RealDealPolitics.com

There are many derogatory jokes about red necks, a non-protected species, but if you think about it, which few do, they are the very same people that:
1. Repair your car or boat
2. Fix your plumbing
3. Raise your beef and dairy cattle
4. Grow your fruit
5. Harvest your grains
6. Build your house (or at least supervise those who do)
7. Make your beer and whisky
8. Rewire your electricity
9. Provide your lawn service
10. Protect your neighborhood with a shotgun

How long do you think you would make it without rednecks?

Out of the remaining politicians looking to get the GOP nomination, and that’s what some of them are, just politicians, we know that two of them have changed their mind or seem ambivalent on many issues of the day:  Romney and Gingrich.  There are also two left that have no record of reversal on any of the issues:  Paul and Santorum.

 

Representative Ron Paul is a great congressman and has been a good ally in the fight for limited government, less taxes, less spending, and less government intrusion.  Paul’s public record shows no record of flip flops, unlike Gingrich or Romney, and consequently seems very congruent to the words that he speaks.

Paul’s “stick our head in the sand” foreign policy scares the heck out of conservatives, but otherwise appeals to many liberals and moderates.  His common-sense limited government views are attractive to people across the political spectrum.

Paul, however, is somewhat unelectable as a presidential candidate.  He is old, has wrinkles, a few strands of white hair, and doesn’t “look presidential.”  I apologize for the reality check but that is the fact of the matter.  He comes across as a charming, doddering, old grandfather-type, which is very appealing to some people, but it doesn’t make him electable.

Given that nobody even knows what Romney or Gingrich actually stand for anymore, the stage has centered on former Senator Rick Santorum.  He has no set of flip flops, environmental or otherwise, unlike the two former frontrunners, Gingrich and Romney.  Oh and let’s not forget, he just swept three states, including an annihilation of the competition in the “show-me-state,” to the tune of 55%.

Just when you thought the race was almost over, and the establishment candidate, Romney, was about to run away with it, a former Senator that is just as knowledgeable on the issues, almost as good looking, and has adequate hair to be elected, has entered from stage right.

It is true that Santorum was fired from his job in the Senate in 2006 by an 18% margin. However, we know that the 2006 elections were a referendum against President George Bush, for his Big Government policies and “war-mongering” in the Middle East.  Some great senators such as Santorum and George Allen (VA) were casualties of this referendum.

American voters smartened up again in the last general election, having realized what a huge mistake Obama has been. If the 2006 election had been in 2010, Santorum and Allen would have likely won in landslides.  When analyzing an election, you always need to take into account the circumstances and the ruling party or president at the time.

The fact that Santorum lost his job is a liability to his candidacy, but appears to be his only real problem.  Normally, the lack of executive (state governor or VP) experience is somewhat of downfall as well, but given the fraudulent elections of Obama and former President John Kennedy (RIP), senatorial experience seems to be adequate.

Years ago, in 2004, I stood outside the voting precinct handing out GOP propaganda, primarily because I was rightfully horrified by the thought of a John Kerry presidency.  My democrat party counterpart engaged me in a discussion of our differences, and I never forgot what he said.

The democrat propagandist was averse to the incumbent President because Bush was a “moron,” primarily.  He had problems with the fact that someone that stupid could be president of the US.  I countered by saying that the president doesn’t need to be a genius, just someone with a vision, and the judgment to put smart people in charge of the cabinet positions, which Bush certainly did.

Another thing I did not forget the democrat saying was that if it were Rick Santorum running for president, he would have probably voted for him.  The democrat said, “Santorum, now that guy is smart. I can see voting for him.” Whoa!  A democrat would have voted for Santorum because he is one of few politicians that actually is intelligent. If you have heard him in a debate, then you understand.

I couldn’t believe my ears at the time, but he was serious, and he had a good point.  Many democrats think they’re intelligent, primarily because they can regurgitate the brainwashing they received from the liberal media and public schools.  Some of them actually are intelligent and just lean socialist, under the faulty conception that socialism can work on a national scale, which has been proven false. In other words, their historical notions are inaccurate.

But the fact that a democrat would vote for a die-hard, solid, unapologetic conservative because such a politician not only seems smart, but is clearly intelligent and has a solid grasp of the issues, was an awakening for me.  Democrats and others voted for Obama because they thought he was smart, which he really isn’t but apparently has done a good job convincing many in the public that he is of higher intelligence, with some help from the media that is in love with him.

Let’s go back to the available list of candidates.  Do you think any democrat would ever vote for Gingrich?  There is evidence that this would never happen, given his consistent opposition to the democrat party.  It is true that Newt passed some great measures in cutting government spending and welfare reform, all of which Clinton took credit for regardless of the fact that Congress would have overrode his veto.  However, all of the measures were very conservative and Newt has little support outside the GOP.

We already covered Ron Paul, a great congressman and good man, but he seems unelectable.  Move on to Mitt Romney, this year’s establishment candidate.  He has many sets of flip flops on just about every major issue from health care to environmentalism, much like Newt.  However, he is also (gasp) a Mormon, something that doesn’t sit too well with many people.  I have nothing against the church of LDS, but that church is a very small minority in the country, and many consider it a cult.  We are just talking about practical electability here, and sadly, certain religions are a liability.

Here we go around again, full circle to Rick Santorum, who recently said “when the government gives you rights, the government can take them away.”  Let’s face the fact that there is nothing Santorum says that doesn’t make sense.  Foreign policy, domestic policy, all of it is hard to argue with.  So why does the establishment dislike Santorum?  Primarily because he is a true conservative, and the only one left in the GOP race. The establishment desires someone to preside over the decline of America, not a president that might reverse it.

There are four candidates left in this race to oust Obama, and two are proven flip-floppers that will likely not get any votes from registered democrats.  The third is a libertarian that is portrayed as an old clown, and the fourth is a common-sense conservative who has very few drawbacks other than his devout Catholicism and unelection from the Senate.  However, recall that Kennedy also unequivocally proclaimed himself as a Catholic before his fraudulent election as president.

Yes, we realize the likelihood of getting a GOP candidate fraudulently elected is very slim, since those tactics are pretty much reserved for the democrat party. Any republican fraud would be met with the greatest media outrage of all time, while jack-ass-party fraud tactics go largely ignored by the media. That is simply the situation we are in.

However, the appeal of a smart conservative that has command of the issues and can articulate his positions on such can be felt across the political spectrum.  Many democrats, Hispanics, independents, and other special interest groups could be intrigued and interested in Mr. Santorum because of his failure to toe the party line, but instead stand up for his beliefs and principles.

