All the president's tax cheats Michelle Malkin - Syndicated Columnist You never get a second chance to make a first post-inaugural impression. Less than three weeks into his first 100 days, Barack Obama has left an indelible mark on his nascent presidency: the mark of incompetence and hubris. Despite the administration's much-touted wealth of bright minds and high bars, the transition has been a complete disaster.   In a double whammy on Tuesday, tax troubles and ethical clouds forced the withdrawal of not one but two high-profile Obama nominees. These come on the heels of former Commerce Secretary-nominee Bill Richardson's withdrawal due to a pay-for-play probe in New Mexico and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's "tax goofs" involving his failure to pay $43,000 in federal self-employment taxes for four separate years -- until, that is, he was nominated for the Treasury post. Thorough vetting, it seems, is an inconvenient process -- a pesky "distraction," if you will -- in the Land of Hope and Change.   Health and Human Services Secretary-designee Tom Daschle finally bowed out after aggressive rehabilitative efforts failed. His chummy Senate pals on both sides of the aisle may have been willing to forgive his failure to pay longstanding back taxes owed on limo services, undisclosed consulting fees and dubious charitable donations worth an estimated $146,000, including interest and penalties. But the American people were not. (And an interesting postscript: He may have apologized and dropped out of the administration, but Daschle still owes Medicare taxes equal to 2.9 percent of the personal value of the car service he received from Democratic donor and crony Leo Hindery, Jr.)   Just before the Daschle announcement came the withdrawal of Nancy Killefer. She was tapped to be President Obama's "Chief Performance Officer," overseeing compliance, organizational effectiveness and waste management across every federal agency. But the former Clinton Treasury official and head of the prestigious Washington office of the management consulting firm McKinsey & Company, Inc., couldn't be bothered to manage her own household help effectively. She failed for a year and a half to pay employment taxes and had an outstanding tax lien on her home. The lien was worth less than $1,000 -- far less than the tax liability Geithner owed.   If I were a left-wing feminist, I'd be sorely tempted to whip out the gender card and give the Good Old Boys Club a few whacks. Killefer gets thrown under the bus, but Geithner gets to drive? No justice, no peace!   Now, compare President Bush's transition track record in 2001. Remember that the traditional 100-day period was shortened as a result of the election lawsuit. Wrote Paul Light of the left-leaning Brookings Institution at the time: "Bush gets an A on the transition into office. He survived his truncated 40-day transition with only one major mistake -- Linda Chavez, who withdrew her nomination for Labor Secretary after the flap over allowing an illegal immigrant to stay in her house....Bush also deserves an A-plus for the timely assembly of his White House team. Building around Vice President Dick Cheney, the Bush White House is an MBA's dream: efficient, predictable, well controlled, on time, under budget."   During Tuesday's press briefing, glib White House spokesman Robert Gibbs did his best to bat down a rising chorus of questions about his boss's judgment -- not only on the nomination "glitches," but also on an ever-growing list of exemptions to Obama's no-lobbyists pledge. Echoing Bill Clinton's "most ethical administration ever" and Nancy Pelosi's "most ethical House ever" mantras, Gibbs defensively asserted: "The bar that we set is the highest that any administration in the country has ever set."   Then how, pray tell, did all the president's tax cheats make it past the front door? And where is Vice President Joe Biden to wag his finger at their lack of patriotism? Team Obama embraced these damaged candidates despite advanced knowledge of their lapses. Killefer's tax lien was four years old. Questions about Daschle's judgment have lingered for years. Ask GOP Sen. John Thune, who defeated Daschle the Dodger in 2004 after news broke of his bogus property-tax homestead exemption claim on his $1.9 million D.C. mansion -- which he listed as his primary residence despite voting in South Dakota and claiming it as his primary residence in order to run for re-election.   The buck stops at the desk of Barack Obama. A little of that humility and personal responsibility he spoke so much about during his inaugural address is now in order.   COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC. Media frustration spills into briefing A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.He also asked new press secretary Robert Gibbs why ABC, which paid millions to host the DC Neighborhood Ball, was granted the only inauguration day interview with President Obama – a move he equated to “pay to play.”“We have a tradition here of covering the president,” said Plante, who is covering his fourth administration.Gibbs defended the White House’s moves, insisting aides acted in a “way that was upfront and transparent” in allowing the standard pool into the swearing-in. And Obama himself seemed mindful of making a good impression, paying a surprise visit to the White House pressroom a few hours after the briefing. It’s been a bumpy 24 hours for Gibbs and company, as members of the White House press corps have publicly expressed frustration with an administration promising openness and transparency. At the same time, some members of the Obama administration’s press team have signaled that they plan to shake up some of the old traditions of White House coverage, some of the longest-standing – and most jealously guarded – in town.In recent weeks, New York Times editors complained that its White House team hadn’t gotten a sit-down with Obama during the transition, breaking an unofficial tradition whereby recent president-elects have free-wheeling exchanges with the Gray Lady before the inauguration. In the case of the second swearing-in, however, it seemed to give reporters a chance to lay down an early marker on questioning whether Obama would live up to one of his key campaign pledges, at least when it comes to the media.“It is ironic, the same day that the president is talking about transparency, we were not let in,” CNN’s Ed Henry said on the air Wednesday night after news of the second swearing-in broke.Henry’s main gripe was that television reporters weren’t permitted to cover a historic moment, when Obama once again raised his right hand and took the oath before Justice John Roberts. The only images came from White House photographer Pete Souza.Three wire services — The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse – refused to move those images, in protest of the White House’s handling of the event.The wire services’ photographers were also denied access to photograph Obama sitting in the Oval Office on the first day, and similarly refused to move the White House approved photos.Michael Oreskes, the AP’s managing editor for U.S. news, told his own news outlet that “we are not distributing what are, in effect, visual press releases.”Later, in a statement to Politico, Oreskes said that the AP believes “access for news photographers has been a time-honored tradition at the White House through many administrations and needs to be continued.”