It has been said that the uncommon zeal exhibited by Barack Obama’s followers is more like a religion than a political movement. It is so. We have uncovered tenets of the theocracy surrounding this messianic candidate. In order to better understand the movement and, in the spirit of forgiveness (for they know not what they do), accept them into our hearts, we provide this information.

Variations of Obamanism

The Fundamentalist Obamanites believe in the inerrancy of the Prophet Obama’s holy website.

The majority of his followers believe that the statements made on his holy website, barackobama.com, are infallible when berating his opponent, Senator John McCain or bashing the President, George W. Bush. But they believe that when discussing healthcare, taxes, abortion, William Ayers, Rev. Wright or anything else, he speaks in an ancient tongue not fully understood by mortals and thus, he is often misquoted and misunderstood.

Some of his flock are staunch defenders of each and every word on the holy site – they believe that barackobama.com (having been blessed by the Prophet) is incapable of hosting anything but truth – it is entirely inerrant. It even states “I AM HE WHO AM,” and they believe that he really “is he who is.”

The Four-day Obamanites are a small spin-off faction of the Seventh-day Obamanites but meet in 4-day Tire store for worship. The tire shop surroundings have resulted in a “What Goes Around, Comes Around” doctrine to keep the faithful from hydroplaning down the road of life.

With sermon themes like “Inflate Your Tires, Not Your Ego” and “Stay Pumped Up, Don’t Fall Flat,” the Four-day Obamanite congregation expects a “Good Year” as a result.

A Reform (or Reformed) Obaminite believes that Obama’s dogma is a “living” dogma. It is subject to constant reinterpretation in an attempt to keep pace with the Obamessiah’s dogma de jour.

Reform Obamism is a form of Confusionism which embraces the Phlip Phlop creed. The creed tells of a Mantra of Alternating Voices by which one may confuse voters by talking out of both sides of one’s mouth.

First defined by Master Dam Wee Phlip in 1610 and further expounded by Sub-master Ewe Kan Phlop in 1612, the scripture requires that disciples constantly change position to keep Republican demons from gaining advantage. Those who follow this scripture are known as Phlip Phloppers and religiously follow opinion polls.

Some berate the Prophet when speaking extemporaneously because he often pauses and inserts an “uhhhh” or an “ahhhh” into his replies. The faithful prefer to believe that Obama is meditating during the “uhhhh” and “ahhhh” pauses in his sermons, all the while thinking far ahead of any mere mortal.

A Conservative Obaminite is an oxymoron; no such thing exists.

An Orthodox Obaminite is a Marxist in a Ralph Lauren suit – a Ray Nagin (New Orleans Mayor) with a better façade. The group’s philosophy is “Let Sleeping Dogmas Lie.” Orthodox Obaminites attend worship services but are oblivious to sermons. Instead, they meditate on important issues, like Priestess Scarlett Johansson in a teddy, Scarlett Johansson in a bikini, and Scarlett Johansson without her priestly trappings.

No matter the sect, all Obaminites embrace the theology of “He is the One We’ve Been Waiting For” for faith fills their hearts and they yearn for his triumph. Lives will be complete, ambitions achieved, and all will be right in the heavens.

Passages from The Book of Soros, The Book of Wright, The Book of Ayers, etc. have not yet been fully translated. The first book to be completed was The Book of Deception. It is presented here:

The Prophet Obama, the Book of Deception

For I will stretch out My hand, and smite McCain with all my wonders which I will do in the midst thereof. Neither will the people hearken to the voice of McCain. He is old of body, and of a slow tongue, lest he be the king and bring upon us an age liken unto the old king and beget an era of war.

And Obama said unto McCain, what is that in thine hand? And McCain said, it is a rod of truth. And Obama said, cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent of truth; and Obama shrank and fled from before it.

And God (not Obama) spoke

Verily I say unto you, why have Democrats sent us such a false prophet? He hath naught in his heart, not truth, not wisdom. He hath gathered no straw, he has built no shelter, nor has he suffered a bondage. He is empty of tunic and his head is of air, he knows naught but what he is bid by the Pharisees of Soros and the minions of moveon. And he has not a strong hand and our enemies will know he is weak and rain down stones and fire upon us.

