Obama campaign gives database of millions of supporters to new advocacy group

By Michael Isikoff, National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

latimes.com

President Barack Obama’s presidential campaign has turned over its most valuable asset — a massive computer database containing personal data on millions of American voters — to a new advocacy group created to advance the White House agenda on issues ranging from gun control to immigration reform. 

Organizing For Action (OFA), the advocacy group set up in recent weeks by the president’s top political aides, has already acquired access to the database under a leasing agreement with the Obama campaign, Katie Hogan, a former Obama campaign aide who is now serving as spokeswoman for the lobbying group, told NBC News. The information will be used to unleash an “army of the door knockers” to back the president’s legislative agenda as well as raise money for “issue ads” – particularly in crucial congressional districts, she said.  

As an opening salvo, the group on Friday urged the president’s supporters to call members of Congress in support of Obama’s gun control proposals, even offering a sample script of what they should say.

The creation of OFA, which is being chaired by former Obama campaign manager Jim Messina, is stirring controversy – both among public interest groups over the group’s plans to accept unlimited corporate donations, and among privacy advocates over the transfer of the database.

“It’s extremely worrisome,” said Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, noting that Obama campaign supporters likely have no idea that personal data they voluntarily shared with the campaign has now been transferred and is being used for purposes beyond the election.

Dubbed the “nuclear codes” by campaign aides, the Obama campaign database is widely described as one of the most powerful tools ever developed in American politics. According to published reports, it contains the names of at least 4 million Obama donors – as well as millions of others (the campaign has consistently refused to say how many) compiled from voter registration rolls and other public databases. In addition, the campaign used sophisticated computer programs — with code names like “Narwhal” — to collect information through social media: Anybody who contacted the campaign through Facebook had their friends and “likes” downloaded. If they contacted  the campaign website through mobile apps, cellphone numbers and address books were downloaded. Computer “cookies” captured Web browsing and online spending habits.

“I can’t think of anything that rivals this data,” said Coney, noting that much of the data was voluntarily supplied by voters, something that consumers are often reluctant to do when dealing with commercial companies. “The private sector would love to be able to do what the (Obama) campaign was able to do.”  

OFA spokeswoman Hogan said that Obama supporters have the option in emails they receive of opting out — or unsubscribing — from the list, as required by federal law. But critics say that is not necessarily an option for information collected about voters through other means (such as public databases) and note that many on the list likely don’t notice the “unsubscribe” fine print on the emails.

At the same time, OFA’s plans for corporate-backed lobbying of Congress have spurred sharp criticism from campaign reformers — a cause the president once championed. Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a leading reform group, called OFA “dangerous and unprecedented,” noting that it has been set up under the same section of the tax code used by controversial GOP advocacy groups, such as Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS (as a 501(c)(4) “social welfare” nonprofit organization). This will allow the group to accept unlimited donations from wealthy individuals and corporations.

“With his decision to allow corporations to fund the new organizations that will operate as an arm of his presidency, President Obama has ‘given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money,’” said Wertheimer in a statement that quoted Obama’s own words two years ago to denounce the Citizens United Supreme Court decision striking down  many campaign finance limits. “This would take President Obama about as far away as he could possibly get from the goal he set in 2008 to change the way business is done in Washington.”

Keep reading on Openchannel >>

Biden in '16? The hints are heavy

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read at nbcpolitics >>

Is Ted Cruz Eligible to Run for President?

breitbart

legalinsurrection.com

Tony Lee

In a testament to Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s (R) star power, Politico recently questioned whether Cruz would ever be eligible to run for president.

It is a question many have asked after Cruz started to gain momentum in his Texas Republican Senate primary against Texas Lieutenant Gov. David Dewhurst. 

Cruz was born in Canada to an American mother (who was born in Delaware and had lived in the country for at least ten consecutive years) and a father who was born in Cuba. 

There is no legal precedent for Cruz’s case, which is why people on the right, left, and in legal circles have been curious about whether Cruz would be in fact eligible to run for president. 

The U.S. Constitution states that only a “natural born Citizen” can be eligible to run for president. 

As Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman told the publication, “The question ultimately is, What do we mean by a natural born citizen?”

“The problem is, no one knows what a natural born citizen is,” agreed University of California, Davis law professor Gabriel Chin, who argued in 2008 that Sen. John McCain was not eligible to be president.

Advisers to Cruz told the publication that “because his mother had U.S. citizenship at the time of his birth, it transferred to him on foreign soil.”

“Ted is a U.S. citizen by birth, having been born in Calgary to an American-born mother,” a Cruz spokesperson told the publication. 

Temple University law professor Peter Spiro told the publication Cruz would have a “very strong argument” that he qualifies under the definition. 