“We are working diligently with the White House staff to ensure this access,” he added.Jennifer Loven, the AP’s White House correspondent and president of the White House Correspondents' Association, said she and the group's board "are addressing this aggressively with the White House—our strong objections to both the issue of them releasing photo handouts from events that the press should be able to cover, and the issue of how the pool was structured last night."Providing access is probably the easiest ways to appease the White House press corps, which feeds on it. So by not allowing the three wire services in the Oval Office for day one—a ritual that typically yields flattering shots of a new president writing at his desk or chatting with aides—the press team picked a fight that could have been avoided.But those weren’t the only issues of access to come up in Thursday’s roughly 50-minute briefing.  Before Gibbs took the podium, reporters were given a background briefing under an agreement to only attribute information to “senior administration officials”—a policy some news organizations object to as a matter of policy.But when Gibbs let slip the name of one briefer, Greg Craig, a couple times, The Wall Street Journal’s Jonathan Weisman asked, “Are we allowed to repeat that name?”During the earliest days of the Clinton administration, such abrupt changes in the traditional press access were often met with harsh criticism from the briefing room pack, most notably, the blocking off of access to the office of then press secretary George Stephanopoulos.Former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers, who succeeded Stephanopoulos, said in PBS’s “The Clinton Years” that the move “made the press very angry because they lost access to a part of the building that they had had access to.”“And it didn't serve us,” she continued. “And it was stupid and didn't last very long. I can't remember when the decision was made and the door was finally reopened but it was a complete waste of energy. It alienated people for no purpose. It served nothing. It served no one. And it was a rookie, rookie mistake.”Myers said Thursday that the Obama team’s decision to bar widespread access to the re-do of the oath wasn’t in the same category as shutting access to the press office, but wouldn’t help in relations with the media.“I think not letting video, that’s a bit of a rookie mistake,” Myers said, adding that “when you can, it’s better to err on the side of inclusiveness with the press.”On balance however, she said of Obama’s press team, “I think generally speaking they’re doing very well so far,” said Myers.There have been a handful of rocky moments so far. Some press staffers found their name cards misspelled on Wednesday and phone lines weren’t properly hooked up. Reporters trying to reach the press staff got emails bounced back.Also, press aides informed reporters that the doors of the lower press office will be locked until 8:30 am, an inconvenience for those on the early shift. Following a USA Today blog item, there was confusion about whether the Whitehouse.gov site would regularly publish pool reports since there was a “pool report” link on the site. And in the hours before Gibbs’ briefing, the northwest gate of the White House started running out of temporary passes.Now, given the expected learning curve, most of these wrinkles should be ironed out in time. But on broader issues of access, it remains to be seen if the Obama press team is making rookie mistakes, or simply asserting a new protocol, not bound to past traditions that White House reporters have grown accustomed to. While the press corps balks at changes in access, these rules aren’t written in stone. It may chafe veterans of the briefing room, but it’s the administration’s prerogative on such matters.Of course, the media landscape has changed significantly over the 16 years, and getting one’s message across through establishment media isn’t the only option for the new administration.The Obama campaign proved that one could skirt around the mainstream media at times, whether by blasting out text messages to millions of supporters (the Biden pick), or leaking to select news outlets and blogs as a means of getting out the day’s talking points out.But even if the press team is keeping reporters and photographers at bay, perhaps the President will draw them a bit closer.After Obama signed an executive order Thursday morning to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay within a year, “press office staffers began to shoo the pool out the door, and the camera lights were dimmed,” wrote Scripps Howard’s Bartholomew Sullivan in a pool report.However, Obama stopped the reporter from being ushered out, saying, “there are three of these.” The lights came back on. Feinstein Furious Over Panetta Pick Sen. Diane Feinstein is reportedly fuming that Barack Obama picked Leon Panetta as his new CIA Director and never consulted with her. Feinstein, the incoming chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, issued a sharp statement Monday that was a thinly veiled criticism of the pick. The statement made it clear that she had expected a career intelligence professional – unlike Panetta, who has no intelligence expertise whatsoever – to be leading the CIA. "I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director,’’ Feinstein said. “I know nothing about this, other than what I've read," said Senator Feinstein, who will chair the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in the 111th Congress. "My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time." Panetta could face tough questions at his nomination hearing about his background in intelligence. A former senior CIA official who advises Obama defended the surprise choice of Panetta, whose only military and intelligence experience is a two-year stint in the mid-1960s as a U.S. Army lieutenant. The official told the Associated Press that Panetta had been a consumer of CIA intelligence when he was at the White House. The source said Panetta was selected for his administrative, management and political skills that will allow him both to control and advocate for the agency. The official added that Panetta will rely on the expertise of CIA officers to balance his lack of personal intelligence experience. Veterans of the CIA were caught off guard by the selection. "I'm at a loss," said Robert Grenier, a former director of the CIA's counterterrorism center and 27-year veteran of the agency who now is managing director of Kroll, a security consulting company. The lack of intelligence experience puts Panetta at "a tremendous disadvantage," Grenier told The Associated Press in an interview. "Intelligence, by its very nature, is an esoteric world. And right now the agency is confronted with numerous pressing challenges overseas, and to have no background is a serious deficit. I don't say that he can't succeed. It may be that he can compensate for the obvious deficit." Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., ranking member of the committee, raised the specter of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 in questioning Panetta's experience after reports surfaced that Obama had tapped the former congressman and White House chief of staff to head the CIA. “Job number one at the CIA is to track down and stop terrorists," Bond said in a statement reported by The Hill Web site. "In a post-9-11 world, intelligence experience would seem to be a prerequisite for the job of CIA Director." Bond said that he will refrain from judging Panetta immediately, but he warned Obama and Panetta that he "will be looking hard at Panetta’s intelligence expertise and qualifications.”     