An Enemy of the State

An Enemy of the State

This Profil does not promote, support, condone, encourage, advocate, nor in any way endorse any racist (or "racialist") ideologies, nor any armed and/or violent revolutionary, seditionist and/or terrorist activities. Any racial separatist or militant groups listed here are solely for reference and Opinions of multiple authors including Freedom or Anarchy Campaign of conscience.


I have pondered at great measure what would be the line in the sand that our government should not be allowed to cross, and after having crossed it would be justification for waging war, either covert or overt, against it.

We see increasingly horrible instances of tyranny that include draconian sentencing, torture and even assassination by our governments. The governments claims the legal right to commit every specie of crime, tyranny and oppression and offers as justification the famous Nixon line that says “If your President (government) does it, its not against the law.” Government also allows its partisans, in the form of various and numerous corporate entities such as banks and security firms, defense contractors, pharmaceutical companies, oil corporations and many other favored government partisans of every variety, to engage in private tyrannies against Americans without redress under law.  Consider how government legalized theft and fraud by financial corporations or the slaughter by Blackwater and cyber-attacks conspired by HB Gary.

I finally decided that, because the government is increasingly becoming our enemy, Americans owe it no more reverence than we do any foreign government that has made itself the enemy of the American people and their liberty.  In fact, we owe it less leniency because as a domestic enemy of the Constitution it is an enemy that has made its way into our land and homes and is therefore an even greater threat as it disguises its tyranny and criminal rackets under the color of law. Moreover, we have believed our government's lies and have been placed in a position in which, due to the government claiming the power as the final arbiter with a corresponding monopoly on the use of violence over the people and land in which we reside, foolishly believed that in exchange for these powers granted the government it would guarantee justice. Yet, government sophistry justifies tyranny as being law, albeit a law devoid of any justice.  The government first robbed us of justice and then every protection on our rights, liberties and wealth fell to them and their criminal state.

 So, even though our government has become a greater enemy due to the insidious position it has obtained through lies and subterfuge by using Americans' misplaced trust, I will still grant it the same consideration I would grant the government of a foreign enemy.  This consideration is granted at great risk because government that has become a domestic enemy to the people can and will betray, lie, confuse, bribe, torture, indoctrinate and punish those who would otherwise be friends of forces fighting a foreign enemy in the cause of liberty.  In short, our government has betrayed us. Those who would side with the government's lies are either part of the racket or weak-minded.  One need only research what measures the government has undertaken to oppress the people to discern its intent.  Those in power want people to serve the state as opposed to the American tradition of the state serving the people.

The consideration I will grant our government will be to first review what justifications would be needed to engage in and wage a just war against it. For this I will refer to the tenets of the Catholic Church with its Just War Doctrine. It has been an axiom that a government which resists and makes impossible peaceful change in a peoples’ pursuit for liberty and justice, makes violent change necessary. After reviewing the Just War Doctrine I believe one will be a better position to decide if our government has made violent revolution justifiable, necessary and the final resort.

The Future That Never Comes

The Future That Never Comes

The strange thing about America’s dot com titans is how short their lifecycles are. The development of the internet has been dominated by a handful of companies that changed the paradigm and were then run over by a new paradigm in under a decade.



The Netscape CEO was on the cover of Time Magazine in 1996 sitting on a golden throne. Today an entire generation of internet users has grown up without ever having bought his web browser. They don’t even think of a web browser as something you buy.

Netscape directed traffic to Yahoo, without realizing that having a site that millions of people visited was a better way of making money than selling a piece of software that let you browse those sites. Yahoo’s portal was powered by Google because it thought that offering people services was a better way to make money than something as grubby as a search engine.

Google used search to become an ad empire and began piling on more services, Yahoo style, while not paying much attention to the growth of social media. And today, Facebook is Google’s biggest real competitor on the internet. Until some upstart company, maybe Twitter, figures out how to eat Google’s lunch. And then someone eats their lunch.



IBM may have been mocked for its stodgy ways, but it stayed relevant far longer than the companies of the dot com waves that break upon the silicon shore and then vanish into obscurity.  Yesterday’s genius on his golden throne who represents the wave of the new is writing his memoirs in a few years while trying to explain what went wrong and trying to figure out how he can get it all back.

The public is treated to a parade of computer geniuses who will deliver the future without realizing that all they’re seeing is another Alpha techie who doesn’t understand the future, but is successfully monetizing some service or piece of software that has suddenly become popular. If he does it well enough, he can build an entire ring of failed businesses around that single golden egg, the way that Microsoft has with its operating system licenses, Google with its search ad sales or Facebook with the sheer number of users in its social graph while pretending to be an innovator and change agent.

The constant expansion and destructive acquisition of small innovative companies maintains the illusion that the latest digital horse is something special. It’s not. The unglamorous truth is that Google makes its money selling ad space to insurance companies and Microsoft makes its money releasing incremental updates to its flawed operating system that it alternately sabotages and then repairs. If you’re annoyed by Windows 8, don’t worry. Windows 9 will “fix” the problem. It’s part of the idiotic business plan by a company that exploited a niche in IBM to become a much lamer IBM.

The “genius” factor is the sizzle that convinces investors to put their money into companies that have one core product whose profitability depends on the internet remaining the same ten years from now. It’s a furious buzz of activity that makes investors overlook the hard numbers. Take Amazon, which sells physical objects for money, and yet has been described as a shareholder subsidized charity because it funnels all its profits into getting bigger and bigger without actually turning a profit.

The absurd economics of the thing have made it so that not having a business plan is proof of sincerity. Any MBA can put together a business plan, but it takes a real genius to waltz into Wall Street wearing a hoodie and flipflops accompanied by a few celebrity pals with a plan to become the biggest companies that does everything ever… at which point it might turn a profit.

All this silliness has distorted our sense of how business is supposed to work and how things actually get done. Every CEO is supposed to be brilliant, to make irrational snap decisions that his peers will think make no sense and to parachute out of the company just ahead of the next trainwreck. And now it’s also how our government runs.

Obama’s public image is tethered to some illusion of genius entirely divorced from real world results. If he accidentally sat on the red button and ended the world in a blaze of nuclear fire, his horribly scarred mutant biographers would still explain in detail why he was much too smart to be president. And they’re probably right. Dot coms are likewise full of CEOs who are too smart to run companies, but enjoy solving abstract puzzles, buying other companies, waterskiing in Samurai costumes and giving interviews full of buzzwords to business magazines. Another word for them is idiots.

Applied intelligence is far more useful than abstract intelligence. It’s the difference between an eight foot basketball player who never bothers to learn the game and the six footer who spends every waking hour practicing and strategizing. The former has a genetic gift combined with some good nurturing and no useful skills beyond that. The latter has cultivated and applied his talents to the task.

Work isn’t glamorous. Not even the kind of work that most people think is glamorous. Being a movie star is about walking along a taped line and reciting the same lines again and again. Running a company is about knowing how the sausage gets made and seeing that it gets made on time. And being president is about doing both of those things a whole lot.

