The Big Kahuna keeps bringing in the talent! Enjoy the “Random Thoughts” of a most
interesting gentleman. You may contact
him here.
I hope my "random
thoughts" won't be too overbearing. I am a 10 year Marine veteran
who served proudly, including in Vietnam. I then became a Federal
Officer, with a specialty in intelligence, among other things for 30
years. I retired a few years ago after a 40 year career so I try to
be politically aware. I am told by some
that I skate on the razor's edge between balance and a radical
opinion.
I love this country, I
prefer a Republic, not Marxism or "social democracy”, and I tend to be
very conservative on many topics, including: the value of life, duty, family,
accepting responsibility for ones' actions, honor, and justice. I seek
TRUTH in its many forms, but I believe many are afraid of it.
Updated 06/08/08
I am constantly amazed at how idiotic some in our
nation are. I have actually heard citizens who claim to be conservative
say they will vote for Obama rather than for McCain because he McCain is not
conservative enough for them!
How amazingly STUPID is that? They will
vote for an inexperienced, vapid, vacant charlatan, who is of questionable
religious beliefs, has demonstrated racial bias toward whites, a tendency
toward leftist radicalism, a friend of Muslims and the Nation of Islam, and has
no evident experience to qualify him for the presidency, rather
than vote for a true American hero who has more positive traits and experience than
negative ones. He is imminently qualified to be Commander-in-Chief.
Barry Barrack Hussein Obama's platform is out of
the Communist Manifesto, to whit: Big Government, higher taxes and
equalization of wealth, nationalism of big business, universal tax-payer
funded health care, increased welfare, restriction of free-speech, decrease in
military efficiency and capability, elimination of military research and
development, increased abortion on demand, restriction of ability to buy and
bear arms, elimination of "In God Trust" on all currency (this has
already started under the Democrat Congress and Senate), Black Theology
radicalism added to educational courses (brain-washing of our children and
grandchildren), and other liberal programs yet unnamed.
Anyone who stays home, or votes liberal in this
election only contributes to our "Idiocracy" and the fall of the once
great American Republic. Communism fails whenever it is tried, and it
leaves behind a devastated country filled with a depressed populace who wander
around lost. Immigrants flock to the U.S. to get away from rampant
socialism/communism, and now under Barrack and the liberal majority we face a
dim future ruled by a Big Brother Government.
When faced with what one perceives to be two evils,
always vote for the least of them. Vote John McCain. Save the
nation. God bless America.
Mr. Veritas
John
McCain's Sons
Talk about putting your most valuable where your mouth is! Apparently
this was not 'newsworthy' enough for the media to comment about. Can
either of the other presidential candidates truthfully come close to this? ...
Just a question for each of us to seek an answer, and not a statement.
You
see...character is what's shown when the public is not looking. There
were no cameras or press invited to what you are about to read about, and the
story comes from one person in New Hampshire.
One
evening last July, Senator John McCain of Arizona arrived at the New Hampshire
home of Erin Flanagan for sandwiches, chocolate-chip cookies and a heartfelt
talk about Iraq. They had met at a presidential debate, when she asked the
candidates what they would do to bring home American soldiers - - soldiers like
her brother, who had been killed in action a few months earlier.
Mr. McCain did not bring cameras or press. Instead, he brought his youngest
son, James McCain, 19, then a private first class in the Marine Corps about to
leave for Iraq. Father and son sat down to hear more about Ms. Flanagan's
brother Michael Cleary, a 24-year-old Army First Lieutenant killed by an ambush
.. a roadside bomb.
No one mentioned the obvious: In just days, Jimmy McCain could face similar
perils. 'I can't imagine what it must have been like for them as they
were coming to meet with a family that ......'
Ms. Flanagan recalled, choking up. 'We lost a dear one,' she finished.
Mr. McCain, now the presumptive Republican nominee, has staked his candidacy on
the promise that American troops can bring stability to Iraq. What he
almost never says is that one of them is his own son, who spent seven months
patrolling Anbar Province and learned of his father's New Hampshire victory in January
while he was digging a stuck military vehicle out of the mud.
Two of Jimmy's three older brothers went into the military. Doug McCain, 48,
was a Navy pilot. Jack McCain, 21, is to graduate from the Naval Academy
next year, raising the chances that his father, if elected, could become the
first president since Dwight D. Eisenhower with a son at war.
I
chose to share this with those who I believe will pass it on, to others who
will pass it on. We hear so much inflated trash out there. How about a
simple act of kindness ... and dedication to others placed above oneself?
