Democrats Consider Eliminating 401 (k) Tax Breaks

(Compiler's note: Must read -- if we go down this road, it will impact about 60% of our working people. This is yet another form of economic terrorism. Now some elements of the U.S. Gov't want our 401K. rca)

from News Cycle Blog

Want a glimpse into what an Obama administration and Democratic-controlled Congress will look at in the area of tax policy? House Democrats are already considering an overhaul of the nation's $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.

Republicans are throwing around the "socialist" tag all over the campaign trail when referring to Sen. Barack Obama. But if the Democrats are even considering such a radical plan as to seize private pension accounts, it's hard not to look at Democrats in any other way.

James Pethokoukis of U.S. News & World Report wrote on a congressional hearing in the 401(k) matter:

House Democrats recently invited Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor at the New School of Social Research, to testify before a subcommittee on her idea to eliminate the preferential tax treatment of the popular retirement plans. In place of 401(k) plans, she would have workers transfer their dough into government-created "guaranteed retirement accounts" for every worker. The government would deposit $600 (inflation indexed) every year into the GRAs. Each worker would also have to save 5 percent of pay into the accounts, to which the government would pay a measly 3 percent return. Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, said that since "the savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."

The director of the Congressional Budget Office, Peter Orszag, also testified at the hearing and said that about $2 trillion in retirement savings has been lost over the past 15 months.

Workforce.com explains the rational in the move:

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”

Under the current 401(k) system, investors are charged relatively high retail fees, Ghilarducci said.

“I want to spend our nation’s dollar for retirement security better. Everybody would now be covered” if the plan were adopted, Ghilarducci said.

She has been in contact with Miller and McDermott about her plan, and they are interested in pursuing it, she said.

“This [plan] certainly is intriguing,” said Mike DeCesare, press secretary for McDermott.

Blogger Ed Morrissey of Hot Air notes "that means your employer can no longer write off their contributions to your 401(k), and your capital gains would be taxable year to year. In other words, it becomes just another investment or savings account, with no tax benefit at all, and no employer contribution. Instead, Uncle Sam would give you your “matching” funds — up to a whopping $600 per year! Whoopee!"

This huge disruption of Americans' retirement plans may be only one element of an Obama Administration's tax hike on workers. The Wall Street Journal notes that "the prospect of these tax increases is now hanging over the economy like a pall, as investors and businesses wonder where and how heavily an Obama Administration and Congress would strike."

Here's what the Journal reported Rep. Barney Frank as commenting recently on tax increases:

"I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat. ... I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of the money."

The Journal then concludes:

Federal budget deficits are not something we obsess about, but eventually this new spending has to be paid for, and Barney Frank's comments only underscore that big tax increases are coming. The prospect of these tax increases is now hanging over the economy like a pall, as investors and businesses wonder where and how heavily an Obama Administration and Congress would strike. The pall is likely to continue well into 2009, as millions of Americans delay their investment decisions until they know how much their after-tax returns are likely to fall.

Trail of Odd Anthrax Cells Led FBI to Army Scientist

By Joby Warrick

In late October 2001, lab technician Terry Abshire placed a tray of anthrax cells under a microscope and spotted something so peculiar she had to look twice. It was two weeks after the country's worst bioterrorism attack, and Abshire, like others at the Army's Fort Detrick biodefense lab, was caught up in a frenzied search for clues that could help lead to the culprit. Down the hall, Bruce E. Ivins, the respected vaccine specialist, was looking, too.

Abshire focused her lens on a moldlike clump. Anthrax bacteria were growing here, but some of the cells were odd: strange shapes, strange textures, strange colors. These were mutants, or "morphs," genetic deviants scattered among the ordinary anthrax cells like chocolate chips in a cookie batter.

Unknowingly, Abshire had discovered a key to solving the anthrax case. But it would take nearly six years to develop the technology to allow FBI investigators to use it. ....

Who Wants to Be President?

(Compiler's note: Must read and consider .... rca)

It would be fitting symbolism for the next President to wear a crash helmet on Inauguration Day.