If Obama were a sports star, he wouldn’t be a basketball player, to the disappointment of so many white liberals. He would be a wrestler. You could easily see him playing a character, running around the ring, winning over the crowd, feeding off the drama and then staying around for a rigged match; the only kind he could win. It’s the easy glamorous stuff that he likes. Not the hard work.

And it’s why the dot com idea that you can have genius without hard work is so seductive to him. What he doesn’t understand is that the guy sitting opposite him at some Silicon Valley event isn’t building his company. He’s a boy who had one good idea, worked hard to implement it and is now in charge of being a “genius” and having a vision for the company. Meanwhile a thousand like him sit around doing the actual hard work of maintaining his core business and wasting time trying to implement all his new visions while working on their own big idea that will eat his for lunch.

Obama kept comparing Healthcare.gov to dot com companies because he assumed that building it would be some childishly simple act of genius. And he had every reason to think it would be easy. For the lifecycle of a mediocre internet company, he has lived a charmed life in which he only has to snap his fingers to get things done. There’s an extensive infrastructure of websites built around him that transcribe his speeches and inserts references to him into the biographies of American presidents.

But Healthcare.gov was actually supposed to a bunch of things, most of them more complicated than just delivering another dose of Obamaganda do the masses. And it had to be done, not by engineers waiting around for their stock options to (hopefully) make them millionaires, but by government contractors who spend all their money on lobbyists, not on talent, because that’s where their payday comes from. If you have to choose between working for CGI or the next Facebook, why would you choose to spend your days poring over charts from some clueless government idiot at CMS?

Now Obama has run into the end of his own political lifecycle. The billionaires who invested in him, no longer need him. The Democratic Party needs to convince voters that Hillary will fix his messes. And he stupidly made the mistake of actually trying to implement one of his ideas in a way that will directly affect people. Obama is no longer Google. Now he’s been reduced to being a Yahoo.

If you’re pretending to be a genius, the one thing you can’t do is screw up. You can smash all the plates while screaming obscenities. You can deliver tedious lectures on 18th century writers that no one but you has ever heard of. You can loudly declare that Einstein was wrong. And you can waste billions buying incompatible companies in pursuit of some vague vision about the future. Until the whole thing fails and the investors realize you’re not a genius and start demanding you bring in a professional CEO to secure the value of the company, even as they start thinking about carving it up.

Obama’s real crime was to make it obvious that he isn’t a genius. Just a guy in flipflops and a hoodie. Not an eccentric genius who wears a hoodie and flipflops because he’s an original thinker, but a guy who wears them because kids half his age wear them and he’s too lazy and deluded to grow up.

Investors will give their CEO geniuses a lot of rope as long as they think there’s a trillion dollars on the other end. They will engage in complex rationalizations to explain why they’re throwing money at a guy whose ideas never seem to pan out and whose one big idea is approaching its sell-by date. And then the moment comes, a perspective shift hits and the genius is the guy who burned through billions of their dollars and is still promising them Pi in the sky while the future has moved on.

Obama is no longer the future
Obama is no longer the future. He can’t be. Not on his second term. The smart money is no longer on books explaining why he succeeds, but books explaining what went wrong. The old genius has to make way for the next genius who will make the same exact mistakes, but offer a little more variety.

The game could have gone on a little longer, if only Obama hadn’t made the mistake of actually assuming that he could deliver, if he hadn’t been so taken by the applause of the crowd and the outcome of the rigged matches, that he actually tried to wrestle one of the slabs of muscle for real.

Modern genius is an intangible thing. It isn’t the brilliant poem or the moving sonata. It’s the idea of genius. The distilled abstraction of change. The shiny flash of the magician’s powder. A change in appearance that startles and excites. Vague promises of an amazing future soon to come. That is true of our politics and our dot com economics.

The future arrived some time ago. We are living now in the post-future of the present where everything is momentarily amazing, but nothing endures, where last week’s blockbuster is already forgotten and last year’s genius is sheepishly fondling his framed magazine covers and the hit songs never go away, until they’re gone, and then they’re gone for good.

Obama is an empty construct of what the future was supposed to be; young charismatic, post-racial, post-partisan and solution-oriented. Now he’s already becoming old and outdated, a future that was, a future that might have been, a poster on an aging Occupier’s wall, a fading magazine cover, another progressive dead end for a movement always dreaming of a tomorrow that never comes.

This national insanity

"In America, the criminally insane rule and the rest of us, or the vast majority of the rest of us, either do not care, do not know, or are distracted and properly brainwashed into acquiescence." 

This national insanity

Those seeking truth must pursue it through the alternative media and seeking out unbiased critical thinkers who relentlessly abide by what the facts expose. This is no time for wishful thinking, delusions and fantasies. In the end, the facts are all that matter. As Heinlein noted decades ago, the future is uncertain so facts are essential in navigating a course that doesn't lead you to ruin upon the shoals of ignorance.
"What are the facts? Again and again and again - what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what "the stars foretell," avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the un-guessable "verdict of history" - what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!" ? Robert A. Heinlein

Facts are treasonous and dangerous in an empire of lies, fraud and propaganda. It is maddening to watch the country spiral downward, driven to ruin by a psychotic predator class, while the plebs choose to remain willfully ignorant of reality and distracted by their lust for cheap Chinese crap and addicted to the cult of techno-narcissism. We are a country running on heaping doses of cognitive dissonance and normalcy bias, an irrational belief in our national exceptionalism, an absurd trust in the same banking class that destroyed the finances of the country, and a delusionary belief that with just another trillion dollars of debt we'll be back on the exponential growth track. The American empire has been built on a foundation of cheap easily accessible oil, cheap easily accessible credit, the most powerful military machine in human history, and the purposeful transformation of citizens into consumers through the use of relentless media propaganda and a persistent decades long dumbing down of the masses through the government education system.

This national insanity is not a new phenomenon. Friedrich Nietzsche observed the same spectacle in the 19th century.
"In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."

The "solutions" imposed by the supposed brightest financial Ivy League educated minds and corrupt bought off political class upon people of the United States since the Wall Street created 2008 worldwide financial collapse are insane and designed to only further enrich the crony capitalists and their banker brethren. The maniacs are ruling the asylum. John Lennon saw the writing on the wall forty five years ago.

"Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives.... I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends ... and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it." - John Lennon, Interview BBC-TV (June 22, 1968)
The world is most certainly ruled by a small group of extremely wealthy evil men who desire ever more treasure, supremacy and control, but the vast majority of Americans have stood idly by mesmerized by their iGadgets and believing buying shit they don't need with money they don't have is the path to happiness and prosperity, while their wealth, liberty and self-respect were stolen by the financial elite. Our idiot culture, that celebrates reality TV morons, low IQ millionaires playing children's sports, egomaniacal Hollywood hacks, self-promoting Wall Street financers, and self-serving corrupt ideologue politicians, has been degenerating for decades.

"We are in the process of creating what deserves to be called the idiot culture. Not an idiot sub-culture, which every society has bubbling beneath the surface and which can provide harmless fun; but the culture itself. For the first time, the weird and the stupid and the coarse are becoming our cultural norm, even our cultural ideal." -Carl Bernstein -1992
The examples of our national insanity are almost too vast to document, but any critical assessment of what we've done over the last one hundred years reveals the idiocracy that has engulfed our collapsing empire.

