Observations of the Presidents and First Ladies

 

These are from Secret Service agent Ronald Kessler's book about his observations of the Presidents and First Ladies are pretty much the image they projected while in office but some or very interesting.  I especially like the last one about Gen. McChrystal’s response to Obama. Scroll down to read what Kessler thinks of the presidents he served. Interesting, but not surprising!
  

JOHN & JACQUELINE KENNEDY
*A philanderer of the highest order.*
*She ordered the kitchen help to save all the left-over wine

from State dinners, mixed it with fresh wine and served again

during the next White House occasion.*
 
LYNDON & LADYBIRD JOHNSON
*Another philanderer of the highest order. In addition, LBJ was as crude as the day is long. Both JFK and LBJ kept a lot of women in the White House for extramarital affairs and both had set up early warning systems to  alert them if/when their wives were nearby. Both were promiscuous and oversexed men.*
*She was either naive or just pretended to not know about her husband's many liaisons.*

RICHARD & PAT NIXON
*A "moral" man but very odd, weird, paranoid.

He had a horrible relationship with his family

and was almost a recluse.* She was quiet most of  the time.*

   
SPIRO  AGNEW
*Nice, decent man. Everyone in the Secret Service was surprised by his downfall.*

GERALD & BETTY FORD
*A true gentlemen who treated the Secret Service with respect and dignity.

He had a great sense of humor.  *She drank a lot!*

JIMMY & ROSALYN CARTER
*A complete phony who would  portray one picture of himself to public and very different in private e.g. would be shown carrying his own luggage but the suitcases were  always empty. He kept empty ones just for photo ops. He wanted people to see him as pious and a non-drinker but he and his family drank alcohol a lot! He had disdain for the Secret Service and was very irresponsible with the "football" with nuclear codes. He didn't think it was a big deal and would keep military aides at a great distance. Often did not acknowledge the presence of Secret Service personnel assigned to serve him.*
*She mostly did her own thing.*


RONALD & NANCY REAGAN
*The real deal, moral, honest, respectful and dignified. They treated Secret Service and everyone else with respect and honor, thanked everyone all the time. He took the time to know everyone on a personal level. One favorite story was early in  his Presidency when he came out of his room with a pistol tucked on his hip. The agent in charge asked: "Why the pistol, Mr. President?" He replied, "In case you boys can't get the job done, I can help." It was common for him to carry a pistol. When he met with Gorbachev, he had a pistol in his briefcase. 
*She was very nice but very protective of the President and the Secret Service was often caught in the middle. She tried hard to control what he ate. He would say to the agent, "Come on, you gotta help me out." The Reagan's drank wine during State dinners and special occasions only otherwise they shunned alcohol. The Secret Service could count on one hand the times they were served wine during family dinner. For all the fake bluster of the Carters, the Reagan's were the ones who lived life as genuinely moral people.*

GEORGE H. & BARBARA BUSH
*Extremely kind and considerate, always  respectful. Took great care in making sure the agents' comforts were taken care of. They even brought them meals. One time she brought warm clothes to agents standing outside at Kennebunkport. One was given a warm hat and, when he tried to say "no thanks" even though he was obviously freezing, the President said "Son, don't argue with the First Lady. Put the hat on." He was the most prompt of the Presidents. He ran the White House like a well-oiled machine.*
*She ruled the house and spoke her mind.*


BILL & HILLARY CLINTON
*Presidency was one giant party. Not trustworthy. He was nice mainly because he wanted everyone to like him but to him life is just one big game and party. Everyone knows about his sexuality.*
*She is another phony. Her personality would change the instant cameras were near. She hated, with open disdain the military and Secret Service. She was another who felt people were there to serve her. She was always trying to keep tabs on Bill Clinton.*


ALBERT  GORE
*An egotistical ass who was once overheard by his Secret Service detail lecturing his son that he needed to do better in school or he would end up like these guys, pointing to the agents.*

 
GEORGE W. & LAURA BUSH
*The Secret Service loved him and Laura Bush. He was also the most physically in shape who had a very strict workout regimen. The Bushes made sure their entire administrative and household staff understood that they were to respect and be considerate of the Secret Service.*
*She was one of the nicest First Ladies, if not the nicest. She never had any harsh word to say about anyone.*


*BARACK & MICHELLE OBAMA
*Clinton all over again - hates the military and looks down on the Secret Service. He is egotistical and cunning. He looks you in the eye and appears to agree with you but  turns around and does the opposite. He has temper tantrums.*
*She is a complete bitch who basically hates anybody who is not black, hates the military and looks at the Secret Service as servants.*

A TRUE STORY ABOUT General McChrystal's resignation in Obama's office from General McChrystal's book  NEVER STAND IN LINE AGAIN:

Some men carry and handle their diplomacy better than  others. When former U.S. Military commander in  Afghanistan, General McChrystal, was called into the Oval Office by Barack Obama, he knew things weren't going to go well when the President accused him of not supporting him in his political role as President.

"It's not my job to support you as a politician, Mr. President, it's my job to support you as Commander-in-Chief," McChrystal replied, and he handed Obama his resignation.
 
Not satisfied with accepting McChrystal's resignation, the President made a cheap parting shot. "I bet when I die  you'll be happy to pee on my grave."
 
The General saluted and said, "Mr. President, I always told myself after leaving the Army I'd never stand in line again."

4 Simple Questions about Obama

1.. Back in 1961 people of color were called 'Negroes.' So how can the Obama 'birth certificate' state he is "African-American" when the term wasn't even used at that time ?

