1. new old stock ww2 footage
2. $4 dollar gas buys?
3. dog sense
4. repost of jumpingforjoy's "tony robbins deconstruction"...brilliant
5. Macau, China booming 8% a year w/ our jobs and T bills.
6. day of glass
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"If farm kids and bureaucrats swapped jobs, you could enjoy an efficient government while starving to death."
"I still remember when I was a freshman in h.s. and the Debate Issue for the year
was, "The President of the U.S. should be elected by the direct vote of the
people." I think it was used a few other years too during D plus 55 yrs since
then. As you know Debates have both positive and negative debaters. Our
coach was Ms. Raawe, a social studies teacher. I was usually the first negative
contestant. It was a good beginning to learning much about issues. One can
certainly see from this email from a cousin of mine that highly populated cities
would EASILY TAKE CHARGE OF ALL ELECTIONS. I think that I was
about 14 yrs old when I was on the debate team. 62 yrs later, I can see that the
skills she gave us are so RELEVANT TO THE 21ST CENTURY TOO!!
READ THOROUGHLY AND ABSORB!!"
In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the
time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise
the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy
collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of
history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations
always progressed through the following sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."
The Obituary follows:
Born 1776, Died 2012
It doesn't hurt to read this several times.
Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul,
Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the last Presidential
Number of States won by:
Square miles of land won by:
Population of counties won by:
Obama: 127 million
McCain: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was
mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.
Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income
tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the
"complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy,
with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the
"governmental dependency" phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders
called illegal's - and they vote - then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer
than five years.
If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.
If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at
stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom..
This is truly scary!
Of course we are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic .
Someone should point this out to Obama.
Of course we know he and too many others pay little attention to The
There couldn't be more at stake than on Nov 2012."
"One of the highly developed talents of President Barack Obama is the ability to
say things that are demonstrably false, and make them sound not only plausible
That talent was displayed just this week when he was asked whether he thought
the Supreme Court would uphold ObamaCare as constitutional or strike it down
PHOTO : Mika V. Stetsovski
He replied: "I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be
an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a
strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."
But how unprecedented would it actually be if the Supreme Court declared a
law unconstitutional if it was passed by "a strong majority of a democratically
The Supreme Court has been doing precisely that for 209 years!
Nor is it likely that Barack Obama has never heard of it. He has a degree from
the Harvard law school and taught constitutional law at the University of
Chicago law school. In what must be one of the most famous Supreme Court
cases in history — Marbury v. Madison in 1803 — Chief Justice John Marshall
established the principle that the Supreme Court can declare acts of Congress
null and void if these acts violate the Constitution.
They have been doing so for more than two centuries. It is the foundation of
American constitutional law. There is no way that Barack Obama has never
heard of it or really believes it to be "unprecedented" after two centuries of
In short, he is simply lying.
Now there are different kinds of liars. If we must have lying Presidents of the
United States, I prefer that they be like Richard Nixon. You could just look at
him and tell that he was lying.
But Obama is much smoother. On this and on many other issues, you would
have to know what the facts are to know that he is lying. He is obviously
counting on the fact that, in this era of dumbed-down education, many people
have no clue as to what the facts are.
He is also counting on something else — namely, that the pro-Obama media will
not expose his lies.
One of the many ways of lying smoothly is to simply redefine words. Barack
Obama is a master at that as well.
In the comment on the case pending before the Supreme Court, President
Obama said that he wanted to remind "conservative commentators" that they
have complained about "judicial activism" — which he redefines as the idea that
"an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and
First of all, every law that the Supreme Court has overturned for the past 209
years since Marbury v. Madison was "a duly constituted and passed law."
Second, the "judicial activism" that conservatives have complained about was
judges making rulings based on how they felt personally about the issue at hand,
rather than about what the Constitution of the United States said.
In recent years, great efforts have been made to redefine "judicial activism" in
terms of judges declaring laws unconstitutional, instead of "deferring" to
Congress or other government institutions.
But what is the Constitution's Bill of Rights supposed to protect the ordinary
citizen from? Government institutions! If judges are to defer to the very
institutions that the Bill of Rights tries to protect the citizen from, what is the point
of having a Bill of Rights?
As for Supreme Court justices being unelected, that has been true since the
Constitution was created. That was done deliberately, so that they could render
their judgments without fear of political repercussions. If unelected Supreme
Court justices are to automatically defer to elected officials, that again raises the
question of why they are there at all.
Why are the taxpayers paying their salaries and housing them in an expensive
marble building — just so that they can go along to get along?
It would be hard to become nostalgic about Richard Nixon, who was forced to
resign in disgrace. But at least you could tell when he was lying. Obama's lies are
just as big but not as visible, and the media that exposed Nixon is covering for
|Liveleak on Facebook|