Progressing Forward From The "Race to The Office"; and furthering, The White Hous finale,.

Required field must not be blank: Mr./s. President i.e.{Zapf Chancery} !
"The Red, White, and Blue, Blog"
ABOVE Each POST's Title : Post's DATE-Preceeds in Victory Red
Post Titles-"#001776" <><> Links- Hover(mouse over text turns Gold
SHARED CONTENT(BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS DATABASE LINK TimeSeries/LNS14000000 )
Continuing the "2008", "2009, 2010, 2011,", "2012 politics", wondering, Is it really "Just Plain" Politics?


Blogger's Profiles Population Location United States": 2,310,000 3,160,000 (April/5th/2010 8,670,000)(October 18th, 2010 6,120,000); Now results total Listed In This Location , December 6th, 2010 Results Total 10,700,000 LATE OCTOBER 2015 = 1 of 6,600_

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

A NOTE IN PASIANCE IN NUN OF THEE ABOVE

"Pastance" may be the word from the folk lore etymology, but even in that, a note can apply from the etymology of "pastime" (the position of having a president as our representing leader,) and PLEASAUNCE Fr. (but not one individual's preferrances at all of our expence, but only a sellect few...; then who?)
There are "no laws against Christ", so if somethings are against Christ what will become of those things? JUST B.S'n if its about politics and todays world and history in this country?


Here is a descriptively close(not exact) partial set of info from a related set of politics-

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGknFsl0lKTD8Bb8FXNyoA?p=%22CONSERVATIVES+TODAY%22The+Old+Regime+and+the+Revolution+%281856%29&fr=yfp-t-103&fr2=sb-top&sao=0
American conservatism: Facts, Discussion Forum, and Encyclopedia Article
Isolationism had discredited the Old Right and their opposition to ... days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the ...
www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/ American_conservatism - 230k
RedBlueChristian
... and female, between rich and poor, and between the young and old ... conservatives today do believe in supply-side economics; those who've thought it ...
www.redbluechristian.com/ index.php? paged=7

Conservatism in the United States is a major American
United States
The United States of America is a Federal government constitutional republic comprising U.S. state and a federal district. The country is situated mostly in central North America, where its Contiguous United States and Washington, D.C., the Capital districts and territories, lie between the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Oceans, Borders of the U... political ideology
Ideology
An ideology is a set of aims and ideas, especially in politics. An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things , as in common sense and several philosophical tendencies , or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society..... In contemporary American politics, it is often associated with the Republican Party
Republican Party (United States)
The Republican Party is one of the two major party contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the Democratic Party . It is often called the Grand Old Party or the GOP..... Core conservative principles include outspoken belief in God
This article also goes way on, with God
(adding: God is a deity in theism and deism religions and other belief systems, representing either the sole deity in monotheism, or a principal deity in polytheism.... and country
and then Patriotism...

Remember this was a conservative post
liberal next?

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Are you the messiah?

This post is not to insinuate, or judge, or to dignify, what seems to me "an idiotic question", but..
..for the eliment of an earlier post Thursday, April 30, 2009 growandknow: Obama ..
and from that origin on the GrowAndKnow.BLOGSPOT excerted:
In My Life Time
He comes not as a THIEF IN THE NIGHT IF.....You WATCH !
Jesus said, "What I say unto you, I say unto all, WATCH!" - Mark 13:37
Directly to homeworship101 Prelude to "are you the messiah?"
(from second page):
Worldly wisdom does not clarify spiritual matters. The simple messages in Yahshuas’ parables revealed matters “. . . hid from the wise and revealed to the babes” (Mat.11:25). Most teachings of the Pharisees were boring the people with dry, lengthy debates, and confusing explanation of the Scriptures and traditions. The people were attracted to Yahshua’s parables, which contained striking images, dramatic action, and bold character development; all built around universal themes of clarifying and defining the Kingdom of YAHWEH-GOD.
The Parables of Yahshua can be recited in minutes, yet the complex message of His parables was so revolutionary, that no other New Testament personality ever tried to copy this aspect of His teachings. Throughout the ages, thousands of volumes of scholarly commentary have been written t-r-y-i-n-g to explain their simple messages.
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
...Serpents, brood of vipers!
How can you escape the condemnation of hell?”
Matthew 23:29-33
As the reformer Yahshua challenged the orthodoxy. No one had ever before denounced the priests and Pharisees, or dared to question the doctrine of the elders. He expertly quoted the Prophets as He strongly rebuked Judaism’s stiff-necked religious hierarchy - the establishment religionists who never lived the righteous life. They were corrupt. They were blind guides. They were play-actors, and did not live according to the spirit of the Law (Mat.3:7, 5:20, 23:1-36; Luk.11:37-54, 18:9-14; Jno.8:44).
Yahshua challenged the doctrines of the scribes and rabbis, telling them bluntly that they did not know the Scriptures (Mat.22:29). At least eight times Yahshua scornfully denounced them for being legalistic and fourteen times for being hypocritical. They were excellent in reading and quoting Scripture, to keep the people on a tight leash, but in practice they themselves disobey by following their own ritualized customs.
Yahshua detested some of the Pharisees, the religious fundamentalists of the day, because they did not have a heart for the sinners, and were not sensitive to the needs and hurts of the individual. Yahshua taught of YAHWEH’S free salvation by grace, not by law - very revolutionary. And He taught in His Sermon on the Mount that He brought a Kingdom for the meek and for the poor in spirit (Mat.5:5-11), which clearly was just as opposite as you can get to what the Pharisees taught.
Yahshua strongly scolded them because they were always bitter and constantly finding faults, tearing everyone apart. This, the “holier than thou” crowd, by their own attitude, promoted bigotry, prejudice and hatred. He showed them that their religious worship was mere ritual, with emphasis on minor details, “while ignoring the weightier matters of the Law,” such as “justice, mercy and faith.” He taught that the motive of the heart was important, not just the outward action (Mat.23:1-23).
Yahshua chastised them for the many traditions they added to YAHWEH’S Law, making the Law a hardship on the people.
The religious authorities pretend to love you, but in reality they just want to hold you hostage. The Pharisees slowly gained power over Jewish society, by being the overseers of the many elaborate and intricate Jewish oral laws that they required the people to live by. These “traditions of men,” in an effort to micro manage the people, only burden the community, and has reduced righteousness to mere ceremonialism of outward splendor (Mar.7:6-13).
YAHWEH calls HIS people to unity, not uniformity. The simple - common sense - Laws of YAHWEH do not enslave people, it sets them free!
In the Book of John, when Yahshua witnessed the Gospel to Nicodemus a Pharisee, he could not understand Yahshuas’ plainness of speech (Jon.3:1-21). He also admonished them for not being able to see the signs, “You look but can’t see; you listen but do not hear . . .,” (Mat.13:13; Luk.6:42).
The sage would say,
“What is simple, is rarely understood.”
  1. (from homworship101.com's page 1 of "are you the messiah?"
    "Throughout time
    over 270 different civilizations around the world
    tell the story of a world flood,
    and of a family in a boat full of animals
    that was saved to replenish the Earth."

