In My Right Mind

"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain

My Photo
Location: Universal City, Texas, United States

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

Wednesday, September 04, 2013

Liberals All of a Sudden Love War!

When Saddam Hussein used chemical warfare against people in his country, there wasn't a peep of outrage, or call for military retaliation from one single liberal. In fact, they did nothing but bash Bush for trying to, and then going to war with Iraq. Somehow, though, when Syria does it to their citizens, its a serious outrage and all of the liberal media networks cover it non-stop, and the drumbeats of war commence. We have to go to war now! Bush made every precautionary move before he went to war with Iraq. He took his case to the UN and gained a lot of support. He took his case to Congress and waited for their approval. Once he received it, he proceeded. Obama, on the other hand, has not approached the UN for its approval. He has had to grudgingly wait for Congress' approval, despite his wish to go to war without them, and he only has what, France's support? Even our strongest ally, England has left our side on this one (what does that tell you?). And, oh by the way, guess who's on the side of Syria? Russia. This could get ugly. My question is, is it a smart idea for America to come to the aide of the Syrian rebels, who are comprised of al Qaeda terrorists? The very ones that sucker punched us on 9/11? What kind of President do we have? You see, liberals are not only hypocrites, they also aren't really peace lovers who detest war. They just detest wars that they themselves don't start. And they seem to be on the side of the Islamo-fascist terrorists. I don't know for sure, but I think they are cowards who think that if we just placate them, they will leave us alone. Wishful thinking. We do NOT need to get involved in Syria. We have enough of our own problems domestically to tend to. How about we listen to what George Washington warned us about in his farewell speech; to not get entangled in foreign alliances? How about we stop trying to be the policemen of the world? America was not founded to push the Democratic/Republican system of government onto the rest of the world. We were founded as a Democratic Republic for us to operate under as a nation. The other nations are free to pursue whatever government and way of life they wish, as long as they don't try and tread on us.

Monday, March 18, 2013

The Anti-Federalists Were Right!

I have been involved in a debate with another person who defends The Federalist Papers and our present Constitution. She characterizes the Anti-Federalist authors as merely trying to ditch the proposed Constitution and, if they had had their way, we would never have had a Constitution. This is a misguided framing of those authors’ intent. They were men who, like the authors of The Constitution, revered personal liberty and distrusted anything that might smack of tyranny. They also saw the Articles of Confederation as being lacking in any real power assigned to the Federal Government; teetering towards anarchy. Their criticism of the proposed Constitution was based on perceived loop holes in it that could in fact, in time, produce a tyrannous Federal Government. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention were sent there to repair the weak Articles of Confederation, not to discard it and come up with something else. My opponent asserts that had the Anti-Federalists won, we would have no Bill of Rights (their contribution) or any constitution whatsoever for that matter. This is what I deem as a false “doomsday” argument; where it was essential that the Constitution the Federalists gave us was to be adopted; lest we have nothing at all. I doubt very seriously that the Anti-Federalists would have rested after defeating the proposed Constitution with nothing offered in its place. She maintains that the Constitution has served us well for over 200 years. To that, I would agree. But, it is evident to any student of history that slowly but surely, after the ratification of the Constitution, the Federal Government has grown in its size and encroachment on its citizen’s personal liberties; to such a level that we are now at the point where we face a Federal Government threatening to curtail our 2nd Amendment rights or abolish them all together, while it arms its Social Security personnel (what do you suppose that is all about?). It looks to me that it is plain that the warnings of the Anti-Federalists about a Federal Government, as framed by The Constitution, would spiral towards one that was tyrannous was right after all and that States would end up with no real rights. What do you think?

Sunday, July 04, 2010

"Don't Tread On Me"

234 years ago, a group of English colonists gathered together to come up with a bold message to their King. They had tried and tried to receive justice as English citizens. They had reached out to the King with messages pleading time and time again to be treated fairly and for him to respect their rights as English citizens. This time the message they sent to King George III was different. It was an announcement that they were no longer his subjects. They declared their independence from England and its King.

