unchanged. Politicians that are elected to office with a clear mandate often find their efforts hampered by forces beyond their control in Washington. Natural disasters around the world place even more pressure on a precariously fragile world economy. Here at home citizens perceive that their President is out of touch, oblivious to the crises around him, and doubling down on a dubious agenda born out of Leftwing extremism.

What is a conscientious citizen to do in the face of such overwhelming calamity?

First, remember that there is hope, not the kind that comes from empty campaign slogans but the type that is born deep within the human spirit when individuals connect to their internal spiritual core. The Enlightenment that brought the world out of the Dark Ages and into a flourishing era of liberty, creativity, and entrepreneurship had its foundation in the notion that religious faith must be coupled with rationality. Both are necessary. Without rationality religious faith can be an exercise in superstition. Without religious faith rationality loses its moral and ethical compass.

When the individual reaches deep within the wellspring of hope that resides at the core of human beings endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, then no calamity is too severe or too frightening to face.

Second, the God-given hope that resides at the core of who we are as human beings is a fountainhead of strength. No obstacle is too big or too foreboding to address.

Our forefathers knew well of this strength. When the United States undertook the seemingly impossible task of building the Panama Canal, the project appeared to be far beyond the reach of the technology that was available at the time. A trench had to be dug across an isthmus that is 48 miles across. Engineers had to account for the differential in sea levels between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The French had already attempted such a feat, only to withdraw after nearly 22,000 workers died in the process. But when the Americans undertook the project in 1904, workers attacked the daunting task with an attitude encapsulated by the words from a popular song at the time–’Got any rivers you think are uncrossable? Got any mountains you can’t tunnel through? God specializes in things thought impossible. He does the things others cannot do.’

In the face of seemingly insurmountable odds, remember you are stronger than you think. And the God who strengthens us does the impossible.

Third, a good rule of thumb in troublesome times is to ‘pray and hope for the best, and prepare for the worst.’ Prepare yourself physically, spiritually, mentally, materially for a ‘rainy day.’ Take prudent measures to protect yourself and your family from disaster. Plan ahead. Stock up on non-perishable items. Buy ammo and guns for protection. But pray and hope for the best, believing that God has never abandoned His children. Make a prayer list and pray for your loved ones, family, friends, and acquaintances. Let them know you are praying for them. We need to encourage one another during tumultuous times. Write letters of comfort and encouragement. Make phone calls to brighten up someone’s day. These are things all of us can do no matter what our station in life.

There is no way to know how the present crisis will turn out in the end. We don’t know about tomorrow. But we know Who holds tomorrow. And we know who holds our hand. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is a comfort to know and a shelter in the time of storm.

The investigation was conducted by Northeast Intelligence Network–a team of experienced, professional private investigators whose services have been utilized by Fortune-500 companies.  The director, Douglas J. Hagmann, is a 23-year veteran in high-level investigations and is a member of the International Counter-Terrorism Officers Association.

Hagmann’s investigation into the background and Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States is extensive and thorough.  His conclusions are stunning.

For example, neither of Obama’s parents were citizens of the United States at the time of his birth.  Therefore, Obama would have to have been born on U.S. soil in order to qualify as a ‘natural born citizen’ according to the qualifications specified in the Constitution.

But Hagmann’s investigation reveals that, contrary to the notion of those who point to a short-form birth certificate in Hawaii, and 2 birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers, neither of these factors proves anything at all about Obama’s status or citizenship:

the Certification of Live Birth is consistently cited by individuals, the media and others to prove the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA.  Nonetheless, even an authenticated and genuine Certification of Live Birth is legally insufficient for the purpose of proving eligibility, as it merely represents that OBAMA’s birth record is on file in the state of Hawaii. It falls short of providing the information necessary to determine constitutional eligibility in at least two areas: it does not offer any information regarding who supplied the information, nor does it confirm the authenticity of the information provided. Again, it merely indicates that the information is “on file.”

In other words, the ‘certification of live birth’ as touted by Obama apologists and the mainstream media as ‘proof’ Obama meets the eligibility requirements of the Constitution actually proves nothing.

In addition, Hagmann disputes the notion that birth announcements in local Hawaiian newspapers provide proof:

Many who argue that Barack Hussein OBAMA II was born in Hawaii not only point to the COLB as direct evidence of eligibility, but they also point to two separate birth announcements that appear in the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin in 1961. Those doing so either fail to understand the legal definition of a natural born citizen as it applies to the eligibility factor, or are guilty of intentionally misdirecting the core issue. A birth announcement is simply that – a public announcement that a baby was born. The birth announcements do not provide any information about the child’s citizenship, cannot be authenticated, and hold no weight of evidence to support either side of the eligibility argument.