...

2.. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961 & Lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, Right ? At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged

25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in "Kenya , East Africa ".

This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his father's birth. How could Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet Exist? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate". (check it below)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...

3.. On the Birth Certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital". This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called "KauiKeolani Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani Maternity Home", respectively. The name did not change to Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978? (CHECK IT BELOW)

http://http/http/www.kapiolani.org/women-and-ch......

Why hasn't this been discussed in the major media ?

Funny cartoon explaining "If ObamaCare was like buying coffee.

Very simple way of understanding this crazy scam call Obama Care
You will like the video!

The stroy behind the Obamacare website

Michelle Obama's Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the no-bid contract to build the disastrous Obamacare website.

Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of '85, is senior vice president at Canadian company CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the so far costing $678 million Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov.

Townes-Whitley and his Princeton classmate Michelle Obama are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

Toni Townes, Pricenton '85, is a onetime policy analyst with the General Accounting Office and previously served in the Peace Corps in Gabon , West Africa .

George Schindler, the president of the CGI Federal's Canadian parent CGI Group, became an Obama 2012 campaign donor after his company gained the Obamacare website contract.

________________________________________________

Soooooo...........

Let's see if we can connect the dots here ...

1.) No American companies considered for building Obamacare's website;

2.) CGI Federal was chosen by God knows which criteria and hired;

3.) CGI Federal was given a NO BID contract worth $93 million;

4.) A top executive at CGI Federal was a Princeton classmate of Michelle Obama;

5.) Previous company's experience was building a gun registry for the Canadian government;

6.) CGI Group was fired by Canadian Government for overruns that cost Canada $100 million;

4.) CGI has continued its practice of overruns as the Obamacare enrollment website has gone from $98 million to costing U.S. tax payers $678 million, and it's still going up.

Does this bother anybody else besides me? 

Government steals your home under "Free Obamacare"

Fine print: State can seize your assets to pay for care after you’re forced into Medicaid by Obamacare
POSTED AT 9:41 PM ON DECEMBER 16, 2013 BY MARY KATHARINE HAM


My, this is an unpleasant consequence of Obamacare. I’m not going to call it unintended because in its current form, it potentially earns a bunch of money for states, so I’m pretty sure that’s intentional. What I think is unintentional is anyone noticing this is what they’re up to.

But the Seattle Times noticed:

It wasn’t the moonlight, holiday-season euphoria or family pressure that made Sophia Prins and Gary Balhorn, both 62, suddenly decide to get married.

It was the fine print.

As fine print is wont to do, it had buried itself in a long form — Balhorn’s application for free health insurance through the expanded state Medicaid program. As the paperwork lay on the dining-room table in Port Townsend, Prins began reading.

She was shocked: If you’re 55 or over, Medicaid can come back after you’re dead and bill your estate for ordinary health-care expenses.

The way Prins saw it, that meant health insurance via Medicaid is hardly “free” for Washington residents 55 or older. It’s a loan, one whose payback requirements aren’t well advertised. And it penalizes people who, despite having a low income, have managed to keep a home or some savings they hope to pass to heirs, Prins said.
So, here’s the deal. There used to be a provision whereby the state could recuperate funds spent on a Medicaid patient post-55 years old from whatever assets he owned. So, a low-income individual in nursing home care after age 55 might pass away and his kids would find out the family home or car of whatever he had to his name had to be bought back from the state if they wanted it. It’s called estate recovery, and sounds pretty shady if it’s not boldly advertised as the terms for Medicaid enrollment, which is most definitely is not.

Before the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, there weren’t that many people in Medicaid who had much in the way of assets for seizing. But now that Medicaid enrollment requirements have been relaxed, more people with assets but low income are joining the program or being forced into it. For instance, a couple in their 50s who, say, retired early after losing jobs in the bad economy may have assets but show a very low income. Under Obamacare, if their income is low enough to qualify for Medicaid, they must enroll in Medicaid unless they want to buy totally unsubsidized coverage in the now-inflated individual market. As teh Times notes, this is no small difference:

People cannot receive a tax credit to subsidize their purchase of a private health plan if their income qualifies them for Medicaid, said Bethany Frey, spokeswoman for the Washington Health Benefit Exchange.

But they could buy a health plan without a tax credit, she added.

For someone age 55 to 64 at the Medicaid-income level — below $15,856 a year — it’s quite a jump from free Medicaid health insurance to an unsubsidized individual plan. Premiums in King County for an age 60 non-tobacco user for the most modest plan run from $451 to $859 per month.
The couple in the Times story was able to marry, combine their incomes, and get out of the Medicaid trap. Others will not be so lucky, and may not even read the fine print:

Prins, an artist, and Balhorn, a retired fisherman-turned-tango instructor, separately qualified for health insurance through Medicaid based on their sole incomes.

But if they were married, they calculated, they could “just squeak by” with enough income to qualify for a subsidized health plan — and avoid any encumbrance on the home they hope to leave to Prins’ two sons.
For no one else in the world is it a-okay to give low-income people a loan that might endanger their family’s assets and not even clearly inform them they’re getting a loan.

This Daily Kos diarist has a nice write-up (I know) on the toll this could take on lower and middle-class people looking for relief and getting what amounts to a surprise predatory loan instead:

We haven’t had lots of people younger than 65 on Medicaid, because in most states simply earning less than the Federal Poverty Level did not qualify one for Medicaid.

