Merry Christmas!

This week I join with billions of followers and admirers of Christ in celebrating his birth.

Many followers of Christ call themselves Christian as I do, having dedicated their lives to studying and following the example he set for us in his life and accepting Christ as our sole personal Saviour and relying upon his mercy or grace for salvation from sin.

Other religions such as Judaism and Islam admire Christ as a prophet, a wise and noble leader, a rasul or rabbi. Still others admire Christ's teachings from a philosophical, secular viewpoint with an admiration for his ability to lift the human spirit.

I find nothing not to like about Christ. I am grateful for a federal holiday we have to honor the birth of such a person who promoted so much good in the world and has inspired so many to persue love, kindness, truth, forgiveness, and charity.

In the spirit of Christ, let me wish you and your family a "Merry Christmas"!

The gig is on, Steele!

I have no beef with Mike Duncan; he has in my opinion led the Republican National Committee (RNC) in dignity and with passion. His term is due to expire in January.

But time has come for change. We need new faces and a more visible face for our party. I believe the right person to lead our party is Michael S. Steele and am giving him an official NACILBUPERA endorsement.

Michael is a new face in the GOP; he's a "rising star" and is just plain cool. He was the first African-American to hold state-wide position in Maryland and as Lt. Governor became the highest-ranking elected AA Repbulican (Wikipedia).

Michael has been a visible face appearing on a multifarious range of news media including Foxnews, The Tom Joyner Morning Show, Newsbusted, The Washington Times, and Real Time with Bill Maher. He also was one of the speakers during the Repbulican National Convention in August.

Nacilbupera is asking you to join the cause by spreading the word and signing the petition at: www.draftmichaelsteele.com/. At this site you can also watch/listen to videos of some of his speeches. Another speech given at the Voter's Values Summit is available at Youtube.

Has Obama Committed Fraud?

If there is one thing that upsets me most about a politician, it is when he or she is involved in an illegal activity.

I mean, it's one thing for Clinton to have sex with Lewinsky, but another for him to lie under oath about it. Clinton should have been impeached then and would have if it hadn't been for his Democratic buddies in the Senate; that deeply angers me because I view the Presidency as a noble office for noble citizens NOT liars and cheats. I am not purporting to be self-righteous: we are all sinners and make mistakes, but we are also accountable for the wrongs we do.

I have been watching the likes of Jeremiah Wright and self-proclaimed bomber Bill Ayers come out of the woodwork now that their good friend Barack Obama is president-elect; hey, I rather expected that. It is frankly repulsive--for example to listen to Ayers' continued rhetoric that he was "demonized" for doing the right thing at a time when "thousands of our people were being murdered by our government every month." He then applied his "militant" philosophy to our day: "...just as today, I don't think we've done enough to stop these wars." So, would he bomb again today? Or, being older now, would he encourage others to do so? Yet in the end analysis there's no crime committed in Obama having radicals as friends and Obama has condemned Ayers' actions and left Wright.

Obama has committed a crime in the distant past: he admits he did illegal drugs including marijuana and cocaine. Pretty despicable, but at least he was honest about it and appears to have left those days long behind. For that I can forgive him.

There is a update on a very low-simmering story that has finally come to head concerning whether or not Obama registered for the draft as he was legally required to do so. Debbie Schlussel's recent blog on this subject highlights several extreme irregularities.

I am by nature cautious and skeptical of stories from new sources to me personally. I didn't and don't bite the hook on Obama's so-called forged birth certificate. But being an amateur genealogist I have general familiarity with US government documents and am very concerned that this document may likely be forged.

Schluessel's points are well-documented and easy to follow, but I also enjoyed the Breitbart video interview with Schluessel as well.

Briefly, some of the concerns supporting the forgery of the document are that:
(1) Document Locater Number appears to have been number issued this year rather that 1980
(2) The postmark seal appears to have been forged
(3) The document form (either Feb 1990) issue date is ten years after Obama signed it or altered (Feb 1980) in which case no such form exists

Here's the bottom line: if the document is a forgery, then who signed the form, housed in Obama's hometown of Chicago? Did Barack or a surrogate sign it? If so, then Obama is a fraud. If so, Obama has no noble choice but to resign. Nixon did the noble thing and resigned when he committed a crime.

I agree with Schlussel that an independent investigator be appointed. I am tired of electing government officials and either want my faith renewed in my president-elect that my suspicions are wrong and he is not a crook or I want him out of office.

No Crooks For President!

Hail to the new Commander-in-Chief!

What a marvelous thing we have done, partisanship aside here, that an African-American can be elected President of the United States of America! I was impressed with the dignity in which the leaders of the Republican Party gave respect and homage to Obama's victory and in turn Obama's gracious acceptance speech. These words of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. seem to have been completely fulfilled: '"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."'

Yet it seems to me Rev. King had a bigger vision for our country: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." To me, the vindication of this latter part of the dream comes not on the excitement we share today that an African-American is elected president or tomorrow's dream of an Asian- Indian- or Hispanic-American being elected, but that we see past the color of the skin and it matters not to us what color they are.

Tears of joy are fine for today. It is good to release the pent-up emotion of our forefathers. But today let us begin to further Rev. King's dream by being the first day of beginning to be "color-blind". It is a task that I expect to take many years, perhaps a generation or two, but it ours to take.

