Judicial Watch Sues HHS to Obtain Documents Related to President Obama’s Closed-Door Health Care Meetings

President Broke Campaign Promise to Broadcast Health Care Meetings on C-SPAN; Held Private Health Care Discussions with Vice President Biden, HHS Secretary Sebelius, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and Union Officials
Contact Information:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305

Washington, DC -- March 18, 2010

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it filed a lawsuit against the Obama Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain documents related to President Obama’s closed-door health care meetings with Vice President Biden, HHS Secretary Sebelius, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and union officials in violation of a campaign promise to broadcast all health care discussions on C-SPAN.

According to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, filed on March 17, 2010:

At an August 21, 2008 town hall meeting in Chester Virginia, presidential candidate Barack Obama promised the nation that, to achieve health care reform, “I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We’ll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies – they’ll get a seat at the table, they just won’t be able to buy every chair. But what we will do is, we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-Span, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies. And so, that approach, I think is what is going to allow people to stay involved in this process.”

In a startling breach of his campaign promise, between January 1, 2010, and January 15, 2010, President Obama, Vice President Biden, Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius, and White House Office of Health Reform Director DeParle met behind closed doors with various groups to reach accord on health care reform before a final vote occurred in the U.S. House of Representatives. One group of individuals was senior officials of major unions. A second group consisted of Senate Majority Leader Reid and House Speaker Pelosi and other members of Congress.

Because President Obama and Secretary Sebelius held closed door negotiations at the White House, the public was denied the transparency President Obama had promised as a candidate.

In order to try to restore some minimal degree of transparency to the negotiations, Judicial Watch filed its original Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on January 15, 2010. HHS acknowledged receipt of Judicial Watch’s request on January 19, 2010. On January 21, 2010, and March 12, 2010, HHS indicated that two offices within the agency found no responsive requests. However, the Immediate Office of the Secretary and the Office of the Secretary Scheduling Office have thus far failed to respond. As Judicial Watch noted in its FOIA lawsuit, these are the two offices within HHS most likely to have custody of the requested records.

“First President Obama breaks his promise on making health care negotiations public and now his administration is stonewalling the release of records from his secret health care meetings. The President and liberals in Congress are on the verge of staging a government takeover of our health care system, and the American people, at this key moment, are completely in the dark. This lawsuit is designed to hold President Obama to his promises of transparency. It is shameful that the Obama administration would violate FOIA law to help ensure passage of Obamacare,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

The Illustrated Results of Obama's "Community Organizing"...Obama Was Not Even A Decent Community Organizer

If I didn't know better, I'd think this was Beirut in the nineteen seventies. But, in reality, it's the current state of the housing for which Barack Obama claims responsibility as a "community organizer." It turns out the developers enriched by his government-funded subsidies did a heck of a lot better than the folks who once lived here.

I say "once", because the Boston Globe ("Grim Proving Ground for Obama's Housing Policy") calls many of the units "uninhabitable".

As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.

But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.

Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.

In terms of concrete accomplishments, Obama and “hundreds of other organizers” were not able to transform the South Side neighborhoods or bring in new industries to provide jobs...

Obama’s most commonly cited achievement was in forcing the city to begin testing for asbestos in all city apartments.

...critics claim Obama, now 46, exaggerates his accomplishments, particularly in spearheading asbestos cleanup at a low-income housing project. He omits from his account of that fight a longtime community activist who many people say played a significant role.

And for all his emphasis on the value of grassroots organizing, Obama eventually decided he also needed a law degree to enact lasting change, attending Harvard University... Further blurring the picture are his descriptions of community organizing in his youthful memoir, "Dreams From My Father," in which he admits he disguises names, creates composite characters, switches some chronologies and uses "approximations" of dialogue.

I can see why.

Look at this beautiful playground, with all of children frolicking; they're so care-free and so delighted that Barack Obama's community-organizing has helped them at the expense of his developer friends.

The squat brick buildings of Grove Parc Plaza, in a dense neighborhood that Barack Obama represented for eight years as a state senator, hold 504 apartments subsidized by the federal government for people who can't afford to live anywhere else.

