Obama to Honor Stalin

U.S. Troops to March in Red Square Parade

From Pajamas Media
By Kim Zigfeld

When I read the news on March 18, I was ashamed to call myself an American, ashamed to admit that Barack Obama was my president.

I learned in a tiny Internet blurb from the Associated Press that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow had confirmed that on May 9, 2010, American soldiers would march in the infamous military parade through Red Square alongside the neo-Soviet army of proud KGB spy Vladimir Putin. Obama wants U.S. soldiers to help the Kremlin celebrate the 65^th anniversary of the allied victory over Nazi Germany. British and French soldiers, it seems, will also take part.

All part of the now infamous Obama “reset” on Russia. Next stop for U.S. troops? Maybe a similar parade in Tehran?

Make no mistake about how Russians will understand this event. Putin will say to them: “You see, not only will they not help you fight for democracy, they will march against you. They will help me crush you.” Meanwhile Russian propagandists lose no opportunity to divide and conquer the West, even going so far as to buzz Alaska with nuclear bombers on a routine basis.

The reporting of the item was so obscure, one could almost have thought Obama was ashamed of his decision — as well he might have been.

Two days later, a massive wave of protests swept Russia, in a coordinated move by the opposition known as “Day of Anger.” The Russian government outlawed the protests, shut down the website that was organizing them, preemptively arrested activist leaders, and then conducted mass arrests of those who dared to show their faces on the streets. Obama said nothing in support of these freedom fighters.

The contrast between the craven actions of the Obama administration and the valiant stand being taken by activists within Russia could not be more disturbing. America can clearly be seen betraying the bedrock principles upon which it was founded, allowing a vehemently anti-American regime to consolidate power in Moscow, and supplying aid and comfort to American enemies across the globe. Obama is rapidly becoming a president who will live in infamy.

Signs of popular unrest are growing daily in Putin’s Russia as the KGB regime further and further compresses personal freedom and civil society, and more and more badly bungles the management of the economy. A recent news report and YouTube video showed today’s Russia in microscosm: Workers assigned to build the Sochi 2014 Olympics venues are going unpaid, starving, and living in slum conditions, because the Kremlin, strapped for cash and hopelessly corrupt, cannot pay them. Russia spent five times more preparing its athletes for the 2010 Olympics compared to 2006, and collected one-third fewer medals.

Obama got a taste, though, of how Putin treats his own countrymen when he sent Hillary Clinton to Moscow begging for a renewal of the START treaty, which lapsed months ago despite Obama’s much ballyhooed “reset” of relations, of which sending U.S. soldiers to Red Square is an obvious part. Putin chose just that moment to announce he would press forward in helping Iran to light up a nuclear power plant even as Clinton courts world sanctions against that rogue nation because of its nuclear weapons secrecy.

Seasoned Latvian diplomat Sandra Kalniete urges Obama to remember a little American history. In the past, she writes, Americans understood that while one might seek to make deals with the Russian government in the interests of world security, it was imperative to simultaneously reach out to the “second Russia” being oppressed by the first. Obama, in the manner of Neville Chamberlain, seems to have forgotten about this equation and to have firmly turned down the road of appeasement.

One hopeful sign, however, is that Senator John McCain seems to have at last gotten the message. On March 17, he rose dramatically on the floor of the U.S. Senate to demand action from the Obama administration. McCain declared:

I had an opportunity the other week to meet with one of these brave Russian champions of human dignity and freedom — a man by the name of Boris Nemtsov. Mr. Nemtsov is but one of the many Russians who believe that their country deserves a government that enshrines the human rights of its people in an inviolable rule of law that allows citizens to hold their leaders accountable through a real democratic process. I asked Mr. Nemtsov what we in Washington could do to support the cause of human rights in Russia, and he simply said: “Speak up for it. And speak up for us.” It is my pleasure to do just that today.

Russia expert Vladmir Kara-Murza writes of Nemtsov: “Kremlin propagandists would have the outside world believe that its puppet ‘parliament’ and its sanctioned ‘opposition’ parties represent the full spectrum of views in Russian society. The Solidarity leader’s meetings on Capitol Hill are proof that the world knows better.” Perhaps the Congress and the world know, but does Barack Obama? Nemtsov may have been too ambitious in his plea for assistance. Perhaps he ought to simply have asked that the U.S. not make things worse by sending military forces to Red Square.