Obama and New Party

When I first saw this video about Barack Obama belonging the radical "New Party" I thought Jody Miller was joking: after all, she's pretty hilarious. And, I naively thought to myself 'Haven't I done all my research and found all the radical associations Obama has been a part of?' Apparently I was wrong.

There is a substantial amount of documentation linking Obama to New Party including these two documents from New Party's old website achived by non-partisan Internet Archive:

http://web.archive.org/web/19990202063635/www.newparty.org/up9603.html
“We're also backing Danny Davis in a Congressional race, Barack Obama for state representative, and judicial candidate Patricia Martin.”
http://web.archive.org/web/19980203213956/http:/www.newparty.org/up9610.html
"Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)"

...and this article from the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America demonstrating that Barack's New Party relationship was more than a simple organization that endorsed him, but rather a reciprocal contract:

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html
About 50 activists attended the Chicago New Party membership meeting in July. The purpose of the meeting was to update members on local activities and to hear appeals for NP support from four potential political candidates. The NP is being very active in organization building and politics. There are 300 members in Chicago. In order to build an organizational and financial base the NP is sponsoring house parties. Locally it has been successful both fiscally and in building a grassroots base. Nationwide it has resulted in 1000 people committed to monthly contributions. The NP's political strategy is to support progressive candidates in elections only if they have a concrete chance to "win". This has resulted in a winning ratio of 77 of 110 elections. Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.
The political entourage included Alderman Michael Chandler, William Delgado, chief of staff for State Rep Miguel del Valle, and spokespersons for State Sen. Alice Palmer, Sonya Sanchez, chief of staff for State Sen. Jesse Garcia, who is running for State Rep in Garcia's District; and Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. Alice Palmer. Obama is running for Palmer's vacant seat.

...or how about this from the Progressive Populist?

http://www.populist.com/11.96.Edit.html

"New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago."

Notice how all these sources are solidly left-wing media, not right-wingers trying to substantiate some false association. So why haven't we heard more about this? Well Barack sure hasn't been forthcoming about his past, but the distancing started early on:

http://web.archive.org/web/19991115093609/members.aol.com/NewPartyIL/natnews1.html

"NP member and State Senate candidate Barack Obama won uncontested. Interestingly, it appears that the local Democratic machine is trying to distance itself from our folks. At a "Democratic Unity" march on Chicago's West Side, a flyer invited community members to join with a host of local democratic candidates. The only two west-side Democrats not listed: NP members Danny Davis (U.S. House candidate) and Michael Chandler (Alderman and Ward Committeeman)."

So what did this radical New Party stand for? Well, I encourage you to sample some of their own words. Like most parties, they generalize with statements that seem incontrovertible that all would agree with and some "reading between the lines" is needed but I thought these highlights taken from the links below were worth reading:

http://web.archive.org/web/19990222062425/http://www.newparty.org/about_the_np.html and http://web.archive.org/web/19990128005940/www.newparty.org/npprogram.html

• A reduction of national military spending to that necessary to the defense of the United States, and an end to unilateral military interventions [read: reduce military might; we don't defend our country unless we have UN support]
• In all aspects of our economy and social life, an absolute bar to discrimination based on race, gender, age, country of origin, and sexual orientation, and absolute security in reproductive rights, fundamental liberties, and privacy. [read: pro-gay marriage; pro-late term abortion; perhaps pro-infanticide in the case of botched abortions?]
• A progressive tax system based on the ability to pay. [read: increase taxes on the weathly; income redistribution]
• Rebuilding our cities and metropolitan regions -- the cornerstones of a high-wage and ecologically sustainable economy -- through community-led programs of comprehensive, democratic, high-wage, and low-waste economic development. [read: We love groups like ACORN and AFL-CIO!]
• Full public financing of elections, universal voter registration, proportional representation, free party competition. [read: pro-voter fusion; fund and require everyone to be registered to vote even if they don't want to vote; create "affirmative action" laws for the government representation by race, gender, etc.]
• Full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal "social wage" to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time, and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity. [read: SOCIALISM OR COMMUNISM; WE DONT CARE WHAT YOU CALL IT JUST BRING IT ON!!!!]

I am serious about this folks, this is the Barack Obama hidden agenda. Look at how it matches exactly with what we've already learned about Obama. I know I am being a bit of a johnny-come-lately but I am trying my best to let you know too before we get "Change" we will regret.

Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich

Obama continues to deny his Socialist agenda.

His latest attempt is to deflect the accusation through misleading analogy and humor. The problem is his analogy is grossly misleading: sharing your toys or your peanut butter and jelly sandwich is charitable and praiseworthy.

The problem is that he wants to take my money and your money and "spread it around". The correct analogy to what he wants to do is he wants to go take your peanut butter and jelly sandwich and give it to whomever he feels better deserves it.

Never mind that you worked hard for your sandwich; never mind that you were looking at the poor kind across the lunchroom yourself to share your own sandwich through charity. And never mind that in the process of giving your sandwich to someone else Obama (representing big government) will take a couple of bites out himself. This is the true analogy and this could be construed as Socialism, Marxism, or Communism depending on how your look at it. I personally use the least severe term "Socialism" because I believe the other two terms present a level of coercion Obama has yet to put forth.

The final point to all this is that Obama is a deciever: he is trying to deceive Americans into believing his agenda is charitable, not his true socialist colors.