CAN YOU PROVE THAT YOU ARE A NATIVE-BORN AMERICAN? A PUBLIC SERVICE MESSAGE FROM RAGNAROK65

If you do not have a "certified copy" (the one with the State Seal on it, not the hospital issued birth certificate) get ready to jump through some hoops - especially if you were adopted!

I relocated back to Utah last year, and went down to get a Utah driver's license. I was told that a federal law took effect in 2009, and that I had to have a certified copy of my birth certificate in order to get a driver's license now.

Well, here's where things become even more complicated, because I was born in NJ, and adopted by my maternal grandparents in NY when I was 5 years old. Not only do I need the certified birth certificate to get my driver's license, but I need a certified copy of the Final Order of Adoption from NY State to prove the name change. What does NY want from me to get the Adoption Order? A certified copy of my birth certificate from NJ! I'm jumping through more hoops than a circus dog, in order to prove - after 67 years on Earth, 53 years of paying income tax, and 20+ years in the US military - that I am indeed a bona fide American citizen. BUT... in order to get the Adoption Certificate I have to have "certified copies" of my grandparents (the adopters) Death Certificates, to which I never had access. Tracking those down will probably take a month or so, dealing with the bureaucracies of Pinellas County. Florida and some other county in NY, who will also probably want copies of whatever!

To make matter even worse, in my case all of these things must be taken care of through the US Postal Service. That means delays of at least one week in each direction if everything goes smoothly... which it never does! I figure, with any luck, I should have my Utah driver's license sometime in 2012. My retired Air Force ID means nothing in this process, much like my Top Secret clearance status while I was on active duty, or the fact that the FBI approved me to buy several firearms just last year.

This is not just a Utah law! Proof of citizenship is now required by Federal law prior to issuing a driver's license, so, my advice to you is this: if you are a native-born American, and you don't have a certified copy of your birth certificate, complete with the state seal, and your current driver's license was issued prior to 2009, get a certified copy of whatever you need before you find yourself in the same bureaucratic quagmire that I'm in! Especially if you were adopted!!

Luckily, my Oregon driver's license doesn't expire until 2015. With any luck this should be resolved by then. Does this keep illegal aliens from driving? NO! - they'll drive without a license, which is a minor offense compared to violating our border. Or, they'll have somebody illegally create the required documents to obtain a license. If Obama can do it, why can't they?

YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIVE IN WISCONSIN...

You don't have to live in Wisconsin to appreciate the financial and physical dangers of forced union membership, which is what Wisconsinites are faced with today - and what the entire nation may be faced with tomorrow.

American labor unions outlived their usefulness decades ago. The original intent of organized labor was good, even though their objectives in those "formative years" were achieved primarily through violence. Employers weren't, as a general rule, paying workers a decent living wage. Some companies did provide "company housing" (substandard), and a company-owned version of a general store which carried basic necessities. But, both were provided at a premium price. By the time the company extracted the employees "rent", and items charged at the store each week, the worker's take-home pay was approximately the equivalent of one of today's dollars.

Today, labor unions function primarily through leveraged "negotiations" - using the implied threat of a production-ending strike to achieve their goals. A strike is essentially a variation on your basic blackmail scheme - "If you don't give us what we want, we will ruin you (financially) by shutting down your business until we get what we want."

In the most recent skirmish in the battle over the right to work in Wisconsin, a Dane County Circuit Court judge ruled in favor of the unions, saying the state legislature violated the state's

open meeting law. Apparently the unions own some judges in Wisconsin. The media are reporting the Wisconsin law as an "anti-union" law, when the proper way to look at it is as a pro-worker law.

The United States Declaration of Independence proclaims "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Nowhere in the Declaration is forced union membership mentioned! Nor is the payment of union dues by non-union workers, which is another desire of the union bosses! True liberty includes the liberty to perform labor under conditions to which the individual freely agrees - not under conditions of coercion by way of threats or acts of violence.