Has anybody heard if Barack Hussein Obama has served in The American Armed
Services?
This is for all you Barack voters.
From Barack's book, Audacity of Hope:
'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly
direction.'
HE DID NOT SAY STAND WITH AMERICANS!!!!!
The Black Messiah
Barry Barrack Hussein Obama is the presumptive
Democrat nominee for president, and leftists, Muslims, communists and social
liberals around the world can now celebrate. If elected Mr. Obama will be
the most liberal President of the United States since Jimmy Carter. And
what a presidential disaster Jimmy Carter was, and is!
If elected, Obama will lead this nation toward a
Big Government socialist state. He is for: Big Government, Nationalized
Health Care, higher taxes on the middle class and big business, increased
welfare, increased affirmative action, and countless social welfare programs
that will drain funds from the productive to support the non-productive in our
society. Every platform plank he describes will cost the tax-payers of
this great nation more in unfair, and ill-used taxes.
He wants to bring change to America. The
major change that is needed is the death of liberalism So far the change
he has effected as candidate Obama is an increase in black racism, white
hatred, religious vitriol, increase is radicalism and a threat to freedom of
speech. Can the U.S. survive the "change" that is to come
in an Obama administration?
Barry Barrack Hussein Obama claims to be
qualified for the presidency and he wants to bring change to Washington, D.
C. Can anyone state factually anything Obama has done since he was an
activist in Chicago? Can anyone prove any change to Illinois or for that
matter Chicago since Obama has been in politics?
Has Obama reduced lawlessness in Chicago's
South-side. Has he sponsored any law to reduce black on black crime in
Illinois, or prosecute out-of-control gang violence in Chicago? Has
he done anything to protect the elderly, young, rich, poor, and innocent from
abuse on the streets of cities in Illinois?
The answer is a resounding NO! If he can
not change Illinois how can he change anything in the 60 states he believes
make up the United States? Any honest, thinking, sober, astute person of
any political party whose head is not firmly jammed up their anal cavity must
understand that Obama can't change America in any positive way. He has no
accomplishments, no experience and no vision. Wake up America. Vote
wisely. God bless America in this time of need!
The following email is
currently making the rounds:
Theodore Roosevelt's
ideas on immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here
in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be
treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to
discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American,
and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegi ance here. Any man
who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.
We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one
language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one
sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Editorial Note: A little more research brought forth
more comments on the subject:
Although Roosevelt did not hold public office again after leaving
the presidency in 1909 (his efforts to regain the White House as a third party
candidate in 1912 proving unsuccessful), he remained active in the public
political sphere; in the waning years of his life, as World War I raged in
Europe and America entered the conflict on the side of the Allies, he
frequently spoke of his belief that immigrants taking up residence in the U.S.
should assimilate into American society as quickly as possible, learn the
English language, eschew hyphenated national identities (e.g.,
"Italian-American") and declare their primary national allegiance to
the United States of America.
On 1 February 1916, for example, Roosevelt advocated measures for strengthening
and ensuring the "loyalty" of American immigrants:
Theodore Roosevelt, speaking at a luncheon given
yesterday by Mrs. Vincent Astor for the National Americanization Committee in
the Astor Court Building, declared that one of the reasons why many
German-Americans have shown greater love for their native land that for their
adopted country is that the German system demands greater loyalty than is
demanded in this country, and a greater contribution to the common welfare.
"And all of you know I am free from a taint of neutrality," he added,
"so I can say this without suspicion."
The encouragement of better housing conditions and a compulsion to learn the
English language, Colonel Roosevelt said, would help the process of
Americanization.
"We cannot make the Americanization movement a success," Colonel
Roosevelt said, "unless we approach it from the economic standpoint. It is
true that governmentally Germany is an autocracy. But there has been a great
deal more industrial freedom there than many of our old industrial communities.
The German Government says we expect you to work out good results, to get
together with the laborer, and yourselves decide what you are going to pay to
the doctors who are to pass upon the health of the employes, and the amount of
damages any employee merits. The Government insists upon a great amount of
self-government by the people themselves.
"I feel that by insistence upon proper housing conditions we shall indirectly
approach this. I want to see the immigrant know that he has got to spend a
certain amount of his money in decent housing; that he will not be allowed to
live on $2.50 per month board basis.
"Let us say to the immigrant not that we hope he will learn English, but
that he has got to learn it. Let the immigrant who does not learn it go back.
He has got to consider the interest of the United States or he should not stay
here. He must be made to see that his opportunities in this country depend upon
his knowing English and observing American standards. The employer cannot be
permitted to regard him only as an industrial asset.
"We must in every way possible encourage the immigrant to rise, help him
up, give him a chance to help himself. If we try to carry him he may well prove
not well worth carrying. We must in turn insist upon his showing the same
standard of fealty to this country and to join with us in raising the level of
our common American citizenship.
"If I could I would have the kind of restriction which would not allow any
immigrant to come here unless I was content that his grandchildren would be
fellow-citizens of my grandchildren. They will not be so if he lives in a
boarding house at $2.50 per month with ten other boarders and contracts tuberculosis
and contributes to the next generation a body of citizens inferior not only
morally and spiritually but also physically."1
A few months later,
Roosevelt expanded on this theme in a series of Memorial Day speeches he
delivered in St. Louis:
Moral treason to the United States was charged by
Mr. Roosevelt, in an address delivered before the City Club, against
German-Americans who seek to make their governmental representatives act in the
interests of Germany rather than this country. He characterized the
German-American Alliance as "an anti-American alliance," but added
that he believed that its members "not only do not represent but
scandalously misrepresent" the great majority of real Americans of German
origin.
Using the motto "America for Americans" for all Americans, whether
they were born here or abroad, the former President declared that "the
salvation of our people lies in having a nationalized and unified America,
ready for the tremendous tasks of both war and peace."
"I appeal to all our citizens," the colonel said, "no matter
from what land their forefathers came, to keep this ever in mind, and to shun
with scorn and contempt the sinister intriguers and mischiefmakers who would
seek to divide them along lines of creed, or birthplace or of national
origin."
Col. Roosevelt said he came to St. Louis to speak on Americanism — to speak of
and condemn the use of the hyphen "whenever it represents an effort to
form political parties along racial lines or to bring pressure to bear on
parties and politicians, not for American purposes, but in the interest of some
group of voters of a certain national origin or of the country from which they
or their fathers came."
He was equally against the native American of the wrong kind and for the immigrant
of the right kind, the former President declared, but the immigrant who did not
become in good faith an American "is out of place" in the United
States. He said each nation should be judged by its conduct and that the United
States should oppose encroachment on its own rights, whether Germany, England,
France or Russia be guilty of misconduct.
"The effort to keep our citizenship divided against itself," the
colonel continued, "by the use of the hyphen and along the lines of
national origin is certain to a breed of spirit of bitterness and prejudice and
dislike between great bodies of our citizens. If some citizens band together as
German-Americans or Irish-Americans, then after a while others are certain to
band together as English-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans, and every such
banding together, every attempt to make for political purposes a
German-American alliance or a Scandinavian-American alliance, means down at the
bottom an effort against the interest of straight-out American citizenship, an
effort to bring into our nation the bitter Old World rivalries and jealousies
and hatreds."2
In a Fourth of July
speech in 1917, Roosevelt urged the adoption of linguistic uniformity,
including a requirement that all foreign-language newspapers published in the
U.S. should also include English translations:
Touching on the matter
of language, Col. Roosevelt declared that "We must have in this country
but one flag, and for the speech of the people but one language, the English
language. During the present war all newspapers published in German, or in the
speech of any of our foes, should be required to publish, side by side with the
foreign text, columns in English containing the exact translation of everything
said in the foreign language. Ultimately this should be done with all
newspapers published in foreign languages in this country."3
Likewise, on 27 May
1918, Roosevelt urged in a speech at Des Moines, Iowa, that English be the sole
language of instruction used in American schools:
English as the sole language for schools,
newspapers and other usage in this country was urged by Theodore Roosevelt in
an address here tonight under the direction of the National Security League.
[...]
In voicing his approval of the recent proclamation by Gov. Harding, ordering
that English be the only medium of instruction in public or private schools in
Iowa, Col. Roosevelt said:
"This is a nation — not a polyglot boarding house. There is not room in
the country for any 50-50 American, nor can there be but one loyalty — to the
Stars and Stripes."4
The comments quoted at
this head of the page are more in the same vein; excerpts not from (as claimed
in the accompanying text) a statement made by Theodore Roosevelt in 1907 (while
he was still President), but from a letter written shortly before his death in
January 1919, just a few months after the armistice that ended the fighting in
World War I:
NEW YORK, Jan. 6. — What was the last public
statement by Col. Roosevelt was read last night at an "All-American
concert" here under the auspices of the American Defense society, of which
he was honorary president.
"I cannot be with you and so all I can do is to wish you Godspeed,"
it read. "There may be no sagging back in the fight for Americanism merely
because the war is over.
"There are plenty of persons who have already made the assertion that they
believe the American people have a short memory and that they intend to revive
all the foreign associations which more directly interfere with the complete
Americanization of our people. Our principle in this matter should be
absolutely simple.
"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here
does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall
be treated on an exact equality with every one else, for it is an outrage to
discriminate against any such man because of creed or birthplace or origin. But
this is predicated upon the man’s becoming in very fact an American and nothing
but an American.
"If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated
from the rest of America, then he isn't doing his part as an American.
"We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the
red flag which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization just as
much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We
have room for but one language here and that is the English language, for we
intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, and American
nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding house; and we have room
for but one soul [sic] loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American
people."5
A copy of this letter, obtained from the
Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, can be viewed here.
(Too
bad we don't have folks on Capitol Hill willing to speak out like this. J.D.
Pendry is a retired Marine Sergeant Major who writes for Random House. He is
eloquent, and he seldom beats around the bush!)
'The Axis of Idiots
Jimmy Carter, you are the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the
Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to
confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage.
You're the runner-in-chief.
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at
war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from
it. Your weak-willed responses to the U.S.S. Cole and the First Trade Center
Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed
to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001.
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about
American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more
fiction than fact. You've accused our military of terrorizing women and
children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the
same words you used to describe Vietnam. You're a fake. You want to run from
Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq,
like Vietnam, is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily
in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof
and said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa, John? And the Democrats call
you their military expert! Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury
while you were off building your war hero resume? You're a sad, pitiable,
corrupt and washed up politician. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount
to a good pimple on a real Marine's ass. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run
away, John.
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of
Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot, who murdered two
million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the
Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was
not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us! See Dick run.
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Ghraib in
front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that
Iraqi's torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news,
Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated another beheading for you. If you truly
supported our troops, you'd show the world poster-sized pictures of that
atrocity and demand the annihilation of it. Your legislation stripping support
from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You're a bloated,
drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned
freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John
Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ
Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, the Hollywood
Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam: Every time you stand in front of television
cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our
President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we
should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers - the same ones that tortured
and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and
all they have to do is hang on a little longer. It is inevitable that we, the
infidels, will have to defeat the Islamic jihadists. Better to do it now on
their turf, than later on ours after they have gained both strength and
momentum.
American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish
stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods,
you become one united with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and
mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to
publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you
are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face
Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.
You are America's 'AXIS OF IDIOTS.' Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us.
Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to
you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers.
It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport
of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your
hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that. Your
frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you
want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your
country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.
Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I'm also
questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing.
You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform.
You need to run away from this war, this country. Leave the war to the people
who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing
to defend it.
No, Mr. President, you don't get off the hook, either. Our country has two
enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it
from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It's your
obligation to support them by confronting the AXIS OF IDIOTS.
America must hear it from you that these self-centered people are harming our
country, a betting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little
anger, please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute
those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those
in the media who knowingly publish those secrets.
Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot. They need you to
do it now.
Semper Fi,
J. D. Pendry - Sergeant Major, USMC, Retired
(New Link added on home page for J.D. Pendry’s web blog
page.)
Free
Speech According TO Obama
The citizens of our growing "Idiocracy"
have been issued a directive from the "Supreme Leader" Barry Barrack
Hussein Obama. It contains the new rules for freedom of speech in the
United States. Effective immediately citizens may not talk about the
following:
Comrade Obama's ears, mixed blood, full name,
religion, religious guru Rev. Wright, indicted friends, terrorist friends,
elitist friends, Marxist friends, white grandmother who he threw under the bus,
where his mother and father's marriage certificate is, (there seems to a
question concerning whether they were actually married), his Indonesian
step-father, and half-sister, qualifications to be president, lack of any grasp
of American foreign policy, belief that there are 57 states that he
visited, 1 he never made it to, and Alaska and Hawaii he was not
"allowed" to campaign in, (60?)political achievements (?), no hand
over heart during the National Anthem, refusal until this week to wear an
American Flag lapel pin, Muslim sympathy, where his campaign money really comes
from, his wife who hates America, and is a racist and the bitterest millionaire
in America, and any other question he doesn't know the answer to, or refuses to
answer.
Comrade Obama would like everyone he meets from
now on to call him Mister President, or preferably Messiah as a sign of
respect for his birth in a manger. He would like all of his faithful
followers to cry during his indoctrination sermons, cheer on cue from his
handlers, and faint as appropriate when cameras from "his" media
operatives are documenting his splendor.
Comrade Obama would like all to know that if you
disagree with his day-to-day policy equivocations you are a racist. If
you don't like his anti-American views, you are a racist. If you don't
like his anti-religious views, you are a racist. If you don't like his
anti-gun views, you are a racist. If you don't like his lack of
experience, you are a racist. If you don't like how cocky he is, you are
a racist. If you don't like his love for terrorists, you are a
racist. If you claim that Affirmative Action gave he and his wife
preferential access to education and job opportunities, you are a racist.
If you don't like his extremely naive views, you are a racist. If you
don't plan to vote for him because he is a Marxist, and unqualified for the
presidency, you are a racist. If you don't believe he is the Messiah, you
are a racist. And on top of that all of you gun clinging, religious
zealots, who are depressed in middle America, Comrade Obama would like you to
raise yourselves out of your low-class existence and walk into the
"light" with him as he leads this nation out of the past and into the
future.
Welcome to change in America, Obama style.
Freedom of speech will soon be dead in our "Idiocracy!" God
bless America. Vote wisely.
Mr. Veritas
Thought you had
heard it all? not quite!!
Adding a tax to
your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people,
you're so stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every
cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read
below...............
Nancy
Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. You aren't going to believe
this. Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock
market profits (including Retirement funds, 401Ks and Mutual Funds!)Alas, it is
true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed
Minorities! Boy, are we in trouble... This woman is frightening.
She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income in
our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.'When
asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied: 'We need to raise
the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we
have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need
our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market
windfall profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people th
e standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.'
Having tired of the two potential Democrat candidates, and being
concerned about the "liberal" Republican candidate I began recently
concentrating on the potential first lady. Of the three "waiting in
the wings" who would be the best? Lets consider Michelle Obama
first.
Michelle Obama is considered by many to be an atheist regardless of
how often she claims she sat in Reverend Wright's indoctrination center,
mistakenly called a church. She has been exposed to hate for America,
hate for "whitey," and hate for the U.S. Government. Ms. Obama
has stated that this is the "first time in my adult life that I am proud
to be an American" because her husband may be elected president. She
says that "America is a mean place." She further states that
she has been hurt by prejudice in America, and doesn't feel it is fair that she
has to pay back her student loans.. She is the bitterest millionaire in
the United States!
The media have already crowned her the most exciting first lady
since Jackie Kennedy, and her husband has not been elected yet. She
appears to me to have all the style and grace of a football fullback. The
way she "hulks" around the podiums with her rather effete looking
husband lets me know who wears the pants in their relationship. It seems
though that the liberal media have already decided the election for Barry
Barrach Hussein Obama before the citizens cast the first ballot, so Michelle Obama
may be the first lady of hate and racism in America. She may indeed
"take America back," and get "her turn."
Secondly we have William Jefferson (Blythe) Clinton who will make
history if his wife (in name only ?) is elected. He is already the first
"black president." Now he may be the first male first
lady. How amazing is that? He may be allowed to conduct
tours of the white house, especially the "Oral (sic) Office, greet
visitors and guests, bake cookies and "look pretty" for the
cameras. Imagine that picture if you dare!
Thirdly we have a rather quiet multi-millionaire first candidate
who appears to be a picture of style, grace and genuine affection for her
military-hero husband, and her country. She appears fit, pretty and
gracious. If the dictionary had a definition-photo of a first lady, her
picture might grace the page. She also owns a beer franchise!
Wow! Whats not to like? She's rich, pretty and you could drink all
the beer you want. I'm voting for her to be first lady. How about
you?
Mr. Veritas
Now that another Earth Day has come and gone,
let's look at some environmentalist predictions that they would prefer we
forget.
At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder
warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war
as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." C.C. Wallen
of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has
been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed."
In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich, Vice President Gore's hero and mentor,
predicted there would be a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the
1970s ... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death."
Ehrlich forecasted that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between
1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6
million. Ehrlich's predictions about England were gloomier: "If I were a
gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year
2000."
In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning the world would run
out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and petroleum,
copper, lead and natural gas by 1992. Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The
Doomsday Book," said Americans were using 50 percent of the world's
resources and "by 2000 they [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all
of them." In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning,
"The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000."
Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "... civilization
will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against
problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson
warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 "... somewhere between 75 and 85
percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."
It's not just latter-day doomsayers who have been wrong; doomsayers have always
been wrong. In 1885, the U.S. Geological Survey announced there was
"little or no chance" of oil being discovered in California, and a
few years later they said the same about Kansas and Texas. In 1939, the U.S.
Department of the Interior said American oil supplies would last only another
13 years. In 1949, the Secretary of the Interior said the end of U.S. oil
supplies was in sight. Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous
claims, in 1974 the U.S. Geological Survey advised us that the U.S. had only a
10-year supply of natural gas. The fact of the matter, according to the
American Gas Association, there's a 1,000 to 2,500 year supply.
Here are my questions: In 1970, when environmentalists were making predictions
of manmade global cooling and the threat of an ice age and millions of
Americans starving to death, what kind of government policy should we have
undertaken to prevent such a calamity? When Ehrlich predicted that England
would not exist in the year 2000, what steps should the British Parliament have
taken in 1970 to prevent such a dire outcome? In 1939, when the U.S. Department
of the Interior warned that we only had oil supplies for another 13 years, what
actions should President Roosevelt have taken? Finally, what makes us think
that environmental alarmism is any more correct now that they have switched
their tune to manmade global warming?
Here are a few facts: Over 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is the result of
water vapor in Earth's atmosphere. Without the greenhouse effect, Earth's
average temperature would be zero degrees Fahrenheit. Most climate change is a
result of the orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the sun's
output. On top of that, natural wetlands produce more greenhouse gas
contributions annually than all human sources combined.
PERSONALITIES OF PAST
PRESIDENTS QUITE INTERESTING.
The writer, Capt.
Denny Keast, flies for UAL and flew many SAMs (Special Air Missions) for the
White House.
I flew 4 Presidential support
missions in the C-141 out of Dover AFB, DE.. Two for President Johnson and two
for President Nixon.
Johnson was a first
class jerk and on the two occasions I flew for him, if the Secret Service and
their Liaison in the Pentagon hadn't intervened, we would have had to stay on
the airplane for hours while he (Johnson) was off somewhere. Nixon never
required that and the four (4) stops we made with him he was cordial to the
Secret Service and to me and my crew.
We had a neighbor when
I lived in DC who was part of the secret service presidential detail for many
years. His stories of Kennedy and Johnson were the same as those I heard from
the guys who flew the presidents' plane. Yes, Kennedy did have Marilyn Monroe
flown in for secret 'dates,' and LBJ was a typical Texas 'good ole boy'
womanizer. Nixon, Bush 41, and Carter never cheated on their wives. Clinton
cheated, but couldn't match Kennedy or LBJ in style or variety.
The information below
is accurate: The elder Bush and current president Bush make it a point to thank
and take care of the air crews who fly them around. When the president flies,
there are several planes that also go, one carries the armored limo, another
the security detail, plus usually a press aircraft.
Both Bushes made it a
point to stay home on holidays, so the Air Force and security people could have
a day with their families.
Hillary Clinton was
arrogant and orally abusive to her security detail. She forbade her daughter,
Chelsea, from exchanging pleasantries with them. Sometimes Chelsea, miffed at
her mother's obvious conceit and mean spiritedness, ignored her demands and
exchanged pleasantries regardless, but never in her mother's presence. Chelsea
really was a nice, kindhearted, and lovely young lady. The consensus opinion
was that Chelsea loved her Mom but did not like her. Hillary Clinton was
continuously rude and abrasive to those who were charged to protect her life.
Her security detail dutifully did their job, as professionals should, but they
all loathed her and wanted to be on a different detail.
Hillary Clinton was
despised by the Secret Service as a whole. Former President Bill Clinton was
much more amiable than his wife. Often the Secret Service would cringe at the
verbal attacks Hillary would use against her husband. They were embarrassed for
his sake by the manner and frequency in which she verbally insulted him,
sometimes in the presence of the Secret Service, and sometimes behind closed
doors. Even behind closed doors Hillary Clinton would scream and holler so
loudly that everyone could hear what she was saying. Many felt sorry for
President Clinton and most wondered why he tolerated it instead of just
divorcing his 'attack dog' wife. It was crystal clear that the Clintons neither
liked nor respected each other and this was true long before the Monica
Lewinsky scandal. Theirs was genuinely a 'marriage of convenience.'
Chelsea was much
closer to her father than her mother, even after the Lewinsky scandal, which
hurt her gravely. Bill Clinton did in fact have charisma, and occasionally
would smile at or shake hands with his security detail. Still, he always
displayed an obvious air of superiority towards them.
His security detail
uniformly believed him to be disingenuous, false, and that he did nothing
without a motive that in some way would enhance his image and political career.
He was polite, but not kind. They did not particularly like him and nobody
trusted him.
Al Gore was the male
version of Hillary Clinton. They were friendlier toward each other than either
of them were towards former President Clinton. They were not intimate, so
please don't read that in. They were very close in a political way. Tipper Gore
was generally nice and pleasant. She initially liked Hillary but soon after the
election she had her 'pegged' and no longer liked her or associated with her
except for events that were politically obligatory.
Al Gore was far more
left wing than Bill Clinton. Al Gore resented Bill Clinton and thought he was
too 'centrist.' He despised all Republicans. His hatred was bitter and this was
long before he announced for the Presidency. This hatred was something that he
and Hillary had in common. They often said as much, even in the presence of
their security detail. Neither of them trusted Bill Clinton and, the Secret
Service opined, neither of them even liked him.
Bill Clinton did have
some good qualities, whereas Al Gore and Hillary had none, in the view of their
security details.
Al Gore, like Hillary,
was very rude and arrogant toward his security detail. He was extremely
unappreciative and would not hesitate to scold them in the presence of their
peers for minor details over which they had no control. Al Gore also looked
down on them, as they finally observed and learned with certainty on one
occasion. Al got angry at his offspring and pointed at his security detail and
said, 'Do you want to grow up and be like them?'
Word of this insult by
the former Vice-President quickly spread and he became as disliked by the
Secret Service as Hillary. Most of them prayed Al Gore would not be elected
President, and they really did have private celebrations in a few of their
homes after President Bush won. This was not necessarily to celebrate President
Bush's election, but to celebrate Al Gore's defeat.
Everyone in the Secret
Service wants to be on First Lady Laura Bush's detail. Without exception, they
concede that she is perhaps the nicest and most kind person they have ever had
the privilege of serving. Where Hillary patently refused to allow her picture
to be taken with her security detail, Laura Bush doesn't even have to be asked,
she offers. She doesn't just shake their hand and say, 'Thank you.' Very often,
she will give members of her detail a kindhearted hug to express her
appreciation. There is nothing false about her. This is her genuine nature. Her
security detail considers her to be a 'breath of fresh air.' They joke that
comparing Laura Bush with Hillary Clinton is like comparing 'Mother Teresa'
with the 'Wicked Witch of the North.'
Likewise, the Secret
Service considers President Bush to be a gem of a man to work for. He always
treats them with genuine respect and he always trusts and listens to their
expert advice. They really like the Crawford, Texas detail. Every time the
president goes to Crawford he has a B-B-Q for his security detail and he helps
serve their meals. He sits with them, eats with them, and talks with them. He
knows each of them by their first name, and calls them by their first name as a
show of affection. He always asks about their family, the names of which he
always remembers. They believe that he is deeply
and genuinely
appreciative of their service. They could not like, love, or respect anyone
more than President Bush. Most of them did not know they would feel this way,
until they had an opportunity to work for him and learn that his manner was
genuine and consistent. It has never changed since he began his Presidency. He
always treats them with the utmost respect, kindness, and compassion.
Please pas s this on.
It is important for Americans to have a true inside understanding of their
President. And also the woman who is currently a candidate for president.
Additions to Webster's Dictionary
Now that Barry Barrack
Hussein Obama closing in on the Democrat Party nomination, and he has made
race an issue, many new words should be added to Webster's Dictionary.
Included are:
Obama Girls, Usually white or Hispanic girls who see Obama
as a black rock star.
Obamamaniacs, Anyone who is absolutely "crazy"
about Obama.
Obamaphiles, Anyone who "loves" Obama no matter
what nonsense comes out of his mouth.
Obamaphobes, Anyone who wisely "fears" Obama and
his Marxist platform.
Obamanuts, Anyone who is so nuts about Obama their brain shuts down at the
mention of his name.
Obamaracist, Anyone who mentions Obama's full name,
disagrees with his 'wrong-headed" policies, or does not support and vote
for Obama.
Ghetto Wife, Name given by Al Sharpton to Obama's wife, who
for the first time in her adult life is proud to be an American (only because
her husband may become president.)
Obama Christian, Anyone who is Muslim at heart like Obama and
his pastor, reverend Wright, but pretends to be a Christian in order to
"fly under the radar,"
Obama Terrorist, Anyone who, like Obama's good friends in the
Weather Underground, American Communists, and Muslim dictatorships support
forcible overthrow of the U.S. Government.
Black Messiah, Term used by Obamanuts to describe Obama.
I am sure that as the
campaign rages on many new terms will arise. Please feel free to add your
own Obamawords to the list. Vote wisely. God bless
the USA.
Mr. Veritas
Proposed changes in taxes after 2008 General
election:
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN
15% (no change)
OBAMA
28%
CLINTON
24%
How does this affect you? If you sell
your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are
heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a
retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to
taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the
income from their homes as part of their retirement income.
DIVIDEND TAX
MCCAIN
15% (no change)
OBAMA
39.6%
CLINTON
39.6%
How will this affect you? If you have
any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life
insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends,
you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama or
Clinton become president. The experts predict that "Higher tax rates on
dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market yet do absolutely
nothing to cut the deficit."
INCOME TAX
MCCAIN
(no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA
(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
CLINTON
(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
How does this affect you? No
explanation needed. This is pretty straight forward.
INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN
0%
(No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA
keep the inheritance tax
CLINTON
keep the inheritance tax
How does this affect you? Many families
have lost businesses, farms and ranches, and homes that have been in their families
for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those
willing their assets to loved ones will not only lose them to these taxes.
NEW TAXES BEING PROPOSED BY BOTH
CLINTON AND OBAMA
* New government taxes proposed on
homes that are more than 2400 square feet
* New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't
high enough already)
* New taxes on natural resources
consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)
* New taxes on retirement accounts
and last but not least....
* New taxes to pay for socialized
medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world
countries!!!
Can you afford Clinton or Obama?
American Idol held a
charitable "American Idol Gives Back" event last week to raise money
primarily for black African countries and some U.S. charities. This week
President Bush authorized more money, approximately $200 million added to the
billions already forwarded to black African countries. Many in America
are filled with pride about how wonderful we are.
When we see the poor
black children, bloated from hunger, flies buzzing around their poor little
mucus and tear streaked faces, we are shocked and dramatically moved.
Some of us reach for the phone and donate immediately. After our
pledge, we are satisfied that we have done the right thing and we feel good
about what we have contributed to change the world. We don't take the
time to investigate where the money goes, nor do we think about what we have
just done.
Charity is a wonderful
part of our American culture. Americans give generously to countries
around the world. But few stop to think about where the money
goes. Most of the money given for African aid goes to the Muslim, or
communist dictators who rule most black African countries. The money that
is donated rarely trickles down to the poor children shown on television.
The African leaders
enrich themselves with our charitable donations, and the tax money our
government sends them. They buy arms and munitions, and use them to kill,
mutilate and intimidate their own people. Some of the money that goes to
Muslim countries is used to buy weapons that are used to kill Americans.
Our largess does not just apply to Africa. America pays
"tribute" to many countries, many of whom hate us. Their leaders also
enrich themselves, and threaten us in the best Marxist tradition.
Obama and Clinton, as
college trained Marxists often refer to the global "village', and
"giving back,' They prey on the American conscience, and liberal
taught guilt to make one feel bad about being successful. They try to
make one feel an obligation to "feed the world." They pledge
more hard-earned tax dollars shouldered by the American middle class to support
the world's hungry. However, they rarely pledge to help a poor West
Virginian family, or a Mississippi family, or a mid-western family, or any
needy family working hard to survive in this great country, If
elected Clinton and Obama will increase our taxes, and also dramatically
increase our "tribute" sent abroad, especially to African
nations.
The poor American
families mentioned above don't want welfare, and many of them refuse to take
welfare. They just want a fair chance. They want a small
responsible government which understands that their prime objective is to
protect Americans first and then give its citizens the opportunity to work hard
and become successful without government interference. They want a strong
economy. They want a competent school system with qualified, dedicated
teachers who have an academic agenda, not a liberal "hate God",
"hate America' agenda. Also, they want the freedom to worship as
they please without being condemned for their faith by elected Marxists.
Americans want to keep
more of the money they earn, and not have to support the non-productive in this
or any other country. Charity begins at home. Don't be fooled by
liberal rhetoric. We don't have to feed the world by sending our tax
money, or charitable donations abroad. We have a responsibility to
take care of America first.
If one must
feed the world, faith-based charities that one trusts may be the best
way. Explore the options. Think about where your money is going,
and what it will be used for. Don't fall prey to emotion. Use you
brain and spend your hard-earned money wisely.