    "The methods or lessons may vary according to the culture,
    but 'universal' lessons of the sin of pride,
    the moral teachings of “the Golden Rule,”
    the spiritual conflict of good against evil,
    a future 'supernatural being' to conquer evil,
    and an afterlife where man will finally find justice,
    can be found in every major religion."
(page 1 .. as continued..below, as follows-)
YAHWEH'S Covenants are either HIS promises or HIS lies, it is for you to decide. To give hope to Adam and Eve, one was one of HIS first promises was that HE would, sometime in the future, send a 'Redeemer/Messiah' to cancel the curse of sin (Gen.ch.3; The Fist Book of Adam and Eve ch.3, from The Forgotten Books of Eden). This hope of YAHWEH'S Promises, were passed do through the generations to Noah. And the hope of a Redeemer is the central concept in the oldest book of the Bible, Job, thought to predate the Books of Moses.
After the Flood, Noah and the following generations - of whites, Orientals, and blacks - had the same spiritual knowledge of YHWH and the Noahic Covenant (Gen.ch.6-10). When the time of the Tower of Babel came around, Satan began to influence the people and corrupt their spiritual knowledge. After the Tower of Babel, YHWH scattered the people around the world, and their good and bad spiritual stories went with them. Some lost all their original knowledge, but many societies throughout history kept some of the highlights such as the flood, judgment day, the golden rule, a redeemer-messiah who will finally conquer evil. etc. As time went on, different schools of interpretations developed, but some core teachings remained. (Click to enlarge picture.)
The term messiah, means anointed or anointed one. Satan is always mudding the clear spiritual water's, and messiah was a common title used by kings, priests and lunatics in ancient Israel. Just for the record, in our study, Messiah, or in the Greek, Christ, means anointed one of YAHWEH.
But they knew,
one day there would be a special one,
someone who would be unique,
someone who would miraculously deliver them.

YAHWEH still needs someone to take over the Throne of the Earth that Lucifer first failed at, and then Adam. To "redeem" HIS creation, HE has a plan...
At the foundation of the world, HE promised HIS first son Adam that HE will send a Messiah, who would defeat Satan and restore the Kingdom to Earth. Since that time the faithful have wondered when, and how? And since that time, they continued to wait, and watch for the signs.
"Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign:
Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son,
and shall call His name Immanuel.”
- Isaiah 7:14
The Prophets have been talking about it for centuries. The people heard it all before, the promise of a deliverer is a prophecy that goes w-a-a-a-y back. The Judeans did not live in peace, they have been living under the rule of one despicable despot after another - and “the hills are full of deliverers.”
But they knew,
one day there would be a special one,
someone who would be unique,
someone who would miraculously deliver them.
.
The Prophets told of His position:
“. . . and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His Name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever . . .” Isaiah 9:6-7.
.
The first sign:
A remnant of the Israelite nation must be in Jerusalem (Dan.9:25). The Hebrew people of the tribes Judah, Benjamin and Levites returned to Jerusalem from their Babylonian captivity in 536 B.C.E. When the Judeans returned to their beloved city, Jerusalem, they immediately began to rebuild the city and the Temple. With YAHWEH’S help (told in the Book of Nehemiah) they accomplished this most difficult task in a very short time.
.
The second sign:
They need their Temple up and running. In 20 B.C.E. the Second Temple became known as Herod’s Temple when the Roman King Herod annexed Jerusalem and magnificently enlarged the Temple and its surrounding buildings.
The Prophets foretold all of this. Now the stage is set! The Jews must be in Jerusalem, and the Temple would be rebuilt, because this would make “the way” ready for the promised Messiah (Dan.9:24-26).
By now in Roman Jerusalem,
the Prophets have been quiet for 400 years,
and the faithful are still watching and waiting . . .
The Prophets gave a hint as to the area, Bethlehem (Mic.5:2).
The Prophets foretold He would be born of a virgin, from the tribe of Judah, from the root of Jesse (father of King David), someone with a pure heart and pure in her genetic heritage (Gen.3:15, 49:10; Isa.7:14).
Imagine for a moment, knowing of the great conflict between good and evil, and all of what is at stake on Earth as well as in the heavens, now comes to rest on the shoulders of a young Jewish girl. Remember, YAHWEH brought “the flood” because Satan tried to destroy this genetic blood line and prevent this moment in time. This simple young woman will now bring forth the “crucible” in this intergalactic spiritual war - the Heavenly powers are watching closely.
Many young girls quietly wondered about it? What would it take to qualify? What would it be like? Technically speaking: YAHWEH would not touch this sinful planet. HE is aware of HIS own prohibition against fornicating with the humans. But in some mysterious way, YAHWEH will send HIS seed by way of the Holy Spirit. Miraculously implanted, the Messiah will arrive by way of a natural childbirth by a virgin Hebrew girl. But who would it be? Who is worthy? And when will the Word be given? ( Click picture for info, click here for life in ancient Israel )
The Word is given, and the Angel Gabriel announces to a young Jewish girl named Miriam, commonly called Mary in English, “. . . blessed are you among women! . . . thou shall conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son.” The Angel Gabriel told her His Name will be called, pronounced Yah'shua, which means YAHWEH' saves, “because by the power of His FATHER He will save the people from the “Curse of Sin.”