The case being made here is that Senator Santorum, despite his two drawbacks, could be the most electable republican candidate for president this year.  If you can get past his devout Catholicism and his failure to be elected to a third term in the Senate, the latter of which can be blamed on the referendum on GW Bush, then what are the remaining problems? None.

What you have in Rick Santorum is a solid, common-sense, “compassionate” conservative, that is simply unapologetic for his beliefs and principles.  The reason I enclosed the above word in quotations is that the real meaning of “compassionate” is often misinterpreted because of GW Bush using it as a term to propagate a big government socialist agenda under the Republican banner.  Real compassion means getting people off of welfare with jobs, not enrolling them as wards of a state which increases spending.

But Santorum believes in no such socialism as far as we know.  He hasn’t changed his views on the various issues of the day, in order to become more popular or likeable. In fact, he admitted the other day that he has not lost his principles, which the two former front-runners apparently have. Now, Santorum might be the frontrunner, after sweeping CO, MO, and MN.

There is more to it than just being the frontrunner of the day, however.  It seems very likely, given the intelligence of Santorum that even democrats admit to, that he would destroy Obama in any debate.  That of course, may never happen, and might in fact be a pipe dream.  Obama is not required to participate in a debate.  Obama has nothing to gain from a debate, since any of the remaining GOP candidates would utterly demolish him, teleprompter or not.

Instead, Obama will happily continue to let the media prop him up as a legitimate statesman, rather than the miserable failure that he really is, and the “mainstream” media will be delighted to continue endorsing him as some kind of messiah, even as their ratings go down the tubes.  That is because they have an agenda that is the same as that of Obama: presiding over the death and destruction of America.  Santorum has other plans, and that’s a good enough reason to get my vote.

The following comments were recently made regarding Rick Santorum:

What They Say

“Rick won’t apologize for America being great, and he will defend Israel. He didn’t shy away from taking on the partial-birth abortion ban or welfare reform, and he’s certainly not going to shy away from getting this country back on track.” — Kim Lehman, Iowa’s National Republican Committeewoman and former president of Iowa Right to Life

“Not many politicians have spine; this one does.” — Talk-show host Glenn Beck, introducing Santorum before a June interview on Fox News

The Democrats have said that the Occupy Party was their answer to and “just like” the Tea Party. You decide…….

REPORTED	OCCUPY PARTY	TEA PARTY
ARRESTS	4149+	0
DEATHS	7	0
RAPES	12	0
ARSON DAMAGE	$10,000,000.00	$0
PUBLIC DEFECATION	YES	NO
ANTISEMITIC RANTS	12	0
COST TO TAXPAYERS (11/9)	$19,327,487..00+	$0
PUBLIC MASTURBATION	3	0
MOLOTOV COCKTAILS THROWN	10	0
FIGHTS STARTED	YES	NO
CHILDREN EXPLOITED	YES	NO
POLICE CARS DAMAGED	2	0
PUBLIC DRUNKENNESS	YES	NO
DRUG POSSESSION ARREST	YES	NO
CONCEALED WEAPON ARREST	YES	NO
DRUG OVERDOSE	YES	NO
THEFTS	YES	NO
BURGLARIES	YES	NO
VANDALISM ARREST	YES	NO
TRESPASSING ARREST	YES	NO
NON FATAL SHOOTINGS	1	0
PUBLIC URINATION	YES	NO
URINATION ON OTHERS	YES	NO
ISRAELI FLAGS BURNED	2	0
AMERICAN FLAGS BURNED	1	0
AMERICAN FLAGS DANCED ON	1	0
AMERICAN FLAGS DESECRATION	25	0
FELONY ASSAULT ON AN EMT	1	0
HEAD/BODY LICE OUTBREAKS	1	0
TUBERCULOSIS OUTBREAKS	1	0
MURDER	1	0
SUICIDE	1	0
SHOTS FIRED AT WHITE HOUSE	1	0
SCABIES OUTBREAKS	1	0
OBAMA ENDORSED	YES	NO
PELOSI ENDORSED	YES	NO
CAIR ENDORSED	YES	NO
SOCIALIST PARTY ENDORSED	YES	NO
NAZI PARTY ENDORSED	YES	NO
MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD ENDORSED	YES	NO
COMMUNIST PARTY ENDORSED	YES	NO
BIDEN ENDORSED	YES	NO
HUGO CHAVEZ ENDORSED	YES	NO
BLACK PANTHERS ENDORSED	YES	NO
HEZBOLLAH ENDORSED	YES	NO
MARXIST UNION ENDORSED	YES	NO
9/11 TRUTHER ENDORSED	YES	NO
BOLSHEVIK ENDORSED	YES	NO
IRAN GOVERNMENT ENDORSED	YES	NO
AYATOLLAH ENDORSED	YES	NO
NORTH KOREA ENDORSED	YES	NO
FARRAKHAN ENDORSED	YES	NO
NATION OF ISLAM ENDORSED	YES	NO

 Yup, now I see the similarities……..

Now that Hermann Cain has established himself as a leading contender in the GOP Presidential Primary, it’s time for the left wing to start attacking him.

They won’t attack him on his record of running successful businesses or his common sense political views however; it’s time to get personal.

Like Clarence Thomas, who the leftists still hate vehemently, they brought up some old sexual harassment allegations against Cain that were apparently never proven.

The facts seem to be that Cain, as president of the National Restaurant Association, fired a woman, who retaliated with a sexual harassment claim, in order to get some severance pay, which she then received in order to dismiss the matter.

If you’re not familiar with this type of business, what happens especially with large corporate organizations, is they will consider the cost of sending the CEO to court to defend charges versus a payoff to shut up the alleged victims. The cost of the settlement normally pales in comparison to that of the legal battle, which can drag out into massive attorney fees, not to mention horrible publicity for the executive and the company. Even if the charges have no substantiation, some kind of settlement is always far cheaper.

Why is this subject so important anyway? It’s not, but to the Democrat-controlled media it is a big part of their smear campaign against Cain.

It wasn’t important that Bill Clinton had numerous sexual harassment allegations against him, some of which included rape-like cases, rather than just “inappropriate comments” that Cain and Thomas were accused of. They tried to cover up the Weiner episodes and instead go after the accusers to vilify them instead.

It wasn’t important that Obama admitted in his book before being fraudulently elected, that he had been a drug abuser in college. Who cares if the person controlling the world’s largest nuclear arsenal is a drug abuser?

Things like that aren’t important. What is important is to smear conservatives on unsubstantiated personal attacks, because you can’t beat them on the issues.