Staying sane in a society gone mad is not easy. Millions of people believe themselves to be sane, but they have really just adapted to an insane society, so they appear sane within the warped paradigm of that insane society. The truly sane people appear to be insane in an insane society. It's enough to drive a man crazy. The immense forces of normalcy bias and social inertia have led millions to refuse to understand the mathematical certainty of the coming collapse. The worldwide banking system is like a great white shark that needs to keep moving or it dies. Exponential growth and continuous credit expansion have been the essential ingredients to expanding the American empire, but the growth has stopped, while the debt keeps growing.

Infinite growth on a finite planet is impossible. As natural resources deplete and become more expensive to obtain, while the planet's population continues to grow, the fractional reserve banking system and the nation states who continue to pile up trillions in debt will suddenly suffer a catastrophic collapse. We are in the end stages of a confidence game. Your government will not give you warning. We need to come to our senses one by one, until there are enough sane people to tip the scales in our favor. I've concluded that I live in a dishonest, insane, intolerable world and consider it my duty to spread discontent among those I can reach. I'm a dangerous man in the eyes of our corporate fascist surveillance state. So be it.

"The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is apt to spread discontent among those who are."

The Taking of America

Against the backdrop of a Constitutional Republic known as the United States,

 One Two Three



In late 1974, the movie The Taking of Pelham One Two Three, based on a novel of the same name, was released. The main plot involves four men, using colors as codenames, boarding the subway at Pelham station in New York at 1:23 pm., (hence the name) where they ultimately take a subway car full of hostages. They demand one million dollars or they will begin killing hostages.





Today, America appears to be in a similar position. The United States is that subway car and we, as citizens, are the hostages under the control of a small group of people. The difference, however, is that our intended fate will be decidedly different than the hostages in the movie. Our captors simply want us dead.

It is interesting to note that earlier that same year, an article appeared in the Council on Foreign Relations quarterly publication Foreign Affairs titled “The Hard Road to World Order.” It was written by Richard N. Gardner who wrote the following:

“In short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great “booming, buzzing confusion,” to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault. Of course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of these specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate relationship with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but the main thing is that the essential functions be performed.”



To fully appreciate and understand the context very last scene of the 1974 version of the movie, one must watch the entire film. So it is with the current events taking place in America today. You will not understand the context of certain events taking place without seeing the entire picture, or the “big picture.” CFR member Richard Gardner, who joined the Columbia faculty in 1957 and was a professor at Columbia Law School through 2012, the alma mater of Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, provides an overview of sorts for “The Taking of America One Two Three” in his 1974 article.

Nonetheless, let’s look further into “The Taking of America One Two Three.”

Plot summary (Caution: contains spoilers)

Against the backdrop of a Constitutional Republic known as the United States, the story begins by a rapid historical recap of the founding of a nation, the creation of an immutable document known as the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights, and slows in the early years of twentieth century. Then a small group of powerful men, aided and abetted by government insiders and the press, conduct an “end around” our national sovereignty and capture the nation’s economy through the creation of central banks and an income tax that lines the pockets of the bankers, despite reports to the contrary.

This same group, operating under the codename “The Committee of 300” as meticulously documented through the extensive research of Dr. John Coleman,  becomes more entrenched in nearly every aspect of American government and society. Through their wealth and power, they influence U.S. politics to the extent that U.S. presidents are first selected before they are elected, as are the Secretaries of State appointed by each president. This “Committee of 300” creates and nurtures sub-organizations, such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and many others. Like a destructive virus, these cretins infect the host bodies of our political, financial, corporate, religious and societal institutions. This infection causes national immunodeficiency, or the state in which our national immune system, the U.S. Constitution, is compromised.

Political leaders who associate themselves with the right-left paradigm enter the scene dressed as physicians, posing as knowledgeable and helpful saviors, pretend to treat this national infection. (Note: the audience who has seen the plot from the beginning and read the book on which the movie is based realize that these leaders are the actual captors. They know the history, and are not fooled. Others in attendance are fully entranced by the action onscreen and don’t understand the twists and turns of the subplots).

The film speeds through the world wars and police actions, the assassination of JFK, the Watergate “scandal,” and begins to become more intense with scenes from the opening shots of Desert Storm, the passage of the NAFTA and GATT treaties, the repealing of the Glass-Steagall Act and the related consequences, and stops momentarily on September 10, 2001. At that point, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is shown announcing that $2.3 trillion of the defense department budget cannot be accounted for, followed by scenes of the carnage the following day.

From there, scenes of attacks against Afghanistan and Iraq play out under George W. Bush, who happens to be the son of former President George H.W. Bush. Amid the main plot are numerous complex subplots that relate to previous scenes, ultimately progressing to one of the leading characters being selected and ostensibly elected as the 44th president of the United States under mysterious circumstances.

This character is double-billed as Barack Hussein Obama and Barry Soetoro, a man of questionable eligibility to hold the office under Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution. An investigation into this character’s constitutional eligibility is thwarted at every turn by individuals in power, taking their orders from the now fully functional shadow government answerable to the global elitists, previously billed as “The Committee of 300.” Even the “good guys” clamor that this character’s eligibility is nothing more than a distraction, and soon convince many that they are racists, bigots or at the very least, conspiracy nuts for even mentioning this character’s origins.

But it’s not just the origins of this character that is of concern, but his allegiance to the United States. The importance of this problem becomes much clearer as this Soetoro/Hussein character surprises even his earlier supporters by continuing an aggressive war posture, increasing domestic surveillance, and generally running the country by fiat.

The final scenes of the movie are tense, where the Obama/Soetoro character is shown filling his inner circle with Marxists and Islamic terrorists, nationalizing a large portion of the country’s economy and consolidating immense power by overseeing the implementation of national health care, purging the military, expanding national surveillance, equipping a federalized army with billions of rounds of ammunition, destabilizing the Middle East, and pushing for a U.S. Senate rule change that effectively permits a coup of the judiciary. Meanwhile, much of the supporting cast, many dressed in white hats and appearing to oppose this increased tyranny, are exposed for who they are and their allegiance to a globalist agenda through their associations with “The Committee of 300” and its associated groups.

There is cinematic chaos as scenes of various twentieth century tyrants flash across the screen between scenes of Obama/Soetoro gradually being elevated to the position of a tyrant himself. Film directors Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and George Soros surprise audiences by cameo appearances.

As the camera pans to various individuals in power, political pundits, and members of the media, special effects and graphics are used to reveal their true allegiance, either as unwitting dupes or willing prostitutes in the employ of the shadow government.

By then, it’s too late. The subway car is shown screaming down the tracks as helpless onlookers begin to weep for those aboard. Before fading to black, a “remnant” of individuals suddenly emerge from the crowd, breaking free from their trance-like states to save those aboard. There is acrimony and chaos as the main cast members, many believed to be on the side of the good and righteous, attempt to stop this group of men from saving the subway car, using every tactic available to the shadow government.

But is it really too late?
Genre: Nonfiction; playing at locations all across the U.S. Genre: Nonfiction; playing at locations all across the U.S.