Most of the men who bravely put their signature to The Declaration Of Independence forfeited their property and wealth. Some became bankrupt as a result of their participation in this declaration of defiance. The amount of sheer bravery it must have taken to take on - what would at the surface looked like a foolish, suicidal goal of independence - is beyond what most of us today even have the fortitude to even attempt.
Benjamin Franklin was reported to have declared: “We must all be prepared to hang together or we shall surely all hang separately.”

Of course, history shows that they were able to muster an army of like minded colonists who successfully defeated an army many times their size. And today, we celebrate our independence and freedom as a separate nation that this group of brave men initiated for us through their declaration of independence from tyranny.

But, it’s not just their declaration of independence from tyranny that is to be taken away from The Declaration Of Independence, penned by Thomas Jefferson back in 1776. These Founders of our great nation declared something revolutionary that would inform the government that they would form. They had the audacity to declare that people’s rights and personal liberty come not from any King or government, but from Nature’s God.

In this day and age where ideologies like socialism have become popular, where a lot of people look to the Federal Government for answers to every problem, it is important to recognize that this is a completely antithetical attitude and belief than that of those that gave us our Democratic Republic. They only saw government as a necessary evil. To them, the government’s only role was to secure the God-given personal liberty and rights that its citizens were born with.

To them, anytime the people started believing that they derived their rights and sustenance from government that tyranny was right around the corner. In fact, it is very un-American to adhere to the socialist/progressive/liberal agenda of the left in this country today. Too much was sacrificed from 1776 on for our personal liberty to throw it all away on these alien ideas about how Americans should be governed. From Thomas Paine, who helped start the desire for independence rolling with his popular pamphlet, “Common Sense”: “That government is best which governs least”.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

When Will It Matter?

I received this via e-mail today. I have no idea of who the actual author is, but this is spot on. Initially, I wanted to give Obama a chance. But, it is clear now that his "Hope and Change" agenda is really anti-America. As Glenn Beck says, do your own homework on this. If it's true, and I believe it is, this should raise your blood pressure a notch or two:

Fundamental Transformation of America

When Obama wrote a book and said he was mentored as a youth by Frank, (Frank Marshall Davis) an avowed Communist, people said it didn't matter.

When it was discovered that his grandparents, were strong socialists, sent Obama's mother to a socialist school, introduced Frank Marshall Davis to young Obama,
People said it didn't matter. When people found out that he was enrolled as a Muslim child in school and his father and step father were both Muslims,
people said it didn't matter.

When he wrote in another book he authored "I will stand with them (Muslims) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction." People said it didn't matter.

When he admittedly, in his book,said he chose Marxist friends and professors in college, people said it didn't matter.

When he traveled to Pakistan, after college on an unknown national passport,
people said it didn't matter.

When he sought the endorsement of the Marxist party in 1996 as he ran for the Illinois Senate, people said it doesn't matter.

When he sat in a Chicago church for twenty years and listened to a preacher spew hatred for America and preach black liberation theology, people said it didn't matter.

When independent Washington organization, that tracks senate voting records, gave him the distinctive title as the "most liberal senator", people said it didn't matter.

When the Palestinians in Gaza, set up a fund raising telethon to raise money for his election campaign, people said it didn't matter.

When his voting record supported gun control, people said it didn't matter.

When he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done, people said it didn't matter.

When he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan and Mummar Kadaffi and Hugo Chavez, people said it didn't matter.

When it was pointed out that he was a total, newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing, people said it didn't matter.

When he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals, people said it didn't matter.

When his voting record in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question, people said it didn't matter.

When he refused to wear a flag, lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry,
people said it didn't matter.

When people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises, people said it didn't matter.

When he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance, people said it didn't matter.

When he surrounded himself in the White house with advisors who were pro gun control, pro abortion, pro homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition people said it didn't matter.

When he aired his views on abortion, homosexuality and a host of other issues,
people said it didn't matter.