If Obama is chosen, the fault hath lain in thine own people and great taxes and bondage will fall on the country. He will smite our swords and take them away, our children will be cut from the womb, and He will bring pestilence and frogs and locusts and swarms of flies upon the land. Fish and insects will be exalted and people will be diminished. Thunder and hail will darken the land. Our oils will dry up and our lamps will dim and freedom will shrivel and die.

And we will be beholden to the false prophet.

OBEY MY WORD: SPEAK NOT OBAMA, SPEAK MCCAIN

Following are excerpts from:

Teachers give Dallas ISD's new grading rules an F

12:00 AM CDT on Friday, August 15, 2008

By KENT FISCHER / The Dallas Morning News
/ The Dallas Morning News
Tawnell D. Hobbs, Stella M. Chávez and Karin Shaw Anderson contributed to this report.

Dallas public school students who flunk tests, blow off homework and miss assignment deadlines can make up the work without penalty, under new rules that have angered many teachers.

The intent may have been to create a uniform grading policy, but the result was to lower standards, said Dale Kaiser, president of the teachers' group NEA-Dallas. The school board and superintendent "talk about elevating standards and holding high expectations for kids, but we're telling the kids that whether they do the work or not is irrelevant," he said.

Last school year, Dallas' board of trustees reaffirmed a policy that prevented teachers from giving students a grade lower than a 50 in any one grading period. The reason given was that students who fall below 50 have no hope or motivation to bring up their grades and just give up.

“Babying the rules so that [students] have almost unlimited chances to pass, that’s unreal,” said Joshua Perry, a 2007 graduate of Skyline High School. “In the real world, you don’t get a whole lot of chances or other ways to make something up.”

-------------------------------------------------------------

Even the teachers and the NEA union are against this bone-headed move.

I just read an excellent article by Joseph Farah (World Net Daily) about Obama’s “nuanced” responses to questions on the Rick Warren show.

And it struck a nerve.

The technique of “nuanced” response appears to be a tenet of the left. Rather than a direct, concise answer to a question, it appears that lefties are more impressed by obfuscation – by verbal gymnastics, in order to avoid a simple, direct answer. As an example from the Rick Warren’s forum, Warren asked about how to handle “evil.” John McCain’s response was “defeat it.” Obama’s “nuanced” answer took 1:27 minutes and it boiled down to “confront it.”

Like John (who served in Vietnam) Kerry before him, Obama’s command of the language impresses those with a lesser ability, and for them, that equates to a superior intellect. Why on earth would anyone answer a question with a simple “yes” or “no” when one could impress the sheeple with subtle shadings and delicate gradations, all the while spinning a web of misty confusion. “What the hell did he say?” “I dunno, but it sure sounded smart!”

It certainly appears to be a pattern. Remember John (he served in Vietnam) Kerry’s oratorical exercises when “answering” questions? His meanderings through the English language led his followers to believe him to be light-years above George Bush in intellect. Based on real evidence, it wasn’t true. I still have a 7-8 page study of their SAT scores and military tests that showed Bush to have a higher IQ than Kerry – whoda thunkit? Certainly not Kerry (who served in Vietnam) supporters.

And Barry Obama is perhaps even better at subtleties and waltzing with words than Kerry (who served in Vietnam) was. The problem is that Barry leaves one train of thought to insert another explanatory part-statement and before he’s completed that one, he’s off to yet another shading of the issue. I don’t know if the man is capable of a simple one-word “yes” or “no.” Evidence shows otherwise.

I’m beginning to believe that Barry’s disciples prefer the verbal meanderings since they result in a statement so ambiguous that a creative parsing of the words can yield almost any desired interpretation. Remember Bill Clinton’s "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is?

His positions are hard to pin down, not only because they’re a moving target, but because his statements are so inexact. And, in that respect, Obama is an artist - a real Renoir of bullsh*t. When he speaks without the crutch of a teleprompter, the “ahhhs” and “ummms” are a signal that he is searching for a camouflaging statement to hide his real thoughts.