The Messiah comes as salvation in His FATHER’S Name (Jno.5:43). “He shall be great and called the Son of the High; and YAHWEH the FATHER shall give unto Him the throne of His father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of His Kingdom there shall be no end” (Mat.1:18-25; Luk.1:26-33). (Picture shows the Sacred Names of YAHWEH and Yahshua in the original ancient (Paleo) Hebrew script turning into the modern Hebrew (Masoretic) script. Remember, Hebrew is read from right to left.)
Technically speaking: When the Hebrew name Yahshua is transliterated into English it is written as Joshua, or Yoshua. Jesus is a Greek Hellenist invention.
Scriptures say His people will not deny His Name (Rev.3:8), but the Messiah’s Name along with the CREATOR’S Name stirs great controversies in some circles. How to pronounce it. How to spell it. Should it be used? Does it really matter? It’s too Jewish! It’s a Hebrew Name for the Hebrews only! Space here is too short to review all the supporting details, for more information on the Sacred Names see the links page.
*WARNING: The Messiah's Sacred name is one of the three powerful Sacred Name's opening the way for truth - as much truth as you can stand. There is a severe spiritual penalty for misuse of the Name, Exo:20:7. "Respect is what we owe, love is what we give," and vocalizing the Sacred Name of the CREATOR, the Messiah, and the Holy Spirit must be with respect. If you do not believe in them, then it is better never to say the Name's, (reading does not count), then to use or speak them in a slanderous or disrespectful way.
*BEWARE & BE AWARE: We should be very cautious not to give to man, (or woman), what rightly belongs only to YAHWEH, (Exo.20:7; Rev.19:10). In other words, the Sacred Name's are never-ever to be used for the name or title of a mere mortal.
Miraculously, YAHWEH-GOD by the power of the Holy Spirit sends a spark of life to Miriam, and GOD becomes Man (Luk.1: 34-38). Research shows that He was born on the fifteenth day of Tishri (September-October) during the Feast of Tabernacles. The year of His birth is open to some speculation, it could be anywhere from 4 to 1 B.C.E., with 1 B.C.E. as the best guess.
One must remember when tracking Yahshua’s genealogy, that in Jewish law the mother determines the heritage of the child. If the mother is Jewish and the father is not, the child is Jewish. When the father is Jewish and the mother is not, the child is not considered Jewish. Besides, Miriam’s soon-to-be husband had nothing to do with this miraculous birth.
The Prophets foretold He would be like a Prophet unto Moses. Moses in one of his most specific predictions declared that YAHWEH would raise another Hebrew Prophet in the future whose life would closely resemble his (Deu.18:15-19). In a comparison of the life of Moses and Yahshua of Nazareth, at least fifty elements and events are parallel in both lives. Many of these were beyond the ability of any human control.
Consider the roles that Moses and Yahshua both played: prophet, priest, lawgiver, teacher, leader of men. Both spent their early years in Egypt, miraculously protected from those who sought to put the prophesied deliverers to death.
Both had a Divine mission and taught new truths from YAHWEH, and they confirmed their teaching with miracles performed before many witnesses. Both fasted for forty days and faced spiritual crises on mountain tops. Moses rescued Israel from the dead religion of pagan Egypt, Yahshua rescued Israel from the dead letter of the law of tradition. The people were ungrateful and rebelled against the leadership of both men. The generations that rebelled against them died in their lack of faith, one in the wilderness and one in the siege of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. Moses and Yahshua both died on a hill.
The New Covenant taught by Yahshua is based upon what was written in the Hebrew Testament (Heb.8:8-10), and He began handling His FATHER’S business in the Temple at age twelve (Luke 2:42-43).
Yahshua qualifies as a valid Prophet . . . continue to next page
From the book The Mystical Rites of our CREATOR ISBN 0-9675266-0-4
etamo e`taler
Posted September 21, 2007 at 11:08 am Permalink
ABSTRACT : it has been said that of the many religions working together with their government diplomats, it is thought from governing views- that- none can be recalled of, that rests their bases on any “one line of scripture”; yet with regaurd to the rest of the scriptural doctrins contexts, circumstances can exist that allow that one line to be the truth in the way it was explained, therfore an exeption could be possible to exist in a way that is both legal and against the law; in that while the law in government is of collections to positive productive innervissions, it is the obligation to the community and people within to present how it affects those of which jurisprudence is also the governments to enforce and or to protect…
…no one line of scripture found yet, that represents the entire faith…?
All of the above, of what is over or above and beyond…; to destiny and what we are, or what we were or what will we become,; ..what will become of us all, without notice of many things great or small?

