Friday, December 21, 2012


I will be taking a little time from posting over the holidays.  So this is my last post of 2012.  I'll be back at the first of 2013.  Time flies when you are having have some fun and I'll be back before you know it!!  And Merry best as you can!

It  never occurred to me that a few days before Christmas in 2012 I would be writing a post on this blog about protecting Americans from its own government, especially on the issue of gun rights.  We cannot lose these rights, friends. 

History is replete with examples of tyrannical governments who disarmed their citizens and then either murdered or starved their opposition or the "unwanted" among them.  From King Herod to today, elimination of opposition is a hallmark of tyranny.  The Obama administration, and all of their minions and useful idiots, want to rule over a populace that cannot defend itself.  Rulers do not like opposition. This is the reason for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, to prevent tyranny over a defenseless public.  
Since Obama took the White House, the Federal government of the United States has been very actively involved in arming enemies of freedom and attempting to disarm the patriots of this nation.  The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) allows for the arrest and detainment of American citizens without warrants or due process.  Congress enacted a law that keeps protesters out of sight and far away from.....elected officials, a law that insulates the ruling class from the ruled.  All of the Federal agencies have armed up and requisitioned millions of rounds of hollow point bullets.   Here  And Here:

"In March DHS ordered 750 million rounds of hollow point ammunition. It then turned around and ordered an additional 750 million rounds of miscellaneous bullets including some that are capable of penetrating walls. This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen. Is this something we and the Congress should be concerned about? What’s the plan that requires so many dead Americans, even during times of civil unrest? Has Congress and the Administration vetted the plan in public."

Yet, now, because a deranged  psychopath was allowed to act out a horrendous atrocity against children and school teachers, Obama would like nothing better than to disarm everyone everywhere, EXCEPT of course his own government.  

Yesterday the news brought an item about the Chinese Communist government releasing a statement that demands the United States enact gun control.  Really???  Isn't that so nice.  Who the heck are the Chinese Communists to "demand" anything of the United States and our citizens?  I'm sure Anita Dunn who put Mao ornaments on the White House Christmas tree a few years back is delighted with support from the Chinese for disarming Americans.
"The Chinese government stated, “Their blood and tears demand no delay for the U.S. gun control.”

The current Chinese government, the communist People’s Republic of China, was established in a revolution led by Mao Zedong, who killed an estimated 40-70 million people with starvation, executions, and re-education camps.
 From a site called Mercy Seat (linked below) you can read: 
The China chapter is much less enlightening, mostly because the victims of Mao's genocide, unlike Hitler's, left much less of a record for Western historians to uncover. While many scholars agree that about one million people were murdered during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), the number of people who were starved to death by Mao's communization of the economy from 1957 to 1960 ("the Great Leap Forward") might be as low as one million, or as high as thirty million. [47]

Mao, like Hitler, inherited gun control from his predecessor's regime. [48] A 1912 Chinese law made it illegal to import or possess rifles, cannons, or explosives without a permit. [49] The law was apparently aimed at the warlords who were contesting the central government's authority; Chinese peasants were far too poor to afford guns. [50] Communist gun control was not enacted until 1957, when the National People's Congress outlawed the manufacture, repair, purchase, or possession of any firearm or ammunition "in contravention of safety provisions." [51]
A short walk through history will tell you all you need to know about despotic rulers who eliminated their opposition by disarming them.  
From Warrior Times
1911 – Turkey disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1915 – 1917 they murdered 1.5 million Armenians.
1929 – Russia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1929 – 1953 they murdered 20 million Russians.
1935 – China disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1948 – 1952 they murdered 20 million Chinese.
1938 – Germany disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1939 – 1945 they murdered 16 million Jews.
1956 – Cambodia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1975 – 1977 they murdered 1 million Educated people.
1964 – Guatamala disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1964 – 1981 they murdered 100,000 Mayan Indians.
1970 – Uganda disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1971 – 1979 they murdered 300,000 Christians.
I would argue the numbers of Chinese murdered was much higher than that list indicates.  I've read higher accounts, most saying 30 million.  At the side bar of this page you will find  this on history of global communist tyranny.
Two of my favorites below:
From Thomas Hobbes:
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed."

From Thomas Jefferson:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. … Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
There are many more at that'll like them!!!  Argue against Obama's government as if your life depended on it....because it does.
Hat tips: 

Monday, December 17, 2012


Under "liberal" (progressive) rule over our infrastructural institutions for the last 50 years, justice, law enforcement, and the mental health professions have all failed.  The "Great Society" has failed.  The directors of the failure unfortunately are still in charge.  The collectivist idea that everyone share in the failures (and successes) of complete strangers is driving the nation off the cliff.  "Never let a crisis go to waste" is driving totalitarian advocates inside our government.  Heaven forbid citizens should be allowed to protect themselves.

It is interesting to see that criminals (both sane and insane) look for soft targets.  What progressive liberals do is create soft targets for their power-mad policies.  So now, after this latest school massacre of defenseless teachers and children, we are going to hear, ad infinitum, how everyone in the nation should lose rights and suffer punishment for what one mentally deranged person was allowed to do because of the failure of the mental health policies put in place by the progressive liberals. Once again the same people who created the problem in the first place are now grandstanding on soapboxes and telling every innocent law abiding citizen to go eat dirt.  This is Heads I win, Tails you lose.

As an aside here I want to interject my observation of the progressive liberal mind.  Excluding the truly evil of minds in the power structure in this nation, the average run-of-the-mill liberal cannot compute the consequences of liberal policies.  Liberals, I personally know, simply lack the ability to walk through the steps through to the natural culmination of their actions.  This makes them sheep, easily led down the garden path.  If something sounds nice, or if someone tells them how a problem will be fixed by an action by government, they will buy in faster than a "speeding bullet" and never ask a question about what that action really means.  Then they sit around crying when a disaster happens and look back at government to fix the problem that government created in the first place.  "Oh, it must be the guns that did it....MSNBC and the POTUS say so."  "Please government, take away everyone's guns!!"

Am I equating power-mad liberals with the Connecticut school shooter?  In a way, yes.  In the same way the shooter looked at innocent people as targets to use for his own diabolical and insane plot, progressives in positions of policy authority in whatever profession they are in, look at the rest of society as their target.  These folks may have a myriad of motives, some under the guise of saving the world from itself, some (most) blatantly for their own power, but the result is always the same.  Innocent people are used as targets to fulfill the wishes of people who want power.

