Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans..."

Not doing it this time.  If the polls are any indication, I don't know

who more than half of you are anymore.  I do know something terrible

has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit.  Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office. The reason I'm quitting is simple.

I'm fed up with you people.

I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world.  Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours.

And the majority of you are too danged lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let's start local.  You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media.  Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank, and that's despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners.  While we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high.  Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration.   I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.

Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets.  Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too dang stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world.  Don't give me this "blood for oil" thing.   If I was trading blood for oil, I would've already seized

Iraq's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell, and don't give me this 'Bush Lied, People Died' crap either.  If I was the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty.  Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me.  Let me also remind you, regime change in Iraq, was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named 'Clinton' established that policy.  Bet you didn't know that, did you?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy.  Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off.  We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do.  We were simply able to outspend and out-tech them.

That's not the case this time.  The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive.  In fact, they want to die.  That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can, but; they are. They want to kill you, and the scumbags are all over the globe.  You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11, but; you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that.  When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'.

Instead, you've grown impatient.  You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy.  Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dang it, you might just as well Fedex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist.  It amounts to the same thing

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News.  Even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter.  Most of you would rather watch American Idol.  I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, but; you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.  I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from, but I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford.

I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient.  No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here, pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.

Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too.  That means Pelosi is your new President.  You asked for it.  Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there're just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.So that's it. ,God bless what's left of America. Some of you know what I mean.

The rest of you, ?????????.

Bill Weber, author (distributed via the internet)

According to the latest Democratic Party Platform, they would have us make a huge commitment of additional taxpayer money and US military forces to the United Nations.  Obama and the Democrats would have American taxpayers spending additional billions to improve education worldwide via the U.N., while our own education system is in trouble.

Americans will be called upon to spend more on international abortion “services” and population control via the U.N.  rather than use family planning.

 Under Obama, the military would be expanded – including open and active homosexuals – to carry out these new U.N. missions.  There will also be new energy and emissions requirements on the US.   driving up the cost of fuel without having an energy policy to cover the broadbans of energy services to eliminate our demand for foreigh oil.

Last but not least, if Obama wins the Democrats vow to bring back the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” (albeit under a different name), which is designed to reduce conservative talk radio and restrict the ownership of broadcast outlets. Hitler started with cencership and so did Mao.

So read what follows from Accuracy In Media very carefully and help get the word out! 

QUOTE:

Dems Endorse Expansion of U.N. Power

AIM Column  |  By Cliff Kincaid  |  August 21, 2008

Our media are running stories about the planks in the new 2008 Democratic Party platform but they’ve missed a big one¯expansion of the power of the United Nations, and especially more U.S. involvement in U.N.-authorized military operations.

In another bow to the world organization, the platform indirectly endorses Senator Barack Obama’s controversial pro-U.N. Global Poverty Act. “It is time to make the U.N. Millennium Development Goals, which aim to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015, America’s goals as well,” the document says. It leaves out the estimated cost¯$845 billion over 13 years.

This plank is listed under the “Invest in Our Common Humanity” title of the platform. The word “invest” is as deceptive as the legislation. It means to spend taxpayer dollars.

While it may seem strange that the platform would not endorse the legislation by name, this reflects awareness of how controversial the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433) and its federal commitment to the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals have become. Increased foreign aid spending is not popular with the hard-pressed American taxpayer. So the one piece of legislation actually introduced by Senator Barack Obama (which passed the House and Senator Joseph Biden’s Foreign Relations committee by voice vote without hearings) is mentioned only indirectly.

A section titled, “Revitalize Global Institutions,” is more direct. It declares the need for “stronger international institutions” on “issues from weapons proliferation to climate change.” While admitting that the U.N. is in need of “reform,” the organization is said to be “indispensable” and the U.S. must rededicate itself “to the organization and its mission.” This inevitably means more money for the world body.

Even though the U.S. public school system is rotting from within because of unaccountability and incompetence, the platform calls for more spending on educational systems in other parts of the world. It urges a $2 billion Global Education Fund that will “bring the world together in eliminating the global education deficit with the goal of supporting a free, quality, basic education for every child in the world.”

On another international matter, the Democrats declare that “We will repeal the global gag rule and reinstate funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).” This means that Americans will be called upon to spend more on international abortion “services” and population control. In this context, the platform urges support for “Health Infrastructure 2020,” which is described as “a global effort to work with developing countries to invest in the full range of infrastructure needed to improve and protect both American and global health.” No cost is put on this effort.

Similarly, we are not told about how much it will cost to launch the “collective action” needed to confront the “global challenge” of climate change. But we are told that it will require a “Global Energy Forum that will lay the foundation for the next generation of climate protocols.” It declares the need for a “global response to climate change that includes binding and enforceable commitments to reducing emissions…” This means more U.N. treaties impinging on our freedom and sovereignty.