When he said he favors sex education in Kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination, people said it didn't matter.

When his background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him, people said it didn't matter.

When the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate, people said it didn't matter.

When he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezco, a man of questionable character, who is now in prison and had helped Obama to a sweet deal on the purchase of his home, people said it didn't matter.

When it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire Marxist, spent a ton of money to get him elected, people said it didn't matter.

When he started appointing Czars that were radicals, revolutionaries, and even avowed Marxist/Communist, people said it didn't matter.

When he stood before the nation and told us that his intentions were to "fundamentally transform this nation" into something else, people said it didn't matter.

When it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and served as an attorney for ACORN, people said it didn't matter.

When he appointed cabinet members and several advisors who were tax cheats and socialist, people said it didn't matter.

When he appointed a Science Czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers, people said it didn't matter.

When he appointed Cass Sunstein as regulatory Czar and he believes in "Explicit Consent", harvesting human organs with out family consent, and to allow animals to be represented in court, while banning all hunting, people said it didn't matter.

When he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual, and organizer of a group called gay, lesbian, straight, Education network, as safe school czar and it became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers, people said it didn't matter.

When he appointed Mark Lloyd as diversity czar and he believed in curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the wealth and admires Hugo Chavez, people said it didn't matter.

When Valerie Jarrett was selected as Obama's senior White House advisor and she is an avowed Socialist, people said it didn't matter.

When Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director said Mao Tse Tung was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for inspiration,
people said it didn't matter.

When he appointed Carol Browner as global warming czar, and she is a well known socialist working on Cap And Trade as the nations largest tax, people said it doesn't matter.

When he appointed Van Jones, an ex-con and avowed Communist as Green Energy Czar, who since had to resign when this was made known, people said it didn't matter.

When Tom Daschle, Obama's pick for Health And Human Services Secretary could not be confirmed, because he was a tax cheat, people said it didn't matter.

When as president of the United States, he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, people said it didn't matter.

When he traveled around the world criticizing America and never once talking of her greatness, people said it didn't matter.

When his actions concerning the Middle-East seemed to support the Palestinians over Israel, our long time friend, people said it doesn't matter.

When he took American tax dollars to resettle thousands of Palestinians from Gaza to the United States, people said it doesn't matter.

When he upset the Europeans by removing plans for a missile defense system against the Russians, People said it doesn't matter.

When he played politics in Afghanistan by not sending troops the Field Commanders said we had to have to win, people said it didn't matter.

When he started spending us into a debt that was so big we could not pay it off,
people said it didn't matter.

When he took a huge spending bill under the guise of stimulus and used it to pay off organizations, unions and individuals that got him elected, people said it didn't matter.

When he took over insurance companies, car companies, banks, etc. people said it didn't matter.

When he took away student loans from the banks and put it through the government,
people said it didn't matter.

When he designed plans to take over the health care system and put it under government control, people said it didn't matter.

When he set into motion a plan to take over the control of all energy in the United States through Cap and Trade, people said it didn't matter.

When he finally completed his transformation of America into a Socialist State, people finally woke up........ but it was too late.

Any one of these things, in and of themselves does not really matter. But, when you add them up one by one you get a phenomenal score that points to the fact that our President, Obama, is determined to make America over into a Marxist/Socialist Society. All of the items in the preceding paragraphs have been put into place. All can be documented very easily.

Before you disavow this, do an Internet search. The last paragraph alone is not yet cast in stone. You and I will write that paragraph. Will it read as above or will it be a more happy ending for most of America? Personally, I like happy endings.

If you are an Obama Supporter, please do not be angry with me because I think your president is a socialist. There are too many facts supporting this. If you seek the truth you will be richer for it. Don't just belittle the opposition. Search for the truth. I did. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Constitutionalist, Libertarians and what have you, we all need to pull together. We all must pull together or watch the demise of a society that we all love and cherish. If you are a religious person, pray for our nation.

