Politico Article Reveals Obama’s Cloward-Piven Strategy Backfiring

Allow me to refresh your memories concerning the infamous Cloward-Piven strategy, which was the brainchild of two leftist professors to take total control of America by overwhelming its social support structures to create a “crisis”:

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when “the rest of society is afraid of them,” Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven’s early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1972 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one.

I genuinely believe that Barack Obama – a follower of Saul Alinsky as well as the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate when he belonged to it to go along with a long and deep relationship with leftist radicals – is pursuing a “heads we win, tails you lose” strategy. If the economy somehow miraculously picks up under all of this massive spending and even more massive debt, then Democrats win big and Republicans lose. If – far more likely – the economy crashes under its own massive weight due to hyperinflation as interest payments on the debt soar and the Obama Treasury devalues the currency by printing money, then a starving, terrified people will scream for help from their government. And Democrats will – in solving the “crisis” they themselves created – secure the pure-socialist totalitarian state they have always envisioned. Either way, Obama liberals believe they will win big.

Government by crisis is a tried and true fascist approach.  It is up to you to decide whether it is a coincidence or not that Barack Obama is using the same approach, as described by his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel:

EMANUEL:  “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.  What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.  This is an opportunity. What used to be long-term problems — be they in the health care area, energy area, education area, fiscal area, tax area, regulatory reform area — things that we had postponed for too long that were long-term are now immediate and must be dealt with.  And this crisis provides the opportunity for us, as I would say, the opportunity to do things that you could not do before.”

Obama began his presidency by fearmongering a crisis to get his way.  He fearmongered the stimulus through the Congress, predicting terrifying scenarios if it failed and hyping claims that have turned out to be completely false if he got his way.  Republicans were completely shut out of the stimulus, and the legislation was rushed through Congress so quickly that not one single Representative or Senator had any chance to read the bill that Obama then took leisurely four days to sign.

There was just one problem: Cloward-Piven depended for its success upon a death by incrementalism, as vividly depicted by a frog placed in a pot of water.  If you put the frog in boiling water, it will leap out immediately.  But if you put the frog in cool water and gradually turn up the heat, you can literally cook the frog to death.  Obama’s problem is that he turned the heat up too fast for the American people, and they are now leaping out of the boiling cauldron he created for them.

Or, perhaps another illustration will do to depict the American people-as-frog:


Note that the article that follows is written from a clear liberal slant (e.g., “Then Obama lost control of the health care debate by letting Republicans get away with their bogus claims about “death panels.”). Nevertheless, the article clearly admits to the crisis-style mentality that Obama used to try to push through his entire agenda at once.

Obama’s Big Bang could go bust
By: Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei
August 21, 2009

Barack Obama’s Big Bang is beginning to backfire, as his plans for rapid, once-in-a-generation overhauls of energy, financial regulation and health care are running into stiff resistance, both in Washington and around the country.

The Obama theory was simple, though always freighted with risk: Use a season of economic anxiety to enact sweeping changes the public likely wouldn’t stomach in ordinary times. But the abrupt swing in the public’s mood, from optimism about Obama’s possibility to concern he may be overreaching, has thrown the White House off its strategy and forced the president to curtail his ambitions.

Some Democrats point to a decision in June as the first vivid sign of trouble for Obama. These Democrats say the White House, in retrospect, made a grievous mistake by muscling conservative Democrats in swing districts to vote for a cap-and-trade energy bill that was very unpopular among their constituents.

Many of those members were pounded back home because Democrats passed a bill Republicans successfully portrayed as a big tax increase on consumers. The result: many conservative Democrats were gun-shy about taking any more risky votes — or going out on a limb on health care.

The other result: The prospects for winning final passage of a cap-and-trade bill this year are greatly diminished. And, while most Democrats still predict a health care bill will pass this year, it is likely to be a shadow of what Obama once had planned.

“The majority-makers are the freshman and sophomores from conservative districts where there’s this narrative building about giveaways, bailouts and too much change at once,” said a top House Democratic strategist, who requested anonymity to discuss internal politics candidly. “There’s this big snowball building in those districts. That’s why those folks are so scared.”

David Axelrod, Obama’s political architect, said it was “very clear early in the transition” that Obama would have to attack a number of festering issues simultaneously.

“The times demanded it,” he said in an interview. “We didn’t have the luxury of taking things sequentially, year after year, and hoping we got there. That’s the reason that all these major issues had been deferred for decades: Change is hard.”