And we haven’t had many people with lots of assets on Medicaid, because in most places you have to have less than around $2400 to your name before Medicaid will cover you. You can keep your house and your car, but Medicaid reserves the right to put liens on them and take them when you die.

But now we have the Affordable Care Act, and its expectation that everyone in the lower tier of income will end up in the Medicaid system. To accomplish this, they have dropped the asset test. So now we will have lots of people ages 55-64, who have assets but not a lot of income right now, for whatever reason, on Medicaid.

The kicker of it is, if you make the right amount to qualify for a subsidized health insurance plan, your costs are going to be shared and subsidized by the government. But if you go on Medicaid, you owe the entire amount that Medicaid spends on you from the day you turn 55…

How will this play out? No one knows, as far as I can tell. But it is easy to see how this could become a real problem. If someone is low income and goes on Medicaid, will Medicaid put a lien on their house? If they need to sell their house and move, will they then lose all their equity in paying off the lien? Will people get hit with bills and liens for many thousands of dollars, even if they were healthy and hardly ever went to the doctor?
The fact that this is being treated with seriousness at Kos is an indication of how large a liability it could be for this government program. Washington is scrambling to change the law. No doubt other states will start looking at their implementation of this part of Obamacare. But there will be people caught unaware that their houses effectively belong to the government because the government forced them into Medicaid coverage. You’re welcome!

Interesting, if not just a little bit scary! Who is Obama?

OBAMA DOJ CLAIMS INTERNATIONAL TREATIES TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

OBAMA DOJ CLAIMS INTERNATIONAL TREATIES 

TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

Posted 10.31.13 by Greg Campbell, TPNN Political Analyst

As Americans argue over Obamacare, illegal immigration and a variety of other important issues, the very real threat of Second Amendment infringements continues to creep as anti-gun rights advocates seek to approve the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

The United Nations General Assembly approved the ATT earlier this year, which has been designed to regulate the traffic and possession of weapons between countries. The treaty has been signed by Secretary of State John Kerry, however the international treaty must be approved by the Senate in order to be recognized.

While Kerry and others try to gain support for the treaty, Tea Party Senator Ted Cruz warns that the Obama Administration is already making the argument that an international treaty supersedes the rights outlined in the Constitution.

Justice Department attorneys are arguing before the Supreme Court a position that undermines American sovereignty. Obama’s Department of Justice is arguing that a law that abides by an international treaty adopted by the U.S. would allow the federal government to prosecute a case that would otherwise be handled by state or local authorities.

The case in question is Bond v. United States, where a woman allegedly used chemical agents for revenge against a woman with whom her husband had an affair. While the use of a weapon would normally fall under the state’s jurisdiction to prosecute, the federal government has gotten involved and seeks to undermine state sovereignty by claiming that the woman is in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, the international agreement that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad has been accused of violating.

While the woman’s actions may be heinous, the DOJ’s position, if affirmed, would place the federal government in a position to use international treaties to prosecute American citizens.

“The Constitution created a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers,” Cruz told said in an interview. “The Supreme Court should not interpret the treaty power in a manner that undermines this bedrock protection of individual liberty.”

Bond’s lawyer similarly agrees, stating,

“The problem here is precisely that Congress, rather than implementing the treaty consistent with our constitutional system of federalism, enacted a statute that, if construed to apply to petitioner’s conduct, would violate basic structural guarantees and exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”

The issue is much larger than who gets to prosecute the defendant. If this position is allowed to stand, then the federal government is in a position to invoke treaties that run contrary to our constitiuional protections.

If anti-gun rights supporters can garner the necessary votes in the Senate to pass the ATT, then the ATT can be used to restrict American Second Amendment liberties under the authority of the international treaty.

The treaty calls for regulation of firearms and while it’s supporters have claimed that the treaty does not violate our Constitutional rights, the very nature of the treaty’s enforcement suggests otherwise as a registry would be necessary to enforce the provisions of the treaty to crack down on gun trafficking. As the U.N. is largely concerned with where the firearms ultimately end up, it would be impossible to track firearm usage without noting who bought each firearm and when.

Further, the treaty would afford the international community greater powers to regulate arms imports and exports, conceivably allowing for the barring of import or export of certain classes of firearms to and from the U.S. that “endanger women and children.”

With such broad, overreaching outlines as to what the treaty does and does not do, it quite naturally has gun rights advocates worried. The international community is largely unfriendly to the uniquely American concept that firearm ownership is a right and that government is not only allowed to permit such a right, it is duty-bound to uphold and protect that right.

“The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “This treaty threatens individual firearm ownership with an invasive registration scheme. The NRA will continue working with the United States Senate to oppose ratification of the ATT.”

Is Obama a Usurper?

Posted on Friday, October 25th, 2013 at 11:03 pm.by: Thomas Jefferson

via The Free Patriot
by Brandon Walker

What if the whole Military purge had a bit of self-preservation to it? What if the US Military has grounds to arrest President Obama, not under impeachment, but under usurper status?

This may not be as far-fetched as it seems. In fact, it has some very prominent figures looking at the idea. The argument seems centralized on two very key points. The first is that under the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, there was a fail safe built-in, a third grand jury. There was a citizens grand jury. The last time it was used properly was 1935. It states that there is a third grand jury specifically for corruption. Obama has already been indicted by several of these grand juries. Here is one:

There are several from the NAACP, the Black Caucus, Freedom Watch, and others from as early as 2009 to as late as 2013. The trick is who has the jurisdiction to enforce it?

