oldhippiecom

Two Rights Don't Make A Wrong...

2010-09-11T17:22:00.000-07:00

Here we have a group wanting to put up a Mosque near Ground Zero. They have every right to do it, it's in the US Constitution that they can. I have sworn many times to defend their right to do this with my life.
But is it the wrong decision to build it there? Probably... We Americans have a bad spot in our hearts about Ground Zero and it will be a long time getting over, if ever.
Here we have some Nut Pastor wanting to burn the Koran. He has every right to do just that. It's his right under the same Constitution that protects the Mosque. This is another of those rights I have sworn to defend with my life.
But is it the wrong decision to do this? Probably... Anyone who goes out of their way to upset a billion Muslims is just a little crazy.

But let there be no mistake, The Pastor and the Muslims have every right, and if they want to. they can build where they want, or burn what they want. We as Citizens of this Country have zero right to tell them otherwise, PERIOD!

Let's look at a little history:
The 60's Civil Rights Act was opposed by the Majority Party, Democratic Party. But it was passed with the help of the Minority Party, Republican Party. The Majority of the Country didn't want it passed and fought it every step of the way, but it was the right thing to do so it was passed.
A little further back, The majority of the country didn't want schools to be segregated and fought it all the way, One Governor even went so far as to send in the State National Guard to stop it. But it was wrong to stop it, everyone has a Right to an equal education and it happened. Now all schools are integrated (Unless it's a school for women only) and that's because All People Are Equal...

Do things go on in this Country that we object to? Hell Yes!!
Do things go on in this Country that we flat don't like? Hell Yes!!

But this is the United States and we pride ourselves in our tolerance for what is different, let's face it, that's why this Country exists in the first place...

But let's remember, just because it's right, it doesn't mean you should do it, just think about how it effects others... But if you must, go ahead because I'll be here to defend your right to do it...

The U.S. put a U.S. STATE on the U.N. Human Rights Report? WHAT!!!

2010-08-30T16:32:00.000-07:00

You have to be kidding me! This has to be an April Fools Joke! Am I living in another plane of existence!

The U.S. Department of State put Arizona on the U.N. Human Rights Report. Read here. I am personally having a problem with the concept of this action. Correct me if I'm wrong (And I'm right 99.7% of the time) but the Arizona Law, S.B. 1070, just made it mandatory for Arizona Law enforcement to enforce the current Federal Law. Not the Law BHO (By the way, that would be pronounced Bee-Hoe) wishes for, or is imagining in his sick twisted mind, or in the mind of his Socialist Handler. But the written, passed and signed into to, Federal Law!

If BHO isn't going to enforce the Immigration Laws, why won't he just say so? If he wants to create new Progressive Socialist Voters, why won't he just say so? If he is trying to make up for past transgressions that the "White" race has committed, why won't he just say so? But this Crap HAS TO STOP before BHO starts another Revolution in this Country. Like the Declaration of Independence states, We Have An Obligation To Throw Out A Totalitarian Government By Whatever Means Is Necessary! Period!
And BHO is doing just that by ignoring the wished of the vast (70%+) majority of the people of this Country...

If we are so bad, why is everyone else in the world trying to get here, LEGALLY, I might add. If we are such a Racist Country, why is the rest of the world trying to get here?

I have Hispanics working for me that hate what's going on at the boarder, as much as I do. They work hard, pay their taxes, and do the legalization paper to become citizens. They want the illegal crossings to stop, the wall put up, troops on the boarder, anything to put an end to it as much as I do. Some even have friends and family being (Or trying to be) Mules for drugs, to join the cartels or die. They won't do it! They have to move to different Mexican States to get away from it or who knows what will happen to them.

I have even told some that, If they want to go back and fight these evil Drug Cartels, I would help with anything they need. And that is not limited to weapons (Hear that Secret Service?) I can be contacted through this blog if the S.S. wants anymore info... Interesting, didn't I learn of another organization that used the initials S.S. at one time? That's right, THEY DROPPED BOMBS ON MY MOTHER IN THE EARLY FOURTIES!

Better watch out BHO, the people of this Country aren't going to put up with you much longer...

Thank God I Dont Have BHO Care!

2010-08-27T14:04:00.001-07:00

I just had to go to the ER for my back and I got to thinking about BHO Care. I have some serious issues with my back, and have had for years.* But because a "Pill" would mask it, what kind of care would I get under BHO Care? Because he is over Sixty, we are going to save the money for someone who has their life ahead of them, and, not let him have the surgery/treatment/whatever and let him have pills instead"

Well I have insurance that only comes from serving "King and Country". I make no apologies for that, I worked hard for my disabilities and pay out of pocket for what I am getting, no Government Subsidies, no handouts from "Big Brother". But guess what? BHO Care wants to take that away so I will be more equal with the Progressive Socialist model of "Fairness in Healthcare" Go ahead and try to take it away, TRY!
I WILL NOT PAY for BHO Care, your Tax for not having it, or participate in any way in YOUR HEALTHCARE!!!

*For reference sake, I originally messed up my back as a Correctional Officer. Don't misunderstand for a minute... I was a P.O.S.T. Academy Instructor, ran Death Row in the State I worked, and had the respect of my peers. But aside from trashing my body, I lost my Marriage, my Son and my Sanity over that line of work. I do regret that more than could be expressed, but I can't change that, just live life as best I can. I have a good life now, but work hard to keep it. A Wife that loves me and people that trust me. Hope someday to fix the Son issue though.

Now, you have to come away with this, after reading this blog:
You have to take care of yourself in this World. I never asked for a thing, and suffered through the worst that was thrown at me, AND SURVIVED! With no Government Help... So Can You!!!

I Guess some have 1st Amendment Rights, and Some Don't...

2010-08-23T18:30:00.000-07:00

I find it interesting the rhetoric coming from the supporters of the Muslim "Cultural Center". They claim they have 1st Amendment Rights to put their "Cultural Center" wherever they choose. And guess what? THAT IS EXACTLY CORRECT! And anyone who opposes it is a racist. You aren't allowed to object to where we want it!
What i find absolutely absurd is, if you oppose it you are immediately labeled a racist. A RACIST??? So when do our 1st Amendment Rights become wrong? Why is it whenever you say "I want your Cultural Center be put somewhere else" you are violating their rights?

I look at it this way, you have a right to put it anywhere you want and I get to object. That is the fundamental basis of the Constitution. That does not make me a racist, it just makes me different...

Now here is the hitch in this particular situation, Who Wins? No one really, not at this point...
When it comes to the 1st Amendment you have to realize that somewhere along the way a compromise has to be reached. Now, bad or not, those against it have no room to compromise, they want it moved and nothing else will satisfy. Where the compromise has to come in is with those who do want it near Ground Zero. Personally I wish there was another way around this problem, but there isn't. So here is what should be done:
Move the "Cultural Center" to another location further away from Ground Zero, and have the people of New York offer up some free land to put it on. That way everyone has to give something and that would be good...