He will inherit an economy that will be stuck in either a depression or a slow grinding recession that no economic gimmick or "redistribution" will help.

And he will likely be thrown into a Middle East war between Israel, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and the United States.

Americans aren't weak and passive fatalists who go quietly to the slaughter. We fight to solve our national problems and overcome obstacles, no matter how great. But the die has been cast on this Wall Street meltdown, and now the brightest minds on the economy see long-term devastation ahead. Arthur Laffer, the father of the Reagan recovery writes in today's Wall Street Journal that "The Age of Prosperity is Over." He writes, "Financial panics, if left alone, rarely cause much damage to the real economy, output, employment or production." But government intervention does real damage. It was the case after the 1929 crash, and Laffer thinks it will be the case now, with the Bush-Pelosi-Paulson bailout attempt.

How bad could things get? Many younger Americans can't remember bad economic times, because they have never experienced them. Laffer reminds us that during the period of recession and stagflation between the Kennedy and Reagan booms, a period which constituted most of my childhood, "The average annual real return for U.S. assets compounded annually was -6% per year for 16 years." Between 1929 and 1932, the New York Times Index of stocks, the equivalent of today's Dow, contracted some 89%. Unemployment grew to 25% or more, and didn't fall below 10 percent until 1941, with the beginning of World War Two.

Ouch.

Economics guru Nouriel Roubini, the NYU professor dubbed "Dr. Doom" for precisely predicting the current Wall Street meltdown, now predicts "hundreds of hedge funds will go bust and stock markets may soon have to shut - perhaps for as long as a week - in order to stem the panic selling now sweeping the world." Roubani told the London Times that "the world economy was 'at a breaking point'. He believes the stock markets are now 'essentially in free fall' and 'we are reaching the point of sheer panic'."

Add to this carnival of gloom, a Middle East war. This one is easier to explain. An Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear installations in the months ahead is a military and geopolitical certainty, with or without a "green light" from an American president. If Iran's nuclear program is not stopped by diplomatic means, Israel will hit it, and not just with a few bunker busters. Commando teams will have to be dropped because the installations are so far underground. It will be a big operation, and will trigger an Iranian and Hezbollah offensive against Israel, probably sucking in Syria, especially if Damascus senses that Israel can be delivered a knockout blow.

Neither McCain nor Obama will be able to stop any of this. The next President will have to wear it.

An Open Letter to the Beneficiaries of America's Military Prowess

(Compiler's note: A must read. rca)

by Maj. W. Thomas Smith, Jr.

Dear reader,

I’m writing this in direct-address fashion because – as we near the 233^rd birthday of our Marine Corps (born in a Philadelphia alehouse on Nov. 10, 1775) and Veterans Day (born of the armistice ending World War I, Nov. 11, 1918, exactly 90 years ago) – this is as much an appeal as it is an opinion piece.

I’ve often said, far too many Americans – through no fault of their own – take our military for granted.

Those who have never served in uniform – particularly those who have never slogged through the mud with a rifle nor known what it feels like to be awakened by ‘incoming’ – just sort of assume that America dominates all comers militarily because America has money (yeah, well, at least we used to) and superior technology. And we can be sure that money and technology do count in the successful prosecution of war.

But it’s much more.

America has been winning all of its wars since the colonial era, including Vietnam, which we clearly won militarily, but lost in Washington and on the broader homefront (we’ll save that for another discussion). But we have been winning – often against great odds – primarily for one reason: AMERICAN MILITARY TRADITION.

Unfortunately, too many of us take military tradition for granted because we incorrectly assume that tradition is “nice,” but largely insignificant.

I don’t condemn those who believe such. Most people simply have no frame of reference to appreciate just how amazingly efficient the American military is despite its being an arm of the far-too-often inefficient federal government.

But trust me, our military prowess – that prowess of the individual soldier, sailor, airman, Marine, and Coast Guardsman who has never failed to keep the wolf away from the door — is a direct result of our military tradition.