Friday, June 12, 2009

TOBACCO

BELIEVE WHAT YOU WANT, DECIDE WHAT YOU WILL, BUT TODAY, AGAIN THIS HAS HAPPENED WITHOUT A FAIR REFLECTION OF CITIZEN CONCERN IN MIND, BUT RATHER THE INTEREST OTHER THAN THE REASONINGS GIVEN APPLY...
WHERE SHOULD A PRESIDENT STAND ON ISSUES OUTSIDE HIS AREAS OF EXPERTISE, OTHER THAN THE EXPERTS OPPINIONS THAT HE IS GIVEN... THAT IS IF ANY OTHER INTERESTS EXISTS OR CAN BE SEPPERATED?
HOW COULD ANY OF US CITEZENS FIND OUT THE TRUTHS?
TODAY, A LAW PASSING AS A LIE IS TOLD SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS "NO GOVERNMENT EXCEPTED AUTHORITY" (by rule) TO OPPOSE THE GOVERNMENT'S (NOT THE PEOPLE'S)INTEREST (SO..this "what's best" is and example of "White.Wash.ing"(if I can coin that phrase to mean White House/U.S. Government\Washington D.C. - STATEMENTS THAT DIFFER FROM OTHER TRUTHS) :
Example: TOBACCO
Because the chromosomes of tobacco so quickly enter the human nervous system and adapt so closely to the formation models of the chromosomes that the mix or blend with or to; then you could attach, or attack tobacco users health and insurrance reality, to any health problem that relates to the human nervous system(and who can prove elsewise? 30 YEARS AND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND MILLIONS OF RATS WERE SPENT{OR EXAUHSTED TO PROVE THAT "1 RAT" GOT CANCER FROM A SPECIFIC CONDITION WITH THE TOBACCO)
TODAYS REPORT
LIE #1 (any figures other than the Governt's figures) More than 400,000 people die every year from tobacco-related diseases, according to government figures. About 45 million U.S. adults are smokers, though the prevalence has fallen since the U.S. surgeon general's warning 45 years ago that tobacco causes lung cancer.
The House, which first passed a similar FDA bill in April, voted 307-97 to endorse the version passed 79-17 by the Senate on Thursday.

(WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING)
President Barack Obama quickly expressed his support, appearing in the Rose Garden almost immediately after the House gave final approval to the bill giving the Food and Drug Administration control over tobacco production, marketing and sales.
LIE #2 (THAT ONLY BY THE FDA/GOVERNMENT CONTROL can THIS BE PERSUADED)
The measure puts special emphasis on dissuading some of the 3,500 young people who every day smoke a cigarette for the first time. It prohibits use of candied and flavored cigarettes popular among young people and severely restricts advertisements and promotions targeted toward youth. It bans use of words such as "mild" or "light" that give the impression that the brand is safer. It requires stronger warning

What can we figure anyway?

Tobacco has had a tough place in its place between authority/government control and individual, citizen, andd subject's usage privelidge. Arguements exist today that are some 3- 5000 year old arguements, or debates, carved in stone tablets of "whether or not to allow the use of tobacco in the temples?"

No "one" has a right to copyright God either, although this is unrelated it is being preached by relgious orginizations that are Christian, I could say in the very least, JESUS could have.
(I wont say what I believe-its not important, right?)
Science has its own views that dictate or outline some fathoms.
Is there a popular science and a forbidden science like a forbidden archaeology?
A popular politics and a forbidden?

So what figures? Impressionists?
Dissuading some of the 3,500 young people A day FROM A "TRY OF ANY TOBACCO PRODUCT" for the first time?
How about 3,500 ADULTS TO SAY every day THAT WOULD HAVE STOPPED ME THAT DAY OR ANYDAY?
How about if it was just something adults did with no advertising or visual usage?
Children would stop and so would the adults who cant see it or smell it either.
God could still.
The problem with that is the need is not always an addiction and is usefulness can be seriously needed at almost any time and place....(, never mind)
Are there somethings we do just because we like the way they effect us?


I got an email today in humor, and the funny thing was, "I had to search to find if it were true".... The Subject was: "Postal Service Recall - Important...."
Message: The Postal Services created a new stamp with a picture of President Obama.
The stamp was not sticking to envelopes. This enraged the President, who demanded a full investigation.
After a month of testing and $1.73 million in congressional spending, a special Presidential commission presented the following findings:

1. The stamp is in perfect order.
2. There is nothing wrong with the adhesive.
3. People are spitting on the wrong side.
end email

ALSO UNRELATED, what I found in that search for it's truth:

Obama Selective Service Document Problems
Obama Selective Service Document Problems CilyPudi Discrepancies found in Barack Obama's Selective Service documentation


BING.COM

  1. United States Presidents - Alphabetical and Chronlogical ...

    www.apples4theteacher.com › … › U.S. President Activities

    Alphabetical list of presidents. Information on the United States Presidents by term - chronological list of presidents of the United States. Explore each president ...

  2. American PresidentMiller Center

    millercenter.org/president

    The Miller Center is a nonpartisan affiliate of the University of Virginia that ... American President: ... Click here to take a short survey and tell us what you ...

  3. Including results for us president.

    Do you want results only for usapresident?

keyword search for more

BEFORE THE ELECTION, I ASKED BEFORE BLOG POSTS : Special Interests? Breaking or Broken RECORDS

United States Of America, President

The Challenge of The Voters is That, Over-All, It Is "Our Vote", that counts!

