Barack Obama was the architect and producer of this health care summit/theater/reality show. This was definitive Barack Obama theater, but arrogance exposed two major flaws in the production, which in turn exposed Obama’s noxious deficiencies as he took center stage without teleprompters and with script.

Revelations about Obama from the health care theater:

After producing a substantial record of accomplishing nothing of substance or rectitude in his first year, Obama demonstrated his penchant for public discussion of issues rather than actually making a genuine effort to fix them. His entire professional track record has revolved around discussing rather than doing; he continues unabated. Obama was elected as president of these United States, a leader, not as the meretricious philosopher laureate of America.

Obama grossly overestimated his performance at the Republican retreat in Baltimore in January when he challenged Republicans to an open debate. To his credit, he did have a solid performance. The cameras were focused on him the majority of the time, which was unfair to the Republicans, but should not take away from his performance. But when a grandiose ego trumps diminutive commonsense, as was proven at this health care theater, Obama is not a master, but rather a slave, to unrehearsed debate about policy or topics of substance. Conventional wisdom dictates that Obama should never be more than a few feet from his teleprompters, unscripted, and should never bandy rhetoric with an opponent that is prepared, able, and argues from the vantage of reality.

Obama’s character flaws manifest when he is challenged intellectually and on substantive issues, sans script and teleprompters. He is not mesmerizing or dominant, but will display the temperament of frustrated l’enfant, with an arrogant and combative demeanor. When confronted on the facts while moderating the show, Obama addressed his challengers with condescension and insolence, all the while allowing the Democrats more than double the minutes of the Republicans by not counting his own pretentious monopolizing of the minutes. For a man who has ascended to president of these United States, it is astounding that he has never developed tolerance for differing opinions.

Obama demonstrates an overwhelming fetish for displaying his exhaustive constitutional illiteracy. There are three separate branches of our government. Obama, having a law degree from Harvard, has probably never been exposed to the influences of the Founding Fathers of this country, as case law trumps constitutional law within those hallowed confines. To thoroughly understand the Constitution, knowing what influenced the Founding Fathers is compulsory. The spirit of our Constitution lies in the separation of powers, which can be directly attributed to French philosopher Montesquieu and his book The Spirit of the Laws. Trias politica, the separation of powers, is the foundation of keeping the federal government’s powers in check. It is impossible to reconcile Obama having a health care legislation writing party in the White House with various union representatives, presenting his own health care legislation, then conducting this circus with legislators, without being in direct violation of the Constitution.

Obama’s penchant for prevarication is becoming legendary. The spectacle lasted 7 1/2 hours. Obama stated regarding the meeting, “We’ll go section by section. America can’t solve our economic problems unless we tackle some of these structural problems.” The math: 2700 pages, at least one hour of complete and honest argument per labyrinthine page equals 112 days of debate. For a bill that equals 1/3 of the entire United States economy, an average of 10 seconds per page was invested. At 2700 pages, this bill is not about health care, Obama knows it, the Democrats know it, the Republicans know it, and the majority of the American people know it.

This meeting was never about bipartisanship. The summit was held on Thursday, but on the preceding Monday, Obama posted on the White House website his own version of health care legislation. The summit was pure political theater. Harry Reid, before the meeting, was already planning on reconciliation the following week. Obama has made it clear that reconciliation will be used if the bill cannot reach cloture. Which, oddly enough, is another lie. His fabrications: On 11/02/2004: “My understanding of the Senate is that you need 60 votes to get something significant to happen. Do we have the will to move an American agenda forward and not a democratic or republican agenda forward?” On 29/25/2007: “We are going to have to ask a 60% majority in the Senate to actually get a health care bill to my desk.” This week regarding the bill: “…deserves the same kind of up-or-down vote that was cast on welfare reform, the Children’s Health Insurance Program.” Up-or-down equals reconciliation.

Rep. Paul Ryan spent six minutes debunking the chicanery of subsidizing 30 million Americans with government run health care, while miraculously lowering the deficit by increasing spending with money the government does not have. Obama’s health care bill is a mathematical achievement that would have Isaac Newton scratching his head and rethinking his life’s work. Ryan dazzled attendees with sophisticated mathematics: If you have $100 and you spend $150, how much do you have left? This was actually his methodology. Obama and the Democrats’ reaction to Ryan was the unintelligible retort of one who had not read nor comprehended the bill, and would be hard pressed to pass a primary school math quiz.

In their usual liberal fashion, the Democrats lamented about various anecdotal stories of the inhumane suffering of people who died or were horribly mistreated because the government was not providing them with health care. The morbid ruse about these stories is that, in the past, most of the heart wrenching tales the Democrats have paraded about have been either fabricated or immensely aggrandized to the point of emaciation. The Left will continue to subject one and all to their anecdotathon–a phrase coined by Missourah.

Not one to be surpassed with pointless rhetoric, Obama resorted to his own personal anecdote about insurance:

When I was young, just got out of college, I had to buy auto insurance. I had a beat-up old car. And I won’t name the name of the insurance company, but there was a company — let’s call it Acme Insurance in Illinois. And I was paying my premiums every month. After about six months, I got rear-ended and I called up Acme and said, I’d like to see if I can get my car repaired, and they laughed at me over the phone because really this was set up not to actually provide insurance; what it was set up was to meet the legal requirements. But it really wasn’t serious insurance.

Now, it’s one thing if you’ve got an old beat-up car that you can’t get fixed. It’s another thing if your kid is sick, or you’ve got breast cancer.

First, anyone who owns a car has the option of either purchasing full coverage insurance including collision, or the state mandated liability minimum insurance. Obama was covered by the latter. Second, according to Obama’s analogy, to “treat a sick kid or breast cancer,” either dental insurance or the insurance on a boat should suffice. Third, Obama, in his attempt to annex one-third of the U.S. economy through the insurance sector, knows less about insurance than a bourgeois automobile owner. This anecdote proves that Obama did not understand how insurance worked as a college graduate, and does not understand how insurance works as president.

Should the Republicans have even attended the summit? It was a disappointment that they did not challenge Obama’s authority to be directly involved in legislation, or challenge the myriad unconstitutional provisions within the health care bill. The Republicans should have insisted on preconditions before attending. They should have insisted that the bill be legal before debate. But in retrospect, they did expose the deceitful math, the unpreparedness, and the ignorance of the Democrats and Obama regarding the substance of the bill. The bill presented by Obama, much like Obama himself, was all style and no substance as the Congressional Budget Office was not able analyze Obama’s bill because it was sufficiently lacking in details.

Say you were just driving along in your car when all of a sudden your car is being pelted with books of a classical nature, scholarly writings, and dictionaries. You slam on your brakes, exit your car, look up into the sky and witness the horror unfolding. Flying saucers are discharging the aforementioned  literary ammunition through the square shaped barrels of extraterrestrial space guns. All moving objects are being targeted and shot with erudite and literate publications. You look down at the amassing publications, when you are pinged in the temple by Shakespeare’s The Tempest, knees buckling, you slide to the ground and take cover in your automobile.

What could be the cause of such a bizarre attack? There can only be one conceivable and logical conclusion for the cause of this outer-space blitzkrieg: the Martians, intent on taking over the world for sinister and unknown reasons, had one shot, and one shot only, of discovering the one crippling weakness of the human race that could be exploited instantaneously, without chance of recovery, and their one shot was determined by a short but intense observation of one of the more senior politicians of this country, Maxine Waters.

The Martians observed Maxine Waters one afternoon “debating” Ben Bernanke about the nuances of the difference between the Federal Funds Rate and the Discount Rate. And that one afternoon of observation was enough for the Martians to categorically conclude that the human race, especially the most powerful nation on the earth, The United States, was the most ludicrously moronic and stupid aggregation of humanity on God’s green earth, based purely on the profoundness of Maxine Waters’ imbecility.

But the Martians’ ill-conceived plan would fail. The majority of their intended targets did not fall to the ground and writhe with cerebral spasms whilst their heads exploded like popcorn in a microwave–as Maxine Waters’ head would surely do if infected with knowledge–but instead picked up the literary munitions, sat down, and started reading. The Martians, in a disbelieving stupor, retracted their square-shaped extraterrestrial space guns into their flying saucers, hit warp-speed, and disappeared into the heavens.

The world was saved by faulty intelligence gathering by the Martians. They assumed that since Maxine Waters was such a powerful elected official, and was statistically probably one of the four dumbest organisms on the planet, including pets, mummies, trees, and Nancy Pelosi, that the electors must be much dumber. But the one factor that was not calculated into their equation is that in this country, no matter how seemingly smart the voters are, they have a self-inflicted tendency to elect, then reelect, the intellectually and morally reprobate into office, then spend the time between elections complaining about their elected official, then starting the cycle over again, and again, and again.

So with that bit of anecdotal fantasy behind us, Maxine Waters and the vastness of her stupidity sits on the following committees in the House of Representatives:

Financial Services Committee

• Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity
• Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
• Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology

Judiciary Committee

• Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security
• Subcommittee on Immigration

She also holds the honor of being perennially named one of the 15 most corrupt members of Congress by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Please find below the video of the back and forth debate between Maxine Waters and Ben Bernanke about the difference between the Federal Funds Rate and the Discount Rate. Keep in mind that Maxine Waters is acting in the capacity of the Financial Services Committee, and if you ever wonder how this government fails at every considerable level,  just remember that it is run by some of the more illiterate of this country. And also keep in mind that this video could potentially cause an invasion of the Martians.

The summations of reality:

Barack Obama: During the presidential campaign, and immediately after winning the election, Barack Obama was declared urbane… super cool… IQ off the charts… probably the smartest guy ever to become president… the cerebral president… too intelligent for the job, and boundless tantamount protestations of the like.

One year later, the evidence and aftermath have painted a different picture of a man whose intelligence and general competence were prejudicially manufactured by the media and the demagogues of the Left. The only existing evidence supporting Obama’s formidable intelligence and heightened IQ were, and are still, sequestered from public perusal, as his actual accomplishments present a garden variety philistine intellect. His academic record, for all practical purposes, does not exist. Not one of the myopic windbags who championed his intelligence has ever been afforded the luxury of admiring his Punahou School records, his SAT scores, his Occidental College records, his Columbia College records, his Harvard College records, and his nonexistent Harvard Law Review articles as the editor.

Obama’s record of a man possessing such an impressive IQ and academic foundation seems to run counter to his manufactured super-human perspicacity. Obama has demonstrated this past year an astonishing ignorance of constitutional law, American history, world history, basic fundamental economics, and a primary school grasp of the structure of the federal government, including each branch’s role.

Obama’s brief tenure has been plagued by a battle between his alleged super-intelligence and his doubtless super-arrogance, with the latter generally prevailing at the end of each round.

This past year, we have learned that Obama’s penchant for lying is not wielded for political expediency, as are plenty of political prevarications, but rather appears founded in a pathological affliction. Only 65% of Americans did not believe the substance of Obama’s State of the Union Address, which is low considering that almost the entirety of the speech, when weighed against substantiated facts, was one misrepresentation of the truth after another. Only 6% of Americans believe his $800 billion debacle of a stimulus package has created any jobs. To put this number in bleak perspective, 8% of Americans believe Elvis is still alive, and 83% believe Tupac Shakur is still alive.

Obama told a group of Republicans that he was not an ideologue. But this past year, the evidence has convicted Obama as the embodiment of Leftist ideology. A cursory perusal of his appointments and cabinet members’ pasts and recent affiliations with Leftist organizations, Communist organizations, and Fascist organizations, would substantiate his ideology beyond any reasonable doubt, regardless of his disputes.

Currently, only 22% of voters strongly approve of Barack Obama’s performance as president, while 41% strongly disapprove. This gives Obama a presidential approval index of -19.

So what have we learned this past year about Barack Obama? When Barack Obama ran for president, he possessed no leadership experience. When a man in his late 40’s is void of leadership roles, he is not a leader. A natural leader leads. Whatever the situation or circumstances, a leader always emerges as a leader. And to lead, you need followers, and Obama has divided this nation asunder. Continuing to divide and lead a minority of Left-Wing ideologues down a path of destruction does not a leader make. Obama was not qualified when he was a candidate, and has proven that he is not qualified one year later.

If Obama could be summarized in one act, it would be his speech earlier at the National Prayer Breakfast. He stood erect, jaw jutted out in arrogance, shrouded by teleprompters, reading words someone else wrote, and pronouncing the word “corpsman” by accentuating the “p.” This speech was embarrassing, pathetic, pregnant with fabrications, ignorant, and disrespectful, and summed up the first year of Barack Obama.

Sarah Palin: I like Sarah Palin. She, out of Obama, McCain, and Biden, was the most qualified to be president. Yet, she is not qualified to be president at this juncture, and being a celebrity is not advancing her qualifications for the job, but it is advancing conservatism. Palin does possess one trait that eludes the other three, and this trait is essential as a leader: common sense. She has values, and those values resonate with the majority of Americans. She possesses and projects a morality that eludes the majority of politicians in this country, and frustrates the Left into spasms of exasperation. Palin seems to possess the fundamental knowledge of the principles upon which this country was founded, which would make her a far better leader than our current president. I believe Sarah Palin is a very smart woman, but when pressed for specifics about the Constitution, she uses talking points that rarely penetrate into a deeper understanding. Her lack of previous intellectual curiosity regarding U.S. history and the Constitution has cost her a foundational knowledge. That can be corrected. A reading of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, studying legitimate American history from 1766-1790, reading the Federalist Papers, and reading the debates and personal writings of the Founders regarding the Constitution, would give Sarah Palin a much better understanding of the Constitution than most Ivy League Constitution Law graduates. But, with that said, she still has a better understanding of the meaning and intentions of the Constitution in the aggregate than the majority of the congress, Barack Obama, and four unnamed Supreme Court Justices whose initials start with Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, John Paul Stevens, and Stephen Breyer.

What have we learned this year about Sarah Palin? Sarah Palin is currently in her most suitable and accommodating role to advance the values of true conservatism. She continues to cause the loathsome and reprehensible essence of contemporary liberals to expose itself through their reactions to her. As Palin has gained her footing on the national stage, increased her knowledge base of national issues, and mastered a compelling authority to communicate her message, with each incremental step she has advanced, the Left has incrementally increased their thrashing about in the throes of their confounded agony. It would be a great loss to the conservative movement if Palin were to run for office in the near future, and abandon the power she wields in her current endeavor. Sarah Palin has settled into a position of much greater power and influence than if she held public office. Sarah Palin is good for conservatives, and good for this country.

Joe Biden: What can be said about Joe Biden one year later? Joe Biden possesses the same picayune spirit and values that were responsible for his getting caught plagiarizing a paper in law school, and graduating at the bottom of his class. His intellectual and moral evolution since becoming a senator and subsequently vice-president has been somewhat of a disappointment, as he is still the same little dimwit he was in law school.

What have we learned this year about Joe Biden? The same thing Joe has learned: nothing.

John McCain: John McCain, politics aside, is a true American hero, a man who possesses a type of courage that only a handful of Americans can claim, and as much as a lifetime of politics will corrode and decay a person’s honor and integrity, McCain has been able to keep most of his intact. John McCain, on his best day, is a run of the mill progressive, which conflicts with some of his conservative values. Most of what ails this country today can be directly tied to policies that John McCain supports. McCain, throughout his political career, and especially in the past ten years or so, has been an erratically moving contradiction, which does not characterize a maverick as much as it characterizes an indefinable entity, and what this country does not need as president is an indefinable entity.

John McCain and Joe Biden do share one thing in common: they both were sponsors of bills that had portions ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, Biden’s Violence Against Women Act and McCain’s McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Act.

What have we learned this year about John McCain? Nothing. McCain is what he was ten years ago: an inconsistent and indefinable entity.

In conclusion, one year later, the only person of the four to advance to a level of genuine and functional relevance is Sarah Palin. McCain and Biden are still McCain and Biden. Barack Obama has proven that when a president is elected whose only demonstrable skill is reading from a teleprompter, then after one year, his only discernible skill is still only reading from a teleprompter.

The gist of the meeting according to the NOAA press release:

More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives.

It is interesting to consider the information the NOAA decided to leave out regarding the weather and climate: anomalous winter storms around the world, a trend towards globally cooler temperatures for the past decade, atmospheric CO2 and temperatures lower than during the medieval era, the decline of the earth’s temperatures between 1940 and 1980, and during the 1970’s, the same global scientists wringing their hands about the impending cooling of the earth and the devastation it would wreak upon mankind if the earth did not start warming.

But fear not, NOAA spokesman, Justin Kenny, is happy. Kenny states that, “NOAA is happy to have a chance to educate people about the difference between the climate and the weather. Education is well needed in this arena.”

Clarification please: if the earth has been cooling for the past decade, and winter storms are coming earlier each year and are more severe, is that the weather or the climate? I am going to take a stab in the dark and say the earth is cooling, not warming. My untrained and anecdotal logic: Fact, the earth has been cooling for a decade; fact, for the past ten years there has been an increase in aberrant winter storms around the globe; fact, various places around the globe are either receiving snow for the first time in many decades, or are receiving snow earlier than any time on record; fact, the more prominent American and British climate scientists had almost the entirety of their man-made global warming science indicted as a first-rate counterfeit ring by thousands of hacked emails substantiating their deception.

And let’s not forget the granddaddy of all global warming summits in Copenhagen, Denmark, which was decimated by winter storm. Denmark has a maritime climate that lends itself to mild winters. But for the first time in 14 years, Denmark had a white Christmas, as the temperature plummeted to an unprecedented 25 degrees Fahrenheit and dumped 4 inches of snow on the city. This was of the utmost inconvenience for the 1200 limousines and 140 private jets that dumped their CO2 across the globe en-route to Copenhagen to save the planet.

Does a decade constitute weather or does it constitute climate? Here is a list from the examiner.com :

• January 15, 2004 – A global warming rally held in New York is subdued by one of the coldest days in New York City history. Gore tells the audience it was caused by global warming.
• November, 2006 – Al Gore visits Australia two weeks before the start of summer. Ski resort operators are caught off guard by the snowfall.
• February, 2007 – A hearing in the House of Representatives on global warming is cancelled after a snow and ice storm strike DC.
• April, 2007 – Two feet of snow arrive on Itaca, NY in time for an Earth Day rally.
• April, 2007 – A rally in Reno, Nevada held by the Northern Nevada Coalition for Climate Change is cut short by heavy rain and sleet.
• March, 2007 – A media briefing on the Senate’s climate bill is cancelled due to a snowstorm.
• December 5, 2007 – Washington DC receives its first snow of the season as the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee debates global warming legislation.
• January, 2008 – A global warming rally in Baltimore, Maryland is held amidst falling snow.
• October 22, 2008 – Al Gore appears at Harvard amidst temperatures that approached 125 year old low temperature records.
• October 28, 2008 – The House of Commons debates a climate change bill as London gets its first October snow since 1922.
• October 28, 2008 – John McCain and Barack Obama campaign in Pennsylvania. A wet, wintry mix causes McCain to cancel a rally while Obama goes forward. He teases people holding ‘stop global warming’ signs saying, “This is probably not the weather to hold up those signs. I’m not into global warming either but it’s a little chilly today.”
• November, 2008 – The “People’s Power for the Climate” protest in Newcastle, Australia is canceled after one day due to rain and cold. Participants had been told to bring sunscreen and hats.
• December, 2008 – The former vice president speaks to an audience in Milan, Italy about global warming. Outside it is snowing, a rare event in the area. Snow and freezing rain also strike Rome, Naples, Palermo and Sicily.
• January 17, 2009 – President-elect Obama on his train tour to the capital stops in Philadelphia. He tells those gathered, “A planet that is warming from our unsustainable dependence on oil.” Temperatures were 18 degrees with a wind chill below 10 degrees.
• January 28, 2009 – Al Gore is set to testify to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about global warming. A winter storm arrives at the nation’s capital.
• February 5, 2009 – Temperatures down to -6 degrees freeze a major global warming conference in Buffalo.
• March 2, 2009 – A major global warming rally billed as “the nation’s largest act of civil disobedience” sees low turnout after a blizzard blanketed the nation’s capital with snow. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi cancels an appearance at the event after her flight was delayed due to the storm.
• July, 2009 – Leading up to a visit from Al Gore to launch Safe Climate Australia, Melbourne suffers through temperatures approaching zero degrees.
• October 9, 2009 – Al Gore is in Madison, Wisconsin for a convention of the Society of Environmental Journalists. Record cold temperatures arrive with him.
• March 2, 2009 – Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had to cancel an appearance Monday at a global warming rally in Washington, D.C., that was hit by a snowstorm because her flight was delayed, her office told CNSNews.com.
• December 24, 2009 – Copenhagen Climate Summit ravaged by unusual winter storm.
• February 10, 2010 – NOAA forced to hold press conference by phone due to unprecedented D.C. winter storm.

Perhaps if I look at man-made global warming through the same prism that Obama looks through to determine the state of the U.S. economy, I would see the light: the more debt he can pile on the country, and the higher he can make the deficit of the United States, and the more people that are unemployed, then apparently, the better, as just last week Obama told us so: “We are seeing the corner turn on the economy growing again.” So with that logic, the colder it gets, the warmer it must be getting. Makes sense to me.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is also an irrational and run-of-the-mill incoherent conspiracy theorist. He believes that George W. Bush stole the presidential election in 2004. Not the 2000 election against Al Gore, but against John Kerry in 2004. He stated, “After carefully examining the evidence, I’ve become convinced that the president’s party mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people in 2004.”

He is to the science of vaccines as Al Gore is to the science of meteorology. Kennedy, like Gore, twists, bends, molds, contorts, then lies about science to fit his agenda.

Kennedy has attributed almost every conceivable malady of mankind to vaccines. Vaccines, who needs them? Certainly not the hundreds of millions of people who have been inoculated against chickenpox, diphtheria, hepatitis, measles, mumps, tetanus, and last but not least, polio. Question: Would Kennedy’s fellow Leftist, FDR, have been opposed to vaccines also, especially the polio vaccine?

The best Kennedy could come up with regarding George Bush’s 2004 stealing of the election were vague, shadowy, and unsubstantiated accusations. Nothing more. But when an organization that operates as a crime syndicate, which has either been indicted or is being investigated for voter fraud spanning multiple states, commits continuous felonies of voter fraud for the Democratic Party, Kennedy has this to say:

And all of this stuff that we’ve heard recently about ACORN falsely registering people, it’s really not an issue in our country. The stuff that ACORN was involved in really was people who were working for ACORN defrauding ACORN. You hear these stories about somebody filing 18 different registrations for the same person. Well, there’s actually nothing illegal about that. You can file as many registrations as you want. It’s only the last one that counts. And that, you know, they have Mickey Mouse registered or whatever.

Now that the worst snowstorm to hit Washington D.C. in the past 90 years has completely shut the city down this past week, including the federal government, there is no better time than the present to reminiscence about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lamenting about the lack of winter weather in Washington, D.C. a mere 15 months ago. Kennedy, possessing the title “resolute defender of the planet,” self titled, of course, penned his anecdotal observations– as are most man-made global warming facts– about the disappearance of winter weather in D.C. forever. Of course American corporations are to blame.

His maxim:

In Virginia, the weather also has changed dramatically. Recently arrived residents in the northern suburbs, accustomed to today’s anemic winters, might find it astonishing to learn that there were once ski runs on Ballantrae Hill in McLean, with a rope tow and local ski club. Snow is so scarce today that most Virginia children probably don’t own a sled. But neighbors came to our home at Hickory Hill nearly every winter weekend to ride saucers and Flexible Flyers.

In those days, I recall my uncle, President Kennedy, standing erect as he rode a toboggan in his top coat, never faltering until he slid into the boxwood at the bottom of the hill. Once, my father, Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, brought a delegation of visiting Eskimos home from the Justice Department for lunch at our house. They spent the afternoon building a great igloo in the deep snow in our backyard. My brothers and sisters played in the structure for several weeks before it began to melt. On weekend afternoons, we commonly joined hundreds of Georgetown residents for ice skating on Washington’s C&O Canal, which these days rarely freezes enough to safely skate.

Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil and its carbon cronies continue to pour money into think tanks whose purpose is to deceive the American public into believing that global warming is a fantasy.

These Leftist activists are much like chameleons. They bounce around from one populist cause to another, changing their colors to suit their environment, and generally for profit. But as with Kennedy and Gore, beneath the veneer of their changing colors is nothing but a cesspool of counterfeit and fabricated credentials, and good intentions that, coincidently, are as passionate as the money involved.

Bill of Rights

Amendment I

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.

Emphasis is mine, but as complex and esoteric as some prevaricated constitutional pseudo-scholars, and the hand-wringing Leftists who just lost their patent on wholesale vote purchasing by this Supreme Court decision, the first five words of the First Amendment should always set the pace for any First Amendment discussion, argument, law, or decision.

Special interest money, union money, and the entirety of the mainstream media’s astonishing unvetted support for Obama were paramount to his being elected. It took Obama only two short days to formulate an opinion lambasting the Supreme Court’s ruling restoring First Amendment rights to corporations regarding how they choose to spend their money in the political arena on a scale that the Left has enjoyed for years. Obama said he is “working with Congress on a forceful bipartisan response.” Now he wants to work with the entire Congress as opposed to just the Left-Wing of Congress, this after coming off what has turned out to be a disastrous first year of working exclusively with the Left-Wing of Congress, and a couple of Republican senators he could purchase with taxpayer money (Snow and Collins). His bipartisan cajoling will be for naught for two reasons: 1) He spent the entirety of his first year completely spurning the Republicans from the legislation process. 2) The restoration of First Amendment rights to corporations has evened a very one-sided advantage the Democrats have enjoyed over Republicans.

It was a correct decision, and has leveled the playing field.

The case: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, wanted to make a movie titled Hillary: The Movie, which was none too pleasing about Hillary Clinton, and release it during her campaign for the Democratic nomination for president. Citizens United, being a legal corporation, was disallowed under the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law of 2002, and Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce of 1990, to exercise their free speech.

Barack Obama responded to the Supreme Court Ruling with the same benighted and illiterate constitutional comprehension that has decorated his every comment regarding the United States Constitution as far back as his prattle has been documented and continued it through his State of the Union Address. Before Obama could again brandish his unconditional lack of decorum and impropriety by admonishing the Supreme Court justices in attendance by speaking with a very forked tongue about their decision, he took the liberty to solidify his wholesale ignorance of the Constitution. He stated:  “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal….” The we are “created equal” phrase was a wonderful touch. Unfortunately, it is not “enshrined in our Constitution” as Obama stated. Perhaps if Obama knew the history of this country and its founding documents, he would know that the phrase is the start of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. 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.

Barack Obama’s reaction to the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, for the very sake of humanity, deserves to be broken down into the flagrant affirmations of his ignorance, obliviousness, obtuseness, of who he is, how he became president, who created him, and his general inability to connect the dots.

He promises to fight a Supreme Court decision on political donations by corporations and unions. He stated that he couldn’t “think of anything more devastating to the public interest.” Perhaps he can’t think of anything more “devastating to the public interest,” but I can, and apparently so did the state of Massachusetts last week by electing Scott Brown over Obama acolyte Martha Coakley, by replacing Leftist incumbent New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine with conservative Chris Christie, and by conservative Bob McDonnell winning the Virginia Governorship. And according to the latest polling numbers, more than half of the citizens of the United States have come to realize this past year what could be “more devastating to the public interest,” and that is Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and most of the Democrats skulking in elected office.

“Last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limits in our elections.” Perhaps after having his health care reform agenda systemically rejected by the most liberal state in the Union last week, Obama, being in a stupor from said rejection, and having to rewrite his State of the Union Address sans health care destruction, may have really believed that a century of  election law was reversed. But then again, maybe he lied. What the Supreme Court did was reverse the McCain-Feingold Act that included all corporate spending. This was an amendment added to election law by the McCain-Feingold Act. The court did not reverse a century old ruling that prohibits directly sending money from corporations to candidates. It kept intact the ban on  “a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State or local election” by foreign corporations The Citizens United ruling was limited to the funding of speech by corporations attacking or agreeing with a political candidate. The decision really was that simple.

“This ruling opens the floodgates for an unlimited amount of special interest money into our democracy. It gives the special interest lobbyists new leverage to spend millions on advertising to persuade elected officials to vote their way — or to punish those who don’t.” For the love of Pete, if it is possible to clinically suffer from a phobia of truths so severe one might actually spontaneously combust from speaking the truth, Obama has been summarily diagnosed. George Soros, just during the 2004 Bush election, spent $400 million to influence the election. Soros has solicited foreign money to influence U.S. elections. Obama spent $847 million on the election to McCain’s $550 million. The major differences: 1) Obama outspent McCain by $300 million. 2) All of McCain’s contributions can be accounted for. But within Obama’s $850 million are $366,708.22 from China, $25,259.00 from the United Arab Emirates, $7,062.60 from Russia, $6,716.28 from Saudi Arabia, $6,350.00 from Indonesia, $5,000.00 from Kenya, and $1,750.00 from Egypt. The source of almost half of his donations cannot be accounted for.

“The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections.” Again, Obama seems to be cheating death by spontaneous combustion by telling the truth. Immediately upon taking office, Obama signed an Executive Order entitled “Ethics Commitments” that would “close the revolving door that lets lobbyists come into government freely.” This is the most sweeping ethics reform in history… blah, blah, blah. Two days– 48 hours– after signing the most sweeping ethics reforms in history that shut the door on lobbyists, Obama signed a waiver overriding his Executive Order to hire his first lobbyist, and has subsequently filled almost the entirety of his cabinet with lobbyists or cabinet members with strong lobbyist ties. There quite possibly could be more lobbyists working for Obama than working within the District of Columbia.

He has instructed his administration to work with Congress to “fight for the American people” and develop a “forceful bipartisan response” to the decision. Now Obama wants bipartisanship with the Republicans. Obama wants bipartisanship from the conservative wing of the Congress to circumvent a Supreme Court ruling that just evened the playing field between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Supreme Court just restored the 1st Amendment rights to corporations to spend their money as they please to voice their opinions about certain political candidates, positive or negative, who would have far reaching effects on the corporations. And for this, Obama wants the help of the entire Congress to implement some form of legislation to usurp the Supreme Court decision.

Obama stated that the decision will make it harder to enact financial reforms, close tax loopholes, promote energy independence, and protect patients from insurance company abuses– key elements of his domestic agenda. Obama is correct that it will be harder to pass counterproductive legislation, as he has witnessed, but his reasoning is wrong. He has not, and will not, be be able to pass negative impacting financial reforms, close tax loopholes that only punish the industrious who structure their taxes according to laws written by Congress, decimate the American economy with the Democrat’s version of energy independence, and destroy the entire medical industry with the Democrat’s version of health care reform. What has made it harder, and going forward, almost impossible, was demonstrated by the Democrat’s astounding losses in several key elections renouncing Barack Obama and the Democratic Party’s unacceptable agenda. Obama’s support for his agenda enjoys very little public support, and that is what will make it hard to implement. Connect the dots.

“We don’t need to give any more voice to the powerful interests that already drown out the voices of everyday Americans. And we don’t intend to.” Again, another interesting assessment of powerful interest groups considering he hosted a health care legislation writing party in the White House with labor unions, AKA, powerful interest groups, to write legislation, instead of the legislators that were elected by the voices of everyday Americans.

“It will be a priority for us until we repair the damage that has been done.” Sorry Obama, but you are late to the party by exactly two key Republican Governors, one very key Senator, the graveyard of socialist legislation decaying at the White House doorstep, and the majority of the American citizens. The damage is in the process of being repaired, the damage that was done on November 2008, with the election of you, Barack Obama, and the commanding yet squandered Democratic majority in the Congress. This country started being systematically repaired with several major governor’s races in November, and as recently as last week’s Massachusetts Senate race, by repudiating your and the Democratic agenda.

So who really won? The Bill of Rights won and so did the citizens of the United States. Sure, a corporation is not a citizen. It does not have a brain either. It is formed, operated, maintained, capitalized, and its opinions, be they political, are created by bona fide United Stated citizens–officers and shareholders– who possess all the constitutional rights afforded by the United States Constitution.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority in the Citizens United case, profoundly summarizing not only what can be said, but what can be heard: “… when Government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.”

Analyzing Obama’s response to the ruling only further substantiates his vainglorious persona, while still seeking validation, relevance, and the subsequent rescuing from the incoherent quagmire in which he has been ensconced since November 2008.

The argument that state-created entities (corporations), should not have the same rights as individuals is baseless because, thanks to the intrusiveness of the Democratic faction of the federal government, from the moment we are born, we are regulated, documented, stamped, registered, controlled, in this system, in that system, approved for this, approved for that, rejected for this, rejected for that, etc., etc. Haven’t we all just become state-created entities, with just semantics separating we the people from corporations?

As stated in Article I Section VII:

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

It was always my understanding, and the absolute intention of the venerated and peerless men who created this country and its governing document, the United States Constitution, that the granted powers of the Executive Branch, as enumerated in Article II Section III, were to “faithfully execute” federal law written by Congress, not to create or write law outside the halls of the Congress.

As stated in Article II Section III:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information on the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Assuming that when you voted for your congressman, you were under the archaic delusional assumption that your elected legislative representative was being elected to craft the laws of the land, and not be on the receiving end of a briefing by labor unions about the legislation they just created in concert with Barack Obama at the White House.

It is perilously intriguing that Barack Obama has spent an inordinate amount of time either creating or riding herd over the making of laws, especially laws of an unconstitutional complexion, when the only mention of the Executive Branch’s power to execute federal law lies in a truncated sentence within the lengthy Article II defining presidential powers. Article II, through intentional vacancy, expressly excludes the Executive Branch from creating law. It is even more perilously intriguing, with the reconciliation of the House and Senate health care bill at hand, that Obama is conducting legislative writing meetings crafting sections for the reconciled health care bill, sans congressional participation, in the White House. It is even more fantastically perilously intriguing that labor unions are in the White House crafting federal law with Barack Obama, which will have a devastatingly and immeasurable impact on the entirety of the citizens of the United States.

After 15 hours of self-imposed sequestering, and furtively holed-up behind closed doors at the White House, the labor unions have emerged with an extraordinarily unconstitutional key component of the extraordinarily unconstitutional health care bill that will tax health insurance “Cadillac plans.”

How could this possibly go wrong?

The egocentric result: A family paying more than $24,000 per year for family plans, and individual plans costing more than $8,500, will be taxed at a rate of 40%. Now families, which may only be marginally affording their premiums of $24,000 per year, will see their policies increase to $33,600 per year. The individual that pays $8,500 per year will see an increase to $11,900 per year. That equals very little hope, and a whole lot of change for the soundly and responsibly insured.

As an added bonus, and a highly suspect and curious amendment to the labor union crafted plan, health care polices negotiated by the very labor unions writing this new law would be exempt from the new taxes until 2017. That equals a whole lot of hope, and very little change for the blessedly and overly insured.

But fret not about your congressman being left out of the loop. Four of the labor union negotiators/ad hoc legislators briefed the eschewed lawmakers about the legislation they wrote in their stead during a luncheon on Capitol Hill. Apparently, the labor unions felt it sporting to let Congress know what laws they had written for them, since Congress has to vote to approve it or something or other.

After the celebratory breakthrough of the labor union’s negotiated health care law, which is of the most contraband nature, Barack Obama, the great bridge builder, this uniter of men, then summoned all House and Senate leaders, sans Republicans of course, to the White House to brief them on the laws he and the labor unions had generously crafted for them to read, if they so chose to break with their newly created modus operandi of never reading bills, then vote for its approval.

But why the labor unions? Why are they at the White House writing laws?

That American-made car you purchased, it was made with union labor. Manufacturers pay their union laborers approximately $29 per hour. But their wages are $75 per hour. Nestled inside that number are benefits: life insurance, pension, health care, etc. GM alone is on the hook for $57 billion in health care benefits for retired employees, but is operating those benefits with around $9.4 billion in assets. These arrangements, based on the systematic financial raping, plundering, and pillaging of companies like GM by the labor unions through the negotiating of employee wages that are two thirds higher than the average wage, are now known as the scorned “Cadillac plans.”

What can be expected when a labor union negotiates a wage of $29 per hour and the total hourly compensation is $75 per hour– triple the average wage in the private sector– with the bulk of $46 above the actual wage proposed to be taxed at 40%? If labor unions were responsible for multi-millions of dollars being contributed to the Obama campaign, and feel responsible for the union members’ predicament (i.e., they need your vote), the labor union can expect to become a de facto third house of Congress, set up shop in the White House, and with a little bit of hope and change, exempt union members’ “Cadillac plans” from the 40% tax for at least seven years.

Imagine George Bush conducting legislation writing parties in the White House, conducted by Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, after the collapse of Enron. Overhauling the trading of electrical futures, gas futures, and accounting trickery, then the negotiators of Enron conducting a briefing to Congress explaining the laws they had rewritten, cracking down on the aforementioned trading standards, sans the new law’s application to Enron of course?

Regardless of how the Obama or the Left slice, dice, nuance, spin, disguise, or inveigle this egregious symphony upon the masses susceptible to statist propaganda disguised as hope and change, it is textbook Barack Obama usurping the United States Constitution, yet again.

Poor Janet Napolitano. Her peers know her as very capable, but severely handicapped by an unsophisticated gullibility for get-rich-quick schemes. When she strides down the hall at Homeland Security, her underlings scatter like Democrats in chamber with copies of the Constitution being reigned down upon them. You see, each week she is hustling a different multi-level marketing get-rich-quick scam into which she has invested heavily. She also is a chump for believing anything that anyone will tell her. She lost the bulk of her wealth in the 1990’s as the victim of one pyramid scheme after another. It is her gullibility that has caused her to commit one remarkably inane blunder after another, but sadly, there is a morbid and pathetic backdrop to these calamitous stories.

Four of Janet’s blunders:

1. Janie’s statement regarding the fact that she believed that the 9/11 hijackers illegally entered the U.S. through the Canadian border is breathtaking. She professed, “Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country or suspected or known terrorists have entered our country across a border, it’s been across the Canadian border. There are real issues there.” When asked if she was talking about the 9/11 perpetrators, Napolitano replied, “Not just those but others as well.”

In her defense, she was given very bad critical information, but then again, how important is it for the current Homeland Security Secretary to know how the 19 hijackers who murdered 3000 innocent Americans got into this country? The IT guy at the office of Homeland Security told her he had it on good advice from his uncle that all 9/11 hijackers crossed the U.S.-Canadian border at Grand Portage, MN. “If you are sure about this, I will use it to my benefit some day,” she gushed to Eric the IT guy.

2. Janie’s use of the phrase, “man-made disasters,” as opposed to “war on terrorism,” was a painful decision, but one of legal prudence. Judge Marilyn Milian, who presides over daytime television’s The People’s Court, advised Janie that there is a good chance that she could personally be sued for labeling someone, or an entire group, as terrorists. Not only is it not politically correct, and downright offensive, she could be on the receiving end of a defamation lawsuit. Milian also cautioned Janie that if the suit ends up on The People’s Court, “God help you, because I can’t.” Janie said, “Thank you so much. I will use it to my benefit some day.” Thus, Janie prudently made it through her entire Congressional testimony without using the words “terrorist,” “war on terror,” and “9/11″ while discussing how she will do her best to prevent and protect the country from unnamed and unmentionable events.

3. Janie has stated that “crossing the border is not a crime per se.” Janie was reprimanded by her hair stylist’s third cousin, Ernesto Coli, who told her that technically, just crossing the border in some remote area of Texas was not a crime, but that running through a legitimate border crossing manned with guards and agents, without stopping, was a crime. She was advised that that is why there are very few actual illegal crossing-the-border crimes and prosecutions; it’s just not illegal per se. Janie replied, “Sounds good me, if you say so. I will use it to my benefit some day.”

4. Janie stated that, in reference to the Northwest Flight’s attempted passenger-made disaster, “there was so far no evidence of a wider terrorist plot….” Her insurance agent told her he had it on good authority that Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab, more than likely, was the only individual left in the Middle East who wanted to do harm to the United States, acted entirely alone, and it would be impossible for a larger plot to destroy the United States to be in existence. “I hope you are right, because I am going to run with it, and use it to my benefit today,” stated Janie.

As the reader can discern, the foundation has been laid for Janie’s magnum opus of get-rich-quick schemes. The FBI has released a series of emails between Janie and Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab dating back to October of this year, which led to Abdul, as she affectionately called him, being aboard Northwest Flight 253 on that fateful day, December 25, 2009.

The emails:

To: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

From: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

Sent: November 19, 2009 6:38 AM

Subject: Request For Urgent Business Relationship

Dear Beneficiary. This is to inform you.

CONFIDENTIAL

Good day and compliments. This letter will definitely come to you as a huge surprise, but I implore you to take the time to go through it carefully as the decision you make will go off a long way to determine the future and continued existence of the entire members of my family.

I need to hear from you before I can make consummate this deal to confirm if you are dead or not.

Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab, heir apparent to the estate of the late Head of State of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, General Ali Katt Abdulmutallab.

My ordeal started immediately after my father’s death on the morning of 8th June 2008, and the subsequent takeover of government by the last administration. The present democratic government is determined to portray all the good work of my late father in a bad light and has gone as far as confiscating all my late father’s assets and properties, freezing our accounts both within and outside Nigeria. As I am writing this letter to you, my cousin Hous Bin Pharteen is undergoing questioning with the government. All these measures taken by past/present government is just to gain international recognition.

I and the entire members of my family have been held incommunicado since the death of my father, hence, I seek your indulgence to assist us in securing these funds. We are not allowed to see or discuss with anybody. Few occasions I have tried traveling abroad through alternative means all failed.

It is in view of this I have mandated DR GALADIMA HASSEIN, who has been assisting the family to run around on so many issues to act on behalf of the family concerning the substance of this letter. He has the full power of attorney to execute this transaction with you.

My late father had/has Eighty Million USD ($80,000,000.00) specially preserved and well packed in trunk boxes of which only my father and I knew. It is packed in such a way to forestall just anybody having access to it. It is this sum that I seek your assistance to get out of Nigeria as soon as possible before the present civilian government finds out about it and confiscate it just like they have done to all our assets. I am willing to offer you 50% of my treasure.

I implore you to please give consideration to my predicament and help a son in need.

May Allah show you mercy as you do so?

Your faithfully,

Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab

N/B: Please contact DR GALADIMA HASSEIN, on this e-mail address for further briefing and modalities

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: November 19, 2009 6:40 AM

Subject: Re: Request For Urgent Business Relationship

Dear Abdulmutallab,

Is this a one of those Nigerian email scams I have heard about? If so, do not contact me again. If not, please tell me more. I am interested if this is legitimate. How do I know you really have the money packed as you state? I do have some experience with scams, and need to be sure. Will I truly receive $40 million?

Please advise.

Regards,

Janet Napolitano

To: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

From: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

Sent: November 30, 2009 2:42 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Request For Urgent Business Relationship

My Dearest Madam Napolitano,

I can assure you that this transaction is pleased to be legitimate. Please notice attached legitimate photograph taken only one hour ago of the specially preserved and well packed trunk boxes of treasure of $80 million. I prey your eyes are pleasing with it. Please understand time is most urgent for transaction must happen very quickly?

May Allah show you mercy as you do so?

Your faithfully,

Abdul

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: November 30, 2009 2:44 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Request For Urgent Business Relationship

Dear Abdul,

I feel such relief. I am extremely cautious with trust of this type and what someone confides in me, but I truly do trust you. I am committed to your/our plight. Why me? What is it you need from me? What can I do to assist you?

Regards,

Janet

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: December 4, 2009 2:45 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Request For Urgent Business Relationship

Dear Abdul,

Please advise. I can operate with speed. Is the money in large or small denominations?

Regards,

Janie

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: December 6, 2009 2:46 PM

Subject: A few more questions

Dear Abdul,

My friend, can I consider myself wealthy? This is too good to be true. I have waited for this for so long. If you only understood.

Warmest Regards,

Janie

To: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

From: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

Sent: December 10, 2009 6:52 AM

Subject: Re: A few more questions

My Dearest Janie,

Your help is needed in careful deciphering of encrypted message, as I believe you are expert, and then a pleasant meeting with DR GALADIMA HASSEIN, who you should prepared to assist in locating the treasures from the ruins of Detroit, where it is secretly hidden in the vast ruins of one, long ago great city. I implore to you meet me at the Detroit airport December 25, then we may enjoin DR GALADIMA HASSEIN. Your much needed financial assists is muchly needed. Please wire transfer from your banking establishment to my banking escrow the sum $45,000 = First National Bank of Yemen = account number XXXXXX = routing number XXXXXX to assure my safe and unencumbered travel to present you to your cipher which will bring you riches, and purchasing for DR GALADIMA HASSEIN a safety army of mercenaries to traverse the deadly paths of Detroit. And please send postal, my attire for me to wear for access to my flight. I may not be discovered. I will need you to ship via postal a nun’s habit. As I may enter passenger security dressed as an ancient nun in wheelchair, with the cipher safe in the habit. I dare not be searched. I have arranged for intermediary with airport security forces if trouble arises without passport. May I depend on your assistance!!

May Allah show you mercy as you do so?

Your faithfully,

Abdul

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: December 10, 2009 6:54 AM

Subject: Re: Re: A few more questions

Dear Abdul,

My dear Abdul. You will never get past airport security dressed as an elderly nun in a wheelchair. The chances of your being strip-searched are tenfold compared to that of a young Muslim man. Trust me, I know. Please follow my instructions for your safe passage: dress casual, pay cash for a one-way ticket, bring very little luggage, carry a copy of the Koran, and please utter repeatedly the phrase, “praise be to Allah.” You will be safe, my friend. No one would have the audacity to search you as such.

J 

To: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

From: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

Sent: December 12, 2009 7:42 AM

Subject: Additional help

My Dearest J,

How shall the cipher be carried to present safe passage!! If lost, our fortune is lost.

Abdul

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@yemen.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: December 12, 2009 7:44 AM

Subject: Re: Additional help

Abdul,

I will transfer the much needed money, my investment. I will send via postal a very special pair of underpants (hope this is not offensive to you), with a hidden department in the “more sensitive area” where the cipher can be hidden. It will pass the most rigorous security. I will see you on December 25 at the Detroit airport.

Best wishes my friend.

J:) xxoo

To: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

From: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@cityofdetroit.gov]

Sent: December 26, 2009 8:22 PM

Subject: I hate you

I hate you. I hate you. You infidel. What pleasure to me are 72 virgins without my XXXXX which has been BURNED off!!!

Do not ever contact me again. I hate you.

P.S. I just now understand your system is working for me. Pleasing meals, prayer times, no one interrogations me, no one speaking to me with harsh tones wanting information, my brothers in Yemen are safe from my tongue, I speak to no one if I choose not. INCLUDING YOU!! My lawyer representative at law told me to say nothing.

Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab

To: Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab [mailto:ababdul@cityofdetroit.gov]

From: Jnapolitano@homelandsecurity.gov

Sent: January 6, 2010 2:22 AM

Subject: Re: I hate you

Listen Abdulmutallab, just as I suspected, you were trying to scam me. I never believed a word you said. I was stringing you along, gathering intelligence. You have no idea with whom you are dealing.

It looks like the last laugh is on you, Mr. Disaster-maker. I happen to know that the State Department has revoked your U.S. visa. How do you like them apples?

P.S. If someone wanted to get in touch with DR GALADIMA HASSEIN, how would she go about contacting him? But not about the chests of money, of course.

Janet Napolitano

The score: Muslim terrorists responsible for 9/11 = 18. The subsequent attempts at terrorism on United States soil include those of Richard Reid, the Muslim terrorist who attempted to detonate a shoe bomb on a flight from Paris to Miami, and Abdul Mudallah, who attempted to detonate a bomb over Detroit. Muslim terrorist attempts and successes at terrorism via airplanes = 21. Christian, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, etc. attempts and successes at terrorism via airplanes = 0.

The White House has labeled this an act of terrorism.

Janet Napolitano made the perfunctory appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows, as politicians do when selling something, or cleaning up a an asinine statement they made the day before. She became more incoherent, confused, and detached from reality with each successive interview. She tried to clean up her Sunday morning discombobulation on Monday morning, but after appearing inebriated with fermented “hope and change,”  she has thusly resigned herself to release a carefully worded accidental exposé to clarify the Obama administration’s stance on the “T” word and explain how the system was a glaring success and failure simultaneously.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s statement regarding the incident:

I first want to apologize for the White House’s use of the word terrorism in their statement. This was an unfortunate involuntary impulse. Keep in mind that the term “terrorism” was a Bush administration dysphemism to fuel the “politics of fear,” and is much too inflammatory for this administration’s tastes. Your president, Barack Obama, has asked me to give a shout-out to the New York Times for their exemplary reporting of Northwest Flight 253. Not once did they use the term “Muslim,” or “terrorist” unless within the context of a quote. Their superbly written article could just as well have been describing any one of the many white supremacists from a Southern Republican voting district, any military veteran, any anti-abortion proponent, or any gun control opponent, or any Christian that takes the Bible literally.

The right-wing terror media has labeled this an act of Islamic terrorism. Let me be clear, just because this individual’s name happens to be Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab, was on a plane over a major U.S. city, tried to detonate a bomb to destroy the plane, kill all passengers aboard, including himself, has admitted that he is an Al Qaeda operative, received his explosive device and instructions in Yemen from Al Qaeda, does not automatically make him a terrorist, especially an Islamic terrorist. What we are dealing with here is a passenger-made disturbance, not to be confused with a passenger-made disaster.

We are looking at all possibilities. The passengers who subdued this gentleman, especially the white male Dutch passenger, are also persons of interest for a possible violation of Mr. M’s civil rights, especially his freedom to practice his non-Christian religion unencumbered. Nothing at this stage has been ruled out. We have myriad suspects from this flight who may or may not have been involved in a civil rights violation.

We are unsure at this point as to why this young gentleman would attempt to detonate a bomb on this flight. He has no apparent ties to the Republican Party, the military, anti-gun control groups, or various other “terrorist” organizations. We are also looking into the possibility that the lack of publicly funded single-payer  health insurance plan could be an extenuating factor in Mr. M’s apparent distress.

It’s true that Mr. M’s name was not on the Transportation Safety Authority’s no-fly list. And for legitimate reasons. Even though his name was on every conceivable terrorist watch list in the entire world, and his father warned the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria about his son’s inclinations toward jihad against the United States, there was insufficient derogatory information available on Mr. M for the TSA to add him to the no-fly list. We deal with hard facts, not speculation. Just because someone is on an international terror list, was denied a visa by Britain, visited Yemen, paid cash for a one-way ticket to the U.S., brought one piece of luggage for an extended stay in the U.S., did not have a passport, does not warrant being on the TSA’s no-fly list; this is profiling, and will not be tolerated by this administration. We are certain that our overseas contingency plan worked as planned. We have it on record that he was forced to remove his shoes, and did not carry-on more than one ounce of shampoo. But the pair of magic underpants he was wearing, well that may well be a religious formality, and we have legal looking into it. There is no suggestion that the alleged suspect was improperly screened.

Rest assured that the system we have in place worked to perfection and did not work to perfection. Mr. M’s alleged attempt at a passenger-caused disaster was successfully detained after the flight landed. This validated the system. Before the landing, there may have been areas where the system could be tweaked.

We have put into place the following new procedures: all passengers will have to remain in their seats for the last hour of their flights, no personal items allowed in passengers laps for the last hour of their flights, hands placed upon the knees, and looking straight ahead. These new rules should not be taken as an instruction manual  to go to the restroom well before an hour before landing and assemble an explosive device, then return to your seat with an activated explosive device well before the last hour of the flight. That would be a violation of the new rules that are in effect.