Move over, Hitler, Stalin, Chairman Mao, Mussolini, and Castro.

There’s a new thug on the block...Max Baucus: card-carrying member of our democratic (autocratic) Congress - demonstrating an appalling abuse of government power, and intruding into the private sector once again. 

In a thugocracy (thug-oc-cracy) they use investigations and gag orders, instead of boxcutters and brass knuckles; but their intent and purpose remains the same- the vicious, dictatorial suppression of one's right to disagree.

 
Baucus - the tyrannical Senate Finance Committee chairman - has requested an investigation of Humana, a Kentucky-based health insurance company, for simply telling the truth.

Seig Hiel!  Welcome to Germany...circa 1938. Brownshirts anyone?

Instead of Christal Nacht (forbidden book-burning) we are witnessing "postal-nacht," preventing a private enterprise to LEGALLY communicate by mail. 

Anti-president Obama - no longer tolerant of free speech - threatens a full frontal Whitehouse attack against anyone who disagrees with him, as he directs his HHS goons in their assault against hapless Humana.

Sure, just make an example out of them...let 'em know Big Brother is watching all. 

If anyone dare dissent, beware...thug Obama is coming to shut you down - if not imprison you - or at least cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees; a tactic he learned in Chicago. A threat loud and clear to all who erroneously believe we are still protected by the First Amendment.

But in the age of Obama, is it really that shocking that a U.S. Senator would use the power of his office to suppress the dissenting views of a private company, simply for disagreeing with his analysis of pending legislation?

Uncork the Dom (Perignone)! Fascism is now en vogue in our new Amerika!

Humana "foolishly" was mistaken in informing its seniors about the coming horrors under Obamacare - hence, CEO Michael McCallister had better hire a crackerjack team of lawyers.

Count on Baucus and the Obama Administration to make Humana an object lesson before the rest of the health insurers - meaning they won't stop until McCallister humbly geneflects beneath them - or is fired.

Obama could care less about the First Amendment; or for that matter, the entire Constitution itself - a document written to limit government.

Since he first ran for office, Barack Obama has litigated, lied, and intimidated his way across the political landscape. So why should anybody be surprised by his use of goon squads to squelch critics? He's Chicago-made, media-sculpted, and feels he's absolutely above all criticism -blithely using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights.

Or how about the other congressional thug from San Francisco? Nancy (Nazi) Pelosi, who on a Monday night last July, ordered a spontaneous vote, then had her Democrat stooges shut down the U.S. House of Representatives, rather than allow any dissenting Republican congressmen to speak on the floor.

What could have been so offensive (or frightening) that Pelosi felt she had to protect her party by gagging free speech in the House?

Simple; Pelosi - our All-Amerikan Speaker - wanted to deny the members, the media, and the public to right to read questionable, anti-Constitutional legislation before it was voted on. 

The House had been set to discuss Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s gaffe, a candid statement where he had said (quote)..."if any Members were required to read the Democrats’ healthcare reform package, BEFORE it was voted on, it would fail."

Thus, the Speaker obviously felt that if anyone were truly aware of her party’s agenda, they would reject it. Ever since she assumed the gavel in January of '07, Pelosi has kept the public in the dark by her dictatorial trampling of the centuries-old democratic traditions of the House.

So where are we headed America? Once we lose our rights under the First Amendment - think about it; think about it VERY SERIOUSLY- it will literally require the use of force - yes, rebellion - to get them back!

Once entrenched, dictators NEVER willingly cede their power.

The Whitehouse, the Senate, the House are literally crawling with these Stalinist, atheist politician-criminals, who will stop at nothing until they force all of us against the wall of our constitutionally-guaranteed rights, and are more than willing to dispatch armed men in uniforms to force their will upon us.

The liberal media mocks those bearing signs of protest - signs calling these radicals what they really are: usurpers of the Constitution, expanding the federal government until someone (or something) has courage enough to stand in their way.

PREFACE: Two hundred forty five years ago, it was called the Stamp Act; in the near future, it may be known as the "Baucus Compromise"-  nothing other than a high-tax, wealth re-distribution scam; a testimony that Karl Marx did not write his manifesto in vain.

This unconstitutional, so-called "reform plan" from Democratic Senator Max Baucus (of Montana ) would make health insurance MANDATORY. It would provide tax credits to help the "poor" cover the cost of buying insurance. 

Baucus' proposals include "non-profit" insurance co-ops, individual MANDATES for purchasing health insurance, and new fees on insurance companies to finance the plan; yet another socialist sucker punch aimed directly at those who actually work for a living.

And those not complying would face hefty fines; $950 a year for individuals and $3800 for families. So obviously, a single person is looking at a policy around $1000/ year, with families paying close to $4,000.

Of course Baucus realizes that the money collected from the fines will go to pay for insurance for "less fortunate" people in other states.

And the really fun part is the government will have access to one's bank account; that's right boys 'n girls - they'll debit those fines right out whenever they want! Thanks to the Obama-inspired Baucus plan, our good friends at the IRS will no longer have to wait until April 15th to waylay money from you.

Is this not the same basic set of circumstances why our forefathers once revolted in the first place?

What if you're a healthy person by nature? What if you spend at least that much a year on nutritional supplements, and go to great "pains" to keep in top physical condition? What about the people who don't smoke, maintain ideal weight, and haven't been to a doctor since they were in school?

Why is there no tax credit for those not likely to ever see a physician, except in the rare event of an emergency?

Baucus' plan could have just as easily had a provision for lesser, catastrophic policy premiums, covering those unlikely to need health services during the younger (and most productive) period of their lives.

But fascist-socialists like Baucus and Obama know that would entirely make too much sense, and obviate the vast pool of funds available to be distributed to "the poor" (i.e. the democratic voting plurality).

Now enter Senator Chuck Grassley, a member of the "Gang of Six" Senate finance committee - one of the Republicans still trying to talk Baucus down off his ledge. Thus, the future of Baucus' compromise - in large part - remains in Grassley's hands.

Most fortunately, by initial news reports, Senator Grassley has implied "no deal."