But I also feel that those who want it near Ground Zero have no reason to compromise, because the real reason for keeping it there is for the sole purpose causing controversy, plain and simple. They want to hear the protests against it because it bolsters support from the Arab World, a world that has no concept of "Human Rights" Women have no right to speak out, marry who they want, drive a car, etc. Look, they will stone to death any woman that "May" have had an affair with another man, without any punishment to him, I might add... They will kill Doctors that are there to help, because they might have a Bible? But if someone like me who, by the way has read the Koran, says it is an evil book written by the Devil, gets a Fatwa against him. Now I don't believe that, not at all, but because I said it in this Blog, I will probably have a Fatwa put on me. Well go for it... Don't forget the 1st Amendment...

A little history: Years ago the Catholic Church put a Nuns building near a Holocaust Camp. The church received objections from Jewish groups and the church moved it. How hard was that???

No, the supporters have no desire to compromise or even feel sympathy for how it makes us react. Unfortunately, we are reacting exactly the way they want, because that is the only reason for putting it there. That way, in the Arab World we are racist and deserve nothing less than total destruction.

This isn't going to end well I think, to bad...

Nancy, PLEASE INVESTIGATE ME!!!

2010-08-21T14:28:00.000-07:00

So I hear Nancy wants to investigate anyone that disagrees with the placement of the Muslim "Cultural Center"...
Well Nancy, even though it is Constitutional for the Muslims to put their "Cultural Center" anywhere they choose, that doesn't make it right!
We as Americans always go out of our way to, "Not offend" other Religions, Races, or Ethnic Makeups. But I think it's time for them to return the favor.

Ground Zero is Sacred to the people of the United States. As sacred to us as, let's say, Mecca... How would Muslims feel is someone were to put a Pork Rib Shack in Mecca? Oops, that would never happen, Muslim Countries don't allow Religious Freedom do they? Guess what? They won't even allow the construction of a Church in any Muslim Country...

How about we try something new and improved and put a new policy into effect..

We treat other countries in the same manner that they treat us... Makes sense to me! But that would never work for the Progressive Socialists...

So PLEASE INVESTIGATE ME!!! I could use a little fun...

What Will The Progressive Socialists Call Me Now?

2010-08-17T18:21:00.000-07:00

First I would like to mention why I haven't been posting lately... Of the two major issues in my personal life, work and My Health, my life has been pretty much a wreck.

In the BHO economy I have to worry about keeping my employment. As a lot of you have found out lately, keeping your Job can be difficult at best. So I have had to put what little energy I have into Work. I'll talk more about the economy and Jobs in a later Blog...

And that brings up the Health issue... I'm pretty much trashed, health wise. I gave up my physical well being to "Serve and Protect". Protecting those of you who, in some cases, could care less whether or not I live or die, unless you need a Cop. You know what i mean, PIG! PIG! Oh protect me from the bad man/woman who is trying to rob me, or steal from me etc. To those of you who actually appreciated what I was doing for you, Thank You Very Much and I appreciate the support. To the rest of you? Does "UP A ROPE" sound about right?

But I digress...

I know some of you have had to put up with being accused of being homophobic because you don't support Gay Marriage, I have too, but that's a moral issue not a legal or an issue anyone has a right to comment on, one's moral beliefs. For the record, I have a Brother-In-Law that is Gay. I love him as if he were my actual Brother. He's a wonderful person and so is his "Better Half". But my Wife, his Sister, and I do not support Gay Marriage. So? Also for the record, I am from the Bay Area, Oakland/San Fransisco/Bezerkly. I am an actual Height Hippie from the Sixties. I have grown up in that environment all of my life and some of my best Friends are Gay, Black, Asian etc. So?
BUT because I won't support Gay Marriage I AM HOMOPHOBIC? What a load of dung!

Because I won't support BHO's vision of Immigration Reform, I am anti Hispanic? For the record, my family has been in the Republic of California for more than 300 Years... My family came up the coast from Mexico with the Spanish Missionaries (And I don't mean the position) I have many Hispanics working for me. Also wonderful people... The hardest working group of people in this country. I help them with their immigration paper, help them with their computers, help them learn English etc. We joke and laugh at things that most Progressive Socialists would call Racist, but they know that I do it with love and respect, Why? because for all practical aspects, I am one of them, even if my skin isn't dark, or because I don't speak with an accent... I respect them, and they in turn, respect me...
But because I support a secure boarder and want the illegals (That have criminal records) out of MY Country, I AM A HISPANIC? What a load of dung!

Now we have this new issue of a Muslim Mosque, cultural center, day care, whatever, near the Holy of Holy Ground, the smoking hole at Ground Zero... For the record, in the late 70's, when I was a Deputy, a group of Iranian Students wanted to protest against the U.S. in my County. I put my uniform on and stood guard over them so they could have their protests, and I would have given up My Life to allow them to have it! Why? Because I have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States more times in my life than could be counted...
But come on people, if those who want this Mosque want to build a better relationship with the people of this Country, simply say "We respect the feelings of the people of the United States, so we will build it somewhere else". But no, they insist that it be there...
So where is the money for it coming from? Why won't the Imam refuse to condemn terrorism? Why won't our own President stand by the people of his Own Country? (Well actually he's doing it for Votes or for his future retirement home in the Middle East)
But because I am asking for the Islamic Mosque/Cultural Center to be built somewhere else, I AM ANTI ISLAMIC? What a load of dung!

Everyone that says "Our Country supports and defends everyone" are all Lying to you. They say these things until someone disagrees, then they call you a racist, or anti Islamic, Homophobic or whatever new and improved word that can be invented to fit their way of Thinkspeak...

Just remember the words of George Orwell, ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL, EXCEPT SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAT OTHERS...
Those that agree with them are of the correct type, those that don't, well they are just wrong and probably should be put in re-education camps (Opps, I was thinking of the old USSR and not the current USSA)

I'm Starting To Be Frightened...

2010-04-19T19:07:00.000-07:00

I don't mind telling this, I....AM....FRIGHTENED!!!

The things that are going on are not only unimaginable to people of common sense, but down right scary. Things like:

Passing a Health Care "Plan" More like a TAKEOVER, of our Health System and one sixth of our economy. A "Plan" that tells us all what kind of insurance to have and if you don't get what they say you "Need", you get fined. But it was for the Fatherland...
A National Security "Plan" that allows Iran to get a Nuclear Weapon and the whole time saying "We will stop them from getting it" but doing nothing and convincing, no one, to enact any meaningful sanctions. But it was for the Fatherland...
The PAYOFF of U.S. Congressmen and Senators to pass a "Plan" that they know will result in the lost of their jobs. But it was for the Fatherland...
Members of the Tea Party Movement are portrayed as "Radicals" and Shills for the Republican Party and trying to connect their disagreement about what is happening to the Country, to Timothy McVey and Oklahoma? Now this is not only Disgusting but it reminds me of the Thirties, Juden! Juden!
But it was for the Fatherland...
Half of the Country isn't paying any Taxes AND they get a REFUND! But it was for the Fatherland...
5% of the working population is paying what in Taxes? 80% and that isn't enough?
But it was for the Fatherland...
The Vice Socialist taking credit for the victory in Iraq in the name of the BHO Regime.
But it was for the Fatherland...
The Polls show the County simply doesn't trust their own Government, and the Socialists come back with "After they read it they will thank us" or "People should thank us" for raising our Taxes?
But it was for the Fatherland...
The current Regime wants to take control of the Financial System and the Energy production in the Country, and PEOPLE ARE OUT OF WORK!!! But it was for the Fatherland...
The current Regime completely ignoring the "States Rights" spelled out in the Constitution.
But it was for the Fatherland...
Schools that SPY on our Children while they sleep!!! and say that the ability to do that was for Stolen and Lost laptops... WHILE SLEEPING??? But it was for the Fatherland...