McCain has been shockingly silent on Russia since Obama defeated him, apparently out of respect for the presidency. But now he has seen too much. It is one thing for Obama to ignore the need to speak up for American value; it’s quite something else for him to send U.S. troops to march alongside the forces of the man who is leading the attack upon them. McCain must now lead Republicans back to the forefront of U.S. foreign policy, demanding that Obama cease his reckless course of appeasement and stand behind his oath of office.

And all Americans of good conscience should write their elected representatives and demand that U.S. soldiers break their date with the neo-Soviet empire of Vladimir Putin.

Kim Zigfeld is a New York City-based writer who publishes her own Russia specialty blog, La Russophobe. She also writes about Russia for the American Thinker and for Russia! magazine and is researching a book on the rise of dictatorship in Putin’s Russia.

Obama Excludes Private and Parochial School Children From Easter Egg Roll Ticket Giveaway

Only a Public Option for the Easter Bunny

The Obama administration announced on Tuesday it has reserved 3,000 free tickets to the annual White House Easter Egg Roll for students in D.C.-area public and charter schools, but not for children who attend private or parochial schools.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Al Sharpton Calls 'Em As He Sees 'Em

From Rebellion Blog

Folks on the right, especially the Tea Party protesters, were soundly condemned for characterizing Obama's agenda as socialistic. All that's changed. Everyone on the left is dropping the pretense now that they've pushed through the government takeover of health care.

In case you missed it:

"The American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama." The Reverend Al Sharpton.

Thanks for clearing that up for us, Reverend.

Obama Administration to Prohibit Fishing

And you thought the Obama Administration would just take away your guns. No, not content with that, they want your fishing rod too.

Obama administration will accept no more public input for federal fishery strategy

From ESPN Outdoors
By Robert Montgomery

The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation's oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is "fluid" and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn't issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.

That's a disappointment, but not really a surprise for fishing industry insiders who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force. These angling advocates have come to suspect that public input into the process was a charade from the beginning.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Democrats Asking if Rahm Emanuel is Done

Here's a very interesting look at Obama's version of Lavrenti Beria and the political feuds consuming the Democrats. Liberal Democrat and blogger, Cenk Uygur, is dissatisfied with Emanuel because he's too much the establishment conservative.

Massa Details Naked Shower Fight With 'Son of the Devil's Spawn'

Rahm Emanuel, 'Son of the Devil's Spawn'

It's now becoming clear that Representative Eric Massa's problems and his sudden resignation from Congress are the result of blackmail by White House thug-in-chief Rahm Emanuel. It is intended as a lesson, no doubt, to any other Democrats who might be tempted to represent their constituents rather than rubber stamp the Marxist agenda for America prepared by the Obama administration.

And if this is what they are willing to do to one of their own, a Democrat representing the most Republican district in New York State, imagine what these racketeers will do to win the next election!

From Fox News

Embattled Rep. Eric Massa used his final hours in office to settle scores with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and other Democrats he claims are pushing him out of office to clear the way for health care reform.

It sounds like the kind of bad dream that only congressmen have -- White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, stark naked, approaches you in the locker room to give you a piece of his mind for not supporting the president's budget.

Only this actually happened, according to Rep. Eric Massa, the embattled New York Democrat who resigned Monday and used his last hours in office to settle some scores with party leaders.

He reserved his most excoriating stuff for Emanuel, whom he called "son of the devil's spawn" on his weekly radio show Sunday.

"He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to a front end of a steam locomotive," Massa said. Illustrating his point, he told the story of how he winded up in an argument with the chief of staff while they were both naked in the congressional gym showers.

Massa said Emanuel came up to him last year, shortly after he entered Congress, while he was trying to clean up to give him grief about a budget vote.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Homeschooling German Family Now Facing Deportation

As you may have already read, the Romeike family fled their native Germany because as Evangelical Christians they do not approve of what their children were learning in government schools, and laws dating to the Nazi regime prohibit them from homeschooling. With the help of the Home School Legal Defense Association, they settled in Morristown, Tennessee, where an immigration judge granted them asylum.

However, the Romeike family aren't Muslims with connections to a radical mosque, or part of a Mexican drug cartel, so Obama administration thugs are now appealing their asylum and seeking to return the family to Germany where, under that nation's laws, their children can be taken from them and placed in foster homes.

Whether viewed from a homeschool or a state-run institution, it is quite a lesson about what has become of America's "golden door" and the land of "liberty and justice for all."

