President-elect Barack Obama is moving swiftly to appoint homosexual activists to positions within his administration. 

Politico.com reports that 10 national homosexual organizations are working with the Obama transition team to get more openly homosexual people appointed to the incoming administration.  Obama's transition team has also reportedly named at least seven openly homosexual people to transition panels assigned to review federal departments and agencies. Three of the seven homosexuals on transition panels have held high-level positions in the Clinton administration.  

Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs with Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action, says Obama is keeping his promises to the homosexual lobby.

"Obama, throughout the campaign, signaled...very quietly, but nonetheless signaled on his web page and elsewhere that he essentially had signed off on every major demand of homosexual pressure groups," he said. "So it's not surprising that he has now allowed some of these radical activists to become part of his administration."

According to the Washington Blade, Obama officials also named President Bush's former ambassador to Romania, Michael Guest, to a transition panel assigned to review issues pertaining to the State Department.

WOULD THE REAL CRIMINAL PLEASE STAND UP! ! ! !

"FEDS" IGNORE WARNING OF FINANCIAL MELT DOWN....."FEDS"  my harry bunghole....democractic Congress... ie. Nancy Pelosi...Harry Reid....didn't want regulation and government intervention on the banks including WaMu...Country Wide, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mack and a list of other failed banks......Liberal press is going to go out of their way to blame Bush....bottom line ..........Bush's economic advisors did their job and Democrats told them to go away, they can handle it.....WAY TO GO F'CK HEADS.....YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUU DID THIS .......

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.

"Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories," California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job.

Bowing to aggressive lobbying — along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK — regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way.

The administration's blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of a philosophy that trusted market forces and discounted the need for government intervention in the economy. Its belief ironically has ushered in the most massive government intervention since the 1930s.

"We're going to be feeling the effects of the regulators' failure to address these mortgages for the next several years," said Kevin Stein of the California Reinvestment

Coalition, who warned regulators to tighten lending rules before it was too late.

• Regulators told bankers exotic mortgages were often inappropriate for buyers with bad credit.
• Banks would have been required to increase efforts to verify that buyers actually had jobs and could afford houses.
• Regulators proposed a cap on risky mortgages so a string of defaults wouldn't be crippling.
• Banks that bundled and sold mortgages were told to be sure investors knew exactly what they were buying.
• Regulators urged banks to help buyers make responsible decisions and clearly advise them that interest rates might skyrocket and huge payments might be due sooner than expected.

Those proposals all were stripped from the final rules. None required congressional approval or the president's signature.

"In hindsight, it was spot on," said Jeffrey Brown, a former top official at the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, one of the first agencies to raise concerns about risky lending.

Federal regulators were especially concerned about mortgages known as "option ARMs," which allow borrowers to make payments so low that mortgage debt actually increases every month. But banking executives accused the government of overreacting.

Bankers said such loans might be risky when approved with no money down or without ensuring buyers have jobs but such risk could be managed without government intervention.

"An open market will mean that different institutions will develop different methodologies for achieving this goal," Joseph Polizzotto, counsel to now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers, told U.S. regulators in a March 2006.

Countrywide Financial Corp., at the time the nation's largest mortgage lender, agreed. The proposal "appears excessive and will inhibit future innovation in the marketplace," said Mary Jane Seebach, managing director of public affairs.

MSN Home page....part one of two.

By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, December 1, 2008

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.

There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the new homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five years -- "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental change in military culture," he said.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack have been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corps activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such efforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq was invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil support personnel across the United States.

In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized "preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents." National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to grind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include those who "want to inflict such brutality on our society that we give up the fight," such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.

In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005.

Last month, McHale said, authorities agreed to begin a $1.8 million pilot project funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through which civilian authorities in five states could tap military planners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on a particular threat -- pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane, earthquake and catastrophic chemical release, respectively -- speeding up federal and state emergency planning begun in 2003.

Last Monday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered defense officials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves can respond adequately to domestic disasters.

Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates. He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which concluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready and that they lack equipment and training.

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.

"This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who has assessed the military's homeland security strategies.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be "just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority," or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU's National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of "a creeping militarization" of homeland security.

"There's a notion that whenever there's an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green," Healy said, "and that's at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace."

McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act, that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for security and that their duties will be to protect the force, not other law enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger units to respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riot in 1992.

U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first reaction force is built around the Army's 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April after 15 months in Iraq. The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces that are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal, emergency care and logistics.

The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade's next scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get additional time in the United States to rest and regroup, compared with other combat units, but it may also face more training and operational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.

Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two wars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families. "We want to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan," he said. The 1st Brigade's soldiers "will have some very aggressive training, but will also be home for much of that."

Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in May after more than a year in Afghanistan.

Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security and calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said, Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.

"It's one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it's something else to make it happen," he said. "It's time to put our money where our mouth is."

The U.S. Attorney's office said in a statement that Department of Public Safety Trooper Jesus Rafael Larrazolo, 35, made his first appearance in federal court Monday. DPS spokeswoman Lisa Block said Larrazolo resigned shortly after his arrest Friday.

Brownsville police and agents from the FBI's Special Investigations Unit saw Larrazolo pull into a Best Buy parking lot next to another vehicle, then take two suitcases from it. Larrazolo was dressed in street clothes, but identified himself as a trooper when police approached. He was carrying a gun.

There were 26 kilograms of cocaine in the suitcases. According to court records, Larrazolo told a Texas Ranger after his arrest that he had been forced by threats to pick up the drugs.

Block said Larrazolo joined the department in October 2002 and was working as a commercial vehicle enforcement officer in Cameron County. The FBI is investigating the case.

It was not immediately clear from court records if Larrazolo had an attorney

While the Mormon Church hierarchy  was responsible for organizing millions of dollars and thousands of hours of manpower to pass California's Proposition 8 and Arizona's Prop 102, the church's tactics haven't sat so well with some of its members--including families, members with Mormon heritage going back 150 years, and gay members---who began speaking out in July on the website signingforsomething.org. 

Many have publicly resigned from the church, citing reasons like these:

*I think the church has no right to assume the inner thinkings of its members and take such an open stand of any political issue.

*The Church's involvement in the effort to rescind a basic Constitutional right from California citizens is shameful and misguided.

*The position the church took on this particular issue went against everything I learned from the church. Not only was the church's position discriminatory, but it was also hateful. 

*The leadership fights for bigotry and hate. The God I grew up with was perfect in His Love and Justice. Shame on the men who act so disgracefully in His name.

We've lived in Peace for so long w/ other countries, ppl forgot what it takes to keep our nation free.

We live day to day doing our own thing, we forgot there are actual nations w/ greed and power hungry rulers who seek to destroy us.

We've become so spoiled in our freedoms, we actually believe we can remain FREE w/out fighting. - Liberals have the masses believing going into Iraq was the wrong thing to do, but in reality, it was a wise move.

The argument is, Iraq did not attack us. - They forgot in 2001, President Bush vowed to take out every terrorist network who threatened our nation. They forgot how Sadam Hussein often chanted death to Americans. They forgot Iraq had some of the staunchest terrorist networks who seek to kill us.

Liberal media brain washed the masses that our President invaded a country for oil, and IDIOTS everywhere believed them.

Whether you choose to believe or not believe, Hussein was one of our biggest enemies. - President Bush did what any wise leader would do to protect his country. - He is not a retard or a moron, he had the back bone to do what needed to be done to protect our nation from more attacks. - And we have not been attacked since 911.

I'm convinced the President elect will sell us to the highest bidder. - Let's hope he proves me wrong!

When you have ties w/ American haters such as Pfleger, Ayers, Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright, it really is hard to believe you actually love The United States of America.

Obama Creates New Unconstitutional Office

If Obama is already creating an office of the elect which has no constitutional basis or authority, what should we expect from this man with an ego only equaled by other dictators that have lead their countries down the path of lost freedoms and liberty in the name of leadership and change.

This is a very disturbing turn of events, an  attack on the Constitution, by creating an office which is not expressed or spelled out in our Constitution. What is even more disturbing is the timid behavior and acceptance of the News Media not to call Obama on this self installation in a hubris created position.

If he is this presumptuous before taking office, imagine what it will be like after he takes office.

And there remains a distinct contingent of same-sex marriage supporters who are adamant about retribution. One is Chad Griffin, a political advisor to Hollywood executives who says, "A dollar to the yes campaign is a dollar in support of bigotry, homophobia and discrimination. There are going to be consequences. Any individual who has held homophobic views and who has gone public by writing a check, you can expect to be publicly judged. Many can expect to pay a price for a long time to come."

source : Fox News Web.

   The advocates, the supporters, the politicians, the community of homosexuals that pound and beat the drum of "JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED" are talking about "JUDGING" because their life of abomination has been ruled against by the public. The Proposition 8 platform was a platform asking for homosexual MARRIAGE. It was a platform of RELIGION and NOT CIVIL RIGHTS! ! !....

But by all means, those who speak against others that are supposedly "judging" are going to make a case of JUDGING THE PUBLIC?

Spoken like true Liberal Loon  hypocrites. But GOD accepts you like you are huh?Can you say CONTRADICTION OF TERM.....

Challenge God if you want to....He doesn't lose.

This is from an email I was sent and found it interesting for thought:

  Eugene Volokh blog, who's a law professor at UCLA.  