UPDATE ON OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE By Synnove Bakke, Political Writer, Conservative Pundit  photo:Attorney Phillip J Berg   "Attorney, Phillip J. Berg is not a quitter and does not care who calls him a conspiracy theorist."... Synnove Bakke   UpDate On Obama's Birth Certificate IssueAnd so the saga continues, B.Hussein Obama's Eligibility to occupy The highest office of the land is still an issue!The Supreme Court has scheduled a second Conference on this a week after Congress is to review the Electoral College vote tabulation...Attorney, Phillip J. Berg is not a quitter and does not care who calls him a conspiracy theorist. He is the bravest Democrat that I have ever laid my eyes on!  I can only imagine the heat he has taken for keeping this going! I've taken heat for just reporting on it! This is now a request for an injunction on the election results pending the resolution of a petition for a writ of certiorari, a case that is docketed for a similar conference among the justices on Jan.9th. (A writ of certiorari is a common law writ issued by a superior court to one of inferior jurisdiction, demanding the record of a particular case.) Berg's previous cases have been rejected by two different Justices, and then it came to Justice Antonin Scalia on Dec.18th. It was shown that the docket was then updated to have the motion distributed for conference Jan.16, 2009. Got my eyes glued to this one!I am worn out with the roller coaster ride this Crazy Election has been. We had hopes before that someone would take this case and bring justice to the table, only to have it crushed by each rejection at the Supreme Courts. Most Democrats don't give this the time of day, for obvious reasons, but there are a few people within the Conservative circles that say this case has no merit. To that I say, people have been mislead by Media that twist and even obscure facts. Don't you want to know the truth for your own peace of mind? Do you really want to accept what the media feeds you without question? The only media that reported on the birth certificate issue a couple of times was MSNBC's, Peter Williams, and he was not factual. I don't know if the Liberal media do not know the real facts of the lawsuits or if the dumbo reporters just choose on their own to change the real truth. Another scenario could be that they just don't care to find the truth because it doesn't fit with how they think it should be. "He who walks on water" should not be investigated in a factual manner according to them. I am repulsed by how the Media refuse to act in a fair and factual matter when it comes B. Hussein Obama!There has been more than a dozen lawsuits filed over Obama's eligibility to "occupy" (in my eyes he will occupy) the Presidential Office, many have been dismissed, while others remain pending. The cases, in various ways, have alleged Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "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." Some people have set forward worries about a "Constitutional Crisis" should this not be resolved before he takes office. If it gets discovered that he is ineligible then, and the election declared void, Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that none of the treaties, laws or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal. The Mind boggling question still Remains: Why has B.Hussein Obama NOT shown the REAL birth certificate, to settle all the rumors.  The one on his web site that his campaign posted is a "certificate of live birth" and NOT a birth certificate. We have already established, but for those of you that do not know this, that Hawaii gave out Birth certificates to people that has been born outside the Country. Obama's family members and a Kenyan Ambassador has claimed that B.Hussein Obama was in fact born there. Now I want you all to remember how frustrated we are here at the OCA  and when the truth about B. Hussein Obama comes out! I want you to keep in mind that we questioned the Media's silence AND the courts reluctance to hear this issue. It was also brought to my attention a few months ago that the Supreme Court is not the place to bring this case, and that brought up more questions for us TruthSeekers!  If the Supreme Court does not have the authority to hear this issue, then where does it get heard?   Some facts here are from WND and ObamaCrimes.com Last Friday, a judge in Hawaii threw out the latest lawsuit seeking public release of Barack Obama's No. 1 state secret—his birth certificate! In ruling against the challenge, the judge wrote that he found " insufficient evidence to indicate that the public interest supports."  Update on the Obama Birth Certificate by Synnove Bakke, Political Writer, Conservative Pundit We have had some crazy days since Friday December 5th when the four Supreme Court judges were supposed to make their decision in regards to the Barrack Hussein Obama Birth Certificate birth (.BOBC) Monday December 8th gave us the crushing news that the Supreme Court rejected to hear the case, with no explanation!!  My friends and I were devastated and felt disappointed the Supreme Court. (My friends and I on Facebook.com (FB) are a group of Conservative women that burn with great passion for answers!!) This is not answers! This is evading the answers that the American people are entitled to get! I am aware that it’s a loophole in the Constitution. It says you have to be an American citizen to be President, but it doesn't clarify that one has to provide proof of such citizen ship!!!� Are you kidding me? We are going to let BHO get away with not answering the American people based on a technicality? There also have been arguments on my Facebook  page in regards of where this case should be heard. The Supreme Court is not supposed to uphold the Constitution and close any loopholes that may appear?? Some say not! I wonder then, where this case should be heard.  The other thing that I learned that bothers me is that according to Berg, there is no Federal Agency that's job is to investigate this matter. It's a whole new question and a new set of rules need to apply here! Most average American citizens are not lawyers and they don't know all the facts and loopholes of our laws. If it wasn’t for nonprofit organizations such as "We the People Foundation" there wouldn’t be much information out there on this. I have searched all news during this time and the only place there was any to find was from bloggers...I was able to dig up two videos on You Tube and they were both on NBC and not even accurate on the case from NJ filed by Diofrino. We can wonder and speculate why the Media doesn’t cover this? And when they do they twist the facts or have a smirk, condescending look like Pete Williams on MSNBC. I co-hosted a radio show with Nick Zeus P last night called Young Guns Conservative talk radio. JJ Johnson, Radio personality from Detroit and a very enjoyable Liberal named Marvin Neill was in the discussion panel. We brought this up and had great response and interest on this issue... Nick had an interesting letter from a friend of his in Hawaii; describing how a birth certificate should look like in comparison to how Obama's does...It was very interesting!  