The second relies on if Obama is a Usurper. A Usurper by definition is to seize and hold power (position, authority, etc) by force and without legal right or t to commit forcible or illegal seizure of an office, power, etc.; encroach (Dictionary.com). There are several videos on that as well. Here is one from WND:

We know he gave up his US Citizenship for Indonesia. Forget the Birther movement, did he ever apply to get his US Citizenship back? We don’t know because he sealed his records. If he is a Usurper, it would be the Military’s duty to remove him from that position. Is that why he is purging the Military at a rapid rate?

With that thought in mind comes a well researched account by a person calling themselves watchdog. It is very informative.

It is obviously clear. President Obama is a threat not only to the American people. He is destabilizing the United States every way he can. He did this paying for Treyvon protest trying to start race wars as one example. He is a threat to world peace. He has to be neutralized before he takes the world into an age of war and destruction. Now how can that be done? Congress can pass all the impeachment bills. The US Senate will not by two thirds vote him guilty removing him from office. Politically there is very little that can be done to interpose between Obama and him destroying the world.

So who will step in and take action to avert a disaster from happening? The usurper in the White House is the most lawless President in history that makes Nixon and Clinton look like choir boys in comparison. President Obama does not respect the Constitution and international law. He is waging war against the American people economically and shredding our Bill of Rights daily.

He is waging war against Christianity on the domestic front attacking religious freedom by forcing people of conscience to pay for Obamacare the pays for abortions. He is attacking Christians in the military daring to say the name of Jesus forcing chaplains to marry homosexuals against the moral conviction of the clergy. At the same time erecting Pagan places of worship on military installations. For this matter I call on the Patriots to relieve officers of duty and command who attack the religious freedom of the men and women in uniform. I do not care if the commander is a Buddhist and gay. He must respect and defend all faiths and conscience. If he is willing to follow an unlawful, immoral order without question that will weaken the fighting strength. Then the commanders and officers who carry these immoral orders need to be relieved of command.

Click here to read more.

The Mad American agrees with this commentary  and calls on America to wake up, stand up and fight back!

Please, take the time today to view this old cartoon.

No matter who you are or your political views, you must see this cartoon from many years ago.

Please leave a comment and let us know if this applies today and if it is Prophetic or not.

A must read here! You could be fined over $4000 and still have no Health care coverage!

DISTURBING REPORT — Obamacare Fines to be Seized From Bank Accounts?

Posted on 2 October, 2013 by Amy

(Redflagnews) (PAUL JOSEPH WATSON) — A man who attempted to sign up for Obamacare online was told that a fine of over $4,000 dollars a year for refusing to take out mandatory health insurance could be taken directly from his bank account, and that his drivers license would be suspended and a federal tax lien placed against his home, according to an entry on the HealthCare.gov Facebook page.

Will Sheehan claims that when he tried to sign up for Obamacare and then register to opt out, he received an ominous warning. Sheehan’s full Facebook post reads;If true, the implementation of Obamacare is going to be a whole lot more draconian than Americans have been led to believe.

“I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 A.M. I have a preexisting condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually I chose tier 2 “Silver Plan” and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I “opt-out” and chose to continue along with no insurance.

I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the “REPERCUSSIONS PORTION” for “non-payment” of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with “Non-Payment” and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy “Automatically withdraw” your “penalties” weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is “Free” or even “Affordable.”

Sheehan went on to point out that the site makes you input all your personal information before giving you an indication of the costs, meaning a database of the “uninsured” is being built. He added that he could not afford to pay the premium so would have to break the law and pay the fine, leaving him with no health care coverage. (Do you understand this! He will have to pay the fine of over $4,000 and still have NO Health Care coverage!)

The federal government has consistently denied that any fines pertaining to Obamacare non-compliance could be seized from bank accounts.

“There’s no criminal sanctions for not paying this, and there’s no ability to levy a bank account or do seizures,” then-IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman said in April 2010.

In addition, Americans who refuse to pay for mandatory health insurance “shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution,” according to the law itself. (Then why the tax and fines that are enforced by all the new IRS agents?)

Section 1501(g)(2) of the Affordable Care Act also states that the IRS cannot “file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section.”

EIther Sheehan’s claim that he received this notice is a lie, or the feds have been dishonest with the American people all along, and the revolt against Obamacare is about to take “don’t tread on me” to a whole new level. (hmmm, they lie about Obama care? You must be a T-Bagger radical racist homophobic that clings to his guns and religion)  

Read a copy of the full exchange on Facebook below. Read more via Infowars

Subject: Immigration

Wherever you stand on this issue, please take the time to read this; it should wake you from your careless slumber on this important truth.

We know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration overpopulation conference in Washington, DC , filled to capacity by many of America's finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, "Mexifornia", explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America.

The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that ‘An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.’”

"Here is how they do it," Lamm said.

"First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: ‘The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.’ Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, Corsicans and Muslims."

Lamm went on:

"Second, to destroy America , invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. Make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal; that there are no cultural differences. Make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds."

"Third, we could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: 'The apparent success of our own multi-ethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.' Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school."

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority placation."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. "E. Pluribus Unum" -- From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus' instead of the 'Unum,' we will " Balkanize " America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits. Make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said, "Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book 'Mexifornia.' His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Even barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.' American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America. Take note of California and other states. To date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength."

Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.

If you care for and love our country as I do, take the time to pass this on just as I did for you. NOTHING is going to happen if you don't!