No sooner had the news hit about the Connecticut shooting than the progressive liberals smelled blood in the political water and went after our rights.  Visceral, no?  Same thing happened after the Gabby Giffords shooting incident.  It's as predictable as the sun going down tonight and coming back up tomorrow.

The POTUS cloaked himself in a mourning coat and went to Connecticut yesterday to sell gun control to a grieving public.  Excuse me if I find that sickening. 

Read some history and weep:
The Federalist Society sheds some light"   A very good anecdotal account of events and subsequent murders in this article.

For a while, it was fashionable to blame gun availability for this dramatic increase. But guns did not become more available before or during this change. Instead, federal law and many state laws became more restrictive on purchase and possession of firearms, sometimes in response to such crimes.2 Nor has the nature of the weapons available to Americans changed all that much. In 1965, Popular Science announced that Colt was selling the AR-15, a semiautomatic version of the M-16 for the civilian market.3 The Browning Hi-Power, a 9mm semiautomatic pistol with a thirteen-round magazine, was offered for sale in the United States starting in 1954,4 and advertised for civilians in both the U.S. and Canada at least as early as 1960.5 If gun availability does not explain the increase of mass public murders, what else might?
At least half of these mass murderers (as well as many other murderers) have histories of mental illness. Many have already come to the attention of the criminal justice or mental health systems before they become headlines. In the early 1980s, there were about two million chronically mentally ill people in the United States, with 93 percent living outside mental hospitals. The largest diagnosis for the chronically mentally ill is schizophrenia, which afflicts about 1 percent of the population, or about 1.5 percent of adult Americans.6 A 1991 estimate was that schizophrenia costs the United States about $65 billion annually in direct and indirect costs.7
While I am on this subject, I want to point out the absolute sureness of the progressives in the psychiatry profession who decided to mainstream the dangerous mentally ill.  They were very sure this was a great thing to do.  (I want to ask...who is crazy in this scenario??)  The idea came as one more offshoot from the "civil rights" movement in the '60's.  No one wants cruelty ...including me.  But, now we are seeing the price paid by society by deinstitutionalizing the mentally ill, paid by the mentally ill,  society at large, and now sadly, more victims of a mass murder.  If the POTUS is serious about fixing this mass murder problem, reinstitutionalizing dangerous mentally ill people is way past due and necessary to our survival.  But alas, he blames the guns.  As usual.
Some more reading on the subject:

Friday, December 14, 2012


I can't think of anything comforting to say.  I am a parent and a grandparent. Like most, I've been choking back tears all afternoon thinking of all who have lost their lives and their families who are in mourning.  This is not the sort of thing that heals.  It is something you only learn to cope with, if you are lucky and strong.  I don't think I could.  God help those who mourn these dear loved ones today. 

Today's massacre at Sandy Hook was caused by yet another raving lunatic unleashed on innocent people in America.  I will be interested to learn if there were signs leading up to this 20 yr. old's behavior.  After each of the incidents of murders such as this over the past few years we learn there were indications that the murderer was likely to act out violently against others.  But no one acted ahead of time to prevent it.  In the case of Columbine, the two teens who murdered their schoolmates had set up an entire arsenal in the basement of one of their homes in preparation for their murdering spree.  The parents didn't notice.  The nut who shot Gabby Giffords had been mentally unstable and showed signs of violent reactions, yet where were his parents and counselors?  

I heard someone today describe this type of murder as "public suicide."  I suppose in the sick twisted mind of the individual, that is the statement they were conveying.  No comfort there.  

Just one other thing on my mind as we witness this horror in our nation.  As a child I felt safe.  Our schools were open.  As a teen I could walk out of school and have lunch at the YWCA and then walk back into school....all without a pass and no one's permission but my own.  We came and went at will.  The thought of a predator invading our schools with malevolent intentions never entered anyone's mind.  Why?  Mentally deranged and dangerous people were institutionalized.  Criminals were caught and jailed...not for 6 months, but for long periods of time.  Punishment was severe.  They were not walking around in society at large.  Not only that, but normalizing murder and terror through media was unheard of.  Allowing children to be exposed to the violence children see today was not going to happen.  Society, waaaaay back in the days I was growing up, was not going to tolerate violent mental illness, nor would society expect parents to shelter their grown children who could not be socialized.  That is what state mental hospitals were for.  

Now, in too many instances, losing innocent people at the hands of raving, violent and sick individuals, we find that something might have been done to prevent this.  But no one will do it.  Instead, we suffer through days and weeks of hand wringing about how it is the gun's fault or how we must be compassionate for the murderer. Hand wringing about how this is becoming all to prevalent.  We will no doubt be told the government MUST do something to take guns away from law abiding Americans.  

Bad day at Black Rock today.  No joyful Holiday anticipation.  Just unbearable sadness.  I just cannot fathom the pain the parents of those sweet children are suffering tonight.  More than anyone can bear.

God bless them. 


Wednesday, December 12, 2012


Don't get me wrong.  There are a few in Congress with guts to stand up.  But there are so few of them that nothing will be done to fix the situation.  Those few are stuck in no-man's land.  One of them, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, just decided the situation was so bad, he would go where he might make more of difference.  I wish him well and hope for his success in all ways.

First of all, I believe we have gradually been operating in Constitutional crisis mode for many decades to varying degrees, until now we are historic Rome, the Weimar Republic, the Soviet Union, and Greece all combined into the most poisonous soup ever dreamed up by enemies of the United States.  Just so you know that is my description of the situation we are in.  

As the last few years have drawn on into this abyss, I have read quite a few articles on who is behind the curtain pulling the strings.  It isn't one who, but a handful of who's ..and most of them are the global financiers and geo-political power brokers.  All of them are despicable users with huge egos.  I'm not a financial genius at the level of Hayek, of course.  But it doesn't take a financial genius to see the United States is being manipulated by money into ethical and Constitutional corruption beyond anything we have ever seen.  

