Democrat Governors Concerned About Obama vs Arizona Lawsuit.

From The New York Times.

July 11, 2010

Governors Voice Grave Concerns on Immigration

By ABBY GOODNOUGH

BOSTON — In a private meeting with White House officials this weekend, Democratic governors voiced deep anxiety about the Obama administration’s suit against Arizona’s new immigration law, worrying that it could cost a vulnerable Democratic Party in the fall elections.

While the weak economy dominated the official agenda at the summer meeting here of the National Governors Association, concern over immigration policy pervaded the closed-door session between Democratic governors and White House officials and simmered throughout the three-day event.

At the Democrats’ meeting on Saturday, some governors bemoaned the timing of the Justice Department lawsuit, according to two governors who spoke anonymously because the discussion was private.

“Universally the governors are saying, ‘We’ve got to talk about jobs,’ ” Gov. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee, a Democrat, said in an interview. “And all of a sudden we have immigration going on.”

He added, “It is such a toxic subject, such an important time for Democrats.”

The administration seemed to be taking a carrot-and-stick approach on Sunday. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, in town to give the governors a classified national security briefing, met one-on-one with Jan Brewer, the Republican who succeeded her as governor of Arizona and ardently supports the immigration law.

About the same time as that meeting, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said on a taped Sunday talk show that the Justice Department could bring yet another lawsuit against Arizona if there is evidence that the immigration law leads to racial profiling.

Ms. Brewer said she and Ms. Napolitano did not discuss the current lawsuit. Instead, in a conversation she described as cordial, they discussed Arizona’s request for more National Guard troops along the border with Mexico, as well as other resources.

The Democrats’ meeting provided a window on tensions between the White House and states over the suit, which the Justice Department filed last week in federal court in Phoenix. Nineteen Democratic governors are either leaving office or seeking re-election this year, and Republicans see those seats as crucial to swaying the 2012 presidential race.

The Arizona law — which Ms. Brewer signed in April and which, barring an injunction, takes effect July 29 — makes it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant there. It also requires police officers to determine the immigration status of people they stop for other offenses if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that they might be illegal immigrants.

The lawsuit contends that controlling immigration is a federal responsibility, but polls suggest that a majority of Americans support the Arizona law, or at least the concept of a state having a strong role in immigration enforcement.

Republican governors at the Boston meeting were also critical of the lawsuit, saying it infringed on states’ rights and rallying around Ms. Brewer, whose presence spurred a raucous protest around the downtown hotel where the governors gathered.

“I’d be willing to bet a lot of money that almost every state in America next January is going to see a bill similar to Arizona’s,” said Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska, a Republican seeking re-election.

But the unease of Democratic governors, seven of whom are seeking re-election this year, was more striking.

“I might have chosen both a different tack and a different time,” said Gov. Bill Ritter Jr. of Colorado, a Democrat who was facing a tough fight for re-election and pulled out of the race earlier this year. “This is an issue that divides us politically, and I’m hopeful that their strategy doesn’t do that in a way that makes it more difficult for candidates to get elected, particularly in the West.”

The White House would not directly respond to reports of complaints from some Democratic governors.

But David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser, said on Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the president remained committed to passing an immigration overhaul, and that addressing the issue did not mean he was ignoring the economy.

“That doesn’t mean we can’t have a good, healthy debate about the economy and other issues,” Mr. Axelrod said.

Mr. Obama addressed the economy last week during stops in Kansas City and Las Vegas, and has been calling on Congress to offer additional tax relief to small businesses.

And the heads of Mr. Obama’s national debt commission — Alan K. Simpson and Erskine B. Bowles — were on hand here on Sunday to press the economic issue.

The nation’s total federal debt next year is expected to exceed $14 trillion, and Mr. Simpson, a former Republican senator from Wyoming, and Mr. Bowles, a Democrat and the White House chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, offered a gloomy assessment if spending is not brought under control even more.

“This debt is like a cancer,” Mr. Bowles said. “It is truly going to destroy the country from within.”

Still, the issue of immigration commanded as much attention as anything here this weekend.
Ms. Brewer, who was trailed by television cameras all weekend, called the lawsuit “outrageous” and said the state was receiving donations from around the country to help fight it.
“I think Arizona will win,” she said, “and we will take a position for all of America.”

Immigration was not the only topic at the Saturday meeting between Democratic governors and two White House officials — Patrick Gaspard, Mr. Obama’s political director, and Cecilia Munoz, director of intergovernmental affairs. But several governors, including Christine Gregoire of Washington, said it was a particularly heated issue.

Ms. Gregoire, who does not face an election this year, said the White House was doing a poor job of showing the American public that it was working on the problem of illegal immigration.
“They described for me a list of things that they are doing to try and help on that border,” Ms. Gregoire said of the White House officials at the closed-door meeting. “And I said, ‘The public doesn’t know that.’ ”
She added, “We’ve got a message void, and the only thing we’re hearing is that they’re filing a lawsuit.”

Some Democrats also joined Republicans in calling for Congress to pass an immigration policy overhaul this year.
“There are 535 members of Congress,” said Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana, a Democrat. “Certainly somebody back there can chew gum and hold the basketball at the same time. This is not an either-or.”

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico praised the Justice Department’s lawsuit, saying his fellow Democrats’ concerns were “misguided.”
“Policy-wise it makes sense,” said Mr. Richardson, who is Hispanic and who leaves office this year on term limits, “and Obama is popular with Hispanic voters and this is going to be a popular move with them nationally.”

Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland — a Democrat who voiced apprehension about the lawsuit in the private meeting, according to the two governors who requested anonymity — said in an interview that he supported it.

“The president doesn’t have control over some of the timing of things that happen,” Mr. O’Malley said. “When those things arise, you can’t be too precious about what’s in it for your own personal political timing or even your party’s timing. When matters like this arise, I think the president has to take a principled stand.”

But Mr. Bredesen said that in Tennessee, where the governor’s race will be tight this year, Democratic candidates were already on the defensive about the federal health care overhaul, and the suit against Arizona further weakened them. In Tennessee, he said, Democratic candidates are already “disavowing” the immigration lawsuit.

“Maybe you do that when you’re strong,” he said of the suit, “and not when there’s an election looming out there.”

Mr. Ritter of Colorado said he wished the Justice Department had waited to sue Arizona until after the law went into effect, to give the public a chance to see how difficult it would be to enforce.

“It’s just an easier case to make,” he said. “I just think that law enforcement officers are going to have a terribly difficult time applying this law in a constitutional way.”

Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting from Washington, and Katie Zezima from Boston.

So Why Can't We Solve the Immigration Problem?

So Why Can't We Solve the Immigration Problem?


By Bob Haran;
American Conservative Republican

President Barack Obama says our immigration system is broken.

The Arizona Chamber of Commerce in a statement they recently issued pointed out that the federal failure to enact immigration reform has thrust Arizona into a "divisive, emotionally charged environment that is tearing at the fabric of Arizona's sense of community and threatening the essence of our historically diverse culture."

The Arizona Republic in an editorial today said, "Arizona has to be more than the sum of our frustrations," and that "Yes, federal policies made our state the nation's busiest crossing point for illegal immigration and drug smuggling." The Republic then concludes that the "ultimate solution" has to come from Congress.

The Republic further claims that, "The state's soul is at risk," and that "saving it means calling out the bullies."

Of course, those of us demanding a secure border and the enforcement of our immigration laws are the bullies of which the Republic speaks. The assumption being that all who want immigration laws enforced must certainly be the bullies and racist of our society and those opposed to enforcement and advocating a "comprehensive solution" and "immigration reform" are the open minded, tolerant and good people in American society.

Interestingly, all their "comprehensive reform solutions," always include a path to citizenship for the millions illegally residing in America as an important element in solving our nations illegal immigration problem.

President Obama has endorsed a proposal by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., that would require illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law, pay a fine and any back taxes and perform community service to obtain legal status.

What these good, tolerant and open minded people will never admit, is that every path to legalization and citizenship for those who are in our country illegally is an amnesty for violating our immigration laws.

The true path to legalization and citizenship for those here illegally would be to return to their own countries and enter the United States legally by the front door, after getting permission to enter, then apply for citizenship and take the oath that millions of our ancestors have proudly taken.

The assumption that those demanding a secure border and enforcement of our laws are racist is just ignorance.

The assumption that we somehow hate Latino's or Mexicans or any other group of people is ignorant.

The fact is that America is a nation of immigrants and we welcome those who come here legally and earn American citizenship. All we ask is that you come in the front door and let us know who you are before entering our homeland.

Trying to solve the problem of illegal immigration by making the "illegal" alien a "legal" alien is like trying to solve a speeding problem on the highway by increasing the speed limit. You wont have less speeders but less people will be breaking the speed limit.

The solution to the illegal immigration problem is not that complex, fist look at what caused the problem.

Having a unsecured border that anyone could walk or even drive across was a major cause on illegal immigration. It's the same as keeping your back door wide open and then wondering why people keep coming in your house that way.

Securing the border is just common sense.

As President Obama said however, "the problem cannot be solved only with fences and border patrols."

The greatest magnet to illegal immigration are jobs, jobs that greedy business people give to those here illegally because they profit from the low cost of the illegal immigrant's labor. Of course these employers are the good people of the Chamber of Commerce and certainly not racist, just as the plantation owners who profited from slave labor were good people and pillars of the community.

But wait a minute, we have laws against hiring undocumented workers, why are these people being hired if it's illegal to hire them? The answer is that the law is not being enforced.

Obama said that business should face consequences for knowingly employing illegal immigrants. Well Mr. President, that is the responsibility of the executive branch of government, the branch you are in charge of, you don't need a new law from Congress, just enforce the laws we already have against hiring undocumented workers and call it a "comprehensive solution."

If the president, the Chamber of Commerce and, the Arizona Republic are all that concerned with illegal immigration and what it is doing to our country and state, then they should help solve the problem, secure the border, prosecute those who knowingly hire undocumented workers, and yes, when someone is found to be in the United States illegally, do what the law prescribes, deport them.

Maybe the real problem is that the president and the Republic are afraid of today's plantation owners who must have their cheap labor regardless of the cost to the state or nation.

Obama Declares WAR -- on Arizona

From the Washingtonexaminer.com
By: Byron York, Chief Political Correspondent

June 22, 2010


The Obama administration has a lot of fights on its hands. Putting aside real wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, there's the battle against leaking oil in the Gulf, the struggle against 9.7 percent unemployment across the country, and clashes over the president's agenda on Capitol Hill. Despite all that, the White House has found time to issue a new declaration of war, this time against an unlikely enemy: the state of Arizona.

The Justice Department is preparing to sue Arizona over its new immigration law. The president has stiffed Gov. Jan Brewer's call for meaningful assistance in efforts to secure the border. And the White House has accused Arizona's junior senator, Republican Jon Kyl, of lying about an Oval Office discussion with the president over comprehensive immigration reform. Put them all together, and you have an ugly state of affairs that's getting uglier by the day.

First, the lawsuit. Last week, Brewer was appalled to learn the Justice Department's intentions not from the Justice Department but from an interview done by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with an Ecuadorian TV outlet. "It would seem to me that if they were going to file suit against us," Brewer told Fox News' Greta van Susteren last week, "they definitely would have contacted us first and informed us before they informed citizens ... of another nation."
But they didn't.

"There certainly seems to be an underlying disrespect for the state of Arizona," says Kris Kobach, the law professor and former Bush administration Justice Department official who helped draft the Arizona law. Kobach points out that during the Bush years, several states openly flouted federal immigration law on issues like sanctuary cities and in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. Respecting the doctrines of comity and federalism, the Bush administration didn't sue. Now, when Arizona passes a measure that is fully consistent with federal law, the Obama administration, says Kobach, "goes sprinting to the courthouse door."

Then there is the matter of the White House's assistance, or nonassistance, in Arizona's border-security efforts. On June 3, the president, under criticism for refusing to meet or even talk to Brewer, reluctantly granted her an audience in the Oval Office. After the meeting, Brewer told reporters Obama pledged that administration officials would come to Arizona within two weeks with details of plans to secure the border.

June 17 marked two weeks, and there were no administration officials and no plans. There still aren't. "What a disappointment," Brewer told van Susteren. "You know, when you hear from the president of the United States and he gives you a commitment, you would think that they would stand up and stand by their word. It is totally disappointing."

And now, there's the Kyl controversy. On June 18, Kyl told a town meeting in North Phoenix that Obama personally told him the administration will not secure the U.S.-Mexico border because doing so would make it politically difficult to pass comprehensive immigration reform. "I met with the president in the Oval Office, just the two of us," Kyl said. "Here's what the president said. The problem is, he said, if we secure the border, then you all won't have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform."

"In other words," Kyl continued, "they're holding it hostage. They don't want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform."