"If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under" - Ronald Reagan

Justice for Trayvon

Hello. Don’t recognize me? That’s OK; I understand.

My name was Antonio West. I was the 13-month old child who was shot in the face at point blank range by two black teens, who were attempting to rob my mother, who was also shot.

I think my murder and my mommy’s wounding made the news for maybe a day, and then disappeared.

A Grand Jury of my mommy's peers from Brunswick, Georgia ruled the black teens who murdered me will not face the death penalty... too bad it was me who got the death sentence from my killers instead, because Mommy didn’t have the money they demanded.

See, my family made the mistake of being white in a 73% non-white neighborhood, but my murder wasn’t ruled a ‘hate crime’.

Oh, and President Obama didn’t take a single moment to acknowledge my murder. He couldn’t have any children who could possibly look like me - so why should he care?

I’m one of the youngest murder victims in our great Nation's history, but the media didn’t care to cover the story of my being killed in cold blood.

There isn’t a white equivalent of Al Sharpton, because if there was he would be branded a ‘racist’. So no one’s rushing to Brunswick, Georgia to demonstrate and demand ‘justice’ for me. There’s no ‘White Panther’ party, either, to put a bounty on the lives of the two black teens who murdered me.

I have no voice, I have no representation, and unlike those who shot me in the face while I sat innocently in my stroller - I no longer have my life.

Isn’t this a great country?

So while you’re out seeking ‘justice for Trayvon’, please remember to seek ‘justice’ for me. Tell your friends about me, tell your families, get tee-shirts with my face on them, and make the world pay attention, just like you did for Trayvon.

I won’t hold my breath.

I don’t have to anymore.

And Colorado attacks shotgun owners!

A popular hunting shotgun could be banned under one of the bills moving through the state Capitol. A pump or semi-automatic shotgun is the gun most hunters in Colorado use. It’s a gun state Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, says could be banned under a bill that’s already passed the House and Gov. John Hickenlooper says he’ll sign.

“They’re coming after the standard shotgun,” Brophy told CBS4 Political Specialist Shaun Boyd.

Brophy says if Democrats succeed in passing a bill limiting large capacity magazines in Colorado, they’ll outlaw the most popular selling firearm for hunting.

The shotgun ban would not only restrict hunters but also sportsmen, who use pump action and semi-automatic shotguns on occasion. The avid skeet-shooter President Obama would be devastated if he couldn’t shoot clay pigeons with certain shotguns in Colorado, right?

Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens?

Are you afraid of Obama yet?

Face book has now censored me. Why, because I speak the truth!

Face book has now censored me. Why, because I speak the truth!

I recently became involved in an discussion with a man that attended the same high school I did, at about the same time.

Let me set this up for you because it may be hard to follow but I still think you will find it very interesting read and I really would like your comment on it. It does not matter who you feel is in the right; I just want to hear what you have to say. Please feel free to forward this to your friends and I welcome their input. 
I am conservative, and I openly say so. I’m not sure what Marks call himself. We had some good back and forth posts and were in agreement most of the time and then came GUN CONTROL. I have to admit that I no longer have tolerance for the Liberal talking points. I find them illogical, contrary to the facts and spurred on by a need to show compassion and react in some manner, just to show they care. I really believe that they just want to hold the opposite view of Republicans.

Marks post about guns started including conspiracy’s and voter redistricting, you have to take my word on this, it was very one sided, full of anger and attacks on people like the tea party members. He then he attacked a friend of mine, I had a belly full of it and replied very forcibly below; (My words in reply will be in red and his posted words in black. My friend posted my reply because I had un-friended Mark) 

