The Washington Post has just confirmed as false two statements in the new White House video and AARP emails, which had denied claims of Euthanasia in “Obamacare” health bill HR 3200, that hostile, socialist government takeover of your hospital, doctors, children, and grandparents. An editorial by respected bioethicist and Wash. Post Editorial Board member Charles Lane entitled, “Undue Influence: The House Bill Skews End-of-Life Counsel,” blasts the false claims by AARP and The White House that HR 3200 does not push euthanaia on seniors.
ObamaNet – Government issued Internet ID card required for all Americans
The government will be able to track every web site you visit, every keystroke you send, every purchase you make, every blog comment, and every Facebook and Twitter post.
The Washington Times is warning that the White House cybersecurity adviser and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke are drawing up “ObamaNet,” President Obama’s mandate for what amounts to a national ID card for the Internet.
President Obama wants to establish passwords for every citizen to centralize your personal information. Instead of logging onto Facebook or one’s bank using separate passwords established with each individual company or web site, you will be required to use the government-issued password.
According to the Washington Times, here are the problems with “ObamaNet”:
The government will be able to track every web site you visit and every keystroke you send on your home computer.
The government will be able to track every purchase you make and every deposit and withdrawal, and gain access to your electronic health care records.
The government will be able to track every blog comment you make, along with every Facebook and Twitter post.
The government will be able to create lists of your friends and acquaintances and lists of all your political affiliations, political donations, club memberships, hobbies and interests.
It’s impossible for the government to make this system 100% secure (remember Wikileaks?), meaning criminals would need to steal only one key to unlock a vast amount of your personal and financial information.
Although the White House will tell you it is a voluntary program, the government “voluntary” programs too often end up becoming mandatory. See Web I.D. = more gov’t control.
TAKE ACTION
Your elected officials can stop President Obama and the Federal government from prying into the personal lives of American citizens.
Email your members of Congress today, asking them to issue a public statement in opposition to President Obama’s plan to issue government-based Internet ID cards.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. re-administers the oath of office to President Elect Obama in the Map Room without The Holy Bible. (By Pete Souza -- White House)
SOMETHING WAS IMPORTANT ENOUGH FOR CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS AND BARRY SOETORO TO MEET THE NEXT DAY FOR ‘WORDS’.
GEE JOHN ROBERTS FORGOT —> ( I SWEAR TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION ) . COME ON WE ALL KNOW JOHN IS A WALKING TALKING COMPUTER HEAD!
THE NEXT DAY, THESE FEW WORDS TOOK PRECEDENCE OVER THE HOLY BIBLE, AS THE HOLY BIBLE WAS NOT DEEMED NECESSARY. ONE MUST THEN CONCLUDE THAT WE CAN DO WITHOUT THE HOLY BIBLE AT THE SWEARING IN CEREMONY…EH? AND GEE, WOULD NOT AN ELITIST LIKE BARRY WANT TO DO THE KEWL THING AND BAMBOOZLE HIS PEOPLE BETTER THEN THIS? AFTER ALL ITS JUST WORDS!
I guess this is all just coincidence, being their both Harvard trained elitists!
Lets Go Back To April 30, 1789
Inauguration Day was clear and cool when it finally arrived. Foreign ambassadors and statesmen alike jammed their way into Federal Hall. Townspeople mingled with their neighbors from other states to crowd the roads leading to Federal Hall and Wall Street itself. Historians tell us that at precisely 11:00 a.m., the Senate door swung open and the House Speaker, escorted by three Senators and Representatives from the House, went downstairs to a waiting carriage. Suddenly, it is said that Washington himself appeared at the door, exchanged nervous greetings with fellow statesmen, paused only a moment to acknowledge the cheers from his countrymen, and entered the Hall for the swearing in.
Once inside Federal Hall, we are told that the President-elect, standing regally and tall, accepted the applause of the joint Congress. He glanced around for his Vice President, John Adams, sat down on a beautiful crimson chair and said simply, “I am ready to proceed.” Tension wasn’t in the air . . . it was the air!
