“A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II,
owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many
German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our
attitude toward fanaticism. 'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said,
'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too
busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a
bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen.
Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and
the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in
a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.
We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam
is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just
want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true,
it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us
feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectra of fanatics
rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.
The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It
is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is
the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups
throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in
an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or
honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is
the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape
victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to
kill and to become suicide bombers.
The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent
majority,' is cowed and extraneous.
Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in
peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of
about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's
huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to
kill a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a
warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across
South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic
murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel,
and bayonet.
And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not
be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our
powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of
points:
Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,
because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find
that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs,
Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many
others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until
it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay
attention to the only group that counts--the fanatics who threaten our
way of life.
Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes
this email without sending it on, is contributing to
the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself
a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands,
world-wide, read this and think about it, and send it on - before it's
too late.
"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."--- John
Wayne
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Dee Perez-Scott: Loves Mexico and opposes a rational immgration policy
Mexico’s Immigration Law by J. Michael Waller
Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven’t been sharing that idea with us.
That’s too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it’s noteworthy that nobody has argued that the US look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem. Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
•in the country legally;
•have the means to sustain themselves economically;
•not destined to be burdens on society;
•of economic and social benefit to society;
•of good character and have no criminal records; and
•contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:
•Immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
•foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
•foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
•foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
•foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
•those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens – and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, legal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Población, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country’s immigration policy.
It is an interesting law – and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry.
We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. Now let’s look at Mexico’s main immigration law.
Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
•Foreigners are admitted into Mexico “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.” (Article 32)
•Immigration officials must “ensure” that “immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents. (Article 34)
•Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics,” when foreigners are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when “they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.” (Article 37)
•The Secretary of Governance may “suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest.” (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
•Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
•A National Population Registry keeps track of “every single individual who comprises the population of the country,” and verifies each individual’s identity.
•(Articles 85 and 86)
•A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
•Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
•Foreigners who sign government documents “with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses” are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
•Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
•Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
•Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico – such as working with out a permit – can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says:
•“A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally.” (Article 123)
•Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
•Foreigners who “attempt against national sovereignty or security” will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
•A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
•Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)
All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico’s immigration practices versus its American immigration preaching is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government’s agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States. Let’s call Mexico’s bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let’s propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico’s own law as a model.
Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven’t been sharing that idea with us.
That’s too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it’s noteworthy that nobody has argued that the US look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem. Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
•in the country legally;
•have the means to sustain themselves economically;
•not destined to be burdens on society;
•of economic and social benefit to society;
•of good character and have no criminal records; and
•contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:
•Immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
•foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
•foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
•foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
•foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
•those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens – and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, legal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Población, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country’s immigration policy.
It is an interesting law – and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry.
We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. Now let’s look at Mexico’s main immigration law.
Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
•Foreigners are admitted into Mexico “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.” (Article 32)
•Immigration officials must “ensure” that “immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents. (Article 34)
•Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics,” when foreigners are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when “they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.” (Article 37)
•The Secretary of Governance may “suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest.” (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
•Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
•A National Population Registry keeps track of “every single individual who comprises the population of the country,” and verifies each individual’s identity.
•(Articles 85 and 86)
•A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
•Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
•Foreigners who sign government documents “with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses” are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
•Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
•Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
•Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico – such as working with out a permit – can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says:
•“A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally.” (Article 123)
•Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
•Foreigners who “attempt against national sovereignty or security” will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
•A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
•Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)
All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico’s immigration practices versus its American immigration preaching is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government’s agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States. Let’s call Mexico’s bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let’s propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico’s own law as a model.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Dee Perez-Scott: her form of government
Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Dee Perez-Scott: soon she will join the brigade
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the
government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
I Grey-Haired Brigade
They like to refer to us as senior citizens, old fogies, geezers, and in some cases dinosaurs. Some of us are "Baby Boomers" getting ready to retire. Others have been retired for some time.We walk a little slower these days and our eyes and hearing are not what they once were. We have worked hard, raised our children, worshiped our God and grown old together. Yes, we are the ones some refer to as being over the hill, and that is probably true. But before writing us off completely, there are a few things that need to be taken into consideration.
In school we studied English, history, math, and science which enabled us to lead America into the technological age. Most of us remember what outhouses were, many of us with firsthand experience. We remember the days of telephone party-lines, 25 cent gasoline, and milk and ice being delivered to our homes. For those of you who don't know what an icebox is, today they are electric and referred to as refrigerators. A few even remember when cars were started with a crank. Yes, we lived those days.