Axelrod said the president is “looking forward to an active fall” when he returns from next week’s vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, and is not as worried about the outlook as the denizens of Washington, where “every day is election day.”

But the “Big Bang” theory of governance, as some White House insiders called it, is not without risk and consequences.

By doing so much, so fast, Obama gave Republicans the chance to define large swaths of the debate. Conservatives successfully portrayed the stimulus bill as being full of pork for Democrats. Then Obama lost control of the health care debate by letting Republicans get away with their bogus claims about “death panels.” The GOP also has successfully raised concerns that the Obama plan is a big-government takeover of health care — and much of Middle America bought the idea, according to polls.

By doing so much, so fast, Obama never sufficiently educated the public on the logic behind his policies. He spent little time explaining the biggest bailouts in U.S. history, which he inherited but supported and expanded. And then he lost crucial support on the left by not following up quickly with new and stricter rules for Wall Street. On Friday, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman echoed a concern widely shared among leading liberals. “I don’t know if administration officials realize just how much damage they’ve done themselves with their kid-gloves treatment of the financial industry, just how badly the spectacle of government supported institutions paying giant bonuses is playing.”

By doing so much so fast, Obama jammed the circuits on Capitol Hill. Congress has a hard time doing even one big thing well at a time. Congress is good at passing giveaways and tax cuts, but has not enacted a transformative piece of social legislation since President Bill Clinton’s welfare reform of 1996. “There’s a reason things up here were built to go slowly,” said another Democratic aide.

By doing so doing so much, so fast, he has left voters — especially independents — worried that he got an overblown sense of his mandates and is doing, well, too much too fast. A Washington Post-ABC News poll published Friday found that independents’ confidence in Obama’s ability to make the right decisions had dropped 20 points since the Inauguration, from 61 percent to 41 percent.

Axelrod and others argue Obama had no choice but to tackle all of these issues at once. That might be true for a stimulus bill and the bank and auto bailouts — but that case is harder to make for energy and health care, which have been the focus of intense debate for decades past and probably will for decades to come.

Go-big-or-go-home isn’t the only theory of the case that a new president can adopt. The most promising alternative is to build public support over time by showing competence and success, then using that to leverage bigger things.

So imagine if Obama had focused on fixing the economy, and chosen presidential power over congressional accommodation and constructed his American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as a true, immediate stimulus without the pork and paybacks.

He then could have pushed through tougher regulation of financial institutions, making it clear people were paying for their sins, and would have a much harder time doing it again. This would have delighted the left and perhaps bought Obama more durable support among independents. Instead, the left thinks he’s beholden to investment banks, and much of the public sees no consequences for the financial mess.

Add in some serious budget cuts, and Obama would have positioned himself as a new kind of liberal with the courage to tame Washington and Wall Street, as promised. Under this scenario, Obama might be getting more credit for the economic recovery that appears to be under way. This would have positioned him to win health care reform starting next year — a mighty achievement, and clear vindication against the doubters. Some White House officials said they are skeptical of moving controversial bills in an election year, when lawmakers are often more timid.

White House officials say they never seriously considered a more incremental approach to the year, though they did privately discuss trying to get regulation
of the financial sector done right after the stimulus bill. There was too much disagreement among Democrats at the time over how far to go with regulation to proceed.

If the current strategy fails, the same person who got much of the credit for the crisp first 100 days will get some of the blame: White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. It was Emanuel who has strongly advocated the big-bang approach, declaring during the transition: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. Now, what I mean by that, it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do.”

The confidence of Obama’s aides was bolstered by their fresh memory that a similar approach had worked very effectively for then-President George W Bush after the Sept. 11 attacks. With the public on edge, Bush was able to enact restrictive policies under the banner of protecting American soil, and build an entire new department of government that voters otherwise might have opposed. The economic meltdown would be Obama’s Sept. 11 — the predicate for sweeping legislation that he wanted to enact anyway.

Just past halftime in his first year, the president has won passage of a long list of bills that the White House points to as proof of their approach. In addition to the stimulus, Obama signed major bills on tobacco, pay equity, children’s health insurance, national service and the mortgage rescue. If he gets health care and either energy or regulation this year, it would be hard to argue the big-bang plan wasn’t a success.

Former Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-Ind.), now president and director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, cautions that any verdict on Obama would be “kind of like judging a major surgical operation in the middle of the operation.”

With Obama reaching the defining season of his freshman year, Hamilton said the current agenda reminds him of the scale of the Great Society programs Congress was tackling when he came to Congress in 1965. “This president thinks big but I also think he acts pragmatically,” Hamilton said. “So many things in a congressional session come together at the last few hours, the last few weeks.”