A source close to Grassley said..."in addition to the problem he has with the mandatory levies on families & individuals, he's balking at the $880 billion price tag. The Iowa senator had been hoping for something in the $750 billion ballpark."

Grassley sees that a lot of people could be penalized rather onerously for not spending money they don't have. If a family can't afford to buy health insurance, where's the logic in thinking that they can afford to pay a $3800 fine?

Plus we musn't forget: during his campaign last year, Obama had promised not to raise taxes on the middle class. Not one thin dime, eh Mr. Obama? So how's this for a tax hike, disguised as government-reformed health care? Or is it just semantics?   

In 1582, George Whetstone (ye olde English poet) wrote: "The dashe of a Pen, is more greevous than the counterbuse of a Launce." Hence, the origin of the phrase..."the pen is mightier than the sword."

So rebel not angry Americans!

Indeed, let us all come together and revolt - not by force of arms - but by taking up pen and stationery, and writing letters of gratuity (and urgency) to America's newest true-blue hero in Washington DC, and letting him know we hopefully (and very firmly) stand 1,000 percent behind him!

Charles Grassley - (R - IOWA)
135 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING; WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3744

Dear Senator:

You are most certainly in all of our prayers:

There are a lot of concerned people who are cheering you; especially those 50 million or so very robust Americans, who everyday, go out of their way to assure (not insure) their health. And to them you are a hero, intrepidly standing against the tyranny of socialism.

Indeed, you are one of the perceptive few in Congress who actually realizes your decision affects not just those of your constituents, but every American in all 50 states.

You are but one of the few, with fortitude enough to stand in their way

Forgive the platitudes, but we do need to take back our country, completely rule out compromises, and stand for capitalism, gainful employment, and rooting out all those who attempt to pervade this economic scandal of government health reform - no matter who they are.

Most fortuitously, you (and a few others like you) have upheld the Republican party, and are upholding the Reagan legacy of getting government off the backs of the American people.

Personally, I wish that you were my Senator, because you are standing up for what is right for America, and not for youself in the way of compromising, or reaching across the aisle.

In the past, you have taken up the cause of the little guy, and proven to be a true patriot, and a true conservative. So basically, all I am requesting is that you never change!

Hence, you will always have have my trust, and long-standing support.

May God always bless you Senator:

Previously, no sitting President - speaking before a joint session of Congress -has EVER been accused of outright lying!

But by boldly speaking out, Wilson did more for the conservative cause than even 2 million protesters taking part in the September 12 march on Washington - many of whom carried signs touting..."JOE WILSON FOR PRESIDENT." 

NOTE: There are already bumper stickers being printed that say..."Joe Wilson for President 2012".

It had taken someone like Wilson with the guts to FINALLY call Obama on his "bully" (baloney) pulpit. Obama parses words - lying in public as no president has ever done before.

Obama's intent was to grant legal status to all "non registered" immigrants immediately after healthcare reform passed; so Wilson properly deduced that indeed, all CURRENT illegal aliens would have privleges - regardless of any bill's language.

So thanks to Joe Wilson, there will be no reform passing in either chamber of Congress that even HINTS at aliens' being in line for healthcare freebies, at the expense of the American taxpayer.

He may have been crude, rude, and totally lacking in (sniff) decorum... but Wilson was right! But predictably, his outburst has only served to further divide America along racial lines.

As a South Carolina legislator, Joe Wilson was a "rebel," being one of only seven state senators who fought to keep the Confederate battle flag flying over the state capital building.

After Lincoln was elected, South Carolina was the first state to leave the Union. Flying the Confederate battle flag had always been deeply symbolic in the South, which was once - and in some rare cases is still - inhabited by the KKK.

In the late 1990's, South Carolina's Senate had finally voted 33-7 to take down the Confederate flag; and Joe Wilson was the leader of the so-called "stubborn seven" who held out for state tradition until the very end. 

Not surprisingly, Wilson - for speaking out against Obama - is now being accused of (horrors) racism!

According to MSNBC’s David Shuster: (quote)..."South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson shouting ‘you lie’ to President Obama was racism on display"...“The fact that he is from South Carolina strikes a lot of people as awfully close to the idea that maybe there was some sort of racist or bigoted element there” (unquote).

As a teenager, Joe Wilson worked as a Congressional page for arch-segregationist Strom Thurmond; hence, this indicates hardcore evidence of a "racist" backround, in addition to his nefarious upholding of that ever-dangerous, evil Confederate flag!  

But is Wilson truly racist, or only being an American, who staunchly believes in defending states rights?

-Dwight Eisenhower had a picture of Confederate General Robert E. Lee in his Oval Office.

-Jimmy Carter officially gave his presidential pardon to General Lee, 110 years after the Civil War, posthumously freeing him of any wrongdoing. 

-Virginia Senate Democrat, James Webb, wrote an eloquent defense of the Confederate soldier, in his book entitled, "Born Fighting".

-Teddy Roosevelt praised Robert E. Lee as the "greatest soldier ever in America."

-Woodrow Wilson put the Confederate Memorial Statue in Arlington National Cemetery, and spoke at the unveiling - which was sculpted by a Jewish Confederate Soldier, depicting a black Confederate Soldier.

Nowadays, many blacks view the American flag as just as much a symbol of racism as the Stars and Bars (Confederate flag); some even more so, since it took an entire century to pass the Civil Rights Act, which meant that after slavery, it was yet another hundred additional years of treating blacks as inferiors.

But did we elect Barack Obama because as a "make up" call - or did he really deserve the presidency on merit? The problem being lost in this new "Wilson-inspired" debate on racism is that many Americans continue to ignore history and facts.

POINT: African Americans fought on both sides of the Civil War. If one attends an authentic Civil War re-enactment, you would see black men clad in gray, wearing those same Stars and Bars emblazoned on their uniforms.

POINT: Lincoln didn't fight the Civil War to outlaw slavery, nor technically, to free the slaves; it was to establish that states were not sovereign unto themselves, but subordinate to the federal government.

POINT: When Lincoln actually "freed" the slaves, he did so only for those rebellious states; while leaving those states in the Union free to keep slaves. In fact, the idea of shipping all former slaves back to Africa was the reason why Liberia was founded.