The man you made President of The United States - Barack Obama - during his campaign in 2008, made promises to the big unions that he must keep - or risk losing their support in the 2012 election. Among those promises was the unionization of all government workers, and the implied elimination of those unnecessary right to work laws... which the unions find to be bothersome.

How do the unions benefit their members? Not nearly so well as they benefit the union leadership. Granted, the members are making a "living wage" (and then some), but their wages are paltry compared to the salaries of their bosses. As an example, let's look at just the upper upper-echelon (the top ten officers) of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU - which is also the world's largest union):

Officers and Employees

• Average Total Compensation: $62,170.21

• Total Employees: 1,030

• Employees Making more than $75,000: 321

Top Ten Highest Paid Leaders

Name	Title	Total Compensation
Andrew Stern	International President	$306,388.00
David Regan	Executive Vice President	$265,488.00
Dennis Rivera	Vice President	$265,216.00
Anna Burger	International Sec-Treas	$252,724.00
Eliseo Medina	Executive Vice President	$242,286.00
Mary Kay Henry	Executive Vice President	$231,348.00
Gerald Hudson	Executive Vice President	$230,671.00
Thomas Woodruff	Executive Vice President	$218,723.00
Scott Courtney	Organizing Dir	$204,750.00
Kirk Adams	Executive Board Member	$197,939.00

The total compensation of the top ten SEIU officers costs the membership: $2,415,533 per annum

BUT... they have 1,031 employees whose average salary is $62,170.21p/a and that works out to a dues-paying membership cost of $64,035,316p/a just for the big shots. And 32% - almost 1/3 - of those officials make in excess of $75,000 per annum. The total compensation package of the "International President" of the SEIU is 65% (plus what he can steal from the membership) of that of the US President ($469,000 - plus what he can steal from the taxpayers)!

Since the big brouhaha over restricting union organization efforts in Wisconsin began, several months ago, and WI Governor Walker's attempt to keep Wisconsin a right to work state, there have been these developments...

"We will hunt you down . . . slit your throats . . . drink your blood. I will have your decapitated head on a pike in the Madison town square." Those are the words of a union militant aimed directly at a Wisconsin state legislator for daring to vote to restrict Big Labor's forced dues control over Wisconsin state workers.

There were literally dozens of similar death threats, along with acts of vandalism leveled against Wisconsin state legislators and Governor Scott Walker for not toeing the union boss line.

After reporting a timesheet-padding scheme, one of the whistle blowers was beaten so severely by union thugs he suffered two herniated discs and had to undergo knee surgery.

Another whistle blower found a dead rat in his locker, along with a note which said he would, "be taken care of." And another stated he was told: "If I continue to complain about their finances, they would have me killed."

Union bosses consider themselves to be above the law because -- they are -- thanks to the Supreme Court's infamous 1973 Emmons decision, granting union bosses immunity from prosecution for acts of violence and vandalism they orchestrate in the so-called "pursuit of legitimate union objectives." How stupid was that? Essentially it says that union bosses can instruct their minions to go forth and commit mayhem and murder so long as it is in pursuit of legitimate union objectives, and that the bosses themselves cannot be prosecuted for the directed actions of their subordinates.

Organized labor - on an interstate scale - has been with us since 1866, when the "National Labor Union" was formed. But, organized labor had little impact upon society-at-large until 1914, and the passage of the Clayton Anti-trust Act, which limited the use of injunctions in labor disputes and provided that picketing and other union activities are not illegal conspiracies or trusts.

In the mid-to-late 1800's secondary education and literacy among the working class were much less common than today. Perhaps there was a genuine need for organizing the workers back then. Maybe they were just too dumb to form their own independent groups to insure fairness in the workplace. But, in my mind anyway, 150 years later those conditions no longer exist. By comparison today's worker is highly educated, more aware of what constitutes fair working conditions and compensation, and what options are available to him/her should he feel the entity for which he toils is being less than equitable.

Forcing workers to either join a union, or pay dues to a union which one does not belong, makes about as much sense as going to the supermarket and being charged for all the groceries you didn't want!

