Friday, December 25, 2009


Sussex County Tea Party Committee Announces Campaign to Recall Senator Robert Menendez

A "Committee to Recall U.S. Senator Robert Menendez," sponsored by the Sussex County Tea Party has announced plans to launch an effort to recall Senator Robert Menendez from his position in office. Helping to lead the charge is New Jersey Tea Parties United, the state's grass-roots coalition of county and regional Tea Party groups representing several thousand members in support of fiscal responsibility, individual liberty and limited government. The Committee filed a formal Notice of Intention to Recall with the Secretary of State's office on September 25, 2009. While the office of the Secretary of State acknowledged receipt of the Committee's Notice of Intention to Recall in a letter dated October 5, 2009, it has since provided no further communication. NJ state law requires that administrators respond either with an approval or with a notice of non-compliance stating the reasons within three business days of receiving the Notice, which was October 4, 2009. Since no response had been received, on November 25, 2009, the Committee filed a civil complaint in the Essex County Superior Court of New Jersey against Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State and Robert F. Giles, Director of the Division of Elections, demanding that the defendants be ordered to immediately and forthwith comply with state law by issuing a response to the Committee’s Notice of Intention. To date, the Secretary of State has ignored the Notice and the Complaint in violation of state law and the Committee is awaiting a decision from the court. For up to date information, go to:,, or .

Once the notice is approved by the state or by court Order, the Committee to Recall along with NJ Tea Parties United will spearhead a large coordinated petition drive to collect signatures in support of a special recall election. NJ state law requires a minimum number of signatures equivalent to at least 25% of the prior general election's registered voters in order to grant a special recall election.

Appointed to a special one-year term by Governor Jon Corzine in November 2005, Robert Menendez was subsequently elected in 2006 during the mid-term election and has served in the US Senate for just over four years as a Democrat representing New Jersey. His term isn't scheduled to end until January 2013. The Recall Committee and New Jersey Tea Parties United believe that Senator Menendez has sided with rigidly partisan politicians in his repeated votes for cloture on a variety of key bills, stifling public debate in the Senate and denying New Jersey citizens transparency. For example, the Senator voted down an amendment that would have prevented Medicare from being raided for new entitlements[1], and another that would have limited the government's control over the health care of American families[2]. During this difficult financial period when Americans are cutting their own budgets and trying to save every penny, Senator Menendez voted down proposals to remove from spending bills a number of extravagant, excessive multi-million dollar projects that offered little or no short-term economic benefits[3]. When an amendment was proposed to transfer some of the country’s funding for the United Nations contributions to help offset the costs of providing assistance to family caregivers of our disabled veterans, he voted against it[4]. And in one case, Senator Menendez voted against allowing each member of Congress and the Secretary of Defense to simply review the allocation of certain taxpayer funds[5].

One NJ Tea Party member put it this way, “When NJ voters came out to the polls in November of 2008, they voted for the transparency and accountability that was promised. Rather than believe his own constituents who have desperately been trying to convey their wishes to him on health care reform without a government run option, he chooses to dismiss us, making public statements on the senate floor that our concerns are all nothing more than the greedy insurance companies lobbying to protect themselves.” It is statements like this that have convinced the Committee, NJ Tea Parties United, and other tea party members that Senator Menendez is one of many elitists in government that are more concerned with promoting their own careers than doing what is right for the American people. Those spearheading this effort hope that this will be the first recall of many throughout the nation and that the Constitutional government of the United States can be restored to the American people, to whom it belongs.

[1] Vote 368: H R 3590: Gregg Amdt. No. 2942
[2] Vote 360: H R 3590: Thune Amdt. No. 2901
[4] Vote 310: H R 3326; Vote 285: H R 3288; Vote 284: H R 3288; Vote 283: H R 3288
[5] Vote 310: H R 3326: Coburn Amdt. No. 2565

Sussex County Tea Party contact:
RoseAnn Salanitri, Founder (Branchville, NJ)
Phone: (973)948-8553, Email:

Alternate Contact:
Michele Talam, NJ Tea Parties United

Legal Contact:
Dan Silberstein, Esq.
Phone: (732) 388-8600, Email:

Thursday, December 17, 2009

The Health Bill Is Scary

By Senator Tom Coburn -

I recently suggested that seniors will die sooner if Congress actually implements the Medicare cuts in the health-care bill put forward by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. My colleagues who defend the bill—none of whom have practiced medicine—predictably dismissed my concern as a scare tactic. They are wrong. Every American, not just seniors, should know that the rationing provisions in the Reid bill will not only reduce their quality of life, but their life spans as well.

My 25 years as a practicing physician have shown me what happens when government attempts to practice medicine: Doctors respond to government coercion instead of patient cues, and patients die prematurely. Even if the public option is eliminated from the bill, these onerous rationing provisions will remain intact.