RESOLUCIÓN PROPONE REELECCIÓN INDEFINIDA DEL PRESIDENTE DE ESTADOS UNIDOS

beforeitsnews.com

El pueblo americano se alarmó el viernes cuando escuchó sobre la resolución H.J.Res. 15, que propone enmendar la Constitución de los Estados Unidos para revocar la Enmienda veintidos. Esa Enmienda removería la limitacion del número de términos en el cual un individuo podría servir como Presidente.

El Representante Demócrata José Serrano (D-NY15), amigo fiel del régimen comunista en Cuba, introdujo la controversial resolución el viernes, al segundo día de la sesión legislativa del 2013. Recordemos que ningún comunista ó socialista en este país, milita en el Partido Republicano, eso nos debe dar a nosotros, los cubanos libres, la pauta para saber de qué lado está el enemigo. Y por supuesto, el Representante Serrano, del Partido Demócrata, no es la excepción.

Nosotros como ciudadanos libres, orgullosamente cubano-americanos, nos oponemos a cualquier resolución propuesta que restrinja, amenace, viole ó dificulte la libertad y los derechos a los derechos que hoy gozamos en este gran país y que anhelamos para el nuestro una vez que el régimen comunista sea extirpado de raíz de nuestro suelo.

Como organización, redoblamos nuestro compromiso con la libertad, la democracia y los derechos humanos, y continuaremos denunciando al comunismo en todas sus formas, vístase con el ropaje verde olivo del régimen de Castro ó el rojo solapado de la Administración de Obama.

Visite el siguiente enlace para la información:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hjres15

Junta Directiva,
NetforCuba Intl.

Conspiracy: Obama President for life?

see  thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:H.J.RES.15

Obama Attorneys Endorse Judge's Santa Ruling: 'Court Has No Power To Conduct Hearing'

Birther Report:

Attorneys for Barack Obama have endorsed a Florida judge’s ruling that cited the “Santa” decision from the fictional movie “Miracle on 34th Street.”

The actual dispute pending in court is over a challenge to Obama’s eligibility to be president and the plaintiff, Michael C. Voeltz, is a Democrat from Florida who demanding an evidentiary hearing which is allowed under state law.

Obama’s attorney, Florida Bar member Mark Herron, submitted a “response” to the hearing petition that the judge’s original decision to dismiss the case had been correct.

That decision, from Kevin Carroll of the Florida circuit court for Leon County, dismissed the Voeltz case even though he had raised the issue of Obama’s qualifications under a state law that allows voters to challenge candidates’ eligibility.

Carroll, who had given the plaintiffs until Dec. 23 to respond to Obama’s motion to dismiss the case, changed his mind and abruptly ordered the case dismissed several days before the deadline.

He explained that the fact the government says Obama is qualified to be president is more than enough for him.

CONTINUED HERE: http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/obama-attorneys-endorse-judges-santa-ruling/print

December 27, 2012: The Day Freedom Died in America

canadafreepress/ Judy McLeod

It was five months before the November 6 presidential election when CFP columnist, Northeast Intelligence Network’s Doug Hagmann courageously tried to warn Americans of a deliberate government planned Civil War in an article titled,  “The planned re-election of Obama, revolutionary style”.

“According to my source, there is talk among the highest levels of the uppermost echelon of the Department of Homeland Security, which he describes as effectively under the control of Barack Hussein Obama. During this call, he said that the DHS is actively preparing for massive social unrest inside the United States. He then corrected himself, stating that “a civil war” is the more appropriate term. Certain elements of the government are not only expecting and preparing for it, they are actually facilitating it,” stated my source. (CFP May 8, 2012)

Hagmann’s article went viral but as we all know last month saw the reelection of the man who would bring America into another Civil War.

Straight out of the Hagmann article came a warning that talk among the highest levels of the uppermost echelon of the Department of Homeland Security pointed to a coming “civil war”.

That Civil War was catapaulted to lead story position on the Drudge Report today. http://www.investmentcontrarians.com/advise/ponzi-scheme/?sb=7SHICC&subid=co469&affid=griccs

Just two days after Christmas, the American Senate is coming for your guns, in a move that will toss the Founding Fathers’ cherished Second Amendment into the dustbin of history.

“This is not a drill.  It’s the real thing,” Hagmann told Alex Jones on his radio show today.

Darkness is descending on America.

Historians will record December 27, 2012 as the day freedom died in ‘The Land of the Free’.

Obama's Data Team

TimeMagazine
How startup technology helped Obama win the election.

Eric Holder for president in 2016?

Jerome R. Corsi

WASHINGTON – Before Hillary Clinton decides what she will do after resigning as Secretary of State, she ought to consider that top Democratic operatives are already positioning a leftist challenger who could disrupt her presidential hopes every bit as much as Barack Obama did in 2008.

Very quietly, support is building behind the scenes among the left-wing radicals who have gained control of the Democratic Party to position Attorney General Eric Holder to run for president 2016, expressing a determination to succeed Barack Obama with another equally committed radical.

