How Obama Plans to Cover Illegal Alien's in Health Care Bill...

He'll just make 'em all legal. Here ya go, in his own words Wednesday night at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (and then another video at previous talk follows):

Handel’s Online Petition Opposing Obama Justice Department Gets Over 6,000 Signatures in 48 Hours

We posted this elsewhere on one of our "political" blogs, but it is SO important I wanted to do it again on "my" blog. This has far-reaching implications and we all need to get involved, voice our opposition, and work to keep this issue in the forefront. I've included the original press release at the end of the e-Update from Karen Handel's campaign (Georgia Governor):

E-Update: June 5th, 2009

When President Obama’s Justice Department told Georgia over the weekend that it could no longer verify the citizenship of voters going to the polls, Karen Handel sprang into action. She exposed the Obama plan and revealed that it would allow groups like ACORN to actively find and register illegal aliens to vote in Georgia elections.

Karen took to the airwaves and the Internet to rally opposition to the Obama plan. She appeared on Fox and Friends, the Regular Guys and Herman Cain radio programs, as well as radio and TV news stations across Georgia.

She even started an online petition with the goal of getting 10,000 signatures of Americans who opposed this terrible plan and want to have their voices heard in Washington.

In the first 48 hours, more than 6,000 signed that petition, and Karen is well on her way to the 10,000 signature goal. If you have not signed the petition, please do so now, and be sure to forward this email along to your neighbors, friends and family members. If this progress continues, our voices will be heard.

Please help us tell the Obama Administration that only U.S. citizens should be voting in Georgia by signing the petition today.

Leading conservative activists, columnists and publications have joined Karen's fight for the integrity of our elections. Below are just a few of the stories that have run nationally this week:

The Democrats Are Already Winning the 2010 Elections — Which Is What Happens When the Justice Department Is Really Politicized
National Review, June 3, 2009
Justice Dept. shifts on voting, deportation
The Washington Times, June 4, 2009
Justice Dept. Rejects Ga. Prevote Citizenship Checks
The Wall Street Journal, June 1, 2009

Please join Karen Handel's fight for the integrity of our elections by signing the petition today.

JMac - Here are a blog on the subject and the original press release on the issue:

Obama continues to erode election integrity
Over and over I hear people saying that things are going to get so bad that by the time the 2010 and / or 2012 elections roll around the voters will put Republicans back in control. If not in control, then at least there will be sufficient Republican numbers elected to mitigate Obama's actions...

Obama Justice Department Decision Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia
Decision Bars Georgia From Continuing Voter Verification Process

Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel issued the following statement following the U.S. Department of Justice’s denial of preclearance of Georgia’s voter verification process:

“The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission....

House Schedule for Tuesday

Now that I'm getting daily updates on the House schedule, I can't help but wonder what happens after they enact some of this stuff. I can't imagine that once some of these bills are passed and become law that many, if any, who voted on them ever know what happens afterward.

The volume of stuff going through is amazing. Can you imagine what would happen if all of a sudden everyone from the top down started doing half the things that are enacted way up on the lofty D.C. grounds? We hear it all the time in regards to things like illegal immigrants --- if we followed the letter of the law we wouldn't need new laws or bills or acts. It seems to me that a lot of the bills aren't worth the paper they're printed on (assuming anything is printed these days ;-).

There are a couple on this list I'm going to look up - Reducing Over-Classification Act? Fair, Accurate, Secure, and Timely Redress Act? Not sure what the National Bombing Prevention Act is either...

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2009:
On Tuesday, the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for Morning Hour and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. Unlimited One Minutes per side. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m.

Suspensions (7 Bills)
1) H.R. 748 - Campus Safety Act of 2009 (Rep. Scott (VA) – Judiciary)
2) H.R. 738 - Death in Custody Reporting Act of 2009 (Rep. Scott (VA) – Judiciary)
3) H.Res. 82 - Raising Awareness and Encouraging Prevention of Stalking by Establishing January 2009 as National Stalking Awareness Month (Rep. Poe – Judiciary)
4) H.Res. __ - Supporting the goals and ideals of National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Week’ (Rep. Lewis (GA) – Judiciary)
5) H.R. 553 - Reducing Over-Classification Act (Rep. Harman – Homeland Security)
6) H.R. 559 - Fair, Accurate, Secure, and Timely Redress Act (Rep. Clarke – Homeland Security)
7) H.R. 549 - National Bombing Prevention Act (Rep. King (NY) – Homeland Security)

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 4; THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5; FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2009:
On Wednesday, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. for legislative business.
On Thursday, no votes are expected in the House.
On Friday, no votes are expected in the House.

