DOWN THE COMMUNIST ROAD WE GO

Here is a video of a woman who was born during the time of Hitler, and grew up in East Germany under SOVIET rule.  She knows first hand the progression towards totalitarianism, and sees the parallel here in the U.S. that has been happening for decades, but has been accelerated by the Obama administration.  Listen very carefully to what she has to say.

Very interesting that Hitler provided state-run healthcare.  Obama said during his presidential campaign in 2008 that he wanted a single payer system (the government).  This administration has taken over a major automaker (GOVERNMENT MOTORS anyone?). 

Obama said he favored the redistribution of wealth during his 2008 campaign.  We've seen how well that has worked throughout history: Soviet Union, China, Cuba, etc., etc., and etc.  In our history books now, Communism is glossed over.  Missing are the pictures of the people in abject poverty, the bread lines, and the millions of people that have been murdered by Communist regimes.

During his campaign, Obama was very clear about what he wanted to do if elected.  As a matter of fact, he was one of the clearest candidates I have heard in years.  He was very clear about his Communist agenda.  Since he has been elected, he has followed that path exactly.  The only reason we are not closer to a Communist state than we are now is because Obama had a lot of trouble with support by his own party in a Congress that controlled both houses until the mid-term elections.  That should tell everyone something about just how radically left Obama is.

Remember in November . . . a vote for Obama is a vote for a continued move towards Communism.                                           

MORE OKKEYPIE CIVILITY

NO TIME FOR APATHY

I ran across this movie trailer that is a concise but excellent summation of the leftist agenda.  This is in perfect alignment with the progressives' belief from their beginnings that the Constitution is outdated and has outlived its usefulness.  Some of you who have been on this earth a little while will remember some of this.

AGENDA: Grinding America Down (Extended Trailer) from Copybook Heading Productions LLC on Vimeo.

YOU'RE UNDER ARREST - POSSESSION OF A HAPPY MEAL!

Sound funny? Sound ridiculous?  As ridiculous as it sounds, and would not be taken seriously by anyone in their right mind, it's very close to reality . . . in San Francisco that is.

The Board of Supervisors (still think that is an interesting title for a commissioner - maybe the political structure just wanted to convey the idea that we have to be "supervised" rather than actually working for the people) voted earlier this month that limited toy giveaways in meals high in calories, sodium and fat, and also required servings of fruits and vegetables with each meal.  That's right, eight of the eleven "supervisors" have the audacity to tell you that they can parent and take care of your children better than you.  Politicians telling you what you can and cannot feed your child.  (SOURCE)  

Imagine the wasted food.  The required vegetables and fruits with the meal would be mostly thrown in the trash.  When a kid goes to McDonald's, fruits and vegetables are the last thing they want.  If a parent wants fruits and vegetables with their child's meal, they won't be going to McDonald's or any similar fast food restaurants.  

But that's not the point.  The point is more and more control of people's private lives, this time deciding for parents what to feed their children.  This is another example of government gone crazy and just another encroachment into our private lives.  There is always another agenda which is little by little increasing government intrusion into daily living.  Just wonder what's next on the San Francisco's "supervisors' " list?


The mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, did the right thing.  Mayor Newsom vetoed the ordinance on November 12th (SOURCE).  Mayor Newsom said in a statement, "Parents, not politicians, should decide what their children eat, especially when it comes to spending their own money.  Despite its good intentions, I cannot support this unwise and unprecedented governmental intrusion into parental responsibilities and private choices." (SOURCE)


However, the SAN FRANCISCO POLITBURO overrode Mayor Newsom's veto this past Tuesday, so McDonald's has a little over a year to comply with this government-gone-crazy overstepping its purpose and becoming the surrogate parents of San Francisco's children.  Totally absurd.  The citizens of San Francisco should start petitions to have a recall election for the "Happy Meal 8," starting with the sponsor of the legislation, ERIC MAR.

I might send Mr. Mar a picture of me . . . eating a Big Mac and fries.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39975952/ns/business-consumer_news/?gt1=43001

HOW TO SEND THE ACLU PACKING, PART DEUX

UPDATE ON THE CHRISTIAN FLAG IN KING, NC . . .


The 24 hour guard is still there . . . 

THE FLAG IS STILL THERE!

but the ACLU is not . . . wonder why??