On Nov. 19, approximately two weeks after the 2012 presidential election, Fox News announced Holder had decided to honor President Obama’s request to remain on as attorney general “for about a year” into the start of Obama’s second term.

Then, on Dec. 3, Fox News reported Eric Holder’s chief of staff, Gary Grindler, a “top adviser” to Holder who had played a key role in negotiations obtaining from BP a $4 billion settlement over the BP oil spill, had decided to leave the Justice Department.

Before serving as chief of staff for Holder, Grindler served as acting deputy attorney general, the No. 2 position within the Justice Department.

According to the Fox News report, a Justice Department spokesperson attributed Grindler’s departure to be the result of a normal turnover between administrations.

Yet, congressional Republicans investigating the Fast and Furious scandal had targeted Grindler for not acting after receiving a law-enforcement briefing on the gun-walking operation on March 12, 2012, several months before the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives launched its investigation.

A report by the Justice Department’s inspector general concluded Grindler was negligent in failing to notify Holder when he learned guns found at the scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s murder in December 2010 traced back to Fast and Furious.

Cynically viewed, Grindler’s departure removes a target from the sights of Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee investigating Fast and Furious.

Should Holder run for president in 2016, his candidacy would provide a strong counter to any presidential campaign Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might decide to launch.

As Secretary of State during Obama’s first term in office, Clinton could reasonably expect to have Obama’s endorsement for her presidential run, an endorsement that would be complicated for Obama if Holder decided to run.

With Holder’s nomination for president in 2016, the political left controlling the Democrat Holder could also expect to hold together the modern-day version of FDR’s New Deal coalition that voted Obama a second term in this year’s presidential election.

Holder is likely to draw similar percentages to Obama among minority inner city African-American voters.

Given the Justice Department’s strong opposition to Arizona’s Gov. Jan Brewer and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on immigration issues, Holder is likely to repeat Obama’s gains with Hispanic voters, including any illegal immigrants who might be deemed eligible to vote in 2016.

Holder’s enforcement of workplace rights should also appeal to single women including single mothers and radical feminists, as well as union workers including SEIU government workers.

Democratic Party insiders expect Holder to stay in the Justice Department for at least one year, or as long as it takes to defuse any continuing investigation of Fast and Furious that Issa might yet have the political capital to sustain into Obama’s second term.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/eric-holder-for-president-in-2016/#vfVJtgG1XzjdD63D.99

State elections chief will send team to Miami-Dade

Naked Politics 

Steve Bousquet

Secretary of State Ken Detzner told a Senate committee Tuesday that he plans to dispatch a team of experts to Miami-Dade next week to investigate more fully the "problem" with the recent election, including long lines at the polls and an overwhelming surge of last-minute absentee ballots.
Detzner, who is Gov. Rick Scott's chief elections officer, said Miami-Dade is one of five Florida counties his staff will make fact-finding visits to next week.
Referring to Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez, Detzner said: "The mayor gets it. He knows what the problem is in Dade County and how to solve the problem."
Testifying before the Senate Ethics and Elections Committee, Detzner said the "problem" could be anything from a lack of early voting sites to a lack of money for office operations.
Detzner said the problem os "underperformance" will also be investigated in Broward, Palm Beach, St. Lucie and Lee counties. He said he would report all of his findings to Gov. Rick Scott in January.

Eligibility challenge returns to haunt Florida

WND/ Bob Unruh

cowboybyte.com

A lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s presence on the 2012 presidential election ballot because of questions over his constitutional eligibility that was thrown out by a judge who earlier determined it wasn’t timely has returned to haunt election officials in the state with a request that the Obama victory results be quashed.

“Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is a direct threat to the safety and security of the United States, and its Constitution, which plaintiff must protect and defend by oath,” according to the complaint, which was delivered to Secretary of State Ken Detzner today.

The case earlier this year was dismissed by Circuit Judge Terry Lewis, who said Obama’s eligibility could not be challenged at that time because under Florida election law, technically, Obama hadn’t been nominated to the position.

As WND reported, Michael Voeltz, who identifies himself as “a registered member of the Democratic Party, voter and taxpayer in Broward County,” had challenged Obama’s eligibility, arguing that the “natural born citizen” clause was rightly understood in historical context to mean a child not only born in the U.S., but born to two American-citizen parents, so as not to have divided loyalties. Obama, however, readily admits to being born a dual citizen because of his father’s British citizenship.

In his decision then, Lewis noted that the United States Supreme Court has concluded that “every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States.”

However, attorney Larry Klayman, who is representing Voeltz, said, “The judge equated being a ‘citizen’ with a ‘natural born citizen’ and cited no authority to conclude the two terms are the same. He quotes other state’s cases, where judges reached that conclusion, but that’s not precedent for him. What other courts said in lower cases means nothing to him.”

Klayman also had been concerned that the judge determined the burden of proof that Obama is ineligible fell on Voeltz – but then refused to authorize discovery in the case which could have confirmed that eligibility status.