I feel sorry for Mark, he has gone completely blind with his agenda and hate fills his sprite in a feeble attempt to cast blame on everyone else. He talks about conspiracy theories and attacks the right for all those and yet in his next breath, makes up his own about how the Republicans are trying to steal voter districts. Now he is off again on a new conspiracy about how those who stand by principle will be the destruction of the country. It is sad and very upsetting to see how one’s mind can be so corrupted and filled with hate and resentment to the point of lashing out at everyone and everything around him. He must feel as many Obama supporters feel, that they know what people need and what they do not need. Just as he states, “cling to weapons even unnecessary weapons” Who gave him or them the right to force their views on America? Yet, when people object to this invasion on our rights, Mr. Mark and those like him, verbally attack the patriotism of those in disagreement with him. Then he twists words and makes untrue statements about how the right wants to abandoned the sick, the old, the poor all for the sake of a dollar. All the facts point to conservatives giving more of their time and money than liberals. The main difference being that the right wants to control how and where they help (stop fraud and waste)  and the left wants the government to control how the money is spent. No sane man can point to a government program that is run efficiently as private programs, that is just a fact of bureaucracy! Liberals will not accept this fact.  Marks statement that “They believe it is okay to confiscate property from the poor if they are unable to pay for their medical bills.” Is a bold faced lie! He goes on to lie by telling what the right wing believes in, but his view could not be further from the truth. This is very disturbing. I think I sent him off on this tirade when I suggested that voters should own property or pay taxes to vote. The point I was trying to get across is that politicians are getting elected by people who are not contributing to the government but instead are benefiting from the social programs. A Liberal reads into this that I want all old and sick people to die! How does that happen? How can it be so twisted, because that is not what I believe or promote and yet, Mark takes it and runs as far left with it as he can. I have un-friended Mark on FB because I can’t stand to hear a mind that thinks like what he writes below;
“They include people like Bruce Clark, and Trace Turpin. They do not believe the right to vote is an inherent right given to all citizens regardless of race, color, creed, or religion. They do everything they can to stop citizens of this country from registering to vote or allowing them to vote, by creating long lines and illegally purging voting records, and enacting voter registration laws that unfairly tax the poor, the needy, and the helpless. They even claim that those poor should not be allowed to vote as they don’t own “property.” They believe in only registering Republicans, and discarding the registrations of Democrats.” My word!!! Did you read this? His statement is, for the lack of a better word, CRAZY! I refuse to be drawn into defending his lies against me and others. It would make no difference, his mind is closed and dark, his views are unwavering. This is so hypercritical as he writes how the right is “driven by extremists who believe absolutism is a substitute for principles who cling to their absolutes even to the destruction of the country.”  And yet there seems to be an “absolute” on his part and that is apparent when you read his writings. No one is putting words in his mouth or forcing him to converse in this manner. 
Mark lies again when is writes, “I’m afraid they are taking it back the days of slavery and child labor” perhaps that is not a lie…because he believes it. But who in their right mind would believe such a view? It is beyond silly but at the same time, very disturbing. 
“I fear if we do not speak up this is how democracy will end” Mark, is this you making up your own conspiracy or just the view of a paranoid mind? 
Mark is not on the same playing field when he attacks Allen about “the anger in the comment that resorts to denigration” My word, does he not read his own words??? Then he twists words and tries to paint Allen as what? Allen pointed to a poll that supports his view but that is attacked by Mark because Allen has said before that he does not trust polls. So? dang, nothing wrong there. Mark is the exact same way! He does not trust Allens poll but quotes one of his own. Do Liberals not take the time to think? How…oh…never mind, it’s like beating a dead horse.
I leave Mark with a note on his last attack on Allen; “And the last part of this post once again is a great example of a conspiracy that only exists in the minds of the extremist like Rush Limbaugh, And I guess Alan”
Allens words where; “The rights to free speech has been trampled on not by the Republicans, but by the Democrats that have been trying to get shows off the air for speaking out against injustice.” I don’t know why Mark calls it a conspiracy. There are attacks on both sides, the right dislikes the liberal media and the left dislikes the right sided talk shows and news like FOX. The president has even attacked both in the last couple of days so Mr. Mark, it’s not a conspiracy, it’s just a fact!

I leave Mark with his own words about himself; 

“It is his belief, that in a world of hate and violence it is only a love that is true, unprejudiced, unbiased, unjudgmental, and all accepting that can prevail.” This is on his FB description of himself 

Shame he does not live by his own words.
End of post

I really don’t care that I was attacked like I was, I’m sure that my reply to Marks post brought it on and indeed it was meant to get a rise out of him. Still, I had no idea that he would respond with such aggression and lies. It seems that when I pointing out where and how he lied in his reply really upset him.

Well, I saw the post I spoke of above on Allens time line and that is what I replied to. As I had un-friended Mark for the reason I just did not wish to see his posts anymore, I asked Allen to post my reply above to the comments on the subject, I felt the need to defend my friend Allen, he sure did not go over any line or personally attack Mark in any manner and in my modest opinion, Mark needed slapped down for his off the wall attacks on us both.

Below is Marks response to my reply that Allen posted for me; (I will make comments within his post and leave you to your own conclusions) 