In a disgustingly biased personal attack on Cain, posing as an actual news article in the Huffington Post titled “Intellectual Rigor vs Rigor Mortis,” the writer tries to portray Cain as some kind of idiot that would get wasted by the intellectually superior Obama in a debate.

No really, this is what they wrote about. The former CEO of a successful restaurant chain and the major national trade association for restaurants, is some kind of a dunce.

Obama, who has never run anything except a successful campaign, would beat up on Cain like Ali vs Urkel, it claims.

Here’s an excerpt:
“Beauty and brains against bigotry and bias. Truffle against trifle. You get the point. Obama does his homework and is not afraid of facts. But taking a look at Cain’s political positions, there is a consistent pattern of obstinate wrongheadedness.”

Wow, no bias there. The Obama “beauty and brains” comment is so nauseating that it’s hard to even read it, or any of the rest of that piece of garbage disguised as an article, but it was worth quoting just so you can see their vile, slanted, hatred towards conservatives.

Obama isn’t afraid of the facts that he has almost completely destroyed the US economy, and would have succeeded by now if the GOP hadn’t taken control of the house? Or the fact that he increased federal spending by over 30% his first year in office? Or the fact that he’s getting beat in the polls by a generic GOP candidate?

There are few facts that Obama should not be frightened about, such as the majority of the media who support him and his communist policies. Or the fact that he will likely raise more money from unknown sources than his opponent in next year’s election.

By far the majority of real facts do not reveal anything positive about Obama or his ability to run anything except a successful campaign using other people’s money.

Hermann Cain is infinitely more qualified than Obama to run anything, including his mouth. Cain actually understands how businesses operate and create jobs and wealth, since that is what he spent his career doing.

Obama only knows how to rob people of their wealth so that the government can spend it, while running his mouth about how great he is for doing so.

One of the best racist liberal rants about Cain is that “he knows his place in the back of the bus.” If the back of the bus includes being a CEO for a multimillion dollar company, maybe more people should be headed for the back seat.

Sponsors:  CNN and the Western Republican Leadership Conference

Location:  Sands Expo Convention Center, Las Vegas, NV

Moderator:  Anderson Cooper (90)

Participants:  Gov Mitt Romney, Gov Rick Perry, CEO Herman Cain, Sen Rick Santorum, Rep Newt Gingrich, Rep Ron Paul, Rep Michele Bachmann (Gov Huntsman boycotted due to date changes.)

The debate began with Anderson Cooper’s open-ended invitation for everyone to attack Hermann Cain, an offer they all took him up on.  Then it proceeded with quarreling and attacking, mostly involving Romney and Perry, and ended with Newt disapproving of the constant squabbling during the debate.

 

The following is a list of topics to choose from in this article. Underlined comments in the section represent best answers given.

Ranking the Debaters and Summary

Taxes and Cain’s 999 Plan

Obamacare Alternatives and How to Implement Them

How to Secure the Mexican Border

Opening a National Nuclear Depository at Yucca Mountain

Nevada Devastated by Real Estate Bubble

The “Occupy Wall Street” Idiots

Should a Candidate be Judged on Religion

Proposed Defense Budget Cut of $500 Billion

Foreign Aid: Should it Continue?

Who Can Beat Obama in the Presidential Election?

Conclusion

 

Ranking the Debaters

This is how the candidates performed and their best answers or quotes.  Note, these are not a ranking of the candidates themselves, just how they performed in the debate.

Rank	Candidate	Notes	Comment or Quote
1	Newt Gingrich, Former Speaker of the House	Smartest person on stage, best debater, with most sense and knowledge	“The idea that we have a bunch of historically illiterate politicians, who have no sophistication about national security trying to make a numerical decision about the size of our defense budget, tells you everything you need to know about the bankruptcy of the current power to lead in this country, in both parties… to say I’m gonna put the security of the US against some arbitrary budget number, is suicidally stupid.” “Maximizing bickering is probably not the best road to the White House.”

2

Ron Paul, House Rep from Texas

Hard to argue with his limited government common sense policies.  Had best responses in several categories, see right column

“Too much government is the problem… whenever government gets involved in something, the prices go up.”Paul wants to remove the incentives for illegal aliens to be here, and to stop the group mentality of giving to one group (race) of people and removing benefits from another, and also that we should worry more about securing our own border than the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.Paul questioned the right of 49 other states to punish one state by dumping their garbage in it. The private companies should solve it, and energy shouldn’t be subsidized. “Foreign aid is where you take money from poor people in this country and give it to rich people in other countries, where they use it to build weapons of war.”

3	Mitt Romney, former Mass Governor	Co-smartest person, wealth of knowledge on issues.  Too much bickering with Perry	Romney said that Nevada should be able to say no if they don’t want the nuclear storage at Yucca, and the energy companies should give them a good deal to change their mind.  States could have competing bids if Nevada doesn’t want it.Romney pointed out that we’re borrowing money from China and handing it over to other countries.
4	Rick Santorum, former Penn Senator	Also very sharp, with great specific knowledge on issues, but too much bickering.	Santorum said the voters should pay attention to the candidate’s values and what their faith teaches them about how to live their lives.Santorum said that less than half the people in a recent Pew poll could even name one of the GOP candidates.  He stated his track record as winning twice in the swing-state of Pennsylvania, against Democrat incumbents, as an unabashed conservative.
5	Michele Bachman, House Rep from Minn	Smart and interesting, but gave too many specifics on what’s wrong, with no specifics on how to fix	Bachmann said you can’t give congress a new tax because they won’t get rid of the old one and they’ll raise the rate on it, whatever it may be. Her plan, which was not specified, calls for abolishing the income tax and flattening it for all Americans, but everyone should pay something.Bachmann’s take was a bit different, as she believes it already costs $118 billion per year for our government to take care of illegal immigrants, robbing each American household of about $1000 per year.
6	Hermann Cain, former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza	Didn’t have time to adequately defend and explain his economic plan, seemed discouraged after initial attack.	Cain had few allies, but defended his plan, said the math is available on his web site, and told the other candidates they were trying to mix apples and oranges, as in national and state sales taxes.  He emphasized removing the 10 million word tax plan with something simple that would create jobs.Cain said that Wall St didn’t put in place failed economic policies or destroy the economy, and they’re taking out their frustration in the wrong place. They should be going to the White House.
7	Rick Perry, current Governor of Texas	Another bad night, got too involved personally with Romney, and anger was showing	Perry said we need an administration that doesn’t block our ability to harvest our own energy, so we can create jobs and have energy independence.Perry stated that we could build a fence, but it would take 15 years and $30 billion, but in the meantime we need boots on the ground.  A wiser expenditure would be to build fences in places where it makes sense, and use predator drones to monitor the entire border and give real time information to soldiers on the ground.

 

Details of the debate are listed below by category.  Best answers are underlined.

 

Taxes and Cain’s 999 Plan

Bachmann said you can’t give congress a new tax because they won’t get rid of the old one and they’ll raise the rate on it, whatever it may be. Her plan, which was not specified, calls for abolishing the income tax and flattening it for all Americans, however, everyone should pay, even if it’s just one dollar, just for the benefit of living here. Obama’s plan is destroying the economy.

Others such as Perry and Romney told Cain his plan “wouldn’t fly” because people would have to pay a national and state sales tax, in fact doubling purchase tax in some states.  They also claimed it was a “regressive tax” that would increase burden on middle class, raise rates, and not account for family support.

Cain had few allies, but defended his plan, said the math is available on his web site, and told the other candidates they were trying to mix apples and oranges, as in national and state sales taxes.  He emphasized removing the 10 million word tax plan with something simple that would create jobs.

The other candidates sounded kind of slow, by pretending they did not realize there’s a difference between the two, but they claimed to not understand it.  Newt defended the plan as bold, but said it would take several years to think it through.

The next invitation Cooper issued was for Perry and Romney to attack each other since Perry had previously called Romney a failure as governor.

Perry said we need an administration that doesn’t block our ability to harvest our own energy, so we can create jobs and have energy independence, to which Romney agreed.  Romney defended Romneycare from various attacks, as not being the basis for Obamacare.

Newt pointed out a Boston Herald report that the state is fining small businesses $3000 each, because their $750 per month health care plan is inadequate to the bureaucrats in Boston.  He said it was a faulty plan because it was designed in a top-down, big government fashion.  It also would not have worked in other states that didn’t have such an expensive federal Medicaid donation.

 

Obamacare Alternatives and How to Implement Them

All candidates agreed that Obamacare needs to be repealed, and offered solutions where patients and doctors could make decisions rather than the government.

Rep. Paul summarized the mutual feelings best: “Too much government is the problem… whenever government gets involved in something, the prices go up.”

At this point, Perry suddenly turned to Romney and brought up the same accusation from 4 years ago, that Romney had hired illegal aliens to work on his property (which McCain had, with the same certainty, accused of Romney, along with having a pink house, both of which Romney had denied.)

Romney, first laughed off the comment, then after being repeatedly interrupted by Perry in his defense of this, proceeded to lecture Perry on the rules of debate, told Perry he might be testy after some tough debates, and that if Perry wants to be president, he should learn to let other people speak. Perry received some boos during his interruptions.

 

How to Secure the Mexican Border

In the next question, Cooper stated that Cain had said at one point he would build an electrified fence on the Mexican border, but later said it was a joke, then again said he meant it. Cooper asked him to clarify.

Cain responded that we should secure the entire border with a fence, and use technology and boots on the ground to monitor it.  He also wants to improve the existing path to citizenship and enforce current immigration laws.

When asked if he would build a fence, Perry stated that we could build a fence, but it would take 15 years and $30 billion, but in the meantime we need boots on the ground.  A wiser expenditure would be to build fences in places where it makes sense, and use predator drones to monitor the entire border and give real time information to soldiers on the ground.

Bachmann’s take was a bit different, as she believes it already costs $118 billion per year for our government to take care of illegal immigrants, robbing each American household of about $1000 per year.  Therefore she would build a fence along the entire border, and remove taxpayer subsidies for illegal aliens.

Romney basically agreed with a fence and personnel to secure the border, and noted that 400 million are waiting to come here legally, and he would prefer they come in that way.  He also claimed that illegal immigration to Texas had increased 60% under Perry because of the “magnets” like in-state tuition for children of illegal immigrants.

Cooper then of course raised the question of how they will woo the Latino vote after the racist act of closing off the border.  Newt said that people that came here legally should have the same America as everyone else.

Paul wants to remove the incentives for illegal aliens to be here, and to stop the group mentality of giving to one group (race) of people and removing benefits from another, and also that we should worry more about securing our own border than the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Cain said people of all color need a growing economy.  Perry said using our own energy resources would create jobs for them, but the current administration wants energy prices to go up instead. None of the candidates would repeal the 14^th amendment which protects “anchor babies.”

 

Opening a National Nuclear Depository at Yucca Mountain

Obviously a controversial topic in Nevada, there were some well thought out answers for this issue, which would require all nuclear waste in the nation to be hauled to Yucca mountain for storage.

Newt said we need to find a place to keep the waste geologically safe for however many thousands of years, and previous studies suggested Yucca was such a place.

Paul questioned the right of 49 other states to punish one state by dumping their garbage in it. The private companies should solve it, and energy shouldn’t be subsidized.

Romney said that Nevada should be able to say no if they don’t want the nuclear storage at Yucca, and the energy companies should give them a good deal to change their mind.  States could have competing bids if Nevada doesn’t want it.

Perry, in a rare moment, said “Mitt has hit this nail on the head,” and also agreed with Paul’s take.

 

Nevada Devastated by Real Estate Bubble

Santorum first claimed that everyone else on the stage supported the TARP bailout plan, except for himself, to which he was met immediately with shouts of “Wrong” by Perry and Cain.  The former senator insisted that Perry wrote a letter to congress to pass it on the day of the vote. He added that we need to let the markets work and not have managed failure.

Perry stated his letter was not to pass TARP, but to decrease regulations and taxes on business.

Romney disapproved of the idea that Washington DC can help the economy by intervening.

Cain said he supported the concept of TARP, but not how it was used by the administration.

Bachmann used this opportunity to appeal to women who are at the end of their rope and losing their homes where they raise children.

 

The “Occupy Wall Street” Idiots

Cooper quoted Cain as saying, “don’t blame banks or Wall Street; blame yourselves.”

Cain said that Wall St didn’t put in place failed economic policies or destroy the economy, and they’re taking out their frustration in the wrong place. They should be going to the White House.

Paul would blame Wall St, the White House, and the Federal Reserve. The bailouts from both parties went to big banks that were ripping people off. They should have given the money to people losing their houses, not the banks.  He added that the government is not capable of managing almost anything.

Romney pointed out that Obama has failed us on the economy, because he has no idea how the economy works or how to create jobs.  Median income has dropped 12% in the last three years.

 

Should a Candidate be Judged on Religion

Cooper brought up the controversy surrounding Pastor Robert Jeffress, who supports Rick Perry, saying publicly that Mormonism is a cult, and asked if the voters should pay attention to the religion.