“How can you say we have the burden of proof, then not allow discovery?” Klayman asked. “He says we have burden, but doesn’t allow us to meet it.”

And he said Voeltz has standing to bring the case, under Florida law. More >>

Pravda: Illiterate society reelected Obama

Birther Report: Excerpts Via Gina Miller @ Renew America

Throughout most of the twentieth century, the Pravda newspaper was roughly the Russian equivalent of our leftist, state-controlled "mainstream" media, publishing only regime-approved, Communist party line content. Since undergoing a change in ownership in the early 1990s, it now offers warnings against the communism that infected the former Soviet Union and caused the deaths of millions of Russian citizens.

Despite the warnings of history and those who have lived under its iron fist, communism has come to America, and the useful idiots who dumbly adore the Communist-in-Chief, Barack Obama (or whatever his name is), are gladly and stupidly drinking the kool-aid of ignorance in embracing that deadly and dead-end ideology. Even the Russians can see this!

I read with sad amazement a couple of columns in the new, non-communist Pravda online by Xavier Lerma. One is titled, "Obama's Soviet Mistake," and the other, "The Reason Obama is President." Mr. Lerma clearly understands the terrible place of tyranny America has chosen, and he knows the reasons why. The reason Obama is President is the same reason I have repeatedly declared here in my columns: America has turned away from God and to self-worship and fleeting, carnal pleasures.

In "The Reason Obama is President," Mr. Lerma writes, [...]

[...] Despite the election result numbers, I do not believe the ignorant people yet outnumber the informed in America, although most of the informed are of the older generations. The Left has election and voter fraud down to a science, and it may well be that conservatism will not be allowed to win major elections anymore. The reports of election fraud since November 6th are sickening, but it appears the Republicans are content to lie down and take it, while they go off on misguided, introspective tangents about what they should have done differently to get the women and minority votes. It is stupidity in motion. If the election numbers are fraudulent, then speculation on "why" we "lost" is dumb, because without the election fraud tacked on, it is likely that we didn't lose!

Regardless, it remains that we are now saddled with the Communist federal government we deserve. Those of us who know better have allowed our liberty to lapse under decades of incremental thefts of our freedoms by an ever-growing monster bureaucracy in Washington. We have ceded our freedom to our Republican and Democrat masters in DC. Can we ever get it back? Not without a return to God's principles found in the Bible. And, looking around at the younger members of our degenerate, ignorant society, I am not holding my breath that they will suddenly turn to the Lord, although a few of them will, as God has called and chosen them.

Nevertheless, we will continue to pray for our nation and fight to rid our government of the evil criminals — both Democrat and Republican — who have commandeered it.

CONTINUED HERE: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/miller/121127 >>

Cuban-American Vote Explains Everything

Townhall.com/ Dennis Prager 

go.bloomberg.com

If you want to understand why President Obama was re-elected despite a largely unsuccessful presidency and almost unprecedentedly high and continuous unemployment, just look at the Cuban-American vote.

In fact, if you want to understand America today -- specifically, why it is in decline -- just look at the Cuban-American vote.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, "The president captured 48 percent of the Cuban-American vote in Florida -- a record high for a Democrat."

Democratic presidential nominees went from 25 percent of the Cuban-American vote in 2000, to 29 percent in 2004, to 35 percent in 2008 to 48 percent on 2012.

We obviously have a dramatic trend here.

Now, why would that be?

There are two reasons: No experience of evil and American education.

The first generation of Cuban-Americans had escaped Communist evil. People who know evil are generally conservative. Leftism and liberalism -- no longer distinguishable -- are rooted in large measure in naivete and wishful thinking. The beliefs that people are basically good, and that evil regimes can almost always be negotiated with are two such examples.

Also, when you escape a Communist regime, you treasure liberty and you understand that as government and state expand, liberty must contract.

That is why Jews from the Soviet Union are the only non-Orthodox Jews who vote in the majority for Republicans. They, too, know evil, and they recognize the destructive appeal of a big, take-care-of-you, state.

The other reason for the dramatic shift in the Cuban-American vote is American education.

Most American elementary schools and high schools, and nearly all colleges and universities, teach everything that is significant from a liberal/left perspective. Multiculturalism has replaced E Pluribus Unum; the American past is villainous; the country is racist; morality is relative; and the left-wing cause of the day -- now global warming -- is taught as incontrovertible truth (ask your children if they have been shown Al Gore's global warming video, "An Inconvenient Truth," or if they have been taught both sides of the man-made-global-warming-leading-to-catastrophe hypothesis).

American schools, especially universities, are left-wing seminaries. The only difference between your local college and a Christian seminary is that the latter are more honest. The Christian seminary announces its goal -- to graduate committed Christians. The universities deceive when they say they have no agenda other than to open minds. They may believe this deception but it is one nevertheless. Almost no university ever has a conservative speaker at its commencement exercises; nearly every professor in liberal arts departments is a Democrat (and a left-wing Democrat at that), and on the few occasions that conservatives do receive an invitation to speak at a college, they are likely to be continuously heckled, may well need body guards, or their invitation is rescinded, as Fordham University did to Ann Coulter last week.