...oooh, it seems that "Our" in "Our Vote" could come down to "Our" Judicial Branch decisions that could put any election results into, one, a position to be revoted on by "Our" Congress, limiting their's to the Judicial Branch approved candidates of "Our's", which would limit the possibility to gain the popular candidate's victory (simply because there are less people in congress than when "our" vote is counted with their's) and therfore to give us a result of a victor of a more narrowed representation to that of the influences in likes with the majority of citizens; "Us"; or two, a New Nationwide Vote for "Us" all, to be "Our President".



In Short: This is NOT Over Yet And "We" "Are Not" "Hearing Yeah Or Neah About This:" At "ALL" From (Our) "Reliable News Sources" ...YET...?

ISN'T THIS IMPORTANT? DOES IT MATTER: WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG OR WHAT WE BELIEVE:


This post related the lack of reporting on the topic of "qualification by citizenship and candidates proven, proofs, and scrutiny of credabilty and public opinion; including whether the qualification is more an honorary custom or a definitive law?...:

When Do They Set Up 24 hours a day at a Court House To "REPORT?" ?; or should ""WE", "really"", ...care.

Or is it reallyJust Plain Politics?

2008 politics""



United States Blogger Population Profiles-"Location-United States": 2,310,000 3,160,000 (April/5th/2010 Now 8,670,000 )_






AGAIN - TAKE A REAL LOOK AT THE FIELD:

Is Just Plain Politics ? SEE THE CURRENT Population 2,310,000Blogger's Profile - Locations:"United States"

The Challenge of The Voters is That Over-All,... ...::Yet there is much we can do--and must do::... ...It Is "Our Vote"!

The Vote is for "President Of The United States Of America". That's what this blog is all about! ... ..so what else is there if we dont vote? ... Then Go Back To The Top and start looking what you can find from The U.S.A. and Any Current President's found change that is "spared" for you!

Q&A Resource:

Candida Casa {\/\/HITE HOUSE}

POSTS JANUARY 20th, 2008, AND OLDER

(Edited January 31, 2008;

on this day of edit,this was the quickest I could catch of the 4 videos

most related On The "Video Bar" above:)

Tuesday, January 20, 2009 New Presideent - Old Posts And Comments

Today The Oath was taken by our new President of The United States Of America.

Today, the Supreme Court of The United States Of America has not yet updated the final docket, set for discussion on January 16th, 2009 , with any results of this discussion.

Soon, all posts and comments leading up to this day will be entered as one post, alonng with the links and candidates that ran for this office in 2009.

(that day is today- january 31, 2001)

See More from today(scroll down) with Sources and Descriptions:

Example:

(Source is in bold)George W. Bush,

"Today, a good man took Office!"(Description - plain text) Back in Texas!

Yahoo! News

Kennedy, Byrd collapse - inauguration luncheon

Yahoo News- Barack Obama, left, joined by his wife Michelle, takes the oath of office

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Chief-Justice-John-Roberts/photo//090120/480/70898f22ce0c4fa9a00f838fd875a9d9//s:/ap/20090120/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_rdp Barack Obama, left, joined by his wife Michelle, takes the oath of office from Chief Justice John Roberts to become the 44th president of the United States at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2009. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

The Supreme Court Of The United States Of America(Give them time to update any progress on decisions to Proceedings and Orders)

http://search.access.gpo.gov/supreme-court/SearchRight.asp?ct=Supreme-Court-Dockets&q1=obama&x=38&y=28

No. 08A505

Title:Philip J. Berg, Applicantv.Barack Obama, et al.

Docketed:Lower Ct:United States Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitCase Nos.:(08-4340)~~~Date~~~~~~~~~~

Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dec 8 2008 Application (08A505) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.

Dec 9 2008Application (08A505) denied by Justice Souter.Dec 15 2008Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Kennedy.

Dec 17 2008Application (08A505) denied by Justice Kennedy.Dec 18 2008Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.

Dec 23 2008Application (08A505) referred to the Court.Dec 23 2008DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 16, 2009.~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Phone~~~Attorneys for Petitioner:Philip J. Berg555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12(610) 825-3134Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531Party name: Philip J. BergAttorneys for Respondents:Gregory G. GarreSolicitor General(202) 514-2217United States Department of Justice950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, DC 20530-0001Party name: Federal Election Commission, et al.Lawrence J. JoyceLawrence J. Joyce LLC(520) 584-02361517 N. Wilmot Rd., #215Tucson, AZ 85712Party name: Bill Anderson

Friday, January 16, 2009

TODAYS USAPRESIDENT.COM (Text's Style)

January 20th 2008 Brought Change, BUT, This Website
(USAPresident.Com) Has Been Found To Be To UnReliable For Related Searches For Anything "PRESIDENTIAL OF THE" Keywords Searched; i.e.:
Related Searches Day Of The Dead Lake Of The Ozarks End Of The World The Real Thing Best Web Underdark Parlux Hordes Of The Underdark Mark Of The Beast USAPresident.com Sponsored Listings for LIST OF PRESIDENT FOR US are Linked As Is , As Follows: President-Elect Plate - Official SiteThis Commemorative Plate Celebrates the Historic Victory. Limited Ed. As Seen on TV.www.victoryplate.com Get U.S. Presidential CoverageGet informed results, news & more with the free ALOT politics toolbar.Politics.alot.com 2008 White House Gifts & SouvenirsBoth three and five monuments of Washingon mini-statues include the White House as well as photographs. Other monuments, FBI & CIA caps and shirts, and gifts for Americans of all ages.www.capitolshoppingmall.com President Us at AmazonBuy books at Amazon.com and save. Qualified orders over $25 ship free.Amazon.com/books Dear Mr. President - From PepsiShare Your Hope with the President. Sponsored by Pepsi.refresheverything.com More Sites » Which President is On the Nickel George W bush Campaign President Truman Jib Jab George Bush Cartoon © 2009 usapresident.com. All Rights Reserved. (contact them linked here on their website)
For Searching The Following Terms, use the search engine on this blog(Top Rightof Page)
For resources and information on: President George Bush and List of American Presidents Related Searches President George Bush List of American Presidents U.S. President List of President for Us USA Vice President 1790 President Qualification for Us Presidency Speech President Kennedy Face of Presidents On Coins United States Country Information Senate Congress Presidents of the United States Political