U.S. Marines, for instance, crushed the insurgents during the bloody battle of Fallujah (Nov.–Dec. 2004) and they did so in close-quarters fighting — often tooth-to-eyeball — where much of our technological wizardry was unable to be fully brought to bear.

Those young men were able to win against the enemy because they were Marines. They knew they were holding an unmatched reputation in trust. They had to fight and fight well. After all, they were standing on the shoulders of those giants of men who had successfully battled the enemy in places with names like Hue City, Khe Sanh, Chosin, Iwo Jima, Tarawa, Guadalcanal, Belleau Wood, Harper’s Ferry, Chapultepec (the halls of Montezuma), Quallah Batto, the stronghold and shores of Tripoli, and in nearly every other “clime and place” stretching back to the seaborne slugfests of Captain John Paul Jones’ leathernecks during the American Revolution.

So why all this talk of military tradition?

Because the greatest pillars of our military tradition are our Medal of Honor recipients – those combatants from all services who have received our nation’s highest award for bravery in action – and our greatest living pillars are our living recipients of that award. Their average age is now 75 years, and there are now less than 100 of them still with us. Most recipients are killed during the actions for which they receive the award. In fact, all who have received the award for actions since the end of the Vietnam War have died in those actions.

Now to my personal appeal to you, the reader:

The Medal of Honor Society will hold its annual convention – hosted by the S.C. State Guard Foundation and the Citadel – in Charleston, S.C., Sept. 2010, and I urge your support of this convention now as it will serve to promote public awareness of the Medal of Honor, our living recipients, and at-the-same-time infuse our military tradition with the lifeblood so necessary to future battlefield success.

We Americans are the most generous people on earth. We’re also frugal and savvy: We expect a return on investment, which is one of the reasons I know many of you may not yet be sold on the idea of the value of investing in something like military tradition. But I can assure you – as one who has served his country in-and-out of uniform for years – America’s military tradition is not only a priceless commodity and one that appreciates in value; I am convinced it is critical to the continued security of this nation.

That’s why I’m asking you to support our military and our American military tradition through this noble endeavor. Please visit medalofhonorconvention.com for more information and sponsorship opportunities available. You are not only going to be supporting the very foundation of our military prowess, but you will be furthering an awareness of America’s greatest heroes in the purest sense of the word.

Semper Fidelis,

W. Thomas Smith Jr.

Obama Advisor Praises Iran

by Ed Lasky

Well, is it that hard to believe in this day and age that a major American newspaper offers up an op-ed filled with praise for Iran? This would be Friday's Boston Globe in an op-ed written by Lawrence Korb and Laura Conley, both of whom work for the liberal minded Center for American Progress.

By the way, the fact that Korb has been identified as a key foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama is completely unmentioned – a major journalistic lapse but not a surprising one by the New York Times-owned Boston Globe.

Korb and Conley look upon Iranian efforts to help topple the Taliban as proof of the potential for Iran to work with America in bringing about some sort of Pax Persia in the region. This is a fallacy. Iran opposed the Taliban because the Taliban – a Sunni extremist group - hated the Shiite Persians that were on its border and hated the Shiites within Afghanistan. The Taliban murdered Iranian regime officials. The downfall of the Taliban was in the interest of the regime and their help when America sought to oust the Taliban was based strictly on self-interest. In the diplomatic realm, nations don't have permanent friends, they have permanent interests. The interests of the Iranian regime is regional hegemony and the acquisition of nuclear bombs.

Korb and Conley blame Bush for failure to reach out to the Iranians. This argument falls flat. In fact, various Bush officials have sought to reach out to the regime (as even the op-ed mentions in passing) but have been rebuffed – as have a long line of other Presidents who have tried to establish relations with the Iranians. This is a fact that the op-ed ignores.