I just read a short article today that prompted this post.  It is HERE  I am reprinting the entirety for you below: 

Anatomy of an End run

For all intents and pur­poses, cap and trade is dead in the U.S., but the global elite’s dream of a Technocracy-based economy is still alive and well.
Last month, Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion pitchman Al Gore  “again called for a ‘cap and trade’ system by warning Amer­i­cans the country faces a ‘cli­mate cliff’ in addi­tion to a ‘fiscal cliff.’” According to Gore,
“I think all who look at these cir­cum­stances should agree that Pres­i­dent Obama does have a man­date, should he choose to use it, to act boldly to solve the cli­mate crisis, to begin solving it.”
Far short of any voter-specified man­date, Gore pushes on: The cir­cum­stances that he (and he alone) cites pro­vide their own man­date to elected officials.
The best eco­nomic schol­ar­ship avail­able sug­gests that any kind of cap and trade sit­u­a­tion would impose a sig­nif­i­cant drag on the economy. Gore pays no atten­tion to such cri­tique, claiming that a carbon tax would def­i­nitely solve both fiscal and his dreamed-up “cli­mate cliff.”
What­ever frontal attack Gore (and other Tri­lat­erals) have launched in recent years, they have not gotten very far. How­ever, the have not and will not give up on their quest for the destruc­tion of the brown economy and the cre­ation of their utopian green economy — Technocracy.
So what hap­pens when they don’t get their way? We need not look any fur­ther than the writing of the Council on For­eign Rela­tions (CFR), which has long been a policy center driven by a Tri­lat­eral agenda.
The CFR pub­lished The Global Cli­mate Change Regime on July 5, 2012, which states in part,
“One way for Obama to force progress is to issue more exec­u­tive orders and admin­is­tra­tive rule­mak­ings to par­tially sub­sti­tute for Con­gres­sional oppo­si­tion to his cli­mate and energy agenda. Working through the EPA and the Clean Air Act, he could enact tougher rules that would cut carbon pol­lu­tion from power plants and mit­i­gate the poten­tial effects of the failure to enact a national cap-and-trade program.”
Their con­de­scending atti­tude towards the cit­i­zenry of this country is indeed insulting. Are they the “enlight­ened ones” with some mystic man­date to save us from our­selves whether we like it or not? Apparently.
From a strategic point of view, how­ever, you can see the value of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion hijacking of the Exec­u­tive Branch of the U.S. gov­ern­ment with the elec­tion of Jimmy Carter in 1976. They knew that the Amer­ican people would never go along with their screw­ball schemes, so they have forced them upon us by Exec­u­tive fiat – exec­u­tive orders, reg­u­la­tions and law-creating trade agreements.
Even though some mem­bers of Con­gress are fully aware of the Tri­lat­eral Commission’s agenda, there is no public recog­ni­tion of their iron-clad hege­mony over the Exec­u­tive Branch. Nei­ther are there any com­plaints about the loss of Con­gres­sional authority and inability to rep­re­sent their con­stituents who voted them into office in the first place.
Mean­while, voters are laboring under the delu­sion that those they elect will somehow rein in the Exec­u­tive Branch. How­ever, this has not hap­pened, is not hap­pening, and will not happen in the future.
How can the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion hege­mony be over­come? Only by a direct and forceful Con­gres­sional con­fronta­tion, including leg­is­la­tion ban­ning their mem­bers and oper­a­tives from serving in the Exec­u­tive Branch.

I could not have said it better.   Sure, there are some players not named and the global banksters are not mentioned, but that article tells you a great deal about what has happened to the Constitution.  Executive fiat = dictatorship.  The President of the United States has become, for all intents and purposes, nothing more than a puppet for global powers who really don't give a flying rip about this nation other than what they can take from it....from us.  We are electing people to Congress who stand by with their thumbs in there ears or get in on the take, and generally do nothing to stop this madness.  Oath?  What oath?  We also have a Supreme Court who, even if they could possibly cope with all of the unConstitutional fiats, don't do that job to our salvation either.  (witness the Obamacare decision from Justice Roberts as a recent example)

And then I read an article at American Thinker today that verified what I am seeing.  A quote from that article:  "The Obama administration has pursued an active regulatory agenda. The overall regulatory burden is now $1.8 trillion annually, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and this year alone new rules have added $215.4 billion in compliance costs."

That is ONE YEAR of regulatory burden, friends.  Losses to the economy, to those of you in Rio Linda. (as Rush would say)  Money that could be used productively if otherwise not scuttled down the toilet for this madness.  If the U.S. economy can afford that kind of loss, I've got some green cheese just arriving from the moon for your holiday cheese ball.  Put some nice Communist red paper chain (recycled, of course) garland around it, made by the inmates at our public elementary schools.  Vodka is optional for adult comrades only.

I've asked myself over the years, "How in the H E double LL are these insane regulations getting put upon Americans?"  Where did any freedom go?  I didn't vote for the Trilateral Commission or the CFR, or the IMF, or the UN, or the World Bank, or .....well, you see what I mean.  So the Presidential election (this time I really do believe was stolen with fraud) is a charade.  Sorry, to say.  I'm sure I am late to the party on that, since I have always felt it my duty to study candidates and vote in elections. 

Here's a thought.  Maybe all of those Cialis commercials are really made for male Congress members who obviously are impotent and / or focused on their bank accounts instead of the Constitution.  Not sure what to do with the female ones, but maybe Jane Fonda has them covered.

Still pondering.......

Monday, December 10, 2012


 A statement has been released, endorsed by 134 scientists attached to an organization called International Climate Science Coalition, along with a letter to the Secretary General of the UN, stating the facts that Global Warming is not driven by green house gases, nor does any human activity have enough of an impact on the climate to justify any of the massive spending by governments across the globe.  Hallelujah and pass the eggnog!!

This comes at a crucial time when the UN (using our tax dollars) has put on the circus in Doha, Qatar last week.  Within the statement are these assertions:
  • “there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years. During this period…carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations rose by nearly 9%...Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years.”
  • “Whether, when and how atmospheric warming will resume is unknown. The science is unclear.”
  • “The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence.”

 In spite of the facts, our government just goes marching along into cap and trade hell with the help of global corporations....among them Exxon Mobil:
"Exxon Mobil Corp is part of a growing coalition backing a carbon tax as an alternative to costly regulation, giving new found prominence to an idea once anathema in Washington."