But it's not safe to live here.

About 99 of the units are vacant, many rendered uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage. Mice scamper through the halls. Battered mailboxes hang open. Sewage backs up into kitchen sinks. In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale - a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.

Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered...

As a community organizer, Obama's a hell of a public speaker.

The poor people living here have gotten the shaft from Obama and his developer buddies. And the mainstream media couldn't care less.

Nation Wide Boycott:..CNN...MSNBC...ABC...CBS...NBC.

If anyone needs full copy on this please let me know..I can provide all copy of this to include the logo's and text for posting in full.

As everyone knows...The mainstream media has not been reporting the news to the american people in an honest manner for a long time now...Their advertisers want us to purchase their products..this is what pays the bills at the networks....We the people want unbiased and fair reporting from the news media..We definately are not getting that from the mentioned media outlets listed below.

The time has come to boycott these media outlets and their advertisers...We have included live links in each one of the banners listed below...Please click on the banner and contact these NON media Liars and biased government owned organizations and let them know that you do not appreciate your intelligence being insulted by their biased BS...

We need to get the word out NOW..ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!..If they do not want to report the news in a fair and unbiased way....Then we do not need them...and we certainly do not need to support those companies that pay them with their advertising dollars either.

Tell everyone you know to help with this...We CAN DO THIS!...But we all need to band together for a nationwide effort....Post this every place you possibly can and please encourage others to do so.

The following Biased NON news organizations below are not worthy of our time to watch or listen too As they can not be trusted to report news without being biased and one sided!





















These networks are biased leftwing organizations that do nothing but sponsor one agenda in american politics...They do not service what so ever to the american people in the one sided biased things they talk about!...There fore they are of no use to the american people other than to sponsor the agenda of the corrupt Leftwing extremist Barack Hussien Obama and the rest of the socialist criminals in Washington DC.

The Intelligence Report Media Group

Lusty Chorus of Boos Mock Obama’s “I Have a Scheme” Speech

Mind-boggling experiment in liberal guilt abatement called Obamamania

By John Lillpop Tuesday, June 16, 2009

It seems like decades ago that the greatest nation of earth began a mind-boggling experiment in liberal guilt abatement called Obamamania.

That phenomenon essentially turned the mantle of federal power over to a young, handsome and charismatic, but tragically unqualified, black man from the streets of Chicago.

Just five months ago, the Windy City turned itself upside down in celebrating the coronation-deification of Barack Obama whose formula for CHANGE would, we were promised, fix all of the messes left by his predecessor, the unlovable George W. Bush, and all who preceded W. in mismanaging the government from the Oval Office.

From the depressed economy to the war on terror, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the health care crisis, failing automobile industry, illegal immigration disaster, to America’s battered image among Mullahs and communist dictators all across the globe, this Obama fellow was the answer.

So we were told.

As it turns out, Barack Obama has gone from the pinnacle of adoration and glory to being the object of lusty boos in just five short months.

Moreover, in his hometown while speaking from the presidential lectern to boot!

As reported, in part, at Breitbart:

“Barack Obama isn’t used to hearing boos.

“For all the young president’s popularity, the response he got Monday from doctors at an American Medical Association meeting was a sign his road is only going to get rockier as he tries to sell his plan to overhaul the nation’s health care system.

“The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn’t try to help them win their top legislative priority—limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases.

“But what could they expect? If Obama announced support for malpractice limits, that would set trial lawyers and unions—major supporters of Democratic candidates—on the attack. Not to mention consumer groups.”

Still, there IS hope: Mid-term elections are but 17 months away, at which time the American people can isolate the Obamamania pandemic by removing many of his left wing co-conspirators from the US Congress!

Challenge to FOX NEWS! Report on Facts NOT Emotions

Here is somethings that are not matching the issues.