People are craving to know more and I have made it my mission to at least inform as many as I can. Most people don’t have time to scour the internet for info and that's how we have to get ANY info for this case! I have written an email to Diofrino requesting he come and talk on the Radio show. It probably doesn’t hurt that I recently found out that we live in the same town! I am waiting for his answer and while I wait I will research... There are other law suits pending and there are others preparing to start...I will keep an eye on those... I said in my last article that I would surrender/ throw in the towel and move to a deserted Island if Diofrino's suit was rejected, but I change my mind!!!!  I was heavily attacked by Liberals accusing me of sour grapes and (a few) Conservatives accusing me of not having educated myself enough. I have to say I disagree. Nobody I know has done more research on this!!!! The (few) Conservatives were arguing technicalities and felt very powerful to be able to present me with their "facts"...I don’t give a rosy red behind about their facts of law!! I still want answers and BHO shouldn’t get away with not providing them!! This is now the new and good next step from WND: Last chance to lobby for constitutional eligibility standard. Despite receiving more than 60,000 of our letters last week, the U.S. Supreme Court announced on Monday that it had refused to review one of the cases challenging the President-elect's eligibility to hold that office. "That leaves it up to the Electoral College," says WND Editor Joseph Farah. "If you want to do everything you can, like I do, to see that the letter and spirit of the Constitution are upheld in this election year, this may be your last chance to weigh in before Inauguration Day. I urge you to work with us in sending letters to members of the Electoral College." Here's Our Next Move: Following up the campaign last week to FedEx the U.S. Supreme Court, WND today announces a historic first in its quest to establish Barack Obama's eligibility for office20- a similar FedEx letter drive directed at individual Electoral College members. Through Thursday at noon Eastern, WND is providing an opportunity to Americans who would like to contact electors of the next president before they vote Monday to send Obama to the White House. WND has obtained addresses for more than 87 percent of the 538-member Electoral College. The letters will be sent FedEx to the 470 members for whom addresses are available. They will all be delivered Friday morning, giving each elector the weekend to consider the constitutional issues raised by Obama's presidency.  With the new "FedEx the Electoral College" program, you can reach all 470 with a one-page pre-written letter, with your name and address attached, and delivered overnight for less than it would cost you to FedEx one member - if you had the address. "The idea was to make this very easy and inexpensive for Americans to make their voices heard," explained Farah. "We encourage other creative ways to prevail upon the consciences of the Electoral College members, but these are not high-profile, public figures. They are ordinary Americans who are little known to the public and who lead private lives. It is not easy to find their names, let alone addresses. While we do not feel comfortable making those addresses public, we believe this campaign will allow Americans to offer their opinions and concerns in a controlled way, without violating the privacy of individual members." 0AFarah personally drafted the letter that will be sent to the Electoral College members above the name and address of all those participating in the program. The letters sent in the "FedEx the Electoral College" campaign will read:   Electoral College Member 123 Main Street Any town, PA 12345 Dear member of the Electoral College: Before you cast your vote Monday to make Barack Hussein Obama Jr. the next president of the United States, please seriously consider the following: Right now, a dozen lawsuits are pending all over the United States - including one brought by a former presidential candidate and U.N. ambassador, and another suit brought by a former deputy attorney general of Penny lvania, plus there are many others - all attempting to bring clarity to an issue that will haunt an Obama presidency if it isn't dealt with now. That issue, as you surely know, is the fact that the U.S. Constitution says clearly and unambiguously in Article 2, Section 1 that presidents must be natural born citizens. But, as is evident not only from lawsuits, but from news stories and the actions of millions of Americans signing petitions, this constitutional issue has not yet been addressed, even at this late hour. Unfortunately, there isn't enough time for our slow-moving legal process to deal with this before the Electoral College meets next week. Only you, our Electors, have the power, responsibility, and the obligation under the Constitution to use your authority to establish, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Barack Hussein Obama Jr. qualifies for the office under that standard.  There is grave and widespread concern throughout the American public that this constitutional requirement is being overlooked and enforcement neglected by state and federal election authorities. There should be no doubt whatsoever that America's next president was truly born in the United States. Remember, if the Constitution doesn't mean precisely what it says, then America is no longer a nation under the rule of law. And a nation no longer under the rule of law is, by definition, under the rule of men. Therefore I urge you to honor the Constitution in this matter and uphold the public trust - even if doing so may prove awkward or inconvenient. All Americans should have confidence their president is eligible to serve. In this unique and historic case, you may prove to be the Constitution's last line of defense. Sincerely, YOU  Here is the link: http://shop.wnd.com/store/item2575.html?roi=echo3-3250625347-2673636-39a95f1031d366562b338e71f77df491& My Facebook profile: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/profile.php?id=609616016&ref=profile   ORIGINAL STORY: Obama Birth Certificate...We still want Answers!!     1. The birth certificate he has provided has not been verified to be an original Hawaiian birth certificate. Hawaiian officials in their public press release FAIL to state that this is an original birth certificate. They have publicly said that they do possess it, but in Hawaii a naturalized citizen can get a certificate of live birth, even when born out of the country. Naturalized citizens, such as the Governator of CA, cannot hold the office of President. 2. From Hawaii's official web page: "Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country." The document that Obama has shown does not contain all the information it needs to conclusively verify that he is legally eligible to hold the Presidential office. Also, State officials refuse to minimally confirm that Obama WAS born in Hawaii. They also refuse to comment on the authenticity of the birth certificate. Obama can easily resolve these questions by simply giving us access to the original!!!! 