FINAL JUDGEMENT

iS THIS, FINALY THE LAST CASE? Docket for 08A505 Philip J. Berg, Applicant. v. Barack Obama, et al. ... Application (08A505) referred to the Court. Dec 23 2008, DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 16, 2009. ... Philip J. Berg, 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12, (610) 825-3134 ...www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a505.htm - 4k Momentum by the consitancy of the Supreme Court's decision history of cases so far on this issue are largely in favor of "Not Hearing"; whether this is the last case, I Do Not Know. My wonder is really more about the Supreme Court Establishment's Integrity; i.e.: if one of them says I don't want to hear it, then none of them will say they will either; if any think "we should here this" then one of them should; all this concidering our best interests and not the political structures branched dominion leveraging. The math makes me wonder if anyone could seek a fair hearing when your asking it to be heard against or "about" one of the three branches, "by" one of the other three branches, of what the third and last branch has seeded; can this formula include a fair chance for anyone who is not part "of a branch" but a remedial thread? Thats why I feel The Constitution is the X-factor here. Isn't it? Obama himself is a Lawyer and the dynamics of the Presidential job seems to pose a fabric of obstacle by its nature on the President's weeknesses...just like everthing else about the U.S. would be by its competitor's. Obama could handle his case fine, I figure. The case, though it seems, is about the people, only in this case the Fifth Amendment appears but does what? Its my MATH, followed by case dockets. ITS ABOUT OUR POWERS The FORMULA is "2 Of 3" Branches are divided or multiplied by "1 of the 2" of 3. Does The 3rd have any participation? Or Did They? The issue is not only will the case be heard as its already been pushed up to this level, but a Part is an "X" factor; The Constitution. The "3" are our Branches of Government. The campaign was for change

Monday, December 29, 2008

Article 2 Section 1 OF THE CONSTITUTION is

"ARTICLE 1 SECTION 2 OF THE CONSTITUTION" NOTE It Is, What it "IS" and "is" "AT STAKE"; is It Not?

Docket for 08-570 Oct 31, 2008 ... Dec 17 2008, DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 9, 2009. ... Philip J. Berg, 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 No. 08-570 Title: Philip J. Berg, Petitioner v. Barack Obama, et al. Docketed: October 31, 2008 Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Case Nos.: (08-4340) Rule 11 ~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Oct 30 2008 Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due December 1, 2008) Oct 31 2008 Application (08A391) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter. Nov 3 2008 Supplemental brief of applicant Philip J. Berg filed. Nov 3 2008 Application (08A391) denied by Justice Souter. Nov 18 2008 Waiver of right of respondents Federal Election Commission, et al. to respond filed. Dec 1 2008 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Bill Anderson. Dec 8 2008 Application (08A505) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter. Dec 9 2008 Application (08A505) denied by Justice Souter. Dec 15 2008 Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Kennedy. Dec 17 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 9, 2009. Dec 17 2008 Application (08A505) denied by Justice Kennedy. Dec 18 2008 Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia. Dec 23 2008 Application (08A505) referred to the Court. Dec 23 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 16, 2009. ~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioner: Philip J. Berg 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 (610) 825-3134 Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531 Party name: Philip J. Berg Attorneys for Respondents: Gregory G. Garre Solicitor General (202) 514-2217 United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530-0001 Party name: Federal Election Commission, et al. Other: Lawrence J. Joyce Lawrence J. Joyce LLC (520) 584-0236 1517 N. Wilmot Rd., #215 Tucson, AZ 85712 barmemberlj@earthlink.net Party name: Bill Anderson

Taking a look at this from this point of view:

Philip J Berg lawsuit, US Supreme Court, Update December 2, 2008, Emergency Injunction, Writ of Certiorari deadline, Obama and DNC http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/philip-j-berg-lawsuit-us-supreme-court-update-december-2-2008-emergency-injunction-writ-of-certiorari-deadline-obama-and-dnc-have-not-responded/

Note: ARTICLE 2 SECTION 1 OF THE CONSTITUTION Article II Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows: Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector. The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President. The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United 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. In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected. The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them. Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

WHO IS PAYING FOR WHAT

WHAT IS THIS THAT IS BEING PASSED ALONG IN SOME TANGENT OF "THE LEAST LIKELY TIMING FOR A DESCISION, PROCESS" For A Supreme Court Ruling that Could Change The Results Of The General Public's VOTE for The New President Elect? This may seem out in "left field" (simply "way -out there, somewhere") ... Whats the hold up? And Who is paying for what?(if any one or anything)

5 OLC 180; June 17, 1981

Anti-Lobbying Restrictions Applicable to Community ServicesAdministration Grantees

The anti-lobbying rider in the Community Services Administration(CSA) appropriation act is broader than the generally applicablerestrictions on lobbying by executive officers, and prohibits recipientsof CSA grant funds from engaging in any activity designed to influencelegislation pending before Congress, including direct contacts withCongress.

Congress is under no obligation to make funds available to any agencyfor every authorized activity in any given fiscal year, and there shouldbe no presumption that it has done so.