Everyone on Fox is so strongly out to attack anyone who is seeking the birth certificate.
Labeling all of who are demanding for FACTs to be disclosed on Obama and his proof he is legally entited to hold the office of Commander In Cheif according to the US Constitution...
The Fox News is labeling anyone who has being such as a VERY SMall Group of Extremists.
It is carefully placing a mirror to anyone who holds these veiws as someone who is also a "Nut Case"
That We are not entitled to hold a true concern on what impacts the current paths of Obama has taken us down to socialisim.
Fox News is also going on with the statments that lable anyone who has these ideals and are claiming now that DHS Was right by their actions without a thorough investigation into the background of the indivudial who done the acts in the Holocaust Museum.

Fox News has also labeled anyone who opposes Obama and the issues related to thge constitutional facts he is not entitled to hold the position of President and Commander in Cheif as Hating Jews and Racists!!!

If Fox News wants to go into facts I challenge FACTS.
I challenge them to begin reporting on news that was given to thiem from a woman in Israel when a File Cabinet was sold to her by the US Consulate with records of US Tax Dollars being given to the Terrorist Group Fatah youth Group.
I also challenge them to be more concise and accurate in their actual reporting when it comes to reporting facts that I know I have personally sent to Hannity and Beck as well as Col Oliver North.
If they want to report facts? Then Do it!!!
Do not hide behind a shadow of fear.
When the "Pandemic" Was an issue I showed Fox News this was a Hoax.
From Doctors! even Dr Ron Paul!!! and yet it was not reported!!!

This is not fair reporting!
It also proves a very powerful statement.
There is no truth in the News and No News in the Truth!!
I am a bit skeptical on this act of violence. I will not say that it was Government intervention into stir up a panic. But I will not refuse this as being possible.
Was it something that was a lone man? or was it something that was spured on by any government agency. US Or otherwise.
Where did he get the Ammunition ?
Where did he get the weapon?
Yet more important who is this guy?
For one Fox News already reported that he was not just any World War II Veteran. He was the Commander of a PT Boat.
This means that he was an commissioned officer during WWII.
This also suggests that he has been involved in OSS which years later became the CIA.
He is been reported as having a criminal record of going into the Federal Reserve with a weapon back in the 1950;s This was during the same time frame as when Paul Volcker was part of the Federal Reserve (1953) in NY.
It is also important to look at not just the accused background it is important to look at all the details of this matter!
This is nothing more then a smoking gun into what the Federal Government wants to do if you disagree with actions they are taking and are not part of the two party system Maybe?
My heart and prayers go out to these whom where injured. Although I am not going to sit and state that this was not something that was a clandestine operation to escalate a more dubious action that the Federal Government wants to do to control the people. Even a tactic that would be argued to seize firearms.

Here is something to look at as well.
The Man that is accused attacked a Jewish Museum. This would resemble being a possible Pro Palestine movement. If you are not for the Jews you are against them. If you are a Christian. A truely bible knowledged Christian you know that Jews are the Children of God. and you also understand that the True Jewish Sect is not the enemy it is the Government which attempts to supress and create a clandestine Unrest among peoople that is the enemy.
When you listen to the News you here all the praise of Obama visiting the Concentration Camp.
What you haven't seen though was his actual interest in this issue!
By this I mean: He didn't take his Great Uncle on the trip. He didn't even provide him a means to go As I showed in the reported interview.

What you have seen is that this Administration has been condoning the acts of Iran being allowed to have Nuclear weapons. What you have seen is Hamas has been invited to talks and commended by this Administration
What you have seen is John Kerry and others Visit Syria an enemy of not only the US but Israeal
Actions speak louder then words people.
And the actions that I have witnessed is not matching up to the short visit to a concentration camp that Obama had made a mistaken identity of being liberated with Ostwitz which was actually liberated by the Russian Army. and only after he was exposed in yet another Lie.. YES I CALL IT LIKE IT IS!!! TAKE IT OR LEAVE ME I DO NOT CARE!!!. Obama only after he found out he was using his Uncle who he never spoke to about had to ask him about his time in the Army and liberating Ohrdruf, a sub-camp of the Buchenwald concentration camp in Germany.