For instance, the Reid bill (in sections 3403 and 2021) explicitly empowers Medicare to deny treatment based on cost. An Independent Medicare Advisory Board created by the bill—composed of permanent, unelected and, therefore, unaccountable members—will greatly expand the rationing practices that already occur in the program. Medicare, for example, has limited cancer patients' access to Epogen, a costly but vital drug that stimulates red blood cell production. It has limited the use of virtual, and safer, colonoscopies due to cost concerns. And Medicare refuses medical claims at twice the rate of the largest private insurers.

Section 6301 of the Reid bill creates new comparative effectiveness research (CER) programs. CER panels have been used as rationing commissions in other countries such as the U.K., where 15,000 cancer patients die prematurely every year according to the National Cancer Intelligence Network. CER panels here could effectively dictate coverage options and ration care for plans that participate in the state insurance exchanges created by the bill.

Additionally, the Reid bill depends on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in no fewer than 14 places. This task force was responsible for advising women under 50 to not undergo annual mammograms. The administration claims the task force recommendations do not carry the force of law, but the Reid bill itself contradicts them in section 2713. The bill explicitly states, on page 17, that health insurance plans "shall provide coverage for" services approved by the task force. This chilling provision represents the government stepping between doctors and patients. When the government asserts the power to provide care, it also asserts the power to deny care.

If the bill expands Medicaid eligibility to 133% of the poverty level, that too will lead to rationing. Because Washington bureaucrats have created a system that underpays doctors, 40% of doctors already restrict access to Medicaid patients, and therefore ration care.
Medicaid demonstrates, tragically in some cases, that access to a government program does not guarantee access to health care. In Maryland, 17,000 Medicaid patients are currently on a waiting list for medical services, and as many as 250 may have died while awaiting care, according to state auditors. Kansas, the home state of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, faces a Medicaid backlog of more than 15,000 applicants.

Other unintended consequences of the Reid bill could wreak havoc on patients' lives. What happens, for instance, when savvy consumers commanded to buy insurance realize the penalty is the de facto premium? It won't take long for younger, healthier Americans to realize it's cheaper to pay a $750 tax for coverage instead of, say, $5,000 in annual premiums when coverage can't be denied if you get sick.

OMB Budget Director Peter Orzsag's belief that mandatory health insurance will become a "cultural norm" is bureaucratic naivete that will produce skyrocketing premiums and reduced care for everyone. My state's own insurance commissioner, a Democrat, recently confirmed this concern to me in a letter noting that "the result will be higher insurance rates due to a higher percentage of insured being higher risk/expense individuals."

But the most fundamental flaw of the Reid bill is best captured by the story of one my patients I'll call Sheila. When Sheila came to me at the age of 33 with a lump in her breast, traditional tests like a mammogram under the standard of care indicated she had a cyst and nothing more. Because I knew her medical history, I wasn't convinced. I aspirated the cyst and discovered she had a highly malignant form of breast cancer. Sheila fought a heroic battle against breast cancer and enjoyed 12 good years with her family before succumbing to the disease.

If I had been practicing under the Reid bill, the government would have likely told me I couldn't have done the test that discovered Sheila's cancer because it wasn't approved under CER. Under the Reid bill, Sheila may have lived another year instead of 12, and her daughters would have missed a decade with their mom.

The bottom line is that under the Reid bill the majority of America's patients might be fine. But some will be like Sheila—patients whose lives hang in the balance and require the care of a doctor who understands the science and art of medicine, and can make decisions without government interference.

The American people are opposing this bill in greater numbers every day because the facts of the bill—not any tactic—are cause for serious concern.

Dr. Coburn, a physician, is a Republican senator from Oklahoma.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Code Red Rally

Videos from the CODE RED RALLY in Washington, DC
December 15, 2009

Friday, December 11, 2009

Obama's Jobs Summit: The Invisible Hand of SEIU and ACORN

by Liberty Chick -

As President Obama concludes his first jobs summit, almost a year into his presidency, the nature of the guest list hints at a deliberate initiative that's been underway for over 15 years - and it's not one of the obvious presumptions that most would make. Notice that of the list of leaders invited, the majority are labor union leaders, leaders of businesses with government contracts, or leaders of businesses that operate on partial public funding. There is a common element across most of the businesses represented: in one capacity or another, even if they are private sector businesses, most on the list benefit from some form of public money.

There is a legal precedent over 15 years old that is the pervasive push behind such a premise, one that was the product of ACORN and labor union coalitions. And judging by Change to Win / SEIU’s Anna Burger’s plan for today’s jobs summit, it’s evident that this precedent is in play as we speak.