Santorum said the voters should pay attention to the candidate’s values and what their faith teaches them about how to live their lives.  He said the road to salvation is not applicable to presidency, but the religion does have an impact on how the president will govern with respect to values.

Newt said none should judge others with their approach to faith, but because we are endowed by our creator with rights, who they pray to does matter.

Perry stated clearly that he did not believe the pastor’s remark about Mormonism, and Romney said he had heard worse disparaging comments about his faith.

 

Proposed Defense Budget Cut of $500 Billion

Bachmann said we’re losing international respect, as evidenced by an assassination attempt from Iran on US soil, and the president starting a conflict in a 4^th foreign country was stretching our troops too thin.  Her number one issue would be dealing with Iran and their nuclear ambitions.

Newt had the rant of the night by far on this one, and it’s worth quoting, “…look at this entire model of a super-committee, they have some magic number for us to get to, and if we don’t, then we all have to shoot ourselves in the head.  Then they’ll come back with the idea that we merely cut off our right leg, and then we’ll be grateful that they’re only semi-stupid…The idea that we have a bunch of historically illiterate politicians, who have no sophistication about national security trying to make a numerical decision about the size of our defense budget, tells you everything you need to know about the bankruptcy of the current power to lead in this country, in both parties….  We need figure out what threatens us, and find strategies to defend them… I’m a hawk, but I’m a cheap hawk… to say I’m gonna put the security of the US against some arbitrary budget number, is suicidally stupid.” This rant was met with intermittent but thunderous applause after each point.

Paul said he doesn’t want to cut defense, but would like to retract many of our troops stationed in Korea, Germany, Japan, and other places where we have no business. “The financial calamity is going to be worse than someone trying to invade us.”

 

Foreign Aid: Should it Continue?

Perry would like to have a serious discussion about foreign aid and funding the UN.

Romney pointed out that we’re borrowing money from China and handing it over to other countries. 

Paul said, “Foreign aid is where you take money from poor people in this country and give it to rich people in other countries, where they use it to build weapons of war.”

Bachmann said we shouldn’t cut foreign military aid to Israel, and we should be reimbursed by these nations which we have “liberated.”

Cain would like peace through strength, and start giving money to our friends instead of our enemies.

 

Who Can Beat Obama in the Presidential Election?

Cooper said a poll stated that 40% think Romney has the best chance, and Santorum only 1%. He asked if voters should go with the person they think can win.

Santorum said that less than half the people in a recent Pew poll could even name one of the GOP candidates.  He stated his track record as winning twice in the swing-state of Pennsylvania, against Democrat incumbents, as an unabashed conservative.  He neglected to mention that he didn’t win his last election, which in fact was more of an indictment on Bush and the entire GOP.

Romney stated his credentials as not spending his entire life in politics, but also as someone that created jobs in the private sector, and lowered unemployment to 4.7% in Mass as governor. He also stated that Perry supported Al Gore and 40% of Texas job growth involved illegal aliens.

Perry defended that he had created more jobs in 2 months in Texas than Mass has during Romney’s tenure, and said Romney was 47^th in job growth.

Bachmann claimed Obama will definitely be a one-term president.  She desires bold colors rather than pastels.

Newt said, “Maximizing bickering is probably not the best road to the White House,” referring to the debate format of back and forth quarreling. The former House Speaker said he would be strongest on sheer substance, and would like seven 3-hour debates, with no moderator, just a timekeeper.  He would like to reestablish American values.

 

Conclusion

The closing remark by Newt, who seems to be the father of all the bickering children on stage, sums up the whole discussion.  Cain still refuses to attack other GOP candidates, but needs to do a better job of defending his tax and economic policies to have a chance.

The other candidates could learn from the wisdom of Newt and Ronald Reagan, but instead choose to attack each other, whether personally or on policy.  They should be disparaging Obama, and promoting their own records and policies, rather than assaulting their other candidate’s record.

Why they insist on viciously attacking each other makes no political sense at all, but they fall into the same trap every time.  It’s hard to believe but true.  All of the negativity they unleashed will be rehashed by their opponents next year, who will use the same tactics against them.

Perhaps the voters should elect someone who they think has the best chance of beating Obama, not only in a debate, but because of their electability, including appearance, available funds, and commercial ability.  Newt and Romney are the only candidates that seem capable of all of that.

Date:  Thursday, September 22, 2011

Location:  Orlando, Florida

Moderators:  Bret Baer, Megyn Kelly, and Chris Wallace.

Debaters:  Gov. Gary Johnson, Gov. Rick Perry, Gov. Mitt Romney, Gov. Jon Hunstman, Sen. Rick Santorum, Rep. Ron Paul, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, Speaker Newt Gingrich, Mr. Herman Cain

 

There were few surprises in the latest edition of the GOP presidential debate.  One was the sudden appearance of Gary Johnson, who apprently was a former governor of New Mexico.  Gov. Johnson looked awkward early on, and with a nervous twitch in his thumb and childish face, seemed as a high school boy competing against collegiate debaters.

 

However, after answering a few questions, Gov. Johnson settled into his groove and towards the end of the debate, delivered the most memorable line: “My next door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than this president has.”  To thunderous applause and hysterical laughter from the fellow debaters, it was undoubtedly the line of the night.  The same joke had originated with radio talk show hosts earlier in the week.

 

Governor Johnson was asked, “What makes you a better libertarian than Paul?” He replied that he vetoed more bills as governor than all of the other governors combined.  He supports the Fair Tax and believes it would jump start the economy better than any other action.

 

The debate provided little more that was new, other than fresh attacks by Romney on Perry and vice versa.  Romney continued to attack Perry on words written in his book about Social Security being an unconstitutional program that should be given to the states.  Perry tried to clarify that some states had opted for their own plans already.

 

Perry also was constantly on the defense about his state’s policy of allowing illegal alien students that had been living in Texas to have in-state tuition at state universities, savings worth about $100,000 per student.  Perry defended that, if not given that boost, they would not contribute to the economy, but instead become drags on it as state wards, and that only 4 out of some 180 state legislators voted against it.

 

Much of the debate was a bickering match between Perry and Romney, with others chiming in to attack the two leaders when applicable. Perry seemed to hold his own but clearly was off his game.  He was slow to respond, slow to attack, and looked like he could use a good night’s sleep.  It was his worst of the three debates he’s participated in, but he came out unscathed and still ahead in the national polls.