The really disgusting and upsetting thing is the Republicans, trying to get on the gravy train and the "good" side of media, are looking to jump right in and sell your souls and mine.

"How could a carbon tax be passed in a Republican-dominated House? A carbon tax combined with reduced corporate income tax rates may appeal not only to liberals and moderates, but also to some muddle-headed and panicky conservatives.  Ken Green, an environmental specialist at the American Enterprise Institute adds that part of the appeal to the House majority may be a chance to “green up the conservative brand.”

 Excuse me but "greening up the conservative brand" is not what conservatives have in mind.  To say the least.  Conservative are definitely done with lying, thieving Republicans. 

A few years back I tried to explain to someone why the oceans are not going to overtake the land because of global warming, i.e. that global warming was not caused by CO2 and that the volume of water on the planet has been the same since the existence of the planet.  Yes, the planet shifts around, earthquakes happen, the rains come and go, etc., but this was not our fault. The person with whom I was speaking was of the opinion that the glaciers were melting because America is such a bad country, ruining the earth.  Oh, and she said those people in government telling us this "were smarter than we are, so they must know."   That was the extent of her defense of liberal views.  As I recall, at the time I was trying to explain to her why the ban on incandescent light bulbs was a scam and that using those CFL's was not going to make a tinker's damn's worth of difference to the planet.  In fact, I gave her lots of facts proving my point.  Didn't matter.  She would not listen. Sometime shortly after that, she phoned me to say she never wanted to speak to me again because she LOVED Obama so much. 

Now we are a few years later and Barack Obama hasn't managed to train the oceans to his commands.  There has been no global warming for the past 16 yrs. in spite of China and India cranking up the engines of manufacturing.  

Time marches on.  The real question is when will the liberals / leftists let go of the lies on this issue of climate?  When does the media indoctrination of sheeple-people, like the person I mentioned in the first paragraph, finally stop?  When does the American public school system catch up with the science and start teaching critical thinking based on factual information and scientific facts?


I have compassion for any poor schnook getting duped by a liar.  (I have had that happen to myself a couple of times in my life on a smaller personal level and it isn't fun.  Probably most people have been scammed in some way during their lifetimes.)  The lying usually involves stealing something.  Think of the Maddoff scam ...or just anyone who gets sucked into a program of lies.  Lies wreck lives, waste personal energy, waste economic security, and generally suck the life out of people.  But when entire sovereign nations go on a rampage of lying in order to tax and regulate commercial enterprise, all based on a complete fiction that was made up within the dark recesses of the United Nations, I think we have reached a bridge too far.  (understatement) 

I wonder what would have happened if the British had told the tea manufacturers that they better get on board with them to promote taxing the tea or the British government would regulate them out of business and take their profits.  I don't know for certain that didn't happen, now that I think of it.  Someone had to collect the taxes.  Was it the tea manufacturers, or retailers at the point of sale?  I really don't know.  No matter, the people stood up and said to the British government, "We are not going to allow you to tax us any more!"  Voilá  The revolution began.  Was the general public smarter then?  Or was it all just so obvious, no one had to sift through layers and layers of lies to figure it out? At least at that time, the taxing was blatantly for the benefit of the British royalty.  There were no stupid shenanigans about how this taxing is good for the planet and will save the world for future generations.  People understood that they were being economically deprived in order to prop up their own enslavement to the British.  Today, the same is true in the United States, but the government hands out enough money to prop up some segments of society to make it look like it isn't just the government elite raking it in.  The whole thing is an illusion.  If you use the British example, the royals set up a few charities to make it all seem chic and hip and oh so nice to give them money.  (They do that, too, just to stay in good graces with the public.)  Well, folks...that is what our government has done...set up some programs to gratify certain segments and then sell that to the public as a public relations campaign.

How far we have come!  "Progress", as Barack Obama likes to say, means taxes.  His game face lies are cloaked in warm and fuzzy entreaties like "fairness, climate change, social justice," and the like.  You have to give the guy credit.  He is lying and stealing as fast as he can.  In fact, the lying and stealing goes way beyond the White House, but he is setting a precedent for history's sake. 

We could deal with an occasional Maddoff.  It's tragic and the consequences are terrible for those who got hit.  But you do have to say a situation like that is a lesson to the rest of us.  The other thing is that an occasional Maddoff can be prosecuted, jailed, and pay the consequences of the public crime.  Still, the victims never recoup the losses in entirety.  In the end, crimes of fraud and theft are crimes.  What about politicians lying about "Climate Change?"  They have become no better than the lowest liars and thieves in our midst.  The level of lying and thievery has reached monumental heights, scamming the public in ways and depths only imagined by the tyrants of the past.

Back to the person who thinks the government is "smarter than we are," it seems we are finding out the government isn't smarter at all, but is infinitely more corrupt.  We could also deal with an occasional "useful idiot."  But we can't deal with millions of them, especially if they vote.  That person has been cloned by the public school system and the media, driven by government liars and thieves.  I look back at 1930's Germany and wonder if we haven't reached the same level of indoctrination.  Actually, I don't wonder...I fear we have reached the point of the Weimar Republic when the whole thing just starts going off the rails.

I do know that there were British loyals in American society before and during the American revolution.  But to have that revolution, there had to have been enough freedom loving people willing to step up and go through hell to put the British out of power.  There must not have been enough of those folks in Germany prior to and during Hitler's reign of power.  

Are there enough of us in America willing expose the lies and theft in order to protect freedom for the next generations?   When the UN proposes the U.S. Federal government should sacrifice economic liberty and throttle the freedoms we were guaranteed as American citizens, are there enough Americans who will stand against their own Federal government today?  

I guess we'll see.  I can tell you for certain, we can't count on the person who told me they LOVED Obama so much.  


Wednesday, December 5, 2012


A new product hits the market.  You hear the hype.  It's the greatest thing since sliced bread.  It's an Iphone, or a Cuisinart food processor, or On Star for your car.  Whatever the new product is, it is supposed to make your life easier and take away all of your work and worries.  At the risk of sounding like that guy they called the "unibomber" who hated technology, I have a gadget for you that is not going to make your life easier.  In fact its true intention is to make your life miserable....unless of course you are the strange type of person who wants someone else to make all of your decisions for you. 

