Obama has lied incessantly during his political career. Not the type of lying one would expect for political expediency, but with manufactured lies encompassed with a pathological urgency.

There were 126,558,818 votes cast in the presidential election. Obama received 66,744,472 or 52.7%; McCain received 58,272,729 or 46%; other candidates received 1,541,617 or 1.2%. Obama disgorged one substantiated lie after another daily to the American people. 66,744,472 or 52.7% American citizens voluntarily voted for a candidate they knew was lying to them daily. Perhaps it is far fetched to state that all who voted for him knew he was lying and voted for him anyway, but when presented on a daily basis with one contradictory statement after another from Obama, one would either have to choose to overlook the pathological nature of his lies, or be too blinded with any of the ensuing voter bloc breakdowns below to discern the difference–either one is just as bad as the other.

97% of blacks that voted, voted for Obama– he lied, but he was black, so he got their vote. The white vote he received was because he was a liberal, and he was not Bush or McCain, between who these voters could not distinguish the difference–he lied, but he was not Bush or McCain, and got their vote. The Jewish vote was because he is a liberal something or other–he lied, but he was not a conservative, so he got their vote. 66% of Hispanics voted for Obama because, well who the hell knows why, after McCain committed political suicidium with his base by crafting a sword out of the McCain-Kennedy Amnesty Bill, then unceremoniously falling on it. The Hispanics turned out to be McCain’s Judas Iscariot.

Of Obama’s lies, other than the lies he told about infanticide, the lies he told about his relationships with William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright were the most offensive because one villainous character attacked America with bombs, and the other attacked America with a polluted soul that spewed hate from the pulpit.

William Ayers, the capitalist-hating domestic terrorist, is out, at this very moment, capitalizing on Obama’s win by hawking his new book so he can enjoy the pleasant side effect of capitalism–money. While making the rounds of the morning talk shows, he was asked about his relationship with Obama. His remarks:

“We had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign. But right-wing commentators tried to use those connections to smear Obama,” he writes in the forward of his book.

“Obama’s political rivals and enemies apparently saw an opportunity to deepen a dishonest narrative about him, that he is somehow un-American, alien, linked to radical ideas, a closet terrorist, a sympathizer with extremism,” he said.

Contrast this with Obama’s flippant remarks about their relationship during a debate between him and Clinton, “This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” I am not sure what exactly constitutes an endorsement, but conventional wisdom would dictate that if someone held a fundraiser for a political candidate in their home, that would be an official endorsement.

In regard to Wright, compare and contrast the two statements by Obama at different points in time, and the relevance of convenience:

On March 27, 2004, Obama was interviewed by Chicago Sun-Times religion writer, Cathleen Falsani. The interview was not released in full until after the election for obvious reasons. Obama’s comments about Trinity United Church of Christ:

“One of the churches that I became involved in was Trinity United Church of Christ. And the pastor there, Jeremiah Wright, became a good friend. So I joined that church and committed myself to Christ in that church.”

Falsani asked, “Do you still attend Trinity?”

“Yep. Every week. 11 o’clock service. Ever been there? Good service.
I actually wrote a book called ‘Dreams from My Father,’ it’s kind of a meditation on race. There’s a whole chapter on the church in that, and my first visits to Trinity.”

After the firestorm over Wright’s anti-American, vitriolic sermons hit the national news, Obama started singing a different tune about his church-going schedule and his relationship with Wright. When asked on the campaign trail in 2008 about Wright and the church by Major Garrett of Fox News, after Wright had become persona non grata to genteel folks, Obama said:

Garrett: “As a member in good standing, were you a regular attendee of Sunday services?”

Obama: “You know, I won’t say that I was a perfect attendee. Trinity was always packed, and so you had to get there early. And if you went to the morning service, you were looking at-it just was difficult.”

Barack Obama is cool and suave; his lying is not forced, but very natural–a very practiced professional. He is cool and suave even while under the influence of a willing suspension of disbelief. Maybe that is why he is so popular with 52% of the voting sect–perhaps they believe if we were all better liars, the world would be a better place, or then again, maybe looking at Obama is the same as looking in the mirror and identifying with what they see.

America. The country where anyone can be what they aspire to be. A perfectly good example is Congressional Individual Nancy Pelosi–or Speaker of the House Pelosi. Here is a divine woman who has overcome the most debilitating obstacles to become the first woman Speaker of the House. Speaker Pelosi is afflicted with not one, but two, infirmities that would generally preclude one with her afflictions from even considering a run for office, much less the coveted Speaker of the House. Speaker Pelosi suffers from Cerebral Deficiency Syndrome (CDS), which actually affects many members of Congress, but not to the magnitude of her debilitation. In layman’s terms, her cognitive capacity is that of a salamander. But she has overcome and rose the the rank of Speaker of the House of Representatives. Her second affliction is being devoid of even a basal set of morals–she also suffers from Moral Deficiency Syndrome (MDS). As do most members of Congress, and again not to the extent of her suffering. Harry Reid, leader of the Senate, suffers from both CDS and MDS, at almost the same level as Pelosi. The Center for Disease Control is reporting that there may have been a pandemic of CDS and MDS on November 4th, but that is another story for another time.

With that said, and on the record, there are very simple methods to fix the very Congress that has been proliferated by people with the afflictions Pelosi and Reid. I will present ten fail-proof resolutions, that, if enacted, will bring Congress to the heights it was created to achieve. The ten fixes are as follows:

1. The slogan during the formative years of these United States by the 13 colonies was the phrase, “No Taxation without Representation”. Meaning that they wanted some representation in Parliament before taxes were to be levied on them. They wanted a vote on the subject of taxation. I present a more contemporary battle cry: No Representation without Taxation. If, after the smoke clears, on April 15th, you pay zero taxes, you lose your right to vote until you are a tax paying citizen and contributing to society. Since the majority of taxes are paid by a very small percentage of taxpayers, this would give the taxpayer more control over how Congress spends their money. This would break the cycle of “if you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul’s vote.” It would also eliminate the majority of sitting Congress Individuals who spend ambitious people’s money on less ambitious people like drunken sailors. It would bring in a whole new class of Congressional Individuals.
2. On all bills that have additional pork spending added to them, the author of the pork must pay 1% of the total of their pork expenditure from their personal money. They cannot use campaign money. This would eliminate most of the wasteful spending from Congress.
3. No bill that leaves Congress for the President’s signature can be longer than 2 pages of double space prose. No cheating and writing on the back. This would eliminate the current bills of such girth and breadth, that they become incomprehensible to even the originator of the bill. Keep in mind that this is purposed for dealing with a Congress that, without spell check, would spell cat with a k–and they are writing 1000 page bills that affect the entire country.
4. All members of Congress will be paid according to the status of the Federal Budget. If there is a deficit in the budget, then no member of Congress shall receive their pay, benefits, nor can they receive campaign contributions as long as there is a deficit. It would almost make being a member of Congress appear to be a service to their country, or something heinous like that. No balanced budget, no pay–the way it works for the rest of America. A very practical method of balancing the budget and controlling spending.
5. All Congress Individuals will be limited to three terms in the House of Representatives and one term for Senators. This would not be a compulsory mandate to step down, but rather a consequence of extending tenure. I propose one month in Federal Prison for every year over the term limits a Congress Individual wishes to serve. The logic is that they may not have been caught doing something wrong that would warrant prison, but more than six years in the Congress insures that somewhere, somehow, something loathsome and repugnant was committed against these United States by the Congress Individual.
6. All laws must have a sunset clause. While this may seem ridiculously burdensome, that is the point. If Congress can spend the majority of their time in office rehashing the merits of past laws that are expiring, then it should, theoretically, buffer any new damage they can do by keeping them distracted. It also gives them an opportunity to let bad laws expire.
7. Before speaking to a crowd of more than ten people, all Congress Individuals must be sworn in to tell the truth, just as if they were taking the stand in a trial–the consequence being prosecution for perjury. All Congress Individuals must be accompanied by a certified court reporter to record the speech. Then the transcript will be fed into a computer with an extensive data base and searched for lies. If a lie is detected, then they shall be prosecuted by the “preponderance of evidence”, rather than the standard “beyond a reasonable doubt”, then justice will be complete. Just a little help in training them to tell the truth.
8. All Congress Individuals must be, when seated in Congress, connected to a state of the art lie detector which in turn is connected to a 10,000 volt stun gun apparatus. It sends a friendly reminder to speak the truth when in session. This could also be used as an income generating source for the federal government. Who wouldn’t pay $50 a ticket to watch a Senator or Representative squeal and thrash about the floor of Congress when asked a question as opposed to just listening to them answering with a lie?
9. All campaign contributions must go into one general fund and be spread among the members of each party evenly. As Obama stated, …”help the ones behind you.” This will also keep the office of a Congress Individual or President from being bought and it just seems downright fair.
10. Since all Congress Individuals and the President take an oath of office, and the primary part of the oath commands them to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, it would make sense that before someone can obtain a voter’s registration card, they should be able to have a simple working knowledge of the Constitution–for discernment’s sake. Even basic macro-economics should be added to the mix just to keep them from being bamboozled by the faux economic fantasies presented to them during a campaign. The primary reason being that the elected officials generally do not, and will not, adhere to the Constitution, so an educated voter is the answer for a cleaner and greener representation. Before obtaining a voter’s registration card, a prospective voter will have to pass a fifty question test. Twenty-five questions on the Constitution, and twenty-five questions on Macroeconomics. These would be general, unbiased questions authored by me–only to keep it fair, of course. Just the studying of the study guide I would author would give pause to most voters as to the qualifications of a Congress Individual or President campaigning for office.

*** This is a bonus step: All race based caucuses to be eliminated from Congress. These Congressional buildings should be representative of the American people, and not used for the divisive benefit of any one group, race, or otherwise.

Before the election, Rasmussen did a poll and reported that 59% of Americans would throw out all senators and representatives to elect a new Congress. Only 17% said they would keep the current legislature. So, as usual, nearly all the incumbents were voted back into office. What does this say? As Churchill stated, “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” So after this past election, it is obvious that the average voter does need protection from themselves, and that is what my plan will afford–sounds eerily like a Democratic plan, though.

]]> http://www.jimbyrd.com/ten-step-program-to-fix-congress/feed http://www.jimbyrd.com/barack-obama-president-of-the-united-states http://www.jimbyrd.com/barack-obama-president-of-the-united-states#comments Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:41:44 +0000 jimbyrd http://www.jimbyrd.com/?p=968 I have been powerfully inclined to, for lack of a better word, wax prophetically about the impending doom of an Obama administration. But after considering which of his policies would be the most expediently destructive, and being further educated by conservative political pundits on the impending Armageddon, I suddenly realized which policies would be the most devastating. None of them. There are no policies, only educated conjecture of what could, might, probably, and surely will take place. To compound the adumbrated doom from conservatives, the lack of civility towards Obama from conservatives is starting to rival the putrid dialog of the left. With that said I will show a measure of restraint and civility that should be the bulwark of conservatism.

With that said, congratulations, Barack Obama.

Most presidents are presented with predicaments and sometimes catastrophic calamities. Some more than others. As unfortunate as these are for a country, they are also opportunities for a man to achieve greatness. These are defining opportunities. They also present a president the opportunity to fail, and fail absolutely. A man cannot achieve greatness without the opportunity to overcome something greater than he.

Barack Obama deserves a clean slate, yet his past and his associations will preclude him from receiving the benefit of the doubt. The two can be cerebrally reconciled.

Barack Obama will inherit an economy that is spiraling out of control and settling into a recession. The economy will be Obama’s first test because his dialog in the immediate time span ensuing the election set the tone for the economy. The radical ideas for the economy that he espoused on the campaign trail, if reinforced, will do further damage to the economy and markets. His election alone has caused an historic two day catastrophic effect. He can have a tremendous effect on it by doing the right thing and not presenting his radical liberal taxation program to the public that he pandered with to get elected during the campaign. That would be the right thing to do and would take courage. By leaving the current tax rates will more than likely placate the markets and assist in the road to recovery. Obama has been presented with a presidential anomaly: he has been presented with the opportunity to succeed or fail before being sworn in. He has a clean slate to prove his courage.

Barack Obama needs to realize that this election was about race. He received 96 percent of the black vote. That is the definition of an election about race. Obama is fond of quoting Martin Luther King. Here is a quote from Dr. King that runs antithetical to Obama’s collecting 96 percent of the black vote: “I have a dream that one day my children will live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Obama received that 96 percent based on his skin color. I am not saying that Obama does not possess good character, he has yet to demonstrate it. He has a clean slate. He has the opportunity to demonstrate that he is to be judged by his character and not his skin color, and to become the uniter he has professed to be.

Obama will be confronted with a Russia that tested his mettle the day after the election by threatening to move warheads into Eastern Europe, and which has threatened our European allies if Obama continues with the Missile Defense Shield in Eastern Europe. The United States has agreements to provide the Missile Defense Shield to our allies. Hamas started bombing Israel the day after Obama was elected, breaking a four month truce. These are acts to test Obama’s perceived weakness. The operative word being perceived, since Obama has a clean slate.

Giving Barack Obama a clean slate to work with is civilly apropos. It is diametrically opposed to what liberals would have given to McCain. There is too much hatred and animosity from conservatives directed toward Obama as he has yet to fail. Condemnation for failure should be reserved until failure is absolute. This is not an apologetic for Obama, as there is a distinguishable difference between giving someone the opportunity to succeed, but at the same time logically calculating the probable outcome. It would be extremely unpatriotic at this juncture to wish for Obama’s failure. I want him to succeed. But he cannot succeed with the qualities that he presented to the country. His success is America’s success, and conversely, his failure is America’s failure.

I truly wish Obama success, but expect abject failure. Wishes and expectations generally run the gauntlet of dichotomy. Just as the adage goes, “fits like an old shoe”, corruption, racism, felonious activity, and partisanship have been Obama’s old shoe. He will need to resist the magnetism of his being pulled towards filling his prominent cabinet positions with people that fit the description above and who fit him like an old shoe. Should Obama fill his cabinet positions with the corrupt and ignorant old guard from the Congress, he will, before he takes the oath of office, have created a foundation for his administration that will set in motion not only failure, but a spectacular failure.

He cannot vote “present” as President. His patented nuances, while engaging during the campaign, will only be viewed as sophomoric as a leader. Obama will have to earn his stripes each step of the way. With his past and his radical and unethical associations, he does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. With a clean slate he possesses no honor, no character, no good will, no courage, and no right to wild eyed optimism from the 50 percent of America that did not want him elected. Those attributes he will have to prove.

As his Vice President elect, Joe Biden, said during his debate with Sarah Palin, when plagiarism rolled so easily off his tongue, “the past is prologue.” He failed to give credit to Shakespeare’s The Tempest as his source. Whereof what’s past is prologue’ what to come, In yours and my discharge. Biden’s most recent plagiarism is Barack Obama’s challenge. Can Obama overcome his past? If his past is his prologue, he will fail, and fail miserably.

As Obama called the U.S. economy a disaster and stated that the thanks should go to “John McCain’s president, George W. Bush”, I will use the same logic in closing: Barack Obama is the president of the people who voted him into office, not mine. But I do challenge him to become my president.

[youtubr=

Reaching into the trunk of your auto and pulling out your abacus will not help you, as you would need an algorithm of the highest degree to calculate what I am about to tell you.

Gasoline prices, on a national average, are half of what you paid a few months ago for gasoline. Your electrical bill at your home runs about $219, unless you are Al Gore, and it can top $17,000 per month. Barack Obama has stated, concerning coal companies in the U.S., “So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can - it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.” Considering that half of the electricity in this country is produced by coal, the consequences are predictable. See chart:

If Obama can bankrupt half of the companies in the U.S. that produce electricity, and decrease and increase electrical consumption in the U.S. simultaneously, then we should be better off than we are now, according to Obama–that is, unless he was misunderstood again. But buried deep in Obama’s plan to decrease the consumption of electricity, is the collateral effect that will also help reduce the consumption of electricity–the bankrupting of several coal producing states, you know the ones–the ones who can’t seem to make up their minds if they want to swing red or blue, even with their economy on the line–and causing the unemployment of tens of thousands of workers in all aspects of the coal industry from mining to the end production of electricity. This is a diabolical, yet genius stratagem. What better way to decrease consumption of electricity than to have millions of Americans sitting at home in the dark in their “change we can believe in” t-shirts, unable to afford to light their house, contemplating why they voted for Obama.

If you’re curious about the decrease and increase in electricity at the same time, so am I. Here is Obama’s crystal clear proposition: Obama has called for a 15% decrease in the use of electricity in the U.S., yet at the same time he wants all U.S. modes of transportation to switch from using gasoline to electricity. All I can say is, “Holy Juxtaposition.”

If prices increase spectacularly, who can afford electricity? Obama has an answer for that also, “A lot of us who can afford it are going to have to pay more per unit of electricity, and that means we’re going to have to change our light bulbs, we’re going to have to shut the lights off in our houses.” He addresses those who can afford to pay more while trying to change light bulbs in the dark, but what does he say about those who can’t afford to pay more? Like his fugitive Auntie, for example, living in this country, and on the dole no less, and then having to sneak around to make her illegal contributions to Obama. What about her electricity? Who’s going to pay for it?

The U.S. government is the only entity that is an anomaly to Newton’s third law of motion–to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Newton’s, posthumously, fourth law of motion was created for governments, especially the U.S. government. It states that: to every action, by the government, there is a multitude of shocking, deplorable, and negative opposite reactions. So to arrive at a mathematical and monetary assessment of Obama’s scheme, we will turn to the Tenzing Institute of Economics (TIE), headed by the highly esteemed Professor K. Russell. They have designed a custom and highly specific algorithm to assist with the calculation. The input was simple. Decrease all U.S. consumption of electricity by 15%, calculate the usage of electricity for all vehicles to run on electricity at the same time, input the economic impact of bankrupting several states, job losses in the millions from collateral fallout, double digit inflation from the cost of transportation of goods, and a few other odds and ends. Average cost of a kilowatt of electricity currently is 14.2 cents per kilowatt. If Obama is elected and implements his diabolical bankruptcy/increase/decrease plan–$21 per kilowatt. In laymen terms, it would cost you $62 to boil three eggs on an electrical stove top, or to charge up your newly converted auto, $1100.

So boys and girls, if you are still undecided this election eve, and that is a pathetic story in itself, remember: Obama may decrease your taxes by $4700 per year if you are middle class as the Democrats classify it, somewhere between $16,000-$250,000 per year, but to cook a pot roast in an electric oven will negate all your tax savings for the year.

John McCain’s patriotism has been tested, and tested hard. There is no unknown as to how McCain would handle a crisis. He would not be found under his desk curled up in the fetal position. Politics aside, it would be intellectually disingenuous for someone to either state, or believe, he would have the capacity to fold under pressure.

Barack Obama on the other hand wants to be the Commander in Chief of these United States, when in actuality, and sans his position as a U.S. Senator, had he applied for a job that required the highest level security clearance, it is plausible that he would be denied due to his radical alliances with terrorists, felons, and anti-American pulpiteers. Obama has never been tested, never lead, and it would be intellectually disingenuous to state with authority that he would not curl up in the fetal position, metaphorically speaking, in a time of crisis.

This election cycle presents not only an American economy, but a world economy, that is teetering on the brink of a recession, rogue nations in possession of, or rapidly acquiring or manufacturing nuclear weapons, possible four Supreme Court appointments in the next four years, and another assault on the United States and its allies by Islamic terrorists. These are the issues the next President will face. The next President’s leadership, and the Congress, will determine the dénouement in regard to these issues in the ensuing next four years. Come November the fourth, this, whether the voter is aware of the aggregate of the issues listed above, is what the vote is about. Not the redundant and ridiculous mantra of change, or the same ridiculous mantra of four more years of Bush. Those are irrelevant, sophomoric, and dangerously inept reasons to cast a vote for Obama on November the fourth.

Sometimes a vote is a vote to salvage the soul of a country. A soul that has been chipped away for the past thirty years by the ever increasing radical left’s influence in politics and the courts. Europe has lost its soul. It was not taken in war, sold on the market, or wrenched away in some Machiavellian conspirative, but just given up with the same defeatist modus that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid espouse. For the sake of salvaging the soul of this country, I am voting for John McCain for four reasons only: The economy, national security, judgment, and the Supreme Court. The arguments are as follows:

The Economy: If elected to the presidency, and if the Democrats in Congress increase their position to a super-majority, an all out assault against capitalism in this country can be expected. Some variation of the economy from 1929-1945 can also be expected. Obama will increase taxes on the very entities that create the jobs in this country, which will in turn result in a significant loss of jobs and benefits. Obama’s statement to Joe the Plumber: “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too. My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody … I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” This should give even the most casual observer an idea of where the economy will be headed.

But a more ominous problem faces the economy if Obama is elected and the Democrats can muster up a filibuster-proof majority, The world economic crisis, the very one that can be attributed to a handful of Democrats in the Congress and their defective ideology, the very ones who have the most blood on their hands from their culpability in the current crisis, will be in charge of the banks, Wall Street, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc. To calculate the consequences of that scenario, one would only need to possess a modicum of common sense.

John McCain cannot fix the economy. The economy, other than the proper dispensing of the seven hundred billion dollars by Paulson, is at a point where it can only sort itself out. But Obama, and Congress, can significantly magnify and perpetuate a painfully prolonged experience.

The Supreme Court: Obama has made it very clear that he does not like the disposition of the United States, and has a rabid disdain for the U.S. Constitution that is the foundation of this country, and was the driving force behind making it the greatest, most prosperous, and the most powerful country on this planet. He believes ,as did FDR, that the Supreme Court is a tool to be manipulated by the Executive Branch to recast the foundation of this country in a mold of how he perceives it should have been to start with. When speaking of the Supreme Court, and especially the Warren Court, the most radical court in U.S. history, Obama had this to say about the role of the Supreme Court:

“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. What the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.”

As I have stated many times before, for someone who has a law degree, and taught Constitutional Law, Barack Obama has continually displayed an unparalleled and profound ignorance of the Constitution and U.S. history. He also does not understand the role of the Supreme Court, as set up by the Founding Fathers, as witnessed in this statement by him as to what he believes the role of the Supreme Court should be:

“I taught constitutional law for 10 years, and . . . when you look at what makes a great Supreme Court justice, it’s not just the particular issue and how they rule, but it’s their conception of the Court. And part of the role of the Court is that it is going to protect people who may be vulnerable in the political process, the outsider, the minority, those who are vulnerable, those who don’t have a lot of clout.

“Sometimes we’re only looking at academics or people who’ve been in the lower court. If we can find people who have life experience and they understand what it means to be on the outside, what it means to have the system not work for them, that’s the kind of person I want on the Supreme Court.”

“We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”

Obama’s ignorance of the Supreme Court is absolutely astounding.

Even though John McCain did bruise the tenets of the 1st Amendment with the McCain-Fiengold Act, an act that I hold to be unconstitutional, yet an appointment of a constructionist to the bench can be expected if he is elected . But if left unchecked, with a Democrat controlled Congress, Obama will put in motion a chain reaction that will systematically dismantle the very Constitution that made this country what it is. Can you live with that? Will you live with that? Can the country survive that?

National Security: The dissection of national security, in regard to the two candidates, needs to be broken down into two factions, first being the threat of terrorism domestically, and second being the general security of this nation.

Concerning domestic terrorism, such as 9/11, as with George Bush, McCain will be a failure. McCain is a reckless illiterate in regard to his advocating open borders and amnesty for illegals. It can’t be made any clearer than that. On September 11th we were attacked on our soil by terrorists that were in our country illegally. Seven years later, our borders are as porous as they were on that day and there are still 15-25 million people in this country that the government does not know the identity of. There are, at any given time, 600,000 unaccounted for criminal and visa violating aliens in this country–just as the terrorists were who flew the planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania. Seven years and nothing has changed. A very comforting feeling and the possibility of either candidate changing it is nil.

General National Security with Obama as Commander in Chief leaves no room for his voting “present”, ducking the issue, playing coy by being nuanced, or hiding behind the media’s protective coattails. Obama has zero record of leadership and has demonstrated no quantifiable skills in leadership. A person is either a leader or not and it is apparent in any endeavor they pursue. Obama has never risen to any occasion, not once. Obama has a very dangerous and naive view of the world we live in.

Joe Biden summed it up best:

“Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking.”

“Remember I said it standing here. if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he’s gonna have to make some really tough — I don’t know what the decision’s gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it’s gonna happen.”

If tested, and tested hard, do you, first, want to take a chance on someone with such a perception of weakness as to guarantee a test for this country, and second, if tested hard, there will be one winner and one loser–is that a chance you are willing to take by voting for Obama? Do you want to play that game?

Barack Obama will emaciate the military of this country. He has stated he will dismantle the Missile Defense Shield at a time when Russia, who, incidentally, has approximately twice the nuclear arsenal of the U.S., is flexing its imperialistic muscle. North Korea is continually working on becoming nuclear; Iran, while thumbing its nose at the world, is steadfastly working towards nuclear weaponry; and Communist China is continually increasing its military budget to front a very formidable nuclear military. While Obama wants to regressively shift this country’s national security, Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Congress have stated they will accommodate Obama by contributing to the emaciating process via a 25 percent cut in military spending,saying the Pentagon has to start choosing from its many weapons programs.

Judgment: Obama, if elected, will have the opportunity to make over 1000 appointments from the Supreme Court on down. He has a long history of making very poor judgments in regard to his associations. To exercise sound judgment, one must have a balance of intelligence and virtue. Aristotle, in his work, Nicomachean Ethics, speaks about the five intellectual virtues of knowledge, art, prudence, intuition, and wisdom. Counter to what Obama apologists want to believe, Obama has not demonstrated the possession of any of the five virtues of knowledge beyond a rudimentary level, though having myriad opportunities in his life to do so, thus making his past and future decision making anemically problematic.

Aristotle takes the position that friends can be viewed as second selves. Obama has surrounded himself with the likes of William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Rashid Khalidi, Samantha Powers, and Acorn, etc. According to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, there exists three types of friends. Friendships of utility, friendships of pleasure, and friendships of the good. Utility friendships are of convenience and gain, and are terminated when the usefulness of the friendship has run its course. This seems to be the type of friendships that Obama has cultivated throughout his life. Such was the ease that Obama discarded Rezko, Wright, et al, and has tried to downplay his relationship with Ayers.

The friendship of the good is a combination of like character and a mutual affection for each other’s company. This would be true friendship. This is a void that is apparent with Obama. There has not been a person of the stature of a true time tested friend to stand up for Obama–no one from his childhood, university, or early career had appeared beside him for support. He has only been flanked by supporters and people of a utility nature in his life. He also does not seem to have developed any friendships of pleasure where there would be a general accommodating attraction. Contrast this to McCain, who has a very long list of distinguished true friends dating back to the time of his imprisonment in Viet Nam while serving his country. As there was not a lot of time to be doing community organizing and associating with radicals while lying in a prison cell with broken limbs and refusing to be released until soldiers with a longer tenure in the prison were released first, he forged time tested friendships based upon mutual respect.

The Democrat Party has de-evolved into an uncivilized, and feral cult with an inordinate amount of political clout to possess such a destructive ideology. If you truly believe that the dismantling of the Constitution, a long and painful recession, and being vulnerable to any one of the above enumerated rogue countries is the change this country needs, then by all means vote for Obama, but I will vote for McCain–which will be a vote for America’s soul.

And how about that capitalist pig, Joe the Plumber? Where does he get off literately attacking Barack with racist hate speech. Barack was kind enough, while taking a stroll in Joe the Plumber’s neighborhood, to stop at Joe’s house for some genteel conversation, and WHAM!!!– just like that, Joe is all over him with racist and mean spirited questions about his taxes being raised if he decides to become one of those affluent entrepreneurial plumbers and all. And Joe the Plumber asked about that stupid mantra that you hear from those conservatives about the American Dream, or something stupid like that. The nerve of that Joe the Plumber. Barack told him off though, and quite soundly at that, and I quote from The One: “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too. My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody … I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

You see, the idiots of the Right just don’t get it–…“it’s good for everybody.” Even for you, Joe. Spread it around, Joe the Plumber, and watch it trickle up and before you can say impeachment, we will be living in nirvana. Don’t worry about laying off your plumbing assistants, or whatever they are called, because Barack doubled your taxes–according to Joe the Gaffer, that will make you double patriotic. Don’t feel sorry for them, they will be getting a back-end welfare check from Barack’s new tax plan that will cut the taxes of 95% of adults. No job, no taxes paid, no problem, you still get money back. A check just shows up in the mail. So shut-up, Joe, and don’t spoil it for 95% of the country.

Back to my original point of contention with Barack. Here’s the deal: Barack has raised 603 million dollars for his campaign. That is a lot of money. It is actually more than Mexico’s GNP. Now at first glance those numbers may seem crazy, but bear with me. Follow the math: when you deduct from their GNP the money sent back to Mexico each year from the illegal aliens working in the United States; take all the profits generated from the Mexican drug cartels, the one where the drugs come here, and our money goes there; take away the profit from the kidnap and ransom industry of Mexico; and then finally take away the profit from the coyote smuggling of illegals into America industry, that leaves Mexico with around 137 thousand dollars in adjusted GNP. Far less than Barack has raised.

My problem is with the way Barack has spent his campaign money so far. Very un-Socialistic of him, methinks.

Lets look at the breakdown of the candidates in the race and the money they’ve raised. Obama, Socialist Party, $603,000,000–Chuck Baldwin, Constitutional Party, $204,000–Bob Barr, Libertarian, $1,000.000–John McCain, Republican Party, $358,000,000–Cynthia McKinney, Green Party, $Zero$–and Ralph Nader, Independent, $3,000,000.

Do you see the problem here? Is there a pattern of selfishness? Do you smell capitalism? I do.

Let’s view the presidential candidates that are left in the race as a microcosm of American society according to their income: Barack would be the rich capitalist; McCain would be the upper-Middle Class; Nader and Barr would be the Middle-Class; Chuck Baldwin would be the working class; and finally poor ol’ cerebrally defective Cynthia McKinney would represent the welfare class with zero income.

Now my problem is: Why does Barack not spread the wealth around? He would certainly not be punishing himself. Why can’t he make sure all the candidates behind him have a chance for success too? Why does he not realize that if the candidates on the bottom have money, it will trickle up to him? Spread it around Barack, and it will be good for everybody.

It’s a little hard to give up something you worked for, isn’t it, Obama?

To compound my xenophobic indiscretions, I was completely oblivious that I was a racist until this year. I have been labeled a racist because of my fundamental disdain for the un-American and un-patriotic orientation of Barack Obama–by the most credible bastion of equitable thought–the contemporary liberal.

The ensuing are my confessions of racism, as defined by the left:

• Barack Obama is running for President. He is black. He will do irreparable harm to this country. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama is a Socialist. He has the most liberal voting record in the Senate. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama has never accomplished anything of merit, and has no track record of operating any enterprise, especially with success. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Sarah Palin, John McCain’s Vice President nominee, has more executive experience than Barack Obama, and a verifiable and proven record of change, and in the entire scope of this election, is more qualified to be President than Obama. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama believes it is OK to associate with the criminal organization, ACORN, and continue to fund them while they continue to commit voter fraud across the country for his benefit. All this while they are being investigating by state’s attorney generals, and the FBI. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama is a pal of William Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist just like Timothy McVeigh, except McVeigh was not set free on a technicality. Obama is where he is because of Ayers starting Obama’s campaign in his home. Obama steadfastly refuses to denounce Ayers’ terrorism. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama spent over 20 years in the church of Jeremiah Wright. One of the more hate-filled and anti-American assemblages in this country. He was even married by Wright, and had his daughters baptized in Wright’s church. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama was heavily involved with Tony Rezko, the current felon awaiting sentencing for bribing politicians. Rezko facilitated the cheap purchase of Obama’s mansion, which Rezko picked out, across the street from his own residence. Rezko’s wife just so happened to close on the lot next to Obama’s new house the same day, then proceeded to sell him part of that land at a greatly reduced price later to expand his lot. Coincidentally, Rezko received millions of tax payer’s dollars from Senator Obama to build uninhabitable housing for the poor. Money for money, Chicago style. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama is a defeatist and will cause the United States to become a defeatist nation at a time when the world around us increases in evil. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama loves a weak military, especially at a time when other nations are either expanding or evolving their nuclear arsenal and military, while at the same time becoming more aggressive in the world. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama wants to cut funding and dismantle the Missile Defense Shield at a time when nuclear countries either have the capability, or are developing the capability, of projecting nuclear weapons against our country. The missile defense shield could be our only hope of stopping a nuclear weapon landing on a major city, or installation, within our borders. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama wants to raise taxes when this country is teetering on the brink of a recession that could be short or long, depending on how it is dealt with. Obama’s ideology has the ingredients for a long, deep, and sustained recession. Think Hoover, FDR, Carter. Except Carter’s recession was stalled because of Reagan. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.
• Barack Obama has demonstrated time and again, that for someone who taught Constitutional Law, he is either completely ignorant of the Constitution’s meaning, or does not believe a word in it. Either one is as abominable as the other. Because of this I will not vote for him, so that makes me a racist.

So there you have it, caught red-handed–a racist. But keep in mind, if you call someone stupid long enough, and often enough, they will probably, at some point, start to believe they are stupid, then start acting accordingly.

Before addressing the fundamental problem with ACORN, let us view ACORN’s peripheral condemnations through the prism of fantasy and myopia the left uses to view the world. The left, especially the radical left, exists in an apocryphal reality. To better understand their spurious concept of reality, which is the catalyst that causes them to be incapable of fronting a resistance against the corruption within their fraternity, the best illustrative example of their handicap can be explained by understanding the The Allegory of the Cave from Plato’s The Republic.

An exceptionally short synopsis of The Allegory of the Cave is in order before pursuing the analogy of the two. The occupants of the cave’s entire existence has been only to know the darkness of the cave, with a fire at their backs to create artificial light. Their reality has been the shadows cast on the wall from the light of the fire, completely unaware that this reality is wrong, but the only reality they have known. All things that pass behind them are cast on the wall in front of them as shadows. Any object that casts a shadow on the wall has a name. For example: a hat is cast on the wall as a shadow and is called a hat by the occupants. It is called a hat, and is known as a hat to the occupants, but it is in reality just a shadow of a hat. Plato posed the following question. What would happen if some of the occupants were released from the cave into the real world? Plato proposes that some would immediately be overcome with fear and rush back into the cave, while others would embrace the sun and embrace the world’s reality as it is presented. We shall, for the sake of argument, call the occupants who rush back into the cave, Cave Dwellers. And the occupants who stay and enjoy the sun, the real world and all it offers, Enlightened.

Contemporary liberals (Cave Dwellers), as with the occupants of the cave in Plato’s work, are oblivious that their reality is only a shadow. The cause of this affliction is the Cave Dweller’s innate and magical ability to discard facts and history, while substituting them with their fantastical notions of reality, and thus having created their own set of facts, history, and shadows. Since liberals do see the would in shadows, there are naught distinguishable differences between the two groups.

With the establishment of the two preceding analogies, let us survey the by-products (criminal activity) of ACORN through their shadows of reality and understand their aversion to reality, then move on to ACORN’s fundamental problem.

The financial crisis that has systematically brought the world’s stock markets and economies to their collective knees the past few weeks, was caused by the Cave Dwellers. This started in the 1970’s with Jimmy Carter and the Community Reinvestment Act, or The Great Socialist Experiment. The CRA is a federal mandate that essentially forces banks to give loans to people who do not deserve them with the statistical probability that the loan repayment will never attain fruition. This act was benign at first. Then along comes the Mafioso of the disengaged, ACORN, and their community organizing tactics. ACORN started targeting, with their militant community organizing tactics, every bank in every community that was not servicing the unqualified and undeserved with loans. As time passes, so does legislation, exponentially increasing the burden on the banks to loan to unqualified buyers. Then to aid and abet this nefarious scheme, the Cave Dwellers of Congress restructured Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy up all these loans, which were riddled with the barren mortgages which were a product of the CRA. When the Enlightened wanted to reign in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac runaway train, before a collision with reality, they were blocked by the Cave Dwellers in Congress. Consequently, the mortgage juggernaut exploded. The Enlightened would see this for what it is: not a product of deregulation, but a product of reckless regulation, a horrible socialist experiment gone wrong–a “Frankensteinesque” monster of derivatives and credit default swaps. A Cave Dweller sees absolutely no culpability on their part, and views the reality as being the fault of the Enlightened, and the evil by-product of capitalism and deregulation. A very understandable assessment of the situation if you are only capable of seeing shadows.

ACORN, in another area of criminal expertise where equals are scarce, is currently enjoying the attention of the FBI concerning their voter fraud enterprise. Since they have been, as of today and counting, raided in 11 states for voter fraud, the FBI is obliged to get involved. It has all the characteristics of a national conspiracy to void the integrity of the United States’ election system. The most outrageous of ACORN’s malfeasances to date was committed in the state of Ohio. Not only has ACORN registered hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voters, in Ohio the Democrat, and good liberal soldier, Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, who is in charge of election integrity, is a Cave Dweller herself. When it was discovered that Brunner was sitting on 200,000 potentially fraudulent voter registration forms, rather than follow the due process of letting the local election boards determine the authenticity of the registrations, the GOP filed suit. After being reprimanded and ordered by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to …”set up a system that provides names of newly registered voters whose driver’s license numbers or Social Security numbers don’t match records in other government databases,” Brunner fought back against this ridiculously ethical approach.

Brunner did what any red-blooded liberal would do. She filed an appeal to the Supreme Court seeking an exemption of integrity for the state of Ohio. Brunner has taken it to the next level by tying to get court mandated approval for the state of Ohio to see only shadows. And she won. The Supreme Court lifted the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals order without opinion on the legality of Brunner’s antics. The Court was not persuaded that federal law gave a private party, the GOP, the right to file the suit. In the end, Ohio was exempted from integrity, and allowed to exist in a cave.

To expound further the point of how skewed the left’s view of reality is, a few comments from the left are in order. While ACORN is being investigated by 11 states, and more hitting the news each day, the FBI’s starting a national investigation into the felonious activities of ACORN, and the plethora of interviews of the hapless voters who have been encouraged by ACORN to register as many times as 72 apiece, they still have the ability to make the following assessments with innocent affirmations from deep within the cave:

“This latest attack on ACORN follows a sorry pattern, played out in election after election,” said Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP, outlining what he called a history of voter suppression tactics by the Republican Party.

Mickey Mouse tried to register to vote in Florida this summer with his application stamped with ACORN’s seal of approval. “We don’t think this card came through our system,” said Brian Kettenring, ACORN’s head organizer in Florida.

Raising this specter of “voter fraud” in advance, the GOP is clearly laying the groundwork for de-legitimizing a Democratic presidential victory.

The magnus opus of stupidity in regard to deflecting ACORN’S criminal shenanigans, belongs to a website that I frequent daily for entertainment purposes only, atlargely.com, operated by a one, Larisa Alexandrovna. Which contrary to the author’s claims of not being politically left or politically right, is a liberal fascist with hordes of like minded minions that chime in on a daily basis. Here is her current, non-left and non-right, down the middle, purely bipartisan, “investigative journalistic” assertions of the ACORN voter fraud indictments:

Fabricating the idea of fraud in order to distract from your own actual fraud no longer works. If you open the taboo door of acknowledging that election fraud can take place (fabricated or otherwise), then you better be prepared to examine all election fraud (legitimate or otherwise) evidence.

When your base is made-up of the KKK, the Aryan Nations, fascists, and religious zealots willing to bomb medical facilities for their cause, you are likely going to get these situations.

To the undiscerning eye, the above statements would seem to suggest that the author is an intellectual invalid due to profound ignorance. But to give credence to the author’s fair and balanced assessment of ACORN’s voter fraud capers, she referenced an article in Rolling Stone, a garden variety, left-wing exposition riddled with malignant rumors, accusations, wild-eyed conspiracies, unsupported conjecture, etc. And to further bolster her bibliography of idiocy, she included as reference, the book How the GOP Stole America’s 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008. The authors, Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, could best be summed up as a pair of unhinged conspiracy theorists, and as with most conspiracy theorists, make abundant use of non-facts, unsubstantiated allegations,visions, and vivid dreams to produce, again, a garden variety leftist agenda. This is the modus operandi of the radical left, as they have a strong incestuous literary relationship with each other. You can typically read a liberal article with references, and by the time you read a third related article, you would have been referred back to the first article for reference. It generally take 2-3 articles to make a complete circle with these servants of socialism.

So, without further ado, what is the fundamental problem with ACORN? It is the organized mechanism of going out on scavenger hunts for unregistered voting suspects, who are not engaged in this country, fall in the 45% of working Americans who do not pay any federal tax–that is if the suspect is employed–who are so disengaged they will vote as instructed by ACORN. ACORN’s denial of coercing the disengaged to vote Democrat is as plausible as the expectation that 50% of the voters they register will vote republican. And to perform these scavenger hunts with taxpayer money–makes the entire enterprise nauseating and fundamentally wrong. If someone is so disengaged as to not have the wherewithal to register to vote, make their own decision on who to vote for, take the initiative to place their informed vote, then they should not be allowed within 200 feet of a voting booth.

And what does Barack Obama think about all the attention his beloved ACORN is receiving in the media with their voter fraud antics? “This is another one of those distractions that get stirred up during the campaign.” A long history of being prosecuted for voter fraud, and in the thick of it again this year, and it warrants nothing more than being labeled a distraction. Indeed, Obama is the King of the Cave Dwellers.