And on and on and on and on.....

These people in Congress are going to do whatever they want until November, because after that, the advantage will have been lost. They have been planing the takeover of all of our Constitutional Rights for 60 Years! They know if it doesn't happen now, it will never happen again. (Or until the populace forgets again like they have every time this has happened in the past)

We have to fight with whatever PEACEFUL means we have to stop them, the Socialists, or everything we have fought for, and worked, for and Died, for over the last 234 years since the Declaration of Independence will be gone, and we will become a Socialist Country no better than China or Russia.

Remember, This is a Country of the People, by the People, for the People. If we forget that WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT, then we will be marching in step chanting "I Love The Rodina" or "I Love Big Brother, Big Brother Loves Me"

As always, if anyone in the current Regime wishes to contact me through this blog, Please Do....

Is It Time To End Our Way Of Life?

2010-03-21T15:22:00.000-07:00

When Obama Care is passed, there will be an end to part of the American Way of Life,
WE WILL HAVE SOCIALIZED MEDICAL CARE!

Now the next question is, are we going to put up with this?

Of course you will ask the question, What can I do about it? Well you can say, "Wait till the November Election", and for the most part that would, normally be, the correct answer, but let me assure you this one thing, THAT WILL CHANGE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING... WHY?

Repealing a law that has been passed and signed into law is pretty near impossible... Without the Supreme Court blocking it, years down the line...
If you think things are bad now? Try and take away a benefit that has been given to those who think they are entitled...
No way are the Conservatives going to get a Veto Proof Majority in Congress, so BHO will just veto any law that might be passed to stop Obama Care...
With every Politician "Worried" about their next election, do you really believe they will risk the ever important job, Not only no, but Hell No!!

So what can we do?

We can just let it happen and for the next ten (10) years we will be taxed and controlled for seven (7) years of benefits that most of us will never, ever see... Not an option in my book...
Change the Constitution? Problem with that is the same as above, Politicians are cowards and wouldn't do that...
Civil disobedience? Just ignore all parts of the law by not getting the mandated insurance, or not pay the fine for not getting the insurance, not pay any more taxes until the law is changed, or all of the above and more...
We could always hold a General Strike in this Country and simply close it down until it’s changed...
Use the Obama Care so much, that it Bankrupts the Country! (Bet that would work, but the Socialist Party is already doing that by spending all of OUR MONEY on this and so many other Socialist ideas)
We can take what the Declaration of Independence mandates, Throw the Bastards out by whatever means is necessary, including but not limited to a new Revolution in this Country... May come to that in my personal book, and with my full support and active involvement I might add... Remember this, no other "Great" society has ever survived, they have all failed, look at history for that one.
(PS for the Secret Service, you can contact me through this site and I will be more than happy to tell you what my current address and phone number is)

Does that sound a little harsh? Why yes, yes it does... I have sworn to uphold the Constitution from Foreign and Domestic Enimies, more times than most of you have renewed your drivers licence, and I believe we are under attack from within...

Do we want our Health Care to become Canada?
Do we want our lives to be ruled by people who care nothing about what we want?
So do want to be affraid of our own Government?
Do we want to be told what to buy? and when?
How to think?
What to believe in?
What to eat?
How long we are going to be allowed to live because of our Health?

When our Forefathers created this Country, they created a little document called, "The Constitution of the Untied Staes of America" not the guidelines of "The Union of Soviet Socialist States of America"

I will be taxed because my Health Insurance is to good!, my Wife will be taxed for not having Insurance!, Her Employer will be taxed because they can't afford to provide Health Insurance!
ALL FOR PEOPLE, WHO DON'T WANT, OR NEED, AND EXPECT SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY FOR THEIRS!!

NOT ON MY WATCH..........

National Civilian Defense Force? I know why they want it!

2009-08-28T15:03:00.000-07:00

I have seen a lot of people talk about BHO's desire to create a "National Civilian Defense Force", but no one seems to come to the simple, but blaring, reason for the formation of such a force. I figured it out, and it was so simple I'm surprised no one else figured it out.

Read the Constitution, it's right there for you to see:

Bill of Rights
Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

For as long as i can remember, those on the left have said, the people do not have the right to own private guns because the Constitution "Clearly" states that the Second amendment only applies to "A well regulated Militia". But because the term "Militia" only applies to a civilian force and not the Military (Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines) the Supreme Court has interpreted it to say Civilians are allowed to own guns.

Now here is the catch, "A well regulated Militia" would apply to a "Civilian Defense Force". See where I'm going with this? If they create this so-called "Civilian Force" they will naturally go the next step, and call it a "Well Regulated Militia"... By doing this they will then go to the Supreme Court and make the claim that now we have a "Well Regulated Militia" AKA "National Civilian Defense Force" the Constitutional Law has been met, and therefore the "People" AKA You and I, no longer have this so-called right to own guns.

To some this might seem like a stretch, but this is how the Socialists (Liberals) think! They have been trying for years to put an end to our God Given Constitutional Rights, and they have to start somewhere. I think this is just the start of that goal!

If we let them do this, then we will be on the road to a totalitarian Government. A government that will then start to erode our Free Speech Rights, because the Founders were smart to put the Second Amendment after the First Amendment, because in order to maintain your Free Speech, you may have to Bear Arms, but if you have no Arms, how would you defend that wonderful First Amendment, or any of the others for that matter.

Something to think about, Huh?

Oliver Cromwell to Parliment April 20, 1653

2009-08-23T12:07:00.001-07:00

It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!

Peace? Then or Now?

2009-08-18T18:41:00.001-07:00

Every time BHO says he will "Hold a dialog" with Terrorist Countries, I remember this speach.
My Mother and the rest of England thought this was what was going to stop WWII. They were wrong then, and BHO is wrong now!
You can not appease terrorists with talk, only with force! Nothing less!

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

We, the German Fuhrer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for our two countries and for Europe.

We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.

We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.

My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honor. I believe it is "peace for our time." Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.

Thoughts on Government - by John Adams 1776

2009-08-12T21:44:00.001-07:00

Thoughts on Government - by John Adams

MY DEAR SIR,--If I was equal to the task of forming a plan for the government of a colony, I should be flattered with your request, and very happy to comply with it; because, as the divine science of politics is the science of social happiness, and the blessings of society depend entirely on the constitutions of government, which are generally institutions that last for many generations, there can be no employment more agreeable to a benevolent mind than a research after the best.

Pope flattered tyrants too much when he said,

"For forms of government let fools contest, That which is best administered is best."

Nothing can be more fallacious than this. But poets read his tory to collect flowers, not fruits; they attend to fanciful images, not the effects of social institutions. Nothing is more certain, from the history of nations and nature of man, than that some forms of government are better fitted for being well administered than others.

