Standing against big government and for the people!
Does anybody remember the words that began Obama's first lie as President?
January 21, 2009, the day after assuming office, Barack Obama told his senior staff and cabinet members: “Let me say it as simply as I can, 'Transparency' and the 'rule of law' will be the 'touchstones' of this presidency.”
Touchstone, was a incredibly strong stone used to test the purity of gold and silver that was left on the stone when rubbed with the metal. The 'merit' or 'truth' was then visible for those 'looking' to see that substance...Then you have the trust of those looking that comes into play which, honestly, could fall to corruption, because it was tempting to cheat 'coinage.'
It is the reason that gold and silver use to be measured by weight, instead of just coins, which could easily be 'shaved' to add up to loss, but not as visually seen, unless you took the time to make sure the person you put in charge was of an up-brought value taught shame, restitution and discipline to know the differences between good and evil. It is the main reason that ridges were added too coins, to take the fraud out of shaving coins.
'Merit' was a term we know under George Washington. An actual badge that was hard to earn, because it left no wavering value of immorality and no liars or thieves had a chance of receiving that value, because it was closely looked in to.
Designed by Washington in the form of a purple heart, it was intended as a military order for soldiers who exhibited, "not only instances of unusual gallantry in battle, but also extraordinary fidelity and essential service in any way.
History reflects only THREE BADGES OF MERIT were ever given out under the value George Washington commanded it in substance.
Transparency is only visible, with LIGHT, that shines through for all to see. Without that LIGHT, it is on no value and in truth is only transparent in word only...and unless the willingness to see with that value, lead with that value and teach that value...in truth transparency is darkness of words connected to those that bring darkness, which saying they bring light.
'Rule of law'...What does that mean? It is merely the influence and authority of LAW, within the societal values, constraint upon behavior and standards of those enforcing those laws.
In content and context, that enforcement relies on the individuals in that leadership, and why those put in that position have to be fully, visibly, spiritually, socially, morally, ethically and financially looked at.
Those that are given that authority, have to be of the value that is not looking for personal reward, but in a role of honor of volunteering in their duty to leave the next generation in better shape than the next.
So, if I look at the simple words that started of President Barack Obama, does ANYTHING ring true?
“Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”
Well, lets just look at that value in who visits President Obama alone...THAT says a lot about who he really is, what he really is doing and if those words he started off his Presidency, were that, merely words...
Written by Tom Fitton
“A president that doesn’t want Americans, under law, to know who his visitors are is a president who doesn’t want to be accountable.”
That’s what I said in a statement to the press in response to a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which found that U.S. Secret Service’s White House visitor logs for people visiting the president’s office are not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The disappointing ruling came in a Judicial Watch lawsuit against the United States Secret Service.
As you know, Judicial Watch has been fighting through three presidential administrations – Clinton, Bush and Obama – to force the release of White House visitor logs. Along the way we’ve been both threatened and offered what essentially was a bribe to give up the fight. Always we refuse.
Why so persistent? Here’s how I explained it in my press statement, which contemplates the harmful ramifications of the decision and signals Judicial Watch’s intent to fight on:
“The appellate court decision punches another hole in the Freedom of Information Act, the law which allows Americans to know what their government is up to. We are strongly considering an appeal.
“The legal gymnastics in this unprecedented decision shows that Obama is not the only one willing to rewrite laws without going through Congress. And this legal fight, in which Obama is fighting tooth and nail against full disclosure under law of his White House visitors, further exposes his big lie that his administration is the most transparent in history.”
You remember that great Obama proclamation, don’t you?
It came on January 21, 2009, the day after assuming office. Barack Obama then told his senior staff and cabinet members: “Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”
On September 4, 2009, the Obama White House upped the ante even further, proclaiming to the press: “Today, Obama took another important step toward a more open and transparent government by announcing a historic new policy to voluntarily disclose White House visitor access records.” He added, “Americans have a right to know whose voices are being heard in the policymaking process.”
And what have we gotten instead? Nothing but lying, obfuscation and stonewalling. Just ask our investigators – the best in the business – who must endure one trick after another, day after day, all intended to keep the activities of the Obama administration secret.
Obama administration officials hide behind bogus claims of “national security.” They manipulate the FOIA process. They send useless, completely redacted documents in response to requests. They claim no records exist at all, only to subsequently “find” them when courts intervene. They shift requests between agencies in a ridiculous shell game intended to drag out the process. And on and on and on.
With respect to the White House visitor logs, the administration made the ludicrous argument that government records are not government records at all. And the court, in an act of judicial activism, essentially rewrote FOIA law and bought it.
JW’s pursuit of the White House visitor logs has been a particularly important undertaking for the organization. Because these records go to the heart of the problem with respect to the rampant influence peddling that goes on in this city. Who has the ear of the president and what do they want? These records help answer this question.
In the case of the current administration, JW has demonstrated time and time again that radical leftist special interest groups from La Raza to the ACLU to the NAACP are zipping in and out of the Obama White House making their demands known, helping to craft policies that impact the country, and usually not for the better.
If the appellate court decision is allowed to stand, the Obama administration will have succeeded in turning the Freedom of Information Act on its head. Visitors to the Oval Office will come and go under an impenetrable cloak of secrecy. And Obama and his successors will be able to cut backroom deals with shadowy characters far removed from the essential element of public scrutiny. That is what’s at stake.
As Politico’s White House correspondent Josh Gerstein wrote in his report on the decision, “The ruling is also a defeat for an array of major news organizations, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and CREW. In amicus briefs, they asked the appeals court to uphold the lower court decision and find that the access records are subject to processing under FOIA.”
Gerstein is right on all counts – the ruling is a defeat for the wide array of groups he mentioned. But, he left out the most important group of all: the American people, who must now sit outside the White House gate wondering what is being covertly perpetrated within its confines.
There was one silver lining in the ruling. At least the appellate court did open the records of tens of thousands White House visits that Obama was trying to keep secret. But this is a small consolation if, in the end, this White House – or any White House – is able to conceal information about who is visiting the White House and for what purpose. In the meantime, because of this ruling we may not know who exactly is visiting this president until at least 12 years after he leaves office. Who knows, Chelsea Clinton could be president by then!
As I say, we are considering an appeal, and I will be sure to keep you posted.
Demand Republican leadership defund and delay ObamaCare.