After Kyl's statement went viral on the Internet, the White House issued a sharp denial. "The president didn't say that and Senator Kyl knows it," communications director Dan Pfeiffer wrote on the White House blog. "There are more resources dedicated toward border security today than ever before, but, as the president has made clear, truly securing the border will require a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system."

Kyl is not backing down. "What I said occurred, did occur," he told an Arizona radio station. "Some spokesman down at the White House said no, that isn't what happened at all, and then proceeded to say we need comprehensive immigration reform to secure the border. That is their position, and all I was doing was explaining why, from a conversation with the president, why it appears that that's their position."

Even if it didn't have so many other fights on its hands, it would be unusual for an administration to align itself against an American state. But that's precisely what has happened. Soon it will be up to the courts and voters to decide whether Obama's campaign against Arizona will succeed or fail.

The Fuss over Arizona's Immigration Law

The Fuss over Arizona's Immigration Law
Wednesday, April 28, 2010

By Brit Hume


The president says the Arizona law is "misguided."

His attorney general says it's "unfortunate."

In San Francisco they are talking about boycotting the state.

Al Sharpton is on the way to lead marches and Linda Greenhouse, the esteemed legal affairs commentator of The New York Times, says she will boycott Arizona because, she says, it's now a police state where, "breathing while undocumented" is a crime.

All this is in reaction mainly to two passages of the new Arizona immigration law

One provides when police are engaged in "lawful contact" with someone where there is "reasonable suspicion" the person is an illegal alien, that the police shall make a "reasonable attempt... when practicable" to determine the person's immigration status.

The other provision makes it a crime to be in Arizona illegally. This is the part that Greenhouse says makes breathing while undocumented a crime.

But it's already a federal crime to enter the U.S. illegally. The new law just makes it a state crime, to.

As for the charge police will now make random demands of Hispanics to produce their papers, the bill's authors say that the requirement that there first be "lawful contact" means situations where someone has already been stopped for other law enforcement reasons.

In fact, once you actually read this law, it becomes clear the fuss over it has little to do with breathing in Arizona and a lot to do with hyperventilating in Washington.

— Brit Hume is the senior political analyst for Fox News Channel.

BREWER CLEAR LEADER WITH REPUBLICAN VOTERS

According to the latest Rasmussen poll of 510 likely Republican primary voters, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is the clear leader for the Republican nomination for governor.

Poll results show 26% of Republican voters supporting Jan Brewer with millionaire Buz Mills, who has spent over $1.2 million on TV ads in second place , 8 points behind Brewer with 18% support.

Former Arizona Board of Regents president John Munger of Tucson improved his support with Republican voters and came in third with 14% support, up from 10% in March.

Arizona Treasurer Dean Martin has dropped from third to fourth place with 12% support, down from 21% in March.

Brewer became governor when former Governor Janet Napolitano resigned in January 2009 and went to Washington to serve as President Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security.

After taking the oath of office, Brewer was confronted with a state budget out of balance with increased spending and reduced revenue.

Brewer showed she had the guts to govern and immediately went to work to craft a solution which required very large and unpopular reductions in state spending.

Jan Brewer accepted reality, budget cuts alone would not be enough to balance the budget, and she announced that nothing was off the table, including the need to increase revenue to the state in order to provide a minimum of essential governmental services and a balanced budget. Some Republican members of the legislature didn't want to accept reality however, they would not under any circumstances vote to increase any tax regardless of how serious the budget situation was for Arizona.

Republicans by nature are for less government and less taxes and that has been the position of Jan Brewer throughout her long career in public service.

When Napolitano went to Washington she left Brewer with the tab for years of a growing state budget and no way to pay for it without large tax increases. Brewer is not one to pass the buck however and sponsored a plan that was hailed by the Wall Street Journal as, "a budget breakthrough for state government and an alternative to the California tax and spend model."

The plan was to repeal the hated tax on business property, provide one of the largest corporate tax cuts in the nation from 6.97% to 4.86%, and cut all individual income tax rates by 6.6%. Those cuts would have stimulated economic growth in Arizona and in the long run would have increased revenue to the state. To handle the immediate problem of inadequate income to balance the budget, in addition to massive cuts, the governor and Republican legislative leadership agreed to refer a temporary one cent sales tax increase to the voters.

The Arizona House of Representatives approved the plan but when the legislation got to the Arizona Senate, it ran into serious trouble. Two extremist and irresponsible Republican Senators, Pamela Gorman and Ron Gould, broke ranks with the GOP and voted with the Democrats against the sales tax referral, which killed the Republican budget agreement.

Gorman resigned as the Republican Senate Whip and later resigned from the Arizona Senate to run full time for the congressional seat held by retiring Congressman John Shadegg.

Ron Gould is still making noise in the Senate but has been removed from any leadership position.

Brewer stuck to her guns and eventually the Arizona Legislature accepted reality and referred the temporary sales tax increase to the voters to decide.

While Brewer was displaying extraordinary political courage by putting the people of Arizona before herself and fighting for the unpopular but necessary sales tax increase, other Republicans were taking advantage of the situation and putting themselves first in an attempt to advance their own political careers.

No one wants a tax increase, not you, not me, and certainly not Jan Brewer, but the state budget must be balanced and the people will tolerate only a certain amount of cuts in state services. Brewer has had to make the tough decisions on what to cut and by how much and how to enhance state revenue without taking too much from the taxpayers. She decided to ask the voters for a penny increase in the sales tax temporarily to help fund; education, health and, public safety.

Mills, Munger and Martin, have decided to show no leadership and attacked Brewer for having the courage to lead, telling the people the truth, and doing what is necessary to solve Arizona's budget crisis. The 3M candidates, Mills, Munger, and Martin have showed that they are Missing what Brewer has, the guts to govern and make the tough decisions a governor must make.

On this one issue alone, Brewer has proven that she is the only candidate worth supporting for governor and head and shoulders above the 3M candidates who attack her for providing the leadership Arizona needs.

Mills, Munger, and Martin have decided on a campaign strategy of telling the loudest and most radical what they want to hear, stick their heads in the sand and offer no leadership or real solution to the current budget crisis.

Their do nothing strategy doesn't seem to be working.

Bob Haran,
American Conservative Republican

Pullen on the fall of ACORN

"One too many nuts have fallen from this tree," said Arizona Republican Party Chairman Randy Pullen, as public outcry mounts for a transparent and accountable investigation into the activities of Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN.)

Widely reported in the national news media, ACORN employees were recently filmed giving two individuals posing as a pimp and prostitute, illicit financial advice encouraging them to scam the Internal Revenue Service. This comes on the heals of nearly a dozen arrest warrants being issued in Miami for ACORN workers suspected of falsifying information on hundreds of voter registration cards last year, and States from coast to coast clamping down public funding to the corrupt organization.