We ought to consider what is the end of government, before we determine which is the best form. Upon this point all speculative politicians will agree, that the happiness of society is the end of government, as all divines and moral philosophers will agree that the happiness of the individual is the end of man. From this principle it will follow, that the form of government which communicates ease, comfort, security, or, in one word, happiness, to the greatest number of persons, and in the greatest degree, is the best.

All sober inquirers after truth, ancient and modern, pagan and Christian, have declared that the happiness of man, as well as his dignity, consists in virtue. Confucius, Zo- roaster, Socrates, Mahomet, not to mention authorities really sacred, have agreed in this.

If there is a form of government, then, whose principle and foundation is virtue, will not every sober man acknowledge it better calculated to promote the general happiness than any other form?

Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it.

Honor is truly sacred, but holds a lower rank in the scale of moral excellence than virtue. Indeed, the former is but a part of the latter, and consequently has not equal pretensions to support a frame of government productive of human happiness.

The foundation of every government is some principle or passion in the minds of the people. The noblest principles and most generous affections in our nature, then, have the fairest chance to support the noblest and most generous models of government.

A man must be indifferent to the sneers of modern English men, to mention in their company the names of Sidney, Harrington, Locke, Milton, Nedham, Neville, Burnet, and Hoadly. No small fortitude is necessary to confess that one has read them. The wretched condition of this country, however, for ten or fifteen years past, has frequently reminded me of their principles and reasonings. They will convince any candid mind, that there is no good government but what is republican. That the only valuable part of the British constitution is so; because the very definition of a republic is "an empire of laws, and not of men." That, as a republic is the best of governments, so that particular arrangement of the powers of society, or, in other words, that form of government which is best contrived to secure an impartial and exact execution of the laws, is the best of republics.

Of republics there is an inexhaustible variety, because the possible combinations of the powers of society are capable of innumerable variations.

As good government is an empire of laws, how shall your laws be made? In a large society, inhabiting an extensive country, it is impossible that the whole should assemble to make laws. The first necessary step, then, is to depute power from the many to a few of the most wise and good. But by what rules shall you choose your representatives? Agree upon the number and qualifications of persons who shall have the benefit of choosing, or annex this privilege to the inhabitants of a certain extent of ground.

The principal difficulty lies, and the greatest care should be employed, in constituting this representative assembly. It should be in miniature an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason, and act like them. That it may be the interest of this assembly to do strict justice at all times, it should be an equal representation, or, in other words, equal interests among the people should have equal interests in it. Great care should be taken to effect this, and to prevent unfair, partial, and corrupt elections. Such regulations, however, may be better made in times of greater tranquillity than the present; and they will spring up themselves naturally, when all the powers of government come to be in the hands of the people's friends. At present, it will be safest to proceed in all established modes, to which the people have been familiarized by habit.

A representation of the people in one assembly being obtained, a question arises, whether all the powers of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, shall be left in this body? I think a people cannot be long free, nor ever happy, whose government is in one assembly. My reasons for this opinion are as follow:--

1. A single assembly is liable to all the vices, follies, and frailties of an individual; subject to fits of humor, starts of passion, flights of enthusiasm, partialities, or prejudice, and consequently productive of hasty results and absurd judgments. And all these errors ought to be corrected and defects supplied by some controlling power.

3. A single assembly is apt to grow ambitious, and after a time will not hesitate to vote itself perpetual. This was one fault of the Long Parliament; but more remarkably of Holland, whose assembly first voted themselves from annual to septennial, then for life, and after a course of years, that all vacancies happening by death or otherwise, should be filled by themselves, without any application to constituents at all.

4. A representative assembly, although extremely well qualified, and absolutely necessary, as a branch of the legislative, is unfit to exercise the executive power, for want of two essential properties, secrecy and despatch.

5. A representative assembly is still less qualified for the judicial power, because it is too numerous, too slow, and too little skilled in the laws.

6. Because a single assembly, possessed of all the powers of government, would make arbitrary laws for their own interest, execute all laws arbitrarily for their own interest, and adjudge all controversies in their own favor.

But shall the whole power of legislation rest in one assembly? Most of the foregoing reasons apply equally to prove that the legislative power ought to be more complex; to which we may add, that if the legislative power is wholly in one assembly, and the executive in another, or in a single person, these two powers will oppose and encroach upon each other, until the contest shall end in war, and the whole power, legislative and executive, be usurped by the strongest.

The judicial power, in such case, could not mediate, or hold the balance between the two contending powers, because the legislative would undermine it. And this shows the necessity, too, of giving the executive power a negative upon the legislative, otherwise this will be continually encroaching upon that.

To avoid these dangers, let a distinct assembly be constituted, as a mediator between the two extreme branches of the legislature, that which represents the people, and that which is vested with the executive power.

Let the representative assembly then elect by ballot, from among themselves or their constituents, or both, a distinct assembly, which, for the sake of perspicuity, we will call a council. It may consist of any number you please, say twenty or thirty, and should have a free and independent exercise of its judgment, and consequently a negative voice in the legislature.

These two bodies, thus constituted, and made integral parts of the legislature, let them unite, and by joint ballot choose a governor, who, after being stripped of most of those badges of domination, called prerogatives, should have a free and independent exercise of his judgment, and be made also an integral part of the legislature. This, I know, is liable to objections; and, if you please, you may make him only president of the council, as in Connecticut. But as the governor is to be invested with the executive power, with consent of council, I think he ought to have a negative upon the legislative. If he is annually elective, as he ought to be, he will always have so much reverence and affection for the people, their representatives and counsellors, that, although you give him an independent exercise of his judgment, he will seldom use it in opposition to the two houses, except in cases the public utility of which would be conspicuous; and some such cases would happen.

In the present exigency of American affairs, when, by an act of Parliament, we are put out of the royal protection, and consequently discharged from our allegiance, and it has become necessary to assume government for our immediate security, the governor, lieutenant-governor, secretary, treasurer, commissary, attorney-general, should be chosen by joint ballot of both houses. And these and all other elections, especially of representatives and counsellors, should be annual, there not being in the whole circle of the sciences a maxim more infallible than this, "where annual elections end, there slavery begins."

These great men, in this respect, should be, once a year,

"Like bubbles on the sea of matter borne,
They rise, they break, and to that sea return."

This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey.

This mode of constituting the great offices of state will answer very well for the present; but if by experiment it should be found inconvenient, the legislature may, at its leisure, devise other methods of creating them, by elections of the people at large, as in Connecticut, or it may enlarge the term for which they shall be chosen to seven years, or three years, or for life, or make any other alterations which the society shall find productive of its ease, its safety, its freedom, or, in one word, its happiness.

A rotation of all offices, as well as of representatives and counsellors, has many advocates, and is contended for with many plausible arguments. It would be attended, no doubt, with many advantages; and if the society has a sufficient number of suitable characters to supply the great number of vacancies which would be made by such a rotation, I can see no objection to it. These persons may be allowed to serve for three years, and then be excluded three years, or for any longer or shorter term.

Any seven or nine of the legislative council may be made a quorum, for doing business as a privy council, to advise the governor in the exercise of the executive branch of power, and in all acts of state.

The governor should have the command of the militia and of all your armies. The power of pardons should be with the governor and council.