However, the key information in Hagmann’s report that casts doubts upon Obama’s eligibility is the fact that the very organizations that published the short-form certificate of live birth and the 2 birth announcements in newspapers have direct connections with Barack Obama.

The DailyKos is the primary suspect and the first entity to publish ‘proof’ of a birth certificate.  The DailyKos is an ultra-Leftwing hate-group that not only is ‘in the tank’ for Obama but smears and seeks to destroy those who oppose extremist, Leftwing initiatives in politics.

‘Fight the Smears,’ which also pointed to these 2 erroneous pieces of ‘evidence,’ is owned by ‘Organizing for America,’ which was originally named ‘Obama for America.’   This speaks for itself.

And finally, there is the much-hallowed ‘Factcheck.org’–supposedly an independent, non-partisan clearinghouse that separates truth from fiction in the media and on the Internet.  Hagmann’s investigation reveals that Factcheck is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, which receives its primary funding from the Annenberg Foundation.

Barack Obama was a founding member, chairman, and past President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was also funded by the Annenberg Foundation.  Thus, the supposed ‘neutrality’ of Factcheck.org can safely be called into question.

The bottom line is that so far absolutely no positive proof has been provided that establishes that Barack Obama was born on American soil.

Why is this important?  An individual who would spend millions of dollars hiding his background and pertinent documents from the public, and who would make false statements about about his history, cannot be trusted to tell the American people the truth about what his policy initiatives are intended to do regarding the ‘fundamental change’ of America.

In October of this year, one month prior to the November midterm elections, a special army unit known as ‘Consequence Management Response Force’ will be ready for deployment on American soil if so ordered by the President.

The special force, which is the new name being given to the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, has been training at Fort Stewart, Georgia and is composed of 80,000 troops.

According to the Army Times,

They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.

The key phrase is ‘may be called upon to help with civil unrest.’

This afternoon a local radio talk show host reported that he had been in contact with a member of the military.  This military source stated that the armed forces have been alerted to the strong possibility that civil unrest may occur in the United States this summer, prior to the midterm elections of 2010.

The source described this as ‘our long, hot summer of discontent’ that could be eerily reminiscent of the summer of 1968 when riots broke out in many of our largest cities.

However, the summer of 2010 could well be much worse due to the players involved.  In 1968 the major players were war protesters.  This time, the outrage simmering beneath the surface of American society involves a broad cross-section of the heartland, and most of them are heavily armed.

It is highly unlikely that these citizens would ever initiate armed conflict of any kind.  In their view, gun rights are for self-defense–and for defense against tyrannical government, which our Founders regarded as the most dangerous force on earth.

However, it has become clear that other groups may well initiate violence in order to start an ‘incident’ that would give Obama and a rogue Congress a reason to implement martial law, confiscate the citizens’ guns, enforce curfews, and suspend all future elections until such time as it is deemed ‘safe’ to proceed with human liberty as encapsulated in the right to vote.

Tea Party members, for example, have been warned in recent days that members of Andy Stern’s SEIU union and members of the organization formerly known as ACORN plan to infiltrate Tea Party gatherings in order to incite some sort of incident that could result in armed conflict.

In addition, all indications point to a humiliating defeat for the Democrats and Obama in November.  Not only will the House in all likelihood transfer to Republican control, but it is increasingly possible for the Democrats to lose the Senate as well.

And there are Leftwing groups in this country that would use whatever means necessary to prevent that from happening.

ACORN has already gone underground, changing its name so as to fly beneath the radar screen.  How many people will  the group register to vote illegally?

And with Obama’s plan to naturalize between 10 and 20 million illegal aliens, a brand new voter base for the Democrats will be in place prior to November.

Add to this the growing unrest over continued high unemployment, the coming spike in interest rates and inflation, and the still-boiling outrage over the manner in which Obama and the Democrats shoved ObamaCare down the throats of the citizens, and all of the ingredients are present for a major F-5 tornado to sweep across the heartland.

To what extent would soldiers use deadly force during such ‘civil unrest’ should the Consequence Management Response Team be utilized?  During the anti-war riots of the 1960s they killed student protesters.  What about now?

The military source cited by the radio host today was asked this very question.  He would merely say that the culture of the U.S. military is changing–half support Obama and the other half are dead-set against him.