Thomas Jefferson, the great American statesman, once said, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." We ALL need to be more vigilant in our observations of the processes of the government... before its unabated appetites allow it to completely consume our beloved Republic.

I'm Gil, (and you're not - be thankful!) and I approve this blog. I am an equal opportunity cynic and iconoclast.

THE "RIGHT" TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS?

There has been much discussion over our Constitutional guarantee, as explained in the Second Amendment, of the "right to keep and bear arms". The divergence of understanding of this right is not one of language, but rather one of reader intent. In our Constitutional Republic, unlimited power is not automatically bestowed upon the government to cavalierly change those first ten amendments - also known as "The Bill of Rights". According to the Constitution, which at least for the time being is - ostensibly - the supreme law of the land, our government gets its power from the consent of the people! And, how do we exercise that "consent"? By way of elected "representatives". These "representatives", for more than a century and a half, have represented their own best interests... which are determined by a minuscule (but wealthy, influential, and therefore powerful) portion of their constituency. Can we correct this gross deviation from the intent of our Constitution? Idealistic desires aside, my answer is probably not.

Corruption is self-propagating, and corruption is rampant within our government. Not just in the present administration, but most likely in all administrations since our founding. In the beginning it may have been just a few minor officials who were corrupt, but corruption spread like a cancer to all levels. Today, our elected officials are simply better at concealing their corruption than were their predecessors and foreign counterparts. They are like rodents, in that for every one that is exposed for corruption, there are ten others that haven't yet been discovered. There are few persons of true "honor" left in the world of politics. Why would I say such a thing? Because in today's world it takes many millions of dollars to mount an election campaign. and where do politicians get that money? For the most part from donors. Oh, sure, you donated - but your ten, twenty or even one thousand dollar donation is insignificant. If you are lucky, you will get a letter of thanks from the campaign headquarters, complete with an electronic signature from the candidate. "Every man has his price", is a well-known quote from Robert Bolt, author of "A Man For All Seasons", referring to Thomas Cromwell's corruption in the service of his King. Cromwell's price - power - was met by the King, and to fail the King would result in the removal of Cromwell's power... and his head. The less obvious, underlying tenet in that quote was a reflection of Sir Thomas More's philosophy: "The integrity of oneself should be one's major goal. Without it, life is really not worth living. Death is unpleasant, but losing that part of oneself that guides our actions on the path that we deem to be correct would be unbearable." A philosophy in which principles cost Sir Thomas his own head. Politics is ruled by the fear of possible loss... loss of stature, loss of reputation, loss of position, loss of power, loss of money, and in extreme cases, the possibility of loss of life, etc. But, I digress...

The First Amendment requires that: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." It establishes basic individual freedoms concerning religious belief (or non-belief), the freedom to speak against those things we determine to be inimical (even within our government) to our Constitutional freedoms, it protects the left-wing media as well as the minority right-wing media, and our right to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (such as forcing Obamacare upon us, and the so-called "Patriot Act", which identifies military veterans as "potential terrorists", etc.). The Second Amendment received the prestigious second spot because it insures the citizens right to protect all the other rights and freedoms established by our Constitution. A citizenry, disarmed, are called subjects. They cannot protect themselves, or their countrymen, from the whims of those who would rule rather than govern. It was said in "Cato's Letters" (England, early 1720s) that "Power is like fire. It warms, scorches or destroys, according as it is watched, provoked or increased." Power, when not watched and controlled, is also all-consuming. The more power an individual (or government) has, the more they want.

A government that is unanswerable to its people is a dictatorship. Ours has not yet reached that stage of development. They are still technically answerable to the people... they just choose to ignore our inquiries and our expressed desires! Why? Because Big Brother knows better what is right, fair and just for its people, and they will determine what rights and freedoms are appropriate for those of us with less intelligence than they, and relatively little power to change things. We have three choices: vote for a different, but no less corrupt replacement, at the ballot box; reinstate the same corrupt individual at the ballot box; or, as Thomas Jefferson once said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." As unpalatable as the third option may be to Americans, is it not better than the loss of our Constitution, our freedoms, and the consequent subjugation and enslavement of a free people? (The downside to a second American Revolution would be that all those who envy and despise us [i.e. - the 191 "United Nations"] would seize such a discordant opportunity to conquer, subjugate and enslave the survivors of such an action, and then divide the spoils among themselves.)

THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS THE FOUNDATION OF "HOMELAND SECURITY"! Without it, we have none. The current administration (Obama, Clinton, Holder, et al) has designs upon dismantling as much of the Constitution as meets their desires to rule. Should they be successful in infringing upon our Second Amendment rights, all the other rights will fall like standing dominoes.

But, that's just the way I see things. Perhaps my world view is naive... idealistic... perhaps it is "radical"... or perhaps it is realistic. No matter... it is what it is. And, at least for the time being, my world view is protected under the First Amendment, which is protected by the Second Amendment. I do not encourage a second American Revolution, but I do see it as a possibility when individual freedoms are infringed upon or removed by any government.

Australians Protest Government Gun Grab - Are We Americans Next?

Most Americans, whether for or against our Constitutional rights under the 2nd Amendment, are aware that our "right to keep and bear arms" is under assault from our home-grown left wingers. This, in itself, is nothing new - it has been going on for decades! What is "new" is that the radical, anti-gun left, now IS running our government. They will throw all kinds of unverified statistics into their sales pitch, in an attempt to convince the citizens that banning any/all individual firearm ownership is the key to improving personal safety and national security. Dictators around the world are in agreement - the best way to subjugate the people is first to disarm them, and the Obama administration is in full agreement with that philosophy, hence the "back door" approach to gun confiscation via the signing of a small-arms "treaty" with the U.N. It accomplishes one of Obama's primary goals, while simultaneously providing him with a high degree of deniability - "I didn't do it, the U.N. did!"

For a change, I'm not going to go into a lengthy typed rant about gun control vs. the 2nd Amendment, but watch this video to see just how secure the Australians are after their government's gun grab...

The increase in crime statistics speaks for itself. Who speaks for US?

Reality Shows... Or, More Likely, It Doesn't!

I, for one, am abysmally tired of the so-called "reality shows" on TV. Some may have "realistic situations" in them, designed obviously to entertain the audience through reenactment, but the majority of these shows have more scripting than the collected works of William Shakespeare's plays, and more choreography than a performance by the Bolshoi Ballet. All-in-all, they have about the same amount of reality as does an episode of "The Simpsons" or a few rounds of "World Wrestling Entertainment"! I gave up on them years ago, after the first two episodes of "Big Brother" and about three episodes of "Survivor".

Who, in this extremely litigious American society, is dumb enough (other than Obama supporters) to believe that any broadcast corporation would strand two dozen people on a deserted island with no food, no water and no medical aid available? The networks ownership would probably change hands on a bi-weekly basis if that were the case!

And then, there are what I call the "fluff shows" - "The Bachelor", followed by "The Bachelorette", "Dancing With The Lepers", etc. These are apparently designed primarily to lure the lady viewers into the clutches of their sponsors. Who really cares if Kirstie Alley can do the foxtrot? Let the stars do what they are noted for. I don't care if Johnny Depp can change the oil in his car... show me Johnny Depp acting (when he isn't busy trying to commit career suicide with efforts like "Sweeny Todd" and "What's Eating gilbert Grape")!

There. I feel MUCH better now! How about you?

TEA PARTY CANDIDATE FOR 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

WHO THE HELL IS HERMAN CAIN? Besides being the Tea Party's candidate for the office of POTUS next year that is...

I don't see this as a particularly good move for the Tea Party's first ever Presidential nominee. It appears they are taking a page form Obama's play-book - a man without a nationally recognized name, and no political experience, but... he is also a man who appears to have a silver tongue with which to mesmerize audiences. I'm not certain we need another snake-oil pitchman in the White House.