Judges, justices, and all other officers, civil and military, should be nominated and appointed by the governor, with the advice and consent of council, unless you choose to have a government more popular; if you do, all officers, civil and military, may be chosen by joint ballot of both houses; or, in order to preserve the independence and importance of each house, by ballot of one house, concurred in by the other. Sheriffs should be chosen by the freeholders of counties; so should registers of deeds and clerks of counties.

All officers should have commissions, under the hand of the governor and seal of the colony.

The dignity and stability of government in all its branches, the morals of the people, and every blessing of society depend so much upon an upright and skillful administration of justice, that the judicial power ought to be distinct from both the legislative and executive, and independent upon both, that so it may be a check upon both, as both should be checks upon that. The judges, therefore, should be always men of learning and experience in the laws, of exemplary morals, great patience, calmness, coolness, and attention. Their minds should not be distracted with jarring interests; they should not be dependent upon any man, or body of men. To these ends, they should hold estates for life in their offices; or, in other words, their commissions should be during good behavior, and their salaries ascertained and established by law. For misbehavior, the grand inquest of the colony, the house of representatives, should impeach them before the governor and council, where they should have time and opportunity to make their defence; but, if convicted, should be removed from their offices, and subjected to such other punishment as shall be thought proper.

A militia law, requiring all men, or with very few exceptions besides cases of conscience, to be provided with arms and ammunition, to be trained at certain seasons; and requiring counties, towns, or other small districts, to be provided with public stocks of ammunition and entrenching utensils, and with some settled plans for transporting provisions after the militia, when marched to defend their country against sudden invasions; and requiring certain districts to be provided with field-pieces, companies of matrosses, and perhaps some regiments of light-horse, is always a wise institution, and, in the present circumstances of our country, indispensable.

Laws for the liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people, are so extremely wise and useful, that, to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant.

The very mention of sumptuary laws will excite a smile. Whether our countrymen have wisdom and virtue enough to submit to them, I know not; but the happiness of the people might be greatly promoted by them, and a revenue saved sufficient to carry on this war forever. Frugality is a great revenue, besides curing us of vanities, levities, and fopperies, which are real antidotes to all great, manly, and warlike virtues.

But must not all commissions run in the name of a king? No. Why may they not as well run thus, "The colony of to A. B. greeting," and be tested by the governor?

Why may not writs, instead of running in the name of the king, run thus, "The colony of to the sheriff," &c., and be tested by the chief justice?

Why may not indictments conclude, "against the peace of the colony of and the dignity of the same?"

A constitution founded on these principles introduces know ledge among the people, and inspires them with a conscious dignity becoming freemen; a general emulation takes place, which causes good humor, sociability, good manners, and good morals to be general. That elevation of sentiment inspired by such a government, makes the common people brave and enterprising. That ambition which is inspired by it makes them sober, industrious, and frugal. You will find among them some elegance, perhaps, but more solidity; a little pleasure, but a great deal of business; some politeness, but more civility. If you compare such a country with the regions of domination, whether monarchical or aristocratical, you will fancy yourself in Arcadia or Elysium.

If the colonies should assume governments separately, they should be left entirely to their own choice of the forms; and if a continental constitution should be formed, it should be a congress, containing a fair and adequate representation of the colonies, and its authority should sacredly be confined to these cases, namely, war, trade, disputes between colony and colony, the post office, and the unappropriated lands of the crown, as they used to be called.

These colonies, under such forms of government, and in such a union, would be unconquerable by all the monarchies of Europe.

You and I, my dear friend, have been sent into life at a time when the greatest lawgivers of antiquity would have wished to live. How few of the human race have ever enjoyed an opportunity of making an election of government, more than of air, soil, or climate, for themselves or their children! When, before the present epocha, had three millions of people full power and a fair opportunity to form and establish the wisest and happiest government that human wisdom can contrive? I hope you will avail yourself and your country of that extensive learning and indefatigable industry which you possess, to assist her in the formation of the happiest governments and the best character of a great people. For myself, I must beg you to keep my name out of sight; for this feeble attempt, if it should be known to be mine, would oblige me to apply to myself those lines of the immortal John Milton, in one of his sonnets:--

"I did but prompt the age to quit their clogs
By the known rules of ancient liberty,
When straight a barbarous noise environs me
Of owls and cuckoos, asses, apes, and dogs."

Freedom of Religion 1802 Thomas Jefferson

2009-08-12T18:53:00.001-07:00

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

Dangers of a Salaried Bureaucracy - by Benjamin Franklin

2009-08-11T19:16:00.001-07:00

How could someone that long ago possibly know the struggles we have today...

Dangers of a Salaried Bureaucracy - by Benjamin Franklin

IT is with reluctance that I rise to express a disapprobation of any one article of the plan for which we are so much obliged to the honorable gentlemen who laid it before us. From its first reading I have borne a good will to it, and, in general, wished it success. In this particular of salaries to the executive branch, I happen to differ; and, as my opinion may appear new and chimerical, it is only from a persuasion that it is right, and from a sense of duty, that I hazard it. The committee will judge of my reasons when they have heard them, and their judgment may possibly change mine. I think I see inconveniences in the appointment of salaries; I see none in refusing them, but, on the contrary, great advantages.

Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence in the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice—the love of power and the love of money. Separately, each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but, when united in view of the same object, they have, in many minds, the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men a post of honor, that shall, at the same time, be a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it. The vast number of such places it is that renders the British government so tempestuous. The struggles for them are the true source of all those factions which are perpetually dividing the nation, distracting its councils, hurrying it sometimes into fruitless and mischievous wars, and often compelling a submission to dishonorable terms of peace.

And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable preeminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate, the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your government and be your rulers. And these, too, will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation, for their vanquished competitors, of the same spirit, and from the same motives, will perpetually be endeavoring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people.

Besides these evils, sir, tho we may set out in the beginning with moderate salaries, we shall find that such will not be of long continuance. Reasons will never be wanting for proposed augmentations; and there will always be a party for giving more to the rulers, that the rulers may be able, in return, to give more to them. Hence, as all history informs us, there has been in every state and kingdom a constant kind of warfare between the governing and the governed; the one striving to obtain more for its support, and the other to pay less. And this has alone occasioned great convulsions, actual civil wars, ending either in dethroning of the princes or enslaving of the people.

Generally, indeed, the ruling power carries its point, and we see the revenues of princes constantly increasing, and we see that they are never satisfied, but always in want of more. The more the people are discontented with the oppression of taxes, the greater need the prince has of money to distribute among his partizans, and pay the troops that are to suppress all resistance, and enable him to plunder at pleasure. There is scarce a king in a hundred who would not, if he could, follow the example of Pharaoh—get first all the people’s money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants for ever. It will be said that we do not propose to establish kings. I know it. But there is a natural inclination in mankind to kingly government. It sometimes relieves them from aristocratic domination. They would rather have one tyrant than five hundred. It gives more of the appearance of equality among citizens; and that they like.

I am apprehensive, therefore—perhaps too apprehensive—that the government of the States may, in future times, end in a monarchy. But this catastrophe, I think, may be long delayed, if in our proposed system we do not sow the seeds of contention, faction, and tumult, by making our posts of honor places of profit. If we do, I fear that, tho we employ at first a number and not a single person, the number will, in time, be set aside; it will only nourish the fetus of a king (as the honorable gentleman from Virginia very aptly expressed it), and a king will the sooner be set over us.