But sometimes they just come undone.

Zachary Abrahamson contributed to this report.

A number of points of order: Politico says that Congress…has not enacted a transformative piece of social legislation since President Bill Clinton’s welfare reform of 1996.” But Bill Clinton did not transform anything; it was the Republicans under the Contract with America who imposed the welfare reform of 1996 – and Bill Clinton was forced to sign the thing he subsequently took credit for.

Politico cannot stop itself from falling into blaming Republicans for their  health care demonizing.  But there is an admission that even before health care came up on Obama’s timetable, it was DEMOCRATS who were worried and frightened at the agenda: “There was too much disagreement among Democrats at the time over how far to go with regulation to proceed.” It would be nice if the mainstream media finally reported honestly and acknowledged that if health care doesn’t pass, it is because Democrats are worrying about their seats as an outraged electorate gets its revenge.

Another problem the Politico article glosses over is summed up in the statement: “By doing so much, so fast, Obama never sufficiently educated the public on the logic behind his policies.” But the issue isn’t that Obama never educated the public on the logic behind his policies; it’s that his policies don’t have any logic beyond the most superficial big-government liberalism that most Americans reject.  Other than the argument, “This is a naked power-grab intended to secure Democrat control for perpetuity,” there simply IS no argument.

There’s another point that the Politico article glosses over that emerges from the statement: “There’s a reason things up here were built to go slowly,” said another Democratic aide.” That reason is the Constitution.  We were never set up to be a fascist dictatorship or a totalitarian state disconnected from the deliberation of the people.  Our founders made us to be a nation of laws, and follow a tried-and-true process that would slow us down to avoid tyranny.

But liberals have trampled on the Constitution for years.  Too many leftist intellectuals regard it as the irrelevant product of a cadre of dead, white, sexist, slave-holding males.  Barack Obama has derided the Constitution as “a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you.” The Constitution becomes a problem for Obama.

We have the right to assemble, but the government is not obliged to transport us to protest sites.  We have the right to speak, but the government is not required to provide us with a megaphone or a platform.  The “negative liberties” allow us our basic freedoms while preserving our individual liberties and responsibilities.  Obama wants to fundamentally do away with the Constitution in order to impose an entirely different system which creates a mega-state that will have innumerable duties to take care of us.

If he succeeds, the America that the founding fathers created will officially cease to exist.  The nanny state isn’t in the Constitution, no matter how many penumbras and emanations liberal justices might claim to see in their crystal-ball-gazing.

As for the “death panels” being a bogus claim, do you want to know where the death panels are?  They are right here:


The whole damn maze of bureaucracy is a “death panel.”  Anyone who thinks that the government will be able to expand their government health care – which is already about to go bankrupt – to tens of millions more people, and save money doing it, is a fool.  They are people who cannot see the facts through their ideology.

The Cloward-Piven strategy appears to be having a problem due to Barack Obama’s arrogance and unwillingness to continue to use the system to “get there” gradually.

The only question, given the massive debts Obama has already accumulated – deficits that literally are more than every president has accumulated from George Washington to George W. Bush, combined – is whether the Cloward-Piven strategy will yet have its chance to work.  It might already be too late.  When you look at our real national debt of more than $100 TRILLION and realize that we cannot possibly repay it, if you have any sense you should get more than a little bit concerned that our leaders simply WILL NOT control their spending.

The Democrats have an endgame: when the system collapses, the panicked people will turn to the very government that created the calamity and demand that it take care of them.  And that is precisely what big government liberals have always preached.

One thing is clear: if Obama wins his “public option” in any form, it will become the anvil that broke the camel’s back.

If Obama’s “Big Bang” doesn’t go bust, America will be the one that goes bust and ends up exploding in a big bang of debt.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

66 Responses to “Politico Article Reveals Obama’s Cloward-Piven Strategy Backfiring”

  1. Ben Hoffman Says:

    Your first misstatement is the myth of the frog. A frog will jump out of a pot as the water is heated. Second, look at the economy during the 90s under a liberal compared to that of the 2000s. The rich got richer and the poor got richer during the 90s, but only the rich got richer during the 2000s and eventually everyone lost when the economy collapsed. The same thing happened during the 1980s. Republican economic policies have put our country deep in debt. God help us if we get into another war. How the hell are we going to pay for it?

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    Couple things:
    1) It figures some liberal would actually conduct the experiment on the frog. Did you perform similar “experiments” with the wings of butterflies as a child?