"Over the years, we've all suspected that ACORN was involved in nefarious activities," said Chairman Pullen. "Now we can see exactly what they are up to, and it is as disturbing as it is appalling. ACORN officials would have you believe that the actions of a few employees are not representative of their organization, but a few poisoned apples makes me suspicious of the whole barrel. I suspect the more people look into the ACORN's activities, the more irregularities they will find. I think that this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg."

"Ironically, they are appointing someone to oversee an internal investigation who already has a criminal record," the Chairman continued. "Henry Cisneros, who may be best known for being caught lying to the FBI prior to being named as Clinton's Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, will participate in the probe into ACORN's practices. I can think of no better person to advise ACORN on legal issues than someone who had a mistress convicted of bank fraud and obstruction of justice," he said. "This man also sat on the board of Countrywide Financial which was roundly criticized for their dubious mortgage practices which allowed borrowers to buy homes without down payments, income verification and who allowed monthly payments that didn't even cover the interest. This is the guy they want looking into their misdeeds? You couldn't make this up if you tried."

"More troubling is the media's coverage and President Obama response," said Chairman Pullen. "All but one of last Sunday's talk shows failed to address the issue, but when they did, the President brushed it off as if he was vaguely aware of the controversy. President Obama has evidently seems to be suffering from have short-term memory loss when it comes to his involvement with ACORN. He worked with ACORN for 20 years. He was a community organizer, Director of Project Vote in Chicago, and even served as their attorney. But I guess we shouldn't be surprised by this approach towards his involvement with ACORN. During the campaign he denied had been an ACORN trainer until the New York Times proved he was. We all know that the President has a soft spot in his heart for ACORN, but these recent revelations warrant a strong and immediate response from President Obama."

"Some Democrats like the New York Attorney General have launched full investigations and we need more to follow the lead of Republican Governors from Georgia, Louisiana and California who have already halted ACORN's funding. Even the nonpartisan Census Bureau has severed ties with the group. The question is, 'Who will be the last person left on this sinking ship'?"

THE OBAMA MALAISE

By Helaine Chersonsky

I have worked consistently during the past 30 years as a journalist, corrections officer for the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections, and for an airline. Each time I was out of work, I quickly found another job within various professions and organizations. Not this time; not during Obama/Time. For the past five years I had a job I loved- working for an airline. I loved wearing our new, classy uniforms, loved helping people get to their destinations, both domestic and internationally, loved the customer interaction. Now I am on furlough from my job at the T. F. Green Airport in Providence, R. I.; a product of the general malaise throughout the economy; not as many people are flying, and business travel has dipped way down. So, I am laid off , along with the other 14.5 million Americans. (This figure was published in the September 27th issue of the New York Times, under the article “U.S. Job Seekers Exceed Openings by Record Ratio,” by Peter S. Goodman.)
.
Yesterday, was the Jewish High Holiday of Yom Kippur; I observed the holiday by going to services at conservative Temple Beth Israel and visiting my cousins, who have a jewelry store in Waltham, MA on Moody Street. My two uncles started the string of medium-priced jewelry stores over 60 years ago, after they came back from serving in the Pacific Theater in World War II. I know the business struggled at first; their first store in Marlboro didn’t do as well as their second larger store in Waltham. The Moody Street store took off, and served as the launching pad for other stores on Arsenal Street in Watertown, Burlington and Peabody.

The Waltham and Arsenal street stores are holding their own, but my cousin Bobby, who manages the Waltham store along with my other cousins said when ObamaCare gets passed, that will mean a tax increase for the store, plus added insurance costs. Think more layoffs throughout America, especially in small businesses, once the ObamaCare Express begins in earnest.

There is a general sense of unease now that some people can't put their fingers on similar to the Carter year’s misery index throughout the 1970's. We‘re not through yet because Obama/Management hasn't yet hit . I have a sense that the recession/depression hasn’t dropped yet. It’s as if the country is holding its breath, waiting for the other shoe to drop. The real effect of the recession is holding off, I guess, until Obamacare is passed, then businesses will take a look at the tax bite the health care bill will take out of them and lay off more people. Then the malaise index will rise; the middle class will again feel the squeeze of recession and Massachusetts liberals will blame the last eight years of the Bush presidency for it all.

ANGRY ANTI-GOVERNMENT PROTEST IN D.C.

Anti-Government Demonstration Draws Tens of Thousands to D.C.

By Emma Brown and James Hohmann
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, September 12, 2009 2:52 PM



Conservative protesters by the tens of thousands crowded outside the U.S. Capitol on Saturday, a massive demonstration aimed at stopping what organizers called the over-expansion of the federal government under the Obama administration.

"Hell hath no fury like a taxpayer scorned," declared Andrew Moylan, head of government affairs for the National Taxpayer Union, urging protesters to call their representatives. "You're being ignored today by the media and some politicians."

The crowd -- loud, rambunctious and sprawling -- gathered at the foot of the Capitol after a march along Pennsyvania Avenue from Freedom Plaza. Invocations of God and former President Reagan by the an array speakers drew loud cheers, echoing across the Mall. On a windy, overcast afternoon, hundreds of yellow "Don't Tread on Me" flags flapped in the breeze, mingled with U.S. and Texas state flags.

"We own the dome," the crowd chanted loudly, pointing at the Capitol.

Estimates of the number of protesters varied widely but about 30,000 people have registered online for the march, according to one of the rally's sponsors, FreedomWorks, a Washington-based group headed by former House majority leader Dick Armey (R-Tex.).

"You will not spend the money of our children and our grandchildren to feed an overstuffed government," Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) said of the Obama administration, drawing loud cheers from the throng on the west side of the Capitol.

"Our history is decorated by those who endured the burden of defending freedom," Price said. "Now a new generation of patriots has emerged. You are those patriots."

FreedomWorks and other sponsors, including Tea Party Patriots and ResistNet, comprise a loose coalition of conservative groups that helped organize several health-care and anti-tax rallies during the spring and summer.

At the Federal Triangle Metro stop, demonstrators emerged from packed trains and broke into a rendition of "God Bless America" as they rode escalators to the street.

"Nobody's standing up for us, so we have to stand up for ourselves," said Phil Chancey, 66, who drove to the District from Clinton, Tenn., for the rally. The sign he carried, deriding the president health-care reform plan, read, "OBAMACARE MAKES ME SICK."

