About onmiyogi

Once upon a time I was a liberal. I was young, in college, and not aware of the real world. As time went by I grew up. It's not really a choice; it just happens. Some people try to stay eternally young. I doesn't work, but they don't seem to notice that. After a while they just look silly. So I grew up. I grew up into a conservative. Boy, what a surprise! Living in the real world and working for a living has a tendency to do that, make you conservative that is. I was once irreligious; but never an atheist (too depressing). Now I am religious and it makes me happy, I now have a blog. (Who'd a thought?) Now I can vent! Way cool.

They control the vertical, they control the horizontal …

One World, Malaysia Air!

One World, Malaysia Air!

They know where it is; or at least have narrowed it down.

Further that have known for a while.

They know who did it.

They have been using this time to come up with a story that will justify what comes next.

These are terrorists. They are not “skyjackers”; although they certainly DID “skyjack” the plane. Nor are that “pirates”; although they have “pirated away” the plane.

Obviously they don’t seem to want the word used but these are TERRORISTS!

Next will come either: a ransom demand … probably NOT money OR them (WHOEVER THEY ARE) utilizing the plane itself (with OR without passengers) as some kind of WMD.  

EVERYONE is so furious about the NSA spying on us, but far worse is the fact that they can control all the information we are allowed to hear and see

We will NEVER really know what happened; even when it appears clear … “pay not attention to the man behind the curtain!”

Advertisements

The new wave in healthcare … the old bait and switch!

In the the article on August 16th: “State cuts in care for poor to begin” Chris Megerian speaks of the problems that will inevitably effect ALL Medi-Cal recipients.
It is a timely article but neglects to tell people that these draconian cuts are ALREADY having an effect.

In the article Megerian speaks about the potential cuts to Medi-Cal and the ultimate results that will negatively impact those who receive benefits. What is not made clear is the fact that doctors AND dentists are ALREADY making a mass exodus from ANY plan that pays the new state rates of reimbursement.

I am a survivor of hurricane Sandy and lost virtually everything. I was forced to relocate to LA because there was no affordable housing available in the area effected by the storm. I was going to make the move in the future anyway because most of m family is in LA but Sandy made the immediate decision for me.

I applied for Medi-Cal because it would allow me to get needed coverage while my living situation stabilized. In June I was informed that Medicare would pick up my coverage and I was eligible for a “Medicare Advantage” plan with help from the State of California.

I did my research and chose a plan that seemed to cover what I needed and met with the plan representative to sign up and choose my “primary care practitioners.”
I chose a doctor (whom I LOVE) and a dentist (again a great choice) and signed on. That was in the beginning of June with the plan becoming effective as of July 1st.

At my meeting with the plan’s rep., I was given two lists. One was a list of participating physicians and one a list of dentists all of whom accepted the plan; I made my choices from these lists. The lists bore the titles ‘Participating Physicians” and “Participating Dentists” and both were dated 2013.

What they didn’t tell me was that for THIS plan … 2013 ENDED ON SEPTEMBER 1st!

About a month later in July, and after my visit to my chosen new dentist, I received a new membership card and a letter from Liberty Dental (the plans’ dental affiliate) telling me that I had been ASSIGNED yet another NEW dentist and, as of September 1st, I MUST go to that new dentist in order to be covered.

I called Liberty and questioned why this was being done because (1) I liked the dentist I had chosen and (2) the dental facility that I had been assigned to was one I would NEVER use. I was told that as of September 1st my choice would no longer participate in the plan. So we stayed on the phone for almost an hour trying to find a dentist that would still be on their rolls after September 1st and found that, with the exception of very few dental facilities, about roughly 80% of the dentists were leaving the plan; so my “choices” were limited to the ones that were left. There were 3 within 10 miles of where I live (and I live in downtown LA).