Why would the Federal government grant millions and millions of our tax dollars to companies to develop Smart Meters for utilities, water, electric, and gas?  And then spend more millions on propaganda to tell us we must stop or reduce using fossil fuels and water?  And then spend more millions of dollars to set up regional bureaucratic boards under the "Sustainable Communities Initiative," boards that are designed to regulate water use, land use, and fuel use in these extra-jurisdictional regions? Why?

You get two correct answers on this one.  
#1.  Large utility corporations, most of whom already have monopolies,  are making deals with the  Federal government (using our tax dollars) that will allow them to sell less of their products at higher prices.  
#2. Our Federal government has made deals with the UN and third world nations, promising that the U.S. will stop and reduce using resources for our prosperity and well-being. 

If you replied with either or both of those answers, BINGO!  You win the prize.  (I don't actually have a prize to give you except for an "atta boy, " but I'll give you that!)

The premise for this assumes you actually still own or rent a house and run appliances such as an HVAC system, a refrigerator, a washer and dryer, a coffee pot, a hair dryer, etc.  These modern devices have made our lives better by large degrees.  We are no longer having to use wash-boards and our knuckles to wash our clothes. (My knuckles are very grateful, no doubt about that!)  We can dry our hair quickly in order to get to work on time.  We don't have to haul water from the river or a well to take a bath.  We are extremely more productive because we have climate control of our homes and work spaces. 

Oh, no...we can't have that, now can we!!  Especially if the rest of the world is not as capable of doing all of those things.  Why, we must be evil monsters to be heating and cooling our homes in a practical and efficient way, while the rest of the world doesn't.  Envy is a powerful tool.  Technology can be a huge blessing.  Or it can be used as a curse and a weapon against you.

The utility companies are putting out some massively seductive propaganda for Smart Meters.  If you know what the ultimate outcome will be, the propaganda is truly laughable.  If you don't know what it really is, you are going to swallow it, hook, line, and sinker. 

To understand how this will happen, start with the fact that your home's new digital meter will let information flow back and forth between your home and Duke Energy. That means information about your energy use will be transmitted in near-real time and available to you through your home computer, your smart phone or technology such as a home energy manager. As a result, you won't have to wait for a monthly bill to check on your usage. Instead, you'll be able to monitor your previous day's usage and, if you want, modify the ways you and your family are using electricity to better control costs. How you use the information is completely up to you – and only you, since the new grid gives consumers, not utility companies or the government, more power over energy choices.

Better control over your energy use and costs is just one of the advantages the  modernized grid will offer almost immediately. Another includes greater reliability throughout the entire power distribution network helping both prevent and pinpoint power outages in events such as storms. In addition, the modern day  grid will mean that Duke Energy representatives will no longer need to enter homes or come onto your property to read meters. Occasionally, we may need to have access to the meter for routine maintenance, but we'll let you know before we arrive. And the new technology will make flexible billing and payment options available to many.

If you believe all of that, I have a bridge in Arizona to sell you.  First of all, there are several canards in there.  I already have a meter that is read by remote from a truck that drives around and reads my meter from the street.  So there is no need for the meter reader to come into my property, or yours, anyway.  The utility company doesn't have a problem pinpointing problem areas now when there is an outage.  So the Smart Grid / Meters don't make any special improvements on that score.  As you can see from the first sentence, they mean to have real time information flowing back and forth between your house or business to their equipment, monitored by them.  And they are regulated by the government.   Who do you think wants that information and why?  

Do you really want to spend time every day monitoring your watts per hour?  Is that how best your time can be spent?   You aren't busy enough already?  A monthly bill isn't good enough for you?'s good enough for me.  I frankly don't envision spending my time micromanaging, hour by hour, what my energy, water, and gas usage is.  But they will.  Trust me.

In the future, the new grid will mean you can track exactly which appliances and equipment are costing you the most in energy use, letting you make changes to save on costs. Plus you'll be able to program your heating and cooling system, dishwasher, water heater and other appliances for greater efficiency. The technology  will  let you control your thermostat and appliances remotely and even alert you when you're approaching your own designated monthly energy budget.
The plan involves some really fun aspects to control your life.  This includes charging higher rates for "peak" time use.  It also includes allowing the utility company to regulate your appliances and thermostat.  Yes it does!  My son is currently living in Finland.  He tells me the thermostat goes to 72 degrees....period.  He asked someone about it.  They said, "That's what you get." "No more."  The high outside temperature there today is 28 degrees. I cannot attest to the efficiency of the HVAC system in his home.  (He is on assignment for the Air Force.)

When they talk about programming your appliances for greater efficiency...what that means is this:  If you turn on your dishwasher, your refrigerator energy automatically reduces to accommodate the dishwasher.  If you turn on the shower, using your hot water heater?  Your HVAC system shuts down until you finish your shower.  Wonder how the rest of the folks in the house will like that?  Hmmmm...

Oh, did I mention that appliance manufacturers want to buy this information from the utility companies?  And that the utility companies will be making money selling that information to appliance manufacturers....without your permission, by the way?  So then you can be inundated with appliance manufacturers and retail outlets bombarding you with sales pitches on replacing your appliances, telling you your appliances are not up to date enough and you must buy new ones that talk back to the Smart Meter the utility company just put on your home and business.  

Yep, Smart Meters are just great!  Can't wait til everyone is hooked up on those babies. 

Did I mention there are serious high radiation / health concerns that come with that Smart Meter installation?  And the occasional fires caused by Smart Meters?  And your power, water, and gas can be shut down by remote by the provider....or a hacker?  And that this doesn't save you a dime, but makes buckets and buckets of money for utility companies?

This is not the Nanny you want taking care of you, friends.   This would be called the NIGHTMARE NANNY. 

(Note: I have written Duke Energy and the Public Utilities Commission in my state and told them, in no uncertain terms, that I refuse to have a Smart Meter placed on my home.  I have placed a label on my electric meter saying NO SMART METER!  My advice:  If you have any energy left after all of the onslaught against our personal liberties that we are experiencing, start yelling loud and clear to your city, county, state, and utility providers that you will NOT accept a Smart Meter on your home or business. It is going to take a massive backlash from all of us to stop this dangerous insult to our liberties.) 
Here are some links to labels and information for you:
No Smart

Saturday, December 1, 2012


This must be a week for letters.  Today I received an email from a fellow who read one of my posts (2009) that was republished at Freedom Outpost recently.   The subject was Obamacare and health insurance, but I think he landed on it because he refers to my quotes from Ayn Rand as well.  For the sake of revealing how someone of Socialist ideology thinks, I thought it might be educational to post his email and my response to it for you.  If you wish to see the original post, you can go here: My Tea Party Chronicle

His email:
Ms. Pass:

Having read your blog about Ayn Rand and the execrable parasites known as health insurance companies, I would appreciate it if you would kindly explain why we should mourn their demise.