I’ve recently received some inside information about Obama’s vetting of Vice Presidential candidates. Most of the tips came from a source inside the campaign who only talked when assured of anonymity. He was referred to as “Deep Hyperbole” (he is given to exaggeration).

Originally, we’re told that the vetting team (Jim Johnson, Caroline Kennedy, and Eric Holder) started with a rather long list of possible suspects – something in the order of 78 names. It was later pared down when it was learned that some of the “list compilers” had worked in democrat voter drives in Chicago and consequently the list included some suspicious names like “I.P. Freely,” “Seymour Wiener,” “Hugh G. Rection,” and at least twenty-two dead people.

Now that Jim Johnson has resigned, Kennedy and Holder have been furiously gathering information about the remaining prospects. The vetting process was slowed a bit last week when Kennedy’s Oldsmobile accidentally missed a bridge, ran off the road and into Eurine Creek, outside of Hankpanky, Ohio. Fortunately, Mr. Holder had attended a workshop on “breath holding,” and managed to survive until rescued by a roving band of Dykes on Bikes. Ms. Kennedy was relieved to learn of Mr. Holder’s narrow escape when she called 911 for help the following day. Mr. Holder now brings scuba gear when traveling with Ms. Kennedy, “just in case.”

Some remaining on the “short list” are the names that we’d expect to see, such as: Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore, etc. But a few are not so well known.

Rep. Cliff Notes (Ohio) must be considered a dark horse, but his resume includes “Audio/Visual Club Organizer,” which is known to impress Obama. Additionally, he has only been a member of Congress for 130 days which is another plus. Like Obama, his work history is unsullied by excessive experience.

Two candidates were suggested by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who although at odds with Obama, is still committed to helping his former parishioner.

Mfume Mfumoo earned Rev. Wright’s respect when in his professional capacity as a chicken whisperer, helped many wayward chickens come home to roost. He has attended Trinity United for ten years and, like Obama, doesn’t remember ever hearing one of Rev. Wright’s vile sermons (he usually has his iPod on, listening to inspirational rap from “Fitty” Cent and Ludicrius).

The other suggestion by Rev. Wright is also a long shot. A “sister” in both a literal and figurative sense, it is Sister Mary Oprah, an African-American nun who ministered to orphan goats in Kenya. She formed the first halfway house for goat herders in Nairobi where she helped many herders overcome unrequited love for their “significant” goat. She later moved to Chicago and has been romantically linked to Fr. Michael Pfleger who found that a nun, without her habit, was more fun than a choir boy. If they’re caught un-frocked, they could both be de-frocked.

A name that has recently received much attention is Sen. Ted Kennedy. Sen. Kennedy would bring several strengths to a ticket: his Bahston whiteness would counter Sen. Obama’s blackness, his bulk would offset Obama’s slim physique, his wealthy aloofness would appeal to rich people, and his heroic efforts to save Mary Jo Kopechne add to his appeal as a true hero. Unfortunately, in response to any of the team’s questions, Sen. Kennedy only responds “dos Dewars, por favor … *burp*.”

Of course, Sen. Hillary Clinton has to be one of the front runners. Even though to some, she is genetically “indeterminate,” she is generally regarded as female and could appeal to women whose husbands think that they’ve gotten away with affairs until a sharp blade relieves them of “Mr. Happy.” Obama does know how to get along with a strong woman (i.e., Michelle); he simply cowers and wets himself. It would be humiliating for the President to become known as a “MINO” (Man In Name Only).

And Sen. John Kerry has “reported for duty.” A member of the Foreign Relations committee, he would bring gravitas to the ticket and has a military background. To bolster his record as a decorated veteran, he has applied (retroactively) to USDOD for three more Purple Hearts for wounds received before was discharged, those incidents are “seared” in his memory. Records show that he burned two fingers while “toking up” in late December, 1968, he received a large splinter in the buttockal region from a bizarre outhouse incident in January of 1970, and in April, 1970, while in an airport men’s room, a very large man stepped on his right foot which had “accidentally” moved over into the next stall, badly bruising the pinkie-toe.