3. Attorney Phil Berg's lawsuit against Obama, "3 independent Document Forensic Experts performed extensive Forensic testing on the Certificate of Live Birth posted on Obama's campaign website." He has not publicly identified his sources but one of them is reported to be a reputable professional forensics expert going under the pseudonym "Polarik" for his family's protection. His latest comprehensive report concludes Obama's document is a forgery. We the people foundation has received a lot of reaction to their ads so far. The only place we hear of it though, is through bloggers on the internet. Why is that??? There is no practical reason why Obama refuses to produce the original. I feel that he has a duty to the people of the United States of America to provide the evidence needed to hold the highest office. 4. Then we have the numerous Kenya officials that brag about Obama being a son of Kenya, BECAUSE they claim, he was born there! (I had the recording of the Kenya Ambassador earlier on my page) 5. Family members of Obama claiming he was born in Kenya. 6. His documented trip in 1980 to Pakistan when American citizens where banned from entering the country. The source of some information here is, We The People Foundation, which have taken out a full page ad in the Chicago tribune twice this week! We have all seen it! It’s been circulation the web. There have been numerous lawsuits that have been rejected on this matter. However, on Friday, Dec 5th there is a hearing scheduled at the Supreme Courts. FOUR Supreme court justices will then have to decide if this should be looked into. I can’t wait to see what happens then! If nothing does, then I'm throwing in the towel, waving the white flag and surrender to the mercy of a Liberal Congress and Presidential administration... I might even find a Conservative, deserted island in tropical areas were we could all go and live happily ever after!  By Synnove Bakke   OCA Staff Writer   Update on Blagojevich scandal: "The chairman of the House impeachment committee, state Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie (D-Chicago), will respect [U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald]'s request and not issue the subpoenas for incoming White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and close Obama friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett" ... because Fitzgerald said "doing so would 'significantly compromise' his ongoing criminal investigation of the governor."   Blagojevich says he's fighting for people of Ill.     CHICAGO – Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich said Friday that if what he's done as Illinois governor is an impeachable offense, he's living on the "wrong planet" and is in the "wrong place." Speaking to a WLS-TV reporter outside a Chicago law office, the governor said he was hired to fight for the people of Illinois and that's what he's been doing. The interview marked the first time Blagojevich has spoken to the media since giving a defiant three-minute speech last Friday in which he said he'll fight the forces against him until he takes his last breath. The 52-year-old Democrat is charged with scheming to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder. Federal prosecutors built their case against the governor using wiretapped conversations riddled with profanity. "Look, if I'd have known people were listening, I probably wouldn't have said some of the things you say in private conversations," Blagojevich said Friday. "But I think there's probably tens of millions of people across America who talk like that from time to time." Blagojevich has ignored ongoing calls to step down. He spoke Friday as the committee of legislators investigating whether he should be impeached prepared to reconvene in Springfield on Monday. The group's chair, state Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, said members were "still doing due diligence." The governor's attorney, Ed Genson, said he will provide the committee with a list of 25 of Blagojevich's accomplishments that will render the idea of impeachment ridiculous, according to WLS-TV. Blagojevich said the wiretap recordings show him working for the people of the state. "Even in this process, without saying too much, that was all about trying to end up with the right decision that could do the most things for the people of Illinois, and when the full truth is told, you will see precisely that," Blagojevich said. "If somehow that's impeachable, then I'm on the wrong planet and I'm living in the wrong place," he said. Currie's committee has yet to rule on a request from Genson to subpoena incoming Obama chief of staff Rep. Rahm Emanuel, senior adviser Valerie Jarrett and more than a dozen others, including Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. Genson has said their testimony would also prove Blagojevich's innocence. U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said earlier this week that lawmakers' interviews of current or former members of Blagojevich's staff might jeopardize his criminal investigation.   NO MEDIA COVERAGE:    Race Case & Obama by: Republican National Lawyers Association/Committee for Justice http://www.committeeforjustice.com/default.aspx Today the U.S. Supreme Court considers a petition to review the Second Circuit’s decision earlier this year in Ricci v. DeStefano, in which New Haven, Conn. firefighters – one Hispanic and 17 whites – sued the city after the promotions they earned were denied under pressure from the city’s African-American leaders. The Second Circuit affirmed the denial. In addition to its legal importance, this case stands out because of its implications for both President-elect Obama and Sonia Sotomayor, one of his most likely Supreme Court picks. Don’t miss an excellent piece on the case by National Journal columnist and former New York Times Supreme Court reporter Stuart Taylor (link below).First, some details about the case. The plaintiffs are typified by Frank Ricci, who spent hundreds of hours and more than $1000 studying for the promotion exam and got a high score. But he didn’t get a promotion. New Haven threw out the test results because too few black firefighters scored high enough to earn a promotion. Never mind that the exams were expertly designed to eliminate the possibility of racial biasThe politics motivating New Haven’s decision highlights the ugliness of the racial spoils system behind many of the nation’s affirmative action programs. Taylor explains the Chicago-like politics behind this case: “Politically powerful African-American leaders made it clear that if not enough blacks were eligible for promotion, then no whites should be promoted either. One was the Rev. Boise Kimber, who disrupted meetings of the city's civil service board and warned its members of a ‘political ramification’ if they certified the exam results. Kimber was a key vote-getter for [New Haven] Mayor DeStefano, who had made the minister chairman of New Haven's Board of Fire Commissioners despite his 1996 felony convictions.” New Haven politics may soon impact national politics. Taylor explains: “If the Court grants the petition, the now-obscure case will vault to the top of the nation's racial policy agenda, presenting a tough issue not only for the justices but also for President-elect Obama. He could come under great pressure to take a position for or against … what many voters – and, I would guess, five justices – would see as a raw racial quota.” In his famous Philadelphia speech about race, Obama acknowledged the when "working and middle-class white Americans … hear that an African-American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed ... resentment builds over time." We believe this resentment is at risk of accelerating now that Obama’s election to the nation’s highest office has undercut the “uneven playing field” rationale for racial preferences. Taylor