 

While the top dogs continued to dispute, some of the fringe contenders continued to shine, even if most people consider them unelectable.  The Florida straw poll, which followed two days later, put Herman Cain in the lead.  (Results: Cain 37%, Perry 15%, Romney 14%, Rick Santorum 11%, Paul 10%, Newt Gingrich 8%, Jon Huntsman 2%, Bachmann less than 2%.) Note that early straw polls have little impact on final results.

 

Herman Cain, the former Godfather Pizza CEO, won the night with his likability and common sense, intelligent approaches to the nation’s problems.  He told the brief story of how he overcame two types of cancer.  He stated that under Obamacare, he would not have survived, because he wouldn’t have been able to choose a doctor, and by the time the government assigned him one, it would have been too late.

 

Mr. Cain’s 999 Plan (9% income, corporate, and sales tax) remains the most popular option outside of the Fair Tax among the party’s tax base voters.  He also achieved much approval with his plan to eliminate the EPA and form a new version of it, which would be run by people who were abused by the former EPA.

 

Newt Gingrich continued to deliver glib witticisms that achieved regular applause and laughter from the audience.  The former House Speaker quoted Ronald Reagan, “When your neighbor loses his job, it’s a recession; when you lose yours, it’s a depression; when Jimmy Carter loses his, it’s a recovery.”  He didn’t even need to mention Obama to get thunderous crowd approval on the second-best line of the night.

 

Most candidates agreed that the Dept of Education needs to be drastically changed and reduced, and that federal funding for schools is not having the desired effect.  Most would like to see education run by the states, municipalities, and the private sector. Mrs. Bachmann and the libertarians would like to see the Dept dissolved, as did Reagan, it should be mentioned.

 

All of the candidates made clear that their first step toward health care reform would be to repeal Obamacare, and that there was a need for tort reform.  There were not many original ideas offered, other than Gov. Huntsman’s idea to let individual states experiment with it and eventually we’d have a breakthrough.

 

Speaking of Gov. Hunstman, he had another good debate, for the third consecutive time, and seems like the brightest of the bunch, other than Gingrich.  Despite his positive message, polished appearance, original ideas, and oratory command, he continues to poll at low percentages.  However, Huntsman continues to hang in the race, and even expressed optimism, recalling that in the previous primary, the early frontrunners were nowhere to be found at the end of the race.

 

The one category where there seemed to be the largest variety of opinions was tax reform, which was not delved into sufficiently by the moderators.  While some would abolish the entire IRS and replace it with a Fair Tax or alternative (Bachmann, Paul, Johnson, and Cain), others seemed like they were still wed to the current caste system of taxes.  Cain even pointed out that Romney was still married to the “old” (current) tax code.

 

Romney spoke of tax breaks for the middle-class, assigning class values to such, which according to his tax plan are taxpayers making up to $200k.  Romney did deliver the night’s third most memorable line, “To create jobs, it helps to have had a job.”  He would implement “reasonable” tax levels and cuts.

 

Huntsman has his 8/14/24 plan which again is divided up into class brackets as in the current tax code.  Perry and Santorum would like to lower taxes, but said nothing of overhauling the IRS.

 

There is growing unease among the TEA Party, libertarian, and conservative bases, that there has not been any serious dialogue in these debates by the top “electable” contenders about extreme tax reform.  This is a legitimate concern that goes to the heart of the current revolution that began in the last mid-term election.

 

The mainstream of the TEA Party movement doesn’t want Socialism vs Socialism Lite; they want radical tax reform such as that offered by Cain or the libertarians Johnson and Paul, because they know that it’s the key to jump starting the economy.  Most of the politicians in office know that drastic tax reform is the best answer to the recession, but few talk about it, at least openly.

 

Thus the major disappointment with this debate, as all of them, was the failure to delve deeply into this or other key issues.  In some other countries, these types of debates dedicate an hour to a single subject, so that the public can actually learn something about the issue, rather than just hear one-liners and talking points for two minutes on each issue.  But we saved those thoughts for an article on a new single topic format for presidential policy debate.
 

The last part of the debate was the “fun” question:  “Which one person on this stage would you choose as your running mate?”  It was time for the contenders to start playing dodge ball.

Gov. Johnson not surprisingly picked fellow libertarian Ron Paul.

Sen. Santorum tried to dodge the question but ended up picking Newt.

Rep. Gingrich said he “wouldn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings” by choosing now (with a sly smile).

Rep. Paul said he would answer that when he becomes a top two contender (so don’t hold your breath).

Gov. Perry would take Cain and Gingrich and merge them together somehow.

Gov. Romney dodged the question but said any of them would make a better president than Obama.

Rep. Bachmann also dodged but said it would be a strong constitutional conservative.

Mr. Cain would pick Mitt if he would dump current system and go with Cain’s 999 plan, otherwise Gingrich.

Gov. Hunstman would pick Cain because he likes the 999 plan and choice of ties.

 

The official debate results are in:

Winner: Herman Cain

Loser: the American public

More on how the American public can win from debates in the future

Perhaps you’ve noticed that job training centers keep sprouting up, despite unemployment supposedly remaining the same. The reason is that many of the unemployed don’t know how to do basic entry level jobs, despite most of them having high school diplomas or equivalent.

The problem is that the current purpose of primary education is for indoctrination of the young masses into leftist principles, plus one or two free meals a day on the taxpayer bill. Why aren’t the 12+ years of education preparing students for the basics of the most common jobs around the country?

The answer is that the leftist indoctrination is not complete yet, and the university system is needed so that principles of communism and socialism can firmly take hold in the malleable mind of the young student. This is more important to the establishment than learning how to work.

Thus they force students into college, a colossal waste of money where students’ parents fork over tens of thousands of dollars, sometimes hundreds, so their kids can party for 4+ years and hopefully get a degree. Many companies require sometimes mysteriously, a degree of any kind, even if most high school grads that actually learned something could do the job.

Seriously, many accountants make big bucks, and the profession requires all these degrees and tests. Why? It’s arithmetic: something that is supposed to be learned in grade school. I don’t see accountants doing trigonometry, integrals, advanced calculus. They’re adding, multiplying and dividing. Those who know how to write cookbooks end up adding to their salaries generously.

Some occupations do require extensive training that is needed in college. Engineering, architecture, attorney, certain medical and a few other disciplines require advanced and specific learning that most high schools are completely ill suited for.

But what if high schools were better equipped? What if students could choose their discipline while in high school and get at least a basic two year associates degree for that field? That’s something we should look into. They can do this now in certain schools, but it’s a complicated process and requires part time attendance at a separate vocational school. It would require competent teachers for sure, but that’s a known problem.

For engineering or computer degrees, start the student in high school or earlier with advanced math and science, or programming, and they’ll be ready for entry level or apprentice work straight out of high school. If grade school kids can hack major business computer systems after self-training, then they can handle the computer stuff.