However, there was an awkward pause and then there was confusion! Though reports are sketchy at best regarding how long of a period of time confusion reigned, we know that the cause of the confusion was the missing Bible. What a scene it must have been as members of the first Congress, with ashen faces, searched through the building in consternation and without success. Perhaps many of those present felt that without a Bible the oath could not be administered nor Washington even proclaimed our first President! Soon, however, New York State Chancellor, Robert R. Livingston, a fellow Mason, remembered that his local meeting house, St. John’s Lodge, housed a beautiful altar Bible and, importantly, that Bible was a short few hundred feet down the block. After a quick trip down the street, the historic Bible was provided and, in fact, carefully placed upon a red velvet cushion. Everyone relaxed, calm prevailed, and the stage was set.
Immediately, Chancellor Livingston administered the Oath of Office to Washington. When the oath was completed, Washington added the phrase, “I swear, so help me God!” and, bending down, kissed the open Book. While Chancellor Livingston loudly and joyously proclaimed Washington our nation’s first President, one Joseph Morton, Master of St. John’s Lodge, stepped forward and carefully folded down a corner of the open page, thus preserving a record of the random Bible opening where Washington had rested his left hand. Interestingly, fate sometimes does funny things, for the random selection fell open to Chapter 49 of the Book of Genesis, the book that Biblical scholars remind us that literally means “the book of new beginnings.”
The scene that ensued was bedlam as the crowd broke into a storm of cheers. Livingston reportedly said, “It is done.” and then turned to the crowd and shouted, “Long live George Washington, President of the United States!” Grown men cried and shouted and joyous celebration was the order of the day. Thursday, April 30, 1789, had been a great day, indeed, and a great era was born. However, one must wonder whether or not the day would have ended on such a high note had it not been discovered, at the very last minute, that the ornate Bible — now known as President George Washington’s inaugural Bible — rested in a small room at St. John’s Lodge, No. 1, a few short yards from Federal Hall.
SURE!
Is a Bible required? The Constitution of the United States makes no mention of the use of a Bible in the taking of the oath, nor is it even required that the ceremony be public. Yet from Washington’s first Inauguration in 1789 to the present, almost every President in a very public manner has placed his hand upon a Bible and, while raising his other hand towards the heavens, repeats the Oath of Office. And . . . before the eyes of a world that watches the ceremony unfold . . . the President-elect becomes the leader of the free world. Thus, though the use of a Bible is certainly not constitutionally required, it has become the focal point of every presidential Inauguration and the image of the taking of the presidential oath is certainly incomplete without it.
Did John Roberts Screw Up The Oath On Purpose?
No. 10-446
Title:
Charles Kerchner, et al., Petitioners
v.
Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.
Docketed:October 4, 2010
Lower Ct:United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Case Nos.:(09-4209)
Decision Date:July 2, 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sep 30 2010Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 3, 2010)
1.Whether petitioners sufficiently articulated a case or controversy against respondents which gives them Article III standing to make their Fifth Amendment due process and equal protection claims against them.
2.Whether putative President Obama can be anArticle II “natural born Citizen” if he was born in the United States to a United States citizen mother and anon-United States citizen British father and under the British Nationality Act 1948 he was born a Britishcitizen.
3.Whether putative President Obama and Congress violated petitioners’ Fifth Amendment due process rights to life, liberty, safety, security, tranquility, and property and Ninth Amendment rights by Congress failing to assure them pursuant to the Twentieth Amendment that Obama qualified as an Article II “natural born Citizen” before confirming his electoral votes and by Obama refusing to conclusively prove that he is a “natural born Citizen.”