Is America Being Deliberately Pushed Toward Civil War?

Is America Being Deliberately Pushed Toward Civil War?

In 2009, Jim Rickards, a lawyer, investment banker and adviser on capital markets to the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of the Secretary of Defense, participated in a secret war game sponsored by the Pentagon at the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL). The game’s objective was to simulate and explore the potential outcomes and effects of a global financial war. At the end of the war game, the Pentagon concluded that the U.S. dollar was at extreme risk of devaluation and collapse in the near term, triggered either by a default of the U.S. Treasury and the dumping of bonds by foreign investors or by hyperinflation by the private Federal Reserve.

These revelations, later exposed by Rickards, were interesting not because they were “new” or “shocking.” Rather, they were interesting because many of us in the field of alternative economics had ALREADY predicted the same outcome for the American financial system years before the APL decided to entertain the notion. At least, that is what the public record indicates.

The idea that our government has indeed run economic collapse scenarios, found the United States in mortal danger, and done absolutely nothing to fix the problem is bad enough. I have my doubts, however, that the Pentagon or partnered private think tanks like the RAND Corporation did not run scenarios on dollar collapse long before 2009. In fact, I believe there is much evidence to suggest that the military industrial complex has not only been aware of the fiscal weaknesses of the U.S. system for decades, but they have also been actively engaged in exploiting those weaknesses in order to manipulate the American public with fears of cultural catastrophe.

History teaches us that most economic crisis events are followed or preceded immediately by international or domestic conflict. War is the looming shadow behind nearly all fiscal disasters. I suspect that numerous corporate think tanks and the Department Of Defense are perfectly aware of this relationship and have war gamed such events as well. Internal strife and civil war are often natural side effects of economic despair within any population.

Has a second civil war been “gamed” by our government? And are Americans being swindled into fighting and killing each other while the banksters who created the mess observe at their leisure, waiting until the dust settles to return to the scene and collect their prize? Here are some examples of how both sides of the false left/right paradigm are being goaded into turning on each other.

Conservatives: Taunting The Resting Lion

Conservatives, especially Constitutional conservatives, are the warrior class of American society. The average conservative is far more likely to own a firearm, have extensive tactical training with that firearm, have military experience and have less psychological fear of conflict; and he is more apt to take independent physical action in the face of an immediate threat. Constitutional conservatives are also more likely to fight based on principal and heritage, rather than personal gain, and less likely to get wrapped up in the madness of mob activity.

What’s the greatest weakness of conservatives? It’s their tendency to entertain leadership by men who claim exceptional warrior status, even if those men are not necessarily honorable.

Constitutional conservatives are the most substantial existing threat to the establishment hierarchy because, unlike dissenting groups of the past, we know exactly who the guiding hand is behind economic and social calamity. In response, the overall conservative culture has come under relentless attack by the establishment using the Administration of Barack Obama as a middleman. The goal, I believe, is to misdirect conservative rage toward the Democratic left and away from the elites. The actions of the White House have become so absurd and so openly hostile as of late that I can only surmise that this is a deliberate strategy to lure conservatives into ill-conceived retaliation against a puppet government, rather than the men behind the curtain.

Department of Defense propaganda briefings with military personnel have been exposed. These briefings train current serving soldiers to view Tea Party conservatives and even Christian organizations as “dangerous extremists.” Reports from sources within Fort Hood and Fort Shelby confirm this trend.

The DOD has denied some of the allegations or claimed that it has “corrected” the problem; however, Judicial Watch has obtained official training documents through a Freedom of Information Act request that affirm that extremist profiling is an integral part of these military briefings. The documents also cite none other than the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a primary resource for the training classes. The SPLC is nothing more than an outsourced propaganda wing for the DHS that attacks Constitutional organizations and associates them with terrorist and racist groups on a regular basis. (Check pages 32-33.)

This indoctrination program has accelerated

since January 2013, after Professor Arie Perliger, a member of a West Point think tank called Combating Terrorism Center (and according to the sparse biographical information available, a man with NO previous U.S. military experience), published and circulated a report called “Challengers From The Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far Right” at West Point. The report classified “far right extremists” as “domestic enemies” who commonly “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government , believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional right."  The profile goes on to list supporting belief in "civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government” as the dastardly traits of evil extremists.

Soldiers have been told that associating with “far right extremist groups” could be used as grounds for court-martial. A general purge of associated symbolism has ensued, including new orders handed down to Navy SEALs that demand that operators remove the “Don’t Tread On Me” Navy Jack patch from their uniforms.

The indoctrination of the military also follows on the heels of a massive media campaign to demonize Constitutional conservatives who fought against Obamacare in the latest debt ceiling debate as “domestic enemies” and “terrorists.” I documented this in my recent article “Are Constitutional Conservatives Really the Boogeyman?”

Obama and his ilk have been caught red-handed in numerous conspiracies, including Fast and Furious, which shipped American arms through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. And how about the exposure of the IRS using its bureaucracy as a weapon to harass Tea Party organizations and activists? And what about Benghazi, Libya, the terrorist attack that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton allowed to happen, if they didn’t directly order it to happen? And let’s not forget about the Edward Snowden revelations, which finally made Americans understand that mass surveillance of our population is a constant reality.

To add icing to the cake, a new book called Double Down, which chronicles the Obama campaign of 2012, quotes personal aides to the President who relate that Obama, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, when discussing his use of drone strikes, bragged that he was “really good at killing people.”

Now, my question is, why would the Obama Administration make so many “mistakes,” attack conservatives with such a lack of subtlety, and attempt to openly propagandize rank-and-file soldiers, many of whom identify with conservative values? Is it all just insane hubris, or is he serving his handlers by trying to purposely create a volatile response?

Liberals: Taking Away The Cookie Jar

Many on the so-called “left” are socially oriented and find solace in the functions of the group, rather than individualism. They seek safety in administration, centralization and government welfare. Wealth is frowned upon, while “redistribution” of wealth is cheered. They see government as necessary to the daily survival of the nation, and they work to expand Federal influence into all facets of life. Some liberals do this out of a desire to elevate the poverty-stricken and ensure certain educational standards. However, they tend to ignore the homogenizing effect this strategy has on society, making everyone equally destitute and equally stupid. Their faith in government subsidies also makes them vulnerable to funding cuts and reductions in entitlements. The left normally fights only when their standard of living and comfort to which they have grown accustomed plummets below a certain threshold, and mob methods are usually their fallback form of retaliation.

Austerity cuts, which the mainstream media calls the “sequester,” are beginning to take effect. But, they are being applied in areas that are clearly meant to create the most public anger. Reductions in welfare programs are also being implemented in a way that will certainly agitate average left-leaning citizens. The debt debate itself revolved around those who want the government to spend within its means versus those who want the government to spend even more on welfare programs no matter the consequence. The loss of subsidies is at bottom the greatest fear of the left.

A sudden and inexplicable shutdown of electronic benefit transfer cards (EBT cards or food stamps) occurred in more than 17 States while the debt debate just happened to be climaxing. This month, cuts to existing food stamp funds have taken effect, and food pantries across the country are scrambling against a sharp spike in demand.

Remember, about 50 million Americans are currently dependent on EBT welfare in order to feed themselves and their families. The response to the relatively short EBT shutdown last month was outright fury. Imagine the response in the event of a long-term shutdown, or if extraneous cuts were to occur? And where would that anger be directed? Since the entire debt debacle has been blamed on the Tea Party, I suspect conservatives will be the main target of welfare mobs.

The left, once just as opposed to government stimulus and banker bailouts as the right, is now unwittingly throwing its support behind infinite stimulus in order to cement the continued existence of precious Federal handouts. The issue of Obamacare has utterly blinded liberals to fiscal responsibility. Universal healthcare, perhaps the ultimate Federal handout, is a prize too titillating for them to ignore. Democrats will now go to incredible lengths to defend the Obama White House regardless of past crimes.

They are willing to ignore his offenses against the 4th Amendment and personal privacy. They are willing to look past his offenses against the 1st Amendment, including the Constitutional right to trial by jury for all Americans, and Obama’s secret war against the free speech of whistle-blowers. They are willing to shrug off his endless warmongering in the Mideast, his attempts to foment new war in Syria and Iran, and his support for predator drone strikes in sovereign nations causing severe civilian collateral damage. They are willing to forget Snowden, mass surveillance and executive assassination lists — all for Obamacare.

And the saddest thing of all? It is likely that Obamacare was never meant to be successful in the first place.

Does anyone really believe that the White House, with billions of dollars at its disposal, could not get a website off the ground if it really wanted to? Does anyone really believe that Obama would launch the crowning jewel of his Presidency without making certain that it was fully operational, unless this was part of a greater scheme?  And how about his promise that pre-existing health care plans would not be destroyed by Obamacare mandates?  Over 900,000 people in the state of California alone are about to lose their health care insurance due to the Affordable Healthcare Act.  Why would Obama go back on such a vital pledge unless he WANTED to piss off constituents?

Already, liberal websites and forums across the blogosphere are abuzz with talk of sabotage of the Obamacare website by “the radical right” and the diabolical Koch Brothers (liberals had no idea who they were a year ago, but now, they the go to scapegoat for everything). Once again, conservatives are presented as the culprits behind all the left’s troubles.

As I have stated in the past, Obamacare is designed to fail. The government has no capacity to fund it, and never will. Its only conceivable purpose is to further divide the country and excite both sides of the false paradigm into attacking each other as the reason the system is failing, when both sides should be questioning whether the current system should exist at all.

As the situation stands today, at least 50 million welfare recipients and who knows how many others exist as a resource pool for the establishment to be used to wreck havoc on the rest of us. All they have to do is take away the cookie jar.

Who Would Win?

Who would prevail in a second American civil war? Tactically speaking, conservatives have the upper hand and are far better prepared. Food rioters wouldn’t last beyond three to six weeks as starvation takes its toll, and mindless mobs would not last long against seasoned riflemen. The military, though suffering purges by the White House, still contains numerous conservatives within its ranks. Outside influences, including NATO or the United Nations, are a possibility. There are numerous factors to consider. But I would point out that the most dangerous adversary Constitutional conservatives face is not the left, Obama, or a Federal government gone rogue. Rather, our greatest adversary is ourselves.

If lured into a left/right civil war, would most conservatives be able to see beyond the veil and recognize that the fight is not about Obama, or the Left, or tyrannical government alone? Could we be co-opted by devious influences disguised as friends and compatriots? Will we end up following neocon salesmen and military elites who materialize out of the woodwork at the last minute to "lead us to victory" while actually leading us towards globalization with a slightly different face?

If a civil conflict has been war gamed by the establishment, you can bet they have contingency plans regardless of which side attains the upper hand. In the end, if we do not make the fight about the bankers and globalists, the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund, the Council On Foreign Relations, etc., then everyone loses. Who wins in a new American civil war? If we become blinded by the trespasses of a certain White House jester, only the globalists will win.

Has America become the land of the double standard?

WHAT HAS AMERICA BECOME?

Has America become the land of the double standard?

Let’s see: if we lie to the Congress, it’s a felony and if the Congress lies to
us it’s just politics; if we dislike a black person, we’re racist and if a black
person dislikes whites, it’s their 1st Amendment right; the government spends
millions to rehabilitate criminals and they do almost nothing for the victims;
in public schools you can teach that homosexuality is OK, but you better not
use the word God in the process; you can kill an unborn child, but it is wrong
to execute a mass murderer; we don’t burn books in America, we now rewrite
them; we got rid of communist and socialist threats by renaming them
progressive; we are unable to close our border with Mexico, but have no problem
protecting the 38th parallel in Korea; if you protest against President Obama’s
policies you’re a terrorist, but if you burned an American flag or George Bush
in effigy it was your 1st Amendment right.

You can have pornography on TV or the internet, but you better not put a
nativity scene in a public park during Christmas; we have eliminated all
criminals in America, they are now called sick people; we can use a human fetus
for medical research, but it is wrong to use an animal.

We take money from those who work hard for it and give it to those who don’t
want to work; we all support the Constitution, but only when it supports our
political ideology; we still have freedom of speech, but only if we are being
politically correct; parenting has been replaced with Ritalin and video games;
the land of opportunity is now the land of handouts; the similarity between
Hurricane Katrina and the gulf oil spill is that neither president did anything to help.

And how do we handle a major crisis today? The government appoints a committee
to determine who’s at fault, then threatens them, passes a law, raises our
taxes; tells us the problem is solved so they can get back to their reelection campaign.

What has happened to the land of the free and home of the brave?

——————————————————————————————
Due to the lack of space and time, the following are a few of the issues America is facing:

1. Restriction of Free Speech(First Amendment)
2. IRS‘ targeting of conservative and tea party groups
3. Justice Department targeting of Associated Press and Fox News journalists
4. “Obamacare” damaging economy, healthcare providers, redistributing wealth, penalizing uninsured, increased taxes
5. Deficits ballooning out of control

6. Suppressing religious institutions and speech

7. Gun Control (Second Amendment)
8. Racism
9. Abortion
10. Terrorism – ie: Benghazi Coverup; Ft. Hood killings, Boston bombers
11. No Punishment/Accountability of Government employees for crimes against the “people” – ie: Benghazi, IRS.

SO, WHAT CAN WE DO?

1. PRAY for wisdom and guidance – for our leaders and for ourselves.
2. GET INVOLVED: Seek out and support new, honest politicians (Pres., Reps., Senators, Governors, etc.)
3. EDUCATE yourself, and VOTE your conscience (do not be swayed when you have ballot in hand.)
4. CONTACT existing Legislators and Congressmen/women to express your opinions. (email, phone, text)
5. ATTEND Townhall meetings and ask questions.
6. Push State legislators for a CONVENTION OF STATES to amend the US Constitution – term limits on
Legislative and Judicial branches of government, limit use of executive orders, etc. (34 states needed)

Who Is Really Abusing Children?

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE AMERICAN FAMILY

Who Is Really Abusing Children?

Has anyone bothered to find out just who it is breaking up families all over the country? Some people blame people like me and others in the VOCAL (Victims of Child Abuse Laws, Inc.) organization who are very critical of the "witch-hunt" atmosphere in the child protection business today. They claim we are "against the family" and just want to "make things easier for the child abuser." They claim that we are doing everything in our power to hurt family values.

WHO IS REALLY AGAINST THE FAMILY?
To those who say that, I ask: "Just who is it that takes children from their families at the slightest hint of "possible" abuse and puts them in foster homes where they're statistically much more likely to be abused by the foster parents or other residents than at home? Or into juvenile detention centers where they are mixed with all ages of children, some of them gang members and even murderers -- where they are almost guaranteed to be beaten or sexually assaulted? How about those who find no place at all to put them and so shuttle them back and forth from office to office like so much luggage and they're forced to sleep on the floors there? Isn't this child abuse?

PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO SHOW CHILDREN AFFECTION
I'm a grandfather who is afraid to be alone with the grandchildren he loves because someone who has a dispute with me might someday anonymously accuse me of child abuse and those "dirty-minded" people at the child protection agency will believe him with no more "evidence" than that and ruin my life. I'm also a father. And even though I was not even accused of any wrongdoing when the child protectors went after my equally innocent former wife (I wasn't even in the state), I have not seen two of my children since 1970. Even though they could not prove any charges against their mother, and didn't even have any at all for me, they kept them anyway and used every scam and scheme possible to keep them and put them up for adoption.

FALSE MEMORIES

I'm a man who still fears that someone, somewhere, will accuse him of an imaginary evil deed that could have happened many years ago based on the long-discredited "recovered memory syndrome (now known as "false memory syndrome)" that some judges still accept as evidence. Under this theory, anybody can allege that anybody else is guilty of child sex abuse, even murder, and that they "just remembered it" under "treatment." Many judges have put people in prison for long terms based on these unsupported claims with no independent corroborating evidence.

DAMNED IF YOU DON'T, PROTECTED IF YOU DO!
I'm afraid to be alone with any child because the "Good Samaritan Laws" make it so easy for anybody to accuse anybody else of child abuse or child sex abuse without fear of legal reprisal even if the report can be proven to be a lie and brought up for personal gain. Meanwhile that same law forces anybody who regularly deals with children to report even the slightest suspicion of child abuse (they call them "mandated reporters) under the threat of punishment of they don't, and complete protection if they do. So naturally they will, in self-protection. Even if they don't really believe the case represents real child abuse but are afraid someone else will.

LEGAL ADVICE: REPORT CHILD ABUSE

Lawyers routinely advise people to allege child abuse because there is "no cost." They can't be punished even if their perfidy is proven. There has been a huge rise in allegations of child abuse by people in all kinds of adversary situations because of this, but especially in contested divorce actions. Landlords in landlord-tenant disputes are another large group of false accusers. But the "child protectors," who should know better, accept such reports as true and routinely ruin the lives of families based on false reports.

People are becoming more and more aware of the ease with which they can set the "child protector hounds a-baying" after somebody with a simple anonymous telephone call to a child abuse hotline and they're doing it a lot more often. It's an easy and simple way to get back at someone who has displeased them. It's an "atom bomb" to a family. And no one can punish them for it. In most cases they can't even ask who they are.

And when the child protectors get into it they care not about such inconveniences as guilt. You're automatically guilty because some anonymous person said you were. From that point on, their only goal in most cases is to take your children away from you permanently. They'll do anything, say anything, twist your every word and act, lie to you and about you, and those lies will be accepted as "evidence" in their "rubber-stamp courts."

If, for some reason, the court finds you not guilty, they will keep the children and continue their relentless efforts to destroy your family. To them, the fact that the court didn't find you guilty means nothing. You're still guilty. They just couldn't prove it. And since their action to keep your children is "civil" and not really related to the criminal action, they can do it.

80% OF ALL CHILD ABUSE REPORTS ARE UNFOUNDED!
Eighty percent! And that's by their own figures! Still they treat every accusation as gospel. They go after the family with a vengeance, using the full power and authority of the government, spending ,money like water, destroying family after family, day after day, eighty percent of which are innocent! In the process they're often guilty of child abuse and even child sex abuse themselves.

PENILE PLETHYSMOGRAPHY
This is one of their favorite "treatments." A phallus-shaped object is inserted into a girl's vagina or a ring is placed around the base of a boy's erect penis (I don't know what they do to make it erect). Then they're shown government-made pornography to "find out what turns them on." This is true! I couldn't have even imagined doing such a thing to a child, let alone make it up. And remember: many of these children are as young as twelve years of age! They call this "treatment." I call it "government perpetrated child sex abuse." What would you call it?

CHILDREN DENIED AFFECTION

More and more people, male and female alike, are making it their business to never be alone with a child. Not even their own, for fear of being the subject of a vicious accusation caused by the current child abuse hysteria. Consequently, people like me, who love children, are denied the innocent fun of playing with their grandchildren or with any others because of the "dirty minds" of the "child protectors." Children are denied the love and affection they need and used to be able to expect from parents, grandparents, care-givers, and others who love them. Teachers and other caregivers who used to regularly show affection for their charges now are afraid to touch them. And the children just don't understand why these people now shy away from them. They just know they do.

CHILD CARE WORKER SHORTAGE
There is now a shortage of people willing to work with children. No one seems able to figure out why. I can, can you?

The job of the child protectors is to see to it that every child has a place to be "safe and warm." But instead they rip them from their loving families and put them in places where they can really be hurt. The children cannot understand why they've been "stolen away." So the net result of what the child protectors do is to directly physically and sexually abuse them while they're undergoing the very real indirect abuse of being torn from their homes and the arms of their loving families and being subjected to what can best be described as an "uncertain future."

Many of them never see their parents again and end up not caring because a concerted effort has been made to poison their minds against their parents. They often stay "in the system" until they become adults, at which time they're dumped at a bus stop with a few bucks and advice on how to get on welfare. Which only reinforces their own dependency on the system.

I love my two boys one of which I lost last year and my sweet daughter  , but I'm afraid that if I ever see them again they'll reject me because their minds have been poisoned against me. I'd like to find my boys and tell them how I feel. But I don't know if I could take it if they rejected me. Could you?

To further understand this problem, you should read Global Control of Your Children."http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/2013/11/global-control-of-your-children.html

The first thing you must do to help in this fight is to keep yourself informed as to things the power seekers don't want you to know.

GLOBAL CONTROL OF YOUR CHILDREN

GLOBAL CONTROL OF YOUR CHILDREN

GLOBAL CONSPIRACY?

No, I'm not joining the ranks of the conspiracy theorists who think all our troubles are due to the machinations of members of a single conspiracy. I've said many times that such a conspiracy could not be held together long enough to really do much damage because of all the individual egos involved. But many conspiracies, based on a similar philosophy, could very well do a lot of damage because each individual within such conspiracies expects to be the leader when such a leader is appointed as a result of their work. That since the philosophy used by those in all these conspiracies is the same, they all look like they're all part of a single conspiracy.