The good capitalist steals the best ideas of competitors, and the rest of the world has proven beyond cavil that socialized health care is more efficient than our bloated system, producing equivalent outcomes for a third of the cost.  Why is this such a bad thing? What value do these bureaucratic behemoths add?

The short definition of a modern Republican is a man who is more faithful to his dogma than his wife.  I would counter with a line from one of my other favorite atheist authors, Isaac Asimov: "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right."

Regards, Dissenter

My reply:
The piece re: Ayn Rand that you have just seen was republished recently by Freedom Outpost.  I am assuming that is where you saw it.

From the tenor of your comments I am sure your question is not an honest one. From what you say in your email, your mind is made up and you have demonized not only insurance companies, but capitalism and Republicans as a monolithic group. Nevertheless, I will give you my best answers if you will take the time to read and study this issue.

Your statement here for instance: "The short definition of a modern Republican is a man who is more faithful to his dogma than his wife."
To which I would ask you if the same applies to FDR, Kennedy, and Clinton...each Democrats with mistresses and peccadilloes.

You ask me to defend the insurance industry and then you proceed to defend socialism, which is responsible for the direct and indirect murders of millions of people throughout its history.  Efficiency in killing people would be attributable to the purveyors of totalitarian control, not capitalism.  Do you really need proof of this?  If so, I will give you documentation to read.

The concept of the insurance industry is the creation of a "risk pool."  Replacing the private insurance industry with socialized insurance by government is, nonetheless, a "risk pool." Whether or not you agree with a third-party payer system, you must decide if you wish the force of the government to control your healthcare providers or whether you would rather choose your own insurance and healthcare providers.  Private insurance by choice? Or government insurance by force?  I can only conclude from your email, your response is that you think force is better than choice.

You ask this: "What value do these bureaucratic behemoths add?"
If bureaucracy is your objection, replacing one bureaucracy with an even larger, less personal, government bureaucracy cannot be your solution.  In what universe does that make any logical sense?

As to this statement: "the rest of the world has proven beyond cavil that socialized health care is more efficient than our bloated system, producing equivalent outcomes for a third of the cost."
I'm assuming from that you must have been locked in a room watching Michael Moore's movie "Sicko" in a repeating loop ad infinitum for you to say such a thing. A different question to ask yourself would be: Why do socialist government officials not have to live under the same health care laws that they have put in place for everyone else? If Obamacare is so great, why have our politicians exempted themselves from it?   

To answer this presumption of yours, I refer you to several links which I hope you will take the time to read. The first one is regarding Ezekiel Emanuel, White House health care policy advisor to Barack Obama and author of much of Obamacare.

Below is an example of Canada's Socialized Health Care which you say is "more efficient?"
The typical wait for hip surgery in Canada is 14 months.
In Canada’s Province of Quebec, patients in need of a 30 minute procedure to cure urinary tract infections are on a three year waiting list!
Children with significant hearing problems are denied access to cochlear implants.
Arthritis treatment in the United Kingdom has a waiting period of up to nine months.  Also in the UK, a 22 year old man just passed away because the government refused to allow him to receive a liver transplant.
Patients across the spectrum are denied access to thousands of necessary medications, which are deemed “too costly” or “unnecessary” by non-doctor bureaucrats.

In closing:  Prior to Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, the medical industry was providing adequate and accessible health care to all and at reasonable costs.  Insurance was a catastrophic safety net, while normal health care was an out of pocket expense, affordable to most all Americans.  Pro-bono work by hospitals and doctors took up the rest for the needy.  Churches and community charities took care of those who could not pay.  After Lyndon Johnson involved the government as a third party to the elderly and the poor, the entire situation devolved into a more corrupt money grab.....which tells you exactly what government intervention does to pulverize reason and sanity, care and due diligence, compassion and charity. 

Americans have been blessed with the best health care in the world which is now going to be degraded into the lowest common denominators due to socialism by those who think government is the answer, not the problem.  I take the opposite view because I have lived through the success of a substantial amount of freedom.  Moving toward totalitarian control over our every personal decision is not going to bring prosperity and happiness ....or good health anyone but the political elitists who eliminate the inferior outcomes of socialism from their own lives.  In case you haven't noticed, they vote the best for themselves and the least for the society they govern.  Not much different from the monarchical rulers of the past, eh?

So, Dissenter, march along to your masters' drum beat.  You contacted me with questions and statements.  I hope you understand why I took the time to answer you.

Cheryl Pass

P.S. I notice you quoted Isaac Asimov.  I'm sorry to say your favorite "atheist,"  also a Fabian Socialist, would only view you as a "useful idiot."  If you are trying to equate Ayn Rand with him and with Socialism due to atheism, that would be a canard.  Rand lived in and saw the horrors of Socialism and hence decided to warn Americans of the possible harm that ideology would bring upon us.

Friday, November 30, 2012


Some days I think if I see and read the word "sustainable" one more time, I'm going to go into convulsions, throw up, and pass out.  The word has become so ridiculous at this point you could substitute the word "rubbish" and get the same meaning.  It has to be the most used and abused word that ever crossed civilized culture.  

Where did this modern abuse of the word "sustainable" come from?  According to Wikipedia,  it has come from the UN.  That's funny. I thought you had to be a tin foil hat whacko earth hater to believe that.)

The word sustainability is derived from the Latin sustinere (tenere, to hold; sus, up). Dictionaries provide more than ten meanings for sustain, the main ones being to “maintain", "support", or "endure.”

However, since the 1980s sustainability has been used more in the sense of human sustainability on planet Earth and this has resulted in the most widely quoted definition of sustainability as a part of the concept sustainable development, that of the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations on March 20, 1987: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

See, we're not so crazy after all.  Even Wikipedia agrees.

