I have a question, what is it about Obama that makes people lay down in mud puddles so that he can walk over them instead of getting his feet wet?
We have Hillary who has taken full blame for what happened in Libya. Hillary has killed her career so that this man could look like less of a bumbler in the next election. Of course, he still looks like a bumbler, but some people will absolve him because of her. During the Democratic primary she also gave up her bid for this man and switched to join his camp. What is it?
What is it that caused Judge Roberts to switch sides and allow Obamacare to remain? What did Obama have on this man? Or what did Obama do for him? Roberts didn’t need to be re-elected, why didn’t he stand up to Obama?
Why is the media campaigning so hard to get this man re-elected? The liberal media of today is every tyrants wet dream. Most of the time tyrants have to coerce the media into running their propaganda, but the mainstream media does it in the US for absolutely nothing. It’s shocking, and absolutely disgusting.
They have done nothing but try to influence the election in his favor. They will not say a single bad thing about Obama, they will not talk about how his policies have effected the economy. They will not talk about how his policies are making the country weaker both militarily and economically. Romney trounced Obama in the last debate. The only way the smack down could have been more complete was if Romney bent him over his knee and literally spanked him. He had an answer for everything that man said, and he penned him to his record. Obama got trounced, how can the media turn around and say it’s a win for Obama?
What is it about this man that causes people to literally worship him?
Yes, I mean worship.
It is one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen.
Listen, this man is the biggest hypocrite ever to enter politics. How is he going to tell us what sort of healthcare we should have when he is clearly not qualified to make intelligent decisions about health. Yes, I’m talking about his smoking. If a Republican were trying to pass health care reform and he were a smoker then the liberal media would chew him up and spit him out. Why is there no talk about Obama’s smoking? Also, if Obamacare is so good then all these forsaken politicians should be the first to sign up, but they exempt themselves. Why?
Also, I don’t want to be lectured by fiscal or personal responsibility by the king of wasteful spending. In the real world people with poor credit are discriminated against. Why should Obama be an exception? These are the questions I want answered. What is so great about this man?
I can’t understand this kind of loyalty that goes beyond all sense.
According to the polls I have been seeing it looks like this is going to be a close race. To me it’s unbelievable that this can even be close. It’s simply unbelievable. Obama is he greatest human disaster ever to hit the US. I’m going to break this down as simple as possible.
Are you better off after four years of Obama? Think about it:
I know I’m not. I’m earning about $5000 less in net income than I was in 2007 and I don’t have medical. But forget about me. Are things better overall after four years of Obama? Is anyone better off after four years? Given the facts I don’t see how anyone can want for more years of this man.
I used to think that Obama was the greatest stumbling dolt ever to go into politics in the US and possibly in the world, but lately I have come to see him as a saboteur. This man is doing everything he can to damage and weaken the US.
John P. Holdren, the director for the White House Office of Science and Technology has stated on the record that he wants to de-devlop America.
“A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States,” Holdren wrote along with Paul and Anne H. Ehrlich in the “recommendations” concluding their 1973 book Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.
These people are thoroughly contemptuous of the United States. Listen, one of the first things Obama did after he got elected was cancel the Constellation program. This goes to show where science, progress, and the future of the United States fits on his priority list. He has thwarted every attempt to gain energy independence. He cuts our military while giving aid to our enemies. To support this man you must either hate America or you must be wilfully woefully ignorant. There is no other option, it’s either one or the other.
I am not an evolutionist, but if Obama wins I am going to become a supporter of Eugenics. If Obama wins this time after four years of this garbage then a strong and profound case is made for Eugenics. There is no way around that. The fact is this man, like every other left wing totalitarian tyrant, requires masses of stupid people to flourish. That is not anything new. Emperor Chin, the first Emperor of unified China, also relied heavily on mass ignorance. He was one of the first autocrats, possibly the first, to carry out both a book burning and a purge of scholars. He did it because he had an advisor who told him that intelligent people are more likely to rebel against totalitarian rulers. If you ever read the book of Lord Shang you can see how it is essentially the BC version of “1984″ in terms of MO and reccomendations.
But purges of intelligent people and limiting access to knowledge are common all throughout history. They did it in China, they did it in the USSR, they did it in Cambodia, they did it in North Korea. There are two ways of doing it, one is to kill people out right, and another way is to use dysgenics.