FORCED ALTRUISM
The philosophy involved here is that of "forced altruism." Under forced altruism, everybody who works and produces new wealth is forced to contribute to the needs of those who have not. Thus, the need of one person becomes a demand on the earnings of another.

WORLD GOVERNMENT
The proponents of a one-world government have made no bones about the fact that the government they want to set up will be a socialistic one, meaning that forced altruism will be the law of the land. Socialism is based on the forced altruist dictum of: "From each according to his ability, and to each according to his need." Which very simply means that any socialist government will take from those who earn and give to those who do not.

GLOBALLY RUN SCHOOLS

One of the very basic patterns used by the globalists is to do everything they can to take control of what is taught to your children in school so they can bring them up to be good socialists (collectivists) who believe "they are their brother's keeper." In the United States, the drive to take control of what is taught to your children in school is almost complete. But they still have a problem: some parents object to the things that are being taught and the school authorities wish to eliminate that problem by destroying the parent's authority over the children. Enter the United Nations. According to a recently published report from the United States Committee for UNICEF, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child has been ratified by 191 countries. The only holdouts are Somalia and the United States. Somalia Is now in anarchy and doesn't count. So the only real objector is the U. S. And the pressure is on.

CONSPIRACIES ARE REAL
To suggest that there are absolutely no conspiracies in politics and governance is to reveal yourself as a fool. Conspiracies to control others abound, and have done so since the first government was created. But the most effective conspiracy is one that has convinced the rest of the world there is no conspiracy and that those who maintain there is are somehow funny. That is what the United Nations and its drive to control every government in the world under a socialist system has managed to do to those who don't pay attention to politics and are thus not prepared to counter their lies. But the globalist conspiracy does exist, and they are making inroads against us every day.

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS
The "rights of the child" is the method the globalists are going to use to eliminate all parental authority over children. It is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child that will do it if they have their way. In the United States, our own government has already gone far in destroying parent's rights through their vociferous enforcement of child abuse laws through use of unconstitutional methods, their own abuse of children as well as adults, and their use of rubber-stamp courts to make their edicts law.

But, according to Nobel Prize Laureate Dr. Jose Ramos-Horta of East Timor speaking at the Convention, The convention "disaggregates" the rights of children from the rights of families and constitutes children as independent actors with rights and with respect to both parents and with respect to the state. Such language is deliberately couched in such a way as to not arouse the suspicions of those who do not pay attention to politics. But what he is really saying is that if they have their way, your children will have rights you cannot overcome. The Convention wants to emancipate children from parental authority and invest them with rights that can be enforced against their parents. It wants to completely eliminate corporal punishment in any form, while demanding that parents be responsible for any problems their children create. Under this theory, if a child decides he has a right to join a street gang or a religious cult, the parent's role would be to engage in a dialogue, rather than to exercise parental authority and inhibit the child's freedom of association or religion.

THE PARENTAL ROLE
Under the Convention, the parent's role would be to simply bring their children up according to the dictates of the United Nations. The government's role would be to "assist" them in doing this (Definition of assist: compel).

A THREAT TO OUR SOVEREIGNTY 

Proponents maintain that this Convention is not a threat to the sovereignty of any signatory nation. But look at what they themselves say. In the UNICEF publication The state of the World's Children 1997, they specify: "Once a country ratifies [the Convention] it is obliged in law to undertake all appropriate measures to assist [compel -RT] parents and other responsible parties in fulfilling their obligations under the Convention." In other words, if the government doesn't assist [compel] you in bringing up your children the United Nations way, it can be penalized. If this does not threaten our sovereignty, I don't know what will.

It goes on to say: "Fulfilling their obligations sometimes requires states to make fundamental changes in national laws, institutions, plans, policies and practices to bring them in line with the principles of the Convention. (Emphasis added) In other words, they will ultimately be required to make laws that violate the Constitution if that's what is required to bring us in line. This would ultimately destroy our Constitutional government and make it subsidiary to the United Nations. Which is, of course, what they're after.

AN ATTACK ON OUR SOVEREIGNTY FOR SURE
Clearly, this Convention is the spearhead of a radical assault on parental rights, national sovereignty, and the U. S. Constitution. It is not intended to protect children, but only to enhance the powers of the United Nations.

LOOK AT WHO IS FOR IT
Probably the best way to see just how bad this Convention is for us is to look at some of the nations who are for it: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Viet Nam. Has just one of these countries ever demonstrated even a little bit of commitment to improving the lives of children? Not even, according to Catherine Moorehead, a left-wing activist and supporter of this Convention. She said: "The Convention on Children is being violated, systematically and contemptuously, and no countries violate it more energetically than those who were the quickest to sign." Almost every ill it set out to remedy has grown worse in the years since it was drafted.

THE REAL PURPOSE  

The real purpose is to further enhance the role of the United Nations as a global government. To bring the United States in line with the edicts of the United Nations, not just about children. Children are just the pawns. But to give the United Nations more and more power over our internal affairs, incrementally, little by little, using the Hegelian Principle, causing us to sign away our own rights, hoping to solve a problem usually caused for that purpose. The United States hasn't yet signed this, or many other such treaties, and we can only hope they continue to stand in the way.

The first thing you must do to help in this fight is to keep yourself informed as to things the power seekers don't want you to know.

To do that, join my "Forced Altruism List" by going to: http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/forcedaltruism and following the instructions to get a daily update on what's happening and a place where you can express your own gripes and frustrations by posting them to the entire List.

You may also read the current issue of the monthly online web based newsletter, "Beyond Common Sense," by going to: http:www.angelfire.com/co2/beyondcommonsense.

If you like what you see, you may subscribe to the Announcement List that notifies you when a new issue comes out by going to: http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/beyondcommonsense and following the instructions.

STOP! trying to put lipstick on this pig, ObamaCare is socialism

STOP! trying to put lipstick on this pig, ObamaCare is socialism

There’s Something Happening Here

Have you ever had a song or maybe just a few lines from an old song pop into your head seemingly out of nowhere, but then wouldn’t go away?  Crazy as this sounds, I can’t seem to shake the lead lines of a 1966 song written by Steven Stills for his group at the time, Buffalo Springfield, with its haunting melody:



There’s something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear…

While you groove ahead about ..the man with a gun over there.. allow me to say there is a very good reason for these lines to keep popping up, ‘cause without a doubt - something’s happening here, and what it is, ain’t even close to being clear. ‘Cause the president is - Telling me I’ve got to beware.

Most regular readers here at CFP have known since 2009 or so that the name Affordable Care Act (ACA) was nothing more than political marketing baloney, and being affordable was never even a consideration.  And, you also knew that the name his health care law is better known as, ObamaCare, had even less to do with care than it did affordability. So, knowing what we know, aren’t you a little surprised that so many people are just now realizing, he lied when he said, “You can keep your doctor.. your insurance plan.. while saving $2,500 per family.”



It’s not that you and I are any more accustomed to his lies, but we all know that his biggest lie by far had nothing to do with healthcare, and started with the words, “I do solemnly swear…” I must also admit, with a Cheshire Cat smile, that the hope he was referring to was that one day in our not too distant future, the name Obama will become synonymous with lying;  like “Come on, that was a bald-faced obama, you can’t expect us to believe that.” Now wouldn’t that be poetic justice for a disciple of Saul Alinsky to allow We The People to get the final - ridicule!  