It may be imagined by some that this is a Utopian idea, and that we can never find men to serve us in the executive department without paying them well for their services. I conceive this to be a mistake. Some existing facts present themselves to me which incline me to a contrary opinion. The high sheriff of a county in England is an honorable office, but it is not a profitable one. It is rather expensive, and therefore not sought for. But yet it is executed, and well executed, and usually by some of the principal gentlemen of the county. In France the office of counselor, or member of their judiciary parliament, is more honorable. It is therefore purchased at a high price; there are, indeed, fees on the law proceedings, which are divided among them, but these fees do not amount to more than three per cent. on the sum paid for the place. Therefore, as legal interest is there at five per cent., they, in fact, pay two per cent. for being allowed to do the judiciary business of the nation, which is, at the same time, entirely exempt from the burden of paying them any salaries for their services.

I do not, however, mean to recommend this as an eligible mode for our judiciary department. I only bring the instance to show that the pleasure of doing good and serving their country, and the respect such conduct entitles them to, are sufficient motives with some minds to give up a great portion of their time to the public, without the mean inducement of pecuniary satisfaction.

Another instance is that of a respectable society who have made the experiment and practised it with success now more than a hundred years. I mean the Quakers. It is an established rule with them that they are not to go to law, but in their controversies they must apply to their monthly, quarterly, and yearly meetings. Committees of these sit with patience to hear the parties, and spend much time in composing their differences. In doing this they are supported by a sense of duty and the respect paid to usefulness. It is honorable to be so employed, but it was never made profitable by salaries, fees, or perquisites. And, indeed, in all cases of public service, the less the profit, the greater the honor.

To bring the matter nearer home, have we not seen the greatest and most important of our offices, that of general of our armies, executed for eight years together, without the smallest salary, by a patriot whom I will not now offend by any other praise; and this, through fatigues and distresses, in common with the other brave men, his military friends and companions, and the constant anxieties peculiar to his station? And shall we doubt finding three or four men in all the United States with public spirit enough to bear sitting in peaceful council, for, perhaps, an equal term, merely to preside over our civil concerns, and see that our laws are duly executed? Sir, I have a better opinion of our country. I think we shall never be without a sufficient number of wise and good men to undertake and execute well and faithfully the office in question.

Sir, the saving of the salaries, that may at first be proposed, is not an object with me. The subsequent mischiefs of proposing them are what I apprehend. And, therefore, it is that I move the amendment. If it be not seconded or accepted, I must be contented with the satisfaction of having delivered my opinion frankly and done my duty.

"It's Them That Can't Handle The Truth!"

2009-08-07T21:04:00.000-07:00

I'm just a simple guy, I come from a simple middle class family raised in the 50's, while Eisenhower was President (You know? the "good ol days")

Then there were the 60's, boy that was fun, I'm sure most of you read about it in High school. Well, maybe not, considering the state of the current Educational system. We fought for what we felt was right (Correct that is). We were chased around and they tried to stop up from speaking out for those beliefs, but in the end we won. But it took Kent State to show the Evil that our Government was capable of for the "Greater Good". Sound Familiar?

Then there was the 70's, Nixon (And yes, he did screw up. But if you look at his body of work overall, he will be remembered as one of our Greatest) And then there was Carter, what can we say, 17% inflation, 11-12% unemployment, and an Idiot! Only Reagan could have saved us from that decade. By the way, I was a delegate to the State Democratic Presidential Convention during that decade, yes I did, hard to believe looking back on it... :)

Then I saw the light, Ronald Reagan, and realized that there is Honor in standing up for your Country, Believing in the good of people, knowing that there is Peace in strength through military power, (Though despite the 60's I have always believed in a VERY Strong Military), that was good for me, good for the Country, good for the World.

Now here we are, the Generation of Peace and Love are the ones in charge. Am I ever ashamed and so sorry for what we have done to our Country. I say we because my generation became weak noncommittal "Don't Bother Me" I'm trying to make money. The sad part of that is we raised our children to believe in that same pablum, which lead to now!

What we have now is a, very large, group of Ideologues (Basically Socialists) that "Know" what is right for America. An America that should apologize for all the good we've done in the World, give up our way of life when it comes to energy so the rest of the World doesn't have to, a weak Military because it might offend a Terrorist, can't dig or drill for our own minerals for the sake of an owl?, and now we have to go to a Socialist Medical System because we can't give away enough FREE Medical Care for those who don't want to pay for it of Illegals...
And the Left (Socialist) can't understand what the problem with all this is? Well we created them and now it's time we showed exactly who's in charge and PUT AN END TO THIS!

We have to go into the streets and be heard, whether they want us to or not! We have to go to the Town Hall Meetings and Speak Out! We have to do our "Tweets" and "Blogs" because we no longer have a voice in 98% of the Print Media, and even less in the Television Media. If it wasn't for Radio, we wouldn't have any voice in the electronic Media at all, and they are trying to stop that with the "Fairness Act". Fairness act, tell me that isn't an oxymoron if I have ever heard one...
We need to make our voice heard, our presents known, our will followed as the Declaration of Independence and Constitution dictate they must!

Yes, they will follow you, they did me as soon as I started emailing fair@whitehouse.gov, Yes, after just a couple of times emailing that address they (And you know who) started following my humble Twitter, can you really believe how petty they have to be getting, to do that to Me? But keep this in mind, while they fight us and try and stopping us from saying what needs to be said, "It's Them That Can't Handle The Truth!"

The Truth that as a Country of free thinking people, a Country of people that will, and have, laid down our lives to protect and serve our fellow citizens and protect the world from tyranny, WE WILL NEVER LET IT HAPPEN HERE....

By the way, use the email address above and really piss them off.

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

2009-08-05T12:48:00.001-07:00

Here is a Press Release issued by the House of Representatives on August 4, 2009. Though it was released by Republicans, it shows one side of the tactics being used by the Socialists (aka: Democrats)

..........................................................................

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
http://republicans.oversight.house.gov

{News Release}

Issa to Emanuel: Back Off!

August 4, 2009
WASHINGTON. D.C. – Following reports that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been orchestrating an effort to intimidate members of Congress and Governors who raise legitimate concerns regarding the effectiveness of the stimulus, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA) sent a letter to Emanuel saying “While this type of scare tactic may work In Chicago, it will not work to intimidate me or other Members of the United States Congress.”

“I and others have dared to bring these facts to the attention of President Obama, the Congress and the American people,” Issa wrote. “You’ve unfortunately reacted by once again resorting to the playbook of the Chicago political machine.”

Last month, Politico reported that Emanuel had “launched a coordinated effort to jam” Senator Kyl and other Administration critics… “[A]fter seeing Kyl and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) again paint the legislation as a failure on Sunday talk shows, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel directed that the letters from the Cabinet secretaries be sent to [Governor] Brewer, according to two administration officials.”

Issa noted, “The fact that the letters were coordinated by you to maximize the level of intimidation is supported by the timing, structure, and content of each letter. Not only were the four letters all sent the day following Senator Kyl’s remarks, but they were also remarkably similar in tone and sentence structure.”

