Flat out lies. The most offensive one is where the author singles out and lies about an American serving in the armed forces.  My answers are in all caps.  I'm using 'mobile me' and can't change the font to make it easier to read.  Not yelling.  I'll post a nicer, colorized version on my blog later.  

Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, THIS JUST SHOWS THE AUTHOR'S LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OR KNOWLEDGE OF CURRENT ISSUES.  THERE ARE 2 PLANS AND 2 PROPOSALS BETWEEN THE HOUSE, SENATE AND OBAMA ADMINISTRATION; THE HOUSE DEMOCRATIC BILL, THE SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS COMMITTEE'S BILL, THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN PROPOSAL AND OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN PROPOSAL.    passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, AGAIN, WHICH ONE HAVEN'T THEY READ? ALL OF THEM?  I WISH THE AUTHOR WOULD'VE SIGNED THIS SO THEY COULD TELL ME.  ARE THEY INSINUATING ALL OF THE LEADERS IN WASHINGTON HAVEN'T READ IT? OR JUST THE SIDE THEY OPPOSE? DO TELL.  signed by a president who smokes, EX SMOKER, LIKE MANY AMERICANS (AND YOURSELF) AND LIKE G.W.B. IS AN ALCOHOLIC AND EX-SMOKER  funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, GEITNER MADE AN ERROR ON HIS TAXES A DECADE PRIOR TO HIS CONFIRMATION AS TREAS SECRETARY AND REPAID THE IRS THAT SAME YEAR.  HE WAS CONFIRMED WITH BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND EVEN SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R-UT) TOLD FOX NEWS "HE'S A VERY, VERY COMPETENT GUY"  overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, THE CURRENT ACTING SURGEON GENERAL IS REAR ADMIRAL STEVEN GALSON, M.D.- CLICK THE LINK FOR A PHOTO AND BIO OF HIS HONORABLE SERVICE TO THIS COUNTRY http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/about/biographies/biosg.html  THIS IS PARTICULARLY OFFENSIVE, SINCE THE REPUBLICANS LIKE TO CLAIM THAT THEY SUPPORT OUR TROOPS.  HE MAY BE A SAILOR, AND I A FORMER MARINE, BUT I'LL STAND AND DEFEND THIS COUNTRY WITH HIM ANY DAY.  I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE AUTHOR'S MILITARY SERVICE.  financed by a country that is nearly broke.  WHAT WAS OUR DEFICIT WHEN BUSH ENTERED OFFICE?  WHAT WAS IT WHEN HE LEFT?  FOR ALL OF THE MONEY SPENT ON IRAQ, DID WE EVEN GET ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION OUT OF IT?  DO TELL.   GOING BACK TO THE SURGEON GENERAL COMMENTS FOR A SECOND.  I TRULY HOPE THAT THE REPUBLICANS AND THEIR RIGHT WING HATE MONGERS DON'T START TRYING TO SHIT ON OUR SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN.  THIS IS A NEW LOW, EVEN FOR THEM.  IT'S HATE SPEECH LIKE THIS THAT IS ALIENATING THEM, THE AUTHORS OF THESE EMAILS AND THE PURVEYORS OF THESE EMAILS EVEN FURTHER FROM MAINSTREAM SOCIETY.      On Wednesday, August 19, 2009, at 01:33PM, "Xxxxxx Xxxxxx"  wrote: >

Let me get this straight.

Obama's health care plan will be

written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it,
passed by a Congress that hasn't read it,
signed by a president who smokes,
funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes,
overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and
financed by a country that is nearly broke.

What could possibly go wrong?

FIREFIGHTERS NO HABLE?

After viewing this particular piece, and not knowing the particulars surrounding this,my initial reaction was that this was a poor piece of "journalism" meant to incite a particular audience's xenophobia. They failed to mention why only spanish speaking persons were hired for the position, why no english speakers were hired for the position or the economics involved with this type of work. Nor did they mention any opposing viewpoints. Thus, leaving the viewer to fill in the blanks. If this were an essay or thesis of a college student, they would've received no credit for it.

My opinion:
As an OSHA certified safety trainer, I know the importance of effective communications as they relate to safety and unit cohesion. Firefighting is inherently dangerous and I don't care if they speak Russian, Scandinavian, Chinese or Spanish; if they're protecting people and property and doing a good job at it, more power to them. And if I'm in need of a firefighter to put out a blaze in my back yard or rescue me from a burning high rise, I could care less what language they speak.
A little known fact about the military, and I'm not sure if this is a law or just an un-spoken fact of life, but the non-native speaking service members were usually placed together in the same fire team, squad or platoon in order to maintain safety, unit cohesion and communications at all times.
As for the economics of this type of work, these firefighters apparently make little more than minimum wage. I can't think of too many white guys who'd pick veggies or put out fires for these wages.

I took the liberty of doing a simple Google search and below is what I came up with. The 1st 3 links are from a conservative blogger and he appears to somewhat be eating crow on this topic after his initial post about the news clip. I did another quick search of the names used in the posts and they appear to be the real people (albeit, I did not telephone them or do any personal background searches).