So the definition is something about "meeting the needs of the present without compromising future generations to meet their own needs."  Boy, now there is a stretch.  I read someone else the other day (can't remember who exactly) mentioning that if the people of the 1800's were worried about using whale oil for lanterns because some future generation might need that whale oil, we would still be in the dark.  Extrapolating from there, if someone else in the future wants the land I live on, I should not build on this land for fear of disrupting some future use of it that I can't predict.  I dare not take down a tree for wood to build a house.  Some future unknown human being might want that tree for themselves.  OR...some woodsie owl might live in that tree someday, so I'd better not even think about using it.  This way, the land and the tree will endure forever.  Right?  Oh, wait.  What if there is an earthquake or flood?  Or the tree grows old and dies someday?  Anyone thought of that?  Even woodsie owl has a time limit.

I wonder if the American Indians thought that about buffalo hides.  Heaven knows they killed off hundreds of thousands of the buffalo over centuries to sustain themselves.  But maybe I shouldn't bring up the American Indians because that would be a politically protected indigenous group and one must not deride anything about them or their past practices.  Those tepees they lived in were made of animal hides.  Guess they weren't sustainable either.  

According to the "sustainabilists" nothing humans do is "sustainable" in any way that makes human life worthy of living.  Unless you are a "sustainabilist" and you are preaching about "sustainability" while riding your bicycle to the green building you work in, the one with the turf roof, solar panels and the windmill." Then you might be O.K.  If you are that person, you have given yourself permission to live.  After all, the "sustainabilist" knows how to down-size, do penance, and pretend his or her bicycle is made of cotton candy that will dissolve in the next rain.  Oh, but even then, that might pollute the rivers, so I guess that wouldn't work either.  What really is "sustainable?"

Ownership of anything is not "sustainable" these days.  You can't own anything because it might interfere with the needs of future generations.  Unless you are the government.  Then you can own anything and everything.  That would qualify as "sustainable" because you know the government is definitely going to make sure future generations have their needs met.  Sure, that's the ticket to paradise.

Meanwhile, from the minute I was born I was destined to die, leaving room for future generations.  Wait a minute.  I thought "sustainable" meant something would endure... and endure... and endure some more.  Hmmm....getting a bit confusing now.  Guess that "sustainable" doesn't apply to me.  I'm definitely not "sustainable."  And neither are you. 

Wonder if the wordsmiths will think of a new word to replace "sustainable" when they figure out the word they are using isn't "sustainable" either.  Bet they will.  They always do!

I think I must be channeling Andy Rooney tonight...I suddenly thought this little essay sounded like him.  Oh, I almost forgot, Andy Rooney isn't here anymore either.  Not "sustainable."  And here comes December 2012.  Bet that won't be "sustainable."  It will only last 31 days and we have to figure out what to do with  January 2013.

I'll be sure to turn out the lights before I go to dream of ....not sure what to dream of.  Nothing I dream would be "sustainable" enough.   Goodnight all!

Wednesday, November 28, 2012


Let's back up a minute...This may be repeating for some of my readers, but a reintroduction seems appropriate right now with new readers just getting here and also a backlash web page from the UN to try to contradict through media and propaganda what we know to be true.  Since Americans are figuring out the scheme, the UN decided to try to misinform the public and continue the lies with that page. 

I'm finding that a lot of people are not sure exactly why there is concern about the UN Doctrine called Agenda 21.  First, some people think it only has some vague connection to environmentalism.  That is, if they believe it exists at all.  Second, some people who just have just heard of it recently think it is ridiculous for anyone to think the UN is influencing our American government.  The second premise there is what feeds the "tin foil" hat connotations.  You'd have to be crazy to believe our United States would be controlled by a UN book of rules, right?  Anyone believing that must be a crackpot weirdo. 

Primer on what Agenda 21 is:

 While global environmentalism is used as a major excuse for Agenda 21, the Doctrine is "comprehensive."  By "comprehensive," I mean Agenda 21 covers every waking moment and every activity known to mankind.  Literally, no stone is left unturned.  The Doctrine of Agenda 21 is a user's manual for governments to control every aspect of life.  That is hard for free people to grasp...that some organization outside of our sovereign nation had the gall to put together a lifestyle manual for every human being on the planet.  Who does that?  I remember being taken aback on that realization, myself.  My second thought at the time was, how is our government involved and why?  Surely, I thought, our Constitution and our elected officials would not allow such a thing to take over our American lives.  That was the beginning of my losing my naiveté regarding our Federal government's complicit implementation of Agenda 21.  It does take some serious study to see the web being laid around us.  You can't just grasp it from one glance.  

Anyone in America can sense that something is going on that just doesn't feel right.  People attach that to whatever news soundbite they heard that day, or just blow it off as an ill wind blowing across the nation.  I wish it were that simple.  Comprehensive means comprehensive.  Not an ill wind, but a complete tsunami. 

Just for the fun of it, I'll make a list of some of what it covers:
Food / Agriculture
Shelter / Housing / Building
Transportation / All varieties
Land Use / All Land
Property of any kind
Historical Reference Places
Water Sources
Water Usage
Domestic Animals / livestock and pets
Energy Sources
Energy Usage
Monetary Policies
Planning at all levels of government
Education / All levels
Healthcare / All Medical Care
Reproductive Policies / Sexual morés
Private Industries / Business
Non-Profit Involvement
Religious Institutional Involvement
Climate Change / Global Warming

If I left something out, someone can tell me.  There are 40 long and in depth Chapters discussing what is permissible in all of those things.   The basis for all of it, top to bottom, is Communism mixed with Fascism.  If you were Karl Marx wedded to Adolph Hitler wedded to Mussolini, hanging out with Margaret Sanger and the rest of the Fabian Socialists,  you could not do more to control people than Agenda 21 does.  And it isn't just for America.  It is being put in place globally, in every nation, in every nook and cranny of the populated earth.

So, no.  It isn't just some handbook for environmentalists.  It isn't about environmentalism.  It is about micromanaging everything. 

Within each of those headings come sub-headings upon sub-headings.  It doesn't just describe what is allowable or not, but also describes how governments shall implement the entirety of it.  Surely, you say, just as I did, our government is not about to let the UN tell us how to run our lives?  Guess what?  Our government is all to happy to use Agenda 21 as the basis for running our lives.  Did they forget to tell you?  And did they forget to tell you the whole premise of it is anti-Constitutional?  Must have missed that memo, eh?