*Letter from Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation:
On Sunday, Arizona Senator Jon Kyl publicly questioned whether the stimulus is working and stated that he wants to cancel projects that aren’t presently underway. I believe the stimulus has been very effective in creating job opportunities throughout the country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to your state, as Senator Kyl suggests, please let me know [emphasis added].*

*Letter from Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior:
Some key Republican leaders in Congress have publicly questioned whether the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is working and suggested cancelling all projects that are not currently in progress. I believe they are wrong. The stimulus funds provided through the Recovery Act are a very effective way to create job opportunities throughout the Country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to Arizona, please let me know [emphasis added].*

“At what point do you believe your practice of Chicago-style politics violates a public official’s right to speak out in favor of alternative policies,” Issa asks. “The American people have a right to know what role you played in developing the threatening letters to Governor Brewer and whether you intend to continue to engage in these tactics in the future.”

In order to assist the Committee with its investigation of this issue, please provide the following information by close of business on Tuesday, August 11, 2009:
Your response to Politico’s report that “White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel directed that the letters from the Cabinet secretaries be sent to [Governor] Brewer, according to two administration officials.”
A full and complete explanation of the development of the four July 13 letters from the cabinet secretaries to Governor Brewer, including but not limited to the role you or any other White House official played in writing the letters or encouraging the writing of the letters.
All records and communications between you and Secretary LaHood, Secretary Salazar, Secretary Donovan, and Secretary Vilsack referring or relating to the decision to send the July 13 letters to Governor Brewer.
A full and complete explanation of the role of the Democratic National Committee and the White House Office of Political Affairs in authoring, encouraging, facilitating, or directing the four July 13 letters from the cabinet secretaries to Governor Brewer.

………................................................................

How you read this, and make up your mind as to what it says, is a matter of interpretation. (Based on you political persuasion, Republican or Democrat)
But there is little doubt that there are "Implied Threats" in what the Administration officials are saying. I am paraphrasing now; If you are going to give us grief over what we want to do with Tax Payer Money, maybe you should "Turn Down" the Stimulus Funds. (Though only what? 20% or so has been issued out...)
Problem is, if you take it, you have to spend it the way BHO and the Pollit Bureau wants. If you try to turn it down, then out comes the Ministry of Propaganda portraying you as an "Evil" non-caring, you "Hate" the poor kind of cretin. And they control 98% of the Media, how can you fight this?

Go out to the Town Meetings and protest to your Senator or Congressman. Write, email, Tweet, note by carrier pigeon to the same people. Whatever it takes to make them understand that this must stop NOW! We can't afford to have all of our taxes raised, our employers taxed out of existence, the cost of everything we buy raised (Because of Cap and Trade), just so a few can collect a new kind of Socialist Welfare.

If we do nothing, we get what we deserve!!!

Is this the U.S.A. or the U.S.S.R.?

2009-08-04T19:10:00.000-07:00

Check This Out...

From: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

(There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov)

*THIS IS REAL, CHECK THE WHITEHOUSE LINK ABOVE*

Now I'm not sure about this, but does this sound a little like:

Big Brother
Mao
Pol Pot
Stalin
A.H. (Former popular European Leader)

Or just about any former or current leader of any Totalitarian Regime.

Everyone laughed at the thought of, maybe a Tax on Soda, Death, Beer, Internet Sales, or FOR NOT HAVING Health Insurance... OPPS, They either DO or PLAN TO, Tax Each And Everyone One Of These Aren't They??
I am going to have a hard time dealing with my neighbor, or a co-worker, or a Family Member? (Good Lord I Hope Not), or the Guy driving down the Interstate next to me keeping an eye on me. Are they actually asking people to SPY on each other so the "Right" (Not to be confused with the correct political persuasion) information comes out?
What are they so affraid of? Is it a crime now adays to want what you believe in, instead of what the State wants?

Now I actually wrote to the above address and told them what I thought of this "Correction of Disinformation" of theirs. It's going to be interesting to see if BHO and/or his minions follow this up with another "Information Gathering Spree". I can only hope... Haven't had much fun lately...

Infamous 911 Call

2009-07-27T18:13:00.000-07:00

Here are the transcript from the 911 call the night of the "Black Man in America" incident...

911 OPERATOR: 9-1-1, what is the exact location of your emergency?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Hi, I'm actually at (inaudible) street in Cambridge, the house number is 7 Ware Street.

911 OPERATOR: OK ma'am, your cell phone cut out, what's the address again?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Sorry, it's 7 Ware Street. That's W-A-R-E Street.

911 OPERATOR: The emergency is at 7 Ware Street, right?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Well no, I'm sorry. 17. Some other woman is talking next to me but it's 17, 1-7 Ware Street.

911 OPERATOR: What's the phone number you're calling me from?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: I'm calling you from my cell phone number.

911 OPERATOR: All right, tell me exactly what happened?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Um, I don't know what's happening. I just had an older woman standing here and she had noticed two gentlemen trying to get in a house at that number, 17 Ware Street. And they kind of had to barge in and they broke the screen door and they finally got in. When I had looked, I went further, closer to the house a little bit after the gentlemen were already in the house. I noticed two suitcases. So, I'm not sure if this is two individuals who actually work there, I mean, who live there.

911 OPERATOR: You think they might have been breaking in?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: I don't know 'cause I have no idea. I just noticed.

911 OPERATOR: So you're saying you think the possibility might have been there? What do you mean by barged in? You mean they kicked the door in?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: No, they were pushing the door in. Like, umm, the screen part of the front door was kind of like cut.

911 OPERATOR: How did they open the door itself with the lock?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: They, I didn't see a key or anything 'cause I was a little bit away from the door. But I did notice that they pushed their (interrupted).

911 OPERATOR: And what do the suitcases have to do with anything?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: I don't know, I'm just saying that's what I saw.

911 OPERATOR: Do you know what apartment they broke into?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: No, they're just they first floor. I don't even think that it's an apartment. It's 17 Ware Street. It's a house, it's a yellow house. Number 17. I don't know if they live there and they just had a hard time with their key but I did notice that they kind of used their shoulder to kind of barge in and they got in. I don't know if they had a key or not because I couldn't see from my angle. But, you know, when I looked a little closely that's what I saw.

911 OPERATOR: (inaudible) guy or Hispanic?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Umm.

911 OPERATOR: Are they still in the house?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: They're still in the house, I believe, yeah.

911 OPERATOR: Were they white, black or Hispanic?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Umm, well there were two larger men, one looked kind of Hispanic but I'm not really sure. And the other one entered and I didn't see what he looked like at all. I just saw it from a distance and this older woman was worried thinking someone's breaking in someone's house, they've been barging in. And she interrupted me and that's when I had noticed otherwise I probably wouldn't have noticed it at all, to be honest with you. So, I was just calling 'cause she was a concerned neighbor, I guess.

911 OPERATOR: OK, are you standing outside?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: I'm standing outside, yes.

911 OPERATOR: All right, the police are on the way, you can meet them then they get there. What's your name?

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: Yeah, my name is (deleted).

911 OPERATOR: All right, we're on the way.

FEMALE WITNESS CALLER: OK. All right, I guess I'll wait. Thanks.

The Officer, The Professor, and the President.