From Time
By Tristana Moore

The Romeikes are not your typical asylum seekers. They did not come to the U.S. to flee war or despotism in their native land. No, these music teachers left Germany because they didn't like what their children were learning in public school - and because homeschooling is illegal there.

"It's our fundamental right to decide how we want to teach our children," says Uwe Romeike, an Evangelical Christian and a concert pianist who sold his treasured Steinway to help pay for the move.

Romeike decided to uproot his family in 2008 after he and his wife had accrued about $10,000 in fines for homeschooling their three oldest children and police had turned up at their doorstep and escorted them to school. "My kids were crying, but nobody seemed to care," Romeike says of the incident.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Obama Administration Strategizes with Atheist Anti-Religion Hate Groups

The advocacy group In God We Trust today ripped the Obama administration for meeting to plot political strategy with 60 atheist activists representing organizations comprising the Secular Coalition of America.

"It is one thing for Administration to meet with groups of varying viewpoints, but it is quite another for a senior official to sit down with activists representing some of the most hate-filled, anti-religious groups in the nation," says In God We Trust's Chairman Bishop Council Nedd.

Tina Tchen, the director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, will meet with representatives from groups that comprise the Coalition. The Coalition's sponsoring organization's include American Atheists, founded by Madalyn Murray O'Hare and the Freedom from Religion Foundation which is campaigning to stop the post office from issuing a stamp honoring Mother Theresa.

"President Obama seems to believe that it is a good idea to have a key senior aide plan political strategy with people who believe faith in God is a disease," Nedd says. "Some of the people in this coalition believe the world would be better off with no Christians and no Jews and they aren't shy about it. The fact that this meeting is happening at all is an affront to the vast majority of people of all faiths who believe in God."

According to the Freedom from Religion Foundation's President Dan Barker, "Christianity is an enemy to humanity, and the antithesis of freedom." (Dan Barker, Freedom from Religion Foundation Co-President in Losing Faith in Faith Page 255) and "Religion also poses a danger to mental health, damaging self-respect, personal responsibility, and clarity of thought." (Losing Faith in Faith Page 217.)

Madalyn Murray OHare declared, "Ours is a time when successful struggle against this reactionary philosophy requires more than a petulant argument over the authorship of the Gospels, more than a negative attack on the totalitarian and monolithic authoritarianism of conventional religion, but rather an aggressive action program to spread the positive philosophy of materialism." (Source: American Atheists website.)

"The President should tell the American people whether he believes these groups' hate-filled views to be 'mainstream' and worthy of his supposedly inclusive administration," Nedd says.

In God We Trust is a national political advocacy organization with over 70,000 supporters of various faiths. Council Nedd is a traditional Episcopal priest and serves as the Bishop of the Chesapeake and Northeast for the Episcopal Missionary Church. On the Internet: www.InGodWeTrustUSA.org.

Fall of the Republic: The Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama

Fall Of The Republic documents how an offshore corporate cartel is bankrupting the US economy by design. Leaders are now declaring that world government has arrived and that the dollar will be replaced by a new global currency.

This film reveals the architecture of the New World Order and what the power elite have in store for humanity. More importantly, it communicates how We The People can retake control of our government, turn the criminal tide and bring the tyrants to justice.

Terry Jeffrey: Obama Begins His Assault on Your Life Savings

The welfare state and your life savings are two cars heading down a one-lane road in opposite directions. One must yield, or there will be a crash.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Nine Obama Lawyers Advocated for Terrorists

From Powerline

Byron York reports that nine Obama Justice Department appointees represented or advocated for terrorist detainees before joining the Justice Department. The admission comes in answer to a question posed last November by Republican Sen. Charles Grassley.

Holder did not disclose the names of the nine. Two are already known: Principal Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal represented Osama bin Laden's driver and Jennifer Daskal previously advocated for detainees at Human Rights Watch. According to Holder, all nine are eligible to work on general detainee matters, even if there are specific parts of some cases they cannot be involved in.

No one familiar with the legal community will be surprised by Holder's disclosure. Among many liberal lawyers, representing terrorist detainees has come to be viewed as a badge of honor. (When a lawyer in the Bush Justice Department demurred, he was widely condemned.) For some liberal lawyers who represent corporations, providing free legal services to terrorist detainees is proof that they became lawyers to help the "oppressed" after all; not just to help corporations squirm out of difficulty.