Participants in the demonstrations span the spectrum of conservative anger at Obama, including opponents of his tax, spending and health-care plans and protesters who question Obama's U.S. citizenship and liken his administration to the Nazi regime. By 11 a.m., the route between Freedom Plaza and the Capitol was a sea of demonstrators chanting "USA!" and carrying signs such as, "Taxed enough already," "The audacity of dope" and, "Czars belong in Russia."

Most signs were hand made: "Socialism is UnAmerican," "King George Didn't Listen Either!" "Terrorists Won't Destroy America, Congress Will!" "The American Dream R.I.P."

Debbie Wilson, 51 of Apollo Beach, Fla., flew to Washington last Sunday to make a week out of the protest. She drove to colonial Williamsburg in a rented car.

"We want our country to go back to the roots of doing what our Founding Fathers wanted us to do -- less government in every aspect of my life," she said. "We walked the streets of Williamsburg, and it felt like we were learning how to be a patriot."

Dozens of signs mentioned Rep. Joe Wilson, (R-S.C.), who jeered at Obama during his health-care speech to Congress on Wednesday night. Dee Meredith, 62 of Callao, Va., said she had never of Wilson before he shouted at the president, "You lie!" At the rally, Meredith waved a placard: "Thank You Joe Wilson."

"We're the forgotten people, and he's given us a voice," she said.

When Armey, in his address to the crowd, referred to Obama having pledged to uphold the Constitution, the protesters shouted at the president in absentia: "Liar! Liar!"

Jeff Mapps, 29, a stagehand and labor union member from South Philadelphia, left home about 6 a.m. to come to the protest. He said he hadn't been involved in previous Tea Party demonstrations, but he watches Fox News host Glenn Beck "all the time" and he wanted to be a part of something he thinks will be historic. Beck has been drumming up support for the march.

Holding a sign that said "Preserve, Protect, Defend" on a Red Line Metro train packed with conservative activists, Mapps fretted over a "blatant disregard for the Constitution."

"We've been watching it for six to eight months," he said. "It was finally an opportunity to get involved. It's been boiling over . . . It's not just about health care. It's about so much more than that."

Anna Hayes, 58, a nurse from Fairfax County, stood on the Mall in 1981 for Reagan's inauguration. "The same people were celebrating freedom," she said. "The president was fighting for the people then. I remember those years very well and fondly."

Saying she was worried about "Obamacare," Hayes said: "This is the first rally I've been to that demonstrates against something, the first in my life. I just couldn't stay home anymore."

Like countless others at the rally, Joan Wright, 78 of Ocean Pines, Md., sounded angry. "I'm not taking this crap anymore," said Wright, who came by bus to Washington with 150 like-minded residents of Maryland's Eastern Shore. "I don't like the health-care [plan]. I don't like the czars. And I don't like the elitists telling us what we should do or eat."

UPDATE: 9/13/09 05:11

NBC Evening News last night reported crowds in Washington, D.C. to be in the hundreds of thousands and a sea of people stretching from the U.S. Capitol to the White House.

Wall Street Journal Supports Brewer on Budget

From the Wall Street Journal 8/11/09

Arizona’s Budget Breakthrough

An alternative to California’s tax and spend model.
Perhaps states are starting to learn the right fiscal lessons from the red-ink blowouts in high-tax California and New York. Today, the legislature in Arizona will vote on a tax reform designed to entice more employers and high-income taxpayers to the state. Sponsored by Republican Governor Jan Brewer, the plan would cut state property taxes, the corporate tax and personal income taxes, in exchange for a temporary rise in the sales tax.

Most economic studies agree that states have more jobs and higher income growth when they tax consumption rather than savings, investment and business profits. This explains why most of the nine states with no income tax at all—such as Texas, Florida and Tennessee—have been economic high-flyers in recent decades.

Ms. Brewer’s proposal reflects this economic logic. Effective January 1, 2011, her plan would reduce the state’s corporate income tax rate to 4.86% from 6.97%, which would be one of the largest business tax cuts in the nation in recent years. The proposal also cuts all personal income tax rates by 6.6%, thus lowering the top marginal rate to 4.24% from 4.54%. A hated statewide tax on commercial and residential property would also be abolished.

Arizona has been hit especially hard by the housing slump, and its budget woes were compounded thanks to former Governor Janet Napolitano’s spending spree before she joined the Obama cabinet. On her watch the budget grew by more than 50% in five years—to $10.2 billion from $6.5 billion in 2004. The state now has a $1 billion budget gap, and to close it the legislature will also vote on a one percentage point increase in the sales tax to 6.6% in 2010 and 2011; in the third year the sales tax would fall to 6.1%, and in the fourth year would revert to its current 5.6% rate.

We’d rather see the legislature cut more spending than raise the sales tax, but on the other hand the sales tax would only take effect if it is approved on the November ballot. The political class is giving voters a say in the matter. The sales tax increase also has the advantage of a built-in expiration date, while the tax cuts are permanent.

Democratic opponents are calling this a tax giveaway to big business. But lawmakers needn’t apologize for trying to retain Arizona’s status as a business-friendly state—particularly when jobs are so scarce. Small employers also benefit from the lower property tax rates and the personal income tax reductions. Lower tax payments will enable them to reinvest more in their enterprises.

The opponents should consult a new study of state business taxes by former U.S. Treasury economist Robert Carroll for the Tax Foundation. He examined 50 states and found that states with lower corporate tax rates have higher wage gains and more productivity over time. This tax cut sounds like a high-return investment.

Republicans control both houses of the Arizona legislature, and as we went to press the main obstacle to passing the reform was the Arizona Senate’s anti tax conservatives. They oppose the higher sales tax. These Republicans should look to one of the triumphs of the Reagan Presidency, the 1986 tax reform, which broadened the tax base but substantially lowered tax rates and thus sustained the 1980's expansion.

Arizona has the chance to be the anti-California, closing the budget deficit by growing the economy, not by raising taxes. We hope legislators don’t blow it, because the U.S. desperately needs an alternative to the tax, spend and tax again philosophy of Sacramento and Albany.

Obama and Planned Parenthood in Bed Together.

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The president of the nation's largest abortion business attended what she called a "special meeting" at the White House yesterday on health care reform. This is the second time the Obama administration gave special privileges to Planned Parenthood.
As the mainstream media denies abortion funding is in the health care bills Congress is considering, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards appears to have special access to the White House to make sure it is included.

In a note she posted on Facebook, Richards reveals more about the meeting and the Obama administration's strategy for getting the pro-abortion bill approved.