His conclusion?  There is no way to know for sure if they would obey an order to open fire on ordinary citizens.

Update:  The Cato Institute published this warning when the program was launched in its first phase in 2008 (the program has been updated and expanded since 2008). The Founders insisted that standing armies were never to be used against American citizens on our own soil, no matter what violations of this principle have occurred in the years following.  In the spirit of the Patriots and of real journalists government must be questioned constantly and held to intense scrutiny in order to preserve liberty.

Ben Smith at Politico is reporting that the Democratic National Committee mocked the Tea Party protesters in Washington as they gathered to confront Congressmen and Senators personally, in their offices, on the 2-trillion-dollar dismantling of the U.S. Healthcare System.

At issue is the number of attendees.

Some reports state that the crowd is only around 300.  Others report that it is more like 3000.  The most accurate estimate is that the protesters number from 1000-2000 at this point.

But more Tea Party activists are on the way for the weekend, given that the thing Congress is about to approve will be the single largest assault on the U.S. Constitution in the history of the Republic.

Several good reasons stand out for the lower numbers in the middle of the week.

1. Tea Party members work for a living and cannot, at the drop of a hat, simply pile into a car or bus to travel hundreds or thousands of miles away thus jeopardizing their jobs.

2.  An important part of the strategy for this particular protest is local activism.  Tea Party members, depending on the group, were encouraged to focus on their local area, confronting the home offices of Congressmen and Senators and setting up meetings with various with elected officials and their staffers.

3.  Much of the D.C. strategy is behind-the-scenes.  Protesters were encouraged to individually confront elected representatives in their offices rather than invade offices en mass.  This kind of face-to-face tactic is very effective but doesn’t get very much press.

4.  This weekend is the time when things are coming to a head on healthcare.  The vote is tentatively scheduled for Sunday.  It can be safely assumed that over the weekend the ‘tens of thousands’ that were initially expected in D.C. to protest the bill will be there in full force, given that the possibility of losing a job will not be an issue.

5.  Some activists have come to the conclusion that it is a much better strategy to allow the Democrats to pass the bill.  This is, figuratively speaking, ‘giving them enough rope to hang them.’  They will be on record, for all to see, as supporting the systematic dismantling of the best healthcare system in the world in order to put it under government control, thus flying in the face of the vehement and angry protests of the average voters in the heartland.

This may well be the conservative equivalent of the ‘nuclear option.’  By allowing the Democrats to do their dirty work, complete with bribes, payoffs, back-room deals, and even attempting to pass legislation without a vote, the electorate will benefit from seeing right before their eyes the true colors of most of the people they have elected to office in Washington.

Thus, this November will be a bloodbath at the polls if there isn’t a literal one before that.

This information rocked the scientific community this week, although the American press never mentioned a word about it:

Scientist at the heart of the ‘Climategate’ email scandal broke the law when they refused to give raw data to the public, the privacy watchdog has ruled.

The Information Commissioner’s office said University of East Anglia researchers breached the Freedom of Information Act when handling requests from climate change sceptics.

But the scientists will escape prosecution because the offences took place more than six months ago.

Amid all the hoop-la concerning this continually-unfolding scandal is one central truth–if a scientist’s hypothesis can be verified by the hard data using the ‘scientific method,’ there is no need whatsoever for hiding information from the public and from other scientists, much less manipulating data to prove one’s point.

The very fact that these things were done serves to immediately and irrefutably nullify the notion that climate change is ‘man-made.’

But in this case the scientists involved broke the law.  However, as the article cited above points out, they will not face prosecution due to a hoophole in that law.  How convenient.  Crimes of this magnitude should be prosecuted vigorously and the perpetrators, if found guilty, should do serious jail time.

This is not the only bombshell news involving Climategate, however.

The Times of the U.K. published explosive information just yesterday showing that before the U.N.’s Copenhagen summit on climate change in December, the organization’s climate chief Rajendra Pachauri was informed that the widely-distributed claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was false.

Pachauri, however, proceeded with business as usual during the summit and took a full 2 months to acknowledge the glaring error:

Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists.

The IPCC’s report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions.

Dr Pachauri, who played a leading role at the summit, corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure. He told The Times on January 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. He said: “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my attention. There were statements, but we never looked at this 2035 number.”

Asked whether he had deliberately kept silent about the error to avoid embarrassment at Copenhagen, he said: “That’s ridiculous. It never came to my attention before the Copenhagen summit. It wasn’t in the public sphere.”