Lisen, I’m not trying to be condescending here, but this is an important message that everyone needs to understand. The purpose of welfare is not to help anyone, it is nothing more than a two pronged attack on America. There are generations of people on welfare, and rather than breaking out of poverty they stay in it for generations and multiply. If you incentivise a behavior you will get more of it. Incentivise success and you get more success, incentivise failure and you get more failure. The Democrats use welfare to both buy votes and to increase the numbers in that particular voting bloc. They also bring in masses of unskilled workers from 3rd world countries to increase their voting bloc. The result is a net increase in unintelligent or less intelligent voters. Again, I’m not trying to be condescending but I cannot think of any gentle way of putting this. If Obama wins the case for Eugenics is made. It’s made.
Anyone who is older than me and even semi-aware will say that the ideological difference between Republicans and Democats has grown into a yawning chasm. The difference did not used to be so profound, ever in history, and this is taking into account the fact that the Republican party has been appropriated by neo-cons. Why is this happening?
I was born in 1981, and since then I have noticed a vast change both in the ideological separation of the parties and their constituincies, and the campaign methods used, as well as campaign methodologies. Obamaphone!? “Wake the f*** up!”? Get serious. What is this? Middle school? I have never seen such a vast bloc of ignorant and dependence minded people before. The amount of people on welfare and government assistance has skyrocketed. Back in the 80′s it was about one third (still too much), and now it is nearly half. The immigration and welfare policies have really caused this bloc of people to grow between now and then. In another 30 years the US may no longer even be recognizable if these policies continue.
If Obama wins, you can probably forget about having any more elections after that. There may be elections, but if he wins he is going to cut loose without limit because it will be his second term, and he will bring in so many immigrants from Mexico that our votes simply will not be able to overcome them. If the immigration from Mexico ever slows down he will flood us with immigrants from Africa and the Islamic world. He will do it. Another four years of Obama and you may as well forget about going to the ballot after that. Forget about it, because your vote will make no difference.
I have been debating with Obama supporters for some time online, mostly on news articles, and I have come to the conclusion that sometimes I use too many big words for them. So I am going to break this down as simply as possible, and use pictures so that no one will get lost. Of course I do not expect to persuade any Obama supporters, but what I can do is make everyone aware of what exactly they are voting for.
I have been hearing lots of talk about raising taxes on the rich, as if it were a magic wand that will magically cure all of the financial problems and create jobs. So let us take a moment to step back and look at how this actually works. This is going to be a lesson in real life, plain and simple. I will try to keep the big words and ideological catch phrases to a minimum.
There are three types of people concerned here, the employer, the employed, and the unemployed. They will be represented as follows:
Under the best of circumstances the amount of unemployed people is low, but there are still always those who are unemployed.
This picture represents where people are in the economy:
The group on the left is a large business/corporation, the group in the middle represents people who are unemployed for any reason, whether they lost their job, never had one, or are freshly out of college, and the group on the right represents a small business. The goal of the people in the center SHOULD be to join the group on the right or the left, or if any of them are smart enough, to do something really good that people will pay them for so that they can get more work and more work until they have so much work that they need others to help them do it (which means they can hire people). So basically they want to change their color to blue or red, but most people don’t have what it takes to be red so they will become blue.
Now let’s say there are too many people in the middle section. Why is that? The economy is poor so hiring slows. How do we fix it? Along comes a politician and says that lot’s of people are suffering, and he says that the red guys are not paying their “fair share” and he correctly points out that they have a higher standard of living than the blue guys and black guys. He says that he can take a lot more money from the red guys before they are hurt on a personal level, and that by redistributing it to black guys, and a few of the lower income blue guys, then he can reduce the amount of guys in black.
So here it comes, the Good Ship Government to take some more money:
While he’s at it, he is also going to take some money from some of the blue guys who make higher salaries, but not as much. When this happens, some of the people in blue and black cheer, because they think the guys in red and the higher paid blue guys are undeserving, and that they should have their money taken away from them. This is what those guys get for being greedy.
While I’m at it, let me put myself in the picture. You can put yourself in the picture wherever you fall, but there is me, a middle manager for a small business.