"Yesterday I attended a special meeting at the White House to discuss women and health insurance reform," Richards writes.

"The basic message was that we've got to remind folks why we became so dedicated to reforming the health care system — or more particularly, the health insurance system — in the first place," she continues.

Richards says the government-run health care system is needed because of rising health care costs and appears to indicate more women are visiting Planned Parenthood centers for abortions.

"In fact given the unemployment rate and widespread loss of insurance coverage, at Planned Parenthood we are seeing so many more women," she writes.

Richards also attacks the pro-life advocates and others who have been participating in the health care town hall meetings held by members of Congress.

She says abortion advocates are "watching with incredulity the screaming people at congressional forums who seem to believe that the White House is somehow plotting to create a socialist state."

Richards says the Obama administration "appreciate[s] all the mighty Planned Parenthood supporters speaking up for reform in the states."

Planned Parenthood's special relationship with the Obama administration became apparent when Richards was invited to a White House-sponsored health care summit that left out any pro-life organizations.

Richards' abortion business made the invitation list as did groups that advocate abortion like the Human Rights Campaign, National Council of La Raza and others.

The Obama-Planned Parenthood love-fest continued in July when Tina Tchen, director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, spoke to more than 400 pro-abortion activists at the 2009 Planned Parenthood Organizing and Policy Summit.

Tchen is the former vice president of the National Organization for Women, a prominent pro-abortion organization, whom Obama selected as executive director of the White House Council on Women and Girls.

During the event, Tchen told the Planned Parenthood activists that if they want abortion as a part of the health care restructuring plan Congress is considering, they need to "bring it" -- and up their lobbying efforts.

Pullen Says Obama Presidency; Broken Promises, Rampant Spending, Chicago-style Politics

From Matt Roberts,
Arizona Republican Party

Broken promises, rampant government spending, and Chicago-style politics have marred the first 200 days of the Obama Presidency according to Arizona Republican Party Chairman Randy Pullen. After examining the achievements of President Obama’s first six months in office, Chairman Pullen has concluded that the soaring rhetoric didn't produce the results Americans so sorely need during this time of economic turmoil.

As unemployment continues to rise and the President’s approval ratings decline, many are taking inventory of the progress made by the Obama Administration and have been disappointed with results. Nationwide polling from respected organizations like the Wall Street Journal, Gallup and CNN have shown President Obama’s polling numbers deteriorate the more Americans learn about him and his political agenda.

“President Obama campaigned on a platform of hope for a better tomorrow,” said Chairman Pullen. “If government spending was the answer to the problems Americans are experiencing right now he certainly has made his best effort to solve the crisis. But we know that burdening future generations with debt is as wrong as it is ineffective in dealing with the today’s economy. But the President seems to think otherwise.”

“During the Democrat President’s first 200 days, he has seemingly made it his mission to spend us into oblivion and Americans are beginning to see the President for what he is. Another big-government, big-spending liberal who thinks that all of our problems can be solved with government intervention,” the Chairman said.

“The President and his administration even found time to bully the state of Arizona and try to intimidate our Senators Kyl and McCain by threatening to withhold stimulus dollars,” the Chairman continued. “That type politics may work for Chicago community organizers, but it is offensive from the President of the United States.”

“I do have to say that President Obama was successful in one thing, motivating our grassroots and improving Republican fundraising,” said Pullen. “People are rightfully concerned with the spending spree that our Democrat President is leading us on. Many feel that under the President’s leadership our country is gotten seriously off track and they need to do something about it. Whether that be taking part in grassroots activism or contributing to our efforts to fight a plan to institute a government-run healthcare system.”

“So far Democrats have shown that they are part of the problem not the solution. The Republican Party will capitalize on that reality and show that the Party of ideas is alive and well in Arizona, and around the country,” the Chairman concluded.

Sotomayor Approved by Senate Committee

Politico has reported today that the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court has been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the full Senate is expected to confirm her next week. If confirmed, Sotomayor would replace Justice David Souter, one of the more liberal members of the court.

The 13-6 committee vote was mostly along party lines with all Democrat's on the committee voting in favor and all Republicans, except South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, opposed.

Graham said, "This is the first Latina women in the history of the United States to be selected for the Supreme Court. Now that is a big deal." Graham explained his vote by saying he would not have chosen her, "but I understand why President Obama did. I gladly give her my vote because I think she meets the qualifications test that was used in Scalia and Ginsburg."

Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said, "Based on her record as a judge and her statements, I am not able to support her nomination. In speech after speech, year after year, Judge Sotomayor set forth a fully formed judicial philosophy that conflicts with American philosophy of blind justice to the law."

Arizona Senator Jon Kyl has announced that he will not support Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Sotomayor has said that a "wise Latina" could render a better judgement then a white male.

COMMENTARY:

The American Conservative Republican (ACR), does not understand how an individual's gender or ancestry renders a better judgement then any other's gender or ancestry. We feel that, the belief that gender or ancestry has any connection with human wisdom, is evidence of ignorance. We also believe that too much emphasize is placed on race, gender or ancestry in American society, especially by those who consider themselves progressive. Ending racism and sexism will not be archived by pre-judging people by their race, gender or ancestry. We believe that selecting any individual for any position because of their race, gender or ancestry is, or should be, considered un-American.

We hold that the truth is self-evident, all are created equal.

Bob Haran,
American Conservative Republican

Obama's Sleight of Hand

Obama's Sleight of Hand
by Helaine Chersonsky
Why is President Obama so quick to pass a healthcare bill he hasn't read. Could the prospect of controlling one-sixth or 17 percent of the American economy have unduly influenced him to put his political capital on the line? Obama admitted in his most recent press conference on healthcare that he has not read the house or senate bill working its way through Congress. Why hasn't he read something that is seemingly so important to him? Could he be lying about not reading the healthcare bills? Or does he just not want the media and voters to really understand what is in the oft-promoted bill? Matters of keeping your own healthcare policy that you may be satisfied are discussed on page 16. What seems to be happening in the healthcare bill is that maybe you can keep your healthcare that you currently have, but you may not change it in any way and if you change any part of your employment (being mindful of the constant fluidity of the job market), your only option is to opt into government care. Hopefully, if you are elderly or really sick or in need of surgery you won't be advised to "just take a pain pill" and get "hospice or end of life counseling" both options that Obama wants to make available because to him end of life issues are just too expensive.

CORRECTION, WE GOT THIS WRONG- SOTOMAYOR, "Castrate All White Males."