Other countries do this routinely. They have kids coming out of high school ready for what we call “professional” jobs. This is a key word that has a bit of snobbery associated with it, indicating that the position requires a college degree of some sort. In other less advanced countries, high school has prepared them for these “professional” occupations.

Law schools for sure are guilty of the big rip-off. There is no good reason to force students to waste thousands of dollars and four years obtaining a political science or whatever “pre-law” degree, that is otherwise almost completely useless, other than being able to possibly obtain a “professional” job or teaching gig.

The law degree takes 2-3 years full time and can easily take the place of the last few years in college instead of the other general courses currently used for indoctrination. They just need to focus. Their major is law. If they can’t hack it, they can change their degree to political science. That way, the student and / or parents don’t have to go $100k or more in the hole for this degree.

A doctorate in medicine is perhaps the toughest, but why can’t you start in high school? Get a two year associates degree in advanced biology. Four tough biomedical years in college for a “masters” and then two years of advanced medical studies for the doctorate could fit the bill. Voila, you’re a doctor by 25, and without spending half a million dollars.

The point is that the educational system in this country is not currently preparing people for even the most common and sometimes easiest jobs in business. It is instead used as a 12-16 year indoctrination problem into the leftist principles, which hardly qualifies a graduate to do anything except teach or run for office, which is why some people are lifetime students, teachers, and politicians.

The primary education system should focus on perfecting the basic math, science, and English needed to do the most common jobs around the country, and some advanced training offered in high school toward specific occupations. Think about all the common jobs: retail, cashier, clerk, food service, etc. They’re not rocket science. They just require basic math and English and a positive attitude.

Yes, history and “social studies” should be taught as well, but the current version of these teaches little more than that Reagan was an evil dictator and Obama is the messiah. They have been so compromised by the left, that the misinformation is counterproductive. It would be better off not teaching these at all, then having them taught by leftists. More on the compromise of the public school system here.

Seriously, look where the educational system has us now: Obama is in the White House, posing as president, teaming up with Pelosi and Reid to destroy the country as fast as he can. This is a direct product of our educational system as it stands today. It was designed to put leftists in charge of country, and it has succeeded. And the country is consequently going downhill fast.

Most common occupations in this country require a basic knowledge of math and English, not social studies and Spanish. Drop the social studies and multicultural manure, and focus on the courses that will help our students obtain decent and productive jobs in the real world. It’s either that or having the billets filled by foreigners while our graduates fill the unemployment rolls, and elect more leftists into congress to ensure those rolls are filled.

Islamists tore down the World Trade Center towers, killing thousands of people, wreaking untold terror and havoc, and causing immeasurable billions of dollars in damage. And they want to replace it with a mosque?

History is filled with victory mosques erected by Islamists in their ongoing conquest to conquer the world. The point of a victory mosque is to memorialize the geographical area that the Islamists consider to have conquered. It symbolizes that they have taken control of that territory.

Europe and Asia are filled with these monuments, from the Dome of the Rock, the Blue Mosque, the Sultanahmet Camii, and perhaps most notably, the Cordoba Cathedral, which was a mosque built on a cathedral.

The sites were not chosen randomly. Many of them were formerly Christian or Jewish or Hindu temples, or in close proximity to such. The sacred locations were chosen to symbolize that control was transferred from the other states or religions to the state of Islam.

The mosque planned at 9/11 Ground Zero is the latest in this process that has been going on for centuries. What is interesting about this one, is that it seems premature, considering they have not conquered New York or Manhattan. Or have they?

That depends. If the mosque is allowed to be erected on Park Place in Manhattan, then victory is theirs. It would be the crowning achievement to the 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks, and it would indicate that they have indeed conquered Manhattan and NYC for that matter.

If it is disallowed as it should be, then there is no victory mosque, and no victory. 9/11 will remain a single battle that Islamofascists have won in an ongoing war that they have been waging against the rest of the world for over a millennium.

The spineless jellyfish that we call politicians in our capitol will do nothing about it, because they don’t want to offend Islam. They are afraid of Islam and would rather appease Islamofascists than put them back in their place.

One of the reasons that large scale, organized terrorist attacks have gone stale in recent years in the west is that they are now considered unnecessary by Islamists.

Indeed they have realized that Islam can take over tolerant, peaceful countries such as the US or GB by infiltrating and taking advantage of our lenient policies. And they are doing so quite effectively.

Replicating at rates double or triple that of other groups or religions in western countries, Islamists are taking over in number. It may take a few decades, but that time is short considering the centuries of brainwashed hatred that has been passed down to the current generations of Islam.

Once they have some numbers, they begin by changing local laws, and getting Shariah law implemented in various municipalities. Then they work their way up to the state and national levels.

It is insidious, much like communism, which it is currently teaming up with toward defeat of a common enemy. The appeasing communists will simply be eaten last by the crocodile, as predicted by Winston Churchill.

This is not about freedom of religion. For the moment let’s put aside the fact that the main proponent of the mosque is a radical muslim cleric who espouses the typical Islamic hatred of America and its ‘infidels’.

The US Dept of Justice under Clinton went after Branch Davidians by violent means, calling them a cult because they were harboring guns, which are still legal in the US for now, even if the leftists believe they shouldn’t be.

A cult is allowed under law if it doesn’t harm anyone. That can’t be said of Islam. Their ‘religion’ preaches hatred and the murder of ‘infidels’, meaning those of us who don’t believe what they do.

Is that not truly the definition of a cult? A group that preaches and executes the killing of others arbitrarily for not being a part of their cult.

The solution is that America has to realize that Islam is a violent cult, and it must be treated as such. That is, if there is still an America, which is a matter of debate.

Until then, Islamists will continue to take over, one victory mosque at a time.

In many ways, Obama represents the sum product of the generation primarily responsible for electing him. He is ignorant yet arrogant, narcissistic, selfish, idiotic, delusional, and has an unreasonable sense of entitlement. In other words, he is highly representative of the youngest voting generation.

From a CNN exit poll: “Voters in the 18 to 24 age group broke 68 percent for Obama to 30 percent for John McCain, according to the exit polling. Those in the 25 to 29 age bracket went 69 percent to 29 percent in Obama’s favor…” That would be Generation ME.

Generation ME consists of those older boys and girls of ages between 18 and 40, the group forming the majority of Obama voters. It would be faulty refer to them as young men and women, since those nouns imply some kind of maturity or adulthood. Rather, the majority of them are overgrown children that behave and think like adolescents.