Every single certified APA (American Planning Association) planner in this nation, as of this moment, is completely indoctrinated to sell Agenda 21 to every locale in America. (You will find it under the name of Smart Growth or Sustainable Development.)  The United States Green Building Council is completely covered up with Agenda 21.  The Chamber of Commerce, chasing after government largesse, is pushing Sustainable Development, aka Agenda 21.  Your state Councils of Governments are swimming in the same pool of rubbish.  The National Council of Mayors and the League of Cities, both pushing the same Doctrine.  Those are just the tip of the iceberg.  Every Federal Agency is pushing nothing other than Agenda 21 today.

Now you might say to yourself, if this is so horrible, why would our dear beloved government be putting this in place?  Two things there:  One is that our government is not at all the dear beloved benefactor of all things good.  It wasn't meant to be such and this UN Doctrine surely is not good and benevolent.  Second, there was something called the "Human Rights Treaty," signed by Harry S. Truman in 1949.  Everything the UN is trying to take over comes under their propaganda of "Human Rights."  These rights are not God given, but granted by the UN and governments.  The God given ones are thrown out the window and replaced by Agenda 21.  Agenda 21 replaces the U.S. Constitution.  The two cannot co-exist.

Put on your Tin Foil Hat:  

So we know Agenda 21 exists and is being implemented in the U.S.  If you believe your own eyes and try to alert your fellow Americans, you wear a "tin foil hat."  Or so they are trying to say.  Which is really funny because the UN - Agenda 21 website is right there for anyone to read.  And the documentation of how it is being implemented can be found on my sidebar or accessed in my search bar.  Please go for it.  Read for yourself.  Agenda 21 - UN website

 Who did it? And why?

Here is where the Tin Foil Hat really gets attention.   The most named player in the UN scam is Maurice Strong.  You can google his name and get all the history there you want.  He is the author of the plan, starting with a previous treatise called "Our Common Future."  There are others involved.  Someone named Gro Harlem Brundlandt.  A lot of the ususal suspects: Ted Turner, Al Gore, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the Clintons, the Bush's, and lots more.  Where there is a scam, there is seed money.  You hear about Soros all the time, but not so much in relationship to this UN scheme.  He's with it all the way, but is busy buying up agriculture, oil, and financing socialist programs throughout the world.  

As I was reading today, I found something will have everyone wearing a "Tin Foil Hat."  Ah yes, let's bring up the Rothshchilds while we are at, why don't we?  Today I came across something called the GEF.  The paragraph below   is just one source of information on this, but you can find other sources for this same information.  (Since this report, Edmond Rothschild has died, but his fortune and extended family heirs march on the path to take your family's way of life away.)

Edmund Leopold de Rothschild banker for Global Warming Scam
"After Edmund [Leopold] de Rothschild’s statement, without basis, at the 4th World Wilderness Congress in 1987, that CO2 is the cause of a non-existent global warming – and that combating it needs money (our money), he founded the World Conservation Bank for this reason. In 1991 its name was changed to The Global Environment  Facility (GEF).
The purpose of this facility is to lend money to the poorest countries, printed by the IMF out of thin air, and with the guarantee of our governments. The facility takes wilderness areas with mineral riches as security. The GEF money is then to flow back to our governments as reimbursement for paid loans. I.e. We give away our tax money. For what?
When a country cannot repay loans to the GEF it must give up a piece of its territory to the Rothschild banks (GEF, IMF, World Bank) – up to 30% of the Earth are meant. If land cannot be offered as collateral the country must starve (Haiti, Argentina and others).
Rothschild´s  stroke of genius was that he had his GEF smuggled into the UN system at the Rio UN Summit in 1992 by his friend, Maurice Strong. So now high-ranking ministerial officials from 179 countries (note: now up to 182 countries) are in the the council of the bank – blessing Rothschild grabbing the world!"

The interesting thing about the date 1992 is what happened that year.  Just prior, in 1991, George Bush I signed onto the Rio Accords at a UN conference where Agenda 21 was introduced.  Then in 1992, Bill Clinton enacted an executive order for the President's Council on Sustainable Development, adopting that phrase straight out of Agenda 21 and Our Common Future.  Since then, our government agencies have been very busy enacting every piece of Agenda 21 into our policies, using our own tax dollars to build this insidious trap for Americans. 

Ongoing UN interference through treaties:

For those who think the UN is not a threat to the sovereign laws of the U.S.  and rights of Americans, below is just one little example of how our leadership is tossing us into the rubbish heap of the UN: 

The United States Senate is threatening American sovereignty. Earlier this week, Harry Reid declared the Senate would consider yet another flawed treaty conceived by the United Nations. Like most international treaties, it has a nice sounding name that obscures the very real possibility that it would infringe on American sovereignty by allowing an international committee to intrude into U.S. policymaking.

The so-called United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities would not advance America’s interests abroad, nor would it improve the rights of Americans who suffer with disabilities. Instead, it would only serve to empower a "committee of experts" based in Geneva, Switzerland to make demands that fall well beyond the scope of the treaty and conflict with the legal, social, economic, and cultural traditions and norms of America.

That report just came in from the Heritage Foundation."  Whether you like the Heritage Foundation or not, the report is fact. 

Don't get bogged down in the minutae of whether or not you wish to support people with disabilities.  That is not the issue.  As always, the issue with the UN is dictating how sovereign nations operate within their borders and doing it with the assistance of our own leadership.  We have the LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty), the Small Arms Treaty, the Biodiversity Treaty, this treaty and that treaty....all stemming from the 1949 Human Rights Treaty, hell bent on destroying sovereign nations for the sake of central control by scheming globalists through the UN.     
And that is the point of Agenda 21, i.e. micromanaging every movement of every living, breathing, human being.

Our entire government is being hijacked by Americans who have no understanding or concern of our Constitution, sovereignty, self-rule, borders, economics, or what being American means.  It is these useful idiots, not just in the general population but in leadership positions, who are helping the UN lead America straight off the cliff into hell. 

If you are one of the patriots wearing a tin foil hat's off to you.  Keep up the great work.  If you are new to this knowledge, spread the word and help save our nation. 

End of primer.

Hat tips: