A general election will take place in less than two weeks. The ballot in Texas will include eleven proposals for amending the state’s constitution. For those of you who live in Texas, you should already know that the Constitution of the State of Texas is highly detailed and sets forth not only how the state’s government is to be constituted but how it is to operate as well. That includes telling the legislature what it can and cannot do. Because the founding document is highly detailed, in many cases before the legislature can change the statutes, the constitution must first be amended by the people. That is what is going to happen in a few days.

The following is what my research shows:

Proposition 2, 3 & 5 are all really part of the same issue. For some reason, simplicity or law they have been separated. First of all Texans have always been taxed in Texas on property both real and personal. Real property is land and anything permanently attached to the land. Everything else is personal property. It makes no difference whether it used for earning income, it is all personal property, either private or business. Generally speaking property is always taxed on an ad valorem basis. Ad valorem is a Latin term meaning "at the value of."

Even though it is now just a little house, it can be said that the land would be worth so much more if the house were torn down and parking garage built there. In other words making the taxable value of the land much higher based on a better use of the land. The owner of the house might be required to pay a much higher tax on his property even though was still being used only as a residence.

The first part of the amendment, Proposition 2, addresses that problem by limiting the state to allowing nothing more than the residential value of the land on which your house sits regardless of the highest or best use to which it could be put. The owner must live in the house and it must be a Texas Homestead to get the protection but right now, you don't even have that. So vote on Preposition 2 accordingly.

Currently, the methods used in establishing the ad valorem value of property are set by the local taxing authority. As a result there are many different methods followed. Those differences often produce vast differences in the amount of tax collected.

The second part, or Proposition 3, attempts to take care of the problem of varying methodologies by standardizing the method for all taxing entities. It will provide for the administration and enforcement of uniform standards so that all taxing authorities are on the same page in how they determine the value of your property and therefore how much tax you will owe.

Presently if property you own is in two or more taxing districts, such as mine, you can have three or more taxing authorities evaluating your property, determining the tax rate and collecting taxes from you. It is very confusing. In my case I am in a county which taxes me. I live in a municipal utility district which taxes me. I live in a hospital district which taxes me and two school districts which tax my property. All of them tax at different rates. They each set values on my property following different methods and reaching far different results and each has its own equalization board. It can be a nightmare.

Proposition 3 will, if passed, authorize the legislature to allow a single board of equalization for two or more adjoining appraisal entities that elect to provide for consolidated equalization. That would be something you could control through your voting rights in the taxing entity.

So, most of what has been written about those three propositions has either been mis-leading or outright false. The faulty interpretation lies, I think, in the lack of knowledge as to how the Texas Constitution works and what it says. I would not recommend voting against any of these three propositions. In fact I intend to vote for them in the interest of protecting my own property.

He did it in Cairo. He said it again at the United Nations. The lines have been drawn. Obama has chosen his Muslim brothers while most of the rest of us have chosen Israel. He picked the labor unions, while most of the rest of us choose the right to work. He proposes socialist schemes while most of the rest of us rely on free market based capitalism. He is willing to divide Jerusalem and shoot down Israeli airplanes while most of the rest of us believe in the rights of Jews to have a country of their own. He attempts to force down our throats a total government take over of the health care system in the United States while most of the rest of us want to buy our own insurance, select our own doctors and seek treatment when we are sick or injured without waiting on government to decide for us.

He believes that he now personally holds the power. He believes that the people by electing him have turned all decisions of government policy over to him personally and that we, those who voted against him, no longer have anything to say about our government. After all, he says, "I won!" Not we won. Not a great Democrat victory or even a great victory for socialist policies, but a victory for Barak Obama, himself. I suspect that he plans on being president for the rest of his life, just like Castro, Chaves, Stalin and Hitler.

He has shown no sign of weakening his plan of de-constructing the United States in order that he can rebuild it in the image of a Muslim style Islamic Republic where the only law is the personal laws of Shariah. A country where the leader, who ever the leader is, can simply make up laws as they go along, always claiming that Allah proclaimed it.

If Congress passes the so-called "health care" legislation the government will have absolute control of every facet of our lives. A complete record of our existence including physical examinations and personal conversations we have with doctors will be encoded on government computers and bureaucrats will have the power to decide whether we can get treatment or not, if we can go to hospital or not and even as to whether we live or die.

With that horrible success he will then have Congress pass the so-called cap and trade legislation which will in effect destroy every remaining business enterprise in the United States except those operated directly by the government, with Obama and his fascist, progressive friends calling all the shots and reaping all the profits.

I have always thought that Americans would never allow such a thing to happen, but I'm afraid there are not enough of us left to do anything about it now. We have five or more generations of people who have grown up being taught to rely on the government for everything. We have twenty or more million illegal aliens in country who support that type of government and who will receive complete amnesty from Obama as soon as he can grant it.

The small number of people I know who voted for and continue to support Obama show no signs of recognizing what he stands for and what he is doing to our country. Most of them call me names, accuse me of being a right wing extremist and a racist. That is Obama's most powerful tool. Anyone who does not agree with his taking over the government and changing it into communist, Islamic theocracy is immediately accused of being racist solely because Obama is half-black. In other words, we must all agree with him or prove ourselves prejudiced against him.

In an effort to denigrate an article I wrote, one liberal numbskull suggested that it is Obama’s blackness that I am tired of. I’m not. No. Really. I’m not tired of Obama being black. He can be black as long as he likes as far as I am concerned. I am tired of Obama because he’s red! I am tired of watching him destroy my free country in order to rebuild it in the image of the Soviet Union with Islamic overtones.

During the past few days we have watched while a conscientious dedicated conservative member of the United States Congress has been singled out for the wrath of the left because in a moment of patriotic fervor he blurted out a truth to which we are all witnesses. As Barak Obama stood before a joint session of the Congress, he lied to America. Well, nothing new about that you say. True, but in this case, one man, one patriot shouted out, "You lie!" And ever since Joe Wilson of South Carolina has been criticized by just about every member of government right and left.

Even the Fox News Channel, which some of us have come to look to for re-enforcement of our conservative principles, chastises the man for "rudeness." Two days ago, I asked and I ask again now, why is it rude to call a person a liar when they are in the midst of a lie? And if it is rude to say he’s lying while he’s lying, when might be a good time to accuse him of lying?

Okay, I understand. The House of Representatives has adopted a rule which prohibits being rude to the person occupying the office of President by calling that person a liar, even when he’s lying. Here. I’ll tell you what’s rude. Lying to the American public about the most important things in our lives. That’s rude. Murdering our unborn children - that’s rude. Stealing our property from us without due process of law - that’s rude. Ignoring the law of the United States Constitution after swearing an oath to protect and defend it - that’s rude.

Claiming that you are a natural born citizen of the United States but hiding all evidence of it under seal of law to prevent citizens entitled to know from learning the truth - that’s rude! Barak Obama occupies the residential palace of the legitimate leader of our country, and yet we are not allowed to know whether he is the legitimate leader or not. He lies to us. He steals property from us. He appoints himself monarchial rights over our private industry and makes other foolish decisions which has led to the un-employment of almost ten percent of our work force. It is extremely rude to those he has put out of work to take such actions. Yet, he goes on and now the Democrats in the House of Representatives assembled dare to censure the patriot who called out the true bill of indictment, "You lie!"

The army of the Soviet Union was known as the Red Army. On May 1^st of each year, grand and elaborate celebrations were held in what was known in Moscow as "Red Square". Persons suspected of being communists in the United States were know as "Reds." Red became the international color of communism. Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin was similarly singled out by the Senate charged with failing "to cooperate with the sub-committee on Rules and Administration," and had "acted contrary to senatorial ethics."

Senator McCarthy saw "Reds" everywhere. He ultimately lost his career and possibly even his life over the issue of Reds in sensitive places in our government, our industries and especially in the entertainment industry. Sound familiar? So, rest assured, I have no problem with Barak Obama being black. I have an enormous problem with him being RED above all else. And I do not mean that I think he is an American Indian. I think he is a communist.

No doubt that he enjoys the membership of no known communist party anywhere in the world, otherwise, he would be called a Communist, with a capital C. Bandy these words about all you please, communist, Marxist, fascist, collectivist. What you wind up with is a person who does not believe in the greatest economic engine of all time. The economic engine which made the United States the most powerful, the most wonderful, the most free independent nation in the world, capitalism.

Banks, labor unions, automobile manufacturing and much of our representative form of government has already fallen prey to his obsession with hatred for everything American prior to his election. And now he presently moves on our medical services delivery system in an attempt at the most massive transfer of power from the people to the government in the history of the United States. It is his redness that disturbs me, not his blackness. A redness that says to us that we are stupid, that we are lazy, that we are cowards and that only the government can solve our problems.

Sadly, if we allow Joe Wilson to fall to the same fate as Joe McCarthy we are all those things and worse. When heros step forth, we should rise up with them, not against them. We all heard Barak Obama lie the other night. But only Joe Wilson had the courage to shout out to the world to identify the liar. How about you shouting out in support of Joe Wilson before his private life is destroyed as was Joe the Plumber’s and as was Joe McCarthy’s before them?

A man stands in front of the entire government, the Senate, the House of Representatives, Executive Branch members and the Supreme Court and lies to the American people. When is it more appropriate to call that man a liar? Barak Obama can’t seem to stop telling us lies. He can’t seem to find the truth. What is his name? Is it Barak Obama or is it Barry Soetero? Where was he born? We don’t know. He says it was in Hawaii, but is unwilling to release the documents which would settle the matter once and for all, opting instead to order all of his personal records sealed for all time. Rather than expose the truth, he chooses to continue the cover and denials which prevent the truth from being known.

He made unrealistic promises during the election campaign which he had no intention of keeping. That is not campaign rhetoric. Those are lies. The man who spoke them, a liar. What is wrong with calling him by that title. Following the 2008 election, Obama even created a new office for himself, calling it The Office Of The President Elect! There is no such office. To say there was is a lie. The man who said it, a liar.

He said he would end Cronyism in the government, but filled administration offices with friends and former Clinton staffers, choosing people based mostly on their tendency toward socialism and radicalism rather than on the skills and experience they bring to the office. His promises, lies. The man who spoke them, a liar.

As a candidate he promised transparency in government yet began his massive personal coverup even before taking office. He then went on to appoint more than thirty communist style Czars to administrative positions in the government loyal only to him with no oversight by the Congress or the court system and no constitutional authority for the creation of the positions. Transparency? No. Lies.

We do not even know whether he was legally qualified to run for election to the highest office in our land. The Democrats were in charge and they don’t care. They have long since surrendered honor and honesty for politics and progressivism. So, the man climbs to the stage in front of our government, the American people and the world and speaks lies. When he said that the so-called "health care" proposals now before Congress would not pay for medical expenses of illegal aliens in our country, Congressman, Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina, apparently couldn’t contain himself longer and shouted out, "You lie!"

Rep. Wilson was late. He spoke out only after I had already yelled, "You’re a liar," at the television set a half a dozen times while listening to the ‘campaign rhetoric’ of the Liar-In-Chief. Thank you, Mr. Wilson for speaking for me when I had no voice.

When someone lies, what is wrong with calling him out on the matter? Why is it impolite to call a liar a liar? To hell with politeness! This is politics, after all. Why should it be politically incorrect to point out the lie in the place where it matters most, in the halls of government, where lies hurt us the most?

All of the television news channels I can monitor say it was wrong for him to shout out the insult to the speaker because of the setting and the occasion. I ask where might there be a better time and place, for those of us who continue to doubt, to raise the issue of Obama’s compulsion to take liberties with the truth than when he is speaking?

We’ve already heard it, read it, seen it when he has lied in the past. So what? No one does anything about the lies. Joe Wilson did. At least he spoke out. He called out the word we use when describing what someone does when they speak falsely. Why let a liar continue lying without confrontation over the untruth?

Nancy Pelosi was popping up and down in her seat from the first word he spoke like an overzealous thirteen-year-old cheerleader, encouraging him to continue the lies. Her Democrat minions followed her lead by applauding the lies from the leader of their party. Why should not a member of the opposition express their opinion as well? When George Bush was president, the Democrats booed him. Booed the President of the United States during a state of the union address. Obama was conducting a partisan political rally inside the capitol building and one man had the courage to shout out the correct charge, "You lie!" And he needs to apologize? I don’t think so.

Pelosi has not apologized to the CIA. Harry Reid has not apologized to George W. Bush. And Obama himself has not apologized for having called us terrorists. Why the hell should we apologize to him for noting that he is in the act of lying - again - as he has so often in the past?

We are not in second grade here. Our liberty and our very lives are at stake. We can still call a liar a liar and so can Rep. Joe Wilson even when sitting in the capitol building and most especially at the moment he hears the lie spoken!

Thanks, Joe.

Obama, Obama, Obama. He ran for president for two years or more. The election was last November but he’s still running. I guess it’s to be head of some other world organization next. Or maybe he only wants to be the head of the new North American Union - you know, as a stepping stone toward Secretary-General and Dictator of the United Nations. But it’s the talk I’m really tired of.

The outstanding thing about Obama is that he has pulled off the most stunning political victory in the history of man. I don’t mean the 2008 U.S. national elections. I mean the theft of the United States - right from under our noses. Unqualified for the job both legally and experientially, he lied his way across the country and into the hearts of blind America. The person who lives in a house which I own in Washington, D.C., a house which I and my fellow citizens paid for, is not my president. I do not call him president. He is nobody’s president. He is a usurper and therein lies the brilliance of his campaign.

The last president of the United States was George W. Bush. And as paradoxical a man as you could ever expect to see, President Bush unwittingly paved the way for the Obama family to move into the residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue through his overly self-centered governing style.

Mr. Bush either could not or would not listen to those of us who supported him through every election in which he ran for office. His singularly outstanding achievement was the result of his response to the attack on New York City and Washington, D.C. by Islamofascists. What we as Americans accomplished under his leadership was to strike back at the heart of Islamic sponsored aggression against us and to depose one of its worst leaders. The result is a free Iraq.

In almost every other way, Mr. Bush abandoned us in favor of the Progressive movement. Expansion of government, increased government spending and enlargement of the body of foreign nationals living within our borders, many of whom entered and remain here illegally. Although his reduction in taxes sparked an economic recovery, turning a blind eye toward our southern border canceled the effect by allowing American jobs to be taken by illegal aliens and American wages to flow southward into Mexico and other parts of Central and South America. The over all result was to pave the way for Obama to bring on his dog and pony show, called Hope and Change.

While we all grew angry, the radical Democrats had already chosen their new leader. The Obama Circus traveled about the United States putting on live performances. Television carried his contrived speeches to all parts of the world. Bill O’Reilly called him brilliant. NBC declared him to be eloquent. One man in Florida called him "gracious god." While he took office and moved into the White House, we sat by and complained.

As he gave away our money, we talked to each other about it. We watched him steal General Motors as his own private automobile company. We wrote blogs and comments objecting to this theft, but we did nothing about it. He then stole Chrysler Corporation only to sell it to an Italian Company. Both transactions were completed with the very best financial terms and considerations for the labor unions, which Obama said he "owed." Bitter condemnations were voiced in the columns. But no action was taken.

The banks were taken over. Hundreds of billions of dollars were authorized by Congress to bail them out, to stimulate the economy and to satisfy the greedy needs of an Obama budget. We screamed in print. Soon commentators began hurling insults and calling each other names. It was not long before the dirtiest place in town was no longer the local brothel but the internet. Linguistic pornography now saturates almost every blog and every forum including this one. But otherwise we do nothing.

So, I’m tired of Obama. I’m tired of talking about him. Recently a man who had as much as anyone alive to do with the success of Obama died. Days were spent by enemies and friends alike speaking of him in hushed, respectful tones. I was reminded of Mark Antony’s eulogy for Julius Caesar. I thought, we should not be speaking to praise Ted Kennedy but to bury him. He was a scoundrel while alive and no less a scoundrel when dead. But after his passing, you would have thought he could have never done a wrong thing in his life. He was the lion. And in the eulogies for Kennedy, most speakers had to comment on the fact that he had taken part in the successful coup by Obama which moved him into the most powerful office in the world.

August saw the re-enactment of the historical Boston Tea Party in cities across the nation as members of Congress took their annual summer vacation. Citizens turned out in record numbers to talk to their congressional representatives. To let them know of the great opposition in the land to the massive take over of the health care delivery system. Most of the people from Congress were shocked, dismayed, even surprised that the people wanted to talk back. In the minds of our governing public servants, the purpose of a town hall meeting was for the members of Congress to talk to us. To give yet another speech in which they would have their say and we would listen.

When it was discovered that we wanted to have our say, we were accused of being terrorists and Nazis. And when purple-shirted thugs knocked one man to the ground, they were excused because they were just looking out for the union. Strange thing about that was that similar purple-shirted thugs appeared at other meetings, to shut folks up, to usher people out and to prevent citizens from coming in. What did we do? We wrote about it in columns and blogs and comments. We bitched. We p*ssed and moaned. We clamored. We hurled insults. We called each other names.

And worst of all we argued with liberal shills, trolls, cyber terrorists, hired to disrupt our conversations. To cause rifts in our unity. To dissuade us from our subject of interest. To change the discussion to their condemnation of a former president and praise for the new "gracious god" Obama. And we fell for it - again! In short - we did nothing - again! The country is now led by a thief, a liar and a communist and no one is going to do anything about it.

And one of my senators now wants to be my governor. After six years in Washington, ignoring everything I asked for, and treating me in her letters as though I am stupid, she continues to do nothing about Obama’s constitutional violations. Furthermore, both of my senators and my congressional representative still think they can negotiate with Obama’s Democrats on a Health Care Bill!

Banks, automobile companies, money we don’t have and yet he announces the continuation of his plans to build a civilian force as strong, as well funded and armed as our army, navy, marine corps and air force, combined. And no one does anything about it but talk! On Tuesday of next week, he begins the formation of the Obama Youth Corps which is nothing less than a quickening of the pace of taking over the local school systems and federalizing them. Inaugurating direct access to our children in order to drive a wedge between them and their parents, a wedge which will separate them from the past, from historical fact and into the fantasy of Obama World. And still we only talk.

What can you and I do about it? Not much, really. We can continue to enlighten as many of our fellow citizens as possible, encouraging them to awaken to the dangers and stand with us. We can continue our barrage of letters to our legislators by electronic mail, facsimile, United States Postal Service and the telephone demanding that they listen to us, that they remember they work for us and not the other way around. We can keep reminding them that they were elected to represent us not themselves.

But if they don’t respond on a timely basis, we must find others to help. We must find those like minded persons who have the wealth and power to speak forcefully to power. We must convince them of the impending doom which faces these United States if we do not act in a coordinated, united way to defend our way of life. Those presently in government unwilling to take the necessary action must be removed from office as early as possible. The people chosen to take their places must be able to abandon political correctness, to speak out in defense of our guaranteed liberties and to stand against those who would further corrupt our freedoms into the slavery of socialism and multi-culturism.

This democratic Republic of ours has the means of controlling such despots as Obama. But there is no one in the congress who has the courage or the will to exercise the powers they have. It is, for them, politics as usual. They are more concerned with the security of their own positions and size of their own personal bank accounts and the longevity of their growing careers than they are with preserving and protecting the constitution they promised us they would care for. In the meantime, they are letting Obama walk away, his pockets stuffed with goodies.

So, Obama gets a pass. If that’s true, then Bill Maher was right when he said Americans are dumb. If we allow Obama to get away with this massive theft of our rights, our property and our futures, then Eric Holder was correct when he called us a nation of cowards. If Obama can continue this swindle of the entire nation, then perhaps he is as O’Reilly says: brilliant.

If that’s the way it’s going to be, I don’t want to hear any more of it. I’m tired of Obama, not just tired of hearing about him, but tired of him using the Oval Office as his election headquarters. I’m tired of being called a racist because I don’t believe in communism. Tired of sitting by while my liberties are piece by piece rubbed out and replaced with my so-called duty to the leader.

I’m tired of Obama. I’m ready for something else. I’m ready for some real change. How about you?

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am."

So, two men try to enter a locked dwelling in the middle of the day. It appears they have no key and are trying to force an entrance to the building. A neighbor or passerby happened to see the men struggling to open the door. Thinking that a burglary might be in progress the witness notified the local police department. A police sergeant responded. After interviewing the witness the police sergeant observed a man standing inside the now open doorway to the residence. The officer approached the man and asked him for identification. The man refused to identify himself, instead responding in racially inflammatory language.

The police officer asked the man inside the house to come outside to speak with him in order to help resolve the problem since the officer had been sent to investigate a suspected home burglary.

The man inside became abusive making racially insulting remarks in reply to the officer’s request.

The situation escalated to a point at which the police sergeant arrested the unruly man who had refused to identify himself or his right to be inside the residence. The arrest for disorderly conduct was made when the man came out of the house shouting demands at the police officer. He was taken into custody after leaving the sanctity of the house. At no time was the police officer rude nor did he use racially abusive language.

A supervisor was summoned and eventually the man was released after it was determined that he was Henry Louis Gates Jr., an African-American scholar and professor, who is a resident of the house in question, and was in fact employed at Harvard University. The professor accused the police officer of racism. You already know this story. You have already heard it on the news and watched the coverage of it on television. You already know that the police officer was a Caucasian and the man arrested was a so-called African-American and a personal friend of Barack Obama.

The following day during a press conference, Barak Obama was asked for a comment about the incident and replied by saying that the police "acted stupidly" and suggested the police officer owed Gates an apology. At that point, Obama was unaware of all the details of the arrest and criticized the police officer apparently because he is white. This knee-jerk reaction puts great illumination on the racism of Obama’s attitude.

Much in Obama’s writings, speeches and personal affiliations points out the intense feelings he bears against Whites in general and even to those close to him such as his white grandmother. During the election campaign his fealty to and support of Black Liberation Theology and to the chief writers and leaders in the Black superiority movement was made vividly clear. There are many faces which bear the mark of the racial bigot and they are of many colors. And while many Whites ashamedly wear the mark it has come to pass that some blacks, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright, for example, come to mind who never fail to hurl the charge of racism as part of the performance of their professions.

And now the white police sergeant is being drawn to the White House to meet with Obama and Henry Gates so the two of them can educate the poor stupid White officer in how to deal with Black people. The invitation itself already an insult seems to imply that the offer of free beer was sure to attract a White man to this civil slaughter.

The racist is a fascist. The racist demands that everyone bow to his will. The racist insists that he always knows better how everyone else should treat his race. The racist can never see his own prejudice, never account for his own bigotry, never acknowledge the guilt of his own brethren but is always ready to play the race card at the appearance of a television camera. The rest of us, Black and White alike, sit in front of our televison sets or listen to our radios wondering what our Black or White neighbor is thinking. And whether he is thinking of us.

It appears that you are not going to give up until you lose the entire show. Your staunch position of wanting to negotiate with the Democrats and the liberals of your own party gives away the weakness of that position and its hopelessness.

Some say, "Health care reform continues to dominate the agenda in Washington – and rightly so. We need a comprehensive approach to ensure Texans and all Americans have access to affordable care. This is one of the most important changes we can make to improve quality of life and it requires a thoughtful, deliberative debate and bi-partisan solutions."

Why does health care require debate and bi-partisan solutions? Why can you not see that it is government interference in health care that is the problem?

Had the government refrained from interfering in the automobile manufacturing business General Motors would not be a government owned company today. If both Bush and Obama has tended to the rightful business of the presidency Chrysler would probably still be an American company today. If Congress had kept out of the corporate welfare business and the political election pay back business the United States would not be facing the most horrendous deficit of its history.

And yet you continue. The House of Representatives recently passed the so-called Cap & Trade legislation which is nothing but an enormous tax on the American people, one which will ultimately destroy our economy thereby delivering it up to the whims of Barack Obama and the Social/Democrat party.

Now you want to mess around with health care. You want to try your untrained hand at delivering health care services. Why? You don’t know what you’re doing. Stop it. Get the House of Representatives back to doing what it should be doing and get it out of the business of medicine before it is too late for all of us.

"Absolutely essential? Just as it was absolutely essential that the so-called stimulus bill be passed without reading it? Without knowing where the money was going? Or how much would be spent? And when?

And what exactly do you think appropriate and properly designed means? Members of Congress, most of whom have never run a business of any kind and most of whom have no medical training or experience whatsoever are going to design a health care delivery service?

Stop this insane tinkering with our health. Stop this idiotic tampering with our republic. Stop second guessing us. Stop pandering to the liberal interests of both political parties.

STOP NEGOTIATING! YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE AWAY THE STORE!

Use your best efforts at thwarting the Democrats, not aiding and abetting them. Use your influence to change their vote instead of seeking out how to best allow them to change yours. America does not need its medical services industry changed. It is the finest health care delivery service in the world. The best that has ever existed. And if Congress will leave it alone, it can only get better.

There are matters which should be given the attention of legislators the country over, including you. But so far, you haven’t even looked at them. So far you have only asked yourselves, "How can we cooperate with the man in the White House? How can we show our bi-partisanship?"

How about showing some leadership for a change? How about leaving some hope for America to remain free, independent and productive instead of overseeing its repugnant slide into socialism and tyranny?

In recent responses to me from my congressional representative regarding the matter of the nationalization of the medical industry by Barack Obama and his forces the following three assumptions were made:

1. "Congress must address these problems in order to provide affordable and accessible health care to all Americans."

2. "The health care delivery system in the United States is in need of reform."

3. "Any health care reform package Congress considers should empower Americans with opportunity and provide Americans the ability to make unencumbered decisions about their course of care. Achieving this positive type of change will only be possible by embracing – in a bipartisan manner – a fundamental rethinking of our health care delivery system – into a system which champions personal ownership and coverage."

All three positions or statements are false.

It is not true that Congress must address these problems in order to provide affordable and accessible health care to all Americans.

Neither is it true that the health care delivery system in the United States is in need of reform.

Nor is there any veracity or factual content in stating that a "...positive type of change will only be possible by embracing - in a bipartisan manner - a fundamental rethinking of our health care delivery system . . ." presumably by the Congress.

These are the wrong arguments. The United States has the finest medical care system in the entire world. Our doctors, our hospitals, our pharmaceutical companies, our design engineers and equipment innovators, our nurses and administrative staffs are the best there is anywhere. People come from all over the world to be treated in the United States.

We may have a pricing problem. But it was not brought about by the medical practitioners. It was not brought about by any failure of government to intervene in the very private matter of personal health issues.

There are persons and organizations who bear the responsibility of the current state of medical costs. And the U.S. government leads the list of offenders by not keeping its nose out of a matter which should and must be left in the hands of the people acting privately in their own best interests. It is no business of government to regulate medicine, to operate hospitals, to employ and supervise doctors and nurses or to set and maintain prices for medical services, supplies, facilities or equipment.

The vote in the U.S. House of Representatives should be Nay to any government control of the nation’s health care delivery services. The vote should be against any interference by government in the rendering of medical care to the nation’s citizens. And members of the House of Representatives should acknowledge their absence of powers in this respect and cease and desist from passing laws regulating, interfering with, appropriating funds for or nationalizing hospitals, clinics, ambulance services, laboratories, factories and any other portion or element of the health care sector of our country and vote accordingly.

In my letter to my congressional representative I said, "I have not proposed solutions because we face no medical problem to solve. When you are prepared to discuss the real problems and effective solutions to those problems, please let me know. I will be glad to discuss them with you. In the meantime, know that you are using the wrong argument. As long as you do so, you are destined to lose. Pay attention. The problem is financial and political not medical."

Nationalized health care is but another of Obama’s tools in taking over the United States of America for his own ill-conceived plans and faulty solutions designed to take America in the direction which best suits his personal desires and needs. "Tell Speaker Pelosi that America belongs to the citizens. It is not her private toy."

The problem in the U.S. Senate is different only in the names of its players and the margin of power held by the Democrat party. Reid replaces Pelosi and they have a narrower margin of power. Otherwise, the two houses are very similar in the fealty they show to Obama and the dedication they exhibit in carrying out his orders and/or fulfilling his wishes, as the case may be.

My Senators, too, argue the same falacious arguments. They say that it is about how much money will be spent on medical care. They seem oblivious to the fact that we don’t need a government take-over of the delivery of medical services in America. They seem unaware that it is as Nancy Reagan used to tell us about illegal drug use. She said, "Just say no." That is what the senators should be saying to Senate Majority Leader Reid and to Barak Obama. "Just say no."

Say no, to any government take over of health care and medical delivery services in the United States for the simple reason that it is not within their grant of powers to so act. Add to that the ever growing list of reasons why such a program borders on stupidity as anyone unselfish enough to look at the overall problem can easily see, and you have great reason to say NO.

Where are the problems? Take a look at the courts. Take a look at the myriad of entitlement programs in place. Take a look at the immigration problem along with its offspring, chain migration. Take a look at the Trial Lawyers Association and the burgeoning load of liability law suits designed primarily for the purpose of enriching lawyers. Take a look at the silliness of the Class Action Lawsuit program. Who gets served? Who gets enriched? Follow the money and you will find that it is not the doctors or the hospitals or even pharmaceutical and equipment manufacturers which start the runup of prices. The genesis of the problem lies in the greedy desires of individuals and their attorneys who make it almost impossible for a doctor to practice medicine in the United States for the fear of losing everything the doctor has earned to the clap of a judge’s gavel and the pronouncement of a jury awarding money damages.

And that is not the bottom of the well. Our legal system changed when lawyers were allowed to advertise for clients. It changed when lawyers were allowed to illegally finance their clients’ lawsuits. It changed for the worse when filing a lawsuit against one’s neighbor became not only financially rewarding but fashionable as well.

Most modern problems in America stem from some foolish action on the part of government. Last fall we were told there was an imminent financial disaster that would wipe out our savings and place all of us on the unemployment rolls. It was said that government must act. Many of us screamed NO, that what was needed was for the government to do nothing. For government to stay out of it.

Well the government didn’t stay out of it. They acted. And then acted again and again. Now millions of us have lost our savings and millions of us have been moved to the unemployment rolls. Now with millions poorer and millions out of work – with most of our former greatness in manufacturing prowess shipped overseas – with the U.S. federal government now owning the greatest automobile manufacturing company in history, with a foreign nation owning one of oldest and most respected car makers – the government now wants to take over health care.

And what are our law makers talking about? Not whether the government should run the health care delivery system, but how they should run it. Again! It’s The Wrong Damned Argument.

You remember when the national argument was about Bill Clinton having oral sex with a young female intern in the oval Office? Well, it wasn’t about sex. If it had only been about sex, most men, especially young men, would have congratulated the president and clapped each other on the back shouting, "Way to go, Bill!" Getting the ‘o’ in the Big "O" would have merited re-election. The argument was about perjury and obstruction of justice. It was about Slick Willy lying under oath and blocking a special prosecutor in his investigation and enforcement of the law.

And then when George W. Bush was president we were told constantly that the national argument was about the need for immigration reform and poor people putting food on the table when in fact the argument was about mass amnesty for millions of foreign nationals who had invaded our country and were living here illegally. It was and still is an argument about Democrats, RINOs and other liberals raking up another twenty million votes for the future.

We were then told that the banks were broke and the automobile manufacturers were facing bankruptcy. The argument became one of whether the government should let them go under or bail them out immediately and let them file for bankruptcy later on. It wasn’t about the banks or the auto companies going broke. It was about the government nationalizing the financial institutions of the nation and the last remaining vestiges of our great industrial prowess.

And now, we argue on television, on radio, on the internet and in person about national health care. Once again, that’s the wrong argument. The national argument should now be about Barack Obama usurping the power of the states and of the people in order to take complete control of our lives, our property and our very souls in the name of the immediate need for national government provided health care for everyone. Arguing about health insurance is a waste of time. It’s like arguing about how many people don’t have Cadillacs and have to rely on a crummy little Chevrolet to get around.

Once again it is the wrong argument yet we waste most of our time talking it to death. And of course the goal is to make all of us so sick of the discussion that we will accept the brain washing and support Obama in his last drive to become the permanent leader of what used to be the United States of America.

First of all, it is not about health care. It is about government provided health care. It is not about health insurance. It is about government provided health insurance. It is not about 40 million Americans who do not have adequate health insurance. It is about adding those not now covered by Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Hospital provided medical services and those who simply don’t want to buy health insurance for whatever reason. Maybe they have just lost one job and will be getting another, at which time their medical will either transfer or start with a new company. Maybe they are just healthy and don’t want to waste the money on an insurance policy since their current medical expenses are comfortably manageable without it. Maybe they are just rich and want to pay their own way. It is about forcing Americans into a health care system most don't want and few will benefit from.

Whatever it is, the argument should be about stopping the government from shoving an unwanted, irresponsible, overly expensive change in the way we pay for medical services down our throats. Maybe it is just an argument about whether Americans are ready for utter tyranny and a dictator who talks as though America is already his own private property.

Dinner with Obama, Food for thought ...........

I don’t know who wrote this. A friend forwarded it to me by way of e-mail. It so well tells the story of what Americans are allowing to happen to themselves and their nation, I think it should have wider distribution. The piece is entitled: Dinner With Obama:

I dreamed I was invited to the White House for a private dinner with the President. I was a respected businessman, with a factory that produces memory chips for computers and portable electronics. My invitation to dinner with an American President was an honor.

I checked my coat, was greeted by the Chief of Staff, and joined the President in a yellow dining room. We sat across from each other at a table draped in white linen. The Great Seal was embossed on the china. Uniformed staff served our dinner.

The meal was served, and I was startled when my waiter suddenly reached out, plucked a dinner roll off my plate, and began nibbling it as he walked back to the kitchen. "Sorry about that," said the President. "Andrew is very hungry."

"I don't appreciate..." I began, but as I looked into the calm brown eyes across from me, I felt immediately guilty and petty. It was just a dinner roll. "Of course." I concluded and reached for my glass. Before I could grasp it, however, another waiter reached forward, took the glass away and swallowed the wine in a single gulp..

"And his brother, Eric, is very thirsty." said the President. I didn't say anything. The President is testing my compassion, I thought. I withheld my comments and decided to play along. I don't want to seem unkind.

My plate was whisked away before I had tasted a bite. "Eric's children are also quite hungry."

With a lurch, I crashed to the floor. My chair had been pulled out from under me. I stood, brushing myself off angrily, and watched as it was carried from the room. And their grandmother can't stand for long."

I excused myself, smiling outwardly, but inside feeling like a fool. Obviously I had been invited to the White House to be sport for some game. I reached for my coat, to find that it had been taken. I turned back to the President. "Their grandfather doesn't like the cold."

I wanted to shout, "That was my coat!" But again I looked at the placid smiling face of my host and decided I was being a poor sport. I spread my hands helplessly and chuckled. Then I felt my hip pocket and realized my wallet was gone. I excused myself and walked to a phone on an elegant side table.

I learned shortly that my credit cards had been maxed out, my bank accounts emptied, my retirement and equity portfolios had vanished, and my wife had been thrown out of our home. Apparently, the waiters and their families were moving in. The President hadn't moved or spoken as I learned all this, but finally I lowered the phone into its cradle and turned to face him.

"Andrew's whole family has made bad financial decisions. They haven't planned for retirement, and they need a house. They recently defaulted on a sub-prime mortgage. I told them they could have your home. They need it more than you do."

My hands were shaking. I felt faint. I stumbled back to the table and knelt

on the floor. The President cheerfully cut his meat, ate his steak , and drank his wine. I lowered my eyes and stared at the small gray circles on the tablecloth that were water drops.

"By the way," He added, "I have just signed an Executive Order nationalizing your factories. I'm firing you as head of your business. I'll be operating the firm now for the benefit of all mankind. There's a whole bunch of Erics and Andrews out there and they shouldn't have to come to you for jobs groveling like beggars."

I looked up. The President dropped his spoon into the empty ramekin which had been his Creme Brule. He drained the last drops of his wine. As the table was cleared, he lit a cigarette and leaned back in his chair. He stared at me. I clung to the edge of the table as if it were a ledge and I were a man hanging over an abyss. I thought of the years behind me, of the life I had lived. The kind of life I had earned with a lifetime of work, risk and struggle.

Why was I punished? How had I allowed it to be taken? What game had I played and lost? I looked across the table and noticed with some surprise that there was no game board between us.

What had I done wrong?

As if answering my unspoken words, the President suddenly cocked his head, locked his empty eyes to mine, and bared a million teeth, chuckling wryly as he folded his hands.

"You should have stopped me at the dinner roll," he said.

WAKE UP AMERICA ! The nightmare has begun.

In February of this year Senator John McCain sent an appeal asking for support of a petition promoting the passage of an Obama initiative to raise 700 billion dollars for pork barrel projects. It was supposed to stimulate the economy. The following is a copy of my reply. Little did I know at that time that this would be the template for bill after bill which the Obamanites and their RINO cohorts would ram through Congress and down the throats of the American people. I reprint it here as a reminder. We have just witnessed the passage of the so-called Cap & Trade bill in the House of Representatives. It is now headed for the Senate, where no doubt, Senator McCain will again support passage. Cap & Trade which is actually an enormous energy tax on all Americans was opposed by citizens contacting their Congressional representatives by a margin of 50 to 1 against passage. They ignored us. And soon, we will sit by and watch as Obama transforms the best and greatest medical care system in the entire world into a socialist style, government mis-managed, bureaucratic failure. Or will you make Congress listen?

"February 3, 2009

Unfortunately I cannot join in signing your petition regarding the proposed 'stimulus' plan which is currently before the Senate. I cannot because it is a non-negotiable document. Anything the Republican caucus could possibly get from passage of this bill would be token changes in tax laws.

This is not a slippery slope. It is a headlong plunge into socialism. Obama promised to change America. What he did not clearly say was that the change he proposed was to change the country from a capitalist society into a collectivist economy of communist character where he is the Secretary General and the rest of us sit around and say, "yes sir."

Republicans had no voice in writing the current bill as passed by the House of Representatives and it is presented to the Senate as a perceived fait accompli. You are expected to vote for the bill because it is Obama's wish that you so vote.

The United States of America was conceived in liberty on principles of free men and free enterprise. It grew great through the individual efforts of entrepreneurs acting out of enlightened self interest, not by governmental planning and edict which is what the Democrats now envision for us.

This bill cannot be amended to any good purpose. It should and must be killed, here and now - in the U.S. Senate or else we shall be doomed to decades of descent before we can climb out of the communist hole into which we are sinking. It took the Russians 70 years to throwoff the unbearable yoke of collectivism. It may take us longer for we will have no USA to help pull us out.

You must realize that this is not the time for non-partisan cooperation with Obama. It is the time to finally stand up for what most Americans actually believe in - which is free enterprise, self-reliance and small government with low taxes.

Please point your energies in this direction. Use your support and your vote to kill this terribly expensive piece of legislation. Do not load us, our children and all their children and grand-children with un-payable debt and indentured servitude to a thankless government. The so-called economic stimulus bill will do nothing to stimulate the economy but will do much to destroy capitalism and freedom."

Needless to say, the Senator did not respond. There is so much more to say about government managed health care, but that is not the subject of this writing. The point I’m trying to make now is the great need for us to rise up en masse and stop the insanity that is highjacking our republic by insisting that Congress pay attention to what we want. The Senate will now address Cap & Trade. Next the House will discuss taking over your doctor’s office just as they have General Motors. Commit yourselves to voting out of office anyone now in Congress who votes for this destructive change in our entire way of life and let them know that now!

A reader writes to say, that she has been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq war and the war on terrorism that is bankrupting the nation. True, many of us have heard it said over and over again that the war in Iraq is costing us too much money. That the cost of that war and the war in Afghanistan is bankrupting the nation. But, my reader goes on to say that she has now discovered that the argument about the cost of the war is ridiculous. That the real problem with our economy is illegal immigration.

While the dark side of illegal immigration is that nearly one million sex crimes are reportedly committed by illegal immigrants in the United States, it is also reported that during 2005 there were four to ten million foreign nationals who crossed our southern border illegally, making them what is commonly called, "illegal aliens." Among them, there may have been as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from "terrorist countries." And it has been estimated that millions of pounds of drugs, including cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin and marijuana have been secreted across the border by illegals either immigrating north or working for one of the giant drug cartels.

Illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much?

Check out these items:

Welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments;

Food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens;

Medicaid for illegal aliens;

Primary and secondary school education for children here illegally who cannot speak English;

Education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies;

Incarceration of illegals (30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens);

Welfare & social services for illegal aliens;

Suppressed American wages caused by illegal aliens;

Estimated total cost of mass deportation of illegal aliens already in country between 206 billion and 230 billion U.S. dollars annually over a five year period;

In the meantime, the approximately 20 million illegals already here have sent home $45 billion in remittances to their countries of origin, money sucked out of our economy.

"The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.

My reader concludes: "OH! Now I understand!!!"

And she asks, "Are we THAT stupid?"

My response:

I have been checking this from other sources for over a year now. The "battles" which are going on in Iraq and Afghanistan have not even come close to bankrupting us. And although the invasion of our country by Hispanics, mostly from Mexico, is in the process of bankrupting our local economies, state, county and some cities, it has not done it yet. $338.3 billion is about half of the first so-called stimulus package or TARP, which was squandered by the government. What has bankrupted us nationally is the communist programs of Barack Obama.

To begin with, there was no recession. It was manufactured out of whole cloth by the main stream media who have been in the tank for Obama all along. They did the same thing to a lesser extent in 2003 and 2004 attempting to defeat George W. Bush. In fact, they did the same thing when George H.W. Bush was trying to keep his office against the onslaught of media hype for Bill Clinton, but the strong surging economy left by Ronald Reagan was just too powerful.

Their great success came in 2008 which may go down as one of the most effective partisan propaganda campaigns in U.S. History. As I said there was no recession. Obama rode into office on the wave of that propaganda, but carried it too far when he continued to react as though it was real. Well, that's being generous to him since his goal is to bankrupt the country. It probably made no difference to him whether there was a recession or not.

This was a carefully planned strategy by the liberal Obamacrats. Use the excuse of an alleged recession to "help out" then take over the banks and automobile companies. You may wonder why the auto companies. It was because of the unions. The auto workers unions with financial backing from their enormous reserves, and probably more help from George Soros, along with their iron-clad control of the union vote helped put Obama into the White House.

Obama in return had to take over the automobile manufacturers in order to pay the unions back for their support. That's what he did. That's what he's still doing. I heard today that he plans on taxing us on our insurance benefits and premiums, that is all of us EXCEPT the labor unions who will be exempted.

Taking over the banks was a preliminary step to taking the auto companies. With the banks broke and/or under government control, auto sales would and did drop off dramatically. GM and Chrysler couldn't meet their debt obligations, or so they say, thereby giving Obama the excuse to "help them" and take over the companies.

The most astounding thing about it to me is that we sat by and let it happen! The Republicans walked around Congress like they were asleep and the Obamacrats all jumped on Obama’s socialist band wagon and passed every piece of legislation he asked for.

Blaming the military operations in the middle east and blaming illegal immigration provides Obama with two more tools. If the war is too expensive and has "bankrupted" the country, all the more reason to surrender and bring the troops home. If illegal immigration has bankrupted the country, all the more reason to "reform" our immigration laws and grant amnesty to the 20 million or so illegals in the county now. That is 20 million more votes for Obama in the next election.

They want you to think that there was a genuine recession. There was not. They want you to believe that the "wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan are bankrupting the country. They are not. They want you believe that our immigration laws are unfair to Hispanics. Nothing could be farther from the truth. But, "Are we that stupid?" you ask? I'm afraid the answer is yes. More than half of the voters, (legal and not) voted for Obama. The current polls show that 64% of the country approves of Obama, in fact loves him so much that they don't even care that only about 30+% approve of the way he is running the government.

I am afraid that almost everyone under 40 years of age has bought into the socialist/communist theories of Obama. They believe that we can all stand in a circle, put our hands in each other's pockets and somehow or other all get rich. Almost 70% of the people think that the federal government should either have complete control of all auto manufacturing operations or that the government should have the final say in all important decisions of those companies. Few of them have ever read Karl Marx.

Our country is being bankrupted by Barak Obama and the Socialist Democrat party which now controls the U.S. Congress.

Guess what. Sotomayor is pronounced just like it’s spelled - in English. I will type it out for you phonetically: "So -tow- may -yer." I don’t really care how they say it down in Mexico or in Puerto Rico. They speak Spanish. I am an American. I live in America. I speak standard American English. So the new judge-to-be is Ms. So-tow-ma-yer and that’s that.

And while we’re on the subject. Muslim is pronounced "muzlum" in America, not Moose-lim. And the president of France: Sar-co -zee, with the emphasis on the second syllable. You don’t like that? Then go to France or Canada. They will say it the way you like it in French. We speak American here.

Who makes these decisions? These new rules which everyone is suddenly supposed to follow after speaking one way for all of our lives? I wasn’t asked and did not get a chance to vote on it. Had I been allowed to voice my opinion or express a vote I would never have agreed to begin saying "AYTHER" rather than "EETHER." And when saying the word with either pronunciation who the heck decided that either suddenly means both? For example: "The fence was painted on either side." Meaning that the fence had been painted on both sides. Either requires an or. It does not now and never has meant both. You realize, of course, do you not, that no one would ever say that the fence was painted on "EETHER" side? But when saying "AYTHER" I guess anything goes.

Either. Just think about it for a moment. When you pay for something, you get a receipt. Do you ever call a receipt a "RESYPT?" Well, it’s spelled the same as "AYTHER." Either, Receipt. How do you get one, one way, the other another? The same goes for neither. Note the spelling "ei" as in Receive. Or am I wrong? Perhaps when something comes to you, you say that "you RESYVE it. Or on the football field, maybe the guy who runs out to catch a pass is a "RESYVER?"

Okay! Fess up. Who did it? Who made the decision. Well, I don’t agree to it. And I will not say "PAH- KISS-TAHN ." In English, here in America, it is: Pakistan. Pak as in package. Is as in is, and Stan as in Laurel and Hardy. "Ay-ran" is okay for Iran. Ay-rock is okay for Iraq. And Ay-talian is just as good a way of saying Italian today as it was in days past.

These rules are "STOOPID!" They may also be "STYUPID" but I’m not going to say it that way. The Brits can say the word anyway they want to. Does anyone remember the ridiculous lengths newscasters used to go in their attempts to pronounce Guatemala when the earthquake hit there years ago? It was so extreme that even Saturday Night Live made fun of them.

We speak English. Actually, as I said earlier, we speak American English. It’s not the same as British English. And it’s not the same in New York as it is in Texas. And we don’t all do it the same. Blacks, Whites, Browns in America all have their idiosyncratic mother tongues which are variations of and from Standard American English. The corruption and confounding of our national language has been expedited over the past forty or so years by those who think they can always come up with a cuter, more expressive, sarcastic and cool way of saying something. When they do, the main stream media, the actors guilds, both screen and stage can’t wait to copy the new changes. So no, no one ever says, "Pardon me" or "I’m sorry." Now everybody’s got to say, with gusto and emphasis, "My bad."

I really don’t care if Jose wants his name to be pronounced Hosay. Change the spelling. Then we’ll all say Hosay together. But don’t come up here and tell me that I must change the way I speak English so that you will feel at home. And I don’t care how you say Ahmadeinejad. It looks like "Ah-made -in-jab" to me and if I had a name like that I’d change it to Smith - with a short I not Y. Where is the "ck" in AHCKminidjod? I don’t see it.

During the 2008 elections no one was allowed to say Barrack Hussein Obama. John McCain even fired some of his volunteers for having the temerity to utter candidate Obama’s middle name. Now Obama can’t shut up about it. He, himself, prances around the world with his arrogant nose stuck in the air bragging about his middle name and the church in which he grew up. And we’re told not to use the word terrorist or terrorism. We hear the man who today occupies the White House say there is no war with militant Islamofacists. In fact, there is said to be no such thing as Islamofascists.

In 1594 Shakespeare said it better than I can when he put words into the mouth of Juliet . When speaking of her lover, Romeo, she said,

The point is, nothing is changed by what you call it. So-to-may-er is still an activist Judge who allows her ethnicity to color her judicial decisions. All the fuss about the pronunciation of her name is silly. In America, we must be allowed to follow American English rules for speaking names as well as all other words. No one person should be elevated to a higher rank in the pronunciation scale because their names do not fit easily into English rules.

Perez is still "Pa-rez " in America, not "PED -ES." In Mexico, say it any way you please. And let me not dwell too long on Spanish pronunciations. Those Americans who prefer to speak Eubonics mispronounce my name all the time. Gordon is spelled with a ‘d’ in the middle. The ‘d’ in the middle is a soft sounding ‘d’ not a hard ‘t.’ But I am continually called Gorton instead of Gordon. I always correct them. I always explain that there are two d or t sounds. One soft and one hard. Mine is the soft sounding D rather than a T which has a hard sharp sound to it.

But they still say Gorton. Do they do it just to tick me off? Maybe. I like to think, however, that it is just the peer pressure of their societal group which causes the misunderstanding. Either way, does it matter? Am I any different as Gorton than I am as Gordon? I don’t think so. Well, if you discount the getting ticked off part. And when it comes down to what I think of myself, we are faced with another problem which I think is huge and should be corrected. Are there many people who do not understand what a reflexive pronoun is? Yes. Do many people constantly mis-use them? Most certainly.

A reflexive pronoun is one which refers back to the subject of or, the action of the clause in which it is used, e.g. myself, or as an object, "to wash myself." In short, you cannot do anything to myself. I cannot do anything to yourself. We cannot do anything to themselves. Only they can. I can love myself. I can feed myself. I can curse myself. And while you can curse me, you cannot curse myself. You can only curse yourself. Or feed yourself. Or love yourself. I cannot do those things, yet I can curse you, feed you or love you - but not yourself.

So if there are three of us together. Can I correctly say, "There was Tom, Dick and Myself?" NO! Myself is a reflexive pronoun and as such cannot be used as a subject. I hear this mostly on televison. The great mass media supposedly populated by educated journalists are the worst offenders.

Examples: I attended a meeting yesterday with Tom and Dick. Okay. But Tom, Dick and Myself were at a meeting yesterday? No. Not okay. The fact of the matter is that yourself and myself can’t do a damn thing but be the object of something you do to yourself or I do to myself. Anyone on television paying attention?

Why do people say such things? Because somewhere along the line someone said that it was selfish or conceited to use I, or me when referring to oneself. WHY! Why! I told yourself that it was wrong. No. I cannot "told yourself" anything. Well, it gets worse.

Syllabic considerations have profound impacts on our language. How do you say, "Veterans?"  Fox News’ Shepherd Smith says, "Ve trans." Why? I don’t know. He probably heard someone he admires say it and knee jerked himself into using the word incorrectly without realizing it. The word has three syllables, Shep. Ve te-rans. It’s Veterans’ Day, not Vetrans’ Day.

If I’ve confused you, let me slow down. Yesterday, Chris Wallace was anchoring the D-Day observance in France for Fox News. While he took great pains to make absolutely sure that he pronounced the French president’s name correctly, i.e. Sar-co-ZEE' he nonchalantly pronounced veterans as VE -TRANS. So as Americans while we almost fracture our larynxes saying every foreign name in the world correctly in its owners native tongue we are encouraged to ignore simple rules of English in pronouncing English or American words.

This is not calculus, folks. Veterans is a three syllable word. That is, it has three separate units of sound, to wit: Ve, ta, and run. Put them all together and it sounds like it was meant to sound: veteran. Why shorten it to only two syllables? I don’t know. The British do that a lot with many of their words. It makes them sound, some think, more sophisticated. They like to say, "LIT -TRA-LEE" instead of "lit -er-ra-lee ." I guess it’s tiring to say four syllables instead of three. And just this morning I listened to a female television reporter try to leave out the middle syllable of the first month of the year. It sounded something like JAN’URY.

But back to my problem. Many conservative political thinkers are puzzled and somewhat miffed by the assignation of the color red to those states which vote predominantly Republican, which, as you know, used to stand for conservative values. Why red? Why not blue? Red is known the world over as the color favored by the communists. Then shouldn’t the liberal leaning or socialist Democrat party have red as their designated color? Shouldn’t the GOP states have been called blue states. Blue has traditionally be used by the GOP as a preferred color since the union army wore blue uniforms.

Well, it didn’t work out that way, did it? Why not? Because the liberal media chose to hang red on the states who voted for George Bush as one of their weapons in the Hate Bush war. Here is how I think it works. Communism is almost universally hated in the United States. Red is the color of communists. Calling George Bush states Red States created a feeling of hatred toward Bush without regard for his actual political stance. You must keep in mind that Americans generally refuse to accept the fact that communism could ever happen here. Ha! So I don’t think the folks were regarding the Bush states as communist, but giving them a red color created a bad feeling. Bad feelings, any bad feeling about Bush was a good thing to the Democrats.

And long before the states became red or blue instead of blue or gray, the environmentalists practiced some of their Newspeak by calling jungles, rainforests and swamps, wetlands. Notice how much nicer rainforest sounds than JUNGLE. And isn’t a wetland a much nicer place than a SWAMP? The reasoning behind these changes? It is much easier to gather support and government money for preservation projects if they have nice names. No one wants to save a swamp. Jungles survive quite nicely on their own, thank you. But a delicate rainforest needs our help and we must fight to save the wetlands.

The program of changing the meaning of words, eliminating the use of some words and substituting other words for them has little to do with language but much to do with power and control. Over the entrance to one of Hitler’s concentration camps was the slogan: "Arbeit Macht Frei." Literally that translates as Work Makes Free, or "working will set you free." Clearly, it was never the intention of the Nazi’s to set anyone free. It was mid-twentieth century Newspeak.

The fascists in our country are still doing it today. We are ordered not to speak of homosexuals as qu??rs. (Political Correctness reigns on TH too.) We are told that we must refer to them as Gay. Gay used to be a delightful, happy word with a spring-like aura which we could apply to such things as parties and dinners and picnics. No longer. They’ve stolen it. So this lovely little word is now a dirty word, every bit as vulgar as qu??r, but with the approval of the homosexual political lobby it is declared acceptable.

What do they get out of it? Control. The homosexual lobby gets a free pass on every issue they bring up by reminding us that, ugly straights that we are, we have brutalized them over the years by calling them queers. Now that they are called Gays, we need to sympathize with them and surrender to their every demand for political superiority over all others as sort of a system of reparation for all the damage we did. It is about control, not about language.

Well, the time has come to speak up. The time has come to reclaim our language. It is now time to tell the foreigners, the homosexuals, the environmentalists, the animal rights groups and all of the other lobbying organizations who want to control the rest of us to kiss butt. The CEO of most cities in the U.S. is called the mayor, pronounced MAY'-er. Not May-YOR'. Put a Soto on the front of it and it is still So'-Tow-May'-Er. Want to hear it pronounced some other way here in America? Change the spelling.

But stop telling me that I have to embarrass myself by trying to sound like every other language in the world because you demand that I change my language to fit your wants and needs! I speak American.

.

Have you ever heard someone say, "If we’re not careful, one day they’ll be taxing the air that we breathe?" Well, that day has come. The United States House of Representatives is considering HB 2454, a so-called Cap-And-Trade bill.

Just What Is Cap-And-Trade? Although being touted as an environmentally responsible system of controlling the amount of pollution released into the air by businesses, it is nothing but another federal government tax. The bill is over 900 pages long and, like the 800 billion dollar so-called stimulus bill passed earlier this year, no one in Congress knows what it really says. It is too long to read.

And maybe the biggest insult of all is that in order to get it passed, the Democrat majority in the House of Representatives has hired a speed reader to rush through reading the monstrous thing out loud to the members of the House. Such an act is not only insulting to us, it is ridiculous. How many times have you listened to a commercial on radio or television which closed with a high-speed reading of the "fine print" of some offer? Have you ever been able to understand any of what is being said? Neither have I.

And neither will the members of the House of Representatives. What I cannot understand is why any member of Congress to allow such a travesty to continue!

Cap-And-Trade is a scam. It is actually a tax on the air that we breathe! It is further an outgrowth of Al Gore’s now discredited "Global Warming" theory. There is a total absence of scientific evidence to prove that any of the climatological changes occurring in the earth is being caused by human activity. But if this bill is passed, Al Gore and his friends will make billions of dollars in profit from the buying and selling of "pollution credits."