It’s no coincidence that in the wake of America’s economic crisis, some lawmakers have been pushing for infusions of public funds into the private sector. No, we’re not just talking bank and insurance company bailouts. We’re talking about tax credit and incentive programs, health care reform proposals, green jobs programs, energy efficiency initiatives, and even real estate development companies. As the conservative accusations of socialism have begun to sink in with progressive leaders -especially with union leaders, who are especially sensitive to being perceived as public spenders – the language has been changing. Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand” doesn’t sound so scary when it’s wrapped in the glove of words like “co-ops” and “public-private partnerships” and “national service”, which are now quickly being mainstreamed into the rhetoric.

To the observant reader, one can look at the list of Jobs Summit invitees and know what the outcome will be, and why. The goal is not to create jobs. The goals are to create public-private partnerships and to create union membership opportunities.

In 1994, when ACORN and its community and labor union allies won the first Living Wage fight against Baltimore’s Inner Harbor development project, a national movement was underway. It was not only about Living Wage, but the premise itself opened up the door for a broader, more creative initiative.

The premise of Living Wage: any private business that benefits from public money can be controlled in part by government policy, and in this particular case, must pay their workers a living wage. While minimum wage is a standard national and state guideline across the board, living wage is different in that it calculates the income an adult with the average family of two must make in order to live comfortably in the middle class bracket for that geographic location.

The premise of today’s broader movement: create more opportunities for private businesses and individuals to benefit from public money, and the government can then intervene to dictate anything it wants – labor regulations, wages, health benefits, and much more.
As we see in SEIU’s campaigns to unionize home child care workers and UAW and AFSCME’s campaigns to do the same, any trickle of state or federal subsidies creates an opportunity for government and union entry, which drives up taxes and stresses the economy. And SEIU is applying the same logic to home care workers, nursing home workers, cafeteria workers, and the like.

We see this premise of control via public subsidy in action most obviously today with TARP and the bank bailouts. Conveniently for unions and community organizers, the bailouts outraged many – even constitutional conservatives. Hence, why SEIU especially seized upon the opportunity to channel that collective rage and turn it instead into a marketing tool to create anti-capitalist hype. (Note that SEIU selectively excludes the Automaker Bailouts from its manufactured rage). Bashing capitalism and the free enterprise system has become a favorite pastime for some. It seems just downright trendy these days to equate greed or corruption with capitalism and use it as a basis for throwing out an entire economic system, doesn’t it? When in your lifetime have you stood in line at the grocery store and overheard everyone from your postal carrier, to the elementary school’s janitor, to your neighbor’s college student son, all offering their theories on the evils of capitalism? You don’t even have to know anything about economic theory or the important role of Capitalism in the founding of America to participate in this latest fad. (After all, in a study of the Ability Of College Freshmen To Identify Adam Smith And Karl Marx, only 26.6 percent could identify Adam Smith as the “father of Capitalism”).

By the way, if you want to argue the positive aspects of Capitalism, just watch Steve Forbes put SEIU’s Andy Stern in his place on the issue in this video from the The Federalist Society, where it presented a panel discussion on Redistribution of Wealth at the 2009 National Lawyers Convention. (full panel video on C-Span)

Keeping in mind the consequences facing banks that have received public funds, let’s look at all of the private sector areas in which SEIU and other labor and community organizing coalitions have been gaining unionizing strongholds, based on the same precedent initially set by the living wage laws 15 years ago:

  • Child care workers who have customers that receive public subsidies through welfare programs
  • Home care workers who serve patients who receive Medicare, Medicaid, or other public health care benefits
  • Using unionized workers to drive public weatherization and energy efficiency initiatives that receive public funds
  • Private schools and universities with students who receive public grants or loans
  • Private companies that do business with the government in any capacity
  • Private companies that have received public grants or loans
  • There’s even a push to regulate private companies that have received loans from any banks that have received public funds
  • The future focus no doubt will be on creating regulations related to anyone who receives public health care benefits

Unions have been unable to successfully grow membership in the private sector; therefore, SEIU has focused on growing its public sector opportunities by organizing typically private sector independent workers as mentioned above. In addition, it has focused on acquiring, often by force, other unions, and on creating political policy that will create public sector jobs in their realm of union membership, such as with health care. Lastly, the SEIU conducts repeated corporate campaign attacks on organizations that support free markets and that oppose forced unionism. Simply look at their attacks on non-unionized hospitals like this one and this one, and groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (which coincidentally was left off today’s jobs summit invite list).

In fact, just watch this Campaign for America’s Future video on C-Span, with panelists Anna Burger (Change to Win/SEIU) and Ilyse Hogue (, especially at around minutes 57:00 and at 58:40 when Hogue mentions their joint campaign with SEIU against the US Chamber of Commerce to mobilize 22,000 small business leaders to oppose the Chamber of Commerce under the guise of saving the planet.