    Tell you what: I’ll adjust my metaphor and switch to visual psychology testing that reveals a phenomenon called “change blindness.” Just for you.

    So please stop cooking frogs.

    2) Bill Clinton was such a disaster as president that he created the most massive political backlash in American history as the Republicans took over Congress 2 years into his presidency. And just as Democrat Congress destroyed the economy during the last two years of Bush’s presidency from 2006, the Republican Congress saved Clinton’s economy by imposing fiscal discipline.

    As I wrote in a previous article:

    We need to put some things into historic perspective: 1) Bill Clinton so mismanaged the country his first two years in office that it led to the largest political tsunami ever experienced in American history as Republicans took over in an unprecedented landslide 1994 election. 2) Many of the benefits that Bill Clinton has received credit for were actually enacted by the Republican Congress (example: welfare reform). 3) Bill Clinton benefited from an economy that was just recovering from a severe recession at the end of the Bush I administration as Clinton took over. By contrast, George Bush II – like Barack Obama now – had a significant recession handed to him that will count against his average performance. In President Bush’s case, that recession was compounded by the worst attack on American soil in nearly 200 years in the 9/11 terror attack. 4) Bill Clinton changed the way unemployment figures were calculated back in 1994 – making comparisons to previous eras appear far more rosy than they really were. 5) The “Clinton Budget Surplus” is in reality a myth. In actuality, Clinton created a smoke and mirror illusion by transferring “public debt” costs which are calculated as part of the budget over to “intergovernmental holdings” (eg., by borrowing from Social Security) which are not counted as part of the public debt.

    I might also point out that Bill Clinton’s famous statement from his State of the Union Speech in January 1996 – “THE ERA OF BIG GOVERNMENT IS OVER” – tacitly recognized the new Republican era, and which in reality was the ultimate reason why the Clinton economy became ultimately successful.

    Democrats were wiped out in 1994 as Republicans swept into power when Americans became fed up with Democrat incompetence and massive spending. And Bill Clinton was wise enough to recognize the handwriting on the wall. As a result, he transitioned into a fiscal moderate and avoided the fate of his party.

    For the record, the unemployment rate was 4.5% when the Democrats took over Congress in November 2006. Republicans took over Congress and made things better; Democrats took over Congress and brought unmitigated disaster.

    I am frankly amazed – given the fact that Barack Obama has now accumulated greater deficits than every single president from George Washington to George W. Bush COMBINED that you would make such a patently false and absurd claim that we’re in debt because of Republicans.

  3. Stephen Stuart Says:

    i find it curious that you both give blame the democrats for leaving a bad economy for the republicans or reaping the beniefits from the republicans previous administration, and yet make sure to excuse 9/11 for bush as but attempt to assign the bailout debt to obama. You’re a sad person who see’s only libs and conservatives, and scary that its black and white to you, in your eyes a moderate like me does not exist.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    What I find curious is that you would try to falsely claim I did something that I didn’t do.

    To being with, your sentence, “i find it curious that you both give blame the democrats for leaving a bad economy for the republicans or reaping the beniefits from the republicans previous administration, and yet make sure to excuse 9/11 for bush as but attempt to assign the bailout debt to obama” makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The 9/11 attack occurred in 2001, and the bailouts occurred in 2008 and now continue into 2009. You don’t link them in any rational way whatsoever. I clearly have never tried to argue that the 9/11 attack somehow makes Obama responsible for the bailout debt that occurred 7 years later. What you write is just gibberish, all grammatical errors aside.

    I think you’re talking about this statement in my previous comment:
    “Bill Clinton benefited from an economy that was just recovering from a severe recession at the end of the Bush I administration as Clinton took over. By contrast, George Bush II – like Barack Obama now – had a significant recession handed to him that will count against his average performance. In President Bush’s case, that recession was compounded by the worst attack on American soil in nearly 200 years in the 9/11 terror attack.”

    It is a fact that Bill Clinton turned over an economy that was JUST beginning to enter a recession as Bush took over. And on top of that whammy was the 9/11 DOUBLE whammy. The 9/11 attack badly impacted the US economy; air travel was gutted, and the hotel/entertainment industry suffered mightily. I distinctly note that Obama LIKEWISE inherited a recession. I was NOT comparing Bush to Obama, but to Clinton. My only point was that Bush inherited a rough patch from both Clinton and from history. And if you can’t realize that, please don’t present yourself as a “moderate,” when in fact you would be nothing but a hardcore leftist ideologue who only thinks in terms of demonizing Bush no matter the facts.