It may surprise some “progressives” to learn that while Obama wants to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, he has no plan to reduce the size of the U.S. Armed Forces. Instead, “We support plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 troops and the Marines by 27,000 troops,” it says.

If these troops are not going to be in Iraq, where will they be going? "We believe we must also be willing to consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability¯to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities."

Phrases such as “beyond self-defense” and “common security” constitute an endorsement of the U.N. doctrine of the “Responsibility to Protect.” Since the platform declares that U.N. “peacekeeping” operations are “overextended,” this means U.S. forces will have to be redeployed from Iraq and other areas to address civil wars and problems in other countries that pose no direct security threat to the U.S.

Meanwhile, the platform says the U.S. Armed Forces under President Obama will be expanded to include open and active homosexuals, despite its obvious negative impact on morale and recruitment. If normal heterosexuals leave the Armed Forces as a result of this policy, Obama may be forced to reinstitute the military draft to create the bigger military he seeks. 

Thanks to conservative talk radio and other such outlets, the shocking facts about the Democratic Party platform will be provided to the American people. The conservative media have been a thorn in the side of the liberal establishment ever since President Reagan’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began the deregulation of the media and new voices started emerging.

But the Democrats, whose base of support is in the old media, which are losing viewers and readers, want more, not less, regulation.

“We will encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum,” the Democratic platform says.

While this may sound appealing, terms like “diversity” and “diverse viewpoints” are liberal code words for using the power of the federal government to muzzle conservative talk radio and turning over broadcast properties and airtime to “progressives.” This is the goal of George Soros-funded groups like the Free Press, which puts on an annual National Conference for Media Reform. As I reported in June, at this year’s event, the conference turned into an Obama for president rally.

Translated into ordinary language, the term “we” in the context of the Democratic platform plank on the media means more federal government interference.  As explained by Tim Wu, a Columbia Law School Professor and chairman of Free Press, the U.S. Constitution is flawed because the founders did not anticipate the problem of “the abuse of private power.” The Bill of Rights was merely designed to protect people against government and the founders were concerned about the exercise of “public power,” he explained to the National Conference for Media Reform.

In direct contradiction to the intent and precise wording of the First Amendment to the Constitution, in terms of prohibiting Congressional abridgement of freedom of speech, this grant of massive authority to Congress and the federal government means that the FCC will decide what constitutes “diversity” and the “public interest” in broadcasting. Hence, the FCC, rather than market forces and the people, will decide who gets on the air, who can own media properties, and even who gets Internet access. 

Meanwhile, the Democratic Congress can be counted on to increase U.S. taxpayer support for public TV and radio.  Conservative FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell recently warned that the Fairness Doctrine, which allows federal bureaucrats to monitor and dictate broadcast editorial content, may be brought back under a different name. “I think it won’t be called the Fairness Doctrine by folks who are promoting it. I think it will be called something else and I think it’ll be intertwined into the net neutrality debate,” he told the Media Research Center. The term “net neutrality,” as defined by George Soros-funded “progressive” organizations, means that federal authorities will monitor and regulate Internet networks, rather than letting private competitive forces operate on their own without governmental interference.

But other powerful “progressive” individuals and groups want the Fairness Doctrine back directly and immediately. The public should know that Democratic control of the White House would result in a 3-2 liberal majority in the FCC and the possible return of the Fairness Doctrine through administrative and executive action without any congressional approval required. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already declared she is in favor of it. That’s why she refuses to bring the Broadcaster Freedom Act to a vote in the House. The Broadcaster Freedom Act (H.R. 2905) would prevent the FCC from unilaterally imposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters.

The Democratic platform, in short, calls for more and bigger government on the domestic and international levels. This is the real story that the mainstream media won’t tell.
END QUOTE

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING

Here is the direct link to the story above:

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/dems-endorse-expansion-of-un-power/

I would encourage you to forward this around to as many people as possible to get the word out.

There are apparently plenty of readers leaning toward or committed to voting for Barack Obama.  Obviously, millions of Americans don’t mind Obama’s liberal policies and/or intentions on such things as taxes, abortion, nationalized health care, protectionism, Supreme Court judges, gun control, etc., etc.

They apparently also don’t mind that he not only opposes offshore drilling, but also that he opposes exploration that would finally quantify just how much oil and natural gas that is in the ground offshore.  What, you haven’t heard that?  Then read this:

http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303344360938478

Unfortunately, I doubt if many of Obama’s supporters know what he and the Democrats have in mind for the United Nations, our military and our taxpayer dollars.  Obama is spearheading this effort!

Ditto for the return of the Fairness Doctrine.  Liberals complain that conservatives like Rush Limbaugh dominate the airwaves.  Yet liberal talk radio programs have fallen flat on their faces time after time.  Obviously, tens of millions of Americans PREFER conservative programs.

It’s called the FREE MARKET.  But since liberal programming can’t compete, the Democrats would like to not only restrict conservative programming, but also restrict who can own the various broadcast outlets.

Let’s get the word out fast.