Mark Barger
14 hours ago near Joplin, MO
Recently we had an unprofessional and inappropriate comment made on one of our posts that you may have seen from Bruce Clark. It was posted on our Facebook by Alan Nebeker. Both Alan Nebeker and Bruce Clark are radical right wing TEA Party supporters. (well, I do support the T Party but I am not a member) In typical right wing TEA Party fascism, (he should look up the definition of the words he uses)  instead of supporting their positions or pointing out their perceived flaws in the post in a polite manne...r, (or better yet making their points on their own Facebook), they chose to attack character on ours. Alas due to their inappropriate, disrespectful, and hateful behaviors on our Facebook they have been banned from further conversations on our posts by Facebook. (Yes, he got me... I can no longer post what I did above, I have been censored by facebook but Mark is allowed his posts…go figure, seems a little one sided in my view) It should have been unnecessary but due to their apparent childishness and lack of proper Facebook etiquette it was probably a foreseeable consequence. (well, he apparently complained to FB about my reply calling him a liar from his words here)  Frankly they appear to just be bullies that never quite grew up, never matured, have little respect for others, and are still living in that high school world where they peaked in life. (Dang, he forgot to add the toys in the sand box part... I think I may be scared for life for what he says about me) They appear to have one standard for others and another for themselves. (ever heard the expression, “I think thou protests to much”) It seems they are attracted to extremism and violence because it gives them an outlet to continue their hateful behavior, rather than maturing and becoming a valued contributing member of society. Sadly this is the type of behavior I often see from these TEA Party extremists. (Dang, he sure says a mouthful there huh? I never really knew how bad a person and citizen I was until I read this account of me) I remember once during the healthcare debate a man in a wheelchair was showing support for the Affordable Healthcare Act. I remember one of the TEA Party members walking up to him, screaming in his face that he would decide who and what to pay for other’s healthcare not the government, and threw a dollar bill in the man’s face. It showed a serious lack of compassion and a strong hatred for the sick, the suffering, and the handicap. (I don’t know if that was true or not, or what the circumstances were, but on face value, I sure do not support that kind of abuse and I take offence to anyone that would insinuate that I would) Bruce Clark, supported by Alan Nebeker, made the exact same remark in his last post saying that he wanted to decide what to pay and who to pay, and not have the government decide. (No, that is not true. We were talking about taking care of the needy and who donates time and money. I said that conservatives would rather give to a cause and know how the money is being spent than donate to the government and have no say in how our money is spent. VERY BIG difference. Why must people twist words and plain out and out lie?) Typically this behavior is driven by greed and selfishness and I suspect the same is true of Bruce Clark and Alan Nebeker who have all been banned from comments on our posts by Facebook due to their hate-filled vicious comments. (I have been banned for hate filled comments? Yet Mark is free in his writings? He sure is proud of his accomplishment as this is the second time he has made this statement)  Bruce mentioned that the government doesn’t run things as well as private enterprise therefore the government shouldn’t run social programs that help the poor and the needy and that this should be left to private enterprise. (NO, I never said that. Mark injects this to make me seem very radical and uncaring)  Really? I agree the government is not overly efficient most of the time, but they are also not “For Profit.” (so, so what is wrong with “for profit, why is that considered evil and wrong?”) For profit organizations often cost more than government run programs, (the government doesn’t need to make a profit). (Well Mark, I would like to know where you get your numbers. How can you state that "profit organizations often cost more than government run programs”. How do you back this up?) Even if private enterprise is able to run it more effectively and cheaper, here’s the question I have for these TEA Party folk, what’s stopping more private enterprises from running programs that help the needy and the poor right now? (Nothing Mark, who said there was? Many people and organizations are doing great works, you just don't hear about them in the media) Nothing except it’s not profitable. (Mark, how many charitable organizations are out there that are private, having nothing to do with tax payer funding and yet are serving everyday. I think we all could name a dozen or more) So where are all the private enterprises that are taking over so the government does not have to? In society it has never worked, which is why the government must step in and provide the safety net for its society. (well, I agree in part I guess, the government can and does provide a safety net, and I support that. I would only like to stop the abuse so the needy get help and the lazy get none. I would also point out thosecounties that are failing because of their bloated social programs. Greece and Italy come to mind ) The Nazi Party was a lot like the TEA party in some respects. (O-MY WORD, now he is gone off the wall. These types of statements are what raise the hair on the back of my neck, they are fighting words. Hmmm, but face book condones his attacks but censors me? Maybe I am supposed to complain to them like he must have. No, not my style) They didn’t want to take care of the poor, the sick, the disabled, or the elderly so they euthanized them. (WHAT???? What in the world…tell me where the tea party favors this? This is where a Liberal just lose their mind and it shows when they not only say stuff like this but write it down!) Saves money right? Well we know from history how that turned out. I believe the biggest reason enterprise is not adequately filling the gap is due to greed. Look at your billionaires and multimillionaires, the money they have alone, (that they are not using), (not using Mark? What in the world! How do you know what they do with their money and why is it your concern? If you wish them to donate more of their time and money then work towards that end and not attempt to steal it from them though taxes) would be more than enough to take care of the poor, the sick, the needy, and those less fortunate. (There is it my friends, no matter what you were thinking before. Mark now states the rich are greedy and don’t need all that money. So without putting words in his mouth, I believe he wants the government to take that money and give it to those that Mark feels needs it.)    In fact if they all just paid a decent wage to their workers, (who help them become successful), it would relieve much of the suffering of the poor. (Now, now he want everyone to believe that all the rich guys don’t pay their poor employees anything but bread and water…my word. This is not correct and is CLASS WARFARE and does nothing to help anyone. It just exposes a socialist attitude) I remember one person saying, it’s their money, so they should be able to do what they want with it. (Yes Mark, if you earn it, you should have the right to spend it how you see fit. This is still America.) Really? They made the “widgets” themselves? I don’t think so, they got there on the backs of their workers for which they should be grateful. When their workers are not able to make it on the wages paid while the CEOs and owners have a billion times what they need to make it, that’s not gratitude. (Say that is all true, even if it’s horribly wrong, what would Marks answer to the issue be?) One only needs to look at who supports the TEA Party to see that it is backed by these same wealthy people. (Hmmm at all the rally's I saw on TV, I only saw plain hard working folks out there. Moms, Dads, Grandmas and Grandpas and all the kids playing around. Nothing like the liberal Occupy Wall Street protests that had drugs, people urinating in public, trash, open sex, violation of laws and all supported by the liberal media and Democrat leaders including Obama) If they complain about taxes, can there be any real expectation that they would