Given the observations of all of the above, now examine the highlights from Anna Burger’s plan for creating jobs at Thursday’s jobs summit:

  • Increase unemployment insurance and expand work sharing programs to provide unemployment benefits for reduced hours of work
  • Use TARP funds to increase credit for small businesses
  • Expand federal fiscal relief to states and local governments (to save an anticipated 900,000 jobs?)
  • Create jobs in child care, in-home services for the elderly and disabled, and other community services through a public jobs program
  • Leverage private investment with public dollars through a Green Bank that will promote energy-efficiency and renewables as a major source of job creation; Expand home retrofitting programs begun under the Recovery Act to commercial and public buildings
  • Rebuild schools, roads and bridge; create an Infrastructure Bank to foster public/private partnerships in developing regional and large scale projects
  • Passing health care reform will add “tens of millions of Americans to the healthcare rolls and create more than a million new and different jobs” in healthcare and related industries
  • Pass the Employee Free Choice Act
  • Expand worker training programs on a national scale

Every last one of Burger’s recommendations hinges entirely upon public dependency, both at the business level and the at the individual level. Aside from being one of the most powerful labor union leaders in the world, Burger is a primary participant in today’s summit, and she’s also on the President’s Economic Recovery Board of Advisers. As SEIU Secretary/Treasurer and chair of Change to Win, Burger’s organizations spend the union members’ dues on some of highest lobbying numbers on Capitol Hill for a multitude of self-serving policies.

Today’s jobs summit is not about creating jobs. It seems relatively clear that the goals will be more focused on establishing ways to propagate “public-private partnership opportunities” to all facets of the private sector. “Reformist”, “Social Capitalism”, “Market Socialism” – use whatever terms you want. Most of us know that Capitalism didn’t cause this crisis, because Capitalism isn’t really what we have anymore, which is why the free market needs to be restored. While we may hear what sounds like private sector rhetoric from President Obama, Progressives in Congress, and today’s jobs summit leaders, don’t be easily fooled – beware of Adam Smith’s infamous “Invisible Hand” in the form of the proverbial wolf disguised in sheep’s clothing.

Liberty Chick is an associate member of New Jersey Tea Parties United as well as a contributor to Andrew Breitbart's

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Medicare Tax Increase

by PDR -

Medicare Tax according to Webster's: A tax deducted from employees' paychecks that goes to pay for medical benefits for people over 65 years of age. Medicare tax is paid by both employee and employer.

Medicare Tax was first imposed upon us working Americans in 1966 at a rate of .35 or .70. The current Medicare Tax rate is 1.45% or 2.90%; that is a 241% increase over a 43 year period. Medicare is paid by the employee, yes you the employee and is matched by the employer. There is no wage base for the Medicare tax, you pay it from day 1 and you pay it as long as you are a wage earning American. We already pay too much in taxes.

This tax affects ALL of us adversely:

The young will be paying from the first job they take. They will have no CHOICE but to participate in government sponsored health care. They will this Medicare tax until they are ready to retire at age 65 and collect their and then they will become SENIORS

SENIORS, who have been paying into Medicare are will receive less services by less doctors; higher premiums for MediGap and the government will have direct access to your bank account to obtain payment for services. Medicare already denies more claims than any private insurance plan. HR3962 specifically makes reference to a reduction in Medicare funding, higher Medicare Taxes but less funding and benefits. Is this what we want? NO we do not.

And Small business owners-we know who we are and we know how we are currently struggling under high taxes. We can no longer afford additional taxation. Small businesses combined provide the greater majority of jobs in this country and are always hardest hit by tax increases. Why? Because it is more difficult for small businesses to compete and more difficult for small businesses to increase the costs of goods and services. Colgate Palmolive can increase the cost of a tube of toothpaste 1% to cover this Medicare tax increase and the American consumer will continue to purchase the toothpaste. They can raise the price by 10 or 20% to cover all the additional costs that will be imposed upon us by HR3962 and we will continue to purchase their products. The small business owner who increases his price for goods and services by 10% may be out of business tomorrow.

I urge everyone to oppose HR3962. It is an invasion of our privacy. It takes away our choices. It reduces benefits to our seniors. It increases taxes and costs. And it does not provide coverage for every uninsured American, but it sure does tax every working American.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER? Charges Filed Against SEIU Purple People Beaters...

From the Labor Union Report -

It is said that the wheels of justice turn slowly.
In the case of the SEIU purple shirted thugs who beat a conservative black man selling Gadsden flags at a town hall meeting in August, justice is coming more slowly than usual and the wheels?...Well, in St. Louis, the wheels of justice seem to be nothing more than that of a blue matchbox car.

The St. Louis Post Dispatch, which has a reporter among one of the charged, writes:

Six people arrested in August outside a raucous town hall meeting in south St. Louis County have been charged with misdemeanor ordinance violations.

The six, including a Post-Dispatch reporter, had attended a demonstration outside an Aug. 6 forum called by U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-St. Louis, at Bernard Middle School in Mehlville to discuss health care reform....

The maximum penalty upon conviction would be one year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Some bloggers have been writing for months about the lag between the arrests at the politically-charged event and the filing of charges.