Another name mentioned was Rep. E. Knee Miney, a first term representative from Alabama. Rep. Miney has the prerequisite slim resume, but was a successful businessman who founded the Tuskegee Hairman, a chain of toupee shops. He has been a very prolific bundler for Sen. Obama and has generated sizeable contributions for the campaign, including over $4.4 million from the Sisters of Perpetual Poverty and $2,412,088 from a Buddist Monk temple in California.

The final name on the short list (and perhaps Obama’s favorite) is William Ayers. Obama is known to savor Bernardine Dohrn’s collard greens and sushi. While Ayers does have a number of negatives, Obama is known to respect his expertise in explosives and thinks Ayers is “da bomb.” Ayers is also an expert Marxman. According to Ayers, he and Berrnardine came to the realization that they could do more damage to the country from within the system than on the outside. Thus, Ayers has become mainstream and is now a professor of education, passing on “proper” political ideas to college students.

Obama may be convinced that he can slip one by the voters and nominate his kindred spirit to help him fix our broken country. If nominated, Ayers has agreed to change his first name to “Pungent”, his mother’s maiden name, to hide his true identity.

Obama’s legal team is also investigating whether there is “controlling legal authority” preventing him from holding both President and Vice President positions concurrently. He has suggested that he could wear a black Chicago Bears cap when he is acting as the President and a white White Sox cap when he was Vice President. That way anyone could tell in which capacity he was acting. “Brilliant!” was the unanimous verdict of his staff. “See, now I’m the prez.” On went the black cap, “and now I’m the veep,” switching caps. “Now the prez, now the veep, now the prez, now the veep.” His staff marveled at the pure genius of the idea – it really illustrates the massive intellect at work here.

[Let me first apologize for the length of this piece, it is long, but it is simply not possible to cover the issues in much less space. In fact, it could easily be three or four pages longer]

The purpose of this commentary is to illustrate why Obama’s bill (S.2433) is dangerous to the United States’ sovereignty. It is primarily because it legally ties us to one of the UN’s goals for global governance. This will be the first time that a U.S. law specifically supports, by direct mention, one of the UN’s specific directives.

The linkage is found in the language of the bill itself. The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress:

Global Poverty Act of 2007 – Directs the President, through the Secretary of State, to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide who live on less than $1 per day.

Does the bill actually provide funding for the development goal? No, it doesn’t, but it does establish the underpinnings for the President to include appropriations for the additional foreign policy funding in the budget he submits to congress.

Why hasn’t it been voted on by the full Senate and submitted to the President for approval – what’s the holdup? Simply, they’re awaiting additional democrat Senators (via 2008 elections) to assure passage and … a President Obama to sign it into law.

So, let’s look at the history of the UN’s Millennium Declaration (55/2) (which includes the United Nations Development Goals), how the goals were developed to further the global governance ambitions of the UN, and why it should matter to us.

In 1999 and 2000, under the auspices of the UN, groups called non-governmental organizations (NGOs) held meetings around the world to write what became known as the Charter for Global Democracy (CGD). The CGD document was developed as a blueprint for achieving global governance.

You might ask, “What are non-governmental organizations”? The answer is, nothing more than political groups with their own agendas. The UN says these NGO’s will become the “Assembly of the People,” and will be the new governing authority of the UN.

The CGD described its goals by way of 12 principles:

1. Consolidation of all international agencies under the direct authority of the UN.
2. Registration of all transnational corporations and financial institutions, requiring an international code of conduct governing environmental and labor standards.
3. Consider various methods to create sources of revenue for the UN, such as taxes on international money transactions, taxes on flights, shipping fuels, and licensing of what the UN calls the “global commons.” This includes the use of air, water, and natural resources.
4. Would eliminate the permanent member status in the Security Council. The U.S. is currently a permanent member of the Security Council and has veto power over council resolutions. Principle Four would essentially eliminate the U.S.’ power and influence in that world body. Instead, the CGD called for creation of an “Assembly of the People” which would be hand-picked by the non-governmental organizations.
5. Would authorize a standing UN army.
6. Would require UN registration of all arms and the reduction ofall national armies “as part of a multinational global security system” under the authority of the UN.
7. Would require individual and national compliance with all UN “Human rights” treaties and declarations.
8. Would activate the UN Criminal Court and make it compulsory for all nations.
9. Called for a new institution to establish economic and environmental security by ensuring “Sustainable Development.”