In addition, a science journalist, Pallava Bagla, had asked Pachauri about the error last November, to which Pachauri replied, ‘I don’t have anything to add on glaciers.’

Perhaps someone should inform the good doctor that the issue is not whether or not he has anything to add.  He has ‘added’ quite enough.  The issue at hand is whether or not he will delete grossly erroneous information–false data that has cost governments billions.

The individuals who have engaged in this scandal of historic proportions–perpetrating a hoax on the entire world that has polluted minds and resulted in needless concern and panic–are criminals who should be tried in a court of law and sent to jail.  The United Nations is quick to condemn individuals and nations who veer from its pie-in-the-sky prescriptions for humankind.  Where is the outrage over Climategate?  Why are there no calls for criminal investigations although these scientists broke the law?

The answer should be clear.  As long as one lies on behalf of the ‘approved agenda’ no harm is done.

Conversations over the past week in this popular gathering place have centered on Barack Obama and the state of the economy.

South Carolina has one of the highest rates of unemployment in the nation, which spiked up by .3% in December to 12.6%. December’s unemployment figures for the entire nation continued to move upward, in spite of the jobs created by the holiday season.

The consensus at the Waffle House is that the present state of affairs is the consequence of Barack Obama’s misguided policies.

Even among African-Americans and Hispanics the President receives mixed reactions as many blacks have come to the conclusion that Obama has failed to keep his many promises.

Citizens in this great nation are smart enough to know that an incoming President is not to be blamed for failures of policy…for the first 10 months or so of his term of office.  They may even be gracious enough to grant a new President up to a year.  But after that, it’s an entirely new ballgame.  At that point the President ‘owns’ the economy, the jobless rate, and any other perceived failures of the government.

And it is clear that the present crisis in the stock market, the housing and mortgage industry, the banking business, and the overall jobs market now belongs fully to Barack Obama–not George W. Bush.

The national figures confirm the feelings expressed by the folk at the Waffle House.

Scott Rasmussen’s latest Presidential tracking poll shows that fully 55% of Americans now disapprove of Obama’s job performance, and among Democrats he only manages to garner a 48% approval rating.  Obama’s overall numbers are dismal.  Only 24% strongly approve of his job performance while 43% strongly disapprove.

The Feds are continuing to shut down banks across the country as financial institutions from Florida to Washington State have failed.

Meanwhile, the Financial Times of Londonreports that Obama’s nightmare that began last week will only continue as support for Fed Chair Ben Bernacke deteriorates even among Democrats and as the overall  chances for the President to get his policies approved by Congress grow increasingly dim.

And even the Obama-friendly CNN was forced to admit that the thrill and excitement generated by Obama in the recent past is now gone.

The upshot of all of this is that the mood of the American people toward this President and his policies has changed drastically in a very short period of time, thus showing that the diverse group at the Columbia Waffle House is much smarter than we might think.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated today that she now doesn’t have the votes to pass the Senate healthcare bill.

According to sources in the House, a closed-door meeting was held today with the House leadership during which some strong-and sobering language was used to describe the status of healthcare and a number of other Obama initiatives in light of the pounding Democrats took in Massachusetts.

In short, many Democrats are spooked.

Blue dogs who previously won in red states are particularly vulnerable, and they are not willing to further damage their status with the voters by supporting ObamaCare.

Further, it is now becoming clear that voters in solidly blue states are beginning to turn against Democratic representatives who have held seats in Congress for years.  Even Barbara Boxer of California is reportedly seeing signs of trouble.

The amazing thing about all of this is that although the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate made all sorts of threats concerning passing the healthcare bill in spite of the Brown victory in Massachusetts, it appears that Brown’s vote won’t even be necessary.  This particular version of the healthcare bill is officially dead even before Brown is sworn in.

The significance of this cannot be overstated.

Democrats and their enablers among liberals, extremist Leftwing groups, Marxists, and Maoists came dangerously close to taking over 30% of the U.S. economy, reducing to rubble the finest healthcare system in the world, and rebuilding a medical conglomerate essentially operated by the government that would take allow mediocrity to trump excellence.

In fact, they could still approve some form of this monstrosity with their current overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate.  Patriots, be diligent.

But for now, the ObamaCare bill as presented in the Senate and approved by Barack Obama is dead.

A major change is already on the way in November as voters continue on their mission to clean house.  But that change could turn into an ouster of historic proportions if the Democrats dare to march forward with the extremist agenda of this President and this Congress.