                                                     (cartoon created by Robert Davis)

Could it be they got a lesson on Constitutional government? That ONE person CANNOT overrule the majority?  It's happened way too many times over the years and it's time for the majority of Americans to stand up to special interest groups that use intimidation and bully tactics to promote their agenda.  As I saw one commenter say on the Christian Flag-King Facebook SITE, too many times the ACLU has said "boo!" and we all run and hide.

A look at the cases listed on the ACLU's WEBSITE clearly shows they are not the least bit interested in freedom of speech, or freedom of anything for that matter, for everyone equally.  Just as in the case of King, NC, cases are carefully chosen to advance their agenda.  The ACLU likes challenging small towns because they know small towns do not have the finances to fight the ACLU army.  That's why it's vitally important to stand up and fight for your rights as guaranteed by the Constitution that leftist groups such as the ACLU are trying to take away.  There is strength in numbers, and there are far more of us than there are of them.

cat dog United States Washington government pig sarah palin building engineering truck car Wall Street Ford Chrysler Lincoln Mercury General Motors tree insect spider plants sky space Facebook MySpace boy girl man woman TSA liberal conservative sand World War I World War II Vietnam Iraq Afghanistan Barack Obama George Bush

                                       

SO JUST WHERE ARE THE PATRIOT ACT OBJECTORS?

This report came out in the Washington Post on July 29, 2010. The article, WHITE HOUSE PROPOSAL WOULD EASE FBI ACCESS TO RECORDS OF INTERNET ACTIVITY, reported that the Obama administration was attempting to make it easier for the FBI to force companies to turn over reports of an individual's Internet activity without a court order. Let me say that again. Without a court order.

The Obama adminstration is asking Congress to amend the ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY ACT to include records of Internet activity during the upcoming fiscal year that begins October 1. The criteria for access would rest solely on the subjective judgement of FBI agents. Under this proposal, if an FBI agent believed he or she needed the information for an intelligence or terrorism investigation, then companies would have no choice to hand it over without a court order, warrant, your consent, or your knowledge. The demand for such information would not even have to come from FBI headquarters in Washington. Any FBI field office could do so on its own.

These requests, known as "national security letters", are made by the FBI routinely now. According to a 2008 inspector general report, the FBI issued 192,500 national security letters between 2003 and 2006. The report did not show how many of these letters were for Internet information. What the Obama administration wants to do is add the words "electronic communication transactional records" to the list of types of information the FBI can obtain through the use of national security letters.

While administration officials and lawyers insist that the content of a person's Internet activity records would not be included, the 2008 inspector general's report showed there were numerous possible violations of FBI regulations which included the issuance of national security letters without even having an approved investigation to justify it. In other words, information was obtained with either no investigation in progress, or an investigation that was being done with proper authority within the FBI. There were two cases that were found where information was requested that was not even permitted under Federal law. Imagine that.

Michael Sussman, an attorney for the U. S. Department of Justice under the Clinton administration, expressed concerns about the addition of the new language. Mr. Sussman said, "You're bringing a big category of data--records reflecting who someone is communicating with in the digital world, Web browsing history, and potentially location information--outside of judicial review." Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney with the ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION who filed a lawsuit against AT&T for assisting former President Bush in his "warrantless surveillance program" also has similar concerns. Mr. Bankston said, "Our biggest concern is that an expanded NSL power might be used to obtain Internet search queries and Web histories detailing every Web site visited and every file downloaded."

Now there you have major concerns about this proposal by two attorneys one of whom worked under a very liberal administration, and the other who filed a lawsuit opposing assistance given to the Bush administration' s Patriot Act. Not exactly Tea Partiers. In addition, the U. S. Department of Justice's own Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion on November 5, 2008, which are binding on the Executive Branch, that stated the four current categories of information the FBI can obtain with national security letters was exhaustive. Those categories are name, address, length of service, and toll billing records.

I have an additional concern about this. Remember when the Department of Homeland Security's Janet Neopolitan issued a report last year that classified most Americans as threats to national security (see my post with complete details including a link to the report from April 16, 2009, click ENEMY OF THE STATE). If you believe in the Constitutional sovereignty of the states, oppose abortion, illegal immigration, and free trade agreements such as NAFTA (hey, the free trade thing includes a lot of you liberals!), oppose the expansion of entitlements, favor owning firearms to protect your family, stockpile food (which FEMA itself even says is a good idea in case of a natural disaster), or are a Christian, oppose the New World Order, then you are a "right-wing extremist" and a threat to national security. See how easy it would be for Big Brother to put you under the microscope for these security threats?