But that's really more about what he is, or isn't, rather than who he is... so, who is he? He is the CEO of Godfather Pizza, and he is a black American. I hesitate to use the term African-American for a couple of reasons:

1. The hyphen is a separator, not a unifier. I don't run around proclaiming myself to be Irish-American. I'm probably at least a 5th generation American of Irish descent, so the "Irish" part of my genealogical makeup is exactly that - genealogy - it is not who I am. I don't "celebrate" St. Patrick's Day, nor have I ever been to the "Shamrock Isle". I am an AMERICAN!

(Personally, I see those who use hyphenates to define themselves, to be more proud of the antecedent nationality than that which is subsequent)

2. Just a guess on my part, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that Mr. Cain has never even been to Africa. Probably 90% of black Americans have never made the journey back to the Motherland. How do they then become hyphenated Americans?

The redeeming factor, or at least the single identifiable factor that distinguishes him from Obama, is that he is (apparently) a successful businessman. He has climbed the ladder of success - either by virtue of talent, or political devices, but nonetheless he has reached an enviable pinnacle in the business world. Obama has no such accomplishment on his personal résumé.

Does Mr. Cain stand a chance of success in the 2012 election? I think not. And it won't be solely because of his race, although for some that may strongly influence their decision at the voting booth.

There is a combination of things that will probably cause the demise of his bid for the presidency - chiefly his inexperience in "formal" politics (Yes, big business is fraught with politics, but it's a different kind of politics, and the fate of a nation does not ride upon a choice between pepperoni or Italian sausage). And, yes, some people did elect a relatively inexperienced man as president in 2008, and in 2012 they will have had 4 years in which to regret their decision (but... Americans apparently have become slow to learn from their mistakes, and many of them will choose to make the same mistake again in 2012). He also has to overcome his total lack of name recognition on "The Grand Scale" of national politics! That may or may not be provided by the national media. Then there are suggestions that Cain is a "mugwump", which, in politics, means he sits upon the fence with his "mug" on one side and his "wump" on the other. Herman Cain does not particularly present himself as one thing or the other, although to be the Tea Party candidate, he is most likely significantly more conservative in his "world view" than he is liberal. And then there is the matter of financial backing. The Tea Party better have a helluva "war chest" to promote a virtual nobody into the highest elected office in the country, because it will be an uphill battle all the way.

I guess Newt Gingrich wasn't available, nor was Sarah Palin, or any politically recognizable name. Now that he's really needed, where is Pat Paulsen? DEAD! (If you don't know who Pat was, Google him) If you choose to nominate a political weenie for President, Oscar Mayer would be your best choice. So, when you finally get your buns to the voting booth, remember the name Oscar Mayer! It's a weenie we all know...

Rejoice, Dear Hearts... OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD!

And the chances are excellent that he will be dead all week in the media. We'll get to hear about it until we're nauseous, since it's their biggest story since the Japanese tsunami. Bin Laden's prognosis is pretty much fixed... he won't be any more dead tomorrow or next week than he was yesterday.

Of course Obama is taking all the credit for it, but there are no photographs of him armed and wearing a ballistic vest. A U.S. Navy SEAL Team engaged in a firefight that lasted approximately 40 minutes in order to eliminate Bin Laden - which is really a remarkably short time considering the amount of security that Bin Laden reportedly had surrounding him.

And now the question becomes: "How long will it be before al Qaeda dispatches a team - from the middle east, or a domestic team from a sleeper cell - to assassinate Obama?" Or, will they begin by taking the "easy way" - murdering western embassy personnel abroad, or lesser national political figures in the U.S.? The overseas embassy personnel would be the most cost-effective inasmuch as they are geographically closer - and logistically easier - thereby requiring less for travel and per diem expenses, and allowing them to put more men on the job with less suspicion. Regardless, I fully expect a response from al Qaeda. Their tribal mentality cannot allow them to ignore the extermination of their "leader". Mark my words, we will see some aftershocks from the Muslim culture. Jihad recruiting will become easier, and their numbers will increase exponentially. They do not believe the old adage, "Revenge is a dish best served cold" (from the French - la vengeance se mange très-bien froide). But, more likely, they will react soon... "in the heat of passion".