Never before in the history of America have we been confronted with problems so huge that the very existence of our country is in jeopardy. Don't rely on most television news and what you read in the newspapers for the truth. Search the Internet. Yes, there is a lot of bad information, lies and distortions there too but you are smart enough to spot the fallacies.

Newspapers are a dying breed. They are currently seeking a bailout from the government. Do you really think they are about to print the truth? Obama praises all the television news networks except Fox, who he has waged war against. There must be a reason. He does not call them down on any specifics, just a general battle against them. If they lie, he should call them out on it but he doesn't.

Please, find the truth, it will set you free. Our biggest enemy is not China, Russia, or Iran. No, our biggest enemy is a contingent of politicians in Washington DC.

Friday, January 29, 2010

Is Obama Really Listening?

President Obama stated during his State Of The Union Address a few nights ago that he was willing to sit down with the Republicans and listen to what they have to say about national healthcare solutions. Today, he made a start at making good toward his offer, sort of.

I was watching during lunch time a conference President Obama had today with some Republicans in Baltimore. Beneath his calm, pleasant sounding demeanor was a continued display of his arrogance. Obama may want the nation to believe he’s ready to listen to the other side, but his reaction to the Republicans who questioned him today demonstrated that he really has no real intention of taking their solutions or concerns seriously. He just made his offer to fool those who see him as something new and fresh in DC politics.

He was questioned by a Republican about what they should say to their constituents in response to his administration’s repeated accusations that the Republicans didn’t have any solutions to offer. Instead of actually stepping up and either defending that outrageous claim or admitting it was not true, he just tapped danced around the question without ever really answering it. Instead, he wanted to apply the need for an “independent” professional look at the Republican’s solutions.

As for the Republican plan for Tort Reform, Obama claimed that an “independent expert” had concluded that the overall effect of unnecessary law suits on the fees that doctors have to charge to compensate for their malpractice insurance costs was minimal at best. He produced some miniscule percentage of its effect and claimed that in the long term it wouldn’t really help to lower healthcare costs.

Really? If lawsuits have such a small impact then why have we being hearing differently from doctors for years? Doctors have complained for years that the high price of malpractice insurance necessary to defend them against greedy frivolous lawsuits has almost made it not worth the effort, and forces them to charge much more for their services than they would prefer. The idea that there isn’t a problem with frivolous law suits in this country, especially in the medical field, and that it isn’t resulting in the rise of the cost of medical services is ludicrous at best and down right falsehood at worst.

So, this is the best Obama can do to refute tort reform, a nefarious statistic from an unknown expert? Sorry I am not buying it.

Next, Obama tried to take on the Republican solution for interstate insurance purchase being possible. What was his problem? The unproven claim that insurance companies would find a way to “cherry pick” and only offer insurance to the healthy leaving the unhealthy without insurance. To the contrary, if insurance is expanded to a wider free market of competition there would plenty of opportunities to find affordable insurance from those companies that are looking for clients, particularly clients that other insurance companies allegedly wouldn’t want.

Before I get to the most arrogant and telling example that demonstrated today that Obama’s offer was bogus and that he really has no intention to listen to the other side, there was a common factor that all of his non-answers to the Republican’s question to him mentioned earlier. For Obama, in order for the Republican’s solutions to be consider they must be submitted separately to “independent experts” to approve of. Of course, there has never been such a litmus test for Obama and the Democrats’ healthcare plans.

He lectured the Republicans on the need for their solutions to be not just those of politics but rather well thought out, practical doable solutions. Yet, for his side and his plans, it is different. It is ok for the Democrats to meet behind closed doors and create their own non-vetted solutions and then turn around and claim they haven’t heard anything from the Republicans for alternative solutions to consider. Do you see the hypocrisy of this stance? It was yet another example of Obama doing his best to obfuscate it by a barrage of pompous lecturing to the Republicans about what real solutions should look like.

Finally, there was his threat to the Republicans that if they insist on accusing his and his party’s solution as an attempt for the Federal Government to expand and own even more, the health care market, this time (even though that is exactly what he is after), then they would have no clout with him no matter what they came up with.