The anti-lobbying statute, 18 U.S.C. Section 1913, and the general"publicity and propaganda" rider in the General GovernmentAppropriations Act, have been narrowly construed to prohibit the use offederal funds for "grassroots" lobbying, but not to prohibit a widerange of necessary communications between the Executive on the one hand,and Congress and the general public on the other. The considerationsthat underlie this narrow construction are irrelevant to a prohibitionagainst lobbying by private persons receiving federal grants andcontracts.

Statements made by individual legislators and committees after theenactment of legislation carry little weight in statutoryinterpretation, and are not a sufficient basis for altering a conclusionrequired by the plain meaning of the statutory language.

MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE COUNSEL TO THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OFMANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

On January 19, 1981, the Director of the Community ServicesAdministration (CSA) published in the Federal Register an interpretiveruling by the CSA General Counsel discussing the legal effect of an"anti-lobbying" rider that applies to CSA appropriations. See 46 Fed.Reg. 4919. The history and language of the rider are set out in themargin. /1/ In his ruling, the CSA General Counsel concluded that therider, in its application to CSA grantees, imposes anti-lobbyingrestrictions that are no more stringent than those imposed uponexecutive officers and employees by 18 U.S.C. Section 1913 /2/ and bythe traditional "publicity and propaganda" rider contained in theTreasury, Postal Service, and General Government Appropriations Act./3/ In reliance upon that legal conclusion, the Director of CSA "waived"certain anti-lobbying restrictions contained in existing CSA grants.Those restrictions were apparently based upon an older, more stringentinterpretation of the rider. You have asked whether, in the opinion ofthis Office, the conclusions reached by the General Counsel were legallycorrect.

I.

The CSA rider imposes two different kinds of restrictions on the useof appropriated funds. The first, set forth in the first sentence of therider, prohibits the use of funds "for publicity and propagandapurposes" or for the preparation or use of any "kit, pamphlet, booklet,publication, radio, television, or film presentation designed to supportor defeat legislation pending before Congress, except in presentation toCongress itself." This language is similar to the language of thetraditional "publicity and propaganda" rider contained in the GeneralAppropriations Act. Unlike the traditional rider, however, the CSA ridercatalogs the kinds of materials and "presentations" for whichappropriated funds may not be expended (kits, pamphlets, etc.), and itauthorizes at least two kinds of expenditures. It expressly permitsexpenditures for the maintenance of "normal and recognizedexecutive-legislative relationships," and it seems to contemplate thatfunds may be expended for the preparation of kits, pamphlets, and other"presentations" that are made directly to Congress itself.

The second restriction is set out in the second sentence of therider. Unlike the first, it applies only to persons who receiveappropriated funds under government grants or contracts. The secondsentence states flatly that "(n)o part of any appropriation contained inthis Act shall be used to pay the salary or expenses of any grant orcontract recipient or agent acting for such recipient to engage in anyactivity designed to influence legislation or appropriations pendingbefore Congress." Because this language forbids the payment of expensesfor "any activity" designed to influence legislation pending beforeCongress, it is far broader than the language of the traditional"publicity and propaganda" rider. Moreover, because it applies expresslyto grantees and contractors and makes no express provision for directcontacts with Congress, it is quite unlike the language of the"anti-lobbying" statute, 18 U.S.C. Section 1913.