County Counselor Patricia Redington insisted it had nothing to do with politics, influence or pressure from any official.

"These charges are like the 90,000 other charges we file each year," she said.
[Emphasis added.]

Interestingly, although the county counselor insists her delay has nothing to do with politics, she seemed much more interested in justice nine years ago when she filed charges against a Republican staffer for pushing a camera away from his face.
Redington was quick to file charges back in 2000, when a staffer for Democrat Richard Gephardt stalked serious contender Republican Bill Federer on a parade route. The staffer, James Larrew, tried to shove his camera into Federer’s face until Federer was forced to push the camera away. The staffer freaked, flagged down a cop and claimed that he had been assaulted. Larrew then called Gephardt’s office and spoke to Joyce Aboussie, Gephardt’s top political adviser, who then contacted Redington’s office. Two days later Redington filed assault charges against Federer, on Columbus Day, a national holiday; after which Redington, Aboussie, and Larrew conducted a media blitz, all arranged for by Gephardt’s office.

Something tells us that the wheels of justice are a bit off track in St. Louis.

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Reflections on the Status of Marriage

by CH -

The New Jersey Legislature is contemplating a vote on same sex marriage during the lame duck session. Governor Corzine promises to sign this legislation before leaving office.

I am against changing the definition of Marriage. Marriage is the committed relationship between a man and a woman. It is a unique institution and its meaning to society should be upheld and valued. One of the primary purposes of marriage is to procreate and raise the next generation. Mothers and fathers each bring a unique set of attitudes, skills and emotions to the table to help raise their children.

Children need both of these unique sets of tools to become healthy adults. The traditional Marriage relationship has proven to be the best environment possible to create and nurture children.

In addition, I fear that if same sex marriage is folded in to traditional marriage then any religious organization founded on the basis of traditional religious values will be pressured to change or risk losing their tax status, etc. I recently read that a Catholic Church was being challenged in Canada for refusing to rent out their church reception hall to a lesbian couple. A private religious entity should not be forced to do anything that is against the biblical values they are based on.

The slippery slope concept is worrisome. If same sex unions are defined as marriage then why not include multiple partner marriage or marriage with a minor? How far could we eventually go? Once marriage is opened up to a different meaning then people should be able to define it any way they see fit to adapt to their personal lifestyle.

The current recognition by New Jersey of civil unions for committed same sex couples is justified. It could be used to fight for health benefits, pension benefits, etc. But we don’t have to change the meaning of marriage to accomplish these goals. Same sex civil unions can be used as the vehicle to grant couples the benefits and protections that they deserve. We don’t need to retrofit marriage to make it all encompassing. We need to continue to recognize marriage as the loving union between a husband and wife and the best environment to raise children.

I realize my views will be depicted as hate speech and bigotry and that’s too bad. My views are not against same sex couples, what they do in their private lives is their own business. But I must stand up for the special status of traditional marriage. Most Americans agree. Whenever same sex marriage is put to a vote of the electorate, it loses. Voters recognize the unique status of marriage and want to keep it as such. Pushing a vote in a lame duck session in New Jersey not only ignores the recent election results, but takes the vote away from the people.

Sunday, November 29, 2009

Why Not Try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed In Federal Court?

by Brian Baldwin -

The Stop The Terror Trial in NYC Rally will be held on Saturday, December 5, 2009, at Noon in Foley Square on the steps of the Federal Courthouse.

Organized and led by the 911 Never Forget Coalition, the rally will be supported by 911 family members, FDNY and NYPD personnel, members of the military, veterans, the 912 Project, Tea Party Patriots and thousands of Americans protesting the plan to hold the trial that will give enemy combatants of the U.S. constitutional protections by holding the trial in U.S federal court.

But why is it wrong to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in Federal Court, when Zacarias Moussaoui was successfully tried in Federal Court?

Zacarias Moussaoui, the infamous “20th Hijacker”, was arrested by law enforcement authorities on immigration charges after arousing suspicion at a Minnesota flight school. Moussaoui was mirandized and provided with an attorney. Although he rejected his appointed attorneys and chose to represent himself, the groundwork for a trial in our legal system had been laid down. He was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury on December 11, 2001. His trial finally met its completion in 2006 with a life sentence.

Why shouldn’t Khalid Sheikh Mohammed be tried in Federal Court in NYC? Attorney General Eric Holder says the trials are finally moving forward after “8 years of delay”. Isn’t it time that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was brought to trial?

But what happens if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is found not guilty? Don’t worry. Attorney General Eric Holder brushed off the question, saying, "I would not have authorized the bringing of these prosecutions unless I thought that the outcome -- in the outcome we would ultimately be successful. I will say that I have access to information that has not been publicly released that gives me great confidence that we will be successful in the prosecution of these cases in federal court."

President Obama, while visiting Tokyo, said, "I am absolutely convinced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice…The American people will insist on it and my administration will insist on it."