Is Obama really listening and reaching out to the Republicans in a bi-partisan way? No. He just uses nice sounding promises to fool those in our citizenry who are incapable of seeing through his insincere flattering words. Obama is a great orator no doubt. But if the listener pays attention to the difference between his words and his actions, especially after a year of evidentiary proof, it becomes clear that he talks out of both sides of his mouth.

Obama has change in mind for America alright. It is the change that progressives/socialists/Marxists want. He’s not listening America. He doesn’t care. He has his agenda and vision for America and he is going to do his damned best to inflict it upon us amidst a flurry of pleasant sounding oration.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Obama's "Hope & Change" One Year Later

I was amazed during the 2008 Presidential Campaign at the vast number of gullible people who were mesmerized by Obama's speeches about "Hope" and "Change We Can Believe In". Here was a guy speaking a bunch of pleasant sounding platitudes, without any real definition of what he meant. It was just empty, pretty sounding words. Now, one year later, he has shown us what he meant.

Change we can believe in? Hope? A new era in politics in Washington? Transparency? Hardly.

One of the first things that Obama and his progressive/leftist democrat congressmen did was to expand the bail out process. It started with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac being to "big to fail". Admittedly, it started under President George W. Bush's watch. I am not a sycophant of Bush and this was yet another example of his not really holding true conservative values.

I held my nose and voted for McCain. He could have done a lot toward his victory had he refused to suspend his campaign and return to Washington to help Bush bail them out. He should have taken a stand against this atrocity. In capitalism, no one is "too big to fail". For every business that folds, there are others that spring up to provide even better services.

But, Obama took it beyond that. He moved on to banks and managed to own them through his bail outs. Government controlling the banking industry, step one toward Fascism. Not Fascism yet, but a step in that direction. Government has no place in the private sector, much less trying to control it. The idea that the federal government sets the salaries and bonuses, if any, of bank CEOs is anathema.

Next came his administration’s focus on owning the auto industry. Only Ford, declined, Step 2. Now the government is controlling the banking industry and the auto industry. Before someone starts with the whole, "aren't you exaggerating" shtick, let's not forget tax cheat Geitner's warning that the government is watching all financial institutions that might be teetering toward failure. Yep. The slippery slope has begun and the federal government is chomping at the bit to own even more of the private sector.

Then there was the first stimulus package that Obama swore would be devoid of pork. It looks like he lied. It was replete with wasteful pork, not to mention sinking our nation into further debt. He is even talking about a second stimulus package, as if he hasn't already sunk our nation into a huge deficit. Even China, who is certainly not our friend, was warning him about irresponsible debt! Debt that we owe them nonetheless.

Lastly, on Obama's disastrous economical plans, is his "Universal Healthcare" scam. Let's see, the federal government controls banks and financial institutions, the auto industry and now he wants to dominate the medical industry? Step three towards Fascism. The idea of the federal government overseeing the medical industry is both frightening and ludicrous. It can't even manage Social Security, which is broke, nor Medicare, which is, you guessed it, broke. Who in their right mind would want government bureaucrats determining their worth for medical treatment?

Obama and the leftist/progressives' universal healthcare plans would sink this country into a over 3 trillion dollar debt. Someone, I don't know who, coined this as "Generational Theft". And that's precisely what it is. How can any American support the idea of pushing our debt on to our children, their children, and their children's children? Thomas Jefferson argued with George Washington about going into debt to support the war as being nothing more than a sin since it would pass the debt on to future generations to pay for. And Jefferson was, and is right!

How about Obama on foreign relations? He has made it his modus operandi to apologize to Europe and the world for America's "crimes". Isn't the President supposed to support his country and its people and not denigrate it? Then there were the embarrassing bows. It's hard to not be ashamed of this Neville Chamberlin like progressive as my President.

Then there was Obama's bone headed idea to close Guantanamo Bay and bring the terrorists there into our country for trials here within our shores, as if they were all American citizens that had constitutional rights! This is a very stupid and dangerous idea. But, it looks like Obama thinks that by appeasing the terrorists they will somehow appreciate his cowardly gestures and have a change of heart.

Lets not forget Obama's war on "man made diasters". Consider Afghanistan. Obama drug his feet for months before making a decision there despite having the reports from the military commanders there and their recommendations that victory would only be possible if he instituted a surge. Meanwhile more died there. Hmm. Obama hesitated and more were decimated.

Obama's latest spin is his refusal to see the Massachusetts vote last night in favor of Brown as a referendum against his party. Yet, now he is talking about the need to not cram his Universal Healthcare down our throats and wait until at least Scott Brown is seated. Yeah right! He was all for rushing it through until last night. This just exposes him in yet another lie.

And let’s not forget his pledge for transparency. Really? How were all those closed door meetings regarding the Universal Healthcare by the democrats, shutting out the republicans. transparent? They weren’t. And to add insult to injury, the democrats had the nerve to proclaim that the republicans didn’t have anything to bring to the table, no solutions. How could the republicans bring a solution to a room that was locked to them, denying their participation? Yeah, so much for a different tone in Washington, so much for a new era in politics that would change from the past partisan politics.

It is now past the point of irritation for us to continually hear Obama blame all of his failings on the Bush Administration. One or two times early on, could be overlooked, but now it’s his mantra to cover his ineptness at every turn.

We are now starting to see a lot of buyer's remorse when it comes to Obama. Let's hope that later this year the voters toss all the politicians out of DC, both republican and democrat. We need statesmen in Congress who are there to represent their constituents and not push their own personal agenda.

Let's hope that in 2012 we toss Obama out and send him back to Chicago. Maybe he can spend the rest of his days preaching his "everything is Bush's fault" claptrap to his sycophant progressive fans in ACORN and the other corrupt politicians in Chicago.

I didn't vote for him, so I don't have buyer's remorse. Nor am I surprised. It is time for change that we can believe in alright. It’s time for Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the liberal, moderate republicans as well, to be shown the door. It’s time to take back America before the progressive/leftists succeed in running it off a cliff and destroy the best experiment in political governance that has ever existed in human history.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Something To Think About

I recently received an e-mail from my dad that raises some concerns about Obama and our country. Here it is in its entirety:

A friend of mine (a small business owner who’s been struggling to stay afloat since the new congress and administration came into office, 2007 and 2009) sent me this email. As I pondered over the meaning of this email I've come to a few conclusions that seem to make a lot of sense to me. Maybe you'll agree or perhaps you'll disagree but, although we don't hear much from the media about this scenario of mine, it brings up possibilities to be considered.

Think about Obama's success and what he overcame to beat out a very strong political machine called the Clinton's. Everyone, in the early part of the primary stage, gave the nomination to Hillary, hands down. They all thought she’d win very easily. Obama was just a “flash in the pan”. However, Obama put together a political “money raising machine" unlike anything this country has ever seen. Obama was able (last I heard) to successfully raise nearly a billion dollars with which to outspend not only Hillary but the Republican contender, John McCain, both put together. As far as I can tell Obama still had hundreds of millions of dollars left over after he won the presidency.

Now has any one of us ever heard where the money actually came from? We heard about his successful usage of the internet and were led to believe that the young voters (including very excited blacks) supported him like no other candidate has ever enjoyed. I, for one, don’t buy all of that. In general, most young voters don’t seem to have very much money to give, especially for political donations and most blacks don’t usually donate large sums of money to any thing that would seem to be useful. (Please notice that I said “Most”)

Obama waged a very effective campaign as a “rock star” promising anything that would appeal to his new base. He spent money like no one else has ever done. But, where did the mountain of money really come from?