1st post with video clip and transcripts:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2EyN2VkNTU2NDE1MDFlOTg5NWIyMjg4ZWIzZDEzYzk=
2nd post informing of rebuttal
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjFkYTUyMzQyNmNmZmQxZDU1NWFiYzRhYmFkMzQ0NjI=
Link from 2nd post to "right thinking, conservative thought and commentary" blog where he posts rebuttal from Department of Forestry Fire managers. Below that, he posts letter, presumably from the person who got fired.
http://r-thinking.blogspot.com/2006/07/response-from-bill-lafferty.html

background article from the NY Times
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9400E7D71E3EF93BA15756C0A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

On Aug 19, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Xxx & Xxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:

What say you on this topic Robert. Old news now, but still very pertinent considering we are at the height of the fire season. - XXX

OBAMA'S ALREADY CENSORING FOX NEWS

This segment did have me asking a few questions of my own. Where are Bush's transcripts? Where is his HONORABLE DISCHARGE or his DD214 showing his honorable service? Wheres his "long form" birth certificate?

For starters, the reason you didn't see it on TV last Sunday wasn't a conspiracy to keep the American people in the dark about real news, this was in fact shown on Fox Cable on October 5, 2008. They even mention the upcoming election several times. Of course, the originator of this email is banking on the fact that you chose not to hear that.
This special segment was shown on "Hannity's America", at the time it was their Sunday night program which Hannity did not have to share the screen with his weeknight liberal co-host, Alan Colmes.
In fact, even Fox News admits that this isn't investigative journalism, but OPINION. The executive producer of the show, John Finley said that the program was clearly opinion and that the audience knew to take it as such. "Hannity's America' is an opinion show - it's a show from Sean's perspective, which is obviously conservative"

And finally, like your 'birther' movement, this rubbish has already been discredited as right-wing paranoia and spin, so I'm not going to waste my time doing the research. Enough of it has been wasted watching this BS.

But, for your comfort, if 'OUR NEW GOVERNMENT" takes this off the air or forces Google to remove it from YouTube, I've got a copy saved for you. I'm going to keep this gem alive. And if black helicopters come and swoop me away in the night, I'll never tell them where it is. They'll have to waterboard me in a dark foreign prison cell before I reveal my secrets.

On Aug 17, 2009, at 11:20 PM, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:

Hannity Segment taken off the air on Sunday.


Here are the tapes of the Hannity show that weren't shown this past Sunday.

Forwarded as received - no comment but I did get several 'alerts' from many to watch.

To everyone who thought the special about Obama was going to be on Hannity.
It was taken off.
Here are the segments.
You better watch now before they are removed too.
Yes, the program was not aired Sunday so it was googled and found the segments had been taken off of the internet as well.
Wonder who did this? Wonder who blocked this? Is thisour NEW Government protecting us?

Here are the 6 segments; if they haven't been removed before you get to them.
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rthv8QmJLUw&feature=related_
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJNhKZh8mGY&feature=fvw_
Part 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95XFUi8PrTs&feature=related_
Part 4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl4twMf1xyM&feature=related_
Part 5 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKzFtKEysjw&feature=related_
Part 6 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmEmRbRJFLU&feature=related_

PSEUDO DEFICIT HAWKS BEWARE

As a hard core fiscal conservative, I've got to ask myself; where were all of you right wing 'deficit hawks' when President Bush squandered President Clinton's record budget surpluses? I don't recall seeing these baseless, factually inaccurate emails in my inbox then. All I saw was the right's perverted fixation with Clinton's private sex life and what the true definition of the word "is" is.

Yes, it is a fact that President Clinton inherited President George HW Bush's deficits. And, yes it is a fact that Clinton left office with a record surplus. Last but not least, yes it is a fact that bush quickly squandered that surplus away and left office with a record $438 BILLION deficit.

Below is a timeline that I copied from a previous blog post:

09-27-2000 - Clinton announced a federal budget surplus of $230 billion, the largest in US history (he had a $290 billion deficit when he took office and it was projected to be $455 billion in 2000)
02/02/2004 - Bush sent Congress a $2.4 trillion budget which included a record $521 billion deficit
10/07/2008 - US Budget deficit hits record $438 billion
10/09/2008 - Bush maxed out the National Debt Clock in Times Square


Now, ask yourself this; what is your true motivation behind sending this out? Are you going to send my reply out to all who received the original message? Very few do, but the information is out there for all to see, one only needs to open their eyes, and mind to see.

Cheers,

Bobby






Begin forwarded message:

From: The Xxxxxxxxx's
Date: August 19, 2009 6:37:53 PM GMT-07:00
To:
Subject: COMING SOON!