My situation was further exacerbated by the fact that the dentist I had chosen had submitted a treatment plan to Liberty Dental for approval on July 9th and somehow (?) Liberty had “never received” the proposed treatment plan. The dental office, now fighting the September 1st doomsday deadline, resubmitted the plan on August 2nd and again about a week later; but Liberty still does not have a record of the plan. My guess is that they are waiting for doomsday by avoiding the claim entirely.

What Liberty Dental is essentially doing is suspending an existing plan that actually offered real dental coverage (the plan I signed up for) and instituting a system where they will now act as a “plan manager” and pass on ALL costs to Medi-Cal if the member is even remotely covered by Medi-Cal in any way. This is something, that, if they are allowed to do it, will significantly boost their bottom line.

There was no other notification of this change given to the people who rely on this plan for their health and dental care.

The result is that those covered are left with NO choices at all when it comes to providers and makes the plan an extension of the soon to be reduced Medi-Cal system.

The plan I signed up for is a MEDICARE ADVANTAGE plan; it is not Medi-Cal. The premium ($104 a month) is paid through the State of California but the benefits are sourced through Medicare NOT Medi-Cal.

After hours on the phone and internet sites trying to solve the problem, with NO help from the plan; I eventually, in frustration, I called Medicare.

I explained everything. I told the Medicare Phone Representative what had happened. I told him that I felt I had been a victim of a medical/dental “bait and switch” scam. I asked, no I actually begged, to be able to switch to a different plan, even though it was not the “open enrollment period.” After hearing my impassioned narrative; Medicare AGREED! Yes, it was a “bait and switch” and, even better, yes, I could switch plans. Instead of having to wait till January 1st, 2014; I made the switch immediately, right on the phone with Medicare.

I see articles in the LA Times just about everyday telling us that people are “in the dark” about plans and coverage. We are only “in the dark” because the system is deliberately pulling the wool over our eyes.

The Experts are Coming …

We have (I probably should say the main stream media has) created a whole new class of experts.  

This phenomenon is not exclusive to the United States.  In the UK, for instance,  the mother of a slain teenaged boy has been elevated to peerage solely on the basis of her loss and now pontificates on matters of police prejudice, teen violence and immigration and race.  

For incomprehensible and absurd reasons we seem to elevate the families and friends of people involved in and victims of tragedies to the status of experts on subjects they know NOTHING about beyond their own obvious prejudice.  

It’s sad that your mother, father, sister, brother, aunt, uncle, niece or nephew got killed, maimed, injured, blinded, burnt, hanged, knifed, shot, or variously incapacitated.  I am truly sorry that it happened.  But that does NOT make you and expert on the law or its enforcement.  It does not make you an expert on immigration if you got jailed crossing the border illegally.  It does not make you an expert on the concept and definition of “self defense” if your relative gets himself killed by doing something DUMB.  It does NOT make you an expert on gun control and the constitution because someone in your family was gunned down.

 I respect your pain and grief.  I understand and empathize with you feelings of loss and anger.  BUT … you are no more an expert on any subject NOW than you were BEFORE any tragedy happened.  Further, nine times out of ten; you are being used by people who wish to exploit your tragedy to their own advantage.  Al Sharpton’s “National Action Network” would not exist and PROSPER with donations without people like you.  You are, for all intents and purposes, the product that he sells.

Our sweet baby boy

Wow! I was reading this and I just had an epiphany!!! I think I’ve figured this little creep (he should pardon the expression) out.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bradley-manning-20130726,0,4376097.story

This is how I see it.

This little bugger has a crush on someone in the military; so, he joins the Army to be with this guy.  The guy in question either does not want his attention at all (probably) or decides to break off the “relationship” after the enlistment and that leaves baby boy in the Army, in the lurch and out in the cold.

Baby boy Bradley is devastated.

So he’s pissed and wants out of the Army.  That does not happen; so he wants to get even.  If baby boy tries to get even with the guy who dumped him it would mean that he would NEVER be able to reconcile with the guy; so that won’t work.