In my view, it isn't dishonorable, under most circumstances, for non-military lawyers to assist in representing terrorist detainees before a military tribunal. But the urge to do so is evidence of a mindset that, if transported to the Justice Department, would tend to produce bad policy and legal decisions with respect to dealing with terrorism and terrorists.

Like going after CIA agents whose interrogations of terrorists helped protect the country against attack; trying the 9/11 mastermind in New York City; and reading the Miranda warning to a freshly captured terrorist.

Obama's Fall

How quickly the president and congressional Democrats have turned to tricks and ploys and sham events.

From The Weekly Standard
By Fred Barnes

How the mighty have fallen! Only seven or eight months ago, President Obama and congressional Democrats were on their way to remaking America along liberal lines and positioning themselves for decades of political dominance. Their lopsided majorities in the House and Senate, plus the White House, gave them unassailable command of Washington.

Today, they still have those majorities and the presidency, but they’re no longer in command. Their hopes of enacting the most ambitious agenda of liberal legislation since the days of FDR and the Depression are over. Now they’re reduced to stunts, tricks, and gambits usually associated with embattled presidents and minority parties.

Obama’s invitation to Republicans to join him at a bipartisan health care summit next week has been dubbed the “Blair House stunt” by political analyst Jay Cost. (They’ll meet at the Blair House across the street from the White House.) It’s supposed to give Democrats and Republicans a chance to compromise on health care reform--on ObamaCare, as it’s been nicknamed.

Fat chance. The invitation makes it clear that Republicans would be props in the televised summit as Obama and Democrats tout their own bill. Both houses of Congress have passed “comprehensive health care legislation,” it says. “…The Blair House meeting is the next step in the process.”

If that isn’t plain enough about what Democrats are up to, the strategy that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is currently pursuing on ObamaCare should remove any doubts. She has concocted a three-step process to pass the Democratic bill without any input from Republicans (as usual).

It’s a tricky process, as even some Democrats concede. And it’s both complicated and a last ditch ploy, a legislative hail mary. First, the House must pass the Senate version of ObamaCare, which won Senate approval on Christmas Eve. Then, in a second bill, the House would enact changes in the legislation to make it more amenable to wary Democrats in the House. The third step would have Democrats use “reconciliation” in the Senate to pass the changes with 51 votes, not the 60 normally needed to overcome a filibuster. This tactic would touch off a firestorm of Republican protests.

But it may not work. Putting together a majority in the House may be beyond Pelosi’s skill at cajoling and intimidating reluctant Democratic members. When the House version of ObamaCare passed in November, it got 220 votes. She’s lost 4 votes since then (one by resignation, one by imminent resignation, one by death, one by switching). That gives Pelosi 216 votes, one short of a majority given the vacancies. Also, a number of Democrats may join Republicans to oppose reconciliation in the Senate.

So much for ObamaCare. It’s hanging by a thread. So is the remainder of the liberal agenda. To deal with this dire situation, Obama is preparing to issue executive orders “to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities,” according to Peter Baker of the New York Times.

There’s nothing wrong with executive orders, except they are less immutable than legislation passed by Congress. They can be revoked by subsequent presidents. What’s unusual is that a president with large majorities of his own party in both houses of Congress must turn to such orders to salvage a semblance of his agenda.

On Capitol Hill, Democrats terrified by the prospect of a Republican landslide in the midterm elections in November have come up with a new tactic. They’ll force Republicans either to vote for a series of modest but purportedly popular bills or be accused of obstructionism if they vote against the bills.

It’s stunning that this is what Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and once-triumphant Democrats have stooped to. It’s an old practice. Republicans have used it in the past.

But Democrats, only months ago, thought of themselves as masters of Washington and rulers of the political universe. A liberal transformation of America seemed to be within their grasp. Now, the public having rejected their program, it has slipped away. Their descent into tricks and ploys and sham events--the stuff of uptight legislators and desperate presidents--has occurred with mind-boggling speed. And they have only themselves to blame.

Obama Will Defy Legislative Branch, Use Executive Power

With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using executive power to bypass the legislative branch.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Did Obama Consult Homeland Security Secretary on Day of Christmas Attack?

