a gem of immense value

I've been slowly working on a piece that I think gets to the meat of all the problems we face in our country and in the world today. But I keep stopping myself and re-working it because, as I've always known, no one cares about anything I write. Also, nothing I can write or say can mean anything or make any difference to an audience that has never read the thoughts and philosophies of wise and virtuous men like John Adams. If you can't be convinced by the priceless papers and letters and speeches mined as diamonds from the depths of such noble minds, no arrangement of words that I could produce could ever bring you to recognize that we are in the process of societal collapse. As an example of the wisdom of John Adams, take this segment of a letter he wrote to one of his grandsons. I think it is because we are lacking leaders of this sentiment that we find ourselves in the serious times we are in. And so, without further ramblings from the likes of me, I give you President Adams.

"Oh, that I may always be able to say to my grandsons, 'You have learned much and behaved well, my lads. Go on and improve in everything worthy.' Have you considered the meaning of that word "worthy"? Weigh it well... I had rather you should be worthy possessors of one thousand pounds honestly acquired by your own labor and industry, than ten millions by banks and tricks. I should rather you be worthy shoemakers than secretaries of states or treasury acquired by libels in newspapers. I had rather you should be worthy makers of brooms and baskets than unworthy presidents of the United States procured by intrigue, factious slander and corruption."

This was written to a grandson, but it could have been written for any of us, even in our day. If John Adams could see us and our politicians now!

this also is not a real post

Well, this is actually more postier than the last non-post, but it's not the big one I promised. I just wanted to take one more opportunity to gripe about the current state of the government's campaign to kill you with crappy healthcare. Liberals like to believe that they have the market cornered on humanity and compassion and equality and other such abstract concepts. They try to say that conservatives only have compassion for other conservatives, and if you want to learn the worth of a human you need to look to a democrat. But now the democrats are showing us exactly what they think a human life is worth by comparing human beings to automobiles, and the irony of that seems to only mean anything to me.

In an effort to persuade you to believe that you should be required by law to purchase health insurance, Obama and his army of hell-spawned demons and prostitutes known as the democratic party have been using the analogy of car insurance. Obama says that requiring people to own health insurance is exactly the same as requiring people to own car insurance. If you don't own health insurance, Obama wants to fine you and maybe even throw you in jail. Same thing as car insurance, for those who drive cars. But here's the thing that they hope you're too stupid to think of. If you don't own health insurance, the odds of that choice having any negative effects on anyone other than you are probably zilch. If I drive my car through a red light and total another person's car and it turns out I don't have car insurance, that person might have to pay for all of the damage I caused them. That would truly suck. But if I don't have health insurance, the worst thing that could happen would be that I get tuberculosis and have to borrow money from someone to pay my medical bills and I forget to pay them back. Big freaking deal.

My point is, they want you to believe that they're "reforming" healthcare out of compassion and humanity. And yet, in their attempts to explain their objective, they've completely removed the human element and they are now treating the issue as a raw business scenario. This is one more glaring piece of evidence that shows the real goal of "healthcare reform," which is dominating your life in every imaginable way as a means of getting more money and power. So if Obama wants to use this analogy, it should work in both directions . Since Obama wants to force health insurance companies to cover people with the worst of pre-existing conditions, I think we should also require car insurance companies to cover people with cars that have pre-existing conditions, such as bald tires and exhausted brake pads, missing mirrors, bent chassis, and rusty old dents. Come on, Barry, you heavy-handed, arrogant pimp. I thought you were supposed to be smart. I really expected better quality work out of this guy. I'm really please that he's going out of his way to show us that he's actually just a retarded gangster.

almost a real post

This post is so unreal that I am not even going to capitalize any letters in the tite. However, I am going to put a real post up here sometime in the next week, one which will cause you to scoop your lefty liberal eyes out with a Mcflurry spoon and replace them with Cadbury eggs. But in the meantime, click on this: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/09/taking_liberties/entry5595506.shtml?tag=mncol;txt and read the article. I know this might shock all four of you, but I'm not liberal in any way. But this story disturbs me beyond explanation. K I love you. Bye.

Love,

The American

More on Losers

I want to talk some more about losers, and while it's a fact that the half of you who have ever voted Democrat are losers, I'm actually not talking about you guys. Unless you've been on a drunken cocaine binge for the last three days, you've probably become aware of the "news" of David Letterman's latest self-imposed troubles. Apparently David Letterman has somehow been able to convince women other than his wife to have sex with him, and some other loser at CBS found out and tried to use what he knew about the affairs to blackmail Letterman out of two million dollars. Short story made shorter, Letterman told the cops and then decided to haunt the dreams of children everywhere by telling the entire world what he had done with these shameless/desperate-for-a-promotion/really gross women he works with.

And if you're wondering why I'm mentioning David Letterman for the second time in less than a week, it's not because I'm turning this into a celebrity gossip blog. This is actually a continuation of my last post, and it fits in perfectly with the purpose of this blog, which is to explain to you lazy stupid apes why liberalism is the anti-Christ. The secondary purpose of this blog is to insult anyone who reads it. So the point I want to make with the case of David Letterman is how emblematic he is of the typical liberal with a perverted ax to grind. If you didn't already know, David Letterman loves to make dirty, low-brow jokes about all kinds of conservative politicians, and conservative people in general, and he specializes in making creepy jokes about Sarah Palin. Now, I'm not a big supporter of Palin or any Republicans, but I'm willing to bet that Sarah Palin is a far better, much more morally admirable person than the scumhole David Letterman.

In the 68-and-a-half years that I've been alive, my observations have made me familiar with the most important law of nature, which is that dirty minds always gravitate toward liberalism as a means of self-preservation. And to ensure self-preservation, liberals(perverted dirtbags), will attack all virtue and all truth with no concern for decency or honesty, or even logic. David Letterman, being a nasty old fartbag infidel, fulfills this natural law by cheating on his wife over and over, and then ignores honesty and logic and decency by finding the audacity to take cheap shots at Sarah Palin and everyone like her.

You might say that David Letterman is just an entertainer and nothing that he says really matters anyway. Not true. I believe that the attacks against traditional values by radical leftists in the entertainment industry were largely responsible for the election of the current set of radically-left leaders in our government. Because when thoughtless, gullible, easily-manipulated zombies who NEVER follow the news or think for themselves or study history or politics tune in to some tv show they believe is nonpartisan and get doused in one-sided political trash talk, they tend to go along with whatever the people on that tv show are saying. And without even realizing it, anyone who takes their marching orders from someone like David Letterman is taking orders from a terrible, lying, piece of filth that should never be trusted by anyone.

But this isn't just about David Letterman, it's about virtually everyone in entertainment, and also every liberal politician, and most people who vote for them. And the point I want to make is the same point I made in my last post, which is that liberals are all shameful home wrecking perverts, and to take their side requires either that you become like them, or that you lose your soul by ignoring the truth about the side you're taking.

Red, White, and Bruised (part five): The Real Goal of Liberalism

The other day I was soaking in my bathtub, thinking about the condemnation of God that our species will soon bring upon ourselves, and wondering how we’ve arrived at the place we’re now at where we actually have to explain to our leaders why communism is bad. And just as I was about to drop the toaster into the tub, it came to me. The pattern our society is currently going through is historically redundant, and the engine that drives society to such a set of events is always the same: liberalism. Or as I like to call it: immorality. I’ve been trying to figure out the point of liberal politics my whole life. Is it just power the liberals are after? Sometimes. Is it greed? Frequently, yes. But I’ve recently come to understand that the one thing that all liberals really want is to destroy the world. I know it sounds crazy, but keep reading and see what I mean.

First let’s look at some of the prominent figures in modern liberal politics. Take John Edwards, an ambulance-chasing attorney/politician hell-bent on working in the White House, this married man cheated on his terminally ill wife and fathered a child with his mistress and allegedly told her that if his current wife would just hurry up and die, he would marry her. Next, Ted Kennedy. This drunken meat-headed Irish bog goon murdered a girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in 1969 and got away with it because of his family name. His brothers, John and Bobby, also killed girls and got away with it, and all three were widely known to cheat on their wives on a constant basis. John and Bobby even liked to share their play things, like the good brothers they were.

Next up, Governor David Paterson of New York. The day after his inauguration, it was made known to the public that Paterson had been cheating on his wife. To be fair, it was also made public that Paterson’s wife was cheating on him, too. Although Paterson is obviously a big fan of heterosexual relations, he is known for his perpetual whining about the lack of benefits for gays. This dirt bag took office immediately after Eliot Spitzer, another liberal who left office after an investigation into his personal life revealed that he had spent close to $100,000 on prostitutes during his time as a public servant.

Now, I should just include the entire state of Oregon on this list. If you’ve never been to Oregon, you’re lucky. It gives new meaning to the phrase “den of iniquity.” With public sex shows, repeated attempts at legalizing gay marriage, doctor assisted suicide, and a general atmosphere of depravity, Oregon would make Caligula blush. But to avoid getting off track, I’ll stick to political leaders/participants. So next on the list is Stu Rasmussen, the mayor of Silverton, Oregon. Stu is known as the first openly transgender mayor in the United States. I don’t know how deep his transformation from man to woman has gone, but it’s safe to say that the guy is no Ronald Reagan. Also worth mentioning is the mayor of Portland, the very gay Sam Adams. Even though Adams’ political views are radically liberal, Sam has managed to overshadow those views by what a loser he is in his personal life. Besides being a deadbeat who doesn’t pay his bills, Sammy boy is most famous for having sexual relations with a male intern in a bathroom in city hall. The intern, by the way, was under the age of eighteen when the relations took place.

And since we’re already talking about elected officials who like to take advantage of their interns, who could be better suited to round out the topic than Bill Clinton? Let’s go with him. While big Bill was busy working at his desk in the oval office, little Billy was getting busy under the desk. While his wife was out shopping for new pant-suits, the President was back at the White House sodomizing his young female intern with cigars. That’s good smoking. Now I will bring to your attention Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar,” Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network. This first rate creep was teaching high school in Massachusetts back in 1988 when a fifteen year old student came to him and confessed that he had had sex with a man in his mid-twenties. Instead of contacting the police or telling his superiors, Jennings ignored the law against sodomizing minors and counseled the boy to be sure to use a condom when screwing around with older men.

Before I move on, the one participant in liberal politics that must be included here is the entire community of Hollywood. A network of smut-producing, propaganda-disseminating, fake news reporting, sexually-deviant, drugged-out flunkees with a combined worth of trillions of dollars, Hollywood is the all-powerful mouth that vomits liberal filth and lies all over the planet and enlists foul-mouhted perverts and losers like David Letterman and Bill Maher to convince gullible retarded people like you to vote for gangsters like Barack Obama.

I could go on and write almost forever about examples of liberals known for being creeps, but I honestly believe that there’s not enough bandwidth in the entire World Wide Web to post such a list. Now, it was while I thought about the kind of people that make up the liberal political machine that I decided to compare them to the kind of legislation the liberals are famous for: gay marriage, gay curriculum in public schools, publicly funded abortion, human euthanasia, forced tolerance of Muslims that want to chop our heads off, forced tolerance of public displays of sexual perversion, making it illegal to even mention god or Jesus in public or to display a symbol of a mainstream religion, etc. etc. So when I look at the laws the liberals are known for, and line them up with the shameful people who promote such laws, it becomes clear to me that the real goal of liberalism is to create a society wherein perverts, child molesters, transsexuals, homosexuals, baby killers, mistress murderers, grifters, charlatans, gangsters, and head-chopping Muslims can do whatever they want, and people with traditional values go to jail for trying to speaking out against such behavior. That is the “fundamental change” Obama was talking about.

When you look at history, you will find that the fall of every great society is preceded by an overthrowing of all standards, combined with godlessness, laziness, corruption, and a persecution of people with traditional persuasions who speak in defense of family structure and modesty in both personal and public life. There are exceptions to this rule, such as the plague of the Black Death, volcanoes, and Vikings. But generally it is the moral decay of a society that brings down the defenses. It is the erosion within a society that makes outside attacks possible. Yet knowing this, liberals still want to go down that same old road to self destruction. Why? It is either because they don’t know history, or the only other option is that they know where we are headed, and that’s exactly where they want to go. Either way, their shifting of ancient standards will be our demise.

So, I’ve given only a few examples of the disgusting freaks that have risen to prominence in the left wing of American politics, but they are not unique. The liberal branch is riddled with a disease of corruption and moral filthiness. I honestly doubt that one could find even ten good liberals working in the government today, because the kinds of people who call for liberal social reforms and promote the left wing ideals are ALWAYS disgusting perverts. You might say that it’s not just Democrats who are guilty of such low standards, and you would be right to say so. But I would argue that the Republicans no longer represent conservative values anyway, so such a point would be irrelevant to make.

And now I have some questions. Knowing how wrong the liberal lifestyle is, and how dangerous their goals are, and how predominantly sleezy liberals are, how can any self respecting person get behind such a movement? How can you you associate yourself with such people? How can you claim to want what’s right for your family, or claim to do what’s right by your spouse, or claim to be honoring your heritage and your religion, and at the same time support and accept a political movement that is so clearly opposed to such claims? If you ask me, you have to be one of two things: ignorant of the facts, or out to destroy the world.

HEALTH

My mental state seems to reflect the health of this nation. This day, September 11th, will always affect me deeply and I will always remain patriotic in my reflection of that day. Take that however you will. But this day has been re-purposed as a day of promoting liberal agendas by serving liberal causes, never to mention why we remember this day. Like the sacred meaning of Christmas, the solemn memories of September 11, 2001 have been deemed offensive and politically-incorrect. This country is in bad hands, our safety is in bad hands, our memories are being drowned under a sea of radical agendas, and it is all giving me ulcers and depression. To hell with any of you who feel any differently about these things. You don't deserve the legacy you've inherited.

CORRUPDATE

Jeffrey Immelt is also on the board of directors at the New York Federal Reserve Bank. What the hell?

Progressives: the Enemy of Human Progress

It has been said recently that I do not understand what it means to be "working class" and that the America I promote is one ruled by "special interests," as opposed to the current version of America, which I assume you believe is nice and honest and pro-democracy and all that good stuff. To anyone ignorant enough to make such comments or even think such things, I have but one suggestion: get your tubes tied. The human race is in bad shape, and if poorly-bred half witted "progressives" like you are allowed to contaminate the gene-pool much longer, we will soon be back in the trees flinging feces at each other and competing for nuts and bananas. If you can't afford to be sterilized, you're in luck, because I have an alternate choice to offer you: go drink Drano.

Now that I'm properly vented, let's talk about special interests. First of all, my only interest, as I have said in every post on this blog, is the fundamental laws of this nation. The rights offered me in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are the only thing I have to gain by speaking out against the current form of the federal government. I employ no man and I work for myself, chiseling my sustenance with my wits and my hands. I receive NOTHING for my words or my thoughts or my views. I have no dog in this fight. No, I AM the dog. And I am fighting for my country in every way my meager station in life allows me to.

Would you like to know who really qualifies as a "special interest?" I mean, you meat-headed crapsacks really think that people like me are the problem? You think your government is really YOUR government, devoid of all "special interest?" Then how do you explain guys like Jeffrey Immelt? He's only one man, but he represents the typical officer of the new empire you think serves you. He is the chairman of the board and chief executive officer of General Electric. He earns around 15million dollars per year for his work with GE, which is about, ho, hum, ALMOST 15million more dollars than I earn in a year. A major portion of his compensation comes in the form of GE company stock. As head of GE he controls NBC Universal, which includes MSNBC, CNBC, and the Weather Channel, which are all 100% liberally biased (yes, even the Weather Channel, which could just as well have been called the Al Gore Channel). He also controls GE Capital, which heads up GE's environmental and energy affairs, and GE Energy Infrastructure, which are all based largely on the model of promoting the theory of global warming and then coming up with dog barf quality "green" technologies and making hundreds of billions of dollars off of them, most of those dollars coming from sweet little government contracts. Immelt is also in control of GE Technology Infrastructure, which generates an absurd amount of revenue from one of it's subsidiaries, GE Healthcare.

So why is this guy a problem? Well, Time Magazine considers him one of the 100 most influential people in the world, and he just happens to be an official "adviser" to the Obama administration, advising the "president" on such issues as the economy, HEALTHCARE, and ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES. Surprise, surprise, please cut out my eyes. General Electric is known as one of the largest, if not THE largest lobbying group in the country, and Jeffrey Immelt is it's captain. He is a walking, breathing, power-hungry special interest in the fleshy form of a dumpy-looking old man, in addition to probably being a harbinger of the actual devil. Now, if it were up to me, Immelt and the countless other lobbyists currently pulling the strings of our government would be tarred and feathered on national television for the corruption he promotes and represents. So tell me again how I'm for special interests? Oh yeah. You can't anymore. Well, you can always just eat me instead.

PAGING DOCTOR PLANT

Unless you’ve been in a coma for the last few weeks, you’ve probably noticed all the “angry mobs” going crazy at various town hall meetings on healthcare reform in America. And unless your coma began eight years ago, you should also be aware that it is alarmingly hypocritical of the Democrats to call the protesters at these town hall meetings “mobs.”

Let’s look back at the entire two-term presidency of George W. Bush. On almost a daily basis president Bush was hanged, burned, shot, and decapitated in effigy by masked dissidents in the streets of major cities all around the country, and for that matter, all around the world. Protesters rallied with signs depicting George W. Bush made to look like Adolf Hitler. Cars and buildings were vandalized and innocent bystanders were assaulted as the left side of America treated us to their brand of first amendment application. And amid all of this, the Democrats in Washington and their mouthpiece the media ate it all up and said how inspiring it all was.

But now that average American citizens, responsible, working-class taxpayers who have never protested a thing in their lives, are speaking out against the forced turn to Communism, the left is appalled. In an editorial for NY Times published on the 11th of this month, Maureen Dowd, either unable to read what she is typing, evil, stupid, ignorant, or under the influence of auto-writing, made the observation, “Instead of a multicultural tableau of beaming young idealists on screen, we see ugly scenes of mostly older and white malcontents, disrupting forums where others have come to actually learn something. Instead of hope, we get swastikas, death threats and T-shirts proclaiming ‘Proud Member of the Mob.’” Dowd Continues, “President Obama has proven quicksilver instincts, but not in this case. You would think that a politician schooled in community organizing and the foul balls of a presidential campaign would be ready to squash this kind of nuttiness”

Foul balls? I’ll show you foul balls. On second thought, I’ll leave that one alone.

Why do lefties like Hillary Clinton say things like “I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration,” as long as a Republican is in office, but if you so much as raise an eyebrow to the immortal Barack, you’re suddenly un-American? Oh right, I just remembered why. It’s not that people are “protesting” that makes the Democrats mad. It’s the fact that these people are going to TOWN HALL meetings and EXPRESSING THEIR OPINIONS to ELECTED OFFICIALS that makes them made. Wait. Isn’t that the whole point of a town hall meeting? I mean, where else can you actually meet the official you elected face to face and have a guarantee that they will hear you? Oh yeah, you’re supposed to call them and set up an appointment at their office. Good luck making that happen.

But now all the hypocrisy of pointing the finger and poo-pooing dissidents is starting to backfire in the faces of the Democrats. So they are adopting a new tactic: Soviet-style town hall planted audiences. At a town hall hosted by Texas Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, a Democrat, a supporter named Roxana Mayer got the mic and identified herself as a “general practitioner” (that’s a type of doctor, for all my disabled readers) and claimed to have been working as such for four years. Sheila Jackson Lee hugged Mayer and called for applause on the good doctor’s behalf. Mayer made her statement and silenced all those ugly old white people who had said that doctors were opposed to the Obama health plan, and sat down, having made a slam dunk for the Democrats. Except for one little detail. It turns out that Roxana Mayer isn’t really a doctor. TEE-HEE! Oh, and one more insignificant little fact. Ms. Mayer is actually an official Texas Delegate for… guess who… Barack Obama! LOL!

That’s a good one. And here’s another. At a town hall meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire hosted by the big dawwwggg Obama himself, a cute cuddly wuddly little girl named Julia Hall stood up to ask a question. The “president” said he was happy to meet Julia for the first time, and she proceeded with her question, saying, “As I was walking in, I saw a lot of signs outside saying mean things about reforming health care. How do kids know what is true, and why do people want a new system that can – that help more of us?”

The poor little girl saw mean signs! Hmmpf L Well, as it turns out for the Democrats, the devil is always in the details, and little Julia Hall is actually the daughter of a donor and contributor to Obama’s campaign for president named Kathleen Hall, a woman who has met Barack Obama multiple times and even has pictures of herself with the “president” on her facebook page. Also Kathleen Hall’s facebook page is a list of her “friends,” simple, down-to-earth, reg’lar folks, like: Democrat Martha Coakley, Massachusetts attorney general; Adam Parkhomenko, former aide to Hillary Clinton; Addisu Demissie, national political director of Organizing for America and former Ohio Get out The Vote director of Obama for America; Adrienne Elrod, chief of staff to Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif.; Huffington Post blogger Alan Rosenblatt, associate director for online advocacy at the Center for American Progress; and Alayna Van Tassel, budget and policy director for Massachusetts Sen. Pat Jehlen.

Apparently, Kathleen “won” tickets to the event and submitted her daughter’s question beforehand in hopes that the omnipotent Obama would shine his light on her disheartened little girl and let her have some mic time. Good thing Barack decided to call on that unfamiliar little girl, because it turned out to be another whiz-bang slam dunk for his team.

So where am I going with all of this? I could write a hundred more pages about all the plants at these town hall meetings, but I’ll spare you so you can get back to your important life of watching reality TV and wiping boogers under the couch. But in the tradition of wrapping up with some sort of point, I’ll finish by telling you that I’m just fed up with the double standards of the Democrats, the free pass they have with the media, these cold war Russia town hall meetings, and brainless anomalies like you who refuse to see the Democrats for what they really are: deceptive, hypocritical, agenda-driven opportunists bent on dragging this country down to the eighth circle of hell. Don’t get me wrong, the Republicans aren’t any better, but they aren’t the problem right now. Again I say this: it comes down to trust. And with all the hypocrisy the Democrats keep coming up with, can you really trust them to tell the truth about anything? Go back and look at political news from the past eight years and you’ll see what I mean by hypocrisy. Then you can answer the question posed in this paragraph.

Open thy mouth, Obama, and devour thine own success.

Of all the baffling, mind-numbing, ridiculous bragging points that still seem to be floating around somewhere in the bizzaro-world in which the media exists, there is one that really defecates on reason's back more than all the others combined. What I am referring to is that most dishonest claim that Barack Hussein Obama is a (insert your own adjective) brilliant, accomplished, impressive, eloquent, etc... public speaker. If you were to dig through the outbox of my email account, you would find emails which I sent to various friends and familial embarrassments in which I made the point that Obama can certainly come up with many smooth words in rapid succession, much more rapidly than George W. Bush, but when you really take his words and try to boil them down to something meaningful, the whole of his statements evaporates into thin air. He talks and talks and talks, and yet he says absolutely nothing. And if he ever does manage to speak with purpose and real intent, the very next day he shows up at some other town hall or labor union meeting on how to ruin the world, and negates the thing that he said the day before, thus rendering the same result of nothing being said.

"President" Obama vowed from day one of his campaign that he would be the most visible "president" ever. Many times each day Barry appears on TV shows, on the internet, on the radio, making some slick speech about some new social-justice program he's cooked up. But his quest for airtime is now beginning to work against him. That is because he is a huckster, a shill, and a snake-oil salesmen who plays to the crowd and says whatever he feels will win any given crowd over to his side. But his problem is that he forgets to check his various pitches against each other, and we have each of them on tape. So if he says in one speech that his new healthcare program will be the first successful government program ever and that it will be totally devoid of problems, he better by golly say the same thing in his next speech. But wait, he's supposed to be a genius at public speaking, right? I mean, he couldn't possibly be a big enough jackass to say that his own plan for healthcare is likely to flop like a dying fish, right?

Wrong. On Tuesday, at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, a man named Ben Hershenson asked the "president," "Who can compete with the government?" And in response, the talented statesmen Obama said this: "As long as they have a good product and the government plan has to sustain itself through premiums and other non-tax revenue, private insurers should be able to compete with the government plan. They do it all the time…UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. . . . It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems." Good one, Barry. Way to put a nice shine on that gold-plated turd you've been peddling around the country all summer.

Reader, I challenge you to seriously pay attention to your "president" when he talks. Don't just go into a trance or get hypnotized by his soothing voice like you usually do, but really try to overcome your game show-induced ADD long enough to get the actual point of what he's saying. And then compare those points to one another, and see if there's any semblance of consistency or honesty. And then ask yourself how you can trust a person who treats the presidency like a used car sales job. That's what it comes down to. Trust. Barack's approval ratings are almost as low as George W. Bush's ratings when he left office. That is because the lazy, thoughtless, ignorant dregs that voted for "change" are now learning what that truly means, and they don't like it. They no longer trust the man that claimed he was the messiah and turned out to be the devil. Better late than never. Hopefully.

A Father a Day, part one

Over the next few weeks, I will be posting short biographies for the Founding Fathers of the United States of America. Naturally, I will be posting information on the larger-than-life legends of the revolution, but I will also try to give information on every-day patriots who we no less owe our respect and love for their help in giving birth to the free country we now take for granted. Today’s “Father” is actually a woman who loved the cause of liberty so much that she was more willing to fight for it than many of the men at the time. Her story is heart-rending and inspirational:


Margaret “Molly” Corbin

Margaret “Molly” Corbin was born Margaret Cochran near Chambersburg, Pennsylvania on November 12, 1751. When she was five years old her family was attacked in the course of an Indian raid, and thus she was orphaned and raised by relatives. At the age of 21 she married John Corbin. Four years later, John enlisted with the First Company of Pennsylvania Artillery as a matross, loading and firing cannon in defense of his newly-formed nation. Margaret volunteered as a camp follower, working with other soldiers’ wives to cook for the soldiers, wash their clothing, and attending to other general needs of the army as well as caring for sick and wounded soldiers.

But for Margaret Corbin, her dedication to the cause of freedom did not stop at just domestic duties. On November 16, 1776, while stationed inside Fort Washington in New York, the fort came under a fierce attack by British and Hessian troops. In the face of the onslaught of the notoriously brutal and ruthless Hessians, Margaret took it upon herself to assist her husband, John, in firing a cannon at the advancing forces. After her husband was killed in the course of the siege, Margaret, instead of surrendering, went about loading and firing the cannon by herself until her jaw, arm, and chest were torn and mangled by a round of grapeshot.

The British ultimately took the fort. When they found Margaret and observed her horrific wounds, they allowed her to be “paroled,” and she was taken to Philadelphia to recover, although her wounds never healed completely. Margaret Corbin’s story and situation came to the attention of the Continental Congress and on July 6, 1779, the Congress awarded her a monthly pension, making Margaret the first American woman to receive a military pension. She was also awarded $30 to cover the costs of her initial recovery as well as a new set of clothes. She remained on the Congressional pension until her death at the age of 48 on January 16, 1800 in Highland Falls, New York.

Recommended Reading

Following are a few books and other literature which I find extremely important for an American living under the dictatorship of Barack Obama to read. I believe that reading these materials will enable you to draw the conclusions necessary to motivate you to act in defense of your country.

Animal Farm- by George Orwell

Mein Kampf- by Adolf Hitler

Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance- by Barack Hussein Obama

It Can't Happen Here- by Sinclair Lewis

The Constitution of the United States of America- by the Constitutional Convention of 1787

United States Declaration of Independence- by the Continental Congress of 1776

George Washington's Farewell Address- by George Washington

Gettysburg Address- by Abraham Lincoln

Common Sense- by Thomas Paine

The Holy Bible- by the Prophets, from God

1776- by David McCullough

John Adams- by David McCullough

UPDATE

***Before you read this post, please make yourself familiar with the Privacy Act of 1974.***

Not surprisingly, some of the feedback on my last post was so stupid I almost committed suicide. Let me make it even clearer for you dullards. The White House isn't just interested in things on the internet that spread "disinformation." They refer specifically to "rumors" said in "casual conversation." And when you hear such "rumors," you are asked to "flag" the White House and bring such disinformation to their attention so they can "keep track" of it. And what do they plan on doing with such information? Do you really believe that the White House, the most powerful institution in the world, with the ability to listen to anything being said within a half-mile of a cell phone, needs ordinary citizens to clue them in on what the people are saying about the "president" and his train wreck healthcare bill?

Wake up, you vegetable. This finger-pointing request is such a glaring violation of the freedom of speech, you ought to be ashamed of yourself for not catching it. There is nothing innocent when the executive branch of a government begins enlisting civilians in the hunt for people who make statements that stand in opposition to that executive branch. But wait, isn't Obama just trying to keep track of statements and things, and not people? No way, Che. What is a statement if not the will of an individual? Can you really incriminate a statement without incriminating the person who made it? Statements, or items of "information," or "rumors," if you will, do not form themselves out of thin air.

No, my fellow subjects. The "president" is fulfilling his campaign promise to create a civilian security force that will keep watch on their neighbors. With such a promise having been officially made already, there is no other interpretation. This is no small thing. It should be considered with the full gravity of the office behind it. We aren't talking about a private citizen asking a friend to look for mean things being said about them on facebook. It is the White House, the presidency. And this fishing trip goes way beyond their realm of power and spits on the back of the constitution that gives them that power. But that shouldn't surprise you either, since the "president" also told us during his campaign that he doesn't much care for the constitution. Oh, you don't believe me? Let me enlighten you. According to Barack Hussein Obama, "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 it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties."

Interpret that however you want, but if you interpret it any differently than I do, you are without a doubt an embarrassment to your ancestors.

Go ahead and crap your pants. It's okay.

This has been getting a lot of time on radio and FOX news since yesterday, but in case you've been in a cave during that time, let me be the first to bring this to your attention. This is from the official White House website:

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

If you're a brain-washed inbred half-wit, there's probably nothing in that request that strikes you as wrong. But to me, an American who loves my freedom and the history of my country, this is possibly the most frightening paragraph I've ever read in my life. When did it become the business of the White House to tell citizens that we should act as informants on our neighbors? Is this still a free country, or is this already the extension of communist China the "president" has been trying to create? I keep expecting Mao to jump out from behind Obama and say SURPRISE! My friends, it is our sacred right to disagree with our government and to express such feelings however we want without the fear of retribution or penalty, and yet the White House wants to "keep track" of anyone who openly disagrees with a political policy. For what purpose? HOW OBVIOUS DOES IT NEED TO GET BEFORE YOU WAKE UP AND REALIZE THAT YOU'RE LIVING IN THE USSR?! Damn you all. You're being marched to your deaths and you don't even care.

Red, White, and Bruised (part four): GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE!

Welcome back, geniuses and morons. Or as I like to say, people who agree with me and those who do not, respectively. I’m here to warn you about the death-warrant the “president” has written for all Americans in the form of government-sponsored healthcare. Now I’m aware that a few of you are still bogged down in the belief that such a thing would be good for America, because you heard some co-worker pothead from Potsdam or some other god-forsaken hell-hole of a European country say that their country’s government healthcare is the best in the world. But if this is the case, why do these people live here in the United States? And why do people from virtually every country with government healthcare end up selling their houses and all that they have so they can pay for American healthcare when they discover cancer or heart disease or some other life-threatening health concern? Answer: because universal healthcare is a scam that kills people.

Around 91% of Americans have health insurance, and around 84% of those people are satisfied with their coverage and the healthcare they receive by it. So to keep that huge chunk of people quiet, the extremely powerful and dangerous globalists that support the healthcare reform bill are utilizing every resource they have to convince those people that they will have the option to keep their current health insurance. But thanks to the miracle of video cameras, we have Barack Obama on tape saying that the only healthcare plan he could get behind is a single-payer system, meaning a system that is entirely government-controlled, and totally devoid of private insurance companies and private care providers. Obama’s propagandists are out in full force stating that these videos and quotes are simply being taken out of context. But the bill itself contains a provision for rendering all new private insurance policies illegal, and if you lose your private insurance, you would have to go on the government plan. So when the big B.O. said a couple of years ago that he expects a transition period of ten to twenty years before all Americans find themselves stuck with government healthcare, the only possible interpretation of that statement is that he meant it. His new bill confirms this.

The bill in question also provides for forced in-home vaccinations at the discretion of the government. In short, this means that the federal government can make any given vaccine mandatory for any given person, and then send government agents to your home to administer a “vaccine intervention” for the good of the community. I’m aware that some of you are functioning on little more than a brain stem, and to you zombies I’m sure this sounds too conspiracy-theorist to be credible, but to anyone with a moderate degree of historical knowledge it sets in motion a dangerous chain of events when you give a corrupt government the authority to inject anyone they want to with any chemicals they feel like.

And let's not forget about the age-priority structure upon which this plan is built. If anyone reading this is under the age of fourteen or over the age of forty, you might as well kill yourself now because if you get sick, forget about finding a doctor who will treat you. As the plan goes, anyone that falls outside of the priority window will only get left-over healthcare. And as anyone from Canada can tell you, there is no such thing as surplus healthcare in a universal system. Quite the contrary, there is never ENOUGH healthcare in a universal system. Oh well, sorry mom, the government says you're too old for those antibiotics. See you in hell.

Equally as alarming as the content of the bill itself is the speed at which its proponents are trying to ramrod it through to a vote. When pressed to answer why they don't know the contents of the bill, its supporters make the argument that the bill is more than one thousand pages long and it is unreasonable to expect that those who will be voting on the bill should actually take the time to read it! Then why in the hell do they want to vote on it so soon?! If you have an iota of common sense in that chickpea democrat brain of yours, this should immediately disturb you and make your blood boil. What are they hiding in the thousands of pages of this bill? With such inevitably serious ramifications, why is this issue being pushed at such a rapid rate? They don't want to allow enough time to read the bill because they know that if the bill is read in depth, the truly ugly nature of its content will be exposed, and their chance to force universal healthcare down your throat will be dead and buried forever. That is why they tell you to be satisfied with the official summary of the bill, and just don't worry your little head about the other 998 pages. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

Well, with all that has been said on this issue, and with all that you can find for yourself, I will say no more about the bill itself. But how are the people actually responding to the prospect of DMV-style healthcare? Just take a look at any random “town hall” meeting being held across the new Soviet States of America and the scene you will see is one of desperate, vicious, fearful, indignant revolt. When the “president” sends his human-jackhammers out into the public to force a tunnel through the crowds so he can railroad his policies through to ratification, the once loud and arrogant con-artists find that there is no p.a. system loud enough to make their lies audible over the voice of the American people, and these hacks are trembling at the site of their political careers crashing to the ground.

But the “president” plays it cool, as always, labeling such legally-assembled protesters “mobs” and “manufactured astroturf.” When George W. Bush was in office and community-organizers like Barack Obama went about leading protests against the president, the media considered such gatherings to be patriotic assemblies; responsible citizens exercising their constitutional right to seek redress for their grievances. But when genuine, ordinary Americans seek out the proper venues wherein answers to logical questions should be found, the same media actively portrays such assemblies as nothing more than Republican shenanigans, even when the protesters have a majority of the American populace behind them, according to the most recent liberally-biased polls. In fact, the media has become so corrupt and unreliable that when ten thousand people attended a rally in Columbus Ohio to peacefully protest the “president’s” policies, the few media outlets that covered the event reported a maximum of three hundred people present.

So a little more than half-a-year into this administration’s first term, and the United States is in real danger of no longer existing as a republic. If nearly all of us oppose an unconstitutional policy and it gets shoved through anyway, how can we call our country a republic? If the majority of us who oppose government healthcare are ignored and this communist “president” gets his way, I don’t want to hear any regrets or complaints out of you few remaining idiots who still support Obama and his band of Chicago mobsters when the government denies your application for life-saving surgery. To me, the refusal of life support to millions of retards will be the only good thing to come out of all of this.

THE COLOR OF HOPE IS MULATTO, THE VOICE OF CHANGE IS BLACK

The beauty of all human life is freedom. You may call it moral agency, liberty, or self-governance. However you refer to it, freedom is the very foundation of happiness, and it is the only word that can truly capture the beautiful essence of the United States of America without the aid of any other descriptive terms. With the last presidential “election,” we saw the word “freedom” thrown out and replaced with another, much more dubious one: hope.

It was said of Barrack Hussein Obama that he was the option of “hope.” Here I would like to pose a question. What were you hoping for when you voted for Barrack Obama? Since most people who voted for B.O. are either mentally-disabled or just lazy and selectively ignorant, I don’t expect any honest answers to that question. Instead, allow me to show you that whatever you hoped to get in return for putting the son of lies in the highest office in the world, you will never see those hopes materialize.

If you hoped that Obama would help you out at the expense of some rich fat cat, think again. Obama is the key that turns the corrupt Chicago political machine. Any dividends he is able to scrape together by soaking the rich will be granted to his friends in the government. Poor hacks like you will continue to scratch your living out of the ground.

Or perhaps you hoped that by an Obama victory your freedoms would be expanded. Take a moment to ask yourself if your liberties are safer now than they were before Obama took office. I know it’s difficult to actually think about something other than celebrities dying and which website you’ll be surfing next, but really try to confront this one with all the power your little smut-filled brain can muster. And if it’s too hard for you to dig down and drag out the ugly head of reality, let me do it for you.

The Constitution is a document intended to preserve the freedom of Americans. Without freedom, how can one really pursue happiness? The goal of the government is to uphold the Constitution and defend the peoples’ ability to enjoy its provisions. Effectively, the goal of the government is to limit the number of obstacles it puts in the path of ordinary citizens as they pursue happiness. But has our new chairman done that? Has he kept his oath? Read on and decide for yourself.

B.O. has taken over the banks, credit companies, and virtually all financial institutions. He has taken over the auto and housing industries, which basically form the spine of our national economy. Now Barry is posturing to take over the industries of energy and healthcare, thereby further depleting the options and bank accounts of ALL Americans, while INCREASING our dependency on the government. Every week a new government agency is born, a dozen new czars are appointed, and another news company becomes a 24-hour propaganda distributor for Obama.

So if you want proof that the community-organizer-in-chief Obama is a liar who misrepresents himself and can't be trusted, think about this: Obama told us he didn't want to control the auto industry, yet he now controls it. He said he didn't want to control the banks, yet he controls them too. When certain banks that received bail-out money tried to pay the government back, Obama refused to let that happen. Why? So he could maintain his control over them. He said he would eliminate the national debt within his first term, yet his policies increase the debt by more than a billion dollars each hour. He convinced the poor, degenerate fools who voted for him that he would make their lives easier and more affordable, yet he is fighting to push an energy bill that he himself claims will multiply the cost of energy ten times over for the average household. And if his national healthcare plan gets the green light the average American will see their taxes increase by as much as five percent, all so some worthless illegal alien can feel like he's getting good healthcare for nothing, when in reality everyone with half a brain knows that government-run healthcare is a joke and it is a system that is failing around the world, along with the health of those who rely on it. These things all point to the greatest, most glaring lie of all, which comes in the form of Obama claiming that he's not a communist.

Now you might say that these things are all the actions of the government as a whole, and Obama can’t be held accountable for them. Not so. Obama IS the government. My friends and enemies, Barrack Obama has been given such a mighty sledgehammer of support by nearly all of the various agents of the government, he might as well just declare himself the very embodiment of all three branches of the government. He is at the top of this pyramid scheme, and as such he is the pharaoh of the USA. Knowing this, can you honestly say that you are freer now than you were last year? I think not.

So if you hoped to find liberty in liberalism, you’ve been duped. You have voted and/or silenced yourself into submission. And what stings the most is that you probably didn’t really know what you wanted or hoped for when you decided to support Obama. You simply LIKE him. You are infatuated with his face, his voice, his ambiguous mottos, and his hip style. And now, less than half a year into the most un-American presidency America has ever seen, as we approach the birthday of our great nation, we find our freedoms in shackles. Our mother Liberty is bound, blindfolded, and she is being taken advantage of. And if you want to know who allowed this to happen, look to the ignorant masses, the street bums looking for handouts, the illegal aliens voting with no right to do so, Acorn, and perhaps in a mirror.

When you decided that you liked Obama, you thought you were supporting a charismatic black man who spoke truth and optimism. What you got was a walking contradiction. A half-white, dishonest doomsayer, with a voice as black as the death of freedom. A vicious, repugnant, bitter enemy to America. With men like that controlling her affairs, she may starve to death before she sees her next birthday. So next time you vote for “hope,” make sure you know what the word means. Because what one man hopes for, Lady Liberty dreads.

Red, White, and Bruised (part three): Racism Shmacism

There are many weapons being used at this time to undermine the strength of America. Attacks on religion, political-correctness, moral re-education, just to name a few. But there is another very effective tool being used to weaken this Country, which is much more obvious than most of the others. It is reverse-racism. Here’s the point. By convincing white Americans that they are racist just by existing as white Americans and demoting them to second-rate citizens because of the things white people have done in the past, the anti-American hellhounds have successfully drained every ounce of confidence and strength from the largest race in the country, and thusly the country itself.

Before I continue, I have a confession to make. I am white. Pure, pristine, white as the driven snow. And because of my race alone, I have been called a racist not only by black peers, but by brain-washed self-loathing whites as well. I have been discriminated against specifically because I am white. And yet, not once in my life have I said or done anything even remotely discriminatory to a minority. You are perhaps wondering why I feel a need to divulge this. I do so because I believe this is the case for most white Americans. While whites try harder and harder to prove to minorities that they approve of their citizenship in this country, the clamor against them gets louder and more violent. And since the majority of that noise comes from black Americans, I will write mainly about them.

Since some of you reading this would probably feel too guilty in thinking about black racism towards whites, I’ll warm you up by providing you with examples. Will Smith is perhaps the most prominent black person in entertainment today, next to the comedian/actor Barack Obama. Smith, who openly campaigned for George W. Bush in 2004, recently went on a black pride rampage in response to the election of president Barack Obama. The big Willy went on the Oprah Winfrey show and, during a meteoric descent into insanity not seen on television since Tom Cruise announced his love for Katie Holmes on the same show, cried openly and screamed and met his day’s cardio-exercise goals on Oprah’s stage because a black person had finally won the US presidency. But wait, that’s not racism! He’s just celebrating! Right? Wrong.

Reverse the roles. Imagine that, upon the election of another white president, a white person went on a press junket in celebration of the victory, not because of their politics, but because they liked the president’s skin color. Would that person receive cheers and applause like Will Smith received for his inane behavior on the Oprah show? Hardly. He or she would be declared a bigot, they would be called every libelous name in the human vocabulary, and their reputation would be ruined. But for Will Smith and all other blacks, a totally separate set of rules applies. Smith goes on to take further advantage of this discrepancy in racial standards by saying that Obama “has validated something that I've believed for a lot of years, that I've never really been able to say. People looked at me crazy, and as a black man you were never really allowed to say: You know, I don't think America is a racist nation. I think there are racist people that live here, but I think as a whole America is not a racist nation.You were Uncle Tom if you ever said that before. ... I think [his election] completed a cycle of African-American citizenship. It was like the last stamp on African-American citizenship, and no longer are we African-Americans. We are Americans of African descent.”

So even though blacks were emancipated over 140 years ago by the deaths of millions of white people, and even though millions of white people came to the defense of blacks during the process of desegregation more than forty years ago to further declare blacks as citizens, and even though some of the most powerful people in the government over the last twenty years have been black men and women, black citizenship wasn’t really official until a half-white/ half-Luo man became president. That is basically what will smith is saying. If this doesn’t strike you as racist, you are probably just high.

In his book “Dreams of my Father,” Barack Obama, himself half white, had this to say about his life amongst white people: “ We were always playing on the white man’s court…by the white man’s rules…any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning… our rage at the white world needed no object.., no independent confirmation.” Barack Obama was raised partly in Indonesia and mostly in Hawaii. I wonder just how much racism he encountered growing up. In apparent disgust over his white heritage, Obama writes “ I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of twelve or thirteen… as I imagined myself following Malcom’s call, one line in [Malcom X’s] book stayed with me. He spoke of a wish he’d once had… that the white blood that ran through him, there by an act of violence, might somehow be expunged.” He then categorizes white people as “some cruel, some ignorant.” As if to explain his reason for making racist statements, Obama states that “race-bating could make up for a host of limitations” in the political world.

Please smack me in the face so that I can wake up from this nightmare of a world I am living in.
Now if you’re wondering where this is all going, or how it could end up even affecting you, consider the TKO super-combo of racism AND sexism known as Sonia Sotomayor. She has been nominated to the United States Supreme Court and will doubtless be approved as our newest justice. In one balls-to-the-walls, no-holds-barred, put up your dukes, eat my shorts statement, this bigoted old hack has managed to make official something that most people have sensed for a long time: whitey is going down. She did this by saying “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life”

If you think I’m just blowing hot air, take a look at her record. This is a judge whose rulings in the court of appeals have been overturned by the Supreme Court more than sixty percent of the time because her bias has led her to make extra-legal decisions. Even more disturbing is the fact that Sotomayor is a member of La Raza (meaning "the race"), a latino-pride orginization who advocates for amnesty for illegal aliens, and states their main objective to be the return of the western United States to Mexican authority and kicking out all non-Aztecas. Barack Obama campaigned on the promise that he would nominate judges who would rule in favor of minorities specifically because of their race, and conversely, judges who would rule against whites because of their race. He has now put his money where his teleprompter is. We have reached a point in our history where our government has loudly proclaimed itself unable to dispense blind justice. If the highest court in the land and the highest office in the land can’t be trusted to interpret the law in a manner that honors the constitution, what can they be trusted with?

As I’ve said before, right and wrong have simply traded places. Other than that, there has been no change. Racism against whites is just as racist as racism BY whites. But those with the means have been so successful in mixing up the race cards that they’ve actually convinced white Americans that they deserve to be punished for the crimes of a few long-dead white people. I for one will not be apologizing to minorities as they march me to the gas chamber.

INTERLUDE

It has come to my attention that, after just two posts and an inconsequential number of readers, almost half of you are struggling with the material in this blog. You can not see the connections between the things in my writings. You don’t understand how they are linked. I will explain this once. This blog and the “Red, White, and Bruised” series are about America and all things wrong with it. If this simple premise is too mind-boggling and you really can’t draw the connections, or if it takes too much work to read multiple paragraphs at one time, or if you truly don’t have the mental energy it takes to do a little research to discover for yourself that the statements in these writings are not subjective opinions but facts, then perhaps http://www.sesamestreet.org/home would be more appropriate for your intellectual capacity.

This blog is for people who love America and are willing to at least put in the book time required to justify the way they vote and think. It is for people who treasure the US Constitution in their hearts, and understand that even the most remotely socialistic of policies is in direct conflict with the liberties outlined in the foundational laws of this great nation. This blog is for people who prefer to do their own thinking, rather than contracting out their thinking to regional trend-setters. This blog is for people who don’t turn off the news

Before I post any further writings, I ask that you take a few days to read the Constitution, with special consideration for the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence and actually try to think about what these articles mean to you. You must grasp these elementary pre-reqs before you can even begin to understand the dangers to the nation which I will outline in writings to come. And if this simple assignment takes too much effort on your part, forget it. This blog is not for you. Go back to your reality tv shows, your Daily Show, your NPR. Don’t trouble yourself with the truth. Let those who genuinely care about freedom do the heavy lifting required to maintain such. In fact, if you are one of the millions of thoughtless, spoiled, lazy American ingrates who have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into thinking that socialism has a place in America, take a hike to Canada and stay there. This COUNTRY is not for you.

Red, White, and Bruised (part two)

Consider the following questions. What do the words “liberty” and “freedom” mean to you? Do you believe that the Constitution of the United States of America more closely represents the meanings of these words than any other governing document or set of laws that the ruling forces of the world have ever composed? Do you believe that it is wrong for the United States to continue to promote and defend the philosophical freedoms, cultural heritage, and restrictions on government that have protected and empowered the people since the nation was founded?

If you can not answer these questions without hesitation, discomfort, guilt of conscience, or internal conflict, it is because your natural ability to define the difference between right and wrong has been systematically and deliberately compromised and undermined from the time that you were first able to comprehend language. Here you will find evidence which sustains this claim, and hopefully you will come to understand why the reclamation of your own moral compass may be the only thing that can save America from falling into the prison that is communism.

You may have noticed that since the “cultural revolution” of the 1960’s, countless lives have seemingly derailed and fallen into a bottomless pit of sex, drugs, and moral apathy. But while most people recognize this to be tragic to some degree, most people are indifferent to the millions of lives which are wasted in pursuit of socially-destructive rebellion against family structure, religious observance, patriotism, and the traditional concept of civilized behavior. It is no coincidence that the disintegration of democratic society always commences after the abandonment of the social moral code. For America, the decline of national stability began at the time that the practitioners of Marxism began successfully putting into effect the infiltration tactics of Antonio Gramsci in an effort to eventually gain political control of the United States of America.

Antonio Gramsci was an Italian neo-Marxist philosopher who wrote extensively on the evils of capitalism. He suggested that democracy was merely a tool which the wealthy "bourgeois" used to coerce the lower classes into devoting themselves to a life of hard labor, whereby the rich become richer, and the poor die from rickets. In the world of democracy, as Gramsci saw it, there were two classes: the oppressed, and those who oppress them. Consider this analogy. As far as Gramsci was concerned, the oppressive class could be represented by a wealthy merchant who rides atop a wagon full of valuable goods which he hopes to transport to a nearby village and trade for monetary gain. The oppressed or “proletariat” class is represented by the hungry donkey that pulls the merchant’s wagon. In order to motivate the donkey into pulling the wagon, the merchant dangles a carrot just out of reach of said donkey, which carrot represents the idea of democracy in this analogy.

The donkey sees the carrot as a satisfactory reward for his labors and will pull the wagon indefinitely as long as the merchant waves it in front of him. In the Marxist’s concept of democratic societies, almost everyone is a donkey, duped into believing that if we work very hard we can be rewarded with the “carrot” of freedom to do whatever we want. We believe that we willingly pull the wagon because the carrot is worth the pull. But in reality we never get to experience the joy of democracy because we are so busy laboring that we never get the chance to stop and nibble on it.

So in place of the rigged game of capitalism, Gramsci argued for communism. The goal of communism is to eliminate all social classes by homogenizing the lifestyle of all people. No one can ever progress beyond the stature of his neighbors. The government accomplishes this perceived “equality” by controlling virtually all aspects of the lives of the citizens. A maximum income level is set, curfews are enforced, housing is the same for everyone, a national religion is usually established, and political parties are narrowed to one or two mega-parties. By eliminating the freedom of the people to choose how they live, there is no avenue to allow for a scheming rich person to take advantage of others. If a poor person has nothing better to work towards, he can’t be convinced to work harder. In the communist system, the only reason people are motivated to work is because they know they will starve to death if they do not. Save it be for mere survival, there is nothing else to work for.

In the eyes of Gramsci and all Marxists like him, the bullies and opportunists at the top of the democratic pyramid had to be knocked down and replaced with well-meaning and compassionate communist leaders. But where most proponents of communism advocated for a militant takeover, Gramsci was astute enough to recognize that republican ideals were too strongly entrenched in the United States to be eradicated the old fashioned way. So Gramsci suggested a Trojan horse method. He called it “the long march through the institutions.”

The plan was to plant communist sympathizers in positions as teachers, deans, professors, civic leaders, civil rights advocates, preachers, and other “noble” leadership positions that people would trust and be easily persuaded by. These leaders and teachers would then gradually introduce counter-cultural ideas, slowly building a posterity of “revolutionaries,” with each subsequent generation accepting a higher degree of anti-American values than the previous generation.

Gramsci and his contemporaries knew, however, that there would still be many people who opposed communism in principle. They also knew that a large segment of society would end up on the fence, too lazy or too indecisive to declare a preference in form of government. To deal with these stragglers and stubborn non-conformists, communists simply had to trick these people into submission. This would be accomplished by controlling the language used in reference to politics, religion, and other prominent issues of discussion. Through the use of news media, books, magazines, popular music and other forms of entertainment, as well as the curriculum used in the education system, the very meanings of words could be changed. By reassigning meanings to words such as revolution, Christianity, power, freedom, terrorist, wealth, and other politically polarizing terms, the public’s perception of “right” and “wrong” could be totally manipulated.

Once the communist posterity is raised and all others are tricked into believing that capitalism is evil and/or doomed to failure, enough people will either openly support communism or unknowingly support communist agendas in disguise to allow for communism to quietly replace capitalism through the election process, thus rendering any violent takeover unnecessary. So, to refer back to the thesis of this series, right and wrong have traded places. By changing the way the public views our enemies and our threats, as well as demonizing the values and principles that have made our country strong, the supporters of communism have undermined your ability to judge what is good for the country and what is bad for the country. They have created a culture where conservative values are demonized and sexual promiscuity is promoted. They have convinced the people that it is right to do whatever feels good, and the only thing that is wrong is to deny yourself and others the right to openly party and fornicate. They have deliberately produced a society in which “morality” is considered an outdated tool of the oppressive class, and in so doing they have undermined the sustainability of the United States as a democratic nation. By erasing the traditional concept of what is right, and replacing it with an acceptance of carnal indulgence, the enemies of liberty have eliminated the threat of opposition from those who otherwise would still believe in the conservative values that sustain democracy.

If you think I’m paranoid or even intentionally lying, just consider these indisputable facts. The politicians, lawyers, soldiers, border agents, investigators, and all others who have actively fought the rise of Islamic terrorism are now being categorized as dangerous enemies of freedom by the new president and those who work with him in the government. At the same time, hundreds of terrorists are now anticipating liberation from our detention centers, and those who remain detained will now enjoy a comfortable existence devoid of any harsh interrogation tactics that have previously saved countless American lives. Our old democratic allies are being cut off, while new friendships are being forged with rogue states such as Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, Nicaragua, and others who have openly professed their hatred for America. The current president has stated numerous times that the Constitution is generally worthless, and if he could, he would trash it. And to show that he means business, his newly reorganized Department of Homeland Security has labeled as “extremists” all Americans who openly fight to maintain and support the Constitution.

If we as Americans do not come to our senses and boldly declare the constitution as valid, re-establish the boundaries of right and wrong, and get back to our cultural and political roots, the world’s greatest beacon of hope and liberty will be no more. The flag is being torn apart, trampled under-foot, and burnt in the streets. If we do not protect it, then the rights and liberties it symbolizes will be lost with it.

Red, White, and Bruised (part one)

Once upon a time there was a man who craved great power. So to obtain it, he began to campaign and seek election. He knew that if he wanted to win favor with the majority of the people, he simply needed to promise them everything they wanted. He knew that the masses were uneducated, lazy, and extremely gullible, and that they would never question the feasibility of his promises. He knew that the people were tired of war, that they were hungry for change, and that they wanted to be taken care of. So, equipped with his charisma and his gift for oratory, he used every forum of communication available to broadcast his clever message and mesmerize his followers. He used these same tools of cunning and charm to trample and embarrass his opponents, who were not as skilled in the art of language and who resembled the "old fashioned" form of government too closely for the liking of the voters.

This man built his candidacy on a foundation of deceit, fear mongering, popular fashion, and catchy body language. Simply by acting in a way that he knew people would relate to, he was able to take control of his country and execute his agenda. By promising change, protection, jobs, food, and a sense of destiny, he was able to take the election. But almost immediately after he assumed his new position, he began abandoning his promises. Not only was he unwilling to be the "people's leader" that he claimed he would be, but he began governing in a manner which was more totalitarian and dictator-like than his opponents ever threatened to be. He went to work on issuing order after order, appointing countless czars, building a civilian security force to rival the military, and robbing his people of power and liberties. He began spying on ordinary citizens, listening in on private conversations, and pressuring the media to silence any voice of opposition.

Who am I talking about? Is it Adolph Hitler, or perhaps the current U.S. President? What is terrifying is that both of these men fit comfortably within these characteristics. Because this is the pattern that virtually every single dictator, tyrant, and despot in the history of human governance has used to gain political prominence. The media wants us to believe that this era in American history is historic. Perhaps it is. Only it is not historic in that it is unique or fresh or enlightened. This era is historic because for the first time in the United States of America, we are repeating a pattern of history which is in direct conflict with the principles upon which this nation was founded: we are willingly walking into a trap of total government control.

Recent polls show that less than 60% of Americans prefer a free market over communism. The people have elected a Marxist to the office of president. The government has declared all conservatives and patriots to be a threat to the security of the nation, a measure that seeks to enforce not just rules against actions, but restrictions on thoughts and ideals. The president promised that things would "change" in America. So far, the greatest change that I can see is that right and wrong have traded places.