Like most toddlers who possess only a “ME ME ME” outlook on life; our baby boy HAS TO GET EVEN WITH SOMEONE OR SOMETHING!!

So, taking a page from the current government philosophy; he decides to get even with the Army, the entire government and the world in general.  After all, baby boy KNOWS that he’s not to blame for his own misery and he certainly doesn’t want to blame his former lover so it only makes basic sense to blame the Army and America for his heartache.

Now this is where I have to connect some very disparate dots.  Some time and somewhere he is put in touch with ASSange (one hell of a creepy-ass cracka if I ever saw one).

Our baby boy was OBVIOUSLY “taken” with ASSange and probably was seduced by this well know manipulator of minds and data.

It’s never been mentioned (wouldn’t be PC) but I think there was a sexual component to the relationship between our baby boy and ASSange.  ASSange prides himself on and freely publicizes his sexual exploits having once expressed his intention to populate the world with his illegitimate progeny by screwing anything that breathes.

Now this was not an actual physical, sexual affair, but definitely a fantasy in our baby boy’s dreams.

I have come to the conclusion that our baby boy was sweet talked into giving ASSange everything he wanted.

These was no concern for anyone but himself. He didn’t do this in protest of ANYTHING.

The Sad (?) Tale of Flight 214

I have to say that this incident has really disturbed me in a most unusual sense.  When I first saw the screen shot with the list of “pilots” I thought it wasn’t real.  It was a VERY BAD JOKE.  Totally insensitive and callus; but, I am ashamed to admit … funny.  I laughed out loud and then immediately felt guilty for laughing and finding humor in such a horror.  
 
The next episode in the saga was finding out that it was actually true.  Some really dumb news reader actually sat at the desk and read that copy … ALOUD!  Then to be corrected by a Tweet telling them to actually LOOK at the copy.  Then the TV station comes up with the excuse that someone at NTSB confirmed the list (they never, however, say where the piece originated).
 
So I’m sitting there laughing on the verge of crying over the idea that this San Francisco, obviously dufus station wants me to believe that the NTSB, the very Federal Agency (please note the strategic use and placement of capital letters) that is charged with investigating transportation mishaps and tragedies in all transport modes and methods on land sea and air throughout the USA and its territories would ridicule and demean the victims of this crash with racial slurs.  
 
Oh no … not the NTSB!  They wouldn’t do that.  My laughter had reached a grand guffaw stage and I was on the verge of a spasm and then immediately felt guilty for laughing and finding humor in such a horror.  
 
The final chapter (final by virtue of the fact that I refuse to read anymore about it tonight) brings us to the NTSB representative who makes the statement that: yes, the list did in fact come from them but was released to the press by an INTERN (a nonperson who happened to be standing in front of the bus when it started up or, alternatively, an irreverent wag who obviously has a future in political comedy) who had no authority to speak to the press at all.  (My guess is the comedy option is the way to go.)
 
So here I sit.  Am I pondering the immensity of the horrible incident: the horror of the crash itself, the frantic escape from the burning fuselage, the first responder running over and killing one of the helpless victims, the scarcity of ambulances and the interminable amount of time it took for them to get there, people laying on the ground waiting, the flames, the foam, the pain, the deaths; all of it?  Am I moved to tears for these events?  
 
Yes there are tears in my eyes.  However, perhaps attesting to my own lack of sympathy … empathy … humanity …, I have tears in my eyes because I am laughing so hard.
 
The sad thing is that now whenever I hear any mention of Flight 214 I find it almost impossible not to laugh and then immediately feel guilty for laughing and finding humor in such a horror.  So, can I excuse myself by saying:  well, only a couple of people died … it could have been much worse?  That’s true of course.  Can I pass it of as an example of all that is WRONG with the so many things in the world?  It does speak volumes about all kinds of underlying problems with MSM, the NTSB, San Francisco and the idea of letting a trainee land the damn plane in the first place.
 
I amazes me how bad I feel about laughing … really bad, guilty …really guilty.
 