Napolitano Says She Was in Contact with ‘President’s Office’

From CNSNews

Did President Barack Obama personally consult with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Christmas Day, when suspected al Qaeda terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried to detonate a suicide bomb aboard Northwest Flight 253? Asked that question by CNSNews.com, Napolitano initially declined to answer and then, when asked again, said “we were in contact with the president’s office” that day.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Feds Push for Tracking Cell Phones

From CNET News

Two years ago, when the FBI was stymied by a band of armed robbers known as the "Scarecrow Bandits" that had robbed more than 20 Texas banks, it came up with a novel method of locating the thieves.

FBI agents obtained logs from mobile phone companies corresponding to what their cellular towers had recorded at the time of a dozen different bank robberies in the Dallas area. The voluminous records showed that two phones had made calls around the time of all 12 heists, and that those phones belonged to men named Tony Hewitt and Corey Duffey. A jury eventually convicted the duo of multiple bank robbery and weapons charges.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Senate Judiciary Committee Postpones Vote on Pro-Abortion Dawn Johnsen

"The pro-abortion activist has come under fire for calling women 'fetal containers' and comparing pregnancy with slavery. She has also come under fire for labeling pregnant women 'losers in the contraceptive lottery' and comparing pro-lifers to the Klu Klux Klan."

From LifeNews.com
By Steven Ertelt

The Senate Judiciary Committee has again postponed a vote on pro-abortion Obama nominee Dawn Johnsen. The panel was slated to vote on her nomination today after considering two other nominees but it lost a quorum to do business just before her nomination was slated to be considered.

Johnson's nomination was already delayed one week but was held over until today.

The delay gave pro-life advocates more time to focus on opposing her nomination to the key Justice Department post.

“Nominating Dawn Johnsen to head the Office of Legal Counsel is an insult to pro-life Americans," Congressman Steve King of Iowa said in a statement LifeNews.com received.

"Her personal pro-abortion agenda, previous disparaging comments about pro-life Americans and past criticism of Congress' ban on partial-birth abortion are evidence that she is not interested in finding common ground with those who oppose her narrow philosophy," he said.

King said he hoped Obama would withdraw Johnsen's nomination, which could die on the Senate floor if newly-minted Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts agrees to support a filibuster.

At the end of 2009, the Senate returned her nomination to the White House and President Obama promptly renominated her in January.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue also commented on Johnsen today in an email to LifeNews.com.

"Why is Dawn Johnsen's nomination to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel still being considered?" he asked. "She tried in the late 1980s to take away the tax exempt status of the Roman Catholic Church, all because she wanted to silence the Church's voice on abortion."

Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List also commented on Johnsen.

"In 1988, attorney Dawn Johnsen argued that the Catholic Bishops needed to choose between either having the Catholic Church stripped of its tax-exempt status as a religious organization or keeping their opposition to abortion to themselves. The Catholic Bishops defeated Dawn Johnsen in the Supreme Court Case United States Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization," she explained.

"After the case was concluded, Dawn Johnsen was rewarded for her legal work on the case by being granted the position of legal director of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), where she worked from 1988 – 1993," she continued. "Now, President Barack Obama has re-nominated her to head up the Office of Legal Counsel and is pushing for the Senate to ratify her nomination."

The election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts was thought to be the death knell for her nomination because it would again give opponents enough votes to uphold a filibuster against her -- but Obama re-nominated Johnsen anyway

Johnsen made it through the Senate panel on a party-line vote last March but Republican lawmakers had opposed Johnsen over her rabidly pro-abortion position and because of other political issues, such as terrorism.

Johnsen originally found herself the subject of a Republican filibuster supported by a couple of Democrats, but when pro-abortion Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter caved in to a Democratic primary opponent and flip-flopped to supporting her, the Obama administration signaled she would be re-nominated and would get enough votes to overcome the filibuster.

That's because Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar, who normally votes pro-life, says he will support the Johnsen nomination.

Lugar's press secretary Andy Fisher has confirmed that Lugar "still plans to vote for her."

But, the election of Brown made her confirmation a question and he could provide the 41st vote to support a filibuster because Sen. Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, opposes Johnsen's nomination.

In comments to Roll Call after Brown defeated pro-abortion activist Martha Coakley, Nelson said he didn't think Johnsen's nomination stood much of a chance now. He previously cited her pro-abortion record as a reason for opposing her.

Johnsen had been delayed by Republicans who oppose her because she is strongly pro-abortion -- going as far as saying pregnant women are subjected to a form of slavery -- and because of other political reasons.

If confirmed, Johnsen would be in charge of the office that formulates the attorney general's formal opinions and provides counsel on the thorniest legal questions.