Here are my thoughts:

Back when Bill Clinton first ran for president something I hadn’t noticed before began to happen that greatly involved the Chinese. Their government was donating large sums of money to Clinton’s campaign, something I had never noticed before; foreign countries attempting to directly shape the outcome of our elections. I had been voting in these national elections since 1961 but this particular election was the first time I had ever known of any thing like this happening. Do you remember the trouble Al Gore got in over raising money from the Chinese having something to do with his attending services at a Buddhist Temple? How about renting out rooms at the Whitehouse (e.g. Lincoln’s bedroom) to the Chinese during Clinton’s second campaign?

If you think back to the time of the first Clinton run for the Whitehouse, in general, China was really struggling to make it. Their economy was in the toilet and at the time I thought it strange that they could afford to “help us” get our president elected. Think about China now! Which country is LOANING the USA the most money? Why it’s the same country who decided to “invest” in our national elections! It appears that China made a very, very handsome investment doesn’t it?

Now, which foreign country do you think was donating to Hillary’s campaign? Why China of course!

How in the world did Obama manage to out do her in his fund raising? Which foreign country did he use? Well you might say: I don’t know of any foreign country that donated to his campaign. Well then, WHERE’D HE GET THE MONEY????

My friends, not from a foreign country at all but from a world-wide religion (Muslim)!

And since it apparently came in via the internet I’m not too sure there’s any way for us to track it, at least as far as who the money was from.

Now, if my theory is true, what in the world are we going to do? Obama has already achieved gaining control of our banking system, automobile industry, healthcare, and on and on. Folks it’s time to take account of our situation and decide on what action we must take if we want to preserve this country for our children and grandchildren.



Dear Larry,

President Obama hosted a jobs summit at the White House recently, inviting corporate CEOs and union chiefs to participate in a forum on accelerating job creation, but one major business group was left of the guest list.

The National Federation of Independent Business was not invited to share our ideas at the event featuring 133 guests.

As noted by the Washington Times' Kara Rowland, the list of summit attendees "lacks a diversity of opinion." Labor unions and liberal economists, who supported Obama's election and the stimulus bill, are among the honored guests. At a time when unemployment is at 10 percent and the president expects it to rise, it's troubling that some of our top job creators have been shunned.

Less than 12 months from now, voters across America will go to the polls and determine the future direction of our country. The 2010 vote, more than any election in recent history, will determine the future of our families, our businesses and our freedoms ... even our way of life.

Those now in control of the government in Washington, D.C. are great at promising "change" and making utopian promises to win votes. But according to a September survey by the NFIB Research Foundation, there is little optimism on Main Street that the recession will soon be over.

They found that: "More firms plan more inventory reductions than plan to invest, and more owners plan to trim their workforce than plan to increase employment."

Why isn't our nation's small business engine roaring to life? One reason the Foundation noted is that "Legislative activities in Washington undoubtedly dampen the outlook with talk about healthcare mandates, cap and trade, card check, and new taxes on all sorts of goods and services."

Simply put, fear of what's to come is seriously dragging down our economy. And why shouldn't it?

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman, Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer and so many misguided, wrongheaded leaders in control in Washington have put their radical social agenda ahead of any common-sense effort to cut taxes, cut the deficit, and cut regulations--all barriers to economic recovery and job growth.

Washington simply does not understand that small business owners don't need more government programs. What they need is lower taxes and fewer intrusions by government. It's America's small business owners that create real, lasting jobs ... not politicians voting to spend and print more taxpayers' money.

That is why the NFIB SAFE Trust needs you front and center in the 2010 election battles. The labor unions, trial lawyers and other radical special interests will invest heavily to strengthen their power next November. We need to block their efforts whenever and wherever we can.

Your generous support is essential if we're going to build the well-financed political operation that will bring us victory in November.

We must raise the largest campaign war chest in NFIB history. Please help the NFIB SAFE Trust meet our fundraising goals by making a generous contribution of $35, $50 or perhaps even $100 today. Click here to contribute.

You and I believe in the economic miracle that is American small business. It is at the heart of America's future and freedom. Please let me hear from you today.


Dan Danner
NFIB President and CEO