Nonetheless, Osama will Bin Laden the dirt. And that idea puts a big smile on my face!

OBAMA RELEASES "LONG FORM" BIRTH CERTIFICATE

WASHINGTON – Responding to critics' relentless claims, President Barack Obama on Wednesday produced a detailed Hawaii birth certificate in an extraordinary attempt to bury the issue of where he was born and confirm his legitimacy to hold office. He declared, "We do not have time for this kind of silliness."

Well, that should put an end to the debate... or should it? The article goes on to say that "the question was raised during his campaign". If it was, then why wasn't the question answered satisfactorily then? And, if the issue was "silliness", why didn't Obama put a stop to the "silliness" long before now by producing the long form certificate? Or, perhaps it took this long for one to be created for him. A forged certificate? Heavens no! No upstanding, honorable politician would even consider creating a document where none previously existed. (Oh, my error... honorable and politician are mutually-excluding terms, and I have seen no proof that the two terms can logically be combined when describing a politician.)

The "citizen/non-citizen" debate was allowed to continue for so long, and there was major confusion reported - even among Obama's African relatives - regarding to his birthplace, that I can't help but think that anything is possible in this case. And, with sufficient money and power, anything IS possible.

We Americans are a gullible lot. We tend to believe those politicians who tell us the lies that we want to hear, and I suppose that is just human nature. Tell us that you're for something that we want ourselves, and we'll support you!

God save us from our own stupidity!

A PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA - IT'S IN EFFECT ALREADY AND IS WORKING WELL FOR THEM

This is mainly for the millions of unfortunates who did not get the same email I got this afternoon, as well as for the tens of millions who do not follow my blog, and for the handful of loyal followers who do. I researched the email and got a slightly newer, slightly different, "revised" version - this revision was done by Richard D. Lamm himself (Governor of Colorado from 1975-1987), and conveys essentially the same message...

________________________________________________________

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

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

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

In mid-June of 2005, Lamm told SNOPES:

"Yes, it is a speech I gave a year and a half ago in Washington D.C. It was a 5 minute speech, and I am amazed and gratified it has received so much coverage."

He also passed along to SNOPES the following "revised version" of his speech:

________________________________________________________

I HAVE A PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA
RICHARD D. LAMM

I HAVE A SECRET PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. IF YOU BELIEVE, AS MANY DO, THAT AMERICA IS TOO SMUG, TOO WHITE BREAD, TOO SELF-SATISFIED, TOO RICH, LET'S DESTROY AMERICA. IT IS NOT THAT HARD TO DO. HISTORY SHOWS THAT NATIONS ARE MORE FRAGILE THAN THEIR CITIZENS THINK. NO NATION IN HISTORY HAS SURVIVED THE RAVAGES OF TIME. ARNOLD TOYNBEE OBSERVED THAT ALL GREAT CIVILIZATIONS RISE AND THEY ALL FALL, AND THAT "AN AUTOPSY OF HISTORY WOULD SHOW THAT ALL GREAT NATIONS COMMIT SUICIDE." HERE IS MY PLAN:

I. WE MUST FIRST MAKE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY. HISTORY SHOWS, IN MY OPINION, THAT NO NATION CAN SURVIVE THE TENSION, CONFLICT, AND ANTAGONISM OF TWO COMPETING LANGUAGES AND CULTURES. IT IS A BLESSING FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO BE BILINGUAL; IT IS A CURSE FOR A SOCIETY TO BE BILINGUAL. ONE SCHOLAR, SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET, PUT IT THIS WAY:

"THE HISTORIES OF BILINGUAL AND BI-CULTURAL SOCIETIES THAT DO NOT ASSIMILATE ARE HISTORIES OF TURMOIL, TENSION, AND TRAGEDY. CANADA, BELGIUM, MALAYSIA, LEBANON-ALL FACE CRISES OF NATIONAL EXISTENCE IN WHICH MINORITIES PRESS FOR AUTONOMY, IF NOT INDEPENDENCE. PAKISTAN AND CYPRUS HAVE DIVIDED. NIGERIA SUPPRESSED AN ETHNIC REBELLION. FRANCE FACES DIFFICULTIES WITH ITS BASQUES, BRETONS, AND CORSICANS."