SUPREME COURT NOW HAS OBAMA CITIZENSHIP ISSUE

you got to love Snopes. do the wing nuts actually believe that we won't check Snopes or a myriad of other fact checking sites?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/occidental.asp

I bet if somebody wrote that "bush/cheney approval ratings are at a record 90% among repugnantones and Democrats alike, an incredible 7 months out of office. Snopes confirmed it" this would get sent around the internet and then some tool would add something about Obama had a secret pact with Clarence Thomas to rig the election in his favor and that the liberal media is in on it, just so we could have a black president forgetting that Faux News and rush dumbo would have to be in on it too (don't forget palin and her new job in the liberal media).

Origins: As the April 1, 2009, dateline on this article indicates, this piece originated as a April Fool's joke that has continued circulating long afterwards, a prank which plays on rumors that President Barack Obama is not a native-born citizen of the United States (and thus not eligible to hold the office of President of the United States). Even without the tell-tale dateline, however, several indicators give away this item as a hoax:

* The article is tagged "AP," signifying it came from the Associated Press news agency, but the writing does not at all fit the standard Associated Press stylebook guidelines.

* Obama attended Occidental College in California for two years as an undergraduate from 1979-81 under his birth name of Barack Obama, not as "Barry Soetoro" (the latter is the surname of his Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro).

* Fulbright scholarships for foreign students are coordinated through the American Indonesian Exchange Foundation (AMINEF), which does not not fund Indonesians for undergraduate study in the United States (only for master's or doctorate programs).

* Occidental College has neither released, nor been ordered to release, Barack Obama's student records.

* Neither Britain's Daily Mail nor any other UK newspaper has published a front-page article entitled "Obama Eligibility Questioned" in 2009, nor has any such newspaper published an article consisting of the text reproduced above.

* Leo Donofrio's lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency was denied a hearing by the Supreme Court of New Jersey back in December 2008. It has not been taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court.


Last updated: 10 July 2009



On Jul 20, 2009, at 11:17 PM, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:

Snopes mentioned this in a short statement, but did not elaborate.
(Now you know why he is so eager to get Sottomayer appointed!)

BOMBSHELL:Supreme Court now has Obama Citizenship
AP- WASHINGTON D.C. - In a move certain to fuel the debate over
Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group Americans for Freedom of
Information has Released copies of President Obama's college=2 0transcripts from Occidental College Released today, the transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate at the school.

The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship
program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's
detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is
looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitim acy and qualification to serve as president..

When reached for comment in London, where he has been in meetings with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Obama smiled but refused comment on the issue.

Britain 's Daily Mail also carried the story in a front-page article titled, Obama
Eligibility Questioned leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K.

In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey

This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrio's case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama' s citizenship or qualification to serv e as president.

Gary Kreep of the United States Justice  Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending.

This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter.

LET OTHERS KNOW THIS NEWS THAT THE MEDIA WON'T REVEAL!

HR 1388

You really should've fact checked this one before sending it out. See below for the links to HB 1388 Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act (formally the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act). This act has nothing what-so-ever to do with Gaza or foreign aid.

Maybe the author of this faux email meant to say that President Obama issued Presidential Determination # 2009-15 to provide emergency funds for "unexpected urgent refugee and migration needs related to Gaza. If so, that $20.3M is for meeting the humanitarian needs of Palestinian refugees, but not for the migration of hundreds of thousands of Hamas militants to migrate to the US, live "on the dole" and become registered liberal Democrats.

In fact, your hero, GW Bush issued a similar authorization for $29.5M for humanitarian needs for SOMALIA, SUDAN, CHAD and THE WEST BANK and GAZA, all of which are notable centers for terrorism. I don't recall the right wing wacko's sending out similar faux-emails to our inboxes then.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/palestinians.asp

On Tuesday, June 02, 2009, at 10:42AM, "Xxxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:

HR 1388
" Here we go again America,,,,, Something un-American everyday !!! "
Date: Thursday, April 16, 2009, 11:30 PM

Whether you are an Obama fan, or not, EVERYONE IN THE U.S.A. needs to be aware this kind of major political action and CHANGE!!!

Something happened. H.R.1388 was passed yesterday, behind our backs. You may want to read about it.It wasn't mentioned on the news... just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen. Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA . This is the news that didn't make the headlines....
By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza . ( This is just to get them all into our country )

The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States , was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.

Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

Let's review...itemized list of some of Barack Obama's most recent actions since his inauguration: His first call to any head of state, as president, was to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory. His first one-on-one television interview with any news organization was with Al Arabia television. His first executive order was to fund/facilitate abortion(s) not just here within the U. S., but within the world, using U. S. tax payer funds.
He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees halted.
He ordered overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.
He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole and the "terror attack" on 9/11.
Now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refuges to move to, and live in, the US at American taxpayer expense.