The op-ed also seems to blame Bush for the progress of the Iranian nuclear program. This is absurd. The program did not start under Bush (and was actually temporarily put on hold in the wake of our invasion of Iraq) but had its origins going back to the 1980s. The program has progressed apace – under Democrat and Republican Presidents. We have sought, along with the United Nations and our European allies, to work with the Iranians to curb their nuclear program in return for various "carrots" offered to them. The result? Rebuff after rebuff, as the centrifuges spin away.

What is especially striking in this op-ed is the complete silence regarding the nature of the Iranian regime. One would hope that a foreign policy expert close to Barack Obama would at least recognize how important it is to consider the nature of a regime when advocating diplomatic outreach. Where is the recognition that the regime is – and has long been – designated as the number one terror-sponsoring nation in the world (as Bill Clinton so designated Iran)? Where is the recognition that Iran has been helping kill Americans in Iraq and has done so in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, or the awareness that Iranian proxies have killed innocent Argentineans, Lebanese, Israelis and for that matter Iranians (a regime that hangs children and gays and brutalizes women wins praise from Korb and Conley?).

That little matter of denying the Holocaust while openly boasting of plans to bring about another one? The theological and apocalyptic musings of its leaders (not just President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad), the talk of halos and apocalypse spoken by Ahmadinejad from the podium of the United Nations to bring about the return of the missing Imam? Sheer piffle, not worth mentioning.

We will see more of these efforts to burnish Iran in the days ahead. The Iran lobby is stepping up efforts in Washington. The Persian red carpet is being rolled out.

Welcome to the future of our foreign relations under Barack Obama. Much like his campaign, it involves dreams and fantasy.

Petition Requests Presidential Candidate Prove Eligibility for Presidency

(Compiler's note: A must read. Please do your patriotic duty and send an e-mail. rca)

We urge all of you to contact your elected officials via email, U.S. Mail and/or by phone to deliver a like-minded message. This is not a partisan matter; rather, it is an effort to protect our Constitution. Qualifications to serve as the U.S. president must be met, requirements must be satisfied, and unless we insist on this, we are not doing our civic duty to defend our sacred U.S. Constitution.

You can sign a petition, generate a letter and add a closing statement by clicking here.

The letter addresses this Constitutional concern by covering these issues.

Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads: "No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States."

We would ask that both presidential candidates submit proof of their natural-born American citizenship. John McCain has addressed this issue, demonstrating that he was born in the Panama Canal Zone while his father was serving in the U.S. military. The Canal Zone was a U.S. territory at the time of his birth. Case closed.

On the other hand, on the web and in the media, there are numerous allegations surrounding Barack Obama's claim of natural birth in the U.S., all raising suspicion and doubt as to Obama's actual place of birth and thus qualification to run for the American presidency. So far, these allegations have not been addressed. Some of the assertions to which Philip Berg, an attorney who has filed suit in the Pennsylvania courts to request that Obama prove his eligibility, claims Obama "admitted" (due to no response within the allotted time period) and which one can find in Philip Berg’s suit are: Barack Obama was born in Mombassa, Kenya in 1961 while his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was married to Barack Obama Sr., a Kenyan; when his mother, divorced from Obama Sr., moved to Indonesia and married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian, Obama was adopted by Soetoro and became an Indonesian citizen; while in Indonesia, Obama had his name changed to Barry Soetoro; Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 under an Indonesian passport when Pakistan was a no travel zone for Americans. Additionally, there is an allegation that Obama's Kenyan grandmother claims that Obama was born in Kenya; Muammar Gadhafi, leader of Libya, has publicly claimed that Obama was born in Kenya and studied in Muslim schools in Indonesia.

A lawsuit in Honolulu in the First District Court is seeking a court order to open Obama's birth records. Obama has thus far neglected a Freedom of Information request for the records at two hospitals in Hawaii.

It’s reported that lawsuits in Washington, Georgia, California, Florida, New York and Connecticut are seeking state Superior Courts to force the states' Secretary of State, as the chief state elections officer, to perform their state constitutional duties to require original certifying birth records from Mr. Obama that would verify his birth in Hawaii.