provide for the poor, the sick and the needy? Not that I can see. (That is where a liberal has problems with a conservative. A liberal can’t see anyone helping others just to help them. Liberals believe you have to be forced to help someone and that is where government and taxes come in.) The real reason, I believe, that mr. Bruce probably identifies with these groups is also greed. It appears Bruce and Alan don’t want people touching their money, government or otherwise, (again greed). (NO Mark, it called being responsible for and in control of your own earnings. But he is correct, I don't want anyone stealing my money. I will use it, spend it and donate it as I see fit because by the grace of God, I earned it! I don't want the government spending it on abortions or wasting it by making healthy people dependent on government programs) What people like mr Bruce seem to forget is that most people are not born into money nor marry into money. (What??? I forget what???, This guy sure know a lot about me huh?) They work all their lives to scrape out a living, provide for their family, put food on the table a roof over their heads, pay their medical bills and have little or nothing left over for savings, and must rely on Social Security, food stamps and Medicare for their retirement. (Then if that is true something is very messed up Mark, and the Government is not going to fix it. SS is earned by all those who have worked and paid into it. If people choose to buy big TVs, eat out and spend their money instead of saving, that is their choice. Do not blame someone else because they won't save or invest money throughout their lives. No working person has to rely on food stamps for retirement, that is just over board and a kin to starving old people and babies comments. ) When they discover these social programs are not adequate it leaves them begging for the necessities of life. (MY WORD, NOW IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE HAS TO BEG TO STAY ALIVE IN AMERICA) Not that I would expect Bruce Clark or Alan Nebeker to have compassion on these people but they should be ashamed along with the rest of America for not doing a better job of social governance of the needy. (Well, the man is simply lost to reality. Without listing what I do, I will mention that, as everyone should know, I donate time with Special Olympics and take care of developmentally disabled young adults, one of whom is in a wheel chair. I help DD adults that have had their funding cut 6% because of the financial condition the government is in. I would love to see the needy get all the help we can give them and more, it is money well spent! but to do that we must get rid of the fraud and abuse of the system that robs funds from the needy and gives to the lazy. So when Marks attacks me as greedy and uncaring, well, It just shows how misguided and blinded by his agenda  he really is. I', sorry for being so blunt but people that are on disability and taking funds away from the handicapped just because they are to fat to walk, disgusts me! They wheel into line with food stamps and twinkes, they take no responsibly for themselves, but expect that you and I should pay for their lifestyle choices  I don't buy into that and will not support them at the expense of the truly needy ) These two individuals don’t seem to understand that because of their own greed, individual hatred, or some other misguided impression of mankind they are becoming the very enemy of mankind to their own detriment. They also seem to not understand the plight of someone who has become injured or sick before they are eligible to collect Social Security, such that they cannot do the job they once did, making them rely on a reduced income or welfare. (I think Mark has a lot of pain and anger from somewhere, but that does not excuse his statements made above.) It appears from their rhetoric that they would kick these people off entitlement and welfare programs because they see them as deadbeats. Bruce Clark went so far as to say they should not be allowed to vote, and only those that contribute to society or own property should be allowed to make the rules for society. (Not true and explained in the first part of this letter, yet he will write his view for all to see and paint me as a monster because I disagree with him) They treasure their guns because they seem to envision a government that will one day take away their money, and if not the government then the poor and needy might steal from them just to get a meal, or clothes, and God forbid that should happen so they must be prepared to fend them off with deadly force. (OK, this is just WAY OUT THERE and I can’t say anything more about that) They appear to live in a fantasy world that moves from conspiracy to conspiracy, finding an enemy under every rock. From language and comments they have made it also appears they treasure their guns, especially assault rifles as they see these weapons as necessary to fight the government. Of course that might be treasonous talk or home grown militia terrorism. (OK, so I believe that the second Amendment protects the right to have an AR 15. A Rifle that I love for shoot varmints with. So in Marks view that makes me a terrorist) Well Bruce Clark, Alan Nebeker welcome to the Homeland security watch list. (Ha ha, been on it for a long time I am sure, so if you sent them a letter about me, I guess they just added it to the pile. But hey, thanks for caring and wanting to protect your country from blood thirsty crazy's like me!) They say they are Christians, but the fact is true Christians are held in the grip of the love of their God the Creator, and can stand tall with no need of weapons of self-defense, or drugs, alcohol or other chloroform masks of wealth, power, fame, or status to protect them from reality. (Whew, he sure has an opinion) True Christians are also good citizens. (Dang, somewhere the Bible also says something about judging others, O well…) The hypocrisy of their lives is simply this, should anyone point out that their behaviors and beliefs might just not be in the best interest of a civilized society, they revert to their draconianism and derisive behaviors attacking the character of the individuals who wish to make a difference in the lives of those who need it most. (Ha ha…I mean I would be offended if these statements where not so totally bizarre) They also don’t seem to understand the proper etiquette of Facebook. (Well dang, that upsets me, I didn't even know I did anything wrong...I feel...so... ashamed...) But, with all that said, we must keep in mind that like all bullies, the reactions of people like this are driven by fear, fear of those who are different, fear of loss of income, fear of the loss of control, fear of the unknown future, especially when that future does not look like anything they recognize. In a reaction to protect themselves, they surround themselves only with others who are just as radical and agree with their distorted view. People like this, who are radical absolutists feel they must vilify anyone who dares to see things differently. Sadly it closes their minds and escalates there pomposity. Their paradigms are locked like a laser on a singular point of focus creating a tunnel vision that blinds them to the universe that surrounds them causing them to destroy anything that gets in their way. We must remember, they are to be pitied, for theirs is a life of desperation and fear that is only half lived. (man, I just love the way he talks, has me convinced, he needs to write a book...dreams of my father!) We must also remember that they, above all, need our love, compassion and forgiveness. (Yep, Mark showers that on all of us right-wingers. I'm sure that was his whole point in this post on his time line, nothing but love and compassion for me the other right-wingers  We do not have to agree nor should we agree, we do not have to call their rants of hate “flowery colloquialisms.” We can and should hold them responsible and call it what is, we can and should point out the error of their ways, we can and should stand up for what is right, but we can and should always be willing to forgive while showing them the love and power of the Creator for they need it more than most.
(There it is, the end. Just a note for all who read this, Mark calls himself a preacher and has a congregation. I have no idea if that is true or not. Interesting comments, words and views from a man of the cloth. 

Please leave a comment below and let me know if my thoughts and words are way off base. Thanks!)