If you disagree with me it is ok! But I know the facts! and the truth sets one free!
And all who understand what the Federal Government and NWO ajenda is they also know that we must act rationally in our dissent!
But only until the Government acts against the God Given Rights. And then we must.. I repeat. MUST Stand up for our Rights with deadly force if need be.

A quote from Major General Smedley Butler
There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. - War is a Racket.
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/major_general_smedley_butler_usm.htm

Video: Obama Stimulus Hope vs Job Loss Reality

Big Labor's Investment in Obama Pays Off

This is one of the unions wanting to control you and your job with government permission.
The UAW is right behind them...They want to come into your place of business or your job and make you sign a card to join their unions and will try to force you into signing it...This is not acceptable practices in my book!

By Michelle Malkin
Townhall.com

"We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama -- $60.7 million to be exact -- and we're proud of it," boasted Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, to the Las Vegas Sun this week. The behemoth labor organization's leadership is getting its money's worth. Whether rank-and-file workers and ordinary taxpayers are profiting from this ultimate campaign pay-for-play scheme is another matter entirely.

The two-million-member union, which represents both government and private service employees, proudly claimed that its workers "knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls … and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama." It dispatched SEIU leaders to seven states in the final weekend before the election to get out the vote for Obama and other Democrats.

Through a series of local chapter takeovers and bully campaigns to destroy the reputation of executives who refuse to submit to their will, Stern and his scandal-plagued lieutenants have consolidated low-skill service workers to create a 21st century labor empire. The ubiquitous Stern now enjoys a prominent seat at the table of every major policy discussion at the White House, including economic recovery and health care radicalization.

Obama champions the SEIU's top legislative priorities: expansive government health care (paid for with regressive sin taxes) and the "Employee Free Choice Act" to do away with private-ballot union elections in the workplace. He has SEIU-blessed bureaucrats installed in every corner of his administration to carry out the agenda.

The SEIU scored not one but two Cabinet appointees: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. The SEIU pitched in with maximum donations to Solis' first congressional campaign and lent her nearly 300 canvassers and ground troops. "I wouldn't be here, were it not for my friends in the labor movement," she gushed. Indeed, over four terms in Congress, Solis has pocketed more than $900,000 in union campaign contributions.

Former SEIU chief lobbyist Patrick Gaspard served as the Obama campaign's national political director and transition deputy director of personnel. During the 2004 election cycle, he led the George Soros-funded group America Coming Together (ACT) as national field director. SEIU poured $23 million of workers' dues money into ACT in its failed attempt to put Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the White House. Under Gaspard's tenure at ACT, the get-out-the-vote group employed convicted felons as canvassers and committed campaign finance violations that led to a $775,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission. Gaspard was appointed White House political director shortly after Election Day 2008.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger was appointed to the president's Economic Recovery Advisory Board to provide advice on "boosting the sagging U.S. economy" (translation: imposing new employment regulations on companies and expanding union membership rolls).

Within two weeks of moving into the White House, Obama signed a series of executive orders championed by union bosses. The new rules authorized sweeping powers for the labor secretary that essentially blackball nonunion contractors targeted by labor organizers and blacklist nonunion employees in the private sector from working on taxpayer-funded projects. Such regulatory favoritism limits freedom in the workplace and raises the cost of doing business.

Another measure immediately adopted by Obama requires that when a government service contract runs out and there's a new contract to perform the same services at the same location, the new contractor must retain the old workers. Mickey Kaus of the left-leaning Slate magazine dubbed the move the "Labor Payoff of the Day."

The payoffs keep coming. Last week Obama slashed the Labor Department's funding to investigate union corruption -- a welcome move for Stern, who has seen three of his handpicked deputies resign in 2008-2009 over financial scandals involving cronyism, nepotism and embezzlement.

California officials also reported last week that the Obama White House gave the SEIU an unprecedented role in negotiations over federal stimulus funds. According to the Los Angeles Times, the union lobbied the feds to withhold nearly $7 billion in stimulus money from California unless it revoked a wage cut for unionized health care workers -- which had already been approved by Democratic lawmakers as part of a budget deal forged in February. Top SEIU officials participated in a conference call last month on the issue; the Obama White House backs the union demands.