Members of the second Cuban-American generation have been far more influenced by their schools and by television shows than by their parents. And the same holds true for second and third and fourth and fifth generation Americans of every background.

A long time ago schools taught American history, not Politically Correct American history, as mandated, for example, by California law -- which forbids the use of any textbooks that do not emphasize the roles of women, blacks, Hispanics, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and the transgendered.

And a long time ago most Americans knew what America stood for and taught it to the next generation. In other words, even conservatives have largely forgotten either the distinctive American values system or how to communicate it. Meanwhile, the left has been utterly clear about what leftism stands for and has used schools, the news media and the entertainment media to transmit its values.

As a result, the American trinity of Liberty, In God We Trust, and E Pluribus Unum have been supplanted with egalitarianism, secularism, and multiculturalism -- Europe's trinity.

And that is why the children of Cuban-Americans, like the children of virtually every other group in America, including white Anglo-Saxon Protestant children, increasingly vote left.

Either conservatives -- from presidential candidates to the rest of us -- learn what we stand for and communicate it, or the greatest experiment in making a good society will come to its end.

Is Obama confessing election fraud?

WND/ Bob Unruh
A forensic profiler whose previous cases have included the Natalie Holloway disappearance and the O.J. Simpson double murder says Barack Obama is confessing to stealing the 2012 president election.

“Obama appears to unconsciously confess on multiple occasions that in his secret fury he stole the 2012 presidential election – continuing his attacks on our nation,” Andrew G. Hodges, M.D., told WND in an assessment of Obama.

“But really that is no different whatsoever than in 2008 becoming an illegal president who violated the Constitution. This knowledge comes from one undeniable fact: we have discovered a new unconscious mind that continually quick-reads situations and communicates about it – as Obama reveals.”

Hodges, who wrote “The Obama Confession: Secret Fear, Secret Fury,” previously deciphered the JonBenet Ramsey ransom note from the Boulder, Colo., murder case.

He uses a unique psycholinguistic technique he calls “ThoughtPrint Decoding” to “read between the lines” of people’s statements – called “the cutting-edge of forensic science” by expert investigators. He’s not exactly new to the field, already having identified killers by studying ransom notes, emails, letters and police interviews to spot secret confessions. He decoded O.J.’s “suicide note” to confirm Simpson had committed a double murder. He deciphered the JonBenet ransom note from Boulder, Colo., to identify the child’s killer. He decrypted letters from BTK to predict that he was about to kill again – the only profiler to do so. He studied statements by Joran van der Sloot and Deepak Kalpoe to tie them to the slaying of Holloway. He showed how Casey Anthony secretly confessed to killing her daughter in 200 letters written to a jail mate. He even decoded Bill Clinton’s Lewinsky comments.

See all the details in Hodges’ book “The Obama Confession.”

In a new analysis for WND, Hodges explains that Obama not only confesses, but he suggests a solution for Americans.

“Obama’s deeper moral compass continues to provide guidance to America on how to combat his assaults. In his U.N. speech he repeatedly referred to courageous protesters. ‘They should give us hope… remind us that so long as we work for it justice will be done; that history is on our side; and that a rising tide of liberty will never be reversed.’ Repeatedly, he tells us ‘protest,’ ‘march for justice’ and we can become a rising tide. Citizens still have the power,” Hodges said.

That there are questions about the 2012 election has been reported numerous times by WND.

In Hodges’ assessment: “Following Obama’s presidential reelection impressive findings have emerged pointing to a fraudulent election. A brief summary reveals precincts in Ohio and Pennsylvania reported greater than 100 percent of registered voters turned out to vote. In 100 precincts in Ohio Obama got 99 percent of the votes. Pennsylvania illegally removed GOP poll inspectors from voting locations. Computer irregularities in Pennsylvania (and elsewhere) reverted to a default Obama vote no matter who the voter selected.”

He continued, “Florida prevented absentee ballots from being observed by neutral observers. Military ballots were systematically denied active-duty servicemen and women around the world.”

So he said all he had to do was sit back and wait for the confession.

“One thing is for certain – if Obama stole this election he would confess unconsciously. We now review that possibility from his own mind, listening for his all-seeing unconscious super intelligence to once more tell us how he truly sees himself deep down. As I described in my book, ‘The Obama Confession: Secret Fear, Secret Fury,’ Obama has repeatedly confessed to his misdeeds of his illegal presidency and sweeping attack on America for four years.”

He explains his observations:

“On election night after initial voting reports declared him the winner, Obama once more unconsciously pointed to a confession. Before his anxious and relieved supporters, Obama spoke of his pride in his daughters but commented, ‘But I will say this for now, one dog’s probably enough’ – on the surface referring back to promising his daughters a puppy after his 2008 victory,” Hodges said.