It certainly sounds as if President Obama and Attorney General Holder are sure of the outcome of this trial. Is this the message we want to send to the Muslim world? We are going to pick and choose which high profile cases will be publicly tried while others, that are not a slam-dunk, are left in Guantanamo to rot in prison or face military tribunals. Doesn’t this undermine the arguments of the left that this must be done to show the world “American Justice”. We are treading on a dangerous path.

This is not the first time Eric Holder has shown bad judgment. As Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton Administration, he pushed for the release of 16 violent FALN terrorists against the advice of the FBI, the US Attorneys who prosecuted them and the NYPD officers injured by them.

Senator Barack Obama often held a different position than President Barack Obama, and this case is no different. In September 2006, debating the Military Commissions Act, then-Senator Obama said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and those like him would get "basically a full military trial with all the bells and whistles. He's going to have counsel, he's going to be able to present evidence, he's going to be able to rebut the government's case. Because the feeling is that he's guilty of a war crime and to do otherwise might violate some of our agreements under the Geneva Conventions."

"I think that's good that we're going to provide him with some procedure and process," then-Senator Obama said. "I think we will convict him and I think he will be brought to justice. I think justice will be carried out in his case."

Certainly, not everyone has done a 180 on this. Attorney General Holder was never a supporter of military tribunals. As he said, “after 8 years of delay”, we are finally moving forward”. It is true. Very few military tribunals were ever carried out due to leftist attorneys’ attempts to derail the proceedings with legal challenges. Many of these attorneys are in the Obama Justice Department today – including Eric Holder, a former partner in Covington & Burling LLP. Covington and Burling represented at least 18 Guantanamo detainees, donating over 3,000 FREE hours of legal service, making Holder’s claim of “8 years of delay” even more incredible.

Countless lawsuits delayed the military trials. These same delays, created by law firms like Covington and Burling, are the Obama administration’s justification for holding civilian trials.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was arrested during a military action involving Pakistani ISI (Inter Service Intelligence) and SOG (Special Operations Group), a division of the CIA responsible for paramilitary operations. He was transferred to military custody at Guantanamo Bay detention camp to face a military tribunal – the tribunal once supported by Senator Barack Obama. Although Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was ready to plead guilty and accept a death sentence, President Obama, upon taking office, suspended all military tribunals.

Now that the trial will be moved to Federal Court, what legal rules will be followed? Miranda rights were not read. No attorney was provided. Will any evidence, testimony or previous confessions be allowed, even though he confessed to being responsible for the planning of 9/11 “from A-Z”? Will our military now be compelled to read Miranda rights and collect evidence on the battle field?

Even Judge, Michael Mukasey, who presided over the trial of the blind sheikh Omer Abdel Rahman says “the plan seems to abandon the view that we are involved in a war”. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants will now be given a forum to disseminate hatred and propaganda. A civilian trial will compel the US government to reveal intelligence and how it was obtained, thus hindering US efforts to combat terrorism. Al Qaeda will better understand our intelligence gathering techniques and respond accordingly.

Should Zacarias Moussaoui have been tried by military commission? In 2001, President Bush established military commissions, a wartime system of justice used during the Revolutionary and Civil wars as well as World War II. Congress approved these procedures in 2006, long after Moussaoui’s Grand Jury indictment. Military Commissions have since been upheld by the Supreme Court.

The actions of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were acts of war against the United States and should be prosecuted by a military commission. The world is too dangerous of a place to continue sending mixed messages regarding our commitment to fight terrorism, whether we want to use the name “Terrorism” or “Man-caused Disasters”.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Thanksgiving Day Proclamation 1863

Date: October 3, 1863
By: Abraham Lincoln

The year that is drawing towards its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart, which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to invite and provoke the aggression of foreign states, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict, while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.

The needful diversion of wealth and strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense has not arrested the plough, the shuttle, or the ship. The axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well as of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect a continuance of years, with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised, nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be reverently, solemnly, and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and voice, by the whole American people. I do, therefore, invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea, and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and prayer to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that, while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation, and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with divine purposes, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility, and union.

In testimony where of, I have here unto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington, this third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.

Thanksgiving Day Proclamation 1789

Date: October 3, 1789
By: George Washington

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a Day Of Public Thanksgiving and Prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now Therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the Twenty-Sixth Day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed;-- for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish Constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;-- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge;-- and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also, that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions: - to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness unto us); and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Thanksgiving Day Proclamation 1981

Date: November 12, 1981
By: Ronald Reagan

America has much for which to be thankful. The unequaled freedom enjoyed by our citizens has provided a harvest of plenty to this nation throughout its history. In keeping with America's heritage, one day each year is set aside for giving thanks to god for all of His blessings. On this day of thanksgiving, it is appropriate that we recall the first thanksgiving, celebrated in the autumn of 1621. After surviving a bitter winter, the Pilgrims planted and harvested a bountiful crop. After the harvest they gathered their families together and joined in celebration and prayer with the Native Americans who had taught them so much. Clearly our forefathers were thankful not only for the material well being of their harvest but for this abundance of goodwill as well.