So here we are, the government is sucking out money from these high earning guys, and some of the low income and unemployed guys are cheering. If you stare at it long enough you can almost hear the sucking sound of money going into G. Of course my taxes have not gone up, and in fact they may even be cut. Some of the lower earning people are getting tax cuts, some may even be getting extra money from the government, and all the men in black are getting money from the government. The solid pink lines represent money flowing out of the government to people:
What happens next? Well, the employers now have less money in their hands, which means that they cannot afford to spend as much money as they used to spend, which means that they cannot afford to have all the employees they used to have. They may cut expenditures in other ways, and perhaps raise the price of their services, but some people are going to have their paychecks or their jobs cut.
The big business will downsize, but it will probably still survive, and the people who were laid off can now receive money from the government, but it will not match what they previously made.
For the small business things will be worse. The small business owner now has less money to pay the costs of running the business, and to pay his employees. Of course losing a single employee is a much bigger loss for the small business, so the owner is faced with three choices:
1) He can retire, since his business is no longer generating revenue then the most he can expect out of trying to continue is to end up becoming personally bankrupt.
2) He can go try to work for a big business. Since he has above average skills and intellect to begin with he is more likely to get a position than a fresh college grad or someone trying to enter a different field of employment.
3) He can leave the country and take everything he has left.
But whichever he opts for, the effect on his employees is still the same:
So now I’m out of a job, and so is everyone else. At that point do I care about whether or not I got a tax cut? Not really. Am I glad to be eligible for welfare, foodstamps, or state run medical care? Not really. Am I better off? Not really. Is anyone? Not really.
So here is what it looks like now:
Rather than stimulating the economy there are now a good deal more people unemployed and on welfare, or at least eligible for it. The government now has more people to support, but less money to do it with, which means that things will only get worse rather than better. People who are unemployed now have more people to compete with for an even more limited supply of jobs. This is why conservatives are saying that socialism is trickle up poverty.
I hope everyone can understand this, and I hope that I have made this simple enough. A vote for Obama is a vote for unemployment.
I have been thinking about Obama vs. Romney, and how the liberals and their media are feeling shocked and let down by Obama’s performance. Obama had nothing to say other than his talking points, and he could not answer any of the challenges that were put to him. Whenever Romney pointed out the poor achievements of his record he hung his head, and to me it looked like he was hanging his head in shame. I almost felt sorry for him, ALMOST being the operative word here.
Never before has there been a candidate who has been so trumped up, so promoted, and so devoutly defended without cause, and based on nothing. This man has a huge line of products with images of him, and his people eat it up. They put this man on a superhuman pedestal, and for the die-hard liberals there was no way to shatter that concept because the liberal media protected him. But without that barrier of protection, he’s just a king with no clothes.
For years we conservatives have been saying that Obama is a clown, and an empty suit, but last night liberals saw it for the first time, and they were surprised by it. The question is, why are they surprised? One has to look at the psychology of liberals. Of course for me it is a third person perspective, so I could be wrong here, but I am going to talk about my observations.
In general the left sees their leaders as a superior type of man, or as something more than man, and they see the leadership on the opposition as an inferior type of man, or as devils. Given that, they are more likely to attach their identity to their leaders, and when their person is attacked they often take it personally. They are much more given to adoration, even if they don’t know what the man stands for or how it will personally affect them. It’s the same sort of mentality that causes some women to change their hairstyle or clothing based on what a particular celebrity has done. If it’s not idolatry then it is right on the thin line between admiration and idolatry.
Actually it is a mentality that left wing leadership deliberately feeds and encourages, and which the left has historically used as a means of control. When I look at pictures and videos from rallies around the world where left wing followers meet with left wing leaders, I often see people overtaken with emotion, some of them with tears in their eyes. It looks a whole lot like what I have seen in church over the course of my life. There are always those people in church who get so caught up with their emotions that they cry, and they raise their hands as high as they can, and the unmitigated flow of emotion and being caught up in the moment is apparent on their faces. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with that in the context of worshiping God, but I find it exceedingly disturbing when I see that sort of attitude directed toward a human.
I once saw a clip from a North Korean propaganda video. I don’t remember what it was called, but it was about a female comrade who was so patriotic that she disguised herself as a man and joined the army. In the clip I saw she was outed, and there was this song they were singing. The song was about Kim Jung Il, and they said, “We worship him as our god.”
WHAT?!
Yes really. An ideology like that keeps people cowed, and decreases the likelihood that they will speak out, and since left wing leaders are 100% parasitic and zero percent altruistic it’s the perfect ideology for them. They can just keep on living off the people and doing nothing constructive, and they can live a cush life with as much alcohol, women, men (depending on their fancy), drugs, nice cars, mansions, and whatever else they want, while the people exist as a machine to fuel their appetite. They become the very thing they deride publicly.
Of course someone might say that this could never happen in a western country. Really?
Disgusting blasphemy. It’s ironic how the left is so critical and derisive towards the religious right, when they have AT LEAST just as much faith and worship as we do, and theirs is not even directed toward an objectively superior being.
Obama supporters:
Christian Worshipers:
What is more stupid, getting all caught up in worship over an objectively superior being, or getting all caught up in worshiping a human being? It is not healthy to get that carried away by a human being, regardless of what he may have done. When you worship a human you debase yourself.
Since I was very young I raised to shun idolatry in all forms. I memorized the ten commandments, but even at a young age I thought about it myself, and on my own I came to the conclusion that it was stupid to worship something other than God, specifically a created being. My position is that in order to worship something which is fundamentally the same as yourself requires an inherently servile mentality. There are basically two types of people, those with servile mentalities, and those with independent mentalities. People with the first type make the best slaves, which is why they tend to gravitate towards more totalitarian leaders, and it is also why extreme left wing leaders make a habit of killing intelligent people, and limiting the people’s over-all exposure to information.
The majority of people on the right are more of the independent mentality. Of course there are different subsets within that mentality. People with independent mentalities may be leaders, they may be people who just want to be left alone, they may be ambitious, or they may even be misanthropes. But you won’t find people on the right who have a blind faith or worshipful mentality toward any human.
I am certain that if any liberals are reading this, they are thinking “well you worship your God.” Yes, I do, but there is no shame in that because the being I worship is actually superior. There are three different basic god-concepts. There is the pantheist god-concept which deifies the universe, there is the polytheist god-concept which has gods that are basically suped up human beings, like Marvel heroes, and the all powerful creator-God concept, or God with a big G. We aren’t worshiping some being that came into being at any particular time, or who was born, because that’s basically a suped up human, and worshiping something like that would be like worshiping some guy because he can bench press more than I can. The being that we worship is eternal, with no beginning or ending, he’s not a part of the physical universe or limited by it (much like how a human artist exists externally to his work). He is not a human being, or a human like being with superpowers, he has unlimited power, unlimited intellect, he has no equal, he cannot be physically harmed, he does not have the same nature that we do, and he does not bleed. If you’re going to worship something it should be something which is unquantifiable and infinitely superior. Not some idiot human who you adore for no clearly identifiable reason, and who you tie your identity in with, and who you worship because you feel a need to worship. Seriously, if your need to worship is that strong then go to church. Honestly, the blind Obama crowd gets more reverent and worshipful for their man-god than I do in church on one of my better days.
“Well I don’t believe that your God exists,” someone is thinking. I understand that, but even if I’m wrong (which I’m not BTW) then I am still intelligent enough not to elevate a human being above human level. Worshiping a human being makes one the ultimate chump. There is no higher level of chumpery (yes I know I just made up a word), nor any higher level of brown nosing.
Last night I watched the debate, and I have to say that Romney totally dominated. Even the liberal media and many of the liberal followers have admitted this. Of course the liberal media has their panties in a knot, and they seem to be doing some soul searching on why it was that Obama underperformed. ”Oh if only Obama had said this or that” or “Why didn’t Obama challenge him on _________?” I can tell you why. Because your man is a dunderhead.
Liberals have commented about how he looked like he didn’t want to be there, and he said he would rather be somewhere else at the beginning. Of course during the preparations for the debate he was talking about how it was boring and complaining that he didn’t get to go outside much. So what does that make him?
Honestly, those kinds of comments are ancillary, and not at the core of the matter. At the heart of the matter Obama is an ill-prepared dunderhead trying to defend a position that is both ideologically unsound and weak. I don’t understand why liberals were surprised by his weak performance. I wasn’t, and to be honest he actually did not do as bad as I thought he would. It’s a well known fact among those who don’t recognize Obama as a deity that this man cannot speak coherently without his teleprompter. Of course a teleprompter is not present in the debate, but it looked like he still had some note cards he was shuffling through (if you paid attention to his hands and eyes).
So one of the complaints the liberal media made was that he never looked at Romney. He either looked down, or he looked at the host. In fact, I saw him looking down a lot with a moping expression on his face. He also failed to address most of Romney’s challenges, opting instead for repeating his talking points over and over again (note cards). I noticed that when he spoke Romney was jotting down notes, which is what you do in a debate so that you can respond to specific points that your opponent is making. Obama did not do this at the beginning but later he did it a bit, or appeared to.
So to answer the question of why Obama didn’t address Romney’s challenges or bring him up on other challenges is simple; Obama is incapable of on the spot synthesis, which also means that his reactions to other situations will be slow, stunted, and inappropriate (and we have seen that). We have seen that in the way he responded to the killing of our ambassador in Libya, and the subsequent Islamic attacks on our embassies around the world. This man is a dunderhead, and I really hope he loses the election. Of course, the die hard socialists are going to vote for him anyways, but most of the intelligent people are going to vote for Romney. He has my vote, even though he is still not what I consider to be an ideal candidate. Neither he nor Obama is going to repeal NDAA, but Romney will at least get rid of the Obamacare and steer us toward energy independence. That is one of the most important things. I should be able to put gas in my car without 1) having to pay over $4 a gallon and 2) worrying about how much of my money will end up in the hands of Islamic terrorists (durka durka!).
Hugo Chavez has endorsed Obama, no surprise there. His exact words:
“In the point of view of his politics, if I were voting, I would vote for Obama and I believe that if Obama was from Caracas, he would vote for Chavez, I am positive.”
I’m positive too Chavez, you and he are both birds of a feather after all.
Everyone needs to be aware of this. All these globalists and Marxists (whether cultural or statist) need to go into the waste bin of history. Nobama 2012. Let’s clean out the garbage and take our country back.
The left seems to be having a spazfit over Romney’s comment about 47% of the people in the US having a victim mentality. I don’t know whether or not it will really hurt him. Among conservative voters it will not, and among die hard Republican voters it will not. In spite of all the hype, there is really nothing at all contraversial about what he said.
“There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47% of the people who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who they believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That’s an entitlement. And the government will give it to them. And they will vote for the president no matter what.”–Romney said in the recording.
So basically all he did was call attention to the elephant in the room. The fact that entitlement spending and the amount of people on government aid is growing is a huge problem, and one which cannot be sustained over the long term. Eventually the economy has to bust completely, and there are going to be riots just like there were in jolly old England. Also, those people will never vote for Romney, they will vote for the man who is more likely to give them free stuff, which is Obama. But putting that aside, there is a large constituency for the Dems that can never be won by any Republican no matter what. The Republicans need to realize that and just put up real conservative candidates from now on, not more neo-cons.
Of course Obama’s response about how he is everyone’s president is asinine, and it is probably the biggest lie since the snake told Eve it was OK eat the forbidden fruit, or at least one of them. The fact is Obama represents and caters to his constituency. If he were my president then he would have less time to appear on irrelevant shows like “David Letterman” and “The View” and more time to meet with Netanyahu. He would also never have passed NDAA. He would also not continually suck up to Islam, and he would not call that child molesting bastard who started Islam a prophet. Those are just a few things. No, he’s the candidate for an entirely different group of people which I am not at all by any means a part of.
Welfare Mom:
Cindy Nerger, 28, who relies on food stamps to feed her family, said she was brought to tears after being embarrassed by a manager at a Kroger store in Warner Robbins, Ga.
“He said, ‘Excuse me for working for a living and not relying on food stamps like you,’” Nerger said the manager told her.
The man’s comment came after Nerger and two other store employees disagreed over whether her total purchase was eligible for food stamps – the employees had insisted that roughly $10 of her bill was not covered. She said the manager ultimately told the employees to “just give it to her.”
After Nerger then stressed that she had been right all along, the man made his “working for a living” remark, she said.
It’s no coincidence that an article would come out about someone on government aid after Romney’s comment, and in light of the smear campaign the liberal media is running against him for free. The article is about a 28 year old woman who is married and who has a daughter, but is also on foodstamps. The purpose of the article is to make people pity people those who live off the government and to make Romney look as though he is mean or spiteful, because he wants to cut funding to people like this, supposedly.
To that end, it’s worth noting that they picked a white female who suffers from a medical condition, and who is actually married. They did not want to pick a stereotypical welfare-mom or someone who looks like they could be an immigrant.
Nerger said the reason she and her family – she is married with a daughter – must rely on food stamps is because her husband’s carpentry business isn’t profitable enough to support the family.
Meanwhile, Nerger must devote 12 hours every night to a dialysis treatment to combat her kidney disease, which she’s struggled with since the age of 11. She’s been on a kidney transplant list for five years and hopes that someday, after a successful transplant, she can become a working member of society. She would like to attend college to major in child psychology.
If they picked a healthy woman who was unmarried and knocked up then there would be a good deal less sympathy. The sad thing is that many unthoughtful people will be taken in by this, and an article like this will actually influence the outcome of the election, even if only by a small degree. But let us be analytical.
Here is the woman with her child:
Even though the picture is carefully angled (a tactic which fat women often use when they post pictures online), and no doubt carefully chosen, it is still easy to tell that this woman is considerably overweight, probably obese, which is consistent with what I have seen of women on foodstamps and WIC (more on that shortly). The fact is that whether her need is serious or not, she has managed to get very fat, which indicated excess. If she’s really hard up for money she should eat smaller portions and share with her daughter.
Second, knowing that they were not doing well financially she should never have had a child. Wait until you can afford a kid then have one. If you can’t feed them don’t breed them. Seriously. If we are going to have welfare then the government should make abstinance or sterilization a pre-requisite for receiving aid. Otherwise a large dependent class is bred which just drains the productive sectors of society. Part of the reason the number of people living off the tit has grown so much is because the government pays them to breed. If you incentivise a behavior you will get more of it.
My third point about this couple, is that if her husband’s business is not taking off, then it’s time to do something else. The manager at the grocery store is managing to get by, maybe this guy should go and do that. It’s negligent of this man to keep waiting for this thing to take off IF he cannot afford to feed his family.
The medical condition she has is unfortunate, but this woman is still fat, she still had a child, and her husband is still not doing his job to support them.
Of course judging by the picture of this person it is hard for me to believe that that is the case. In fact, getting back to what I said earlier, obecity is quite common among those who rely on foodstamps and WIC. I know this from first hand experience because I spent a summer working at a grocery store as a cashier back when I was in my teens, and yes, I know it was only one summer, but so many of these people came in. I averaged at about three or four a day. Most of them were fat, some of them were grossly obese. What they would do is have a handful of bare essential items which they would use their foodstamps or WIC to buy, because only certain items can be bought with those programs, then there would be a basket stuffed full of food that they would by with their own money. So if the were responsible they would buy the small handful of essential items with their own money in place of some of that other junk, and get off the government tit. I saw only one woman on WIC who was actually thin, and I saw only a handful of food stamp recipients who were, and they were all in the same family. The family was from some country in Eastern Europe, or maybe Russia, but as foreigners and immigrants they should not even be elligible for foodstamps or any kind of government assistance.
So the issue is not whether Romney is mean, or how bad the situations of government recipients might be, but the issue at hand is deciding what the role of government is, and whether the government is a government or a charity. The left insists that poverty can be solved by throwing more money at it, but in the meantime we just end up with more poverty, which goes back to my comment about incentivising behaviors. If you incentivise a particular behavior or lifestyle then you will get more of it. To me, all the left wing talk about “helping the poor” rings hollow, because the traditional means for supporting the down and out are religious organizations and family, which are two institutions the left is continually attacking and trying to undermine.
If someone was struggling in the 1800′s, or the early 1900′s they could count on their families for help. Women could count on their husbands, and young women were not usually having children outside of wedlock, they were having children with their husbands and staying with them. Widows could also count on their families for help, because usually they had children, or if they were young enough they could remarry and get help from their parents in the meantime. If none of those factors applied, the widows could still get help from their church. This whole concept of government feeding people is relatively new. Traditionally when it came to food the government usually took it away from people, or let them keep it at most, but never have we had a situation prior to the 1900′s where a government tried to be everyone’s sugar momma.
I am firmly convinced that the left wing leadership, and some of the left wing followers as well, want to create a permanent underclass so that they can have a reliable voter-base that will come out for them every election.
This is exactly why I dislike nature worship, and one of the reasons why I dislike globalists. The arrogance and wickedness of these people is beyond words. So they know what the effects of this garbage is (cancer and sterility) but they push it through anyways because they think the Earth is overpopulated and the population needs to be reduced. I have news for all these globalist parasites, the Earth is NOT overpopulated. Some parts of it are, but that’s not an “Earth” problem it’s a problem that exists in 3rd world countries, like India and China. That being said, I have been to India and their food is entirely organic and fresh. The farmers literally grow the plants and animals just outside of town (and inside), and then they bring it to the market where you can by them directly. India is very crowded, and yet, they don’t have to resort to mass production of genetically engineered food in order to feed everyone, AND the cost of food in terms of real wages is much lower there than it is here. So the argument about NEEDING genetically engineered food to feed everyone can best be described as a seditious lie, a.k.a. bullcrap.
But this is the mentality of the globalists behind the NWO. They have decided that they are better than everyone else, for whatever reason, and so they should receive one kind of treatment while most of the rest of humanity is treated like cattle. They think the are a superior breed of people, and they want to be in charge of us. It’s the same mentality behind the Democrats forcing through Obamacare while exempting themselves from it. The globalist agenda is clearly spelled out on the Guide Stones found near Elberton Georgia:
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely—improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule Passion—Faith—Tradition—and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth—Leave room for nature—Leave room for nature.
To me they are a bunch of wackjob nature worshippers. Of course to me the whole concept of nature worship is thoroughly idiotic, but people should have the freedom to do that if that is what they wish. Freedom of religion. However, what makes these people so odious is that they want force the entire world to lineup with their agenda, and what makes them dangerous is that they have the power to do it. So many of them are in places of power.
The Earth is a created thing, like a car or a house, and while we may appreciate our car or house I see no reason to treat them as higher beings, when they are not even beings of any sort. The Earth is dead in the long run regardless of whether or not it is “overpopulated.” The Bible says that the Earth will be destroyed with a “fervent heat” and science has confirmed this as the sun must eventually go supernova. I’m not saying that we should trash it out (actually I hate it when people litter), because for the time being we have to live here, but I am saying that saving humanity is more important than “saving the Earth” because there are other planets we can go to if Earth gets destroyed. But if humanity gets destroyed then the Earth becomes pointless.
But back to these globalist population control pricks. What it really comes down to is they think they are better than everyone else, so they want to literally reduce the rest of humanity to a lesser state of being. They want to have their space and cush lifestyles, while we all live in a backward feudal state with no freedoms. It’s like they bastardized their ideology by lifting the worst elements from Lord Shang, Karl Marx, and 1984, and blending them together into one vile abomination.
If they want space, they should invest their money in space exploration so that they can colonize some other planet, have all the space they need, and NEVER COME BACK. But no, they won’t do that because:
1) They have no real morals
2) They want to have slaves
3) That would take too much effort and requires real ingenuity.
This was a comment I came across left by a yahoo user on a news article about Obama. The user has hidden their real name. I did not write this myself, but it is a good thing for anyone to read when we consider that we could have four more years of this man:
Quit trashing President Obama’s accomplishments. He has done more than any other President before him. He has an impressive list of accomplishments:
First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the Unit ed States
First President to violate the War Powers Act. .
First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico . First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
First President to spend a trillion dollars on ‘shovel-ready’ jobs when there was no such thing as ‘shovel-ready’ jobs.
First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S. , including those with criminal convictions.
First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.
First President to terminate America ‘s ability to put a man in space.
First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.
First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.
First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).
First President to fire an inspector general of Ameri-Corps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.
First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.
First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 102 to date.
First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.
First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
First President to go on multiple global “apology tours” and concurrent “insult our friends” tours.
First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayer.
First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
First President to repeat the Holy Quran & tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they “volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences”. Then he was the First President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the last suggestion.
First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona).
How is this hope and change working out for you? THERE’S AN ELECTION COMING UP…I HOPE YOU REMEMBER THIS LIST WHEN YOU VOTE!
Recent Comments