“But stay with his spontaneous right-brain image. Understand he could have chosen any matter on which to comment and any description but his brilliant unconscious mind which always speaks in a symbolic right-brain language – and carefully chooses its images – selected ‘one dog is enough.’

“Read his confession that America has just elected a dog of a president – and once was enough,” Hodges said.

“He suggests that he’s dogging it as president, faking it as an illegal president in a second way now with a stolen election. That he’s a real ‘dog’ for such deception. The image of a dog further suggests: a pet favored by the media and blind supporters who would not dare to explore his illegality by birth or unfair election; that he will dog or haunt America for another four years because a dog also bites especially a wounded one. (And Obama is deeply wounded beyond belief.) Once again Obama unconsciously points to his deceptive anger and indeed he has bitten/assaulted America in multiple ways, both covert and overt, and plans on more of the same.”

It was interesting, Hodges noted, that Time magazine also then referred to the “dog” image, using it extensively to declare, “It was a fitting end to a one-dog’s-enough sort of campaign.”

“The magazine writer suggests that he had picked up deep down on Obama’s unconscious confession,” Hodges said.

Further, during a Nov. 9 press conference, “Obama snapped at two senators who had criticized U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice for her erroneous declarations regarding the Benghazi attack. He challenged the senators to ‘come after me,’ not Rice,” Hodges said.

“This matches his hidden instructions in the U.N. speech that American citizens be prepared to protest unfair elections. In both his 2008 Fathers’ Day speech as a candidate and in his inaugural address he unconsciously instructed citizens to confront him as an illegal foreign-born candidate/ president,” Hodges said.

“Obama’s ideas continually reflect a preoccupation with unconscious guilt and a need to be caught and stopped. His behavior and decision-making around the Benghazi tragedy with obvious cover-up suggest more guilt – a need to be questioned, a secret confession of being a weak leader and a president who puts a U.S. ambassador’s life at risk,” said Hodges.

He said the newest messages shine new light on Obama’s July 13, 2012, statement that, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

“The symbolic unconscious message (with a deeper context of a potential vote scam) is not difficult to discern: ‘If I stay in business as president, it won’t be because of me. I’m not really the one who will bring about my reelection – others are going to make sure it happens,’” Hodges said. “His headline-grabbing comment has all the earmarks that he was warning America – attempting to shock everyone into grasping – that a secret plan was taking shape to guarantee his reelection.”

Hodges also cited Obama’s Sept. 25 address to the U.N., saying Obama was “confessing to his illegal presidency and an unfair election in 2008. In retrospect – now that evidence points to the real possibility of a fraudulent election – Obama suggests his brilliant always truthful super-intel was also looking ahead and confessing that plans were underway to steal the election.”

On Hodges’ website, Steven A. Egger, associate professor of criminology at the University of Houston, Clear Lake, has written that Hodges’ technique is “becoming the cutting edge of forensic science.”

“Dr. Hodges’ investigation of forensic documents in the Natalee Holloway case indicates that his ‘thoughtprint decoding method’ and ‘reading between the lines’ is, in fact, becoming a major contribution to law enforcement tools used by criminal investigators,” wrote Egger.

See the BIG LIST of vote fraud reports coming out of the 2012 election.

WND’s newest forum is your opportunity to report voter fraud

Stand up to fight against voter fraud right now!

Here’s the blueprint Obama used to steal the 2012 election.

Leaked: Audio of Mitt Romney Explaining to Donors Why He Lost Election — And Guess What Bill Clinton Told Him

The Blaze/ Jason Howerton 

Just like his infamous “47 percent” remarks, former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been under fire for telling his top donors on Wednesday that President Barack Obama won the election because of his “gifts” to minorities, women and young people.

On Thursday, ABC received leaked audio of Romney’s comments. In addition to talking about Obama’s “gifts,” Romney also told donors that former President Bill Clinton called him and told him he thought he was going to win before Hurricane Sandy hit and gave Obama a boost.

Business Insider provides transcripts for the clips:

“It’s a proven political strategy, which is give a bunch of money to a group and, guess what, they’ll vote for you. What I would do if I were a Democrat running four years from now — I’d say dental care ought to be included in Obamacare.”

  Watch More News Videos at ABC
  |
  2012 Presidential Election
  |
  Entertainment & Celebrity News

“What the president did is he gave them two things. One, he gave them a big gift on immigration with the DREAM Act amnesty program, which was obviously very very popular with Hispanic voters, and then number two was Obamacare … For a home earning — let’s say $30,000 a year — free health care, which is worth about $10,000 a year, I mean it’s massive, it’s huge. So this — he did two very popular things for the Hispanic community.”