Really … but it is funny.

Is it racist?


TIME MAGAZINE: It’s Racist For Cops To Prepare For Pro-Trayvon Riots…

July 11, 2013 

AP

AP

(PAUL JOSEPH WATSON) — Time Magazine writer Marc W. Polite argues that despite a deluge of Twitter messages from Trayvon Martin supporters threatening to riot if George Zimmerman is acquitted, police preparations for potential unrest are based on little more than racism.

 

In an article entitled Preparing for Riots After Zimmerman Verdict Is Racial Fear Mongering, Polite states that the “pre-emptive call for calm (by police) runs counter to recent history, and may be akin to racial fear mongering” as part of an, “assumption of violence on the part of the black community, and of black men.”

Nowhere in his piece does Polite mention the plethora of threats made by Trayvon Martin supporters, primarily made on Twitter, that brazenly promise riots, looting, attacks on white people, and murder attempts on Zimmerman if he is found not guilty.

“No one seems to be concerned about the possible violence of Zimmerman supporters if Zimmerman is convicted,” adds Polite, failing to acknowledge that unlike Trayvon supporters, thousands of Zimmerman backers have not took to social media networks to openly announce their plans to riot if they don’t like the verdict.

Even if disorder is unlikely, the sheer volume of messages from Trayvon supporters threatening to stage violence and looting means it would be remiss of authorities not to at least prepare for some kind of unrest.

The race of the people making those threats should make no difference whatsoever. If thousands of white supremacists were making threats to riot, rob and kill, would Time Magazine publish an article labeling police racist for preparing to deal with it?

Polite’s article also fails to mention the fact that Trayvon supporters already staged disorder last year in response to Zimmerman not being arrested, when gangs of teenagers ransacked a Walgreens in north Miami, hardly a “sophisticated” form of protest, as Polite claims has been embraced by pro-Trayvon activists.

Polite argues that relatively recent murders where the victims were black men did not prompt nationwide riots. However, in none of these cases did the President of the United States insert himself into the controversy at the outset as Obama did when he stated, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

In addition, it has now come to light that many of the early pro-Trayvon Martin protests were actually encouraged by the Obama administration.

As Michael Snyder writes, “Judicial Watch has obtained documents which prove that the Community Relations Service, a division of the Department of Justice, was sent to Sanford, Florida in late March 2012 “to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman“. This included spending quite a bit of money, arranging meetings between the NAACP and local leaders, and providing police escorts for protesters.”

Numerous prominent voices, including former Chicago cop Paul Huebl have warned that the outcome of the trial will lead to riots that could surpass those seen in the aftermath of the Rodney King beating.

Sheriffs in several Florida counties have been preparing for the potential that the outcome of the trial could spark riots for weeks. Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith and other city officials are worried that a Zimmerman acquittal could spark “violence” and have crafted a “secret law enforcement” plan to deal with potential social disorder. They are also working with the Department of Homeland Security.

Meanwhile, authorities in Broward County are concerned about flash mob violence being organized via Twitter and are preparing to flood the social network with anti-riot messages when the Zimmerman trial concludes. Read more via Infowars…

Black Racism Killed Martin

Black Racism Killed Trayvon …

Exclusive: Jesse Lee Peterson wants Americans to take stand against intimidation

By Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson 

Rachel Jeantel, the troubled young woman who was speaking on the phone to Trayvon Martin just before he was killed, testified in George Zimmerman’s second-degree murder trial that Martin called Zimmerman a “creepy a– cracka” before their violent confrontation.

I’ve been warning for the past 23 years that black racism is out-of-control – it appears black racism killed Trayvon Martin, and Paula Deen’s career!

Since the shooting of Martin, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the NAACP (along with the liberal media) have done their best to portray Martin as an innocent kid tiptoeing through the tulips who just happened to be the victim of a racist white vigilante (even though Zimmerman is half Hispanic).

Blatant hostility and racism toward whites is common among black youth. Martin’s friend Rachel Jeantel admitted that where she comes from the term “cracka” is a common term used to describe whites.

Before his death, Martin was suspended from school; he was caught with a marijuana pipe; it was reported he had burglary tools in his locker; and it was recently revealed that pictures of marijuana plants and someone suspected to be Martin holding a gun were found on his cell phone. Does this sound like a well-adjusted teenager?

Trayvon Martin was the product of a broken home. He was also a victim of the corrupt civil-right leaders who peddle racism infecting the minds of young blacks. Martin’s parents (Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton) stood next to race hustlers and knowingly allowed this case to be framed as a race issue. As a result, supporters have taken to Twitter, threatening to kill Zimmerman and random white people if he gets off:

  • @HotTopicLys: f**k Don West. f*** George Zimmerman. I’ll kill both them n***as.
  • @StayFocus_Jones: ima kill a white person in self-defense if Zimmerman go free lol on everything.
  • @ZackSlaterExe: If they don’t kill Zimmerman Ima kill me a cracka.
  • @BE4L_Pervis: If Zimmerman win, I’m gonna kill a white kid by mistake.

All the threats and screams of racism from these thugs, as well as Sharpton and Jackson, have nothing to do with justice for Trayvon! Just as the uproar over celebrity chef Paula Deen’s use of the word “N–-er” decades ago has nothing to do with eradicating racism.

Deen has been excoriated after she admitted she had used that word in a deposition over a case accusing her of condoning an atmosphere of sexual harassment and racism in her businesses.

Paula Deen has apologized profusely to everybody and their mama! She released statements, videos and appeared on the “Today” show begging for forgiveness from blacks.

Jesse Jackson (of all people!) has said his organization plans to investigate the matter and that he will help the embattled chef overhaul her image. She didn’t owe an apology to all black people. Jesse Jackson is not the gatekeeper to black America, and she doesn’t need him to remake her image.

Since Paula’s admission, the Food Network, Wal-Mart, Caesars Entertainment, Smithfield Foods, Sears and diabetes drug maker Novo Nordisk are no longer doing business with her. This type of overreaction by majority white-owned companies is the height of cowardice.

Just as in the Zimmerman case, it’s time for people to take a stand against all forms of racial intimidation!

By apologizing to all blacks, Deen and her former sponsors are unwittingly sending the message that just the accusation alone is enough to get whites to cave. This only encourages vultures like Jackson and Sharpton to swoop in and exploit these incidents for personal gain.

Jackson claims he’s going to investigate Deen’s past use of a racial slur. Did anyone investigate his past use of racial slurs when he used the slur “hymie” and “hymietown” respectively when referring to Jews and New York City? Or when Jackson accused Barack Obama of “talking down to black folks” by lecturing them on moral issues?

If Jackson, Sharpton and the NAACP hadn’t jumped on the Trayvon Martin case and made it into a racial matter, nobody would have heard of it. His death would have gone unnoticed, just like the more than 500 black youths that were murdered in Chicago in black-on-black violence last year.

The attention on the Zimmerman trial is not about justice for Trayvon; it’s about intimidation and dividing the American people along race.

I hear from many white people that they’ve given up on trying to help or deal with blacks. If they hire blacks, they’re afraid to correct them because they may cry racism. God forbid if they have to lay off or fire a black employee – all hell might break loose! This is putting fear in white people because they can’t win either way.

Whites have to overcome the fear of being called “racist.” Blacks have to be on the side of good and stand for what is right, regardless of race. In order to conquer these racist black leaders, we must see clearly that the uproar in the Trayvon Martin and Paula cases is NOT about justice.

Original Source: http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/black-racism-killed-trayvon-and-paula-deens-career/

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Accomplished, Oh Yeah!!!

Quit trashing our President’s accomplishments.  A long list of firsts for Obama. Now why doesn’t everyone like him?  He has done more than any other President before him. He has an impressive list of accomplishments:

First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.

First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.

First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.

First President to violate the War Powers Act. 

First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.

First President to spend a trillion dollars on “shovel-ready” jobs when there was no such thing as “shovel-ready” jobs.

First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.

First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.

First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S. , including those with criminal convictions.

First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.

First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.

First President to terminate AmericaËœs ability to put a man in space.

First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.

First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.

First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.

First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.

First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.

First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).

First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.

First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).

First President to fire an inspector general of AmeriCorps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.

First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.

First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.

First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 102 to date.

First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.

First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.

First President to go on multiple “global apology tours” and concurrent “insult our friends” tours.

First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.

First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.

First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.

First President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.

First President to repeat the Holy Quran & tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.

First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they “volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences.”

Then he was the First President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the last suggestion.

First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona).

 

 

Credit where credit is due: Charles Wright for the piece and photo.
Tony Attanasio for the posting

My own personal Obama story

Obama-fly_2461808bBack in 2006, ancient history now, I was working with a young man who kept telling me about this guy Obama. Now this young man is a smart guy, going to school to get his “masters’ ticket” that would eventually qualify him to be a ship’s captain. He is intelligent and well spoken and I listened to his praise of this Obama with respect and curiosity. After hearing so much about Obama, I decided to do my own research.
So, I go online and start data mining on the subject.
I didn’t find much (maybe that was the first clue?) and the little bit I did find was either unremarkable or disturbing.
His voting record while in the elected positions he had held was limited to say the least and predictable considering that his political philosophy was disturbing. It was not difficult to discern his political leanings (somewhat to the left of Mao) from his speeches and political actions. Further is was not difficult the figure out that the man was both a racist AND an elitist; not an easy thing to justify in the world of public service.
I found out that he was a “Christian” by virtue of the fact that he attended the church of then Pastor Jeremiah Alvesta Wright, Jr., and that he had converted to his form of Christianity “not because of religious zeal”: but because he realized that the church was “a powerful political influence in the black community”. The quotes are his.
Now I already knew a bit about the Reverend Wright. I remembered him as the preacher who “God damned” America after 9/11. I remembered reading one of his sermons where he expressed ideas that were anti-Semitic, anti-white, and essentially anti-Christian. Reading this sermon side by side with one given by the illustrious Lewis Farrakhan, I could see no difference in the rhetoric at all. The same hate filled rants of jealousy and resentment that plays to an audience of professional victims who resent the success and happiness of others.
These are the same people who hated Mitt Romney because he was “rich”. They forget that most of the men who have been successfully involved in the politics of the United States have been “rich”. The various politicians that they lionize; FDR, JFK and many more were FILTHY rich.
Then there was the thing about where our boy Barry was born. While I always sympathized with the birthers, I’ve always known that this was a non issue that would never be resolved because Obama supporters didn’t care where he was born.
I found that his claim to fame was having been a “grassroots community organizer”. Been there, done that; but I’ve never thought of that as a reason to aspire to the country’s highest office.
When I reviewed his public speeches I saw that the content was always self-serving and usually contradictory. I saw a man who would say anything to win an audience, a fairly good speaker, as long as he had a teleprompter.
I found it interesting that this man whose father walked out on him and his mother would lionize this bum in a memoir while never mentioning his mother. He put on the personae of a “strong black man” and somehow forgot the Nebraska white side of his heritage completely. He seemed not to remember that it was the white side of the family that took him in and supported and educated him after his mother no longer seemed to want him around her new husband and family.
His mother had taken off to Indonesia with him but subsequently sent him back to Hawaii to live with her parents. His father had long since taken off back to Kenya to live with his other wives. Although Obama made a point of explaining that his father was NOT an active follower of Islam; it sure looked like daddy Obama certainly took advantage of the Muslim philosophy regarding polygamy and had a tendency to acquire wives and drop kids where ever he went. This was the same father who pointedly avoided answering any questions about “marital status’ on any of the hundreds of papers and forms filed with INS during his residency in this country. This was the same father who was fired on the direct order of no less than Jomo Kenyetta himself for being incompetent and corrupt. No small feat considering the climate of corruption that was the Kenyetta regime.
Weighing the results of my research; I wasn’t impressed with our boy Barry. As a matter of fact I just didn’t like him.
The final piece that for me explained and exemplified what he was all about was a short piece of footage that was shot at the event where he was to announce that he was running for the Presidency. Here was this black woman warming up the crowd for the main attraction. I didn’t know who she was and I wasn’t impressed by her speech. But as she made the introduction it became clear that she must be his wife because she introduced him to the cheering crowd as “my baby daddy, Barack Obama”.
For me that said it all; we were in deep trouble.

And they still don’t get it …

“NOT YOURS TO GIVE” DAVY CROCKETT’S SPEECH BEFORE THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Not Yours to Give
Speech before the House of Representatives
by David (Davy) Crockett
From The Life of Colonel David Crockett,
by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)
 
Editor’s note: David Crockett, perhaps best known for his role in the 1836 defense of the Alamo, also served three terms in the United States Congress between 1827 and 1835. The following excerpt from an 1884 biography by Edward S. Ellis, The Life of Colonel David Crockett, reveals how his electorate taught him the importance of adhering to the Constitution and the perils of ignoring its restrictions.
 
Crockett was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.
One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when
Mr. Crockett arose:
“Mr. Speaker — I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this house, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.
 
“Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and, if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.
 
“He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and of course, was lost.
“Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:
“Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be one for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.
 
“The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly.
“I began: ‘Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and–’
” ‘Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’
“This was a sockdolager… I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
 
” ‘Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth-while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intended by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest….But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.’
“I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any Constitutional question.
 
” ‘No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings in Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some suffers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?’
 
“Well, my friend, I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.’
 
” ‘It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can beintrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any thing and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the suffers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditable; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution. So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch it’s power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you..’
 
“I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, for the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him: Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I did not have sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.
 
“He laughingly replied: ‘Yes Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around this district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied that it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert a little influence in that way.’
 
“If I don’t [said I] I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.
 
” ‘No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute to a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting up on Saturday week.. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.’
 
“Well, I will be here. but one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name.
” ‘My name is Bunce.’
“Not Horatio Bunce?
” ‘Yes.’
“Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.
“It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
 
“At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before. Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before. I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him — no, that is not the word — I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times a year; and I will tell you sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian, lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
 
“But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted — at least, they all knew me. In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:
 
“Fellow-citizens — I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.
 
“I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
“And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
 
“It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.
“He came upon the stand and said: ” ‘Fellow-citizens — It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.’
“He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.
 
“I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the reputation I have ever made, or shall ever make, as a member of Congress.
 
“Now, sir,” concluded Crockett, “you know why I made that speech yesterday. There is one thing now to which I wish to call to your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men — men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased — a debt which could not be paid by money — and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificance a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.” David Crockett was born August 17, 1786 at Limestone (Greene County), Tennessee. He died March 06, 1836 as one of the brave Southerners defending the Alamo.
 
  Editor’s note: Crockett had settled in Franklin County, Tennessee in 1811. He served in the Creek War under Andrew Jackson. In 1821 and 1823 he was elected to the Tennessee legislature. In 1826 and 1828 he was elected to Congress. He was defeated in 1830 for his outspoken opposition to President Jackson’s Indian Bill – but was elected again in 1832.
In Washington, although his eccentricities of dress and manner excited comment, he was always popular on account of his shrewd common sense and homely  Although generally favoring Jackson’s policy, he was entirely independent and refused to vote to please any party leader.
 
 At the end of the congressional term, he joined the Texans in the war against Mexico, and in 1836 was one of the roughly 180 men who died defending the Alamo. Tradition has it that Crockett was one of only six survivors after the Mexicans took the fort, and that he and the others were taken out and executed by firing squad.