is concerned that “based on Obama's record and the views of the civil-rights specialists on his transition team, there is every reason to worry that he will appoint civil-rights enforcers, judges, and justices bent on perpetuating the race-based discrimination against whites (and Asians) in many walks of life.” Taylor concludes that it “would be most interesting to find out” if Obama “appreciate[s] the simple injustice of the New Haven firefighter case.” We go one step further: the American people deserve to know where Obama stands on this case, regardless of whether the Supreme Court decides to hear it. After all, it is Obama’s judicial and political appointees who will determine whether injustices of the kind seen in New Haven continue and, most importantly for Obama, whether the resentment of white and Asian Americans builds in the four years before the next presidential election.SONIA SOTOMAYORIn one sense, Ricci v. DeStefano is a typical case of judicial activism in which a panel of three liberal judges decided the case based on ideology rather than law. But in this case, the Second Circuit panel included the notorious judicial activist Sonia Sotomayor, who is at or near the top of virtually every list of potential Obama Supreme Court nominees.As Taylor explains, Sotomayor and her two colleagues knew their decision lay on shaky legal grounds: “[They] affirmed the dismissal, in a process so peculiar as to fan suspicions that some or all of the judges were embarrassed by the ugliness of the actions that they were blessing and were trying to sweep the case quietly under the rug, perhaps to avoid Supreme Court review or public criticism, or both. … The three-judge panel initially deep-sixed the firefighters' appeal in a cursory, unpublished order that disclosed virtually nothing about the nature of the ideologically explosive case.” By a narrow 7-6 vote, the full Second Circuit denied the firefighters’ request for a rehearing. In their denial, Sotomayor and several of her colleagues argued that New Haven’s decision was "facially race-neutral" because New Haven did not “confer any actual benefit on applicants on the basis of race.” As Taylor explains, the judges were making the laughable claim that the city’s action was non-discriminatory because “none of the low-scoring, ineligible African-American firefighters was promoted either.”If Sotomayor is nominated to the Supreme Court, you can bet she’ll be asked about Ricci v. DeStefano, including her absurd definition of race-neutrality and her attempt to deny due process to the firefighters through a cursory order that is difficult to review. posted by Curt Levey at 8:36 AM      Come Out, Come Out Where Ever You Are by: Patsy Norvelle Rep. Rahm Emanuel May or may not be the future White House chief of staff,   Where's Rahm been hiding since the Blago adventures hit the news scene? Is there any reason mainstream media has not pointed out the fact that Rahm has not uttered a word or hardly even been seen in public anymore? The Obama-Blago scandal keeps growing. Obama's denials have now been proved false: Rahm Emanuel talked to Blago six times, and may have been caught on tape by the FBI talking about selling Obama's Senate seat. Backing up a few days to Dec 11 Rahm refused to take questions from reporters about whether he was the Obama “advisor” named in the criminal complaint against Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Dec 12  Emanuel was uncharacteristically absent from Obama’s news conference that morning. He was spotted two hours later in the lobby of Chicago’s City Hall.  He was there to listen to his two children performing in a concert with their school, Anshe Emet. A Sun-Times reporter pressed him to comment about whether he was the emissary named in the criminal complaint. “You’re wasting your time,” Emanuel said. “I’m not going to say a word to you. I’m going to do this with my children. Don’t do that. I’m a father. I have two kids. I’m not going to do it.” Asked, “Can’t you do both?” Emanuel replied, “I’m not as capable as you. I’m going to be a father. I’m allowed to be a father,” and he pushed the reporter’s digital recorder away. Dec 15 At a press conference in Washington to announce his new environmental team, Obama called the corruption charges against the governor an "appalling set of circumstances," but said they had nothing to do with his own office.  Controversy has swirled around Obama and his incoming White House chief of staff, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, following Blagojevich's arrest. The president-elect sidestepped the question Monday when asked whether Emanuel had spoken with aides to the governor. Of course Rham was not present at this press conference. . Blagojevch was caught on tape saying that he wanted the Obama advisor in question to know what Blagojevich wanted in exchange for the Jarrett appointment. Blagojevich said, “He asks me for the fifth CD thing, I want it to be in his head.” Emanuel represents the 5th Congressional District in Illinois. No one in the Obama campaign or administration has been charged with any wrongdoing. Obama said this morning that none of his staff has had a hand in any dealmaking on his Senate replacement. Since Obama said so, well we all have no choice but to BELIEVE and cling to his words. Rahm did have  conversations with Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s administration about whо would rеplacе Obama in the U.S. Senаte, thе Tribune has learned. Emanuel, whо hаs long been сlose to bоth Rod Blagojevich and Barack Obama, has refused to resрond to questions abоut аny involvеmеnt he may have had with thе Blagojevich сamp over the Senаte pick. A spokeswoman for Emanuel alsо declined to comment Friday. One source cоnfirmed thаt communications between Emanuel and the Blago аdministrаtion wеrе caрtured on court-approved wiretaps. Rahm Emanuel delivered a list of candidates whо would bе “acceрtable” to Obama, the source said. On the list were Obama advisеr Valerie Jarrett, Illinois Veterans аffаirs dirеctor Tammy Duсkworth, state Cоmptrоller Dаn Hynеs and U.S. Rep. Jan Schаkowsky of Chicago, the source said. аll arе Democrats. Sometime after the electiоn, Rahm Emanuel cаlled Harris back to add the nаme of Democratic Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan to the approved list, the source said. The main concern I have is why isn’t Rahm Emanuel making it public what he discussed with Blago???? Note: Rahm Emanuel has gone into hiding to avoid the media, and claims he's getting death threats over his involvement in the Blago scandal! NOTE: Per Rush Limbaugh: "Democrats want to throw out a duly elected governor who has yet to be charged with anything. I believe that Rod Blagojevich deserves at least the same due process Democrats are demanding for Al-Qaeda terrorists at Guantanamo Bay." Will Rahm be holding a press conference for us soon?   Cracking and Busting up that Chicago syndicate is hard but not impossible ~Patsy    More to come on this scandal, Jesse Jackson Jr has not been cleared!  RNC: What We Don't Know  PR Newswire posted: 3 DAYS 12 HOURS AGO   Despite Obama's Promises For More Transparency In Government, Many Questions About The Blagojevich Scandal Remain Unanswered  WASHINGTON , Dec. 