UPDATE: WE GOT THIS WRONG. THIS WAS A SATIRE PIECE THAT I DIDN'T CHECK OUT. THERE IS NO RECORD OF SONIA SOTOMAYOR SAYING ANYTHING REGARDING CASTRATING ALL WHITE MALES. I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS ERROR, I SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THIS OUT BEFORE POSTING.

For God and country,

BOB HARAN,

AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN


President Obama said that comments by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in a 2004 speech in which she called for the "castration of all white males until they are no longer dominant," have been "taken out of context" by right wing ideologues.


In the speech delivered to the San Juan chapter of NOW, Sotomayor said, "I want to be perfectly clear about this next comment so that there is no mistaking my words to mean something other than what they plainly say: the time has come to end white male oppression by castrating every white male until they are no longer dominant in Western culture. That means forcible removal of their testicles. I realize the brutality of my comment, and I don't know how to say it more clearly."



White House spokesman Robert Gibbs agreed with President Obama that the statement "has been taken out of context," and added that Sotomayor "certainly did not mean" that white males should be castrated." Judge Sotomayor was simply saying that there should be room at the American table for diverse cultures, that's all. It is astounding that people are reading 'castration' into it."



President Obama told MSNBC: "Look, when Judge Sotomayor appears before the Senate committee, all this nonsense being spewed out by ideologues will be revealed for what it is."



The American Conservative Republican feels that this racist and hateful statement by Sonia Soyotmayor, should be enough to disqualify her for any judicial appointment at any level of government including that of a municipal magistrate. Would any intelligent person approve the appointment of someone who feels that all African-American males should be castrated? Sonia Soyotmayor is obviously afflicted with the disorder of judging people by their skin color and/or gender and is therefore unacceptable for the position of Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and the president should immediately withdraw her nomination. Continued support of Soyotmayor's appointment to the Supreme Court by the president or any member of the United States Senate would be an endorsement of her racist and sexist hatred.

For God and country,

Bob Haran,

American Conservative Republican

Obama Salutes Gay Movement - Skips National Day of Prayer

From Focus on the Family:


Gay-Activist Movement to be Honored at White House

by Steve Jordahl, CitizenLink senior staff writer

Event comes just months after the Obama administration failed to acknowledge the National Day of Prayer with East Room celebration.


The Obama administration, which refused to send a representative to a Capitol Hill commemoration of the National Day of Prayer, is hosting a White House celebration of what most gay activists regard as the birth of their movement.

President Barack Obama has invited key leaders in the gay community to the East Room on Monday to commemorate the Stonewall Riots of June 28, 1969, during which hundreds of homosexuals threw bottles and garbage at police and set a gay bar, the Stonewall Inn, on fire.

Tim Goeglein, Focus on the Family's vice president of external relations and a former special assistant to President George W. Bush, said the White House event is a boon to the gay lobby, which has been becoming impatient with Obama.

"The president of the United State has the largest bully pulpit in the country and clearly gets to pick and choose among the issues that he would want to highlight," Goeglein said. "There's an enormous amount of pressure (to advocate for pro-gay policies). The president has partially extended health benefits to homosexual partners. The president is of course now doing a commemoration, a very important commemoration.

"But I think the larger goals are the ones that he's already committed to doing — overturning the DOMA , which is the protection of marriage in the states, and lifting the ban on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' " which prohibits "out" homosexuals from serving in the armed forces.

What's interesting about the Stonewall event, Goeglein added, is that it comes just months after the White House did not commemorate the National Day of Prayer.

"It's disappointing," he explained, "that after several years of celebrating the National Day of Prayer in the East Room at the White House, the day unfortunately in this instance does not get equal billing.

"It's a mistake not to be able to commemorate the National Day of Prayer at the highest possible levels, and we're very hopeful that this will be rectified next year."

Democrat Fund Raiser for Obama - Clinton Convicted of Fraud

NEW YORK (CNN) – A former Democratic fund-raiser who contributed to the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has been convicted in federal court on four counts of campaign fraud — one for each year from 2004 to 2007.



Norman Hsu, 57, was indicted in 2007 after an investigation into his two investment companies. He was accused of running a massive fraud scheme.



Earlier this month, Hsu was found guilty on 10 counts of mail and wire fraud surrounding his investment practices. In convicting Hsu of campaign fraud, the same court court found that he was involved in illegal "conduit" campaign contributions from 2005 to 2007 that exceeded $25,000 — a finding that will be used to determine the length of Hsu's sentencing, which is scheduled for August 19.



Lev Dassin, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said that Hsu not only swindled investors out of at least $20 million but, according to the indictment, also told some investors to make campaign contributions to the candidates he supported, and suggested that their investments could be jeopardized if they didn't do as he asked.



He "also asked victims to contribute to specific candidates for federal office, and then directly reimbursed the victims for their contributions from his fraud proceeds, in violation of federal campaign finance laws," the indictment said.




When Hsu's activities came to light, the campaigns of Obama and Clinton — as well as others — either returned his donations or gave them to charity.



Hsu could receive a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for each count of mail and wire fraud, and a maximum of five years for each federal campaign finance violation. In addition to the prison time, Hsu also faces potential fines for his fraud and campaign finance crimes.



Hsu will likely also have to forfeit various bottles of wine and champagne from his New York City apartment, along with a saxophone autographed by former President Bill Clinton.



In September of 2007, Hsu was en route from California to Denver, Colorado, when he became ill on an Amtrak train and was taken to a hospital.



Later that day, FBI agents arrested him on charges of unlawful flight to avoid prosecution and he has been in jail since.



Those charges stemmed from an 18-year-old grand theft conviction in California. Hsu had posted a $2 million bond after he turned himself in to authorities in California on that conviction. But a bench warrant was issued for his arrest after he failed to show up for a bail reduction hearing the next week.

Mike Huchabee on Abortion

From Mike Huchabee's Notes.

Americans Moving Firmly Towards A Pro-Life Position


Last week Gallup released a poll showing the American people moving firmly towards a pro-life position. You can find the details here http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-Pro-Choice-First-Time.aspx . I spent a lot of time this weekend thinking about the poll and what it might mean for President Obama's coming choice for a Supreme Court Justice.

This is not a time to move away from what's right to what's convenient. The American people are saying loud and clear they want leaders who believe in the sanctity of life and cherish it even at the earliest stage.

President Obama should be mindful of this as he contemplates a replacement for retiring Justice David Souter. And it is incumbent upon pro-life leaders to speak loudly and forcefully on this issue in the weeks ahead. You can count on me to be one of the loudest.