But they don't teach REAL American history anymore, do they?

Approximately 180,000 African Americans fought for the North. And while some Southern plantation owners maintained slaves during the war, they were banned from fighting until the last year, out of fear of which way they would point their guns.

America unofficialy gave up clinging to its racist roots in the 1960's, when TV gave us interracial programs, such as "I Spy" and "Star Trek." Then came Muhammad Ali and his domination of boxing, who was the first black to become a bone fide world celebrity- worshipped by all races alike.

But as many predicted, the election of Obama has done more to embitter this country, not on racial lines, but along deeply-rooted partisan divisions, and now threatens to divide America like no time since the1850's, which marked the dawn of the Civil War. 

Barack Obama is a radical. He is a divider; he has surrounded himself with other radicals and communists his entire adult life.

Since his inauguration - marking the beginning of his unending efforts to socialize America -even moderates who voted for him are shaking their heads (in disbelief) at the radical path down which he is attempting to lead our country.

Now finally, ONE PERSON has chosen to speak out in opposition, and is of course labeled a racist. So did Wilson call Barack Obama a liar, only because he's a black man?

But what if Obama were white, who had campainged against the previous republican eight-year administration, and the lies put forth about fighting the Iraq war? Would he still have defeated McCain, and be the next democrat to sit in the Oval office? 

The discontent and opposition against Obama and his Marxist agenda is widespread; it has nothing to do with his ethnic origin. The vile distrust he engenders crosses all party lines, races, religions and ages.

And sooner - if not later- America may find itself at the brink of a new civil war.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Been to New York City Lately? You don't know what you're missing:

Thanks to the likes of Barack Obama (and Mayor Michael Bloomberg), even the tourist trade has been censored with the taint of political correctness.

Nowadays, whenever a tour bus stops to pay homage to a vast emptiness once encompassing the destroyed Twin Towers, from the intercom, you'll hear..."This is the site where the 9-11 World Trade Center ACCIDENT occurred..."

9-11 World Trade Center ACCIDENT?

Of course! Two giant commercial airliners were mistakenly hijacked minutes apart; then in the most improbable fluke in all history of aeronautical navigation, each somehow managed to crash into both Twin Towers a mere 18 minutes apart.

Gee, what were the odds on that? 

So according to Obama & Bloomberg, it was sheer misfortune - an accident - that 3000 people died in America 's worst-ever homeland disaster. 

But one thing that's never been examined: how political correctness - and "follow-the-leader" stupidity - were actually responsible for at least 2500 of those that died - or possibly more.  

The World Trade Center actually consisted of seven buildings spread across 16 acres of land.

The Twin Towers - 1 WTC, or the North Tower , and 2 WTC, or the South Tower - contained 10.4 million square feet of office space. The 110-story buildings were each 1,350 feet high. On any given workday, up to 50,000 office workers occupied both towers,

After the first plane struck the north tower, workers in the south tower were told to stay put, making them sitting ducks for the second plane -already making its turn to attack.

Post 9-11 interviews with south tower workers - who had (sensibly) made it all the way down to the lobby - were mystified by an announcement that..."there had been an explosion in Tower 1", and because of falling debris, were told that Tower 2..."was secure, and to go back upstairs."

Hence, more people ended up dying in the south tower than the north.

In the eight years proceeding the Sept. 11 attack, the most contentious issue remains the contradictory public-address announcements made by an official in the south tower lobby, urging tenants to stay in the building, even though an intensely-hot, 3,000* fire was raging nextdoor.

Ironically, less than a minute before the south tower was struck, authorities changed their earlier instructions and THEN ordered an evacuation.

But who was it that had authorized the first announcement, which bore life/death consequences for at least 1500 people, according to the survivors who escaped from the south tower?

Survivors recall they had started to leave the building, but turned back when they heard those instructions. Many others never left their offices. About 600 people were needlessly trapped and died in the upper floors of the south tower after being struck. 

The instructions to stay inside the buildings were given not only over the public-address system, but also to individual tenants in both the north and the south towers who telephoned Port Authority police.

On the morning of Sept. 11, the first responses were directed by several civilian officials - known as deputy fire safety directors - stationed in the lobbies of each tower. In a radio conversation two minutes after the first plane struck, the south tower director - regarding an evacuation- could be heard: (quote)...''I'm not going to do anything until we get orders from the Fire Department.''

At several points during the next 14 minutes, the south tower lobby kept making announcements, declaring that "the building was secure." Some tenants said they were specifically told to return to their desks; others remember being told they could go to a cafeteria.

A tape recording shows that at 8:59, 13 minutes after the north tower was hit, a Port Authority Police captain, Anthony R. Whitaker, called for the complete evacuation of the entire trade center, but it WAS NOT communicated to either of the tower lobby desks!

An initial tape recording reveals that at 8:49, a deputy fire safety director in the south tower told his counterpart in the north tower , he would wait to hear from "the boss" before ordering an evacuation.

So just who were these deputy fire safety morons who ended up adding to the magnitude of the tragedy? Why haven't they been exposed or sued; or even subpoened for a hearing? Why has this been covered up; who was responsible for such sheer incompetence?

To this day, the New York Port Authority continues to defend the idiopathic foolishness of the south tower fire deputy, who told the occupants to "return to their offices," saying that "he made a correct decision, based on the information he had at the time," claiming - after the plane hit the north tower - if the occupants had been allowed to leave and go out onto the plaza, they would have been struck by falling people, plane parts, glass, and sections of the building facade.

Vincent Dunn, Deputy Chief FDNY (now retired) stubbornly maintains: "As a fire chief, I would have given the same instructions. I would not have ordered the evacuation of the south tower. No one could predict that a second plane would crash into the south tower, although in hindsight, the communication announcement to go back into the building cost lives." (Duh).

But after the EPA outlawed asbestos (1971) while the WTC was under construction, the replacement substitute proved to be tragically inadequate. Thus, were it not for the EPA's cockamimee proclaimation, the four-hour-window of an asbestos-coating on the beams could have limited casualties to only those on floors where the planes impacted.