These important, and insightful, issues are being "lost" in the blinding bail-outs and "stimulation" packages. Doubtful? To verify this for yourself: www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488

PLEASE PASS THIS ON... AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT THIS

>

DIVORCE AGREEMENT

I was about to spend countless hours replying to this, but as a gun toting "liberal" / former Marine, I couldn't have crafted a better reply. Thanks Richard! (via: Imperfect Union)

Dear Mr. Wall, duly appointed representative of American conservatives, wingers, fascists, ditto-heads, and all others who believe the only relevant portion of the Constitution is the Second Amendment, et. al.:

We accept your proposal! Yes, we have stuck together since the 1950’s (since 1776 frankly), but your sad refusal to admit that the current economic crisis was caused by the eight year administration of a man who can’t spell “deficit” augers for the divorce you requested. Although we happen to think that our sides share many beliefs, your stubborn refusal to accept blame for any of the myriad issues facing this Country means our relationship must end. I would suggest we end it on friendly terms but — let’s be honest — your track record on this front is pretty poor. So we think the better alternative is to simply ignore one another. You seem pretty adept at ignoring those you don’t agree with, this should be a no-brainer. (Something else you’re good at!).

Here is a model separation agreement:

You suggest each group equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. As a law student I might have hoped you would understand the ideas of “equitable distribution” and distribution proportionally “by landmass” are two different concepts (did you mean to say proportionally by population?) but no matter: you can have the less educated, more heavily subsidized middle portion of the country that favors your party, we’ll take the better educated, more affluent coasts and big cities that favor ours. We will agree to assume responsibility for the nightmare you’ve made of New Orleans if you toss in Chicago (it’s another big smart city, you don’t want it anyway). You can have Florida, New Jersey, and Oregon. We will take all persons of color with the temerity to occupy your regions. You can have the white-priders and neo-nazi’s living in ours.

Your first offer of “redistributive taxes” is rejected. We simply don’t know what “redistributive taxes” are. If you are referring to a tax structure designed to allow our poorest persons the chance to achieve the American dream, move into the middle class (or higher), then pay back that benefit to those who come after them then, yes, we will take it. By the way, you mention you are a law student. Just as an aside, how much did you pay in taxes this year? How much did you pay in tuition? Was your tuition subsidized by State funds, donor grants, or low-interest government loans? Just asking, that’s all.

Next, thank you, we will take the so-called “liberal judges.” It will be impossible to identify them since part of the judicial code of ethics states that they are not allowed to accept party affiliation or comment about political issues but we can start by giving you the “conservative judges” like Scalia and Thomas (they are less concerned about these issues). If by “liberal judges” you mean judges who believe legislators are forbidden from passing laws that violate the Constitutional rights of American citizens then, yes, we would like those people. And we will gladly take the American Civil Liberties Union. I know they irritate you, what with their belief in the rights of citizens. Silly jerks.

Yes we hate war. We believe it is a “necessary evil” to be avoided if possible. I guess this means you like war? I’m going to go out on a limb here and surmise you’ve never served in one. In that regard you are entitled to take as much of the military as will go your way. A suggestion: you might want to keep that “likes war” stuff under wraps. Believe it or not military guys don’t really cotton to being sent to their deaths by spoiled law students who “like war.”

You cannot have all of the guns. We like guns too. We like them so much we think they should be kept locked in safes. We don’t want them stolen by children or thieves. In our experience this leads to bad things. We will continue to regulate the types of guns we allow our citizens to own. This is in accord with our reading of the Second Amendment which states that the right is necessary so far as to arm “well regulated militias.” Since you fellers think that part is superfluous you probably should take it out of whatever new Constitution your beloved corporations allow you to have.

You can have the NRA.

We’ll take Oprah (the billionaire entrepreneur), Michael Moore (a dissident who puts his hope before money), and Rosie O’Donnell (friend of Madonna). In exchange you are required to take Rush (the hypocritical junkie who used his political connections to avoid jail), Karl Rove (a man so cynical he cast your own John McCain as a traitor), and Dick Cheney (just a fucking asshole). Good luck telling them apart.

We intend to have a capitalist economy as well. Our form of capitalism will have rules designed to ensure that corporations are rewarded for producing quality products and services and disincentives for those that make money through dishonest and illegal practices. Our capitalism will reward executives and boards of directors interested in the long-term stability of corporations. We think this encourages people to invest in companies. You can have your “greedy corporations” (your word, not ours) that equates short-term selfish thinking with capitalism. We’ll take our smaller, independent stores that believe fiscal stability and quality products create loyal customers. You can have Wal-Mart and Home Depot. We will take Warren Buffet. You can have Bernie Madoff.

We will take the homeless, the “homeboys,” the “hippies,” and the illegal aliens. In that regard we will also take the Constitution and the Statue of Liberty. Let’s face it, it doesn’t sound like you have much interest in all of that “all men are created equal” and “give us your tired [and] your poor” mumbo anyway. It’s enough to make you think the Founding Fathers were some kinda socialists!

You can have the so-called “hot Alaskan hockey mom”; we’ll take Tina Fey.

You can have that “kick-ass” Jesus who rides a massive white steed, lops the heads from his enemies with a fiery sword, and cures Ted Haggard of all that icky-gayness. We’ll take the humble Jesus that washes the feet of sinners and dares rich men to enter heaven by hoarding their gains. In that vein we aren’t sure why you want those Bibles. Wouldn’t you prefer a few million poorly crafted Left Behind books instead?

You can have the rednecks, thank you.

We will practice diplomacy until it is no longer feasible. We will enter war reluctantly. You go on “hammering stuff” till you obtain peace. Oops, my bad. I forgot, you “like war” don’t you? So I guess you aren’t looking for peace then. Hmmm…well what are you looking for then? Take this Iraq thing. Ever since Bush admitted it was a mistake we’ve been having a devil of a time figuring out what the fucking point is (considering it was Afghanis and Saudis who attacked the Trade Center after all). Can you tell us?

We will gladly accept your offer of all religious beliefs. Again, this is part of that pesky Constitution thing, you don’t care I apologize for boring you. As for Shirley McClaim, we barely remember who she is, much less why we shouldn’t want her. That being said your sheer dislike of her makes her seem pretty endearing. We’ll take her!

The U.N. is in New York which we already have agreed is rightly ours so your offer is worthless. Just so you know, you will be the ONLY nation on the planet that isn’t part of the U.N. Some people might call that the courage of your convictions. Others might call it the righteous indignation of the hopelessly petulant. Six of one I suppose.

The SUVs, the pickup trucks, and the oversized luxury cars are yours. We sincerely hope you feel good about giving your hard-earned money to the oil barons you vow to “hammer.”

We, like 95% of the western world, will give our people health care, thank you. We will even give it to petulant graduate students who earn no money while they live off of the subsidized benefit of our education system. We are nothing if not charitable.

You can have the The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem so long as we get God Bless America. (Let’s face it, it’s a far superior song). While we’re on the topic, would you mind taking title to all of those sappy hick American songs written by artists using any combination of the names Billy, Bob, Randy, Rufus, and Cletus? Oh, before I forget, would you kindly take NASCAR too? Perhaps we liberal socialists are too unrefined to appreciate the subtleties of watching cars zip around a track 500 times but it’s just not to our liking.

We can take Imagine, I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum By Ya, and We Are the World if you want but, frankly, those are the kind of songs your greedy corporations love to bastardize into nostalgic commercial snippets so you probably should ask your corporate masters first. Get back to us on that one.

You have offered us the oddly named “trickle up poverty.” After first taking offense we have come to the realization that we like that idea! Yes, we believe that educating and taking care of our poor allows them to slowly — but surely — rise from their station and have better lives. That way they can become fruitful citizens who take part in our democracy and contribute to the well being of our Nation!
Speaking of which…

We noticed that you didn’t mention democracy at all. It almost seems as if you don’t care about it. We’ll take it. Nor do you mention the Constitution. Once again, it almost seems as if you don’t care about it. We’ll take it. You neglect to mention our schools, particularly our higher education programs (of which you are a beneficiary) which are the envy of the world. Thank you! You ignore our charitable works and programs designed to help others throughout the world. (Why does that surprise me?). You ignored our museums, our libraries, and the other monumental structures created by the New Deal policies of Roosevelt? Ours. You mention those fascinating business-persons a bunch of times but seem to have no interest in our artists, our writers, and our other creative persons. Don’t mind if we do.

Let me save us both some time. Whatever you hate about America we’ll take. We’ll take the wretched refuse, you take the country club set. We’ll take the illegal immigrants, you take the Mayflower matrons. We’ll take the convicts, you take the criminals. You can have your sure thing, we’ll take our chances.

Good luck,

Richard D. Ross
Lawyer and Reasonable Human Being

P.S. You’re gonna make one hell of a lawyer.

On Jul 17, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:

The bottom line… DIVORCE AGREEMENT THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL PUT AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE IT'S BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR , I'LL VOTE FOR HIM. OUTSTANDING. Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al: We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way. Here is a model separation agreement: Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sur e our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them). We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood . You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we 'll help provide them security. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values... You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill. We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find. You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World. We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in 15 years. Sincerely, John J. Wall Law Student and an American P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda & Nancy Pelosi

2012 ELECTIONS

I normally read and then delete these paranoid, fact-less diatribes that are sent out or forwarded by the same people who believe in UFO / lunar landing / 9-11/ birther conspiracies, but certain ones are absolutely reprehensible, and deserve to be corrected. I spent a few hours doing the research that the author of this email failed to do and conveniently put the finding in blue to make it an easy read. I tried to keep it short, but some required more explanation than others. The complete, original email is at the bottom of the page.

I read your point of view, please give me the courtesy and read mine. Feel free to reply back with any factual corrections you may have.

1. What if I had told you in October 2008, before the last presidential election, that before Barack Obama's first 100 days in office, the federal government would be in control of both he mortgage and the banking industries? That 19 of America's largest banks would be forced to undergo stress tests by the Federal government which would determine if they were insufficiently capitalized, so they must be supervised by the government?

A quick history lesson in the time line of the financial crisis:

2/07/2007 - HSBC announces losses linked to US sub prime mortgages (under the watchful eyes of the BUSH ADMINISTRATION)

June 2007 - two Bear Stearns hedge funds run into large sub prime losses and are dumped. Trouble spreads to Merrill Lynch, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs (BUSH ADMINISTRATION)

June - Oct 2007 - US banks posted record losses in the billions

9/07/2008 - Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac put into "conservatorship" (nationalized) by US Treasury (BUSH ADMINISTRATION)

9/16/2009 - AIG Corp bailed out by US Federal Reserve (BUSH ADMINISTRATION)

10/01/2009 - US Senate passed $700 billion bail-out plan (BUSH ADMINISTRATION)

2. What if I had told you that within Barack Obama's first 100 days in office the federal government would be the largest shareholder in the US Big-Three automakers: Ford, GM, and Chrysler? That the government would kick out the CEO's of these companies and appoint hand-picked executives with zero experience in the auto industry and that executive compensation would be determined, not by a Board of Directors, but by the government?

April 2008 - gasoline prices near $4/gallon, GM sales down 16% from the previous year, Ford's down 12% and Chrysler was down 23% (BUSH ADMINISTRATION). Not necessary to comment on what happens with an oil man in office.

6/03/2008 - GM announces closing of 4 assembly plants

11/18/2008 - big-3 CEO's appear before Congress (remember, they didn't carpool?)

12/02/2008 - big-3 asks Congress for $34 billion in government loans. GM alone asked for $18 billion and an immediate immediate $4 billion to survive past 01/01/2009

12/19/2008 - US automakers granted $17.4 billion in LOANS as part of the auto rescue plan crafted by the BUSH ADMINISTRATION. 3/31/2009 deadline set for the companies to show they are financially "viable"

02/18/2009 GM & Chrysler submit restructuring plonas ans ask for further federal aid, totaling $39 billion.

03/30/2009 - GM CEO resigns after Obama administration unveils tougher terms for federal aid to automakers. Calls for sweeping restructuring of GM and berger between Chrysler and Fiat SpA

05/27/2009 - GM bondholders regected GM's offer to exchange bond debt for stock.

06/01/2009 - GM files for bankruptcy protection

07/10/2009 - GM emerges from bankruptcy after 40 days!

Overall, I'd say the financial bailout was not a good idea, it was a great one, and a bipartisan one at that. Can you imagine how it would've affected our economy, and our national pride if one of our big-3 failed? Not to mention all of the Americans who would be out of a job? Would you rather see all of these people loose their homes and families? This email sure makes it seem like that.

3. What if I had told you that Barack Obama would appoint 21 Czars,without congressional approval, accountable only to him, not to the voters, who would have control over a wide range of US policy decisions. That there would be a Stimulus Accountability Czar, an Urban Czar, a Compensation Czar, an Iran Czar, an Auto Industry Czar, a Cyber Security Czar, an Energy Czar, a Bank Bailout Czar, and more than a dozen other government bureaucrats with unchecked regulatory powers over US domestic and foreign policy.

The Bush administration had numerous czars as well. Remember Carl Rove, he was the Domestic Policy Czar, and then there were the Cybersecurity Czar, Regulatory Czar, AIDS Czar, Bird-Flu Czar, Manufacturing Czar and let's not forget the Katrina Czar, but the scariest Bush czar that never came to fruition is the War Czar. In fact, the term Czar is an informal name for a person who directs policies in the United States. Nothing more. The term has been around since the early 70's and is most commonly used in reference to the Drug Czar.

The truth is that the media coined the term, as it is much simpler to say Drug Czar than to say Director of the National Drug Control Policy. Every president is allowed to appoint his Cabinet and administration personnel. In fact, a good percentage of Obama's administrations appointments are roll-over's from Bush.

4. What if I had told you that the federal deficit would be $915 billion in the first six months of the Obama presidency - with a projected annual deficit of $1.75 trillion - triple the $454.8 billion in 2008, for which the previous administration was highly criticized by Obama and his fellow Democrats. That congress wouldpass Obama's $3.53 trillion federal budget for fiscal 2010. That the projected deficit over the next ten years would be greater than $10 trillion.

09-27-2000 - Clinton announced a federal budget surplus of $230 billion, the largest in US history (he had a $290 billion deficit when he took office and it was projected to be $455 billion in 2000)

02/02/2004 - Bush sent Congress a $2.4 trillion budget which included a record $521 billion deficit

10/07/2008 - US Budget deficit hits record $438 billion

10/09/2008 - Bush maxed out the National Debt Clock in Times Square

5. What if I had told you that the Obama Justice Department would order FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high-value detainees captured on the battlefield and held at US military detention facilities in Afghanistan. That Obama would order the closing of the Guantanamo detention facility with no plan for the disposition of the 200-plus individuals held there. That several of the suspected terrorists at Guantanamo would be sent to live in freedom in Bermuda at the expense of the US government. That our returning US veterans would be labeled terrorists and put on a watch list.

This false statement came from a RNC questionnaire called the "2009 Obama Agenda Survey", but was in fact a "push poll" ( a political technique which questions are written in a way that aims to convince the respondent of a particular position - read: political statement masquerading as a question). In a 06/12/2009 letter from FBI Director Robert Mueller III to US Rep Frank Wolf he states

"Regarding Miranda, there has been no policy change and no blanket instruction issued for FBI agents to Mirandize detainees overseas," Mueller wrote. "For years, FBI agents have been trained to analyze whether Miranda is appropriate to use on a case-by-case basis and to consider providing Miranda warnings if prosecution in the United States may occur. For detainees held in military custody overseas, approval by the Department of Justice is required before Miranda warnings may be given.

There are cases in which FBI agents have provided Miranda warnings to persons captured and held overseas, at Bagram and elsewhere. In those cases, a determination was made that a prosecution in ... court may be in the interest of national security and that providing Miranda warnings ... was therefore desirable to maximize the likelihood that any resulting statements would be admissible at trial. In practice, Miranda warnings have been provided to Bagram detainees in only a small handful of cases out of over 4,000 individuals detained and interrogated by the FBI."

6. What if I had told you that the federal government would seek powers to seize key companies whose failures could jeopardize the financial system. That a new regulatory agency would be proposed by Obama to control loans, credit cards, mortgage-backed securities, and other financial products offered to the public.

See numbers 1 and 2 for the Bush administration's give aways and corporate takeovers. Again, it seems like the author wants the country to fail. Like they want to see people out of work. I'm going to use a favorite from the Bush playbook and say that the author is quite UN-AMERICAN and UN-PATRIOTIC and if they aren't with us, they must be against us.

7. What if I had told you that Obama would travel to the Middle East, bow before the Saudi king, and repeatedly apologize for America's past actions. That he would travel to Latin America where he would warmly greet Venezuela's strongman Hugo Chavez and sit passively in the audience while Nicaraguan Marxist thug Daniel Ortega charged America with terrorist aggression in Central America.

Obama bowing to the Saudi King was not only customary, but a norm among presidents. American presidents will continue to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia as long as their citizens are addicted to the oil they pump from below their feet. Bush bowed too, but didn't stop there (see pictures below). I'll refrain from making any further commentary on this subject. Obama and Chavez shook hands. I know this may be difficult for some to understand, but ignoring your problems don't make them go away. Dialogue has to start somewhere. Remember when you and Mom made us apologize to each other after a fight? Should he continue the failed Bush policies of ignoring Iran, North Korea and Venezuala? Look where that got us; North Korea successfully detonated a nuclear weapon underground, Iran is now emboldened now that it's most powerful enemy has been taken out by the West and they're on the way to becoming nuclearized.

8. Okay, now what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new "Fairness Doctrine." That he wants to curtail the First Amendment rights of those who may disagree with his policies via Internet blogs, cable news networks, or advocacy ads. That most major network television and most newspapers will only sing his phrases like state-run media in communist countries?

The Fairness Doctrine was introduced in 1949 by the Truman Administration and upheld by the US Supreme Court in 1969. Essentially, the doctrine required the "holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was honest, equitable and balanced". Them crazy liberals, what did they know back then? Harry Truman was a Democrat, he must've been a Commie or a Socialist. He must've got a concussion fighting in the trenches in WWI. After all, that wouldn't happen in America.

9. What if I were to tell you that the Obama Justice Department is doing everything it can to limit your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. That the federal government wants to reinstate the so-called assault weapons ban which would prohibit the sale of any type of firearm that requires the shooter to pull the trigger every time a round is fired. That Obama's Attorney General wants to eliminate the sale of virtually all handguns and ammunition, which most citizens choose for self-defense.

False. This is a flat out paranoid distortion of the facts. Even Bush supported the 1994 legislation which outlawed the sale and possession of such firearms. This put Bush in direct opposition to the NRA and his base.

10. What if I were to tell you that the Obama plan is to eliminate states rights guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and give the federal government sweeping new powers over policies currently under the province of local and state governments and voted on by the people. That Obama plans to control the schools, energy production, the environment, health care, and the wealth of every US citizen.

There is actually no argument here, because there is nothing cited, no meat in this sandwich. In fact, in July the Republicans sponsored a bill that would've eroded states rights by forcing states to recognize the laws of another with regards to carrying concealed weapons across state lines. The bill failed.

This is a pitifully executed attempt at promoting racism amongst ignorant, uneducated people. If you doubt me, do a google search for "states rights" and see how many times you see Ku Klux Klan and Robert Byrd.

A little history on states rights; Federal and State powers are defined in the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and since it's inception, it has been a lightning rod between the states and Federal government, especially during the Civil War and all of the way through the 1950's and 60' African-American Civil Rights Movement. Yes folks, it really is a racial issue. In fact, it was the rallying cry of the Southern states leading up to the Civil War. It currently lives as a rallying cry for racist and bigots like the KKK and Aryan skin heads.

I know I shouldn't be, but I'm quite astounded that this blatantly racist statement was written by a Republican and being forward around republican circles. I would hope to think that my Grandfather (a devout Republican) would be shocked to see what his party has become. If this is the type of people the Republicans prefer, count me out!

11. What if I were to tell you that the president, the courts, and the federal government have ignored the US Constitution and have seized powers which the founders of our country fought to restrict. That our last presidential election may have been our last truly free election for some time to come. That our next presidential election may look similar to the one recently held in Iran. (And maybe under review by ACORN.)

Again, there is NO MEAT IN THE SANDWICH. Just a bunch of paranoid banter trying to rally the base. Please cite some facts (or even fiction like the rest of the email) and give me something to argue. And what the hell does ACORN have to do with reviewing Federal Elections? The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now is the country's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, working together for social justice and stronger communities. Again, this seems a bit on the racist side. Why would the Republicans be so scared of the poor and low income people gaining a voice in this country? Isn't that what our forefathers would've wanted? What does it say under the Statue of Liberty? Something about "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!". Should she have a secondary clause in this sonnet? I'd bet the originator of this email would like to see "unless they be black, or really poor, or wishing equality of thee. These masses should be of pale persuasion, unless they are servant to me." I'm still dumbfounded why the author of this email is so scared of ACORN, the poor, the minorities. I guess if I had the answers, I would be able to cause world peace and goodwill to our fellow man

On Aug 1, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:

What would you say if I gave you 11 reasons why the elections in 2012 will be the most important in the history of the United States?

1. What if I had told you in October 2008, before the last presidential election, that before Barack Obama's first 100 days in office, the federal government would be in control of both he mortgage and the banking industries? That 19 of America's largest banks would be forced to undergo stress tests by the Federal government which would determine if they were insufficiently capitalized, so they must be supervised by the government?

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

2. What if I had told you that within Barack Obama's first 100 days in office the federal government would be the largest shareholder in the US Big-Three automakers: Ford, GM, and Chrysler? That the government would kick out the CEO's of these companies and appoint hand-picked executives with zero experience in the auto industry and that executive compensation would be determined, not by a Board of Directors, but by the government?

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

3. What if I had told you that Barack Obama would appoint 21 Czars,without congressional approval, accountable only to him, not to the voters, who would have control over a wide range of US policy decisions. That there would be a Stimulus Accountability Czar, an Urban Czar, a Compensation Czar, an Iran Czar, an Auto Industry Czar, a Cyber Security Czar, an Energy Czar, a Bank Bailout Czar, and more than a dozen other government bureaucrats with unchecked regulatory powers over US domestic and foreign policy.

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

4. What if I had told you that the federal deficit would be $915 billion in the first six months of the Obama presidency - with a projected annual deficit of $1.75 trillion - triple the $454.8 billion in 2008, for which the previous administration was highly criticized by Obama and his fellow Democrats. That congress wouldpass Obama's $3.53 trillion federal budget for fiscal 2010. That the projected deficit over the next ten years would be greater than $10 trillion.

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

5. What if I had told you that the Obama Justice Department would order FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high-value detainees captured on the battlefield and held at US military detention facilities in Afghanistan. That Obama would order the closing of the Guantanamo detention facility with no plan for the disposition of the 200-plus individuals held there. That several of the suspected terrorists at Guantanamo would be sent to live in freedom in Bermuda at the expense of the US government. That our returning US veterans would be labeled terrorists and put on a watch list.

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

6. What if I had told you that the federal government would seek powers to seize key companies whose failures could jeopardize the financial system. That a new regulatory agency would be proposed by Obama to control loans, credit cards, mortgage-backed securities, and other financial products offered to the public.

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

7. What if I had told you that Obama would travel to the Middle East, bow before the Saudi king, and repeatedly apologize for America's past actions. That he would travel to Latin America where he would warmly greet Venezuela's strongman Hugo Chavez and sit passively in the audience while Nicaraguan Marxist thug Daniel Ortega charged America with terrorist aggression in Central America.

Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

8. Okay, now what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new "Fairness Doctrine." That he wants to curtail the First Amendment rights of those who may disagree with his policies via Internet blogs, cable news networks, or advocacy ads. That most major network television and most newspapers will only sing his phrases like state-run media in communist countries?

Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

9. What if I were to tell you that the Obama Justice Department is doing everything it can to limit your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. That the federal government wants to reinstate the so-called assault weapons ban which would prohibit the sale of any type of firearm that requires the shooter to pull the trigger every time a round is fired. That Obama's Attorney General wants to eliminate the sale of virtually all handguns and ammunition, which most citizens choose for self-defense.

Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

10. What if I were to tell you that the Obama plan is to eliminate states rights guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and give the federal government sweeping new powers over policies currently under the province of local and state governments and voted on by the people. That Obama plans to control the schools, energy production, the environment, health care, and the wealth of every US citizen.

Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America."

11. What if I were to tell you that the president, the courts, and the federal government have ignored the US Constitution and have seized powers which the founders of our country fought to restrict. That our last presidential election may have been our last truly free election for some time to come. That our next presidential election may look similar to the one recently held in Iran. (And maybe under review by ACORN.)

I know, I know what you will say. That will never happen in America.

If we don't do everything in our power to stop this madness in 2012, may God have mercy on our worthless souls. Pass this on to every freedom loving American you can. Thank you.