I think it’s time we stop, children. What’s that sound? Everybody look what’s going down.

Interestingly, these same people who are just now waking up wanted to believe that their President, the Leader of the Free World, would not intentionally mislead them,  that he wouldn’t lie to us just to win an election. The operative words are - to us - because they are now the ones who just had their health insurance policy - cancelled. Now they have to turn away, be it momentarily during a commercial break from The Good Wife, and say - Damn! A new policy is going to cost me twice what we were paying with these outrageously high deductibles, AND, our children are grown so we don’t need under 12 year old dental; my wife doesn’t need maternity or abortion coverage; or end-of-life counseling.   The newly-awoken will soon find out what being on the giving end of the redistribution of wealth equation feels like.

Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you’re always afraid. You step out of line, the man comes and takes you away.

On October 1st, after spending the past 4 years as an unpopular concept, his signature achievement met the unpopular, light-of-day reality, as the untested healthcare exchange website - healthcare.gov - unbeknownst to anyone in his administration - went live - well, went almost live. Numbers and statistics have never been my strong suit, so it’s understandable why my favorite report on the number of signups in the early days was that more Americans had landed on the Moon than signed up for a new ObamaCare compliant health insurance policy, with 76% of that number, I’m told, placing their insurance order in a shopping cart, as they had to watch the end of The Good Wife. As October turned to November the lies as cover for the earlier lies almost got down to defining the word ‘is’, as Bill Clinton did so slyly.  But, Steny Hoyer came close when he said, he didn’t mean “You can keep it - PERIOD, what he meant to add was “..so long as the policy didn’t change.” But, Steny conveniently omitted that to be compliant, all health insurance policies had to ‘change’ because ObamaCare mandated it. Thank you, Steny, you can sit down now.  And, as everybody ...started to look at what’s going down - Obama panicked!  

Battle lines being drawn. Nobody’s right, if everybody’s wrong.

There seems to be a fundamental battle, with lines being drawn between the policies written into the law and the political showmanship necessary for selling the law to the masses. Now, you can keep your healthcare plan. Period! Well, kinda, but maybe we should have used a small ‘p’ and without the exclamation point.  President Obama told us - again - the other day that, “If you like your insurance policy, you can keep it - For A Year! But, surprise! He can’t make this promise work either, because what he just promised is out of his control, it’s now up to the insurance companies to make that promise work. But, nobody’s right, if everybody’s wrong. Have you ever noticed, how it takes a man with Barack Obama’s integrity to one day refer to all the insurance companies as “Bad Apples” for not meeting his standards and requirements of ObamaCare; but the next day, when he needs them for shifting the blame away from himself, they are - Good Apples.  And, as we’ve come to expect from Dishonest Barack, being in his Good-Apple-Graces may be short lived.  You see, insurance companies don’t want the risk of being his fall guys either; but, they are also smart enough to realize that his latest fix was put in play primarily to shift the blame for policies being cancelled away from ObamaCare and right at them - the mean ‘fat cats’ insurance corporations - aka Bad Apples.

But, even if his latest fix works - it won’t!  What happens if by the end of November healthcare.gov is still not working? How ‘bout the end of December? Since the only way people can receive their federal subsidies on their healthcare policy is through the ObamaCare exchange, if it’s not working, millions who were not able to sign up, will end up paying a fine (or is it a tax?) to the IRS, or say it isn’t so, they will be left with nothing but getting health insurance the old fashioned way by calling an agent on the phone and deciding freely on a policy that works best for them; and then go out to dinner and a movie, in America, with the money that they just saved.

By the way, this latest promise in no way helps those five million citizens.  Like collateral damage their policies were cancelled, and as one commentator, wittily using the medical metaphor said, “You can’t get those shots back in the syringe.” Except for one small problem, they’re not collateral damage or shots - they are American people - who got screwed. The Democrats are in chaos and will try to offer - something - because that’s a lot of votes they could lose - which sadly is their only motivation. I have never been aware of such reversals of fortune since The Republican Shutdown, to today’s Democratic Signature Healthcare Implosion. Meanwhile, one industry specialist noted: “Changing the rules after healthcare plans have already met the requirements of the law could destabilize the market and result in higher premiums for all of our customers.”  The federal government telling a privately owned company what products it can or cannot sell is like them telling us we can’t buy a Pontiac. Oh Wait! They already did that, never mind.

Young people speaking their minds. Getting so much resistance from behind.

It seems that President Obama has gotten everyone, including Congress, so used to his dictatorial tactic of using EO’s to change or amend any part of a law that doesn’t fit his ever evolving agenda, so he threw the old ‘enforcement discretion’, out there, and why not? It worked so well to keep the illegal aliens ‘corralled’ while he works the back-room-deals for their amnesty voting rights. This is basically telling insurance companies to break the law, and we’ll use ‘discretion’ (wink) in enforcing it’.  But, this time there is a Problem! (w/a capital ‘P’) Indiscriminately changing laws on his own violates the Constitutional separation of powers, usurping the power of Congress to exercise its own independent judgment. Now Speaker Boehner must come out of the smoking lounge long enough to say more than, “I don’t see within the law how they can do this administratively… to keep his pledge that would be both legal and effective.”  Someone must get a note to Johnny B. that clearly states, “You debate the legality of ‘amendments’ to the law in the House of Representatives!” Signed - We The People.

But, truly I think .. it’s time we STOP! Children, what’s that sound? Everybody look what’s going down. It’s an overthrow of our Constitutional Republic; it’s socialism destroying our freedoms, that’s what’s going down.

The definition of socialism includes the denial of individual rights - by force. That force used doesn’t always imply a gun-in-ya-face, but it can easily lead to that as we witnessed in Watertown, Massachusetts after the Boston Marathon bombing.  Because, force can also be by overly burdensome taxation, mandates, and regulations.  ObamaCare is by force. There is an old humorous saying that says socialists don’t care what you do as long as it’s mandatory, but it’s not that humorous, when the joke is on us.

STOP! trying to put lipstick on this pig, ObamaCare is socialism, with its 2,000+ pages and tens of thousands of regulations written or to be written by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  ObamaCare is control.  ObamaCare is power over America’s freedoms.  Before ObamaCare, five million people chose their healthcare policies - freely. But, since ObamaCare became ‘the law of the land’ mandating that all insurance ‘products’ meet his new federal standards, while our freedom to choose was taken away or better yet - cancelled!

We are well aware that ObamaCare is only the first step in their ultimate utopian goal of a single-payer, government run/controlled healthcare system.

Our job is to STOP! them. We say - I want my country back.  This may well be our final chance at - getting it back. It’s not going to be easy either, as they say, politics is a blood sport, some of us may get ‘scarred’ a little.  But, here is the choice: we either become - One Nation under Obama with Poverty and Unemployment for All - or between now and November, 2014 we work our ‘no-ifs-ands-or-butts’ off, to send the ultimate message to - Cancel the employment of every Democratic Representative and Senator who nullified their oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America by voting in favor of ObamaCare.  PERIOD.