II. I WOULD THEN INVENT "MULTICULTURALISM" AND ENCOURAGE IMMIGRANTS TO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN CULTURE. I WOULD MAKE IT AN ARTICLE OF BELIEF THAT ALL CULTURES ARE EQUAL: THAT THERE ARE NO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES THAT ARE IMPORTANT. I WOULD DECLARE IT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH THAT THE BLACK AND HISPANIC DROPOUT RATE IS ONLY DUE TO PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION BY THE MAJORITY. EVERY OTHER EXPLANATION IS OUT-OF-BOUNDS.

III. WE CAN MAKE THE UNITED STATES A "HISPANIC QUEBEC" WITHOUT MUCH EFFORT. THE KEY IS TO CELEBRATE DIVERSITY RATHER THAN UNITY. AS BENJAMIN SCHWARZ SAID IN THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY RECENTLY:

..."THE APPARENT SUCCESS OF OUR OWN MULTIETHNIC AND MULTICULTURAL EXPERIMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED NOT BY TOLERANCE BUT BY HEGEMONY. WITHOUT THE DOMINANCE THAT ONCE DICTATED ETHNOCENTRICALLY, AND WHAT IT MEANT TO BE AN AMERICAN, WE ARE LEFT WITH ONLY TOLERANCE AND PLURALISM TO HOLD US TOGETHER."

I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL IMMIGRANTS TO KEEP THEIR OWN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE. I WOULD REPLACE THE MELTING POT METAPHOR WITH A SALAD BOWL METAPHOR. IT IS IMPORTANT TO INSURE THAT WE HAVE VARIOUS CULTURAL SUB-GROUPS LIVING IN AMERICA REINFORCING THEIR DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN AMERICANS, EMPHASIZING THEIR SIMILARITIES.

IV. HAVING DONE ALL THIS, I WOULD MAKE OUR FASTEST GROWING DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP THE LEAST EDUCATED - I WOULD ADD A SECOND UNDERCLASS; UNASSIMILATED, UNDEREDUCATED, AND ANTAGONISTIC TO OUR POPULATION. I WOULD HAVE THIS SECOND UNDERCLASS HAVE A 50% DROP OUT RATE FROM SCHOOL.

V. I WOULD THEN GET THE BIG FOUNDATIONS AND BIG BUSINESS TO GIVE THESE EFFORTS LOTS OF MONEY. I WOULD INVEST IN ETHNIC IDENTITY, AND I WOULD ESTABLISH THE CULT OF VICTIMOLOGY. I WOULD GET ALL MINORITIES TO THINK THEIR LACK OF SUCCESS WAS ALL THE FAULT OF THE MAJORITY - I WOULD START A GRIEVANCE INDUSTRY BLAMING ALL MINORITY FAILURE ON THE MAJORITY POPULATION.

VI. I WOULD ESTABLISH DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND PROMOTE DIVIDED LOYALTIES. I WOULD "CELEBRATE DIVERSITY." "DIVERSITY" IS A WONDERFULLY SEDUCTIVE WORD. IT STRESSES DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN COMMONALITIES. DIVERSE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE ARE MOSTLY ENGAGED IN HATING EACH OTHER-THAT IS, WHEN THEY ARE NOT KILLING EACH OTHER. A DIVERSE," PEACEFUL, OR STABLE SOCIETY IS AGAINST MOST HISTORICAL PRECEDENT. PEOPLE UNDERVALUE THE UNITY IT TAKES TO KEEP A NATION TOGETHER, AND WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS MYOPIA. LOOK AT THE ANCIENT GREEKS. DORF'S WORLD HISTORY TELLS US:

THE GREEKS BELIEVED THAT THEY BELONGED TO THE SAME RACE; THEY POSSESSED A COMMON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE; AND THEY WORSHIPED THE SAME GODS. ALL GREECE TOOK PART IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES IN HONOR OF ZEUS AND ALL GREEKS VENERATED THE SHRINE OF APOLLO AT DELPHI. A COMMON ENEMY PERSIA THREATENED THEIR LIBERTY. YET, ALL OF THESE BONDS TOGETHER WERE NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO OVERCOME TWO FACTORS . . . (LOCAL PATRIOTISM AND GEOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS THAT NURTURED POLITICAL DIVISIONS . . .)

IF WE CAN PUT THE EMPHASIS ON THE "PLURIBUS," INSTEAD OF THE "UNUM," WE CAN BALKANIZE AMERICA AS SURELY AS KOSOVO.

VII. THEN I WOULD PLACE ALL THESE SUBJECTS OFF LIMITS - MAKE IT TABOO TO TALK ABOUT. I WOULD FIND A WORD SIMILAR TO "HERETIC" IN THE 16TH CENTURY - THAT STOPPED DISCUSSION AND PARALYZED THINKING. WORDS LIKE "RACIST", "XENOPHOBE" THAT HALTS ARGUMENT AND CONVERSATION.

HAVING MADE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY, HAVING ESTABLISHED MULTICULTURALISM, HAVING THE LARGE FOUNDATIONS FUND THE DOCTRINE OF "VICTIMOLOGY", I WOULD NEXT MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ENFORCE OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS. I WOULD DEVELOP A MANTRA - "THAT BECAUSE IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN GOOD FOR AMERICA, IT MUST ALWAYS BE GOOD." I WOULD MAKE EVERY INDIVIDUAL IMMIGRANT SYMPATRIC AND IGNORE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT.

VIII. LASTLY, I WOULD CENSOR VICTOR DAVIS HANSON'S BOOK MEXIFORNIA — THIS BOOK IS DANGEROUS — IT EXPOSES MY PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. SO PLEASE, PLEASE — IF YOU FEEL THAT AMERICA DESERVES TO BE DESTROYED — PLEASE, PLEASE — DON'T BUY THIS BOOK! THIS GUY IS ON TO MY PLAN.

________________________________________________

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

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

_________________________________________

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” Noam Chamsky, American Linguist and US Media and Foreign Policy Critic.

OBAMA ADMITS ON VIDEOTAPE THAT HE IS NOT A NATIVE-BORN AMERICAN!

I am assuming (yes, I know...) as I post this video, that it has not been altered in any way... or at least any significant way, since it is made up from segments of various presidential "performances". HOWEVER... the first segment is where the verbal admission is made, and it appears to be virginal - the flow appears to be uninterrupted, and much too smooth for anybody to have edited. Here it is for your consideration...

The facts presented in this video are not particularly recent ones, as evidenced by the claim that Obama "spent $800,000 to date" on keeping his birth and school records (normally these documents are "public records") secured. The most recent figure I have heard was $1,500,000. That's ONE MILLION, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND U.S. dollars! Who in their right mind would spend even a small fraction of that amount, to insure that such records were unavailable to the public... unless they had something to hide? My guess would be that the first segment speech was made just after his election to the U.S. Senate, after which he was magically transformed into a citizen.

There have been numerous (over a dozen the last I heard) lawsuits filed, challenging Obama's eligibility to even run for the office of President of the United States, much less serve in that office. The courts thus far have refused to hear them. I wonder why? I also wonder where the full Congressional Investigation into this matter is. Oh, that's right! I forgot for a moment that Congress is too busy investigating professional sports - and other extremely important things, to be bothered with something as trivial as answering the question of, "Is the person sitting in the office of the President really eligible to be there?"