4.Whether Congress violated petitioners’ rights under the Fifth Amendment to equal protection of their life, liberty, safety, security, tranquility, and property by investigating and confirming the “natural born Citizen”status of presidential candidate, John McCain, but not that of presidential candidate, Barack Obama.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
30 September 2010, 8:00 P.M. EDTCONTACT: Mario Apuzzo, Esq., Jamesburg, New Jersey http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Tel: 732-521-1900, Fax: 732-521-3906, Email: apuzzo@erols.com
JAMESBURG, NJ – (Sept. 30, 2010) – Attorney Mario Apuzzo of Jamesburg, NJ, today filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington DC, on behalf of plaintiffs, Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Lehigh County, PA; Lowell T. Patterson, Burlington County, NJ; Darrell J. LeNormand, Middlesex County, NJ; and Donald H. Nelsen, Jr., Middlesex County, NJ.Plaintiffs are challenging the recent decision of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, PA, which affirmed the dismissal by District Judge, Jerome Simandle, sitting in the Federal District Court, Camden, NJ, of plaintiffs’ lawsuit in which they charge that Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, has NOT conclusively proven to any controlling legal authority that he is an Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 “natural born Citizen of the United States” and thus constitutionally eligible to serve as the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military, and that he has hidden all his early life records including his original long-form birth certificate, early school records, college records, travel and passport records needed to prove he is even a born Citizen of the United States
Obama was born a British Subject/Citizen to a British Subject/Citizen father and a U.S. citizen mother. Obama’s father was not a U.S. Citizen and never intended to be one. Obama’s father was never even an immigrant to the USA nor was he even a permanent legal resident. Obama’s father was a foreign national sojourning in the USA to attend college. Obama is still a British Subject/Citizen to this day because he has never renounced that citizenship. According to this lawsuit, Obama was born a dual-citizen with dual allegiance and loyalty and is therefore not constitutionally eligible to be the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military. The founders of our country and framers of our Constitution required the President to have unity of citizenship and sole natural allegiance to the USA from the moment of birth, which Obama does not and cannot have. This was a national security issue to the founders and framers.
Obama has multiple foreign allegiance claims on him because of his British citizenship which also converted to Kenyan citizenship at age 2. Obama was also an Indonesian citizen as a youth when he was adopted or acknowledged by his Indonesian step-father when he married his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.The lawsuit seeks a trial on the merits to determine the true facts of Obama’s legal identity and exact citizenship status and to require Obama to prove to the courts that he is eligible for the federal office he sits in per our Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, which states: No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The legal term of art, natural born citizen, is defined by the world renowned legal scholar, Emer de Vattel, in his pre-eminent legal treatise and enlightenment to the world of jurisprudence in the revolutionary period, The Lawof Nations or Principles of Natural Law, published in 1758, and which was used by the founders by the Continental Congress during the formation of our country and by the framers of our U.S. Constitution, and whose definition of natural born Citizen is incorporated in several U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Vattel and U.S. Supreme Court decisions agree that a natural born citizen is a person born in the country to two parents who are both citizens of the country. Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, nor even an immigrant to the USA. Thus Obama is not a natural born citizen of the USA, and that is the reason for the lawsuit.
The original lawsuit was filed early in the morning of January 20, 2009, before Obama was sworn in. The case was dragged out by delays by the government in addressing the case and deciding on whether the case would proceed to a fact finding trial on the merits or not. The courts have decided that it will not go to the merits and have dismissed the case using technical and procedural tactics to keep the Plaintiffs from getting to the merits of the charges.
By the lower Courts finding that plaintiffs do not have standing and that their claims present a political question, the lower Courts were able to avoid having to address the underlying merits of the Kerchner case. With such a decision, the American People unfortunately still do not know conclusively where Obama was born and whether he is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and therefore constitutionally eligible to be President and Commander in Chief. Being a born “Citizen of the United States” is a necessary part but is NOT sufficient to be an Article II “natural born Citizen of the United States”. We have asked the relevant questions and provided for the U.S. Supreme Court in our Petition various reasons why it should accept this case and promptly resolves this constitutional crisis.
–more–
For a copy of the Petition and more information about the lawsuit see these links:
For additional comments or information please contact Mario Apuzzo, Attorney at
Law, 185 Gatzmer Avenue, Jamesburg, NJ, 08831, Tel: 732-521-1900, Fax:
732-521-3906, Email: Apuzzo@erols.com
Washington - “How much of my hard-earned money is Washington going to take next year?” It’s a question every single American family, business owner, and investor is asking themselves right now. Unfortunately, not one of them knows the answer.
On January 1, 2011, an economy-crippling armada of tax increases are scheduled to take effect. They include:
Personal Income Tax Hikes – The lowest-income taxpayers (the 10% bracket) get bumped up to 15%. Tax rates for the top four brackets will rise to 28%, 31%, 36%, and 39.6%. That’s less money your family will have to discuss around the dining room table.
Savings and Investment Tax Hikes – Individual capital gains tax rates will increase to 20% and 10% (from 15% and 5%). The double taxation of dividends will increase by as much as 164% (as they will no longer be taxed at the capital gains rate for individuals). Higher taxes on savings and investment will result in less of both – and a weaker job market.
The Marriage Penalty – Married couples will once again be penalized for their commitment with a higher tax burden relative to non-married couples with similar incomes.
The Death Tax – This macabre tax was eradicated this year, but next year it will return from the grave to confiscate up to 55% of a deceased person’s assets over $1 million. The Death Tax would be responsible for the demise of small businesses shortly after the demise of their owners (because the inheritors must sell the business to pay the tax).
Small Business Expensing – Small businesses can currently “expense” (much quicker than “depreciating”) certain purchases valued up to $250,000. That figure will plummet to just $25,000, meaning the primary job-creators in America will have a much tougher time expanding their businesses – leading to a weaker job market.
The Alternative Minimum Tax – The AMT, created in 1969 to cover a very small number of taxpayers, will ensnare upwards of 15 million taxpayers in 2011. Will you be hit? You won’t know for sure until you file your tax return.
All this sounds ominous enough, but it’s just the beginning. (A longer list of 2011 tax increases can be found here.) Our economy and job market would be much better off if Democrats joined with Republicans in stopping these job-killing tax hikes before they take effect. But they won’t do it.
Why not? Because Democrats want most of the 2011 tax hikes to go on as planned, but they don’t want to be held accountable.
“Democratic leaders are likely to punt the task of renewing Bush-era tax cuts until after the election. Voters in November’s midterms will thus be left without a clear idea of their future tax rates when they go to the polls.” (The Hill, 7/1/10)
Consumers and job-creators are reacting rationally to the Democrats’ reckless indecision (plus the prospect of more trillion dollar deficits, higher costs from ObamaCare, and the harmful impact of the Dodd-Frank permanent bailout bill) by putting their consumption and job creation on hold.
But the uncertainty about future tax burdens hasn’t just prompted less buying and hiring. Many families and businesses are preparing for next year’s massive tax increases by pulling as much of their 2011 income as possible into 2010. That spells bad news for the economy (and tax revenues) next year.
Of course, Democrats could easily avoid these job-killing tax hikes and this job-killing environment of uncertainty by addressing the issue today. The fact that they won’t suggests they care more about their own jobs than jobs for the American public.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Day 10 of the protest campaign on behalf of Mother Teresa:
Today I am writing to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio notifying them that Anthony Malkin, the owner of the Empire State Building, has decided not to overrule those who have chosen to deny a tribute to Mother Teresa: our request to have the towers shine blue and white, the colors of her congregation, on August 26th, the 100th anniversary of her birth (and the day the U.S. Postal Service is honoring her with a commemorative stamp), was denied without explanation. Yet the same persons who chose to stiff Mother Teresa decided to honor the Chinese Communist revolution last year, even though 77 million innocent men, women and children were murdered under Mao Zedong.
Everyone is being asked to sign our petition (click here), and to write to Anthony Malkin. His address is Malkin Properties, One Grand Central Place 60, E. 42nd St., NY, NY 10165.
Also contact Melanie Maasch at the Empire State Building:mmaasch@esbnyc.com
The fringe left is trying to distort the truth and silence thousands of Texans — including numerous teachers and parents who have called, e-mailed and testified before their State Board of Education (SBOE) member.
The extremists are even using our great Founding Father, Thomas Jefferson, as a political pawn. Jefferson was never removed from social studies as falsely reported by many. Jefferson will be taught at three grade levels, and the Declaration of Independence and its political ideas are emphasized repeatedly in the standards.
For over a year, Texans have been speaking out against attempts to remove or diminish important historical figures, celebrations, concepts and symbols like:
Neil Armstrong
Albert Einstein
Christmas
Independence Day
The Liberty Bell
Religious Heritage
Thank God a majority of the SBOE rightly struck down such misguided versions of history. Without the elected Board, these important figures would have been removed from social studies for the next 10 years.
But the fringe left still wants to destroy the SBOE’s role as a voice on education standards. Why? Because they want unlimited control over what students learn, to radically change the worldview of our next generation by distorting history.
The review process began over a year ago, but now liberal academia, the ACLU and some political candidates want the State Board of Education to delay the final vote on social studies standards from May 21, 2010 until January 2011 — after the November elections — and one State Senator wants to abolish the SBOE and take away your vote!
Stand up for Texas education — sign the petition now:
I oppose the attempted takeover of education by the extreme left
I support final adoption of social studies standards on May 21, 2010, as scheduled
I support a State Board of Education that has members elected by the public
I believe that Lt. Col. Terry Lakin’s decision to lay his career on the line in the effort to resolve doubts about Obama’s constitutional eligibility for the Office of President is a morally courageous service to the whole American people. To show support on this blog, I have posted a Declaration of Support for him which is now open for email signature. Please help me show appreciation for Lt. Col. Lakin’s conscientious and patriotic fulfillment of his sworn duty to the Constitution.
1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control.”
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
The Radical Homosexuals claim you and other pro-family Americans actually now support same-sex marriage, special job preferences for homosexuals and promotion of the homosexual lifestyle in schools.
Is it true? What do you say?
I have prepared an American Morality Survey for you to fill out that I will provide a link to in a moment.
But first I want to make sure you understand just how serious this issue is.
You see, the Radical Homosexuals are storming through Washington demanding passage of their agenda.
And with the passage of Thought Control last year, they say NOW is the time to push their perverse “life-style” on every man, women and child in America.
And they insist YOU actually support them.
The Homosexual Lobby played a major role in electing Obama and the majorities he enjoys in both houses of Congress.
I can only begin to imagine all the damage the Radical Homosexuals will do with their allies controlling the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House.
As the President of Public Advocate of the U.S., I’ve devoted twenty-seven years to battling the radical homosexuals in Washington.
Backed by Hollywood celebrities, the media and millions of your tax dollars, the Radical Homosexuals have many Congressmen quivering with fear — and they have a Radical Homosexual-friendly majority in control of Congress.
That is why pro-family Senators and Congressmen are counting on me to find out if you really support the Gay Bill of Special Rights and homosexual marriage as the radical homosexuals claim.
Another day, another no-show for the Obamacare reconciliation bill. House Democrats were quick to shift blame to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) with Rep. Robert Andrews telling The Hill that the delay “has been much more technical than substantive. … It’s not like what tax has to go or what spending has to go.” Which is an interesting claim, since Politicoreported that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka was summoned to the White House yesterday afternoon “to discuss a higher-than-expected excise tax on some health care plans.” In fact, Politico added: “A labor source said Trumka’s meeting would focus on the entire bill, not just the excise tax question.” Sounds like more than just technical details are still in flux.
But in reality, none of these discussions really matter. The reconciliation bill being drafted is nothing more than thin political cover for House Democrats who believe the Senate bill is terrible public policy but want to please their leadership and the President by voting for it anyway. As we detailed yesterday,there is no bill but the Senate bill. Once the House passes the Senate bill, the President will sign it. Game over. It has been almost three months since the Senate passed their bill in the dead of night on Christmas Eve. A review of just how terrible it really is, is in order:
Increased Health Care Costs: The Senate bill manifestly does nothing to bend the health care cost curve downward. According to the latest CBO report, the Senate bill would actually increase health care spending by $210 billion over the next 10 years. This follows a previous report from the President’s own Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) showing the Senate bill would result in $234 billion in additional health care spending over 10 years.
Increased Health Insurance Premiums: The President initially promised that Americans would see a $2,500 annual reduction in their family health care costs. But under the Senate bill, premiums would go up for millions of Americans. In fact, according to the CBO, estimated premiums in the individual market would be 10–13 percent higher by 2016 than they would be under current law.
Increased Deficits: Despite claiming to be comprehensive health care reform, the Senate bill does not address the fact that Medicare’s current price-fixing doctor reimbursement scheme is set to reduce doctor payments by 21% this year. That simply is not going to happen. Congress will pass that fix separately. If that cost were included, Obamacare is already $200 billion in the red. Now throw in the fact that the Senate bill is paid for with another $463 billion in Medicare cuts to health care providers. CMS says if these cuts occur, one-fifth of all health care providers will face bankruptcy. That simply is not going to happen. Just like the doctor reimbursement cuts have never happened, the Obamacare Medicare cuts will never happen. So in reality, Obamacare will add almost $700 billion to our national deficit in the next ten years alone.
Increases Unemployment and Puts Millions of Americans on Welfare: According to The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis (CDA), a dynamic analysis of the tax hikes and deficits created by the Senate bill shows that an average 690,000 jobs per year would be lost if it became law. In addition, over half of all Americans who would gain health insurance through the bill (18 million out of 33 million) would do so by being placed on Medicaid, which is a welfare program.
Higher taxes, higher health care costs, higher health insurance premiums, higher deficits, more unemployment and more Americans on welfare. That is America’s future should the Senate Obamacare bill become law.
Whereas: The Obama Administration just announced they would be working with the United Nations to pass a new “Small Arms Treaty;” and
Whereas: The UN’s “Small Arms Treaty” is nothing more than a massive GLOBAL gun control scheme, designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms from law-abiding citizens; and
Whereas: The new treaty will likely be designed to FORCE national governments to enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding citizens cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to buy a firearm legally; and
Whereas: The United Nation’s “Small Arms Treaty” would also likely ban the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons; and
Whereas: The ratification of this treaty would also likely create an international gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation;
Therefore: I urge you to vote AGAINST ratification of the UN’s “Small Arms Treaty.”
The National Association for Gun Rights is dedicated to protecting your Second Amendment rights. We will never stop fighting the constant onslaught of anti-gun legislation from Sarah Brady’s cronies in Congress, but overcoming such a well-financed enemy is a difficult battle.
Only with the financial support of grassroots gun owners can help Nation Association for Gun Rights prevail in the fight to fight for your rights. Please make a generous contribution.
AMERICA, TELL PEPSI TO SHUVE THEIR PRODUCTS UP THEIR
ILLUMINATI/BILDERBERG PROPAGANDA TO DEMORALIZE AMERICA - PEPSI IS AN ADJUNCT TO THIS PROCESS
PepsiCo isn’t content with pushing homosexuality inside its own company. It feels compelled to use corporate leaders in pressing other companies to accept it as well.
In the October 2009 Out and Equal Workplace conference, PepsiCo’s vice-president and CIOled a seminar to teach employees in the art of “leveraging strong sponsor or leader relationships” within companies to embrace homosexuality. The seminar was entitled “Use ‘em or lose ‘em.”
Obama's Earlier Gay Partner Larry Sinclair
At the same event, a manager of PepsiCo’s corporate Contributions and Foundationdepartment served as a judge in the Out & Equal‘s “Outie Awards.” The awards are given in celebration and recognition to companies and employees who advance homosexual causes in the workplace.
PepsiCo also donated money to the event as an “Advocate” sponsorship and placed a half-page ad in the event program.
Forward this to your friends and family so they will know about Pepsi’s support of the homosexual agenda. Millions of people are not aware of Pepsi’s support of homosexual organizations.
Barack Obama and his radical friends in Congress are on the run. They know Americans are shifting away from supporting his so-called healthcare “reform” program.
As Dick Morris, the chief strategist for the League of American Voters, says, Obama’s plan is nothing less than a slick attempt to nationalize all of America’s healthcare.
Dick has prepared a powerful TV ad that exposes Obama’s takeover.
Dick’s ad also warns seniors that, when Obama adds 50 million new patients into the government system, it will collapse Medicare, causing massive rationing of healthcare to people who paid taxes all their lives.
Obama and the Democrats in Congress can’t afford to lose the seniors. They are a key swing group.
Polling data shows our message is getting out there.
A new Gallup poll out this week shows that seniors overwhelmingly oppose Obama’s plan.
For example, lower percentages of seniors expect the reform plan to benefit them personally than any other age group — and more expect their medical care to worsen than improve by a margin of 39 percent to 20 percent.
And only 34 percent of seniors think healthcare reform would improve medical care in this country.
It’s no wonder that Obama’s overall job approval ratings are plummeting.
Have no doubt: Democrats in Congress are running scared.
Both HRC and PFLAG supported efforts in California to defeat Proposition 8 which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. HRC, which received $500,000 from Pepsi, gave $2.3 million to defeat Proposition 8.
Pepsi requires employees to attend sexual orientation and gender diversity training where the employees are taught to accept homosexuality.
Reasons for the boycott