In a brief filed when she was a lawyer with NARAL, Johnsen cited a footnote that said forcing women to bear children was "disturbingly suggestive of involuntary servitude, prohibited by the 13th Amendment, in that forced pregnancy requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state's asserted interest."

Johnsen told lawmakers at her hearing that she merely suggested an analogy in the footnote and "never believed the 13th Amendment had any role" in the abortion issue.

The pro-abortion activist has come under fire for calling women "fetal containers" and comparing pregnancy with slavery. She has also come under fire for labeling pregnant women "losers in the contraceptive lottery" and comparing pro-lifers to the Klu Klux Klan.

Johnsen was the Legal Director for NARAL from 1988-1993. After that, she served in the Clinton administration as the Acting Assistant Attorney General heading the Office of Legal Counsel from 1997-1998 and as Deputy Assistant Attorney General from 1993-1996. She also served on the Clinton transition team in 1992.

Lech Walesa's Warning to America

White House Prepares for Possibility of 2 Supreme Court Vacancies

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Associate justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are seen during a Supreme Court group photograph, Sept. 2009 in Washington. Court watchers believe either or both could decide to step aside and give President Obama his second and third chance to shape his legacy on the Supreme Court.

Lawyers for President Obama have been working behind the scenes to prepare for the possibility of one, and maybe two Supreme Court vacancies this spring.

Read the rest of this entry >>

White House Chief-of-Thugs Apologizes for Calling Comrades "F%&king Retarded"

In response to a demand by Sarah Palin that Obama fire White House Chief-of-Thugs Rahm Emanuel for describing the strategy of Senate liberals as "fucking retarded," Emanuel has apologized to Tim Shriver, the chief executive officer of the Special Olympics.

Since we don't want Obama to succeed in his efforts to reduce America to a European-style welfare state, we're delighted to see the thugs in the White House feuding with soon to be retired comrades in the Congress. Governor Palin's open letter to the President follows:

“I would ask the president to show decency in this process by eliminating one member of that inner circle, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, and not allow Rahm’s continued indecent tactics to cloud efforts. Yes, Rahm is known for his caustic, crude references about those with whom he disagrees, but his recent tirade against participants in a strategy session was such a strong slap in many American faces that our president is doing himself a disservice by seeming to condone Rahm’s recent sick and offensive tactic.

The Obama Administration’s Chief of Staff scolded participants, calling them, “F—ing retarded,” according to several participants, as reported in the Wall Street Journal.

Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking.

A patriot in North Andover, Massachusetts, notified me of Rahm’s “retarded” slam. I join this gentleman, who is the father of a beautiful child born with Down Syndrome, in asking why the Special Olympics, National Down Syndrome Society and other groups condemning Rahm’s degrading scolding have been completely ignored by the White House. No comment from his boss, the president?

As my friend in North Andover says, “This isn’t about politics; it’s about decency. I am not speaking as a political figure but as a parent and as an everyday American wanting my child to grow up in a country free from mindless prejudice and discrimination, free from gratuitous insults of people who are ostensibly smart enough to know better… Have you no sense of decency, sir?”

Mr. President, you can do better, and our country deserves better.

Obama's Fascist Pressure on Switzerland Threatens Collapse of UBS Bank

In an attempt to obtain protected banking information pertaining to 4500 Americans, the Obama tax police are threatening the collapse of one of the world's major banks and more ruin and economic misery in Switzerland and the United States.

If American money is being driven overseas by fascistic socialists in Washington, one wonders how many job-creating, freedom-loving entrepreneurs are also becoming refugees.

From Bangkok Post

Switzerland's justice minister warned in an interview on Sunday that top bank UBS could collapse if sensitive talks with the United States over a high-profile tax fraud investigation fall through.

"The actions of UBS in the United States are very problematic. Not just because they are punishable but also because they threaten all of the bank's activities,'' Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf told Le Matin Dimanche newspaper.

"The Swiss economy and the job market would suffer on a major scale if UBS fails as a result of its licence being revoked in the United States,'' she said.

Switzerland and the United States have negotiated an agreement under which UBS would hand over information on some 4,500 account holders to US tax police.

But a Swiss court ruling earlier this month put the deal in doubt.

Many in Switzerland, where banking secrecy is a source of pride and a key part of the economy, have accused the government of failing to protect UBS.

"We have nothing to blame ourselves for. I don't think anyone could prove that we acted badly,'' Widmer-Schlumpf said in the interview.