  Watch More News Videos at ABC
  |
  2012 Presidential Election
  |
  Entertainment & Celebrity News

“I spoke with President Clinton the day before yesterday. He called and spent 30 minutes chatting with me. He said, ‘A week out, I thought you were going to win.’ And he said, ‘But the hurricane happened, and it gave the president a chance to be presidential, and to look bipartisan. And you know, he got a little more momentum.’ And of course he also said that when he was watching Ann speak at the Republican convention, he decided he was tempted to join the Republican Party. So he may have just been effusive with generous comments as he chatted. He was very complimentary, by the way, of how well we did with middle-class voters, and he said they were surprised by how strong we were in Ohio and in other states with middle-class voters, they did exceptionally well with minorities, but white, middle-class voters, we really cleaned up with and that caught them by surprise.”

  Watch More News Videos at ABC
  |
  2012 Presidential Election
  |
  Entertainment & Celebrity News

Townhall's Rachel Alexander: Obama Likely Won Re-Election Through Election Fraud

- Image Credit: Obama Voter Fraud -

Obama Likely Won Re-Election Through Election Fraud

Excerpt Via Rachel Alexander @ Townhall

According to the Columbus Dispatch, one out of every five registered voters in Ohio is ineligible to vote. In at least two counties in Ohio, the number of registered voters exceeded the number of eligible adults who are of voting age. In northwestern Ohio's Wood County, there are 109 registered voters for every 100 people eligible to vote. An additional 31 of Ohio's 88 counties have voter registration rates over 90%, which most voting experts regard as suspicious. Obama miraculously won 100% of the vote in 21 districts in Cleveland, and received over 99% of the vote where GOP inspectors were illegally removed.

The inflated numbers can't just reflect voters who have moved, because the average voting registration level nationwide is only 70%. The vast majority of voters over the 70% level are not voting because they want to, they are voting because someone is getting them to cast a vote, one way or another. Those 31 counties are most likely the largest counties in Ohio, representing a majority of Ohio voters. This means the number of votes cast above the 70% typical voter registration level easily tops 100,000, the margin Obama won Ohio by.

CONTINUED HERE: http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2012/11

In 59 Philly Wards, Romney Did Not Get Single Vote

By Miriam Hill, Andrew Seidman, and John Duchneskie, Inquirer Staff Writers

It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

These are the kind of numbers that send Republicans into paroxysms of voter-fraud angst, but such results may not be so startling after all.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/2012-election/2012/11/12/59-philly-wards-romney-did-not-get-single-vote?cmpid=NL_FiredUpFoxNation#ixzz2CE4eKDia

Citizens In Over 40 States File Petitions For Secession from U.S.

States highlighted in red mark where petitions for secession from the U.S. have been filed/ GossipOnThis.com

Following last week’s re-election of President Barack Obama, residents in more than forty U.S. states have filed petitions to secede from the country via the government’s “We the People” program on the White House’s official website.

The states include: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

------------------------------------------------

Tim Brown

As I reported over the weekend, Texas and Louisiana citizens began petitions to the White House to peacefully withdraw from the United States and then yesterday that number had grown to nearly forty states. As this happened, the Texas petition topped it’s goal of 20,000 signatures.

As of the writing of this article, the Texas petition has 70,278 signatures, nearly three times the amount required to be reviewed by the White House.
According to the White House petition site, once the petition reaches 25,000 signatures within 30 days “White House staff will review it, ensure it’s sent to the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response.”
Below is a video that explains how the process is supposed to work:

I admit, I am wary of petitioning the federal government over any of this. However, I think the number of petitions and the people signing is only an indication that the “union” is no longer united. This, along with the recent election, demonstrate that we are a nation divided.

It was at another period in our history where states sought to peacefully withdraw from the Union, only to be invaded by that very Union. With stakes as high as they are now, I am not very optimistic that the current state of things in America will lead to a peaceful agreement between the federal government and the states.

Let me be clear, these petitions are not put forth by the states officially, but they are put forth by residents of those states. After all, the people are the ones who select their representatives and if the people voice their disapproval of what is taking place at the federal level enough in their own state, this may gain traction. I suggest not only signing the petition for your state, but letting your state legislature know and possibly garnering signatures to provide your state legislature and governor with.

Texas Governor Rick Perry says he will not give credibility to the online movement. His spokesperson Catherine Frazier said that while Perry “shares the frustrations many Americans have with our federal government,” the governor “believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it.”

I’m guessing the governor has not heard directly from the 70,000 plus people who have signed the petition. Perhaps phone calls and such might just let him know how serious the people of his state actually are.

I leave you with the words of the Founders in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Clearly they believed in the right of peaceful secession of the states from the Union.

UPDATE: Louisiana has also met their goal.

UPDATE 2: Two petitions have been filed at the White House Petitions site against those petitioning for withdraw. “Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America” and “Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them.”

Sorry to say, there may be a Union, but there is definitely not unity.

UPDATE: Florida has also met their petition goal.

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/11/texas-secession-petition-tops-goal-requires-review-by-white-house/#ixzz2CBHv4zWL

Did Obama really win?