10.        Would establish an International Environmental Court.

11.        Demands an international declaration stating that climate change is an essential global security interest and will create a team to allocate carbon emissions based on equal per-capita rights.

12.        Demands the cancellation of all debt owed by the poor nations, global poverty reductions, and the “equitable sharing” of global resources, as allocated by the UN.

As you can see, the Charter for Global Democracy was intended to give the UN domain over all of the earth’s land, air, and seas. In addition, it would give the UN the power to control all natural resources, wildlife, and energy sources. This control would allow the UN to tax everything that could be defined as having come from the earth’s resources – the “global commons.”

The UN would become the policing agency for the entire world. With its own standing army and corresponding reductions in all national armies, the UN’s word would be law. Remember that the UN will be governed by the “Assembly of the People” – their word will be law.

Later, in September of 2000, the UN held a “Millennium Summit” which was attended by literally every head of state and world leader (including then-President Bill Clinton). The original “Charter for Global Democracy” was renamed the “Millennium Declaration” and contained watered-down wording to achieve the same ends but to arouse less negative reaction. No vote or debate was allowed.

The original twelve principles were magically morphed into eight goals. These eight goals are described in much more politically correct terms, to keep from alarming the masses but the intent of the original twelve principles is still there.

Here are a few selected passages taken directly from 55/2 United Nations Millennium Declaration:

• To take concerted action to end illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, especially by making arms transfers more transparent and supporting regional disarmament measures.
• To make every effort to ensure the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol ~ and to embark on the required reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases.
• To take measures to ensure respect for and protection of the human rights of migrants, migrant workers and their families, to eliminate the increasing acts of racism and xenophobia in many societies.
• Global challenges must be managed in a way that distributes the costs and burdens fairly in accordance with basic principles of equity and social justice. Those who suffer or who benefit least deserve help from those who benefit most.
• Responsibility for managing worldwide economic and social development, as well as threats to international peace and security, must be shared among the nations of the world and should be exercised multilaterally. As the most universal and most representative organization in the world, the United Nations must play the central role.
• To strengthen respect for the rule of law in international as in national affairs and, in particular, to ensure compliance by Member States with the decisions of the International Court of Justice.

I selected those few items above from nine pages of single-spaced fluff. Most of the declaration is devoted to rhetoric that no one can quibble with – here are a couple of random examples, under item 20: “To develop and implement strategies that give young people everywhere a real chance to find decent and productive work,” and under item 25: “To strengthen the capacity of all our countries to implement the principles and practices of democracy and respect for human rights, including minority rights.” Who could oppose such noble goals?

I’d be less than honest if I didn’t state that thus far, Obama’s bill only ties us to the first goal. It is the one that proposes to “Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty.” But that is the goal that specifies 0.7 % of “gross national income.” This bill, if it becomes law, will ease the camel’s nose way under the tent, with more to surely follow.

Lest there be any accusation of a misinterpretation of the 0.7 % “assessment,” UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said it plainly in 2005, “Developed countries that have not already done so should establish timetables to achieve the 0.7 % target of gross national income for official development assistance by no later than 2015,” pretty plain, huh?

Consider what we now know about the UN’s effective stewardship of money, Iraq’s Oil for Food program, for example. It is now accepted fact that the program suffered from widespread corruption and abuse. Many UN officials have been accused of taking kickbacks and commissions, some amounting to millions of dollars. At least three indictments have been issued thus far and investigations are continuing. It has been estimated (by our Government Accounting Office) that Saddam Hussein’s regime generated over $10.1 billion dollars in illegal revenues. Even Kofi Annan and his son were among those included in accusations of kickbacks and corruption.

And regarding the effect of our foreign aid, it has been said that “U.S. handouts go into the hands of corrupt dictators who hate us and vote against us in the UN, and that only 30 percent of American foreign aid ever reaches the poor.”