In this spirit, Thanksgiving has become a day when Americans extend a helping hand to the less fortunate. Long before there was a government welfare program, this spirit of voluntary giving was ingrained in the American character. Americans have always understood that, truly, one must give in order to receive. This should be a day of giving as well as a day of thanks. As we celebrate Thanksgiving in 1981, we should reflect on the full meaning of this day as we enjoy the fellowship that is so much a part of the holiday festivities. Searching our hearts, we should ask what we can do sass individuals to demonstrate our gratitude to God for all He has done. Such reflection can only add to the significance of this precious day of remembrance.

Let us recommit ourselves to that devotion to God and family that has played such an important role in making this a great Nation, and which will be needed as a source of strength if we are to remain a great people. Now, Therefore, I, Ronald Reagan, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Thursday, November 26, 1981, as Thanksgiving Day. In witness where of, I have here unto set my hand this twelfth day of November, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and sixth.

The First Thanksgiving Day Proclamation

Date: June 20, 1676
By: Governing council of Charlestown, Massachusetts

The Holy God having by a long and Continual Series of his Afflictive dispensations in and by the present Warr with the Heathen Natives of this land, written and brought to pass bitter things against his own Covenant people in this wilderness, yet so that we evidently discern that in the midst of his judgements he hath remembered mercy, having remembered his Footstool in the day of his sore displeasure against us for our sins, with many singular Intimations of his Fatherly Compassion, and regard; reserving many of our Towns from Desolation Threatened, and attempted by the Enemy, and giving us especially of late with many of our Confederates many signal Advantages against them, without such Disadvantage to ourselves as formerly we have been sensible of, if it be the Lord's mercy that we are not consumed, It certainly bespeaks our positive Thankfulness, when our Enemies are in any measure disappointed or destroyed; and fearing the Lord should take notice under so many Intimations of his returning mercy, we should be found an Insensible people, as not standing before Him with Thanksgiving, as well as lading him with our Complaints in the time of pressing Afflictions:

The Council has thought meet to appoint and set apart the 29th day of this instant June, as a day of Solemn Thanksgiving and praise to God for such his Goodness and Favour, many Particulars of which mercy might be Instanced, but we doubt not those who are sensible of God's Afflictions, have been as diligent to espy him returning to us; and that the Lord may behold us as a People offering Praise and thereby glorifying Him; the Council doth commend it to the Respective Ministers, Elders and people of this Jurisdiction; Solemnly and seriously to keep the same Beseeching that being persuaded by the mercies of God we may all, even this whole people offer up our bodies and souls as a living and acceptable Service unto God by Jesus Christ.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

American Seniors Blast AARP Sellout

ATLANTA— “It is outrageous that the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) endorsed House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s $1.2 trillion, 10-year Obamacare bill, which passed Saturday night and drastically cuts Medicare for seniors and provides weak verification so illegal aliens can sponge off taxpayers,” says Stuart Barton, president of the American Seniors Association (ASA) representing hundreds of thousands of members nationwide.

“The left-wing AARP sold out to Pelosi and the White House so it can sell insurance and reap profits under Obamacare. Obamacare-- replete with its heavy hand of government control and heathcare rationing-- is not an option and must be defeated in the U.S. Senate. The AARP continues to lose thousands and thousands of members because of its sympathy toward Obamacare, higher taxes and big government-- and that is why ASA is getting even more torn-up AARP cards in our mail and why our alternative group’s membership is rapidly growing every day,” Barton notes.

The ASA has major concerns over the Pelosi bill: 1) any government-run plan would limit patient-doctor choice, 2) there would be an employer mandate that kills jobs and lowers wages, 3) taxpayers could be forced to underwrite abortions even if the procedure goes against their beliefs and 4) untold millions of illegal aliens could be given costly healthcare benefits at the expense of citizens and legal residents because there are weak 50-state verification stipulations. Furthermore, House Resolution 3962 is estimated to cost over $1.2 trillion, and especially attacks baby boomers and seniors by cutting $500 billion out of Medicare over the next 10 years.

The original article may be found on the ASA website.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Taxpayers - Not Insurance Company Lobbyists

The following is a portion of a Letter to the Editor submitted to the Bergen Record by a member on New Jersey Tea Party Coalition refuting published comments blasting Congressman Scott Garrett's position on HR 3962 and Comments insulting concerned citizens.

I take great exception to begin called aged unpaid lobbyists for the insurance companies. I am a working taxpaying American Citizen very much against HR 3962. I traveled to Washington, DC last week to protest HR 3962. I took a day off from work, I forfeited a days pay. And I will do it again if I feel I need to.