Philip Berg's months-long lawsuit in Federal Court in Philadelphia reached a dramatic plateau as Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) failed to respond to the court that Mr. Obama is not a natural born U.S. Citizen and therefore not qualified to run for office of President of the U.S. Berg believes they “admitted” to Obama's non-qualification by their failure to respond to a 30-day court ordered discovery in which Obama and the DNC were ordered to answer a petition by Berg. Mr. Berg has stated that if the Federal court chooses to dismiss he will appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. This has now come to pass.

These allegations will not go away until Mr. Obama produces proof to State and federal authorities. If he will not do so voluntarily he must be compelled by every means available.

If our elected representatives exercise their obligations as servants of the People and it turns out Mr. Obama is qualified, then there is no harm done. If they choose not to act on behalf of the people and it is proven that Mr. Obama is unqualified, they should carefully consider the personal political implications they may suffer due to their inaction.

Please go to the petition and do your civic duty today.

Brought to you by the editors and research staff of FamilySecurityMatters.org.

Obama's birth certificate sealed by Hawaii governor

(Compiler's note: If true that he is NOT a natural citizen, even if elected, Obama can NOT serve per the U.S. Constitution.)

By Jerome R. Corsi

Gov. Linda Lingle, R-Hawaii

HONOLULU, Hawaii – Although the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama's birth certificate has become a focus of intense speculation – and even several lawsuits – WND has learned that Hawaii's Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate's birth certificate under seal and instructed the state's Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.

The governor's office officially declined a request made in writing by WND in Hawaii to obtain a copy of the hospital-generated original birth certificate of Barack Obama.

"It does not appear that Dr. Corsi is within any of these categories of persons with a direct and tangible interest in the birth certificate he seeks," wrote Roz Makuala, manager of constituent services in the governor's office, in an e-mailed response to a WND request seeking the information.

Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or "registrant" according to the legal description from the governor's office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant.

WND was told the official reason for denial of access to Obama's birth certificate would be authority granted pursuant to Section 338-18 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, a provision the anonymous source claimed was designed to prevent identity theft.

Still, the source told WND confidentially the motivation for withholding the original birth certificate was political, although the source refused to disclose whether there was any information on the original birth certificate that would prove politically embarrassing to Obama.

Get the book that started it all, Jerome Corsi's "The Obama Nation," autographed by the author, exclusively from WND's online store for the amazing low price of just $4.95.

The source also refused to answer WND's question whether the original document on file with the Department of Health was a hospital-generated birth certificate or a registration of birth that may have been filed subsequent to the birth.

The anonymous source made clear the Hawaii Department of Health would immediately release Obama's original birth certificate, provided Obama requested the document be released, but the Department of Heath has received no such request from the senator or from anyone acting officially on his behalf.

WND also found on microfilm in the Honolulu downtown public library a notice published under the "Births, Marriages, Deaths" section of the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser for August 13, 1961, on page B-6, noting: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack II Obama. 6085 Kalanianaole-Hwy, son, Aug. 4."

In searching through the birth notices of the Honolulu Advertiser for 1961, WND found many birth notices were published between one and two weeks after the date of birth listed.

The notice in the Honolulu Advertiser does not list the hospital where the Obama son was born or the doctor who delivered the baby.

In a startling development, Obama's Kenyan grandmother has reportedly alleged she witnessed Obama's birth at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

Friday, U.S. Federal judge Richard Barclay Surrick, a Clinton appointee, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Pennsylvania attorney Phillip J. Berg who alleged Obama was not a U.S. "natural born" citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency under the specifications of the U.S. Constitution, under Article II, Section 1.

Berg told WND last week he does not have a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama that he alleges exists.

In Kenya, WND was told by government authorities that all documents concerning Obama were under seal until after the U.S. presidential election on November 4.

The Obama campaign website entitled "Fight the Smears" posts a state of Hawaii "Certificate of Live Birth" which is obviously not the original birth certificate generated by the hospital where Obama reportedly was born.

"Fight the Smears" declares, "The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America."