2009-07-26T16:05:00.001-07:00

I was going to leave this misinformed, rash, and yes, Stupid statement by BHO, about the racial statements from the Cambridge Professor alone. But BHO had to keep stepping in it, in every sense of the word.

To start with, let me give my qualifications for making comments on this.
I was born and raised in Oakland California. About half of my friends were "Not White" even though I am White. We hung together, played together and ate together. Even at that age I knew there were issues with the way minorities were treated. It saddened me when I would see "Whites Only" signs, or I had to listen to my own Mother say disgusting things like, "you can go to their home, but don't bring them home with you because they would be uncomfortable here" Uncomfortable with who? a Woman that was a racist like Her maybe, but not with me or my friends.
That was the 50's, then there were the 60's. I was one of those " Protesters" getting chased around the streets of Bezerkley by the Police. But one of my personal causes was Civil Rights. The right to Vote, eat where you choose, ride on the bus where you wanted etc. I marched for that most of all, and it caused lots of problems at home I'll tell you! But I only cared for what was RIGHT! But I digress...

When the question was asked of BHO about what had happened at Cambridge, the first words out of his mouth was "I don't know the circumstances", he should have stopped right then and there. BUT NO, he had to throw in racism into the mix. This so called Black Activist professor is his friend so he immediately took that side. The side of "Is this how you treat a Black Man in America?" How dare he take one side over another without knowing the facts? How dare he take a side before he even knew if his "Friend" was lying to cover his own behind. So now, according to the "President of the United States" the Cambridge Police "Acted stupidly". I contend BHO acted stupid with that one question. Plain and simple.

Now where do we go from here? A beer? Give me a break! If George Wallace had said to the students he tried to block from the Mississippi college, hey let's have a beer and talk about this, they would have laughed in his face.

Therefore I say this, Obama, I laugh at you and no longer trust what you say...

Thought I'd Throw A Little Humor Out...

2009-07-25T13:08:00.000-07:00

I figure with all the depressing things coming from the current Socialist Administration, I'd throw out a little humor to take the bite away. Question is, doe's anyone have a real sense of humor anymore?

Bet there are some Bankers that can relate to this...

Except I liked Bonnie and Clyde...

Kinda looks like my Ex...

Now keep in mind, this was done in good humor. If we can't laugh at the things that are happening in our lives, we would probably cry or worse. So keep a smile and keep the good fight against the changes that we don't need in the Country...

1984 or 2009? You tell me!

2009-07-23T10:44:00.001-07:00

I thought I'd have some fun with a little comparison between what is going on in this Country today and one George Orwell speculated about in his book, 1984.

(Doublethink: The acceptance of two contradictory ideas or beliefs at the same time)

When you hear from BHO on one day that the "New and Improved" Health care will only cover about 33%, at only the "Low" cost of 1.3 Trillion. Now it seems it will cover 98% and only 400 Billion after the Savings from Medicare. Savings from Medicare? I believe Webster might define that as an OXYMORON

Then there's "Newspeak"
(Newspeak: An official or semiofficial style of writing or saying one thing in the guise of its opposite, esp. in order to serve a political or ideological cause while pretending to be objective, as in referring to “increased taxation” as “revenue enhancement.”)

Boy, tell me this doesn't sound familiar?

Tell me "Crimethink" or "Thought Crime" isn't happening as we speak.
(Crimethink: the Government not only attempts to control the Speech and Actions but also the thoughts of it's subjects or populace)

This could best be represented in the "Fairness Doctrine" that the Socialist Party wants. When Left Wing Radio fails at every try, then it is necessary block Right Wing Radio from being heard. Or you can force the people to pay and listen to Right Wing Radio to make it more Equal. (All Animals are equal, except some are more equal than others. Oops, that's from another of Orwell's books, Animal Farm)

Now we are on to the "Thought Police"
(Thought Police: The Secret Police whose job it is to uncover and punish violators of "Thought Crime" aka "Crimethink")
I think we are currently calling this one the F.C.C.

Ministry of truth
(The "Ministry of Truth" is a misnomer because what it does is repeat all information that comes from the government, be it the truth or a lie, until the people believe it)

Here is an area we can all relate to, Health care, the wars oversea, taxes etc.

Now believe me when I tell you, I am not one of those nuts who sees conspiracies at every turn. And I won't even talk about those 911 conspiracy types. I just see things from every point of view, and that can be a curse I'll tell ya.
But it does cause you to think when someone who has need dead, for longer than most of you have been alive, can show us a world that is strangely similar to our own...

So Who is going To Pay For Healthcare?

2009-07-20T14:48:00.001-07:00

Let's start with the Evil Millionaires, those terrible people who built our industry, Cars & Houses & Computers & Hospitals Etc.

We have to go after these Evil industrialists. Let's take away all the incentives to grow thier companies and the JOBS that creates. Why should we leave them any money to do these horrible things? Why should we care if they are forced out of business? It's all for the good of the poor and downtrodden isn't it? (By the way, it will only cover 1/3 of the uninsured) So let's just take 55% of thier income...

Now, we can't forget the working types on this.
We are all going to have to sacrifice for the betterment of our fellow citizens. Those of you who are young and healthy, newly married without children, you to are going to help the downtrodden, how? Easy, you don't need insurance so you are going to "Donate" 2 1/2% of your income so others may have the "American Dream"! You won't need to put money in the bank, your IRA or 401 because you are Going to "Donate" for others...

Think about this for just one minute:
DO YOU WORK FOR A RICH PERSON or A POOR PERSON?
Of you tax the to death, where do you plan to work? For the Obama Administration? And pigs fly...

Abortion is Healthcare?

2009-07-20T11:03:00.001-07:00

Now I don't have a Uteris so I usually keep my opinions about abortion to a close circle. But this is going to far.
Abortion is going to be part of Health Care Reform? What exactly does a woman who can't keep from getting pregnant have to do with this?
I'm sorry, but having sex is not an illness, babys are not a disease, so why am I going to pay for an abortion for some welfair type in upper NY, or southern Florida?
If this kind of stuff is passed, I fear for my Country!

This is Healthcare?

2009-07-19T16:48:00.000-07:00

Now, I have a better than average IQ, but what the hell is this? I have never, in my life, seen such a convoluted mess being presented to the American Public. And they, the Socialist Party, want this passed before the August Recess.

I can see why they want this mess passed ASAP, if it isn't then maybe, just maybe someone will figure out that this will BANKRUPT the country.

Health Care Costs

2009-07-18T17:23:00.000-07:00

Have you read the New And Improved Health Care Bill? Me Neither...

But what I have been able to glean from the most convoluted bill in the history of the Republic is, according to page 16 if you don't have your own policy by the time the Bill is passed and signed, you will be prohibited from getting it. YES you read this right, you WILL NOT be allowed to buy your own policy.

So what can you do then? Here is the catch... You can get the Government Health Policy under their rules and guidelines or get nothing... WRONG!
If you don't want to get the Government Health Care, you WILL have to PAY 2.5% TAX for the privilege of not having Health Coverage. Once again, you did hear correctly, you WILL BE TAXED 2.5% (Income that is) if you don't want coverage.
This is starting to come close to the line of: United Soviet States Of America
How long are we going to allow this to continue...