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following was released today by the Republican National Committee:    Obama Has Not Answered Many Questions Relating To His Or His Staff's Involvement In The Blagojevich Scandal:   Did Anyone On Your Team Speak With An SEIU Official About Your Replacement? How Can You Be Certain That Nobody On Your Team Was In Contact With The Governor When You're Still Gathering The Facts? Did Anyone From The Obama Team (Transition Team, Senate Office Or Otherwise) Have Contact With The Governor Or His Office About Anything Related To The Senate Seat Prior To Election Day Or After?  Will You Release Copies Of Any Written Correspondence Between You Or Your Aides And Blagojevich? Why Didn't You Correct Axelrod When He Said You Had Spoken To Blagojevich About Picking Your Replacement?  Did Anyone On Obama's Team Discuss With Jesse Jackson Jr. Any of Jesse's Interactions With Blago About The Seat?  Obama Has Repeatedly Called For More Transparency In Government: Obama Said That "The American People Are Desperate" For A President They Can Trust, And "That's The Kind Of Leadership" He Provides. Obama: "But when I talk about change, it's not simply policies, it's also a change in leadership. And what, right now, the American people are desperate for is a president that they can trust, who's going to promote accountability and transparency in our government...and that's the kind of leadership I'm providing..." (CBS ' "Face The Nation," 12/23/07) Obama On Transparency: "I Think Actions Speak Louder Than Words." Obama: "Well, I think actions do speak louder than words, which is why over the 20 years of my public service I have acted ... to make sure that we create transparency in our government..." (Sen. Barack Obama, CNN Democrat Presidential Debate, Austin, TX , 2/21/08) Obama: "Here's how I can encourage people to be involved. Number one, it means transparency in our government." (CNN's "Ballot Bowl," 3/15/08) But Several Media Commentators Have Noted Obama's Lack Of Transparency On Questions Relating To The Blagojevich Scandal: Newsweek's Richard Wolffe Said Obama's Comments On The Blagojevich Scandal "Were So Vague And General That You Could Easily Misconstrue Them As Not Being Credible." Wolffe: "It did and not just on this issue. He's been sitting on the sidelines just about everything until now and you just cannot -- what are they thinking? You cannot sit out a story this big about your own Senate seat in your own state. And worse than that, his comments yesterday were so vague and general that you could easily misconstrue them as not being credible when he said he wasn't aware of what was going on." (MSNBC's "Countdown," 12/10/08) Wolffe: "Well, as far as we know, there is no effort by Fitzgerald's office to say, don't comment. ... There's no real issue about prejudicing a jury. He can comment as much as he likes because there is no cloud of suspicion. Still, he needs to come up with his own full account." (MSNBC's "Countdown," 12/10/08) MSNBC's Chuck Todd Noted Obama's "Passive" Response To The Blagojevich Arrest. Todd: "I also expect you will see Obama today probably have a stronger statement condemning Governor Blagojevich. I think yesterday there were some folks who were surprised that it was a passive statement, very much in Obama's demeanor. He is always very cautious in initial reactions to things like this." (MSNBC's "MSNBC Live," 12/10/08) Chicago Sun -Times' Lynn Sweet Called On Obama To Show Transparency By Deed, And Not Just Press Release. Lynn Sweet: "The Obama administration just issued a new transparency policy last week. If there were conversations at all with anyone, I think this is what it means to be transparent. If anyone said anything, even in a low level, they need to be able to talk about it and live with the consequences. If this is indeed his transparency, it's not just transparency by press release but transparency by deed." (MSNBC's "MSNBC Live," 12/10/08) ABC 's Jake Tapper Said "In Order To Be Truly Transparent," The Obama Administration Must Disclose Any Role It May Have Had In The Blagojevich Scandal. "On its website, President-elect Obama's Transition Team is making a big deal about transparency, posting memos and information about meetings with various, largely supportive organizations. True transparency means a little more than that, one might posit. It means telling voters about matters that aren't entirely comfortable to share. And that would mean that in order to truly be transparent, the American people need to find out as much as possible, as soon as possible, about what role anyone Team Obama played in any of the various shenanigans Gov. Blagojevich is accused of committing -- or any others we don't yet know about." ( Jake Tapper, "Obama's Answer On Blagojevich -- And The Questions It Raises," ABC's "Political Punch" Blog, www.abc.com , 12/9/08) The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder: "In an interview with the Los Angeles Times , President-elect Barack Obama draws a line and says he won't answer any more questions about Gov. Rod Blagojevich; in particular -- who on his staff had conversations with Blagojevich: 'Ongoing .... investigation.' ... I suspect that this formulation, with its rich history, will not stop anyone 'there,' even as it's entirely plausible that Obama's legal counselors have advised him not to say anything else." ( Marc Ambinder, "Ongoing Investigation," The Atlantic's "Marc Ambinder" Blog, www.theatlantic.com , 12/ 10/08) The Wall Street Journal's John Fund Noted Obama's Silence On Previous Allegations Of Corruption In The Governor's Office. Fund: "Many people were curious who Mr. Obama would side with in the dispute. Would it be with those Democrats who wanted to move aggressively against an apparently corrupt governor or with his old Chicago ally, Mr. Jones , who preferred to wait? Mr. Obama did neither. He kept silent." (John Fund, Op-Ed, "Obama Was Mute On Illinois Corruption," The Wall Street Journal, 12/11/08) PDF Format: http://www.gop.com/images/research/121208Research.pdf   A Product Of The RNC Research Department Paid for by the Republican National Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. SOURCE Republican National Committee     Blago Indictment Littered With references to Obama! EXHAUSTIVE ANALYSIS: More Questions about Obama and Blagojevich in the Wake of Obama’s Latest Gambit at Transparency “I have never spoken to the governor on this subject. I am confident that no representatives of mine would have any part of any deals related to this seat. I think the materials released by the U.S. attorney reflect that fact,” Obama said at a Chicago news conference. “I’ve asked my team to gather the facts of any contacts with the governor’s office about this vacancy so that we can share them with you over the next few days.” Obama, in other words, will ask his staff to compile documents that reveal when they established contact with Blagojevich’s office. But what about the many “advisors” and other individuals who appear to be relaying information between Blagojevich and Obama in the conversations transcribed and summarized in the criminal complaint filed by Special Agent of the FBI David Cain? I ask this question, as it is clear to me that communication between Obama and Blagojevich was occurring between third parties. While they may not embroil his immediate advisors in any scheme that involving “pay to play,” it does reveal that others who served as emissaries for Blagojevich and Obama did embroil themselves and, by implication, Blagojevich and Obama in such conversations. Obama, according to Advisor B, one of Blagojevich’s advisors cited on page 68 of the complaint, wanted to avoid any “fingerprints” in any arrangement made with Blagojevich. And Blagojevich, according to page 57 of the complaint, sought to “conduct indirectly … a negotiation” with Obama. Nothing could be in writing, and everything must be indirect: this is why Obama’s attempt to appear transparent with a release of all direct communications with Blagojevich’s office is irrelevant. What is relevant are all the indirect communications that occurred. Who are the Advisors mentioned in the complaint? Who spoke with the SEIU representative? Why was Blagojevich on the telephone with “advisors” in Washington, DC? And who on the Obama staff was speaking to these “advisors?” Let us review the chronology as it is outlined in the criminal complaint. Read the rest Well, in the weeks since the election there has been several more of the Obama supporters arrested in Chicago, and now there are  even more questions being raised as the result of a meeting of Bill Richardson with Mexicans.    