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

President Election Overview

I don't know if any of the cases involving the Supreme Court and this years (2008) election will change or add to the following result I picked up on the Cornell Univesity ""Search "LII" "" KEYWORDING "PRESIDENT" and clicking onto the results found under "Elections": election law: an overview Citizens make choices by voting in elections. Two types of elections exist: general elections and special elections. A general election occurs at a regularly scheduled interval as mandated by law. A special election would be held when something arises that does not arise on a regular basis or routine. For instance, if an elected-office suddenly becomes vacant or a legislature wants to put a referendum before the voters, then they can use a special election. The electoral process ensures that no leader can take control for an extended amount of time without forcing the elected-official to answer to the will of the people. Nevertheless, government must play an active role in structuring elections and the electoral process. Consequently, individual states carry out the electoral process by following their own state laws. Sections 2 and 4 of Article I of the U.S. Constitution provide states the right to choose their own Representatives and Senators for the United States Congress. The 17th Amendment, however, mandates that the people directly elect the senators, and explicitly bars state legislatures from choosing the state's U.S. Senators. Presidential Elections: The Electoral College In Presidential elections, the people of the respective states vote for a Presidential candidate by choosing that candidate's slate of Electors. See Section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution. After the state's citizens have chosen a slate of Electors, the Electors then formally elect the President and Vice-President by casting their respective votes. When all states' slates of Electors arrive to cast their votes, the aggregate group makes up that which has come to be known as "the Electoral College." The Office of the Federal Register coordinates the Electoral College. Comprised of 538 Electors, the number of total votes equals the aggregate number of Representatives and Senators that currently make up Congress. The number of Electors in a given state's slate equals its number of U.S. Representatives plus two. The number of Representatives that a state has is determined by considering the state's population in proportion to all other states. Accordingly, each state receives a proportional number of Representatives. The government takes the national census every ten years to determine each state's population. When this occurs, a state potentially can gain or lose Congressmen, which affect the number of Electors, known as electoral votes, that the state will have at the Electoral College. Of the 50 states, forty-eight have a "winner-take-all" system. Washington D.C. follows the same system. A winner-take-all system assigns that state's entire slate of Electors to the candidate who won the popular vote, regardless of how close the popular vote in the state actually was. Maine and Nebraska use different systems in which they divide their states into districts and assign one electoral vote per district. The Presidential candidate who wins a particular district receives that district's electoral vote. Under this system, Maine and Nebraska could potentially split their electoral votes between candidates, although no Presidential election has ever witnessed either state splitting. No federal law exists that binds Electors to vote for a certain candidate. However, twenty-six states have developed laws for this purpose. After each state has submitted their Electors' votes, the votes are counted and a President and Vice-President are named. Usually, the Electoral College emerges with a winner identical to the U.S. popular vote. However, in 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000, the Electoral College winner lost the popular vote. Congressional Elections States may individually decide how to carry out their elections for Representatives, Senators and electors. Each state differs in structure, with most assigning administrative offices the task of running elections. States also differ on rules concerning when, where and how citizens may vote (see Congressional Districts). While the people of the respective states have always directly elected Representatives, most individual state legislatures chose the U.S. Senators that would represent that state until the ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913. A product of the Progressive Era's call for more democracy, the 17th Amendment gave citizens more influence over the federal government. Changes in Election Law While Amendments to the U.S. Constitution are rare, seven of the twenty-seven Amendments that have passed deal with altering the process of electing the United States Federal Government. The 12th Amendment clarifies that each Elector of the Electoral College must cast two votes - one for President and one for Vice President. The 15th Amendment disallows abridging the right to vote on the basis of race, and the 19th Amendment granted women the right to vote. The 17th Amendment gives the people the right to directly elect their U.S. Senators. The 23rd Amendment granted electoral votes to Washington D.C. The 24th Amendment eliminated Poll Taxes, and the 26th Amendment lowered the voting age to 18. Recently-passed federal statutes have created a means for military personnel and overseas citizens to vote and have aided the elderly and disabled citizens' ability to vote. In 1993 Congress passed the "motor voter" law, which enables citizens to register to vote when they apply for driver's licenses. Some states have recently begun adopting voter identification laws as well in an effort to combat voter fraud. These laws require voters to present identification when they arrive at the polling location to vote. Many felt that Indiana had the most stringent requirement because it required voters to present photo identification. Because some felt that the statute disproportionately burdened the elderly and the minorities, the statute was challenged and went before the U.S. Supreme Court in Crawford v. Marion (07-21). The Supreme Court, however, upheld the law. Campaign Reform In 1971 Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) to closely regulate federal elections. The law increased necessary disclosure of federal campaign contributions and created the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) to administer federal elections. In 1979 the FEC permitted political parties to spend unlimited amounts of hard money on certain activities, and soft money went unregulated by the FEC. Hard money refers to funding donated directly to a campaign or political party, whereas soft money refers to funding contributed to organizations, often known as 527s, that advocate issues and indirectly advocate a candidate, without specifically advocating for the election or defeat of a particular candidate. Following the law's passage, the U.S. Supreme Court took up the law's constitutionality in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), a landmark decision concerning the interplay between campaign regulations and First Amendment rights. In Buckley the Supreme Court ruled that the FEC could regulate and limit donations to campaigns but could not cap the amount of money that a political campaign could spend because doing so violates the First Amendment. Buckley also held that the FEC could not constitutionally regulate soft money. Over the next three decades, concerns with the increasing costs of conducting a political campaign did not subside, and the popularity of soft money drove much of this concern. In accordance with this concern, Congress passed the McCain-Feingold (Bipartisan Campaign Reform) Act of 2002 (BCRA). The BCRA amended the FECA to add a provision, which disallowed federal candidates from using corporate and union funding to launch television ads on satellite or cable within 30 days of a primary and 60 days of a general election. A second amendment prohibited candidates and political parties at both the national and state levels from spending soft money on federal elections. Immediately after the President signed the law, members of the U.S. Congress challenged the law's constitutionality before the U.S. Supreme Court. In McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003), the Court upheld the Act's key provisions. However, with two new justices on the bench in 2006, the Supreme Court reengaged the campaign finance debate, striking down a Vermont law because the low campaign expenditure ceiling it implemented was disproportionate to the goal it advanced. See Randall v. Sorrell, 548 U.S. 230 (2006). Then, in 2007 the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life. 551 U.S. ___. As it applied to Wisconsin Right to Life, the Court struck down the portion of the BCRA that prohibited organizations from running issue ads within a certain number of days of the election because the provision restricted political speech and therefore violated the First Amendment rights of the organization. The Supreme Court also expounded on the BCRA's provision known as "the Millionaire's Amendment" in the 2008 case of Davis v. FEC (07-320). The Millionaire's Amendment only affected candidates who had spent in excess of $350,000 in personal funds on their own campaign. The BCRA permitted the opponents of these candidates to receive triple the amount of personal contributions typically allowed and permitted the opponents to accept coordinated party contributions without limit, but the BCRA held self-financing candidates to the normal limit. Finding that the provision burdened free speech and associational rights, the Supreme Court struck down the provision as well. The combination of Davis and Wisconsin Right to Life leaves the BCRA in serious limbo. For more information, see LII's Backgrounder on the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act Cases. Categories:

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Washington's Cruisers

LXXVIII Miss Arendt's only criticism of the American founding fathers is that ... ing a civil society, and the term "appeal to heaven," which does appear, ... links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0032-3195(196312)78%3A4%3C620%3AOR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0 - Similar pages JSTOR: America's Political Heritage: Revolution and Free ... 4~ The artless "Appeal to Heaven" posed a challenge for our Constitution mak- a9 ..... to endure and to be adapted to the various crises in human affairs. ... links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0032-3195(197622)91%3A2%3C193%3AAPHRAF%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P - Similar pages

see todays news topics

NARA | Federal Register| YahooGroups Description EXECUTIVE BRANCH, NOW; Hear THIS,To One Good EAR: