Let it sink in.
Quietly we go like sheep to slaughter. Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ..... During the Carter Administration?
Anybody?
Anything?
No?
Didn't think so! Bottom line .... We've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency ... the reasonfor which not one person who reads this can remember.
Ready???????
It was very simple ..
And at the time everybody thought it very appropriate...
The 'Department of Energy' was instituted on 8-04-1977
TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.
Hey, pretty efficient, huh?????
AND NOW IT'S 2009, 32 YEARS LATER ... AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS
NECESSARY DEPARTMENT
IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR IT HAS 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!
THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?'
Ah, yes, good old bureaucracy...
And NOW _ we are going to turn the Banking System, Health Care & the Auto Industry
over to government?
May God Help Us !!! But why should he, we have taken him out of the government?
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
BUCHANAN TO OBAMA
BUCHANAN TO OBAMA
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America. Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances, and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned-Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses, and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools, and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement, and nursing homes for blacks.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude???
Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids. Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?
Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?
As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims three percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?
Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?
We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case, and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before ... about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.
We are a Christian Nation even if Mr. Obama says we are not.
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America. Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances, and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned-Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses, and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools, and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement, and nursing homes for blacks.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude???
Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids. Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?
Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?
As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims three percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?
Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?
We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case, and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before ... about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.
We are a Christian Nation even if Mr. Obama says we are not.
Vietnam. Some Facts
My college room mate, a Vietnam Vet and a Patriot of the USA and my friend sent this to me... Now we know some facts of this war...
"Of the 2,709,918 Americans who served in Vietnam, Less than 850,000
are estimated to be alive today, with the youngest American.
Vietnam veteran's age approximated to be 54 years old."
So, if you're alive and reading this, how Does it feel to be among
the last 1/3rd of all the U.S. Vets who served in VietNam?!?!? ...don't know
about you guys, but kinda gives me the chills, Considering this is the kind
of information I'm used to reading about WWII and Korean War vets...
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
So the last 14 years we are dying too fast, only the few will
survive by 2015...if any.. If true 390 VN vets die a day. so in 2190
days...from today, lucky to be a Vietnam veteran alive..... in only 6
years..
These statistics were taken from a variety of sources to include:
The VFW Magazine, the Public Information Office,
and the HQ CP Forward Observer - 1st Recon April 12, 1997.
STATISTICS FOR INDIVIDUALS IN UNIFORM AND IN COUNTRY
VIETNAM VETERANS:
. 9,087,000 military personnel served on active duty during the
Vietnam Era (August 5, 1964 - May 7, 1975).
. 8,744,000 GIs were on active duty during the war (Aug 5,
1964-March 28, 1973).
. 2,709,918 Americans served in Vietnam, this number represents 9.7%
of their generation.
. 3,403,100 (Including 514,300 offshore) personnel served in the
broader Southeast Asia Theater (Vietnam, Laos,
Cambodia, flight crews based in Thailand, and sailors in adjacent
South China Sea waters).
. 2,594,000 personnel served within the borders of South Vietnam
(Jan. 1, 1965 - March 28, 1973).
. Another 50,000 men served in Vietnam between 1960 and 1964.
. Of the 2.6 million, between 1-1.6 million (40-60%) either fought
in combat, provided close support or were at least fairly
regularly exposed to enemy attack.
. 7,484 women (6,250 or 83.5% were nurses) served in Vietnam.
. Peak troop strength in Vietnam: 543,482 (April 30, 1968).
CASUALTIES:
. The first man to die in Vietnam was James Davis, in 1958. He was
with the 509th Radio Research Station.
Davis Station in Saigon was named for him.
. Hostile deaths: 47,378
. Non-hostile deaths: 10,800
. Total: 58,202 (Includes men formerly classified as MIA and
Mayaguez casualties). Men who have subsequently died
of wounds account for the changing total.
. 8 nurses died -- 1 was KIA.
. Married men killed: 17,539
. 61% of the men killed were 21 or younger.
. 11,465 of those killed were younger than 20 years old.
. Of those killed, 17,539 were married.
. Average age of men killed: 23.1 years
Deaths - Average Age
Total Deaths: 23.11 years
Enlisted: 50,274 22.37 years
Officers: 6,598 28.43 years
Warrants: 1,276 24.73 years
E1: 525 20.34 years
11B MOS: 18,465 22.55 years
. Five men killed in Vietnam were only 16 years old.
. The oldest man killed was 62 years old.
. Highest state death rate: West Virginia - 84.1% (national average
58.9% for every 100,000 males in 1970).
. Wounded: 303,704 -- 153,329 hospitalized + 150,375 injured
requiring no hospital care.
. Severely disabled: 75,000, -- 23,214: 100% disabled; 5,283 lost
limbs; 1,081 sustained multiple amputations.
. Amputation or crippling wounds to the lower extremities were 300%
higher than in WWII and 70% higher than Korea.
. Multiple amputations occurred at the rate of 18.4% compared to
5.7% in WWII.
. Missing in Action: 2,338
. POWs: 766 (114 died in captivity)
. As of January 15, 2004, there are 1,875 Americans still
unaccounted for from the Vietnam War.
DRAFTEES VS. VOLUNTEERS:
. 25% (648,500) of total forces in country were draftees. (66% of
U.S. armed forces members were drafted during WWII).
. Draftees accounted for 30.4% (17,725) of combat deaths in Vietnam.
. Reservists killed: 5,977
. National Guard: 6,140 served: 101 died.
. Total draftees (1965 - 73): 1,728,344.
. Actually served in Vietnam: 38%
. Marine Corps Draft: 42,633.
. Last man drafted: June 30, 1973.
RACE AND ETHNIC BACKGROUND:
. 88.4% of the men who actually served in Vietnam were Caucasian;
10.6% (275,000) were black; 1% belonged to other races.
. 86.3% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasian (includes
Hispanics); 12.5% (7,241) were black; 1.2% belonged to other races.
. 170,000 Hispanics served in Vietnam; 3,070 (5.2% of total) died
there.
. 70% of enlisted men killed were of North-west European descent.
. 86.8% of the men who were killed as a result of hostile action
were Caucasian; 12.1% (5,711) were black; 1.1% belonged to other races.
. 14.6% (1,530) of non-combat deaths were among blacks.
. 34% of blacks who enlisted volunteered for the combat arms.
. Overall, blacks suffered 12.5% of the deaths in Vietnam at a time
when the percentage of blacks of military age was 13.5% of the total
population.
. Religion of Dead: Protestant -- 64.4%; Catholic -- 28.9%;
other/none -- 6.7%
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS:
. Vietnam veterans have a lower unemployment rate than the same
non-vet age groups.
. Vietnam veterans' personal income exceeds that of our non-veteran
age group by more than 18 percent.
. 76% of the men sent to Vietnam were from lower middle/working
class backgrounds.
. Three-fourths had family incomes above the poverty level; 50% were
from middle income backgrounds.
. Some 23% of Vietnam vets had fathers with professional, managerial
or technical occupations.
. 79% of the men who served in Vietnam had a high school education
or better when they entered the military service.
(63% of Korean War vets and only 45% of WWII vets had completed high
school upon separation.)
. Deaths by region per 100,000 of population: South -- 31%, West
--29.9%; Midwest -- 28.4%; Northeast -- 23.5%.
DRUG USAGE & CRIME:
. There is no difference in drug usage between Vietnam Veterans and
non-Vietnam Veterans of the same age group.
(Source: Veterans Administration Study)
. Vietnam Veterans are less likely to be in prison - only one-half
of one percent of Vietnam Veterans have been jailed for crimes.
. 85% of Vietnam Veterans made successful transitions to civilian
life.
WINNING & LOSING:
. 82% of veterans who saw heavy combat strongly believe the war was
lost because of lack of political will.
. Nearly 75% of the public agrees it was a failure of political
will, not of arms.
HONORABLE SERVICE:
. 97% of Vietnam-era veterans were honorably discharged.
. 91% of actual Vietnam War veterans and 90% of those who saw heavy
combat are proud to have served their country.
. 74% say they would serve again, even knowing the outcome.
. 87% of the public now holds Vietnam veterans in high esteem.
INTERESTING CENSUS STATISTICS & THOSE TO CLAIM TO HAVE "Been There":
. 1,713,823 of those who served in Vietnam were still alive as of
August, 1995 (census figures).
. During that same Census count, the number of Americans falsely
claiming to have served in-country was: 9,492,958.
. As of the current Census taken during August, 2000, the surviving
U.S. Vietnam Veteran population estimate is: 1,002,511. This is hard to
believe, losing nearly 711,000 between '95 and '00. That's 390 per day.
. During this Census count, the number of Americans falsely claiming
to have served in-country is: 13,853,027. By this census, FOUR OUT OF FIVE
WHO CLAIM TO BE Vietnam vets are not.
.
The Department of Defense Vietnam War Service Index officially
provided by The War Library originally reported with errors that 2,709,918
U.S. military personnel as having served in-country. Corrections and
confirmations to this erred index resulted in the addition of 358 U.S.
military personnel confirmed to have served in Vietnam but not originally
listed by the Department of Defense. (All names are currently on file and
accessible 24/7/365).
Isolated atrocities committed by American Soldiers produced torrents
of outrage from anti-war critics and the news media while Communist
atrocities were so common that they received hardly any media mention at
all. The United States sought to minimize and prevent attacks on civilians
while North Vietnam
made attacks on civilians a centerpiece of its strategy. Americans
who deliberately killed civilians received prison sentences while Communists
who did so received commendations.
From 1957 to 1973, the National Liberation Front assassinated 36,725
Vietnamese and abducted another 58,499. The death squads focused on leaders
at the village level and on anyone who improved the lives of
the peasants such as medical personnel, social workers, and school
teachers. - Nixon Presidential Papers
"Of the 2,709,918 Americans who served in Vietnam, Less than 850,000
are estimated to be alive today, with the youngest American.
Vietnam veteran's age approximated to be 54 years old."
So, if you're alive and reading this, how Does it feel to be among
the last 1/3rd of all the U.S. Vets who served in VietNam?!?!? ...don't know
about you guys, but kinda gives me the chills, Considering this is the kind
of information I'm used to reading about WWII and Korean War vets...
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
So the last 14 years we are dying too fast, only the few will
survive by 2015...if any.. If true 390 VN vets die a day. so in 2190
days...from today, lucky to be a Vietnam veteran alive..... in only 6
years..
These statistics were taken from a variety of sources to include:
The VFW Magazine, the Public Information Office,
and the HQ CP Forward Observer - 1st Recon April 12, 1997.
STATISTICS FOR INDIVIDUALS IN UNIFORM AND IN COUNTRY
VIETNAM VETERANS:
. 9,087,000 military personnel served on active duty during the
Vietnam Era (August 5, 1964 - May 7, 1975).
. 8,744,000 GIs were on active duty during the war (Aug 5,
1964-March 28, 1973).
. 2,709,918 Americans served in Vietnam, this number represents 9.7%
of their generation.
. 3,403,100 (Including 514,300 offshore) personnel served in the
broader Southeast Asia Theater (Vietnam, Laos,
Cambodia, flight crews based in Thailand, and sailors in adjacent
South China Sea waters).
. 2,594,000 personnel served within the borders of South Vietnam
(Jan. 1, 1965 - March 28, 1973).
. Another 50,000 men served in Vietnam between 1960 and 1964.
. Of the 2.6 million, between 1-1.6 million (40-60%) either fought
in combat, provided close support or were at least fairly
regularly exposed to enemy attack.
. 7,484 women (6,250 or 83.5% were nurses) served in Vietnam.
. Peak troop strength in Vietnam: 543,482 (April 30, 1968).
CASUALTIES:
. The first man to die in Vietnam was James Davis, in 1958. He was
with the 509th Radio Research Station.
Davis Station in Saigon was named for him.
. Hostile deaths: 47,378
. Non-hostile deaths: 10,800
. Total: 58,202 (Includes men formerly classified as MIA and
Mayaguez casualties). Men who have subsequently died
of wounds account for the changing total.
. 8 nurses died -- 1 was KIA.
. Married men killed: 17,539
. 61% of the men killed were 21 or younger.
. 11,465 of those killed were younger than 20 years old.
. Of those killed, 17,539 were married.
. Average age of men killed: 23.1 years
Deaths - Average Age
Total Deaths: 23.11 years
Enlisted: 50,274 22.37 years
Officers: 6,598 28.43 years
Warrants: 1,276 24.73 years
E1: 525 20.34 years
11B MOS: 18,465 22.55 years
. Five men killed in Vietnam were only 16 years old.
. The oldest man killed was 62 years old.
. Highest state death rate: West Virginia - 84.1% (national average
58.9% for every 100,000 males in 1970).
. Wounded: 303,704 -- 153,329 hospitalized + 150,375 injured
requiring no hospital care.
. Severely disabled: 75,000, -- 23,214: 100% disabled; 5,283 lost
limbs; 1,081 sustained multiple amputations.
. Amputation or crippling wounds to the lower extremities were 300%
higher than in WWII and 70% higher than Korea.
. Multiple amputations occurred at the rate of 18.4% compared to
5.7% in WWII.
. Missing in Action: 2,338
. POWs: 766 (114 died in captivity)
. As of January 15, 2004, there are 1,875 Americans still
unaccounted for from the Vietnam War.
DRAFTEES VS. VOLUNTEERS:
. 25% (648,500) of total forces in country were draftees. (66% of
U.S. armed forces members were drafted during WWII).
. Draftees accounted for 30.4% (17,725) of combat deaths in Vietnam.
. Reservists killed: 5,977
. National Guard: 6,140 served: 101 died.
. Total draftees (1965 - 73): 1,728,344.
. Actually served in Vietnam: 38%
. Marine Corps Draft: 42,633.
. Last man drafted: June 30, 1973.
RACE AND ETHNIC BACKGROUND:
. 88.4% of the men who actually served in Vietnam were Caucasian;
10.6% (275,000) were black; 1% belonged to other races.
. 86.3% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasian (includes
Hispanics); 12.5% (7,241) were black; 1.2% belonged to other races.
. 170,000 Hispanics served in Vietnam; 3,070 (5.2% of total) died
there.
. 70% of enlisted men killed were of North-west European descent.
. 86.8% of the men who were killed as a result of hostile action
were Caucasian; 12.1% (5,711) were black; 1.1% belonged to other races.
. 14.6% (1,530) of non-combat deaths were among blacks.
. 34% of blacks who enlisted volunteered for the combat arms.
. Overall, blacks suffered 12.5% of the deaths in Vietnam at a time
when the percentage of blacks of military age was 13.5% of the total
population.
. Religion of Dead: Protestant -- 64.4%; Catholic -- 28.9%;
other/none -- 6.7%
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS:
. Vietnam veterans have a lower unemployment rate than the same
non-vet age groups.
. Vietnam veterans' personal income exceeds that of our non-veteran
age group by more than 18 percent.
. 76% of the men sent to Vietnam were from lower middle/working
class backgrounds.
. Three-fourths had family incomes above the poverty level; 50% were
from middle income backgrounds.
. Some 23% of Vietnam vets had fathers with professional, managerial
or technical occupations.
. 79% of the men who served in Vietnam had a high school education
or better when they entered the military service.
(63% of Korean War vets and only 45% of WWII vets had completed high
school upon separation.)
. Deaths by region per 100,000 of population: South -- 31%, West
--29.9%; Midwest -- 28.4%; Northeast -- 23.5%.
DRUG USAGE & CRIME:
. There is no difference in drug usage between Vietnam Veterans and
non-Vietnam Veterans of the same age group.
(Source: Veterans Administration Study)
. Vietnam Veterans are less likely to be in prison - only one-half
of one percent of Vietnam Veterans have been jailed for crimes.
. 85% of Vietnam Veterans made successful transitions to civilian
life.
WINNING & LOSING:
. 82% of veterans who saw heavy combat strongly believe the war was
lost because of lack of political will.
. Nearly 75% of the public agrees it was a failure of political
will, not of arms.
HONORABLE SERVICE:
. 97% of Vietnam-era veterans were honorably discharged.
. 91% of actual Vietnam War veterans and 90% of those who saw heavy
combat are proud to have served their country.
. 74% say they would serve again, even knowing the outcome.
. 87% of the public now holds Vietnam veterans in high esteem.
INTERESTING CENSUS STATISTICS & THOSE TO CLAIM TO HAVE "Been There":
. 1,713,823 of those who served in Vietnam were still alive as of
August, 1995 (census figures).
. During that same Census count, the number of Americans falsely
claiming to have served in-country was: 9,492,958.
. As of the current Census taken during August, 2000, the surviving
U.S. Vietnam Veteran population estimate is: 1,002,511. This is hard to
believe, losing nearly 711,000 between '95 and '00. That's 390 per day.
. During this Census count, the number of Americans falsely claiming
to have served in-country is: 13,853,027. By this census, FOUR OUT OF FIVE
WHO CLAIM TO BE Vietnam vets are not.
.
The Department of Defense Vietnam War Service Index officially
provided by The War Library originally reported with errors that 2,709,918
U.S. military personnel as having served in-country. Corrections and
confirmations to this erred index resulted in the addition of 358 U.S.
military personnel confirmed to have served in Vietnam but not originally
listed by the Department of Defense. (All names are currently on file and
accessible 24/7/365).
Isolated atrocities committed by American Soldiers produced torrents
of outrage from anti-war critics and the news media while Communist
atrocities were so common that they received hardly any media mention at
all. The United States sought to minimize and prevent attacks on civilians
while North Vietnam
made attacks on civilians a centerpiece of its strategy. Americans
who deliberately killed civilians received prison sentences while Communists
who did so received commendations.
From 1957 to 1973, the National Liberation Front assassinated 36,725
Vietnamese and abducted another 58,499. The death squads focused on leaders
at the village level and on anyone who improved the lives of
the peasants such as medical personnel, social workers, and school
teachers. - Nixon Presidential Papers
Subject: The Difference
If a conservative doesn’t like guns, they don’t buy one. If a liberal doesn’t like guns, then no one should have one.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, they don’t eat meat. If a liberal is, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.
If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.
If a conservative is homosexual, they quietly enjoy their life. If a liberal is homosexual, they loudly demand legislated respect.
If a black man or Hispanic is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful. Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church. A liberal wants all churches to be silenced.
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, they don’t eat meat. If a liberal is, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.
If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.
If a conservative is homosexual, they quietly enjoy their life. If a liberal is homosexual, they loudly demand legislated respect.
If a black man or Hispanic is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful. Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church. A liberal wants all churches to be silenced.
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.
A pretty good summary Todate
One of Bob Oster's CEO friends wrote this. Bob respects him highly. (For those on this list who don't know Bob: he was CFO of Oracle when it went public, also CFO of Syntex, and holds a Ph.D. in economics from Berkeley. Since 1987, he has been an angel investor and private VC. He is on the Board of Overseers at the Hoover Institution.)
My 6 Month Evaluation of the Obama Presidency
In November 2008, I wrote my evaluation of the Obama candidacy and what it might mean to America. I filed this away, but sent it to family members and a few close friends and associates just so I'd be accountable for my real time observations. It’s now been 6 months since Obama’s inauguration. (In the business world, this is typically when a first job review would occur; so, I made a note to myself to revisit his performance on the 6-month anniversary.) Thus, I now commit to filing my mid-year evaluation of our new President. As well, I’ve put in the file (but not forwarded to anyone) a separate “background check” — the one the press should've done on the Obama candidacy prior to presenting him to the American public — in case this is ever of relevance as things unfold.
As concerned as I was by Obama’s candidacy when I wrote out my November pre-election reservations, truth be known, I didn't much like McCain/Palin either. At the time, I still had hopes that Obama might “govern from the center.” Six months into it, however, I can say that he’s been considerably worse than my worst fears. Thus, I'm updating my evaluation — this time with the fervent hope that by the year-end I can be genuinely more optimistic.
I’ve concluded that not only was Barack Obama too inexperienced to be President, but he also appears to be incompetent as an executive, more-than-just-politician-level-dishonest and a bit of a narcissist (if not a fascist). He seems to have little understanding of American history, her dreams, or her tremendous potential for risk-taking, self-correction and innovation. He and Michelle have turned out to be quintessential Ivy League “Oppression Studies majors” with (carefully concealed) “attitudes.” Obama seems, above all, to be a Community Organizer with shakedown credentials and extraordinary speaking ability. All of this should have been clear -- had we simply done serious background checks.
(The following 4 items, at least, should have been clear to voters:
1. His surrogate father figure was Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed Communist. 2. Barack served as a committed trainer for Community Activist and Marxist, Saul Alinsky.
3. He sat for nearly 2 decades at the feet of Jeremiah Wright, an angry, anti-American “Black Liberation Theologies”.
4. His first autobiography, Dreams from My Father, was almost certainly ghost-written by William Ayers, a Vietnam-era domestic terrorist. [This last assertion has now been supported by careful analysis of syntax, spelling and common errors].) If these unusual threads (standing alone) are discounted to the point of not being disqualifiers, those evaluating Barack Obama might have considered that he'd never:
1. held a job in the private sector
2. managed a payroll
3. led a turnaround
4. held any sort of executive position.
But, none of this mattered in the fall of 2008. After 6 months, I’m left wondering if power brokers on the Far Left of American politics aren't pinching themselves at their success in creating a fictitious character the press ushered to market in a Bush-weary and "politically correct" America. In his second autobiography, The Audacity of Hope, Obama recognizes the advantage of his tabula rasa “creation” when he writes, “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
And, project we did! Thus, the former Barry Soetoro of Honolulu, Jakarta, Mombasa, Occidental, Columbia, Harvard and the mean streets of Chicago moved at light speed from being the first-term senator nobody had ever heard of to President of the United States. In the process, despite numerous efforts, no one has yet seen his birth certificate, his college transcripts, his application to Occidental (likely as a “foreign student”?), or the passport he used to travel in 1981 to Pakistan with buddy Wahid Hamid (likely an Indonesian one?). For some reason, the Obama campaign has, so far, spent $3/4 million keeping these records out of public view. So, it’s easy to wonder -- if they supported Obama’s putative CV -- why not make them available and put to rest all suspicions about provenance, training and politics?
My growing hunch is that there’s virtually no paper trail because the Obama biography has been created largely out of whole cloth. There -- I’ve said what increasing numbers of people must be thinking, but are afraid to voice. Whether or not Obama is more than a cleverly-marketed fiction, and whatever one thinks of his history, one thing is clear. He finally does have a record to evaluate. And, it’s not a confidence-inspiring one from my standpoint.
At best, Obama is an attractive symbol for America and a compelling communicator; but he’s
1. Not an executive. He’s shown an utter inability to focus, to set priorities and to consider 2nd and 3rd order or long-term consequences to his actions. Lack of focus on priorities is fatal as a CEO; (but, maybe less so for a political leader?) 2. Not a steward or fiduciary for America. Obama clearly does not see his primary job as one of overseeing the security and well-being of America during his tenure as its chief executive. He’s not only unwilling to stand up for America, but he also regularly seems to go out of his way to apologize for her history. This makes it apparent that he believes his most important job is to change America into what he and Michelle think it should have been had we not suffered the Founders’ flawed vision.
At worst, Obama’s aims seem truly radical (if stealth); his methods pure Alinsky; and his success derivative of obfuscating the truth, creating crises, and rushing changes into law that no one can possibly absorb under artificial deadlines — all aimed at limiting private property rights, changing the Constitution and forever altering our free market system?
For those who consider Obama’s training and background irrelevant, they can now evaluate him as a Commander-in-Chief and CEO from what he’s done over his first 6 months.
Among many other things, these evidences have come in the form of:
1. A $787B “stimulus” package (sold as preventing a “crisis from becoming catastrophe”)
2. The failure to focus on addressing the banking crisis as “Job One”
3. The migration of TARP funds to non-banking concerns, viz., auto industry
4. Announcing tax increases in the middle of a recession
5. Failure to identify projects to fund job creation (Thus, <10% of stimulus yet spent)
6. Announcing that there would be “no pork” or “earmarks” in the “stimulus” package in order to get it passed without review when there were nearly 10,000 buried in the unread bill (including a $9B high-speed rail line to Las Vegas for Harry Reid)
7. Bailouts of the banking and auto industries
8. The appointment of a 31-year-old to manage the recreation of the auto companies
9. The exalting of union claims above those of bondholders (violating a 200+ year history of contract law/property rights)
10. The appointment of 34 unvetted “czars” -- creating more than in the House of Romanov between 1762 and 1917!
11. The failure to appoint a Cabinet of tax-paying, competent Americans (reason for the move to the Czar system of administration?)
12. The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court despite an apparent lack of qualifications and judicial temperament,
13. The dark-of-night passage of “Cap and Trade” legislation (300-page-long addendum inserted at 3AM the morning of the vote in the House)
14. The high pressure tactics to rush through a budget-busting $1.6T takeover of healthcare.
15. Phony “townhall” meetings with a fake cross-section of Americans selling Obamacare on ABC.
16. “Lying” about budget deficits — projecting 4% GDP growth by year-end. 17. Lying” about job losses — projecting that if Congress would just ram through the “stimulus” that job losses could be halted at 8% (currently on their way to 10% and rising).
18. “Lying” about the costs of nationalized healthcare -- (just as when politicians projected Medicare’s cost in 1990 to be $3 billion, its actual cost turned out in 1990 to $98 billion — 30 times as much)
19. Pretending that new entitlement programs will provide lower costs, better care, no significant tax increases, more competition (as government joins the fray!?) and keeping current private options. Claiming “free” healthcare will make America more competitive is baffling. Everyone knows the above are lies; but no one seems ready to call them out.
20. Forcing the “stimulus” package on states to impinge on “States Rights”
21. Failing to support the freedom-loving citizens in Honduras and Iran (and instead, giving comfort to their dictators) to say nothing of his ineffectiveness with North Korea and anti-Israeli pronouncements.
22. Allocating $4B of “stimulus” funds to ACORN, the voter fraud thugs.
23. Seeking to push through Union Card Check, the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” and threats to take away 2nd amendment rights (see Eric Holder), etc.
24. Moving the heretofore non-partisan census into the Whitehouse under the direction of Rahm Emanuel.
Whatever one thinks of the results, the process of getting to them shoul d bother all Americans. In the Obama (Mayor Daley?) style of governing, it’s not clear that Congress — who can’t possibly process thoughtfully the blizzard of legislation — really serves any useful purpose other than to provide Politburo-style cover. Not only does Congress no longer debate legislation, but Obama has effectively circumvented its oversight of the executive branch by his appointment of czars.
In contrast to the direction Obama is taking us all, the Economist recently pointed out that 53% of all of the jobs created in the U.S. were created in one state last year: Texas (the most free market of all State economies and the “last best hope” [ha!] for secession?). Meanwhile, in California, -- as a perfect preview to “Obama’s America” -- job losses are already well into double digits, the state faces a $25B budget deficit and is closing down services and considering bankruptcy. I cannot predict what will happen to Obama’s popularity, as people wake up to the size and intractability of the deficits he’s promoting, the unavailability of credit for small businesses, or the increased tax rates on energy and payrolls provoking a continuing loss of jobs as small businesses shed employees due to skyrocketing costs.
Is bad economic news bad for Obama? Sadly, the answer, if one studies the Alinsky formula for bloodless revolution, is “Heck no!” Indeed, high unemployment is necessary for the Obama Redistribution Plan. According to Alinsky, only with high unemployment will people look to the government for help (and then become dependent), allowing government to gain control over the factors of productions. If one considers that the Alinsky manual might be Obama’s “playbook,” one can’t help but want to evaluate how closely it’s being followed.
Thus, in evaluating Obama’s performance, it’s probably worth noting (for the 6-month record) the key elements of the Alinsky formula. Written in 1971 by Chicago Organizer, Saul Alinsky, under the title of Rules for Radicals, this manual for effective change became Young Barack Obama’s “bible.” David Alinsky, son the author said of our new President: “Barack Obama patterned himself after the Saul Alinsky model in everything he has done since arriving in South Chicago.”
Alinsky clearly stated its purpose: “Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.”
Note how closely Obama is following the rules for internal revolution, based on Alinsky’s specific instructions: 1. Pursue an “Ideology of Change” (Alinsky’s phrase for the most effective way to market revolution)
2. Target the banks that serve the steel, auto, and other industries.
3. Start class warfare -- Fuel the anger of what Alinsky calls the “Have-Nots,” and the “Have-some-but-want-mores” against the “Haves.”
4. Use crises to create fear.
5. Use pollution as a foil to grab power.
6. Set up “jobs programs” to make workers dependent on government.
7. Show supreme self-confidence.
8. Make communication skills your key weapon.
9. Use simple catch phrases and vague slogans (‘Of the Common Welfare, [Nazi takeover of Germany], ‘Bread and Peace,’ [Bolshevik Revolution]) In this context, it’s not hard to imagine that Change & The Audacity of Hope will one day be seen as the battle cry for the Obama revolution.
10. Use deception --“…in war the end justifies almost any mea ns.”
11. Remain calm, appealing, likeable while inciting fear, conflict, defeat.
As these steps are being pursued, the press continues to refer to "the Republican recession," so Obama’s popularity remains high. Any who saw tapes of President Bush warning Congress (on two separate occasions) that the market was headed for disaster unless it instituted the very reforms Barney Frank and Chris Dodd pooh-poohed, may be surprised to see the level of “cover” the press is providing this revolution.
As bleak as things look for free markets, I have hope. Why? Just as Bernie Madoff learned that ponzi schemes eventually come to light — Barack Obama may soon learn that you “can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” It’s unclear to me how much and how long America will have to pay for its experiment with Obamunism — his fantasy “green jobs,” his new taxes, his junk science, his czars, his meddling in the auto and banking industries, his sure-to-be-disastrous Obamacare and the encouragement he’s giving to union bosses, dictators and tyrants the globe over, to say nothing of his "Peace-through-Weakness” foreign policy. But, at some point, reality will take over, as it always does. I just hope America will have its Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan ready to step into the breach when the time comes.
So far, the nervousness of Blue Dog Democrats and their ability to resist some of the wackier directives has been the only thing that has kept Obama from an outright failing grade, in my view. Perhaps, just as the Gingrich Congress rescued Bill Clinton, it may be these so-called Blue Dogs that rescue Obama. If not, it may be important for the survival of the union for government to be forever split between the parties.
Additional comments:
I really hope large numbers of people will simply do their homework and research the ties among the Czars and others who surround this Administration. Once people see the connections of the families that go back to the 40s and 50s with the Communist Party and the Alinsky radicals of the 60s I’m confident they will be very afraid. We truly have a frightening convergence of revolutionary players in our current government. That’s just one side. Then there’s the FED, Treasury, Big Bank connection which now controls the mortgage markets, insurance markets, many of our largest companies, and soon the healthcare industry. All in all a pretty scary scenario.
My 6 Month Evaluation of the Obama Presidency
In November 2008, I wrote my evaluation of the Obama candidacy and what it might mean to America. I filed this away, but sent it to family members and a few close friends and associates just so I'd be accountable for my real time observations. It’s now been 6 months since Obama’s inauguration. (In the business world, this is typically when a first job review would occur; so, I made a note to myself to revisit his performance on the 6-month anniversary.) Thus, I now commit to filing my mid-year evaluation of our new President. As well, I’ve put in the file (but not forwarded to anyone) a separate “background check” — the one the press should've done on the Obama candidacy prior to presenting him to the American public — in case this is ever of relevance as things unfold.
As concerned as I was by Obama’s candidacy when I wrote out my November pre-election reservations, truth be known, I didn't much like McCain/Palin either. At the time, I still had hopes that Obama might “govern from the center.” Six months into it, however, I can say that he’s been considerably worse than my worst fears. Thus, I'm updating my evaluation — this time with the fervent hope that by the year-end I can be genuinely more optimistic.
I’ve concluded that not only was Barack Obama too inexperienced to be President, but he also appears to be incompetent as an executive, more-than-just-politician-level-dishonest and a bit of a narcissist (if not a fascist). He seems to have little understanding of American history, her dreams, or her tremendous potential for risk-taking, self-correction and innovation. He and Michelle have turned out to be quintessential Ivy League “Oppression Studies majors” with (carefully concealed) “attitudes.” Obama seems, above all, to be a Community Organizer with shakedown credentials and extraordinary speaking ability. All of this should have been clear -- had we simply done serious background checks.
(The following 4 items, at least, should have been clear to voters:
1. His surrogate father figure was Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed Communist. 2. Barack served as a committed trainer for Community Activist and Marxist, Saul Alinsky.
3. He sat for nearly 2 decades at the feet of Jeremiah Wright, an angry, anti-American “Black Liberation Theologies”.
4. His first autobiography, Dreams from My Father, was almost certainly ghost-written by William Ayers, a Vietnam-era domestic terrorist. [This last assertion has now been supported by careful analysis of syntax, spelling and common errors].) If these unusual threads (standing alone) are discounted to the point of not being disqualifiers, those evaluating Barack Obama might have considered that he'd never:
1. held a job in the private sector
2. managed a payroll
3. led a turnaround
4. held any sort of executive position.
But, none of this mattered in the fall of 2008. After 6 months, I’m left wondering if power brokers on the Far Left of American politics aren't pinching themselves at their success in creating a fictitious character the press ushered to market in a Bush-weary and "politically correct" America. In his second autobiography, The Audacity of Hope, Obama recognizes the advantage of his tabula rasa “creation” when he writes, “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
And, project we did! Thus, the former Barry Soetoro of Honolulu, Jakarta, Mombasa, Occidental, Columbia, Harvard and the mean streets of Chicago moved at light speed from being the first-term senator nobody had ever heard of to President of the United States. In the process, despite numerous efforts, no one has yet seen his birth certificate, his college transcripts, his application to Occidental (likely as a “foreign student”?), or the passport he used to travel in 1981 to Pakistan with buddy Wahid Hamid (likely an Indonesian one?). For some reason, the Obama campaign has, so far, spent $3/4 million keeping these records out of public view. So, it’s easy to wonder -- if they supported Obama’s putative CV -- why not make them available and put to rest all suspicions about provenance, training and politics?
My growing hunch is that there’s virtually no paper trail because the Obama biography has been created largely out of whole cloth. There -- I’ve said what increasing numbers of people must be thinking, but are afraid to voice. Whether or not Obama is more than a cleverly-marketed fiction, and whatever one thinks of his history, one thing is clear. He finally does have a record to evaluate. And, it’s not a confidence-inspiring one from my standpoint.
At best, Obama is an attractive symbol for America and a compelling communicator; but he’s
1. Not an executive. He’s shown an utter inability to focus, to set priorities and to consider 2nd and 3rd order or long-term consequences to his actions. Lack of focus on priorities is fatal as a CEO; (but, maybe less so for a political leader?) 2. Not a steward or fiduciary for America. Obama clearly does not see his primary job as one of overseeing the security and well-being of America during his tenure as its chief executive. He’s not only unwilling to stand up for America, but he also regularly seems to go out of his way to apologize for her history. This makes it apparent that he believes his most important job is to change America into what he and Michelle think it should have been had we not suffered the Founders’ flawed vision.
At worst, Obama’s aims seem truly radical (if stealth); his methods pure Alinsky; and his success derivative of obfuscating the truth, creating crises, and rushing changes into law that no one can possibly absorb under artificial deadlines — all aimed at limiting private property rights, changing the Constitution and forever altering our free market system?
For those who consider Obama’s training and background irrelevant, they can now evaluate him as a Commander-in-Chief and CEO from what he’s done over his first 6 months.
Among many other things, these evidences have come in the form of:
1. A $787B “stimulus” package (sold as preventing a “crisis from becoming catastrophe”)
2. The failure to focus on addressing the banking crisis as “Job One”
3. The migration of TARP funds to non-banking concerns, viz., auto industry
4. Announcing tax increases in the middle of a recession
5. Failure to identify projects to fund job creation (Thus, <10% of stimulus yet spent)
6. Announcing that there would be “no pork” or “earmarks” in the “stimulus” package in order to get it passed without review when there were nearly 10,000 buried in the unread bill (including a $9B high-speed rail line to Las Vegas for Harry Reid)
7. Bailouts of the banking and auto industries
8. The appointment of a 31-year-old to manage the recreation of the auto companies
9. The exalting of union claims above those of bondholders (violating a 200+ year history of contract law/property rights)
10. The appointment of 34 unvetted “czars” -- creating more than in the House of Romanov between 1762 and 1917!
11. The failure to appoint a Cabinet of tax-paying, competent Americans (reason for the move to the Czar system of administration?)
12. The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court despite an apparent lack of qualifications and judicial temperament,
13. The dark-of-night passage of “Cap and Trade” legislation (300-page-long addendum inserted at 3AM the morning of the vote in the House)
14. The high pressure tactics to rush through a budget-busting $1.6T takeover of healthcare.
15. Phony “townhall” meetings with a fake cross-section of Americans selling Obamacare on ABC.
16. “Lying” about budget deficits — projecting 4% GDP growth by year-end. 17. Lying” about job losses — projecting that if Congress would just ram through the “stimulus” that job losses could be halted at 8% (currently on their way to 10% and rising).
18. “Lying” about the costs of nationalized healthcare -- (just as when politicians projected Medicare’s cost in 1990 to be $3 billion, its actual cost turned out in 1990 to $98 billion — 30 times as much)
19. Pretending that new entitlement programs will provide lower costs, better care, no significant tax increases, more competition (as government joins the fray!?) and keeping current private options. Claiming “free” healthcare will make America more competitive is baffling. Everyone knows the above are lies; but no one seems ready to call them out.
20. Forcing the “stimulus” package on states to impinge on “States Rights”
21. Failing to support the freedom-loving citizens in Honduras and Iran (and instead, giving comfort to their dictators) to say nothing of his ineffectiveness with North Korea and anti-Israeli pronouncements.
22. Allocating $4B of “stimulus” funds to ACORN, the voter fraud thugs.
23. Seeking to push through Union Card Check, the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” and threats to take away 2nd amendment rights (see Eric Holder), etc.
24. Moving the heretofore non-partisan census into the Whitehouse under the direction of Rahm Emanuel.
Whatever one thinks of the results, the process of getting to them shoul d bother all Americans. In the Obama (Mayor Daley?) style of governing, it’s not clear that Congress — who can’t possibly process thoughtfully the blizzard of legislation — really serves any useful purpose other than to provide Politburo-style cover. Not only does Congress no longer debate legislation, but Obama has effectively circumvented its oversight of the executive branch by his appointment of czars.
In contrast to the direction Obama is taking us all, the Economist recently pointed out that 53% of all of the jobs created in the U.S. were created in one state last year: Texas (the most free market of all State economies and the “last best hope” [ha!] for secession?). Meanwhile, in California, -- as a perfect preview to “Obama’s America” -- job losses are already well into double digits, the state faces a $25B budget deficit and is closing down services and considering bankruptcy. I cannot predict what will happen to Obama’s popularity, as people wake up to the size and intractability of the deficits he’s promoting, the unavailability of credit for small businesses, or the increased tax rates on energy and payrolls provoking a continuing loss of jobs as small businesses shed employees due to skyrocketing costs.
Is bad economic news bad for Obama? Sadly, the answer, if one studies the Alinsky formula for bloodless revolution, is “Heck no!” Indeed, high unemployment is necessary for the Obama Redistribution Plan. According to Alinsky, only with high unemployment will people look to the government for help (and then become dependent), allowing government to gain control over the factors of productions. If one considers that the Alinsky manual might be Obama’s “playbook,” one can’t help but want to evaluate how closely it’s being followed.
Thus, in evaluating Obama’s performance, it’s probably worth noting (for the 6-month record) the key elements of the Alinsky formula. Written in 1971 by Chicago Organizer, Saul Alinsky, under the title of Rules for Radicals, this manual for effective change became Young Barack Obama’s “bible.” David Alinsky, son the author said of our new President: “Barack Obama patterned himself after the Saul Alinsky model in everything he has done since arriving in South Chicago.”
Alinsky clearly stated its purpose: “Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.”
Note how closely Obama is following the rules for internal revolution, based on Alinsky’s specific instructions: 1. Pursue an “Ideology of Change” (Alinsky’s phrase for the most effective way to market revolution)
2. Target the banks that serve the steel, auto, and other industries.
3. Start class warfare -- Fuel the anger of what Alinsky calls the “Have-Nots,” and the “Have-some-but-want-mores” against the “Haves.”
4. Use crises to create fear.
5. Use pollution as a foil to grab power.
6. Set up “jobs programs” to make workers dependent on government.
7. Show supreme self-confidence.
8. Make communication skills your key weapon.
9. Use simple catch phrases and vague slogans (‘Of the Common Welfare, [Nazi takeover of Germany], ‘Bread and Peace,’ [Bolshevik Revolution]) In this context, it’s not hard to imagine that Change & The Audacity of Hope will one day be seen as the battle cry for the Obama revolution.
10. Use deception --“…in war the end justifies almost any mea ns.”
11. Remain calm, appealing, likeable while inciting fear, conflict, defeat.
As these steps are being pursued, the press continues to refer to "the Republican recession," so Obama’s popularity remains high. Any who saw tapes of President Bush warning Congress (on two separate occasions) that the market was headed for disaster unless it instituted the very reforms Barney Frank and Chris Dodd pooh-poohed, may be surprised to see the level of “cover” the press is providing this revolution.
As bleak as things look for free markets, I have hope. Why? Just as Bernie Madoff learned that ponzi schemes eventually come to light — Barack Obama may soon learn that you “can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” It’s unclear to me how much and how long America will have to pay for its experiment with Obamunism — his fantasy “green jobs,” his new taxes, his junk science, his czars, his meddling in the auto and banking industries, his sure-to-be-disastrous Obamacare and the encouragement he’s giving to union bosses, dictators and tyrants the globe over, to say nothing of his "Peace-through-Weakness” foreign policy. But, at some point, reality will take over, as it always does. I just hope America will have its Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan ready to step into the breach when the time comes.
So far, the nervousness of Blue Dog Democrats and their ability to resist some of the wackier directives has been the only thing that has kept Obama from an outright failing grade, in my view. Perhaps, just as the Gingrich Congress rescued Bill Clinton, it may be these so-called Blue Dogs that rescue Obama. If not, it may be important for the survival of the union for government to be forever split between the parties.
Additional comments:
I really hope large numbers of people will simply do their homework and research the ties among the Czars and others who surround this Administration. Once people see the connections of the families that go back to the 40s and 50s with the Communist Party and the Alinsky radicals of the 60s I’m confident they will be very afraid. We truly have a frightening convergence of revolutionary players in our current government. That’s just one side. Then there’s the FED, Treasury, Big Bank connection which now controls the mortgage markets, insurance markets, many of our largest companies, and soon the healthcare industry. All in all a pretty scary scenario.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
On View On AARP
>
> This is a letter to the AARP. It is a must read regardless of your age.
> Some people just make sense in what they say. This lady certainly does.
AARP forgot who made them... They let their greed to sell more insurance overshadow their role of representing seniors. Do not forget that AARP although they present themselves as an advocate for the seniors are also a huge profit making Corp... They have many businesses they run behind the AARP banner and insurance is a huge one...
--------- ---------- ----------
>
> This was sent to Mr. Rand, the Executive Director of AARP
>
> Dear Mr. Rand:
>
> Recently you sent us a letter encouraging us to renew our lapsed membership
> in AARP by the requested date. I know it is not what you were looking for,
> but this is the most honest response I can give you. Our gap in coverage is
> merely a microscopic symptom of the real problem, a deepening lack of faith.
>
>
> While we have proudly maintained our membership for several years and have
> long admired the AARP goals and principles, regrettably, we can no longer
> endorse it's abdication of our values. Your letter specifically stated that
> we can count on AARP to speak up for our rights, yet the voice we hear is
> not ours. Your offer of being kept up to date on important issues through
> DIVIDED WE FAIL presents neither an impartial view nor the one we have come
> to embrace. We do believe that when two parties agree all the time on
> everything presented to them, one is probably not necessary. But, when the
> opinions and long term goals are diametrically opposed, the divorce is
> imminent. This is the philosophy which spawned our 200 years of government..
>
> Once upon a time, we looked forward to being part of the senior demographic.
> We also looked to AARP to provide certain benefits and give our voice a
> power we could not possibly hope to achieve on our own. AARP gave us a sense
> of belonging which we no longer enjoy. The Socialist politics practiced by
> the Obama administration and empowered by AARP serves only to raise the
> blood pressure my medical insurance strives to contain. Clearly a conflict
> of interest there!
>
> We do not understand the AARP posture, feel greatly betrayed by the guiding
> forces whom we expected to map out our senior years and leave your ranks
> with a great sense of regret. We mitigate that disappointment with the
> relief of knowing that we are not contributing to the problem anymore by
> renewing our membership. There are numerous other organizations which offer
> discounts without threatening our way of life or offending our
> sensibilities.
>
> This Presidential Administration scares the living daylights out of us. Not
> just for ourselves, but for our proud and bloodstained heritage, but even
> more importantly for our children and grandchildren. Washington has rendered
> Soylent Green a prophetic cautionary tale rather than a nonfiction scare
> tactic. I have never in my life endorsed any militant or radical groups, yet
> now I find myself listening to them. I don't have to agree with them to
> appreciate the fear which birthed their existence. Their borderline insanity
> presents little more than a balance to the voice of the Socialist mind set
> in power. Perhaps I became American by a great stroke of luck in some cosmic
> uterine lottery, but in my adulthood I CHOOSE to embrace it and nurture the
> freedoms it represents as well as the responsibilities it requires.
>
> Your website generously offers us the opportunity to receive all
> communication in Spanish. ARE YOU KIDDING??? Someone has broken into our
> 'house,' invaded our home without our invitation or consent. The President
> has insisted we keep the perpetrator in comfort and learn the perp's
> language, so we can communicate our reluctant welcome to them.
>
>
> I DON'T choose to welcome them. I DON'T choose to support them. I DON'T
> choose to educate them. I DON'T choose to medicate them, pay for their food
> or clothing.
>
>
> American home invaders get arrested. Please explain to me why foreign
> lawbreakers can enjoy privileges on American soil that Americans do not get?
> Why do some immigrants have to play the game to be welcomed and others only
> have to break & enter to be welcomed?
>
> We travel for a living. Walt hauls horses all over this great country,
> averaging over 10,000 miles a month when he is out there. He meets more
> people than a politician on caffeine overdose. Of all the many good folks he
> enjoyed on this last 10,000 miles, this trip yielded only ONE supporter of
> the current administration. One of us is out of touch with mainstream
> America. Since our poll is conducted without funding, I have more faith in
> it than one which is power driven.
>
> We have decided to forward this to everyone on our mailing list, and will
> encourage them to do the same. With several hundred in my address book, I
> have every faith that the eventual exponential factor will make a credible
> statement to you.
>
> I am disappointed as hell. I am scared as hell. I am MAD as hell, and I'm
> NOT gonna take it anymore!
>
>
> Walt & Cyndy Miller Farms Equine Transport
> This is a letter to the AARP. It is a must read regardless of your age.
> Some people just make sense in what they say. This lady certainly does.
AARP forgot who made them... They let their greed to sell more insurance overshadow their role of representing seniors. Do not forget that AARP although they present themselves as an advocate for the seniors are also a huge profit making Corp... They have many businesses they run behind the AARP banner and insurance is a huge one...
--------- ---------- ----------
>
> This was sent to Mr. Rand, the Executive Director of AARP
>
> Dear Mr. Rand:
>
> Recently you sent us a letter encouraging us to renew our lapsed membership
> in AARP by the requested date. I know it is not what you were looking for,
> but this is the most honest response I can give you. Our gap in coverage is
> merely a microscopic symptom of the real problem, a deepening lack of faith.
>
>
> While we have proudly maintained our membership for several years and have
> long admired the AARP goals and principles, regrettably, we can no longer
> endorse it's abdication of our values. Your letter specifically stated that
> we can count on AARP to speak up for our rights, yet the voice we hear is
> not ours. Your offer of being kept up to date on important issues through
> DIVIDED WE FAIL presents neither an impartial view nor the one we have come
> to embrace. We do believe that when two parties agree all the time on
> everything presented to them, one is probably not necessary. But, when the
> opinions and long term goals are diametrically opposed, the divorce is
> imminent. This is the philosophy which spawned our 200 years of government..
>
> Once upon a time, we looked forward to being part of the senior demographic.
> We also looked to AARP to provide certain benefits and give our voice a
> power we could not possibly hope to achieve on our own. AARP gave us a sense
> of belonging which we no longer enjoy. The Socialist politics practiced by
> the Obama administration and empowered by AARP serves only to raise the
> blood pressure my medical insurance strives to contain. Clearly a conflict
> of interest there!
>
> We do not understand the AARP posture, feel greatly betrayed by the guiding
> forces whom we expected to map out our senior years and leave your ranks
> with a great sense of regret. We mitigate that disappointment with the
> relief of knowing that we are not contributing to the problem anymore by
> renewing our membership. There are numerous other organizations which offer
> discounts without threatening our way of life or offending our
> sensibilities.
>
> This Presidential Administration scares the living daylights out of us. Not
> just for ourselves, but for our proud and bloodstained heritage, but even
> more importantly for our children and grandchildren. Washington has rendered
> Soylent Green a prophetic cautionary tale rather than a nonfiction scare
> tactic. I have never in my life endorsed any militant or radical groups, yet
> now I find myself listening to them. I don't have to agree with them to
> appreciate the fear which birthed their existence. Their borderline insanity
> presents little more than a balance to the voice of the Socialist mind set
> in power. Perhaps I became American by a great stroke of luck in some cosmic
> uterine lottery, but in my adulthood I CHOOSE to embrace it and nurture the
> freedoms it represents as well as the responsibilities it requires.
>
> Your website generously offers us the opportunity to receive all
> communication in Spanish. ARE YOU KIDDING??? Someone has broken into our
> 'house,' invaded our home without our invitation or consent. The President
> has insisted we keep the perpetrator in comfort and learn the perp's
> language, so we can communicate our reluctant welcome to them.
>
>
> I DON'T choose to welcome them. I DON'T choose to support them. I DON'T
> choose to educate them. I DON'T choose to medicate them, pay for their food
> or clothing.
>
>
> American home invaders get arrested. Please explain to me why foreign
> lawbreakers can enjoy privileges on American soil that Americans do not get?
> Why do some immigrants have to play the game to be welcomed and others only
> have to break & enter to be welcomed?
>
> We travel for a living. Walt hauls horses all over this great country,
> averaging over 10,000 miles a month when he is out there. He meets more
> people than a politician on caffeine overdose. Of all the many good folks he
> enjoyed on this last 10,000 miles, this trip yielded only ONE supporter of
> the current administration. One of us is out of touch with mainstream
> America. Since our poll is conducted without funding, I have more faith in
> it than one which is power driven.
>
> We have decided to forward this to everyone on our mailing list, and will
> encourage them to do the same. With several hundred in my address book, I
> have every faith that the eventual exponential factor will make a credible
> statement to you.
>
> I am disappointed as hell. I am scared as hell. I am MAD as hell, and I'm
> NOT gonna take it anymore!
>
>
> Walt & Cyndy Miller Farms Equine Transport
Government Record on Managing Things
The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 - you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke.
Social Security was established in 1935 - you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.
The "War on Poverty" started in 1964 - you have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked and our entire country is going broke.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - you've had 44 years to get it right; they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - you have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.
Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the "Stimulus", the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none show any signs of working.
And finally, to set a new record:
"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress' generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments.
So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record that proves that "services" you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system?
16% of our entire economy?
With all due respect,
You really think we are that stupid?
Social Security was established in 1935 - you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.
The "War on Poverty" started in 1964 - you have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked and our entire country is going broke.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - you've had 44 years to get it right; they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - you have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.
Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the "Stimulus", the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none show any signs of working.
And finally, to set a new record:
"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress' generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments.
So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record that proves that "services" you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system?
16% of our entire economy?
With all due respect,
You really think we are that stupid?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)