The original concerns were that indoor air in skyscrapers would be contaminated by circulating air passing over asbestos fireproofing. As a result, it was only used up to the thirty-eighth floor of the first WTC tower, and not at all in tower 2, with horrific results.

But the chilling possibility will always endure that BOTH building collapses may have been preventable had asbestos been used, and would have prevented the spread of fire to the upper floors- possibly limiting casualties to as low as 200-300.

Even more ironically, local New York building codes in the early 1970's still had not been affected by the federal government ban, which would not have prevented asbestos being used on all floors in both towers. It was only because of pressure to be "politically correct" that the towers were constructed without the unique, time-proven substance.

Steel melts at 2,700* Fahrenheit, but with inadequate fireproofing, it will start to bend and buckle at temperatures as low as 600 degrees. It is increasingly clear that disproportionate, confusing environmental regulations at federal, state, and local levels cost a disastrous number of human lives on that September, 11 day of infamy.

Asbestos has qualities that set it apart from any other material.  It is virtually indestructible. It has been used since the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans, and is prized for its heat-resistant properties. The history of asbestos is its renowned reliability as an insulator and fire-stopper.

But since the EPA entered into the picture in the early 70's, and began its over-regulation concerning asbestos, it has yielded zero evidence of any benefit to human health.

And it was also in the early 1970's that commenced that woe-begotten American era of..."They don't make 'em like they used to:" This has included cars, houses, appliances, manufactured goods, and unfortunately - skyscrapers.

Indeed...what was U.S. Congressman Joe Wilson thinking?

Obviously, he was thinking the exact same thing that 170 million other Americans are discovering: Obama is immutable on his Marxist position about health care reform, and will lie to no end until enacted into law.

Obama -addressing an eroused joint session of Congress - reiterated what he had said last month at a racous Virginia fund raiser: (quote)..."The people that made this mess (health insurance executives) need to stop talking and GET OUTTA THE WAY!

TRANSLATION: "The government knows what's best for you lowly peons; so prepare for health care reform - like it OR NOT!"

Of course, among the multitude of lies Mr. Obama is espousing about his reform plan, there is the one about..."It won't cover non-registered aliens."

Umm-hmm.

Obama had his "big alien lie" positioned from the outset: 

In a brilliant display of his arithmetic wizardry, Obama "de-listed" some 17 million unfortunates from those now without health insurance. No longer is 47 million the operative number. (quote)..."There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage," claims Mr. Obama (note he said "citizens").

So having stated this early-on in his talk, it gave Obama the "latitude" to subtract the 15 to 20 million illegals that indeed will be covered; which of course, seemed to somewhat arouse the ire of Wilson, the indignant GOP Congressman from South Carolina.

"It won't cover illegal aliens" is mere chump change amongst some of the biggest lies fabricated in all of American history. Herein follows ten of the most foremost fibs of all time:

1) "Mission acomplished"

2) "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"

3) America won the war of 1812

4) "Read my lips"   

5) "I didn't inhale"

6) Man-made climate change

7) "I was never in church when he made those speeches"

8) "We cant drill our way out"

9) All men are created equal

10) "I can remember landing under sniper fire"

Or how about J. Edgar Hoover, the late Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who once called Martin Luther King Jr..."the most notorious liar in the country."

Hoover had been alerted early on about "Reverend" King, who once completed a Communist training course in Tennessee .

On Labor Day, 1957, a special meeting was attended by Martin Luther King Jr. and four other accomplices, at a strange institution called the " Highlander Folk School " in Mount Eagle, Tennessee .

The Highlander Folk School was a Communist front, having been founded by Myles Horton (organizer for the Tennessee Communist Party) and Don West (Communist Party organizer for North Carolina ).

One month later - February, 1957 - Horton and King founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, or SCLC. The president of the SCLC was none other than Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The vice-president of the SCLC was the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth, who was also president of a Communist front known as the "Southern Conference Educational Fund," an organization whose field director, Carl Braden, was simultaneously a national sponsor of the "Fair Play for Cuba Committee."

The program director of the SCLC was the Reverend Andrew Young, in more recent years Jimmy Carter's ambassador to the UN (and mayor of Atlanta ). Young also received communist training in Tennessee at Highlander Folk School.

History holds that Martin Luther King was some very devout Christian- a huge lie! King was not even a Baptist Preacher.  He denied the bodily resurrection of Christ, believing that spirituality could be gained through "religious experience"-  as he termed it.

People claim that Martin Luther King Jr. was not a Communist, even though King did everything possible to promote the Communist agenda. At one time or another, he was affiliated with no less than 40 different Communist fronts. 

King openly sought discord under his banner of non-violence; yet violence almost invariably accompanied King's supposedly "non-violent" marches, because it was all planned.

King also led a bizarre sex life, which included acts of ghastly perversion. 

The life story of Martin Luther King is shocking and disgraceful from beginning to end. He was born with the name Michael King on Jan. 15, 1929.

In 1935, his preacher father, "Daddy" King, decided to name himself after the great Protestant reformer, Martin Luther. Daddio then announced to his congregation that henceforth, he was to be called "Martin Luther King" and his son, Martin Luther King, Jr.

"Daddy" King never bothered to see the name-change legalized in court. Thus, his son's real name remains Michael King. His holiday should actually be called "Michael" King Day.

In October of 1963, an FBI order was signed by then U.S. Attorney General, Bobby Kennedy, who had King's office and hotel rooms bugged. Evidence later proved that King was under the direct orders of Soviet spies, and financed by the Communist Party.

Rustin then introduced King to a Soviet spy named Stanley D. Levison - a New York Lawyer and vice-president of the New York Council of the American Jewish Congress. Levison's job was to launder the $1 million subsidy the Soviets annually gave to finance the American Communist Party

According to King's biographer  David J. Garrow, "King privately described himself as a Marxist."

In his 1981 book, "The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr.", Garrow quotes King as saying in SCLC staff meetings, (quote) "...we have moved into a new era, which must be an era of revolution.... The whole structure of American life must be changed....We are engaged in the class struggle."

J. Edgar Hoover personally saw to it that documented information on King's Communist
connections was provided to the President and to Congress. And conclusive information from FBI files was also provided to major newspapers and news wire services.

But were the American people ever informed of King's real nature?

Since the 1960s, the fix has been in: Our lamestream liberal media (and our "bought" politicians) have been bound and determined to push the King myth of sainthood upon an unsuspecting and grossly naive America.

Like Obama, King was their man, and nothing was going to get in their way of making Martin Luther King Jr. a cultural hero. How many thousands of streets, roads, schools and federal building bear his "highly-revered" name?

To this day, The pro-King propaganda machine grinds on; it is even reported that a serious proposal has been made to add some of King's writings as a new book in the Bible.

On Jan. 31, 1977 Mrs. Coretta Scott King obtained a court order- from a sympathetic, partisan judge- sealing for 50 years the 845 pages of FBI records about her husband, (quote)..."because its release would destroy his reputation!"

Left-leaning U.S. Federal Judge, John Smith Jr. had ordered the tapes be not opened until 2027.

Some 90 congressmen, led by the late rep. Larry McDonald, had urged Congress to find out what was on these tapes . But a cowardly, spineless liberal Congress (not wanting to be viewed as "racist") voted 338 to 90, approving a controversial, national holiday declared in King's memory -an honor accorded to no other American; not Washington, not Jefferson, and not even Abraham Lincoln.

So what does it tell you about our lily-livered politicians, who almost, without exception, are always falling all over themselves to honor King as a national hero?

And what about our liberal-controlled media?  When you see how they have successfully suppressed the truth - beholden to an image of King as a virtual god- it can only be described as the most colossal lie of the 20th century.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Yes; it was all those nice "gee-whiz" white folks, who decided that America OWED a debt to those poor, oppressed minorities; so they cast their ballot for a man "who didn't look like them."

Result? A perverse sort of "reverse racism" now pervades America. Termites emerging from the woodwork, like Van Jones, the Marxist race-baiter - blaming whites for everything from school shootings to tooth decay.

-Jones has never recanted his claim to being a communist. He has never distanced himself from outrageous comments about whites poisoning black neighborhoods - or whites dropping poison on immigrants crossing the border.

-While living in Oakland (CA) Jones was an admitted Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, viewing police officers as arch-enemies of black people; and loathing capitalism for allegedly exploiting "nonwhite" minorities worldwide.

-He has never distanced himself from calling for the release of Philadelphia cop killer, Mubia Abdul Jamal.

Can there be any difference between the Libyans' hero-worship of a terrorist - who mass murdered 259 people (flight 103) - and Van Jones, praising an urban terrorist that shot a policeman?

Previously, Jones was arrested for inciting the 1992 Los Angeles Rodney King riot. Afterwards, he brazenly took credit for the looting and destruction of Asian businesses, and bragged of how he was able to work thugs into a looting frenzy.

Jones, the Yale-educated scholar, like so many of Barack O's buddies - is a racist thug.

Jones is simply more proof of what Obama has lived and believed since his adolescent days--that all the world’s problems are caused by evil whitey, and there is a price to be paid...REPARATIONS. 

But Obama is on the record as being OFFICIALLY opposed to reparations for slavery. But (as with other issues) you have to sift through his flower-mouth rhetoric to get at what he really means.  

At a press conference with minority journalists last fall, candidate Obama said he would take action to help people who were "just getting by."

(Quote) "If we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they are disproportionately uninsured," Obama said.

The disguised goal of Obama's health care plan? The redress of health care disparities on the basis of race: punishing "greedy doctors" who perform unnecessary procedures, and "greedy insurance and drug companies," who lust for profits.

Obama - like any true marxist - thinks all things should belong to the government; and this includes profits from health care providers. Obama is striving for health reform for one basic reason: confiscating the wealth of capitalists, then distributing it to those oppressed people of color.

And for anyone doubting this, examine carefully HR 3200 (The House bill on health reform). Nowhere in the entire 12-zillion-page proposed law does it even mention co-payments, which would discourage abuse, and cover much of the cost of reform without taxing employers (capitalists). 

HR 3200 is affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor, to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.

In his health care plan published during his 2008 campaign, it was written that Obama will ..."challenge the medical system to eliminate inequities in health care by requiring hospitals and health plans to collect, analyze and report health care quality for "disparity populations" and holding them accountable for any differences found."

Inequities in health care? Disparity populations? Obama eats, drinks and sleeps race! 

Race effects practically everything Obama has done since he was inaugurated. His stimulus and budget bills are loaded with page-upon-page of legalese double-talk, that boil down to simple redistribution from the wealthy to the poor (minorities).

Hence, it should not surprise anyone at all that Obama functions as a socialist-communist; these are the very ideas he has learned and practiced even before he was elected.

That Obama appointed just another black racist (Jones) to his shadow cabinet should surprise no one; and when ACORN begins moving to government jobs on the death panels, we’ll see a lot more Van Joneses coming along to ration care along racial lines.

So how many more commie-whacko, America-haters do we need to see in Obama’s Cabinet to realize that’s exactly what he wants - what he’s always been about?

Obama overestimated the power given to him by his small election margin (52.7%); while at the same time, he underestimated the power of the new media (bloggers, talk radio) of finding out what he really stands for - undermining the American economy with his disguised, "post-racial" Marxism.

Obama is more than guilty of high crimes, let alone misdemeanors. He superbly conned white  America during his campaign - pretending to be a "uniter" - that he would heal America 's racially-divisive past.

Barack Obama has a thing for Marxist/racists. He befriends them, listens to their counsel, and he even hires them to work in his administration. Van Jones, Valerie Jarret, and you can add Sonya Sotamayor (who has made racist comments toward whites) as a Supreme Court judge.

There is no excuse for the President of the United States of America - the greatest country in the entire world - that Obama should have ever surrounded himself with these hatemongers.

Syria. Iran. Hamas. North Korea. Afghanistan, and... California?

Don't flinch. You read correctly. California is now a foreign, hostile land - an avowed enemy of the United States!

And why not? What now does California have in common with the rest of our resourceful country?

First and foremost, California is home to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a closet Marxist, supported by George Soros and his goal of instilling full socialism into the United States by 2015.

California is a bilious, fractured place of multiculturalism; a land where English is now commonly spoken as a "second language."

California's politics? To the far, radical left. Ever since the late 1960's, California has always been at odds with the rest of America.

Beginning long ago with Black Panther supporter, Angela Davis, California's leftists have literally bubbled up with praise for Marxist societies, where everyone is at the same level of misery.

And nowadays, we are faced with the likes of Henry Waxman; Barbara Boxer: Diane Feinstein; Maxine Waters; and the despicable Fidel Castro sympathizer, Diane Watson; a veritable who's who of public enemies, with Pelosi starring as public enemy number ONE.

Wake up, America, and realize what these people actually believe. They are sick, unbending communist sympathizers - out to destroy the land of the free. We are now witnessing an era when California's Congressional delegation is now politically to the left of even a country like Russia.

Listen to their voices…arrogant…strident…anti-American. And most ominously of all, they are using our electoral process to conquer America. They no longer represent the United States, but rather  a Cuba,  Venezuela, China, or even Great Britain.

As we speak, California seems to be the divisive source of a new, "reverse racism" where radical haters - people like Los Angeles' Waters & Watson, and Oakland's Van Jones, are bashing the rest of conservative America - as if we were the source for ALL evil that exists in the world.

And the more they continue to castigate this country, the more likely these haters will continue to stay in Washington election after election, regardless of term limits (or if a non-incumbent runs in opposition). 

Do they put something in the water in California? How can sane people support (or vote) for these radicals while keeping a straight face? And the more they shift to the left, the more they continue to garner the support of their government-dependent constituents.

Having said that, let's play "what IF."

What if California had the calamitous "Big One?" A huge catastrophic earthquake, say in 1971, and had literally tumbled into the sea? Sure, it would have been a calamity: but where would America now be?

POINT- We would be drilling for our own abundant, offshore oil; the country would be independent of OPEC, and free of the annual, unsustainable export of $700 billion a year. The national debt (and perhaps, our trade balance) would be close to zero, were it not for these radical "green" ideas that Californians have since introduced into Washington, and made law.

POINT- There would be no "multiculturalism:" No immigration problem; no threat of alien amnesty, nor fear of giving the vote to 20 million illegals, who lack even a high school education, or have the capacity to speak English. America would not be faced with the horror of one-party rule for perhaps a generation (or more ) to come.

POINT- There would be no economic threat to our economy from cap and trade, or the Sierra Club; and no push for driving green cars, nor stupid, noisy windmills, and solar power; the United States would have no less than 50 to 100 high-efficiency, CLEAN nuclear power plants generating vast (cheap) megawatts of power, were it not for the radical environmentalism of California.

POINT- The ever-divisive liberal movement for same-sex marriage and homosexual rights would have been a non-event

CONCLUSION: California is no longer just our most populous state ; it is a land that frightens the rest of a right-center country, continually forcing its leftist ideals on a nation wanting no part of them. Yet we are continually dragged into this morass because California's power-mad politicians refuse to back off! 

Our Founders never pictured a state where its radical Congresspeople could destroy the integrity of an entire nation.

And when one state sets out to strangle the other 49 with its brand of hatefulenesss, radical leftism, and divisiveness, its time to become serious about "impeachment" - getting rid of California!

EXAMPLE: Diane Watson of L.A... "Fidel Castro is one of the brightest leaders I have ever met." U.S. Representative Watson held a town hall meeting where she praised Che Guevara for using violence (and murder) to expel the rich from Cuba.

"They kicked out the wealthy." So where was this woman when she was making this comment? Where else in America but California would she feel comfortable?

Watson’s black socialist ideology is illustrative of the culture that defends crime and socialist marxist control, so long as it advances the entitlements and dependency that governments like Cuba want to provide.

And what about Nancy Pelosi? She is highly supportive of unlimited immigration:

According to her, we can never have enough unassimilating Hispanic people with less education than high a school dropout. Pelosi seeks amnesty to the 20 million illegal aliens that are already here, so they can bring in 80 million poor sick relatives- all eventually to become a permanent democratic voting bloc. 

Then we have the lovely and charismatic Maxine Waters, who refuses to vote for a healthcare reform package that..."does not include a provision for creating a government-run medical insurance plan;" an idea opposed by 70% of all Americans-- a statement that drew loud cheers at a town hall meeting at Los Angeles Southwest College.

Waters then reserved her most searing critiques for Senate Democrats who have not embraced the public option.

(Quote)..."Not only are we going to do everything we can to organize and put pressure on the senators -- some of whom are Neanderthals -- we're going to say to the president, 'We want you to use every weapon in your basket in order to get those senators to do what they should be doing.' "

This is the same woman who said she wanted to "socialize" the oil companies. So is it any surprise that she now wants to socialize medicine?

California possesses more than it's share of liberal Congresswomen who are an anathema to ALL of America. Remember...these are people in powerful positions - sponsoring and voting on bills that greatly impact our lives.

So is it any wonder California is beginning to resemble Cuba – bankrupt, overflowing with the jobless; a horrid education system, with flocks of its citizens trying to escape?

As far as most American citizens are concerned, California is the bottom of the barrel; so why let these "rotten apple" marxists spoil the whole bunch?

It is truly astounding how we have come to the point when people like Congresswomen Watson & Waters (and Van Jones) are tolerated and praised for their political philosophies.

But only in California.

California is a dangerous foreign land. It stands for anarchy. Lies. Corruption. Racism . Marxism. A land of oppressors where voting them out has become impossible - elections are useless; they know that they can perpetually retain their power by continuing to impose their harsh leftist tyranny upon us all.

With a mammoth Hispanic population, and a state government the size of Brazil - California comprises a permanent democratic voting bloc that can NEVER be dislodged!

Hence, the cancer of California's political demagogary must be done away with,  BEFORE it undermines our entire nation.

In medical parlance, radical cancer calls for radical measures - complete surgical excision.

This demon state must be eradicated lest our entire nation be forced to move hopelessly left. We must go opposite of what Abe Lincoln once intended: nullifying a criminal state from the Union.

We must draw up a modern "Declaration of Separation"- paraphrased from the original:

Quote..."When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people (United States) to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another (California), and to assume the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation..."

Think about it; if you were elected mayor, wouldn't the first thing you'd get around to doing would be getting rid of all the unnecessary red lights in your municipality? Having done that, you'd be re-elected for life.

After all, wouldn't you continue to support that ONE person who finally had gotten rid of all stupid red lights? And if this were done on a national basis, America's GDP would spike by at least another 3 - 5% annually. The Red Chinese would soon be at our mercy.

Now you could run for governor. And once you began to campaign on a platform of "removing all those stupid red lights in your state", you'd instantly garner a landslide of approval. Your opponent would probably concede the election, or else co-opt (steal) your idea.

"Vote for so-and so! He (she) wants to get rid of all the stupid red lights." The word would spread like wildfire; people would be going door-to-door. It would make the national news. "Gubernatorial candidate so-and-so (from such-n-such) is proposing to get rid of all the unnecessary red lights in their state"!  

Now the movement begins to pick up steam!  All the other mayoral and gubernatorial candidates nationwide are adopting the same platform..."Let's git rid of all those STUPID red lights!"

And now the opponents- not wanting to be left out - begin chanting..."Not only will I get rid of all the dumb red lights, I propose to synchronize all the traffic signals, so no one has to slow down or stop unnecessarily"!  

But seriously, at what point should we actually consider the time and gasoline that's collectively lost nationwide everyday, by idling away at unnecessary or unsynchronized red lights?

Of course we need red lights. They prevent pandemonium at intersections; and red light-crashing is kamikaze driving. But if the nation's traffic signals were synchronized for traffic flow all across the country, it would definitely save huge amounts of gasoline, time and road rage. Plus it would cut down on traffic fatalities. 

Since 90% of fatal traffic accidents occur at intersections, the incidence of running red lights would be lessened if drivers didn't have to guess about the duration of the yellow. If everyone knew that yellow lights were ALL standardized for equal time (duration) everywhere, (say 3 seconds) they wouldn't have to play chicken, and risk T-boning into a car coming from the opposite way.

But still, the stupid-red-light-insanity persists. Every city has them, and every signal has a different time duration for the yellow. So it makes one wonder. Are all these unnecessary red lights there for safe traffic flow, or do they remain there to DELIBERATELY create disrespect for the law?

Instead of removing red lights from where they have no purpose, many cities now are placing red light cameras where drivers crash them most frequently. They always can claim..."it’s for safety."

This is truly sinister. There are now slightly over 3,000 red-light cameras in operation in the U.S., up from about 2,500 a year ago. And given the trend, we can expect that figure to grow exponentially as government bureaucrats seek solutions to generate revenue.

And insurance companies love these cameras. They can tack on "high risk" rates to all the drivers, who must suffer the consternation of a red light ticket in the mail - then get the double whammy of a hike in their car insurance premium.

In 1970, an unknown Nasa scientist, James Hansen, literally shook the world with a startling "discovery": (quote)... "The world was warming, and the cause was greenhouse gases from BURNING FOSSIL FUELS."

But how many people knew that Hansen, supposedly a lone “NASA whistleblower”- who stood up to the mighty U.S. government - had been bankrolled by George Soros, and his liberal think-tank - the Open Society Institute?  

Never in the history of mankind has there ever been so much hype about one single issue - global warming.

(Quote) “It amazes me that so many people believe in global warming; and that it's caused by humans," said U.S. Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma - who recently chaired a “Climate Change and the Media” gathering..."This myth has been promoted by the major media, giving much attention to those who support it, but very little to those who debunk it."

Ironicallly, Inhofe's "major media event" received almost NO media attention.

Hence, any scientist, following the trail blazed by Hansen, can achieve fame (and of course, a meal ticket) by coming out with an "alarming  study" about...sea levels rising by 18 inches...increasing fury of hurricanes...extinction of the polar bears...melting of the polar ice caps...disappearing land masses...etc. blah-blah.

But say we outlawed fossil fuels tomorrow - yet the polar ice caps kept melting, and hurricanes began intensifying. What then? Earth's history abounds with climate changes. And CO2 has little, if anything to do with it. 

Far-flung liberal policies - such as Cap 'n Trade - portend vast economic disruption before any PROOF of cause! Despite our great technological achievements, few Americans now possess even a rudimentary grasp of science. So the "global warmongers" continue to hold sway.

Not surprisingly, most people obligingly (idiotically) ascribe to the coming "crisis" that CO2 atmospheric emissions will evoke a calamitous climatic change, and we MUST move toward renewable "clean" energy, before it's TOO LATE.

CO2 is a natural part of the atmosphere. It's essential to plants. It is neither pollutant nor  'greenhouse gas'. Car emissions comprise but a mere 0.01% of its presence in the air. The balance is almost entirely the result of the carbon cycle.

Remember the "carbon cycle" diagram in your in your seventh grade science text? Well here's a quick E-Z refresher:

Plants take in CO2 (photosynthesis); we then eat the plants (or the nice, tasty animals that ate the plants), and following our digestion and respiration, we breath out CO2, which is then taken in again by the plants. Ca-pish?

So an increase in CO2 would increase plant proliferation - which begets increasing oxygen production - which each one of us then inhales. Ergo; the carbon cycle!

Therefore, there can be no global warming due to CO2 gas. If there IS global warming, it's because the SUN is putting out more radiant energy. Got it?

CONCLUSION: man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people - a political movement led by those who seek to control the worlds' economies, and redistribute the world’s wealth through the trading of "carbon credits."

America-hater George Soros is out to destroy America’s free enterprise system and our economic stability. He is an atheist - the epitome of the fraudulent money changers whom Jesus once cast out of the temple.

In the 1990's, George Soros gained international notoriety when he risked $10 billion on a single currency speculation and shorted the British pound. He turned out to be right- and in a single day- the trade generated a profit of $1 billion; ultimately, it was reported that his profit on the transaction reached $2 billion.

As a result, he is famously known as the "the man who broke the Bank of England." And now, Soros stands to make another fortune by shorting the U.S. dollar:

There are billions of dollars in grant money being thrown around to study global warming, which is why liberal politicians keep the lie alive - to create fear - the basic driver of their power bases. 

Back in 1933, Joseph Goebbels - newly-appointed as Hitler's propaganda minister - was granted domain over all German radio, cinema, and newspapers.

Goebbels originally met Adolf Hitler in 1925. The two instantly "bonded".

In 1926 he was made "Gauleiter," or party leader, for the region of Berlin.

In 1927, Goebbels founded and became editor of the official National Socialist "Der Angriff" (The Attack), a vitriolic periodical which scapegoated all of Germany's problems on the backs of the Jewish and Communists.

A fanatical, hypnotic orator, Goebbels remains unsurpasssed in history for his prowess at staging mass meetings and parades. This was key to projecting the Nazi image of invincibility throughout Europe in the late 1930's - undoubtedly playing a part in Hitler's intimidation of Neville Chamberlain at Munich in 1938 - which would eventuate a year later in the start of World War II.

Goebbels, loyal to Hitler until the end, committed suicide on On May 1, 1945, as Soviet troops began storming the capital city of Berlin.

Joseph Geobbels - the all-time, all-star master of the "Big Lie" - believed in five overriding "principles." 

1 Propaganda output should be determined by its credibility

2-Propaganda must be carefully timed  

3-Propaganda campaigns must begin at the optimum moments

4-Repeat the propaganda theme, but not beyond some point of diminishing effectiveness

5-Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans

Now let's play switch:

In an uncanny historical replay, we have a new, equally devious minister of propaganda who -with his brilliant insight into mass psychology - now works for the advancement of the new Nazi (er, Democrat) party:

Hiel, David Axelrod!

It was Axelrod who was largely instrumental in bringing president (dictator) Obama to power. He has known Obama since 1992 . He is the "brains" of the campaign - the man behind Obama.

Indeed, it was David Axelrod - now Obama's senior advisor - who had once encouraged a wavering Barack Obama to run sooner, rather than later, for President. 

In June 2004, Mr. Obama received a highly-emotional, written memo from Axelrod, noting that..."history is full of failed candidates who ran past their primes... but history bears few examples of those who tried too soon..."

The result? Obama's acceptance to the critical role as Keynote speaker at the Democratic Convention (2004) in Boston, which would catapault the then-unknown Illinois State Senator into the national spotlight.

It was the cool & calm David Axelrod (who could pass for Dr. Phil's brother) that was instrumental in guiding Obama through the biggest minefield of his amazing 2008 presidential campaign, and counseled him to play "dumb" during the Jeremiah Wright controversy.

Obama coyly deflected accusations of being a "radical Wright disciple" by listening to the Svengali-like Axelrod, and breezed through the crisis by simply denying that he had ever heard any of Wright's vituperative speeches.

Axelrod has been the nation's numero-uno specialist in helping black candidates get elected by white voters - mostly in urban areas.

Chief among these was Harold Washington, whom he helped elect as mayor of racially divisive Chicago. Another was Deval Patrick, the governor of Massachusetts; and more recently, Michael Nutter, the popular black Mayor of Philadelphia.

Axelrod's method is simple, if not brilliant: avoid racial controversy altogether by tapping into the candidate's personal life story, then sell him to voters as a "new" type of leader. 

Sound familiar? Hope and change anyone? 

But Axelrod's true talent is his Goebbels-like abiilty to tap into emotions (mob psychology) like no one since Joseph Goebbels himself.

Using Geobbels "principle # 5", Axelrod has been masterful at pitting generational groups against one another..."Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans."

Late during the Obama 2008 presidential campaign, Axelrod devised a scheme to create a generational rift among families. The plan was to manipulate young children as political pawns:

Last September/October, on Nickelodian, the children's TV cable network, Obama "operatives" in the form of youthful TV icons were doing paid advertising spots: "What kids can do to help elect their hero, Barak Obama."

On those Saturday mornings, kids were urged to visit www.myBarackObama... scroll down... click on the "PEOPLE" button...and there they would see Barack Obama's message to kids everywhere; which would read....

(TEXT)..."For the first time, kids can have a voice and enter politics... and lend your voice to supporting Obama.  Here are some awesome ways kids can help to elect Barack president..."

-Draw pictures of Obama in patriotic settings, such as sitting in the oval office with a flag behind him; then show them to your parents, and urge them to vote for Obama

-Wear your "Obama for President" T-shirt to school

-Post an Obama sticker on your school bag

-Talk about "what a great president Obama will be" during class and at lunchtime

-Make sure your parents go to the polls and vote for Obama

-Call your grandparents: tell them that if they really care about you, for YOUR sake, you want them to consider what kind of world you will be living in for the future. So even if they are for McCain, if they love you, you want them to vote for Obama...(end of text)

What could be more insidious than this? Teaching emotional manipulation at an early age, then directing the kids to con the people who care about them most...their family!  Even Goebbels never stooped to that! 

And using children? Is this not typical of the Obama/Axelrod coldblooded way of doing things? Let's call it "Limbo-rock" politics... how LOW can you go!

Now that the once-invincible Obama is sinking faster than the Titanic, he refuses to take it like a real man, and will re-introduce Svengali Axelrod's low-life idea to AGAIN use schoolchildren as junior propaganda ministers.

Axelrod's new "children's program" is basically a reprise of last fall's "stealth" presidential campaign: a focus on using schools for "re-brainwashing' any kids who may have fallen victim to the REAL beliefs that their parents have since tried to instill upon them at home. 

In a letter sent out to the NEA (National Education Association) Education Czar Arnie Duncan announced that next week, on September the 8, Obama will personally make a televised address to the nation’s grade school children.

Supposedly, Obama will challenge students to "work hard, set goals for their education and take responsibility for their learning."

As the president speaks, teachers will ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or "personally meaningful." Younger children should draw pictures or write as appropriate. As students listen to the speech, they are to think about the following:

-What is the president asking me to do?

-What new ideas and actions is the president challenging me to think about?

Then afterwards, comes the propaganda line: 

The school kids are supposed to write a letter to THEMSELVES about what they can do to help the president, then bring it home to read to their parents. 

Does anyone notice the "interesting parallel" between our President's plan for our children, and the methods of another "Great Leader" from the past?