WND/ Joseph Farah

The question must be asked. I wish I didn’t have to be the one to ask it. But, since no one else will, it falls to me.

Did Barack Obama actually, legitimately, fairly and legally win the election?

My answer is an unequivocal no.

It was not a free and fair election. In fact, if we as a nation don’t acknowledge the reality of what I am saying, we may never have a free and fair election again in the future of this once-great nation.

Here are some facts to consider:

• The Obama campaign accepted at least some foreign campaign cash – willingly and knowingly. The campaign website could have prohibited it. It did not. In other words, it deliberately left open the door for illegal foreign contributions in its “by any means necessary” quest for re-election. WND has proven that by actually contributing under the name Osama bin Laden from a Pakistani IP address, with a phony physical address and other neon-lit red flags in hopes of catching attention. Obama accepted illegal foreign contributions in 2008 without penalty, so why would anyone expect him not to repeat his crime in 2012? No one can know the extent of the fraud, because Obama has refused to release the identity of donors of $200 or less – yet he boasts that most of the money he collected was in small amounts.
• James O’Keefe and Project Veritas spent months heroically proving the absolute willingness and eagerness of Democratic operatives to commit voter fraud – especially by having people cast multiple votes.
• Military ballots were systematically denied active-duty servicemen and women around the world. This would be a scandal if it happened once. But it has become the norm when Democrats are in charge of the Defense Department. It would be a scandal if it were due to incompetence. But it appears to be a deliberate effort to suppress the military vote. It would be a scandal if it were not a close election. But it was.
• Prior to the election, Democrats fought for open voting requiring no identification – particularly photo ID. Coincidentally, Obama won every state that didn’t fully require photo ID to vote. Democrats contended that voter ID laws suppress the vote. But they do not. They only suppress the illegal vote.
• Across Philadelphia, GOP poll inspectors were forcibly (and illegally) removed from polling locations. Coincidentally (or not), Obama received “astronomical” numbers in those very same regions, including locations where he received “over 99 percent” of the vote. Ward 4, which also had a poll watcher dressed in Obama attire, went massively for Obama. Obama received 99.5 percent of the vote, defeating Romney 9,955 to 55.
• Obama also won 99.8 percent of the vote in 44 Cleveland districts. In another Ohio county, Obama won with 108 percent of the voters registered.
• Obama received 10 million fewer votes than he did in 2008. Romney received 3 million fewer votes than McCain. Obama won in the four critical swing states by a grand total of 500,000 votes.
• Some 5 million independents changed their votes from Obama to Romney in 2012. So Romney started the day 2.5 million votes ahead of where McCain was in 2008, as Jack Wheeler points out. This means that 5.5 million Republican voters are not accounted for. Either they didn’t show up at the polls or their votes were not counted. Does anyone believe there was less enthusiasm by Republicans about this election than for the one in 2008?

I could go on and on, but you get the point. In such a close election, these anomalies are unacceptable. In an election in which all the voter fraud appears to be perpetrated by one side, it could more than make the difference in the race. Worse yet, will an unscrupulous party that would resort to such crimes to win ever permit another free and fair election in the future – especially if the crimes are not exposed and punished severely?

I believe going into the election that at least 5 percent of the Democratic vote would be fraudulent. That would mean Republicans would have to out-perform Democrats by 6 percent to win. I suspect now I was too conservative in my projections of about the expected level of criminality perpetrated by Obama’s Democrats.

Remember from where Obama arose. He was a community organizer and attorney for ACORN, which is nothing but an organized crime front with a focus on throwing elections.

Do I think Obama won fair and square? No. I think he won only because of systematic fraud, corruption and abuse in the 2012 election.

Very likely, it would not have even been a close election had Obama not made cheating – in every conceivable way – the central component of his campaign effort.

Is there anything we can do about it now?

Not likely.

But if we want to ensure that America has free and fair elections in the future, we better get to work. America’s political system is becoming a thugocracy.

I’m fighting back.

And you can help me in this fight.

I’m challenging the Obama campaign on the acceptance of those illegal donations. I’ve filed a Federal Elections Commission complaint at considerable cost. I have no illusions that it will be easy to challenge a sitting president within his own bureaucracy. But I’m doing it. Meanwhile, some in the press would prefer that I be charged with voter fraud for efforts to expose the system. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if the Democratic machine tries something like that.

That’s why we need your help.

We’re fighting to preserve America’s freedom here – nothing less.

We’re fighting to preserve the concept of representative government – elections that actually mean something.

We’re fighting to expose what no other news agency in the world apparently has an interest in exposing – the dark underbelly of corruption, fraud and abuse in our political system.

Can you help?

Voting Machine Backdoor Guarantees Puppet of Choice Victory

TheAlexJonesChannel Alex welcomes back Bev Harris of Black Box Voting who breaks down cases of vote fraud during the 2012 election.