They are surprisingly arrogant considering their ignorance, and they are also selfish, idiotic, delusional, and brainwashed. They have an unbelievable sense of entitlement. Everything should be given to them just as they want it, regardless of where it comes from or how much other people toiled for it.

(To be fair, not all of them are overgrown children. I certainly know many that are fine young men and women, responsible adults, and good Americans. But these are in the minority, and many are embarrassed of their own generation.)

There are certainly other names we could issue to this generation, but “ME” seems to be the simplest word that sums up so many of their characteristics. Look at all the products that are oriented towards this generation: Imac, Ipod, Ipad, Iphone, Youtube, Myspace. The list goes on. Everything is about ME.

Who is responsible for Generation ME? How did we get here? It’s a long story but you have to look at the big picture. Here’s the short version:

It all started with the Lost Generation that elected President Franklin Roosevelt. FDR was the father of modern socialism in the US. He brought about Social Security and other entitlement programs, and raised top rate taxes to levels unheard of.

Perhaps his greatest legacy was ridding the US of hundreds of thousands of patriots from the Greatest Generation by sending them off to die overseas, in order to save nations of apathetic socialist idiots that didn’t want to even make an effort to save themselves from socialist dictator Hitler (look it up, NAZI = National Socialist Party; Hitler was a man of the left.)

With a large volume of patriots dead and gone, FDR was free to usher in a new era of socialism. In fact, he used their loss as the very excuse for Social Security. There simply weren’t enough young adults around to care for the old anymore, so it was determined the government would care for them.

It did make some sense as a short term solution, considering the government was responsible for sending children of the elderly off to die. However, the program would never go away, and permanent socialistic government care for the elderly replaced the traditional family care that existed in all previous generations. The dead of the Greatest Generation were rolling over in their graves already.

With higher taxes, most of the working class couldn’t afford to take care of extra family members anyway, so the next generation made no efforts to diminish Social Security or taxes. Instead, Baby Boomers stood idly by watching the Socialist Security program expand and taxes go up.

In the meantime, the public schools were being stocked with leftists of all sorts: liberals, communists, socialists, and atheists. These were the people that harbored deep resentment for a capitalist society, either because they couldn’t function in it, didn’t like its morals, or otherwise didn’t want any part of it.

Keep in mind that many of these were counterculture leftists that spent most of the 60s and 70s doing drugs and thus had no practical skills in a capitalist society. Many of them went into journalism as well, building a highly effective leftist propaganda machine on that end. They did, after all, know how to talk.

Either way, much of this collection of misfit leftists landed in public schools and universities. Those who couldn’t do, taught. And what they taught, besides reading, writing and arithmetic, was their leftist principles, including revisionist history.

Those who reported spent most of their time bashing Nixon, Reagan and Bush. Their hero was President Carter, the worst ever US president until Obama*. (* Personally I do not consider Obama to be a valid president, having been fraudulently elected and unable to prove his citizenship, but I’m trying to keep on point here.)

While most responsible Baby Boomer parents were working all day and making money to save for college tuition, their children were in school getting brainwashed by these irresponsible but principled leftists. Thanks to their parents’ hard work, they could receive further brainwashing in college. Thus was born Generation X.

X is a surprisingly accurate title, since it is a heavily divided generation. Think of the X in terms of its two halves.

The first slash in the X represents many of them that grew up to become responsible adults, and shrugged off their communist teachings once they realized how the real world operates. That is, one must contribute to society by participating in some form of business, whether as an employee, manager, owner, or night shift worker, in order to achieve some kind of wages.

The backslash in the X represents those that never shook their leftist brainwashing, and adhere to it to this day. They refuse to think for themselves, and instead believe only what their school teachers and communist media tell them. They were taught that Ronald Reagan was an evil tyrant that tried to destroy the US by bringing down the Soviet Union and lowering taxes, and they believed it.

While the right split of Gen X worked their butts off to make a paycheck, many had little time to pay attention to the brainwashing their kids were receiving, much less get involved politically. They left it to the public schools and the TV to raise their kids while they toiled all day to give their kids everything they wanted, including things they never dreamed of having when they were young.

All this conspired to give Generation ME a deep sense of entitlement. At school they learned that everyone should have according to his need, taking from those according to their means. Then they came home and their parents gave them everything they needed and more, for nothing. It was the ultimate reassurance that what they were being taught by the schools and the TV was correct.

In the meantime, the left split of Gen X was busy teaching, reporting, doing drugs, collecting welfare, and irresponsibly raising families of complete leftist losers, whose primary desire is to bring down the capitalist system and implement their Marxist utopia.

Thus Generation ME is comprised of children of the left split X communists and many socialists from the right split X parents that let the schools and media raise their children. Collectively, this is the most left leaning generation in the history of the US, even though many came from conservative families.

If you tell them how communism killed millions of people under Stalin, Lenin, and the various Asian leaders, they will tell you unequivocally that it wasn’t really communism, and was corrupted by the bad men in charge. With the right people in charge (Obama) it will work. Redistribute wealth and everyone will be happy. Let government run everything and everything will run great.

This is what they believe. This is the scariest generation that you can imagine living on US soil. They faithfully believe in socialism and communism as they were taught, and they fully intend to implement it during their time.

They are not adults, and they are not Americans. They are spoiled brats that believe that America is an evil country that has been run by rich greedy capitalists at the expense of the poor. They do not appreciate the concept that business owners are the people creating jobs in the US. They would rather have the government provide jobs.

Gen ME was raised to believe there is no God; that Government is the only higher power. Government should provide everything to everyone from cradle to grave: jobs, income, welfare, medical care, transportation, utilities, and whatever else you can think of. They don’t care where it comes from.

All wealth should first be given to the Almighty Government, which can then decide how and when to redistribute or squander it. Government should run people’s lives.

This is what they really believe. To paint a scarier picture, consider that many of them have still not achieved voting age. This problem will not go away anytime soon.

If you think going to the voting booth to push R buttons in November will solve the problem, consider that 2 more years of Generation Me will be in there pressing D buttons in hopes they won’t need a job.

They still believe that Obama will provide everything they need, because he’s the right guy in charge. Stalin was the wrong guy. Hitler was the wrong guy. Obama is the right guy. Communism will work under him, because he’s a good guy.

They are delusional enough to think Obama cares about them as well. But caring isn’t part of the communist plan. The plan is for the ruling class to take wealth from the backs of the working class, and distribute it as they see fit, after keeping most of it. It’s that simple.

Generation ME: selfish, ignorant, arrogant, irrational, delusional, and narcissistic.

Obama is their ideal messiah.