SEIU's enforcers have set aside $10 million to un-elect any of its political beneficiaries who abandon their pledges to do the union's legislative bidding. The campaign money was raised by slapping an extra $6-per-member fee on top of regular dues payments -- and funneled straight to the union's political action committee. Meanwhile, after spending a fortune to put Obama in office, the union laid off a third of its D.C. field staff (in violation of its own employment protections, according to the workers) due to … budget troubles.

The laid-off workers are collateral damage in Big Labor's pursuit of power. The only jobs guaranteed by SEIU's merger with Hope and Change, Inc. belong to the brass.

Obama Tries to Stop Union Disclosure

By ELAINE L. CHAO

Fifty years ago, Congress passed the landmark Landrum-Griffin Act to protect rank-and-file union members from malfeasance by union leaders. Senate hearings had uncovered serious corruption and other unethical practices inside the labor movement, and a bipartisan coalition emerged to shine the light of disclosure on union practices.

Nevertheless, Democrats in Congress and in the executive branch have often attempted to undercut that law's financial reporting and disclosure requirements. Prior to reforms adopted in the George W. Bush administration, for example, one union could get away with reporting a $62 million expenditure as nothing more than "contributions, gifts, and grants to local affiliates" -- with no further explanation. Unfortunately, the Obama administration is already showing that it wants to return to this nontransparent standard of financial disclosure.

Within days of the inauguration, the new leadership at the Labor Department moved to delay implementing a regulation finalized in January that would have shed much needed light on how union managers compensate themselves with union dues. The regulation required disclosure of receipts for expenditures and for the purchase and sale of union assets -- disclosures that would help deter embezzlement. The administration has since moved even more aggressively, initiating proceedings to rescind this rule and others promulgated when I was secretary of labor.

The Labor Department's Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS), created to enforce the 1959 law, also recently announced that it would not enforce compliance with the conflict-of-interest disclosure form (the "LM-30" form) that was revised in 2007. Labor's Web site states that "it would not be a good use of resources."

Instead, union managers will be able to file decades-old, less enlightening disclosure forms while the department considers whether to "revise" (i.e., gut) the current disclosure requirements. But what could be a better use of department resources than enforcing the laws under its jurisdiction?

From 2001-2008, the Labor Department secured more than 1,000 union fraud-related indictments and 929 convictions. This enforcement record was accomplished even though the enforcement office accounts for less than 0.1% of the department's budget. OLMS is the lone federal agency with the job of protecting worker interests in how their unions are managed. The last Congress increased President Bush's budget request for the Labor Department by $956 million even as it targeted OLMS for a budget cut.

This repeats the pattern we saw during the last Democratic administration. Under President Bill Clinton, staffing decreased more than 40%. The number of compliance audits dropped no less than 75% from fiscal year 1992 to fiscal year 2000. I would expect the current Congress to once again slash the OLMS budget, with the administration's blessing.

Union membership peaked in the 1950s, when more than one-third of American workers belonged to a union. Today, just 7.6% of American private-sector workers belong to a union. A Rasmussen Research survey conducted in March found that 81% of nonunion members do not want to belong to a union.

The response by union leaders and their Democratic allies to declining union membership is the Employee Free Choice Act. To increase unionization, it would deprive workers of private balloting in organizing elections, and it would substitute a signature-card process that would expose workers to coercion. The bill would also deny workers the right to ratify, or not ratify, labor contracts drafted by government arbitrators when negotiations in newly unionized workplaces exceed the bill's rigid timetable.

The Obama administration likes to say that it is "pro-worker." But something is amiss when its labor priorities are forcing unionization and labor contracts on American workplaces, and denying union members information on how their dues money is spent.