"So, "Is Hillary Clinton Unconstitutional?" In a word, Yes -- or, to be more precise, a Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be unconstitutional.

The Emoluments Clause of Article I, section 6 provides "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time." As I understand it, President Bush's executive order from earlier this year "encreased" the "Emoluments" (salary) of the office of Secretary of State. Last I checked, Hillary Clinton was an elected Senator from New York at the time. Were she to be appointed to the civil Office of Secretary of State, she would be being appointed to an office for which "the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased" during the time for which she was elected to serve as Senator. The plain language of the Emoluments Clause would thus appear to bar her appointment ... if the Constitution is taken seriously (which it more than occasionally isn't on these matters, of course)."

As most of you know, I am by NO means an Obama supporter, but, in the same token, I do think he is a smart man.  I don't agree with his beliefs, I don't approve of late term abortions, nor do I support same sex marriage, and Obama supports both of them. 

I don't know if he will try to take our guns away from us or not, but I believe he would like to.  He will NOT be a very good president, even though I think he is smart.  Being smart and being good are two different things totally. 

We as a nation need to stand up and realize that this country is heading downhill very fast, so even though I don't agree with him, we need to all support him, because if God didn't, I promise he wouldn't be in office.  We need to support him as much as God does, or we will regret it.

God Bless all, and everyone have a good thanksgiving. Gobble Gobble.

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

 Nov. 26, 2008: A video still of a man believed to be part of the alleged terror plot in India.

DEVELOPING: At least 40 people are reportedly being held hostage in Mumbai, India, by gunmen who targeted luxury hotels, a popular tourist attraction and a crowded train station in at least seven attacks that killed at least 78 in the nation's financial capital, police and witnesses said.

Eyewitnesses said the terrorists appeared to be targeting Americans and the British.

Click here for photos.

"We were asked if there were any British or Americans," two eyewitnesses told Sky News.

Recent Attacks on Americans or American Interests in India

At least 78 people were killed and 200 injured in the attacks, which began late Wednesday night, according to Johnny Joseph, the chief secretary of the state of Maharashtra, of which Mumbai is the capital.

There were reports of new attacks on one hotel, the Trident, and gunfire at another, the JW Marriott.

Police were battling the gunmen, Maharashtra Police Commissioner A.N Roy said.

"The terrorists have used automatic weapons and in some places grenades have been lobbed," Roy said.

The State Department condemned the attacks and said it couldn't confirm any U.S. casualties.

"Our sympathies go out to the families and friends of those killed and injured, and to the people of Mumbai," said Robert A. Wood, a deputy spokesman at the State Department. "We are monitoring the situation very closely and stand ready to support the Indian authorities as they deal with this horrific series of attacks. At this point, we are unaware of any American casualties."

Some of the gunmen are still holed up in buildings, a police official told Reuters, while NMTV is reporting two of the terrorists are dead.

Several European lawmakers were among those inside the hotel.

Sajjad Karim told Britain's Press Association news agency that he and several other lawmakers were barricaded inside the Taj Mahal Hotel.

"I was in the lobby of the hotel when gunmen came in and people started running," he told the Press Association by phone from the basement of the hotel.

"A gunman just stood there spraying bullets around, right next to me," he said. "I managed to turn away and I ran into the hotel kitchen."

Karim was part of a delegation of European lawmakers visiting Mumbai ahead of an upcoming EU-India summit.

Gunmen opened fire on two of the city's best-known luxury hotels, the Taj Mahal and the Oberoi. They also attacked the crowded Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus station in southern Mumbai and Leopold's restaurant, a Mumbai landmark.

"People started running out," an eyewitness said. "The crowd came out of the station: I saw people limping and coming out. I said 'Run.' We ran and I said, finally I said, 'Run' and one person got hit by bullet and fell down and I got hit on the neck and went to the hospital and I just came from there "

It was not immediately clear what the motive was for the attacks.

"It was really scary," said Janice Sequeira, a tourist who had been at a restaurant in the Taj Mahal Hotel. "It was like the sound of loud crackers, not one but several, we just ran out of there."

At the Oberoi, police officer P.I. Patil said shots had been fired inside and the hotel had been cordoned off. He would not give any other details.

The Press Trust of India news agency quoted Mumbai General Railway Police Commissioner A.K. Sharma as saying that several men armed with rifles and grenades were still in the train station.

Leopold's restaurant was riddled with bullet holes and there were blood stains on the floor and shoes left by fleeing customers, according to an Associated Press reporter at the scene.

At least 25 people had been brought to the G.T. Hospital near the shootings, said hospital official Yogesh Pandey.

 AP/Nov. 26: A man injured in a gun battle is carried to a hospital in Mumbai, India.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<
/p>

Filmmaker sounds off on new show chronicling Venezuela's outspoken leader