Although the Obama campaign could immediately put an end to all the challenges by simply producing the candidate's original birth certificate, it has not done so. And the "Fight the Smears" website offers no explanation as to why Obama has refused to request, and make public, an original hospital-generated birth certificate which the Hawaii Department of Health may possess.

Quietly, quietly Australia conducts one Islamic terrorist trial after another…

from Winds of Jihad

Jihad by arson the next big thing?

* But remember: Islam is a “Religion of Peace”, Jihad is “inner struggle”,- its only a “tiny minority of extremists”- we cannot paint all Muslims with one brush and Islam is not a monolith and….

AAP

SIX Sydney men accused of conspiring to commit a terrorist act were strong adherents of the Islamic faith, driven by religion and ideology to carry out violent jihad against the Australian public, potential jurors have been told.

* Terror accused ‘planned fiery jihad’

* Nation at risk from ‘dirty bomb

Crown Prosecutor Richard Maidment SC today addressed the first 220 potential jurors for the NSW Supreme Court trial at the Parramatta court complex.

Bradley Umar Sariff Baladjam, 31, Khaled Cheikho, 35, Moustafa Cheikho, 31, Mohamed Ali Elomar, 43, Abdul Rakib Hasan, 39, and Mohammed Omar Jamal, 24, are accused of conspiring to commit acts in preparation for a terrorist act.

Mr Maidment said the men were conspiring to carry out acts of violence, including the detonation of explosives and use of firearms, between July 2004 and November 2005.

“The crown alleges that each of these men were apparently strong adherents to the Islamic faith and were each motivated by a particular religious, political or ideological cause - being the pursuit of violent jihad - which each of the accused apparently believed was founded in the teachings of the Islamic faith,” he told the jury pool.

“In essence, that meant that the accused were motivated to carry out violent activities against members of the Australian community as a whole, in pursuit of their ideals.”

Mr Maidment said the kind of terrorist acts contemplated by the men included the detonation of an explosive device, or devices, or the use of weapons.

The preparatory acts alleged included obtaining or seeking to obtain large quantities of firearms and ammunition, and significant quantities of chemicals which Mr Maidment said were for the purpose of making explosives “capable of causing substantial damage and loss of life.”

The judge, Anthony Whealy, urged the potential jurors not to offer themselves for service unless they were certain they could bring an unbiased mind to the trial.

“Each of the accused is entitled, and emphatically entitled, to the presumption of innocence,” Justice Whealy told jurors in the assembly room via videolink from the court.

“The fact that each is an adherent to the Muslim faith cannot be something that is allowed to raise any aspect of bias.

“It is important to repeat and stress that those who wish to serve on the jury should offer themselves for service only if they are able to bring an unbiased approach to persons of the Muslim faith.

“Similarly, if you are of the Muslim faith and harbour resentment to non-Muslims, you should not offer yourself for service.”

The jury selection process is expected to last the remainder of the week, with Justice Whealy telling the potential jurors the trial could take up to a year and involve 700 witnesses.

Feds Break Up Skin Heads Plot To Assassinate Obama

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two white supremacists allegedly plotted to go on a national killing spree, shooting and decapitating black people and ultimately targeting Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, federal authorities said Monday.

In all, the two men whom officials describe as neo-Nazi skinheads planned to kill 88 people - 14 by beheading, according to documents unsealed in U.S. District Court in Jackson, Tenn. The numbers 88 and 14 are symbolic in the white supremacist community.

The spree, which initially targeted an unidentified predominantly African-American school, was to end with the two men driving toward Obama, "shooting at him from the windows," the court documents show[....]

Sheriffs' deputies in Crockett County, Tenn., arrested the two suspects - Daniel Cowart, 20, of Bells, Tenn., and Paul Schlesselman 18, of Helena-West Helena, Ark. - Oct. 22 on unspecified charges. "Once we arrested the defendants and suspected they had violated federal law, we immediately contacted federal authorities," said Crockett County Sheriff Troy Klyce.

Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered

Another Obama special -- Must read -- listen!!