S. 352 – The DTV Delay Act (Sen. Rockefeller – Energy and Commerce) (Subject to a Rule)

Senate Amendment to H.R. 2 – The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (Rep. Pallone – Energy and Commerce) (Subject to a Rule)

* Conference Reports may be brought up at any time.
* Motions to go to Conference should they become available.
* Possible Motions to Instruct Conferees.

Revisionist History…

On September 5th Commissioner Eric Maxwell attempted to change history. He asked that the Commission change the minutes of a previous meeting (August 1st, 2007) and that they change the affidavit regarding what they discussed during Executive Session.

To understand why this is important in the big scheme of things you need to know a bit about what Commissioners (and any other group of elected officials) are allowed to discuss legally behind closed doors (called Executive Session by the Fayette County Board), and what the restrictions are if they’re going to do so.

They can discuss personnel issues, real estate matters and legal items. That’s it. If they’re going to discuss a legal matter, they MUST have an attorney present.

The record (minutes) of the August 1st meeting reflected that Commissioner Maxwell asked that the Board discuss a LEGAL item in Executive Session. They did not have an attorney at that time.

If the records remained the same, and someone questioned them, then he and the Board could be in trouble.

As it turns out, at the August 1st meeting, Commissioner Pfeifer questioned whether they could go into Executive Session without an attorney. Maxwell said yes, the Board voted to do so, and they went… AFTER the meeting, an affidavit is signed by the Chairman (Jack Smith), which certifies what they talked about. Smith signed the affidavit which confirms they discussed a legal matter.

Now, fast forward a tiny bit.

Commissioner Pfeifer wasn’t comfortable with the situation. He decided to ask the State Attorney General (AG) whether it was or was not legal. There’s really no other entity to ask, as their office is the one responsible for enforcing the laws covering this issue.

Pfeifer got a letter back saying nope, that wasn’t legal, you guys broke the law, but we’re not going to do anything. Generally they have bigger fish to fry and they don’t like to get involved in local politics. Pfeifer provided a copy of the letters to and from the AG to the Board so they’d know they’d stepped over the legal line.

So, what’s a Board to do once they’re confronted with confirmation that they broke the law? They can “come clean”, say oops we goofed, own up and ask for forgiveness… or they could try to cover it up…

Maxwell opted for the second scenario and attempted to revise history.

On September 5th Maxwell recounted a fictitious scenario of the events that occurred on August 1st. He talks about pushing back from the microphone, moving away from the “bench” and being halfway down the ramp. He says he made comments while too far away saying it could be a legal item OR a personnel item and he asked the Board to change the records to reflect it was a personnel item rather than legal.

Some may not know that Maxwell is in a wheelchair. When he talks about being partway down the ramp, he’s referring to the ramp in the main Commission chambers where most meetings are held. Workshop meetings are held on the first Wednesday of the month in the smaller boardroom around a table, not in the main chambers. There is not a ramp. Both the August 1st and September 5th meetings were Workshop meetings held in the boardroom.

When Maxwell refers to pushing away from the microphone and leaving the bench, he is also referring to the main Commission chambers where each Commissioner sits in front of their own microphone on dais (or bench).

He could not have made additional comments while moving away from the “bench” as he was sitting around a small table. The video of the August 1st meeting clearly shows that he was sitting next to Commissioner Pfeifer, he moved closer to the table after the meeting adjourned for Executive Session (not away) and he did not make any further comments.

False accounts aside, there’s another real clear problem with Maxwell’s version of revisionist history. Commission Chairman Jack Smith signed the affidavit AFTER the Executive Session stating they had discussed a LEGAL item. Irregardless of whether Maxwell’s twisting tale had happened, the entire group went into the meeting believing it was a LEGAL item they were going to discuss. They all heard Pfeifer’s question and Maxwell’s caustic response. Then, AFTER the meeting, the Chairman signed off on it being a legal matter they discussed.

Watch the video. Watch the body language. Listen with all of the above in mind. Watch the side-ways stares as Maxwell recounts his tale. Watch the fidgeting hands. While Maxwell may have been the point man on this one, I’d venture to say there was a little scrambling behind the scenes on how to handle the potentially hot breaking of state law. Did they really think they could revise history and that we wouldn’t be able to see the glaring discrepancies? They KNOW that the Fayette Front Page films all meetings. Were they hoping we wouldn’t get curious and take a look? Did they WANT to get caught or did they just assume they could get away with revisionist history?

Watch the video for yourself. Make your own decisions.