I wonder where the left's "hue and cry" is about this? The liberal left in this country yelled long and loud about the Bush administration's monitoring of telephone calls coming in to the Unite States originating in other countries from known terrorists and terrorist organizations. The leftists were on their soapboxes daily on every news network there was screaming ad nauseum, "We are a nation of laws!" But these same people are strangely silent now. It's been two weeks now since the story broke. If anything is being said at all, it is at nowhere near the level is was during the Bush administration. Double standard? Nah! What AM I thinking?

AND SPEAKING OF STEALING ELECTIONS . . .

"Vote Early, Vote Often" is no longer just a tongue-in-cheek jab at the tactics used by the Democrats describing their fraudulent tactics to gain or remain in power. Now, a Federal judge has implemented a system where one can truly vote often. Several times. That's right, one person can vote multiple times in Port Chester, New York, that is, if you are Hispanic.

The U. S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in 2006 against the little village of Port Chester, NY (2006 population 28,300), because it's voting system was unfair in the eyes of Big Brother.

A little side note here: whether it's an individual, a city, or county, if the Federal government files a lawsuit, the person or local jurisdiction has automatically lost. If nothing else, the government will continue to litigate until the funds of the defendant are bled dry. As for the little village of Port Chester, the taxpayers' money that had to be used to fight totalitarian Washington is goods, services, and employment that will be denied local residents. Just another prime example of what the politicians in Washington REALLY think of us regardless of party affiliation. They don't care unless it's election time.

What was unfair about Port Chester's voting system? Time to play the race card. What was unfair was the Port Chester had never elected a Hispanic. From articles I have seen, Port Chester's Hispanic population is anywhere from 21.6% (WORLD NET DAILY) to nearly half (HUFFINGTON POST), and no Hispanic had ever been elected to the village's board of trustees.

So, as a result of the tyrannical lawsuit, here comes Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that a majority vote system violated the Voting Rights Act. The "remedy"? Let Hispanic voters vote six times for the candidate of their choice. You saw that right. SIX TIMES EACH.

Why even bother having the election? Just let the Feds start appointing county commissioners, city council members, and all the rest. That's the precedent that was set here. The precedent has now been established for the Federal government to override the will of the people in any election, and dictate who can hold the office.

There was at least one Hispanic voter who questioned the judge's instructions on how to vote. Arthur Furano, age 80, said, "This was very strange. I'm not sure I liked it. All my life, I have heard, 'one man, one vote.' " Mr. Furano's wife used her six votes to vote once for each of the six candidates. Way to go! U.S. Department of Justice, what say you?

WE INTERRUPT THIS PROGRAM . . .

. . . permanently. Signed, Comrade Obama.

Here is an article that outlines how Comrade President intends to make yet another attempt to silence the opposition. This time it's through the Federal Election Commission and the Federal Communications Commission.

According to an ARTICLE on REASON MAGAZINE, "The Obama administration has announced plans to regulate the Internet through the Federal Communications Commission, extending its authority over broadband providers to police web traffic, enforcing 'net neutrality.'"

"Last week, a congressional HEARING exposed an effort to give another agency--the Federal Election Commission--unprecendented power to regulate political speech online. At a House Administration Committee Hearing last week, PATTON BOGGS attorney, William McGinley explained that the sloppy statutory language in the DISCLOSE ACT would extend the FEC's control over broadcast communications to 'all covered communications' including the blogosphere."

Personally, I think this "sloppy language" that failed to exempt bloggers was intentional. Comrade President has been wanting control of the Internet since Day 1. Enter S 773, the CYBER SECURITY ACT OF 2009. This bill would have given Obama the ability to shut down the Internet whenever Obama declared an "emergency" which when one considers Obama's approval ratings, the administration is experiencing an "emergency." It seems that ever since he was elected, Obama has been trying to silence the opposition to his radically leftist agenda from the very start.

This latest move is merely a strategy to bypass Congress to accomplish the goal of government control of the Internet. Using the regulatory agencies or one of the many "czars", the legislative process can be bypassed. Obama's opposition by the majority of Americans has been a major source of frustration to not only his administration, but the Congressional Democrats too. Whether it's been campaign finance reform, straight out attempts to resurrect the so-called "Fairness Doctrine", and now this are all designed to keep the public from speaking out against government policies. Comrade President knows the majority of Americans oppose his policies, and that support is dwindling. According to Rasmussen, those who Strongly Approve of the job he is doing has dropped two percentage points to 24%.

And he also knows that if communication through the Internet is brought "under control", limiting or eliminating political speech, then the Resistance would be difficult to maintain its momentum.

It's likely this would be struck down by the Supreme Court, but the spectre of all-out fascism is there for this to even be considered by Comrade President and his colleagues in the POLITBURO.

AND TEA PARTY PROTESTERS ARE EXTREMISTS???

For those of you who think Tea Party protestors are racist, violent, extreme narrow-minded radicals, this one's for you. This is an Immigration Reform Rally that took place recently in Atlanta, Georgia. Pay particular attention to what form of government they're promoting while accusing Arizona and some other U.S. states and counties of being "Nazi". You will have to agree they are quite hypocritical when you see this video. Having it on video takes away all the leftist's minimizing and justifying. It's right here for everyone to see. One thing you can be sure of is you won't hear the mainstream media condemning this in any way. The text of the narrative follows in case you have loading problems with the video.

Here is a partial transcript of the video:

Conservatives could lampoon an immigration reform rally the way left-wing pundits, commentators, entertainers, and politicians ridicule the tea party movement. Yes, this rally was comprised of nearly all one color participants, or monochromatic as they like to say of us. There were plenty of fat people, and upside down and misspelled signs. The speakers were angry, and the signs were more extreme than Tea Party signs, pathetically so. According to their signs, Arizona and other states and counties have become equal to Apartheid, Nazi Germany, Genocide, and Jim Crow. Really!?! Is this even remotely attached to reality?

So, this protest could be laughed off in the sophomoric, immature way the Libs mock the Tea Parties. But there was a much more shocking aspect to this protest: the open promotion and acceptance of the most radical communism, leftist revolution, and militancy. In contrast, the Tea Parties are strongly patriotic, filled with a sea of American flags, each event starting with the pledge of allegiance to the flag, the National Anthem, and often prayer. The events are filled with patriotic songs, and expressions of gratitude to the police, the military, and those who protect us, and are replete with references to the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Founding Fathers. Not here! There were few flags, no pledge, no prayer, no national anthem. Instead, many participants were busy reading and passing along to one another the most extreme communist literature. This handout, for instance, reads in part:

It is a system of capitalism-imperialisma system in which U.S. imperialism is the most monstrous, most oppressive superpowera system driven by a relentless chase after profit, which brings horror upon horror, a nightmare seemingly without end, for the vast majority of humanity: poverty and squalortorture and rapethe wholesale domination and degradation of women everywherewars, invasions and occupationsassassinations and massacresplanes, missiles, tanks and troops of the USA bombarding people in faraway lands while they sleep in their homes or go about their daily lives, blasting their little children to pieces, cutting down men and women in the prime of life, or in old age, kicking down their doors and dragging them away in the middle of the nightwhile here in the USA itself the police harass, brutalize and murder youth in the streets of the inner cities—over and over again—and then they spit out their maddening insults, insisting that this is "justified," as if these youth are not human beings, have no right to live, deserve no respect and no future (see video for remainder)

America, this is a serious and dangerous situation! John Adams wrote that America is a nation of laws, not men. Yet, they called for lawlessness! All patriotic Americans must resist; not the rank and file deceived, who are often confused, but the leaders and their propaganda pushing for a radical, extremist juggernaut seeking to sweep this system (yes, our American system) from the face of the earth. Make friends with your immigrant neighbors, with kindness help them see the poison being fed to them. And demand from your representatives a closing of the border. America must stop our hemorrhaging border before we are consumed in the same Communist uprising sweeping South America. I had to see it to believe it, now you have seen the seriousness of our situation, what are you going to do about it?

WHEN HAPPY MEALS ARE OUTLAWED . . .

This is an article posted by DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL on April 28, 2010. It's one of the most striking examples of government gone out of control I have ever seen.

April 28, 2010, - 3:50 pm

DumbAssity (TM) of the Day: Santa Clara Outlaws Happy Meals

By Debbie Schlussel

There’s a reason why, as I’ve previously noted, the letters in the words “Nanny State” also make up the words “Neat ‘N’ Nasty.” It’s nasty when others tell you how to live your life. Others like the statist members of California’s Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors.

I’ve said it before. I’ll say it again. It’s up to parents to teach their children responsibility, discipline, and self-control. Not McDonald’s. And not government. Big Brother is big enough.

But the lefties who run Santa Clara County don’t think so. And, so, they’ve outlawed Happy Meals and other similar promotions by fast food restaurants, which they say entice kids to nag their parents into buying them unhealthy food. So what? It’s called marketing. It’s a form of free speech protected by the U.S. Constitution. When I was a kid I nagged my parents to buy me things, too. And they often said the one word parents today won’t: NO.