Ask yourself this question: “Am I prepared to pay yet another new tax to the UN so they may distribute those funds to third-world leaders in expectation that it will find its way to those in need?”

Obama, following the directive of Kofi Annan, has taken the first step in preparing to assess U.S. taxpayers in a massive wealth redistribution scheme to provide welfare to third-world countries.

Is this the kind of “leadership” we want? Starting down the road to yielding our national security and our national sovereignty to the United Nations?

That is not an American position, it is a “global citizen’s” position.

I’m working on Obama’s Global Poverty Act (part C) right now and will post it tomorrow (I hope), BUT, I just received (thank you, Amazon) both the Obama Nation by Dr. Corsi, and Fleeced by Dick Morris, and I’ve got to at least start on Corsi’s book. Also received Buy Gold Now by Shayne McGuire - anybody else dabble in rare gold coins as investments or hobby?

I was just listening to Hugh Hewitt who invited bloggers to shoot holes in the Obama campaign’s “pushback” of Dr. Corsi’s allegations. He went over a couple, reading the pushback and pointing out the verifiable lies they used as rebuttal on both items. I’m sure that some on Townhall will do just that – that is, shoot holes in the pushback.

Re: Obama’s Global Poverty Act, I’ll have more details underpinning the global governance ambitions of the UN and the so-called rebuttal to the $845 billion dollar price tag.

I’m very pleased to report that Dr. Jerome Coursi was on Hannity and Colmes last evening touting his NYT best selling book “The Obama Nation.” As you may recall, he also co-wrote “Unfit for Command,” which was instrumental in “swift-boating” (in the positive sense) John Kerry’s military credentials in the 2004 election.

Dr. Coursey mentioned Obama’s Global Poverty Act and how it directs the President (whoever he or she is) to “the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal (UNMDG).” Included in the UNMDG, are MANY things that would be damaging to the U.S. Not the least of which would be an assessment of 0.7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) over 13 years, amounting to a tax on U.S. citizens of 845 BILLION dollars, which will be GIVEN TO THE UNITED NATIONS TO SPEND.

Dr. Coursey reiterated the dangers of Obama’s bill committing the U.S. to allow THE U.N. to dictate the amount of our foreign aid, but giving us no say in the distribution of the moneys (and we all know how efficient the U.N. is at handling money). We’ll be pressured to accede to the International Court, the Kyoto Treaty, the Law of the Sea Treaty, and other propositions that are not in our interest, but called for in the UNMDG. I’m doing more research on Obama’s bill and the UNMDG and will post more details on both soon.

It was gratifying to see some national exposure of a newsworthy item that has heretofore been “under the radar” of voter’s considerations when vetting a candidate for President.

This bill, more than anything else, provides the “smoking gun” evidence of Obama’s world government view. If he is elected, you can expect President Obama and a democrat Senate to ram this bill through and create the mechanism to cede many U.S. powers to the U.N. If the bill is passed, it is “unknown” whether President Bush’s will sign it.

Folks, I’m continuing to highlight this issue because I think that we’re nearing a “tipping point” in assuring that Obama will not be our next President. With the candidates within the margin of error on most polls, I believe that this issue could severely damage Obama’s chances, IF WIDELY KNOWN.

After all, how many of us are ready to give the United Nations authority over the government and the people of the United States? THE UNITED NATIONS?

Not me.

His campaign was relieved when Obama’s proctologist called to say that they found his head

Since Michelle doesn’t snore, burp, sweat, or fart, she simply must bi*ch or she’ll blow up

Jesus loves Obama, but everyone else thinks he’s an a**hole

Obama is so dense, light bends around him

If he were any more stupid, he’d have to be watered twice a week

He’s a gross ignoramus, that’s 144 times worse than an ordinary ignoramus

For Obama, everything is possible except skiing through revolving doors

Remember Obama, a closed mouth gathers no feet

Obama tried to get a new car for Michelle, but the dealer wouldn’t take her (rimshot)

Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool

Obama has delusions of adequacy

Obama’s philosophy: “sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

And never, NEVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night

And a few political quotes

Before he clinched the nomination, the founders of Ben & Jerry's ice cream decided to endorse Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, which makes sense because Baracky Road is a catchier name for an ice cream than Pantsuits and Cream." --Conan O'Brien