Then there is the question, as to why anyone would spend in excess of $800,000 employing three (3) law firms to keep from legitimately releasing a $10.00 certified copy of a birth certificate?   Cabinet appointee, Bill Richardson can tell you why. Obama's own Cabinet member: He's 'an immigrant'   Don't believe Barack Obama's grandmother? Don't believe the ambassador to Kenya? How about Barack Obama's own Cabinet member? That's right – former presidential candidate and Obama's choice for secretary of commerce, Gov. Bill Richardson, slipped up. In an effort to reach out to the Hispanic community, he admitted what Barack Obama has been trying to hide all these months: "Barack Obama is an immigrant." See it for yourself: Added00:17 Richardson revelation-Obama is an immigrant You don't need a translator to understand what Richardson admitted: Barack Obama is NOT a natural born citizen. That means we have a guy who's planning to take over the White House who is in direct violation of the Constitution. And his own Cabinet member says so. That's pretty big news, one would think. But the media has refused to cover it with anything more than a blurb laced with a "this is ridiculous" tone. It is ridiculous – ridiculous that the Constitution means so little that we can't even ensure that it's being followed. It's ridiculous that the story of the century is being ignored by those whose job it is to report it.   But now there's something even more ridiculous: Not only will Fox not report the news regarding Obama's citizenship, now we can't even buy an ad on Fox to allow others to hear about the constitutional crisis we're facing. Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, sign WND's petition demanding the release of his birth certificate. CNN is still considering it. Here's the ad text and, as they requested, the information to back up each line: Heard the rumors about Barack Obama's citizenship? These are the facts: The Constitution requires the president to be a natural born citizen. Text of Article II, Section 1. Obama's grandmother said she was there when Barack was born in Kenya. Two tapes of Obama's paternal grandmother: 1. "Native of this village" in Kenya 2. Phone conversation about visiting birthplace Affidavit of Rev. Kweli Shuhubia Obama's 'civilian national security force' Another Barack Obama Gaffe: A Civilian Army? In a little if not ever publicized Part of a Barack Obama speech in Colorado on July 2, 2008 Obama called for the formation of a civilian army to rival the U.S. Military. The Obama Campaign doesn't have this speech on it's website nor a transcript of it. I wonder why?   "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."...Obama “We cannot continue to rely on our military” Wow! We have been relying on them for our National Security through many wars and have provided us the strength to maintain us secure. Words out of his mouth lead us to interpret that, our military is not good enough in an Obama administration. “In order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” Wow! In order to achieve who’s objectives and who has set them. In his own words: Who is we? I don’t recall where there has ever being any discussion about a new National Security Objective.     In reference to the military “just as powerful” Wow! A force that is powerful enough to maintain stability in the entire world. A force that powerful would be strong enough to strip us from the freedom that we have or anything we own; from our constitution to our land.     In reference to the military “just as strong” Wow! With a force that strong after striping us from the second amendment it would not take much time to disarm our population. They could dismantle the militia that our founders put in place to challenge them.     In reference to the military “just as well funded” Wow! In 2008 the Department of Defense budget is $518,000,000,000 ($518 billion dollars). With that kind of money going into it, in no time at all it could turn into the most powerful, the strongest and the best funded Policy State Society that has ever existed. It would dwarf Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Kim II-sung, Fidel Castro and Pol Pot all put together.     The Obama campaign is riddled with controversy and all of the dubious figures that are influencing the promotion of this political career; specially the ones that we do not see. Barack Obama is so new and inexperienced that one has to wonder if there really is some hidden agenda from his Far Left Liberal promoters. He could have never gotten as far as he has if it wasn’t for the Liberal media that is campaigning for him and the unknowns.     Among the unknowns is the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union). The ACLU role in our society among other things is to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States." We can ask Don Imus how much help the ACLU offered him when he was fired for exercising his Freedom of Speech. We can also see how much help they are offering the people of South Carolina while they are trying to defend Freedom of expression by displaying the Confederate flag which they rightfully claim as part of their heritage. As we can see the ACLU has no interest in protecting the civil liberties of all our citizens but only those who sympathize with their Leftist Liberal views. During this presidential election it would be very clear to see on what side of the political arena they are on. Based on that don’t count on the ACLU trying to protect us from a Socialist National Repressive Police.     Another factor to consider is the amount of cash that has poured into Obama’s Presidential race. Based on the contributions that have already being placed on his support, by the time the Presidential election takes place, his cash contributions will have exceeded half billion dollars. Peculiar on his campaign is the continuing flip-flopping of positions and movement away from his Far Left Wing of the party. Make no illusions; it is on the Far Left that he belongs. After securing his nomination for the Democratic Party on a very leftist platform he has moved away from it as he looks for a constituency that was not his from the beginning. The more centrist Democrats were in Hillary’s pocket and now Obama and his leftist backers desperately are trying to figure out how to reach them in November.     To the best of my knowledge Joseph Farah of WND was the originator in this inquires. Any concerned citizen in our society needs to get involved and find a truthful answer to the omission in Obama’s transcripts.