HR 3962 is not about health care it is an assault on our freedom of choice and our liberties. I thought Democrats and the left were big advocates of freedom of choice.

Page 94-Section 202(c) prohibits the sale of private individual health insurance policies, beginning in 2013, forcing individuals to purchase coverage through the federal government

Less than $500,000.00 in gross payroll is not a small business it is a micro business; more like a sole proprietor filing a schedule C. Any small business with one or two partners and several employees will easily exceed this limitation.

Page 297 - Section 501 imposes a 2.5 percent tax on all individuals who do not purchase "bureaucrat-approved" health insurance - the tax would apply on individuals with incomes under $250,000

What will be imposed on individuals earning over $250,000.00? And how long or when will they reduce this income level?

Page 313-Section 512 imposes an 8 percent "tax on jobs" for firms that cannot afford to purchase "bureaucrat-approved" health coverage; according to an analysis by Harvard Professor Kate Baicker, such a tax would place millions "at substantial risk of unemployment"-with minority workers losing their jobs at twice the rate of their white counterparts

We are back to the 8% tax. Employers are already taxed too high!

Page 336-Section 551 imposes additional job-killing taxes, in the form of a half-trillion dollar "surcharge," more than half of which will hit small businesses; according to a model developed by President Obama's senior economic advisor, such taxes could cost up to 5.5 million jobs

What are these additional taxes going to be? They are not yet telling us.

Page 520-Section 1161 cuts more than $150 billion from Medicare Advantage plans, potentially jeopardizing millions of seniors' existing coverage

We are supposed to take care of our seniors!

My company was facing an substantial increase in insurance premiums last year so we investigated our options as we do every year and we were successful in keeping our premiums constant, providing the same coverage and not increasing our employees out of pocket expenses. This bill will take those options those CHOICES out of our hands; we will be forced to participate in the 'bureaucrat-approved' plan and we will have no say in what the government charges us for this plan.

Well I like my choices and I do not like HR 3962. I will continue to fight and oppose this bill.

Submitted by PDR

Refuting An Attack On Rep. Scott Garrett

The following is a portion of a Letter to the Editor submitted to the Bergen Record by a member on New Jersey Tea Party Coalition refuting published comments blasting Congressman Scott Garrett's position on HR 3962.

Re: Letter of November 10th by Linda Cetta, Christian Science Committee "Scott Garrett Sends Screed"

Congressman Scott Garrett is my representative and I feel I must defend him against the misrepresentations presented in the letter by Ms.Cetta. Her letter is full of her own sentiments and are not reflective of what Rep. Garrett actually wrote to his constituents. In reality, he sent us exactly what was given to Members, staff and interested citizens to read regarding H.R. 3962

I am sitting with Congressman Garrett's letter in front of me--comparing what is in his letter and the one published in The Record by Linda Cetta.

Page 94 - Section 202 (c) prohibits the sale of private individual health insurance policies, beginning in 2013, forcing individuals to purchase coverage through the federal government. If Ms. Cetta does not believe Congressman Garrett, she can verify this information at numerous locations on the internet, like I did.

Ms. Cetta also states that on page 225, Scott Garrett asserted "members of Congress will be forced to purchase the public option." She then reiterated that, in reality, he did not say that but she thinks "they should be forced to go into the public option since the government-run health coverage that Garrett currently has is perhaps the best in the nation."

However, this is exactly what Congressman Scott Garrett stated regarding page 225:

"Section 330 permits, but does not require, members of Congress to enroll in government-run health plan, that according to non-partisan actuaries at the Lewin Group, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage."

I suggest that with the plethora of legitimate sites on the internet where you can verify information, it is wise to do so before stating inaccuracies that can be discredited by others.

With the political corruption that flourishes in NJ, we can consider ourselves fortunate to have Rep. Scott Garrett represent us.

Submitted by Peg

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Healthcare Passes Through The House

Unfortunately, as you know by now, the House of Representatives passed Healthcare Reform. We are in the midst of a Culture War in this still magnificent country. As with all wars, we will not win every battle. Many of you fought hard and long in this effort. This was a particularly difficult loss with repercussions that have not yet been realized. No words I can write will soften the sting of Saturday’s outcome. Yet, we cannot let a defeat overshadow our triumphs.

With the aid of your resolve and vigilance, Bergen County and the State of NJ have elected candidates who have assured voters that they will move the County and State in a better direction. We do not know whether these candidates will fulfill those promises. If they do, they will have our support. If they do not, they do so at their political peril. We will be watching. This is a time for hope.

This is also a time to celebrate change in Trenton and in Bergen County ! (Can we still use the words “hope” & “change”?) It is time to “connect” and use our grassroots efforts to affect future council, school board and assembly elections as we strengthen our resolve for the Healthcare battle in the Senate and the 2010 election cycle, which as far as I am concerned, begins here and now!