"Senator Obama answered doubts about his inexperience by saying he has gained tremendous insight from his work as a community organizer, civil rights attorney, constitutional law professor, key club president, 4H treasurer, lunch room monitor, two years of jazz, and four years of tap." --Amy Poehler

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free! - P.J. O'Rourke

In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other. - Voltaire (1764)

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul. -.George Bernard Shaw

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man ....which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -G Gordon Liddy

Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. - James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)

Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries. - Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. - P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. - Ronald Reagan (1986)

To further define that statement and lay groundwork for my hypothesis, first I need to identify who is “us” and who is “them.” The “us” and “them” I’m referring to are the politically informed and the uninformed. And since I’m writing this piece, I get to define the subtexts that qualify an individual as one or the other. Certainly, I’m working within dictionary definitions, but will further define the methods one may use to become informed. Here’s the dictionary definition (from MSN Encarta online) of informed:

1. Having enough information to understand something: having sufficient and sufficiently reliable information or knowledge to be able to understand a subject or situation and make appropriate judgments or decisions regarding it (informed citizens)

2. Based on accurate knowledge: based on an accurate knowledge and understanding of the situation or subject in question (an informed decision)

Let me first state that I won’t simply distribute left/liberal/democrats into the uninformed category and right/conservative/republicans into the informed group. That’s simply not accurate. There are informed liberals and informed democrats. They are informed, but they are (apparently) incapable of lucid thought due to any number of physical or emotional reasons, thus their informed, but incorrect positions. But at least they did some research, for that I can respect them.

No, the voters I am most concerned about are the uninformed of all persuasions. The uninformed have their reasons for being uninformed: I’m “too busy,” I don’t care, both candidates stink, my vote is insignificant, etc.

In MY perfect world, they wouldn’t be allowed to vote. But alas, the world is not perfect and these cretins’ vote will count just like yours and mine. They’ll vote based on name recognition, on skin color, on party affiliation, and an number of other totally illogical reasons to select perhaps the single most important person on the planet.

Our president, man or woman, black or white, will have an impact on every individual living or working in the United States in many ways.  Some will be more affected than others, but the President and the policies that he/she embraces will affect us all. Is selecting that person not important? Isn’t that decision at least as important as where to buy a car, which flat screen TV to buy, or which college our children attend? Decisions that we may agonize over and research for days.

Why then, are so many voters averse to doing some research into the candidates in order to make an informed decision? Unfortunately, many uninformed voters believe themselves to be informed voters. Why, because their information comes entirely from the Mainstream Media (MSM) consisting of print media and network television. By now, I believe it to be an unassailable fact that the MSM in the United States is not objective; they lean liberal and always have. They choose not to publish (or otherwise hide) negative stories about liberals and democrats (John Edwards is the most recent example of that), and choose not to report positive news about the Iraq war or anything at all positive about President Bush and republicans. If the only news that a person hears or sees is tainted, how can that individual make a truly informed decision? That’s easy, they can’t.

And that, dear friend, is what worries me.

Results from two separate nationwide surveys of the general public provide some interesting information as to where voters got their information.

In both surveys, over 80 percent of respondents said that television and newspapers or magazines were personally important for gathering political information. Roughly 77 percent said that they thought political parties and candidates' campaigns were also important to them. Following relatively close behind these were community organizations, radio, and friends, family and coworkers.

This post is an unabashed attempt to drive readers to my other blog “The Future-seeing Device.” It portrays the U.S. as it will be in the future IF the liberals gain control. The following predictions are a sampling of what’s on the Future blog. If you like these, there’s a link at the end to take you there. The predictions are (hopefully) humorous satire.

The Environment

The government has mandated the reduction of personal body temperatures from 98.6 to 97.4 to reduce global warming. Any citizen with a temperature above the baseline (97.4) is subject to ice water enemas until body temperature returns to “normal.”

Citizens are required to skip every other breath (to reduce CO2 emissions) and to release flatulence only in their own homes (or be fitted with a personal fart-scrubber).