These "air permits," as I like to call them, will be issued by the government according to what ever the government decides that each company or industry should pay for the privilege of using the air around their business locations. If a particular company doesn’t use or need all of the "permits" that company could then sell those extra "pollution credits" to some company which needs more.

Are you paying attention? Do you realize what I am saying? The government is going to first, tell each business enterprise how much carbon dioxide it can release into the air. Then the government is going to regulate how those allowances are used even to the point of reselling them from one company to another. The United States government will be creating an entirely new Black Market in which formerly free air will be sold and traded between businesses in the United States! Air!

You know what carbon dioxide is, don’t you? It’s what comes out of your lungs each time you breathe out. It’s what trees create. It’s a part of nature. The government doesn’t own the air. They don’t own the carbon dioxide in the air. They don’t, in fact, own the air that is in your lungs right now which you will expel into the air in the next few seconds. But they are going to regulate it. They are going to tell us how much we can ‘breathe out’ - they are going to buy and sell air!

Oh. I didn’t tell you, did I? The original "pollution credits" issued by the government? You have to pay for them. You have to buy them from the government. Can anybody say TAX? This is the tax that candidate Obama talked about when he told us that the cost of energy would go so high that some companies might be forced into bankruptcy because of it. The same tax which is going to cost each American family thousands of dollars in increased energy costs. That is one of the changes he promised and it looks as though it will pass Congress unless we all act to prevent its passage into law.

Understand that you won’t pay the tax. But you will pay for the electricity and the gasoline and the heating oil, the prices of which will, in Obama’s words, "skyrocket" once cap-and-trade is the law of the land.

The Republicans, to their credit, objected to the bill saying it must be read before voting on it. So, the Democrats decided to have the bill read at a super fast speed, a speed at which no one could possibly understand its provisions, just in order to say that the bill had been read. Then they’ll vote on it. Just like spitting in your face. They think we are that stupid. And if we do not rise up against this outrageous increase in our cost of living right now, perhaps they will be correct.

Contact your congressional representative as soon as possible. Call them on the telephone. Tell them you want them to reject HR 2454 and all other cap-and-trade schemes. You may not be able to get through on the telephone. If not, send an e-mail saying the same thing. If you have access to a fax machine, send them a fax. The form is of little importance. Be polite, but tell them that you are opposed to cap-and-trade schemes and other attempts to raise our taxes. I’m afraid that it is too late for regular letters through the mail. You must call, e-mail or Fax them now. Air is free. So is CO2. It’s a part of nature. Tell your congressman or congresswoman that you do not want them to put a tax on "the air that we breathe." Reject HR 2454.

WE are going to have government mandated, owned and controlled health care shoved down our throats just as we had the so-called stimulus package shoved down our throats. Why? Because the Republicans have joined Obama and his Democrats.

Well pay attention to the so-called health crisis. Obama says that the problem is so severe that the only the government can straighten the system out. The Democrats say that a national health care system is the only solution. And now, in regard to health care, the Republicans say, "Congress must address these problems in order to provide affordable and accessible health care to all Americans."¹

Why? When in the hell did every problem in our country whether real or imagined become the sort of problem that only the government is capable of repairing? If your answer is, "When Obama was elected" you would be incorrect.

If your answer is that George Bush’s White House in 2002 ". . . began an intensive effort to build, launch and manage a diverse portfolio of government-to-citizen, government-to-business and government-to-government websites" which were charged with the responsibility of providing "high-quality solutions" such as "benefit information delivery," among others. Those benefits were determined to include medical information and triage services for citizens, your answer would still be wrong.

During the Second World War, Franklin Roosevelt decided that in order for some aircraft manufacturers to continue receiving contracts to build airplanes for the U.S. Army Air Corps they would also have to pay all of the medical expenses of their employees. Many contractors, among them North American, protected it’s profits by agreeing to FDR’s demand. Did the exaltation of government’s role in life take over at that time? Again, wrong.

It started when the fascists took over our government. Although I can’t pin point the time, clearly Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were two of the national progressives who lead the country down the socialist path.

For a time, most notably during the Reagan years we all thought that we had a choice between big government and small government. But we were really only dreaming dreams of old then. The plot had already been laid. Mr. Reagan only gave us "comic relief" from the strides fascism was making. We now live in a time when the members of both parties in government and out say to us that government and only government can fix all of our problems.

So the Republicans now confess that they too believe the contract between a citizen and his doctor can and must be interfered with by the government. That only through the intervention of Obama’s minions with the assistance of the GOP can health care costs be brought into line with what the government determines those costs ought to be. So, we all will be subjected to government operated socialized medical care whether we like it or not.

Why? How is it that government should have a right not granted to it in the U.S. Constitution to interfere in decisions regarding the medical condition of our own bodies? You might note that the reasoning behind the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade was because a woman has the sole right to make decisions about her own body, even though that decision might pose serious harm to the body of another - her unborn child.

How is there not a conflict here? Well, no matter, unless you think that nationalized health care has something to do with quality of care, improvement of services, patient comfort and well being. It has nothing to do with those things anymore than gun control has to do with safety or law enforcement. Much as the government has declared that only it can solve the banking problems and that its management of the automobile industry will produce better cars, it has only to do with the control of people.

Gun control means control of law-abiding citizens. Control of the automobile manufacturing industry means control of management and the subjugation of investors in order to favor the interests of labor unions. Control of the banking business provides the vast financing required by the government to operate all of its programs without oversight by the people. And control of health care is the ultimate control of who gets health care and who doesn’t. That translates into who lives and who dies. The result is the life and death control of all the people with the entire weight and might of the federal government including its police and military forces to make sure their socialist plan runs as they choose.

This on going national discussion we are having is not about health care. It is not about health care costs. It is not about improving anyone’s lot in life except those sitting in the top ranks of government. For those of you out there who believe that Obama is going to make your car payment for you, buy the gasoline to run it, provide you with a job and a pay check to buy food, I sure hope you don’t get seriously ill. Because whether you know it or not, you will become a very big liability for Mr. Obama’s type of government. And you are likely to learn that big liabilities have a way of being terminated as early as possible under his system.

Anyone with access to a calculator knows that communism cannot succeed for long. And call it what you like, communism, socialism, fascism, progressivism or collectivism is what Obama and the Democrats have now forced upon us. They didn’t do it alone. They were helped with possibly more than one half of the American electorate. More than fifty percent of the votes cast in the 2008 national elections were by people who believed Obama’s lies about hope and the kind of change he was promising. And they didn’t stop there.

I have always said that our government still works and works well. I can’t say that anymore because it is now a broken and failed system. It used to be that if enough people contacted their representatives in government that the government would follow the will of the people and things would be okay. That is no longer true because everyone in government has now joined the same party. They all subscribe to the belief that government is not only the agency that should control our lives but is the only agency capable of running our lives.

You must remember that in the eyes of governmentalists you and I are too ignorant to manage our own affairs. So when I write my guy in government to say I am against the Economic Stimulus Bill, he writes back to thank me for my letter and to say he agrees with me and he will continue to work to get the amount of the stimulus held at a reasonable level. When I say vote against national health care, he explains how government MUST respond to the problem. He might as well have added "whether I like or not."

The Democrats have sixty votes in the Senate to stop any filibuster, to move any question, to win every vote. The Democrats in the House of Representatives are correctly assuming they are representing the will of their constituents since the voters never call in to say Stop It! The bottom line is that the majority of the people in the United States today has decided that communism is okay, that we can all stand in a big circle, each of us with one hand in our neighbor’s pocket and somehow or other we will all get rich.²

And while the big shots in Washington, D.C. are deciding how to carve up the big pie, we call each other names, hurl insults at each other and stupidly suggest that a new revolution has started and won’t-they-be-sorry-when-we-get-through-with-them sort of rhetoric.

When I started to write this a few days ago, my heart and my mind were filled with lofty thoughts of how I might bend the opinions of people and how they might rise up in a telephonic, electronic, FAXic and postal tsunami that would wash the liberalism and the progressivism out of the halls of Congress thereby saving our medical care system for us and for private industry. But I was not considering the capitulation of the GOP. We have no one in national government to represent us. The Socialist-Democrats, the fence-riding, so-called Independents and the Progressive-Republicans form the various caucuses of one giant party of governmentalists which is, as I write this, shoving socialized medicine down our throats.