Ms. Chao was secretary of labor from 2001 to 2009 and is now a fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

White House Puts UAW Ahead of Property Rights

By: Michael Barone
Senior Political Analyst
05/05/09 7:11 PM


Last Friday, the day after Chrysler filed for bankruptcy, I drove past the company’s headquarters on Interstate 75 in Auburn Hills, Mich.

As I glanced at the pentagram logo I felt myself tearing up a little bit. Anyone who grew up in the Detroit area, as I did, can’t help but be sad to see a once great company fail.

But my sadness turned to anger later when I heard what bankruptcy lawyer Tom Lauria said on a WJR talk show that morning. “One of my clients,” Lauria told host Frank Beckmann, “was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight.”

Lauria represented one of the bondholder firms, Perella Weinberg, which initially rejected the Obama deal that would give the bondholders about 33 cents on the dollar for their secured debts while giving the United Auto Workers retirees about 50 cents on the dollar for their unsecured debts.

ACORN Got $53 Million In Federal Funds Since 94, Now Eligible For Up To $8 Billion More

This is not suprizing!..The Congress of this country and past and present presidents have allowed OUR tax dollars to be paid out to a rogue criminal organization who has been convicted of voter fraud and is currently under indictment for voter fraud...Where in the hell is the OUTRAGE over this???
This is also the same organization Obama worked for and claimed he did not!

By: Kevin Mooney
Examiner Columnist | 5/6/09 4:32 AM

At least $53 million in federal funds have gone to ACORN activists since 1994, and the controversial group could get up to $8.5 billion more tax dollars despite being under investigation for voter registration fraud in a dozen states.

The economic stimulus bill enacted in February contains $3 billion that the non-profit activist group known more formally as the Association for Community Organizations for Reform Now could receive, and 2010 federal budget contains another $5.5 billion that could also find its way into the group’s coffers.

An Examiner review of federal spending data found that ACORN has received at least $53 million in federal money since 1994. A downloadable spreadsheet of the $53 million is posted on washingtonexaminer.com.

Scott Levenson, ACORN's national spokesman, said "we have received no significant federal funding." When asked by The Examiner about the $53 million, Levenson said: "If you listen to some of the Republicans who are going to get a billion dollars from the stimulus package, I'm still waiting for my share. Their claims are overinflated, this is a gimmick and an attempt to demonize ACORN."

At least one lawmaker, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-MN, wants to stop the flow of tax dollars to ACORN, but House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-MA, stands in her way.

Frank plans to strip out an anti-ACORN provision Bachman succeeded in inserting in the proposed Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act that could be voted on by the House today or Thursday.

Bahmann’s amendment was unanimously approved by Frank’s committee in a voice vote last week. It would block organizations that have been indicted for voter registration or vote fraud from receiving housing counseling grants and legal assistance grants.

The Bachman prohibition would apply only to the proposed mortgage reform legislation, and would not change ACORN’s ability to receive funds under either the stimulus program or 2010 budget.

Frank said his panel’s approval of the Bachman amendment was a mistake and that he had not carefully reviewed its language when he previously voted yes.

“I did not read it carefully, and it was in the last minute that the amendment was accepted,” Frank said. “It is a deeply flawed amendment and I am opposed to it. Banning people from possible participation in government programs based on an indictment is a violation of the basic principles of due process.”

Frank plans to offer another amendment to the bill on the House floor that would allow non-profits that have been indicted to receive grants under the legislation so long as they have not been convicted.

Bachmann said Frank’s amendment would “eviscerate the meaning” of her original amendment.

“I am disturbed by how cavalierly Washington spends the taxpayers’ money,” Bachmann told The Examiner. “The new charges brought against ACORN this week in Nevada reaffirm my concern about giving taxpayer dollars to organizations that are repeatedly under criminal indictment. Last week, I asked: Whose side are we on, the taxpayer's or ACORN's?”

Non-profit groups like ACORN can apply for $2 billion in funds set aside for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes under the $800 billion economic stimulus bill passed earlier this year.

An additional $1 billion in Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) are included in the stimulus bill. ACORN and other non-profit advocacy groups could receive through federally funded housing programs administered by state and local governments.