Global warming advocate Al Gore filed suit to have each recording station’s devices tested to find any uncounted degrees that might be left hanging about. West Palm Beach monitoring officials had difficulty in identifying whether a temperature had been recorded in Celsius or Fahrenheit (some stations reported both, calling the results into question).

Immigration

The Department of Compassion has started another progressive program, called the “level playing field” program. It applies to all citizens, regardless of their native language or country of origin. Effective Jan. 1, all government documents and signage will be produced in Esperanto only, thus removing any advantage that English-speaking citizens would have had over disadvantaged immigrants. “We just want everyone to have an equal opportunity,” said Dr. Pepe Roni.

As a result of the new immigration policies, Mexico’s entire population has immigrated to the U.S. - Mexico is now empty.

With large concentrations of new citizens flexing their political muscle, the state previously known as “Texas” will be renamed “Texico,” California is being renamed “Tacofornia,” and efforts are underway in Arizona to change that state’s name to “Refried Arizona.”

Healthcare

Though largely unsuccessful in his previous attempts, Minister of Health W. E. Coyote, is leading the research to find a vaccine for the elusive Roadrunner strain of bird-flu.

As a result of his personal participation in the bird-flu research, Mr. Coyote contracted the dreaded “meep meep” virus and periodically has relapses causing unusual accidental injuries (mostly involving mountains, jet power, or TNT).

The new drug powerhouse Price-Spitzer, Inc. has received FDA approval for two new drugs, Obamacillin and Obamamycin. Dubbed the “Messiah Drugs”, they have been responsible for complete eradication of jock itch, yeast infections, hair loss, and constipation.

Transportation

Personal mobility utilizes vehicles manufactured by Yugo Ltd. The most popular model, the “Yugo-girl”, runs fine for 28 days, then becomes uncooperative and hard to start for a few days. Yugo recommends that men avoid contact with this model during the cranky period.

Gasoline and diesel fuels have been replaced by an inexpensive renewable resource – i.e., legume (bean) power. Efficiency is excellent; thirty-two ounces (2 16oz cans) of navy beans will power a vehicle for about 400 miles and about $5 will “gas up” (in the truest sense) at any convenience store or truck stop.

Performance-minded drivers will find that jalapeno ranch beans provide maximum power but the excessively hot gasses tend to really, really, burn the exhaust pipe.

Entertainment

The Population

On July 30^th, Candidate Obama said “There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy. Making sure your tires are properly inflated — simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling — if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You’d actually save just as much!”

Oh, really? Let’s look at that more closely (for the time being, I'm only going to address the 3% tire inflation aspect):

Under-inflated tires can lower gas mileage by 0.4 percent for every 1 psi (pounds per square inch) drop in pressure of all four tires. (Car Care.org)

For a recommended tire pressure of 30 psi (a fairly average norm), a 3 percent underinflation would require the tire to be at 22.5 psi.  Using the Car Care formula (3%/.4% = 7.5 psi) and subtracting the 7.5 from 30 yields 22.5 psi. And note that the Car Care formula specifically states “of all four tires.”

That’s low enough to be felt in the handling of the car (assuming that you’re conscious), but may not be noticeable by a casual glance at the visual profile of the tire.

On a whim, I just checked my four on-the-ground tires and found them to be 31, 30, 29.5, 29.5. Proper inflation is 30 psi for these tires on my crossover SUV. I haven’t checked my tires, nor has the car been to a dealer for service in three months. In other words, I could not participate in the 3 % improvement that Obama talks about.

In order for that 3 % improvement to offset a sizeable portion of the oil that is anticipated from new drilling, how many autos would have to be currently driving around underinflated by roughly 6-8 psi? U.S. Dept. of Transportation says that there are 62,000,000 registered vehicles on America’s roads. It’s going to take a high percentage of those vehicles having four underinflated tires to add up to a savings equivalent to “all the oil they’re talking about getting off drilling.”

I’d sure like to see the numbers that the Obama campaign used to arrive at that statement. If we could get their source numbers and verify them, and arrive at a result reasonably close to justifying that statement, I’ll contribute $200 to the Obama campaign.