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?"

AMERICA - WE ARE THE MOST LITIGIOUS SOCIETY IN THE WORLD!

AND THEREFORE, THE LEAST INCLINED TO ACCEPT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY! The following is a BIG part of the problem...

From today's news - "SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – A lawsuit that seeks to stop McDonald's from selling Happy Meals must be dismissed because parents can always prohibit their children from eating them, the hamburger giant said in a court filing.

The lawsuit claims McDonald's unfairly uses toys to lure children into its restaurants. The plaintiff, Monet Parham, a Sacramento, Calif. mother of two, claims the company's advertising violates California consumer protection laws."

The article goes on to mention names and Mickey D's position on the lawsuit (if I was on the jury hearing the case, this woman wouldn't stand a chance, and I would never change my position). Here's how I see it...

If you don't want the kids to hassle you for the Happy Meal, don't take the little bastards to McDonald's! Take them somewhere else for lunch or dinner. Or, here's a really unique idea - fix their meals at home! DON'T blame the seller if you buy something for your kids that you don't want your children to have. But, I suppose that suing somebody else for your personal inability to parent your kids, is better than being forced to admit that you can't accept your parental responsibilities and simply say, "No. You can't have that because it's not good for you. It may taste good, but it's not good for the rest of your body."

Then the situation is compounded by courts that will actually hear such ridiculous cases... which simply encourages more idiots to file suit to protect their self-image. It seems that most people would prefer to pin the blame on somebody else - especially if that somebody else has a very "deep pocket" - rather than exhibit self-discipline in matters of child rearing. And, they will do so every time, rather than examine their own fragile ego for flaws.

The legal profession has been guilty of "looking out for their own" for centuries. Judges today are the end-product of practicing lawyers, and they are keeping other lawyers cash flow positive with every lawsuit heard, no matter how groundless it may be. That explains why baseless lawsuits, that 50 years ago would have been dismissed as "frivolous" and a waste of the court's time, are allowed to go forward today. Inasmuch as 90% of our law makers are lawyers, that explains why our laws have become so complicated that the common man can no longer understand his rights, and why common sense has been effectively banned from our court system. The lawmakers feather their own nest, and the nests of their legal brethren, by insuring that Joe Average cannot understand the laws that govern his daily behavior. Should Joe find himself afoul of the law, he is defenseless without the expensive services of an attorney.

Citizens today will be greatly disappointed if they go to court expecting justice. With all the technicalities now built into the system, the main purpose of which is to protect legal practitioners, justice is an extremely rare commodity. What the plaintiff or defendant will get is a king-size helping of law, which is frequently lacking even a side order of "justice". To correct that we need panels of at least three judges, two of whom have common sense and have never practiced "law". It would then be incumbent upon the trained judge to convince the majority which party should be the victor in any case - civil or criminal.

But, that's just how I view systemic stupidity in our country. Stupidity, along with corruption, is rampant in all branches of our government... from municipal government to the federal government, what we have is the best government money can buy. We should all have that kind of money... or perhaps, less expensive lawyers.

"Our Muslim Brothers and Sisters"... say WHAT?

I was channel surfing last night, when I stumbled across C-Span, where the Senate Subcommittee on Civil Rights was hearing "testimony" from several people about the recent inclination of We The People toward limiting the rights of Muslim-Americans. The committee chair, Senator Dick Durbin, a left-wing Democrat from Illinois (SURPRISE! That's where Chicago is), and the committee in general appeared to have "stacked the deck" since there was no testimony given refuting their glorification of Islam and its practitioners.

Durbin, at one point, went so far as to refer to Muslim-Americans as "our Muslim brothers and sisters". I'm sorry, but I have no Muslim brothers or sisters! Muslims are neither my blood relations, nor are they my spiritual siblings. Perhaps that sounds racist, radical, insensitive and/or Islamophobic to some of my readers. But, that's the way it is when your "brothers and sisters" follow the doctrine of a "holy" book (the Qur'an/Koran) that exhorts them to -

• Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them(Sura 2:191)
• Make war on the infidels living in your neighboorhood (Sura 9:123)
• When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you catch them (Sura 9:5)
• Kill the Jews and the Christians if they do not convert to Islam or refuse to pay Jizya tax (Sura 9:29)
• Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable (Sura 3:85)
• The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them (Sura 9:30)
• Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticise Islam. (Sura 5:33)
• The infidels are unclean; do not let them into a mosque (Sura 9:28)
• Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies
  (Sura 22:19)
  
• Do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them (Sura 47:4)
• The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them (Sura 8:65)
• Muslims must not take the infidels as friends (Sura 3:28)
• Terrorise and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an (Sura 8:12)
• Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorise the infidels (Sura 8:60)

My spiritual brothers and sisters are much more likely to be Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Wiccan and even Atheist or practitioners of Voodoo and Santeria! Why? Because there is no other "holy book" on Earth that proclaims its followers must "terrorize and kill" any and all who do not share their Muslim beliefs!

During this C-Span hearing, representatives of our own government accused Americans of being "intolerant" toward Muslims. Intolerant? They're lucky we didn't kill 3,300 of them (under Mosaic law) on September 10, 2001! There is no religion on this planet that is as intolerant as Islam! But, let's not mention that... because it would be politically incorrect.

Let's assume, as does our government (and common sense to some degree), that not all Muslims are terrorists, and that not all Muslims wish to terrorize and kill anyone who does not accept Islam as their personal belief system. Unfortunately, you "can't tell one from the other without a program". Why are those majority "moderate Muslims" not eliminating the "radicals" from their midst? Why are the moderate Muslims not identifying the "radical Muslims" to the authorities? Why is the government allowing the continuing influx of Muslim immigrants into our country, when we can't accurately identify those whose goal is our destruction? Who would want a child molester to move in as their next door neighbor? Yet our government allows those who have the proven ability to cheat, steal, lie and murder to promote the goals of World Islamization to pour into our country and set up residence next door. We are the first two of the "Three Little Pigs"... building our domestic protections from straw and twigs, when what we need is bricks!

That just the way I see things. I am not a bigot, but I am a realist. I will not "gild the lily", nor will I tell you that black is white, or that bad is good. The biggest threat to our national security is not in Afghanistan, or Iraq... or even Iran. The biggest threat to our national security is along our swiss-cheese borders, and in cities like Dearborn, Michigan (where the government essentially said, "It's okay to irritate 99% of our population by the broadcasting of the Muslim call to prayer over high-powered amplifiers and loudspeakers five times daily. We just have to be careful that we don't inconvenience our local Muslim population.")

My attitude is basically one of, SKROOM! Let the Muslims become as flexible in their religious practices as they are in their politics...