“ACORN is not normally eligible to apply directly for CDBG funds but may apply to the states and local government units that are CDBG recipients,” Matthew Vadum, a senior analyst and editor with Capital Research Center (CRC), said. “This opens the way for ACORN to receive billions more in taxpayer money.”

In addition to the $3 billion available in the stimulus package, the proposed $47.5 billion Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) budget provides $1 billion for an affordable housing trust fund and $4.5 billion in CDBG funds that could be funneled to ACORN indirectly.

“This means $8.5 billion is on the table this year for ACORN and other left-wing advocacy groups,” Vadum said. “ACORN won’t get all of the money but any tax dollars going to a criminal enterprise like this is just wrong.”

Kevin Mooney is an Examiner staff writer on the commentary staff.

Obama And Homeland Security Think Little Of The American People

This video is not suprizing at all...This is what Obama and his thugs think of most of americans!
I wonder if Obama knows what most americans think of him?..Let me touch on that for just a bit.


Lets see..Obama and his thugs in his cabinet and most of congress are:

1. Criminals
2. Socialists
3. Traitors
4. Unsurpers Of Our Constitution ( See Number 1
5. Terrorist sympathizers ( See Number 3
6. Thugs
7. Tax Cheats
8. Liars
9. Corrupt
10. Leftwing Extremists

Look at this video and see for yourself what he thinks of americans

Obama to Secured Creditors: Drop Dead..Obama Working For The UAW

By Bill Frezza

Are you following the disembowelment of Chrysler’s secured creditors with an eye not just toward what it means for the moribund car company but for what it could do to the very concept of secured debt? Has it dawned on you what the consequences will be if the President gets his way and consideration is given to creditors not according to contracts, rules, and established legal precedents but according to which group is most politically favored? And do you believe the President advanced the cause of economic recovery by publicly excoriating “speculators” who once hoped to profit by lending money against hard assets to an ailing company?

Profit? There’s no profit to incentivize risk taking in this country, only sacrifice!

Law? There’s no law to protect the politically unfavored in this country, only derision!

According to U.S. bankruptcy code, secured creditors - that is lenders who have a contractual security interest or claim to specific collateral - have to be paid before unsecured creditors. Unsecured creditors' claims are prioritized according to explicit rules defined by law. With the exception of short-term payments approved by a bankruptcy judge to keep a company running during the reorganization process, each priority level has a right to be paid in full before creditors with the next lowest priority get a dime. That is why secured debt can be had at a lower interest rate than unsecured debt. In fact, that is why troubled companies have any ability at all to raise money. Credit flows because everyone knows the rules of the game, even in bankruptcy.

Well, at least they used to.

The system is not supposed to deliver equal outcomes or demand equal sacrifice. If it did money could only be borrowed at the highest rates of interest, if at all. Under the law, payment priorities can only be modified if all debtors agree. The ability to hold out and force a company into bankruptcy court is baked into the price of a loan or the discount at which bonds trade.

In Chrysler’s case the TARP-backed lenders – that is, banks-too-big-to-fail now living on the dole – chose to kowtow to the executive branch. What they “sacrificed” was the economic interests of their shareholders in favor of the political interests of their management. The non TARP-backed lenders, in this case a handful of hedge funds trying to protect the pension funds, university endowments, and insurance companies that invested in them, balked at getting lower consideration for their secured debt than the UAW is getting for its unsecured obligations. Hence, a trip to court and a tongue lashing by the president.

Forget about the law for a moment. Forget about right and wrong. This exercise should be getting easier now that pragmatism is the basis of government policy, right? So think for a moment only about the pragmatic consequences of the administration’s reorganization plan.

Why would anyone lend money to heavily unionized companies knowing that if things went wrong, the president and his men could trash their security interests by executive decree, hold them up to public vilification, and subject them to future retribution by regulators?

Why would anyone buy the shares of TARP-backed banks or invest alongside them knowing that their executives have proven their willingness to sacrifice shareholders’ interests and throw co-investors under the bus any time the president snaps his fingers?