Alan Keyes Arrested Again, along with 78 YR Old Priest & others

AP – Alan Keyes, former Republican presidential candidate, is arrested during an anti-abortion protest Friday, …

President Barack Obama may rake in the votes for being pro-abortion, but some people put principle before politics and are willing to face arrest to defend the sanctity of human life.

By TOM COYNE, Associated Press Writer Tom Coyne, Associated Press Writer – Fri May 15, 6:02 pm ET
SOUTH BEND, Ind. – Former Republican presidential hopeful Alan Keyes, a Roman Catholic priest and 19 others were arrested Friday after marching onto the University of Notre Dame campus to protest President Barack Obama's planned commencement speech.

The arrests marked the third straight Friday that protesters have been detained. They are angry about the school's decision to give Obama, who supports abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research, an honorary degree and have him speak at Sunday's commencement.

"Notre Dame is arresting a priest," the Rev. Norman Weslin, founder of the Lambs of Christ abortion protest group, said as Notre Dame security personnel put plastic restraints on his wrists Friday. "Why are you arresting a priest for trying to stop the killing of a baby? You've got it all backward."

Weslin, 78, who has been arrested dozens of times at abortion clinic blockades, was carried off on a stretcher. He and two others were charged with resisting law enforcement.

All 21 arrested were charged with trespassing. Keyes and five others were ordered held in the St. Joseph County Jail until Monday because it was their second time being arrested on a charge of trespassing at Notre Dame, said Sgt. Bill Redman, St. Joseph County Police Department spokesman. Bond was set at $250 for the others.

None of those arrested were students.

On May 1, anti-abortion activist Randall Terry and another man were arrested on campus while pushing strollers containing dolls covered in fake blood. On May 8, Keyes and 21 others, many of them pushing strollers containing dolls covered in fake blood, were arrested.

On Friday, there were no strollers or bloody dolls, but some of the protesters carried signs that read: "Defend her honor, rise and strike for the unborn."

About 35 people, many of them carrying anti-abortion signs, were standing on the four corners outside the school's front gate shortly before noon when a group of about 40 people led by Keyes and Terry marched up. They stopped briefly to say some prayers and to listen to Keyes, who lost to Obama in the Illinois Senate election in 2004.

"It is not consistent with God's love to honor those who have rejected that great gift of love in principle," Keyes said.

After speaking, Keyes then led a smaller group onto campus. They made it about 100 yards on campus before they were stopped by campus security. Keyes was taken into custody immediately, and the others were told to leave or they would be arrested.

Terry did not go onto campus, saying did not want to get arrested because he needs to remain free to lead more protests Saturday and Sunday.

"The reality is that if I get hung up in jail, I'm the only guy on the outside who knows how to keep this thing moving. It's strictly a leadership issue," he said.

St. Joseph Superior Court Judge Michael Scopelitis issued an order Thursday changing how bond is set for a person charged with a crime while already out on bond on a pending charge. Previously, such a person could have been released under a presumptive bond schedule. Now they must await a probable cause hearing, Scopelitis said.

ALAN KEYES ARRESTED

By Helaine Chersonsky,

American Conservative Republican;


Yesterday, May 12, Sean Hannity interviewed conservative presidential candidate Alan Keyes on his radio show after Keyes was released following his arrest in South Bend, Indiana. Keyes and other pro-life supporters were arrested as they protested the forthcoming commencement speech this Sunday by President Barack Obama at Notre Dame. Keyes stated that it was scandalous for the Catholic university of Notre Dame to invite Obama to address the graduating senior class. He proceeded to give an in-depth analysis of the word "scandalous" as endangering each individual soul's salvation who goes along with this outrageous and contradictory invitation on the part of Notre Dame to the man who is most responsive and responsible to the pro-abortion industry in his administration. I was profoundly aware of how clear and incisive Ambassador Keyes is when he is defending both Christianity and the pro-life movement. I remember a long ago trip to South Bend to tour Notre Dame and how impressed I was with the ornate Basilica of the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ -it was magnificent. Let us hope that the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ does not have to break because of the offense of the President of Notre Dame.

Alan Keyes wrote the following on his blog on
Tuesday, May 5, 2009:

Forgive Us Our Trespasses

[FYI: This past weekend Fox news reported the arrest of Randall Terry as he protested against Notre Dame's invitation and honorary degree for Barack Obama. (See Notre Dame: Promoting the Glamour of Evil, and An Open Letter to Father Jenkins.) According to the report "Terry was taken to the St. Joseph County Jail on criminal trespass charges." He has since been released after posting a bond. In light of this occurrence, I feel bound in conscience to make the following statement, commitment and call to all who labor in defense of the God given and unalienable right to life.]

With the arrest of pro-life servant Randall Terry, Father Jenkins and the University administration at Notre Dame take their adulation of evil to a new level of spiritual atrocity.

In a little less than two weeks they will welcome to the university campus a man who represents the most abominable and extreme commitment ever known in US politics to destroying the God given right to life of innocent human offspring. With their actions and the "honor" they confer upon Obama, they will actively promote the lie that it is possible to dishonor God blatantly and unashamedly, yet be somehow "honorable" in the eyes of those who profess faith in Jesus Christ.

Obama Cutting Criminal Aliens Lose

From Bay Buchanan,
Team America PAC

Dear Friend,

Barack Obama is putting illegal aliens ahead of Americans again!! First, he demands amnesty for millions of undocumented students with the DREAM Act and now he wants to gut the federal fund program that allows local law enforcement to keep illegal criminals behind bars until ICE picks them up.

Within his outrageously irresponsible $3.4 trillion dollar budget Obama has targeted The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program-a $400 million program to keep Americans safe! Every one of these dollars keeps proven criminals off our streets and Obama wants it eliminated!! Even the liberal Senator Diane Feinstein knows better-she wants it increased!

This is a program Obama supported when he was planning his presidential run-he knew it was what the voters would want him to do. But now that he has taken possession of the throne he wants to gut it!

I was talking to Mayor Lou Barletta the other day and he said after he passed those tough immigration regulations in Hazelton, PA and illegal population headed elsewhere crime in his city dropped forty percent. The same is true of Prince William County in Virginia. Once the tough illegal immigration policy was in place crime dropped 37 percent.

Obama's policy will force local enforcement agencies to put known illegal criminals back on the street! Crime will climb and once again Americans will pay dearly for the failed policies of Washington.

The president is requesting $27 billion for border security and $112 million to fund E-Verify. This is great news-but he opposes a border fence and has backed off workplace raids which had begun to be enormously effective. He just can't bring himself to enforce the law against those here illegally-even those behind bars!!