers that be” responsible for putting Obama where he is today is counting on the fact that YOU WILL NOT DEMAND HIS IMMEDIATE DISMISSAL BY CONGRESS!

     That’s right, once he’s elected they are counting on Congress NOT to remove him, even when they know, yes, THEY ALREADY KNOW that he is not a legitimate candidate!!!

     How do I, Albert, know this? Because if Obama were a legitimate candidate he would have already coughed up his birth certificate. He’s not eligible! I’ll bet you he’s not! And so this is such a scam against the American people that it isn’t fully comprehended by most. Once elected, they know that the authorities won’t remove him 1) because they’ve been ordered not to perhaps, or 2) perhaps they would be afraid of the backlash that would occur from blacks across the nation.  What a scam!

     If the American people elect this man president, THEY WILL DESERVE WHAT THEY GET!

     Yours, Albert

From one of our loyal readers:  A Google search revealed that Snopes.com is owned by David and Barbara Mikkelson, who live in Southern California and are Obama supporters. An interested reader (unknown to me) suspected that Snopes had a liberal bias after discovering several “half-truths” and distortions. Compare their analysis of the Obama/Ayers connection with truthorfiction.com’s analysis of the same subject. Snopes minimizes the connection, categorizing the rumor as a “Partial Truth,” while truthorfiction calls it a “Truth” and, in fact, references a CNN expose of the two, as well as a Wall Street Journal article about their connection. Snopes not only does not reference either source cited above, but instead, lists a quote from an Obama spokesman as its main source. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ayers.asp http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-ayers.htm Another comparison of Snopes vs. Truthorfiction is their treatment of the email regarding “Obama’s 50 lies.” Snopes adds editorial comments favoring Obama on unproven statements or even on proven ones where the comments are that he is “taken out of context.” http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-lies.htm There are other things that they list as false, even though Youtube has videos of Obama or others actually making the statements. Seems Snopes has a liberal agenda andhttp://www.truthorfiction.com/ might be a better, unbiased source.