Is that McDonald’s fault? Is it Happy Meals’ fault? No. It’s the fault of lazy parents who won’t say no. Lazy parents who use TV, videos, and computers to raise their kids. Parents who have no sense of what it takes to be a parent. A parent who won’t say no to a Happy Meal because their kid wants a cute toy is a parent who will tolerate drug use, sex at an early age, and bad academics by their kid. In other words, that parent is actually just a sperm or womb donor who wants to be friends with their kid.

And the Supervisors of Santa Clara reward that bad parenting, that laziness, that unwillingness of parents to turn down their kids’ every whim and wish, lest they experience some temporary whining or crying.

Happy Meal toys and other promotions that come with high-calorie children’s meals will soon be banned in parts of Santa Clara County unless the restaurants meet nutritional guidelines approved Tuesday by the county Board of Supervisors.

“This ordinance prevents restaurants from preying on children’s’ love of toys” to sell high-calorie, unhealthful food, said Supervisor Ken Yeager, who sponsored the measure. “This ordinance breaks the link between unhealthy food and prizes.”

Voting against the measure was Supervisor Donald Gage, who said parents should be responsible for their children.

“If you can’t control a 3-year-old child for a toy, God save you when they get to be teenagers,” he said. Gage, who is overweight, said he was a living example of how obese children can become obese adults. . . .

The board, whose jurisdiction extends only to the unincorporated parts of the county, including much of Silicon Valley, voted 3 to 2 in favor of the ban after a contentious meeting that included more than an hour of testimony on both sides.

Yup, like I said, Neat ‘N’ Nasty. They have a Neat and easy way to control McDonald’s. And insert their Nasty predilections on a private business that makes millions of Americans’ lives easier.

The Politburo has come to California in a big way. Sickening.

I said above this is an example of government gone out of control. I'll correct myself. It's an example of government gone Communist and absolutely insane. It is NOT government's responsibility to decide for us what's good or bad for our children. This is solely the responsibility of parents. As Debbie said, parents need to learn the one word seldom heard by children these days: NO! Santa Clara County has way overstepped it's boundaries, and those on the Board that voted for this should be removed from office through a recall election.

But, just hold on folks. The Obama administration is wanting to do the same thing through higher taxes on those grocery items they determine are not healthy for us. The arrogance of it all.

WE'RE GETTING THEIR ATTENTION

Here is the text of a post by Macon Phillips on the White House blog dated August 4th, 2009:

THE BLOG

Return to Blog Homepage SUBSCRIBE

TUESDAY, AUGUST 4TH, 2009 AT 6:55 AM

Facts Are Stubborn Things

Posted by Macon Phillips

Opponents of health insurance reform may find the truth a little inconvenient, but as our second president famously said, "facts are stubborn things."

Scary chain emails and videos are starting to percolate on the internet, breathlessly claiming, for example, to "uncover" the truth about the President’s health insurance reform positions.

In this video, Linda Douglass, the communications director for theWhite House’s Health Reform Office, addresses one example that makes it look like the President intends to "eliminate" private coverage, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth.

For the record, the President has consistently said that if you like your insurance plan, your doctor, or both, you will be able to keep them. He has even proposed eight consumer protections relating specifically to the health insurance industry.

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

As I said in a previous post, the Obama administration is now in damage control mode. All the polls out there, scientific or informal, show there is very little support this health care fiasco. Now they're wanting citizens to turn in their neighbors. There is absolutely no logical reason to put out such a plea other than they want to know specifically who opposes them on this issue. Well, if there are very many who cooperate and rat out their friends, neighbors, and fellow American citizens, they're going to have a very, very long list that will amount to the majority of Americans. Earlier the Department of Homeland Security classified conservatives as "right-wing extremists" who are threats to domestic security. Now this. It seems I'm making a very elite list of American patriots. I figure they are probably already watching my blog, so that's OK. Watch on, Washington. I'll keep on helping you with that troublesome transparency thing.

Now, take the time to visit Ralph Petersen's blog by clicking HERE. He writes WELL MEANING GENTLEMEN WITH DIFFERENT IDEAS and is a real stand-up American. He wrote a letter to President Obama voluntarily reporting himself as being opposed to Obamacare which included his blog address! I'd like to see the face of whichever of Obama's aides read this one! Mr. Petersen, my hat's off to you!