We are probably considered old fashioned and out-dated by many. But there are a few things you need to remember before completely writing us off. We won World War II, fought in Korea and Viet Nam. We can quote The Pledge of Allegiance, and know where to place our hand while doing so. We wore the uniform of our country with pride and lost many friends on the battlefield.? We didn't fight for the Socialist States of America, we fought for the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave." We wore different uniforms but carried the same flag. We know the words to the Star Spangled Banner, America ,and America the Beautiful by heart, and you may even see some tears running down our cheeks as we sing. We have lived what many of you have only read about in history books and we feel no obligation to apologize to anyone for America.
Yes, we are old and slow these days but rest assured, we have at least one good fight left in us. We have loved this country, fought for it, and died for it, and now we are going to save it. It is our country and nobody is going to take it away from us. We took oaths to defendAmerica against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that is an oath we plan to keep. There are those who want to destroy this land we love but, like our founders, there is no way we are going to remain silent.
It was mostly the young people of this nation who elected Obama and the Democratic Congress. You fell for the "Hope and Change" which in reality was nothing but "Hype and Lies." You have tasted socialism and seen evil face to face, and have found you don't like it after all. You make a lot of noise, but most are all too interested in their careers or "Climbing the Social Ladder" to be involved in such mundane things as patriotism and voting. Many of those who fell for the "Great Lie" in 2008 are now having buyer's remorse. With all the education we gave you, you didn't have sense enough to see through the lies and instead drank the 'Cool-Aid.' Now you're paying the price and complaining about it. No jobs, lost mortgages, higher taxes, and less freedom. This is what you voted for and this is what you got. We entrusted you with the Torch of Liberty and you traded it for a paycheck and a fancy house.
Well, don't worry youngsters, the Grey-Haired Brigade is here, and in 2012 we are going to take back our nation. We may drive a little slower than you would like but we get where we're going, and in 2012 we're going to the polls by the millions. This land does not belong to the man in the White House nor to the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It belongs to "We the People" and "We the People" plan to reclaim our land and our freedom. We hope this time you will do a better job of preserving it and passing it along to our grandchildren. So the next time you have the chance to say the Pledge of Allegiance, Stand up, put your hand over your heart, honor our country, and thank God for the old geezers of the "Grey-Haired Brigade."
Author, Anon. Grey-Haired Brigade Member
government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
I Grey-Haired Brigade
They like to refer to us as senior citizens, old fogies, geezers, and in some cases dinosaurs. Some of us are "Baby Boomers" getting ready to retire. Others have been retired for some time.We walk a little slower these days and our eyes and hearing are not what they once were. We have worked hard, raised our children, worshiped our God and grown old together. Yes, we are the ones some refer to as being over the hill, and that is probably true. But before writing us off completely, there are a few things that need to be taken into consideration.
In school we studied English, history, math, and science which enabled us to lead America into the technological age. Most of us remember what outhouses were, many of us with firsthand experience. We remember the days of telephone party-lines, 25 cent gasoline, and milk and ice being delivered to our homes. For those of you who don't know what an icebox is, today they are electric and referred to as refrigerators. A few even remember when cars were started with a crank. Yes, we lived those days.
We are probably considered old fashioned and out-dated by many. But there are a few things you need to remember before completely writing us off. We won World War II, fought in Korea and Viet Nam. We can quote The Pledge of Allegiance, and know where to place our hand while doing so. We wore the uniform of our country with pride and lost many friends on the battlefield.? We didn't fight for the Socialist States of America, we fought for the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave." We wore different uniforms but carried the same flag. We know the words to the Star Spangled Banner, America ,and America the Beautiful by heart, and you may even see some tears running down our cheeks as we sing. We have lived what many of you have only read about in history books and we feel no obligation to apologize to anyone for America.
Yes, we are old and slow these days but rest assured, we have at least one good fight left in us. We have loved this country, fought for it, and died for it, and now we are going to save it. It is our country and nobody is going to take it away from us. We took oaths to defendAmerica against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that is an oath we plan to keep. There are those who want to destroy this land we love but, like our founders, there is no way we are going to remain silent.
It was mostly the young people of this nation who elected Obama and the Democratic Congress. You fell for the "Hope and Change" which in reality was nothing but "Hype and Lies." You have tasted socialism and seen evil face to face, and have found you don't like it after all. You make a lot of noise, but most are all too interested in their careers or "Climbing the Social Ladder" to be involved in such mundane things as patriotism and voting. Many of those who fell for the "Great Lie" in 2008 are now having buyer's remorse. With all the education we gave you, you didn't have sense enough to see through the lies and instead drank the 'Cool-Aid.' Now you're paying the price and complaining about it. No jobs, lost mortgages, higher taxes, and less freedom. This is what you voted for and this is what you got. We entrusted you with the Torch of Liberty and you traded it for a paycheck and a fancy house.
Well, don't worry youngsters, the Grey-Haired Brigade is here, and in 2012 we are going to take back our nation. We may drive a little slower than you would like but we get where we're going, and in 2012 we're going to the polls by the millions. This land does not belong to the man in the White House nor to the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It belongs to "We the People" and "We the People" plan to reclaim our land and our freedom. We hope this time you will do a better job of preserving it and passing it along to our grandchildren. So the next time you have the chance to say the Pledge of Allegiance, Stand up, put your hand over your heart, honor our country, and thank God for the old geezers of the "Grey-Haired Brigade."
Author, Anon. Grey-Haired Brigade Member
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Dee Perez-Scott: GOP Governor takes action on welfare front
Hooray for Florida! !
I-95 will be jammed for the next month or so........Druggies and deadbeats heading North out of Florida..
Florida is the first state requiring drug testing to receive welfare! In signing the new law,
Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, "If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.
Applicants who test positive for illicit substances won't be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.
Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving funds for three years!
Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional.
How is this unconstitutional ?
It's completely legal that every other working people have to pass drug tests in order to get a J-O-B which supports those on welfare!
I-95 will be jammed for the next month or so........Druggies and deadbeats heading North out of Florida..
Florida is the first state requiring drug testing to receive welfare! In signing the new law,
Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, "If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.
Applicants who test positive for illicit substances won't be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.
Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving funds for three years!
Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional.
How is this unconstitutional ?
It's completely legal that every other working people have to pass drug tests in order to get a J-O-B which supports those on welfare!
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Dee Perez-Scott: An Actual Letter to Congress
The Honorable Tom Harkin
731 art Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224 3254
Washington DC , 20510
Dear Senator Harkin ,
As a native Iowan and an excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service , I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.
My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stems from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding ofthis bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.
Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I am excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.
Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year.
Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as 'in-state' tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.
Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.
If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative.
Thank you for your assistance.
Your Loyal Constituent, (hoping to reach 'illegal alien' status rather than just a bonafide citizen of the USA )
Donald Ruppert
Burlingtond, IA
731 art Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224 3254
Washington DC , 20510
Dear Senator Harkin ,
As a native Iowan and an excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service , I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.
My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stems from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding ofthis bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.
Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I am excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.
Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year.
Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as 'in-state' tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.
Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.
If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative.
Thank you for your assistance.
Your Loyal Constituent, (hoping to reach 'illegal alien' status rather than just a bonafide citizen of the USA )
Donald Ruppert
Burlingtond, IA
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Dee Perez-Scott: Obama's Marxism on Display
Dee Perez-Scott: Obama's Marxismm on Display
Subject: Washington Post looks at Obama
Well! It seems the liberal Washington Post just had an epiphany. It doesn’t matter if the recipients of this are R’s or D’s, the fact remains that this reporter got closer to the truth than anything I’ve seem come out of the Post up to now. I am not thrilled with the gaggle of wannabes being held up for evaluation (ridicule?) by the R’s, but to simply vote this guy back in with another four years f “Hope and Change” isn’t going to do us much good. It’s too bad the D’s don’t decide to go find a more moderate
candidate to run at the conventions. There is a large segment of the population who don’t have a candidate yet, on either of the two extremes. I don’t think any of us want to hear any more of: “I am more conservative, more liberal, or more progressive than he/she is.” Some of us would prefer, “I am
more reasonable in my thought processes. There are progressive and conservative things to look at, but there is an established set of values and practices which should not be thrown out or treated as politically incorrect.” I can’t imagine anybody in their right mind who would want to touch the hem of the garment of these bums.
The Washington Post
August 18, 2011
Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson
(columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass
hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many
into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the
entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.
And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's
"spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian
looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an
outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was Black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit
extreme, he was given a pass.
Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass -- held to a lower standard -- because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said)
"non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon -- affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat
themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates [and dumbing down] which follow.
Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from
the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin -- that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't
racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.
True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of
achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he
was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?
In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people -- conservatives included -- ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is
absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth -- it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I
inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion
of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
(Reader comment: I think too many miss the fact that Obama's intentions are to ruin this country; reduce it to a third-world country level; redistribute the
wealth that it produces and make it suffer. He was taught to hate America.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)