Why would foreigners buy the distressed debt of American companies knowing that this debt cannot be secured by law but only by political clout?

How is the Federal Government supposed to unwind its ownership in the growing number of companies it has nationalized if prospective buyers know that should things ever take a turn for the worse, Uncle Sam will be back demanding extralegal “sacrifice” in the name of “saving” jobs?

How is private credit supposed to “start flowing again” if the United States of America morphs into a caudillo-run kleptocracy whose explicit policy is to “empower the workers,” chasing ever higher poll numbers by demonizing the very people whose job it is to provide credit?

The fate of Chrysler and its workers pale in comparison to the wrecking ball that would be taken to economic order if bankruptcy judge Arthur Gonzalez approves the administration’s plan to give Chrysler’s secured creditors the shaft. And what prize will we-the-people get in return? A doomed third-rate car company majority owned by its militant union run by Italian management building congressionally designed “green” cars no one wants to buy financed by taxpayers into perpetuity because no private investor in their right mind will touch the company with a ten foot pole. Is this supposed to be economic policy or comic opera?

How many more billions do you think will be flushed down this rat hole before the fat lady is allowed to sing?

White House "Directly Threatened" Perella Weinberg Over Chrysler..Extortion At It's Best

The White House threatened to use the White House press corps to besmirch the reputation of one of the financial firms that holds Chrysler debt, according to a prominent New York bankruptcy lawyer. If true, the explosive charge shows that the White House was willing to go much further than is widely known to have its way in the attempt to restructure the Detriot automaker.

"One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight...That was Perella Weinberg," Tom Lauria, the head of the bankrutpcy department for top New York City lawfirm White & Case, told a WJR 760 radio host.

Perella Weinberg had been one of the firms that was resisting the Obama administration's plans for restructuring, alongside Stairway Capital and Oppenheimer Funds. The group had argued that their position as senior creditors gave them legal rights to be paid in full before junior creditors were paid. They had put forth a counter-offer under which they would have received far less than the face-value of the debt they held, but more than the Obama adminstration had proposed. This compromise deal was rejected by the administration, and the holdouts were characterized by the president himself as unwilling to make sacrifices for the common good.

After intense political pressure, Perella Weinberg defected from the dissenters and agreed to the administrations plans. The majority of senior creditors, including several large banks such as JP Morgan Chase, had already agreed to the plan. Some critics charge that the administration used its leverage as the provider of TARP funds to force banks to comply. Lauria's charges suggest that the administration had to get even rougher with financial firms that haven't taken bailout money.

The suggestion that the adminsitration would direct the White House press corps, composed of newspaper reports and other journalists who cover the Whtie House, to ruin the reputation of holdouts is sure to raise the ire of people who prize media independence. It's not clear whether this was an idle threat or whether the White House believes it exercises this level of control over the journalists asigned to cover it. It harkens back to the dirty tricks tactics of past administrations, and suggest a cavalier attitude toward the exercise of political power to control the actions of private citizens.

One test of whether the White House press corps is as compliant as the White House seems to believe will be how they handle Lauria's charge. The story has not yet been picked up by the traditional media. The blog Zero Hedge, a new but well-read financial blog, picked up the story and posted a downloadable excerpt from the radio interview. (You can download the clip below.)

The charge also undermines a key administration claim about the Chrysler restructing plan. It has insisted that the plan was reasonable, and held up the fact that the majority of senior creditors approved it as eveidence of this reasonableness. If the approvals were obtained through threats, however, theyt would indicate nothing more than a fear of crossing the administration.

This Brave Soldier Says It All

MJ Presnell
The Intelligence Report
April 20,2009

The sentiments of this fine brave soldier are the same sentiments we are hearing from other soldiers both deployed and those who have been deployed in the past.
We all remember how the democrats in congress and the senate did not support our men and women in uniform,Even Barack Hussien Obama while in the senate did not say or do one thing in support of ourn troops.
Now all of a sudden some have done a flip,while most others still do not praise our troops at all.
This administration and congress are nothing less than traitors to our men and women in time of war and to our constitution.