    As far as the debt, Bush passed a $700 billion bailout in late 2008. Obama supported that bailout; he personally voted for it; he urged Congress not to block it. Further, Bush only used HALF the money, leaving the remainder to Obama per Obama’s request. Obama can’t claim that he just “inherited” that bailout, as he VOTED for it, and then used the other half of it himself (he COULD have given it back to the Treasury, you know). He’s responsible for half of it. If you’re not willing to see that, you are no moderate; just another garden variety ignorant liberal ideologue.

    Now, the thing is, that SOMEHOW Obama took that $350 billion and morphed it into $23.7 TRILLION. That being on top of his $3.27 trillion stimulus (that didn’t stimulate), his unprecedented massive omnibus spending bill that had nearly 9,000 earmarks, and the fact that Obama has ridiculously lowballed his deficit by a whopping $2 trillion dollars in only six months.

    I have a habit of linking to what I cite. I am reporting the numbers accurately. It is simply a fact that Obama has compiled FOUR TIMES the debt that Bush was responsible for in his very worst year of 2008.

    You claim to be a “moderate.” I very much doubt that you are. You offer nothing but hard core liberal attack to me. There’s nothing “moderate” about what you’re saying. While I very much understand there are “moderates,” I don’t see why I should view you as being one. Perhaps you might link me to a liberal blog in which you go after a liberal the way you went after me (as a “sad person”)?

    If you respond, deal with the facts/links I present and please, try to make sense.

    And DO realize that I am writing as a conservative; it’s not MY job to try to make liberals’ pathetic arguments for them.

  5. John S. Hardy, M.D. Says:

    Without expounding further, about the more “general goals” of the “Social Justice” (Socialization) process; it is clear that by passing a massive health care reform which purports to guarantee health care to all Americans as a right, the care system will be massively over-whelmed and incapable of sustaining the mandates imposed. As a result, not only will quality drop precipitously, but physicians will be in progressively limited supply and hospitals will be unable to sustain themselves since price fixing and curtailment of profit will almost certainly follow as a necessity of survival. But the people will demand that the government abide by its mandate (or promise to provide “high quality” universal care — an impossibility) and we will face exactly what Alinsky and Cloward and Piven suggested. J.S. HARDY, M.D.

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    Dr. Hardy, thanks for your comment. We should listen to our doctors – especially our doctors with long careers who have seen a lot of different approaches during their service.

    The saddest thing about the 2,000 page healthcare fiasco currently before us is that it does nothing to control COSTS. And that’s what we need to work on.

    We also need to continue to attract talented medical professionals and give them reason to believe that they can make a good living in medicine.

    The mainstream media has been dishonest in their portrayal of the American health care system. When homicides and auto fatalities are excluded (and just how is the health care system responsible when a gangbanger blows away another teenager, anyway?), America has the BEST system in the world bar none.

    We need to maintain the quality and lower the costs. And a classic way to accomplish BOTH is tort reform. Another classic way is to increase competition by allowing insurers to compete across state lines.

    One of the pleasant by-products of increased competition would be fewer regulations, and fewer mandates. Cut the red-tape, cut the bureaucracy, and let the system be improved by the market forces that have improved every system that they have been allowed to influence.

    Democrats are trying to increase access. And that isn’t a bad goal, clearly. But the best way to increase access is to reduce costs. One of the things we could do is allow people to be able to buy the care they need, rather than the “mandated” care governments think people have a “right” to have. Maybe I can’t afford to have cat-scans. But having some access is better than having none at all. Allow insurance companies (or doctors, or whoever) to be able to sell limited access policies. That would be a huge free-market system way to increase access AND cut costs.

  7. B Vella Says:

    Also, “mandated” healthcare by the Federal government troubles me (mandated anything for that matter). It’s an incredible attack on liberty when Americans can be jailed for refusing such a hardship. The face of the original intent is becoming unrecognizible. Thanks again for your insight and fact checking.

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    Yeah, and when the word “shall” appears in the Pelosi bill more than 3,400 times – with each one giving the government more power over people’s lives – you REALLY get the feel for all the terrifying mandates that await you if the Democrats get their way.

  9. j. Gorman Says:

    I agree comletely with the premise that the administration and the majority party are embarked on a crusadw to destroy the country and the government as we know it. The country is already bankrupt and with the probable passage of health care “reform” and “cap and trade” the economy will collapse and we will have a social upheaval. We are facing the most dangerous political and economic crisis is our history engineered by a group of fascisits masquerading as liberals.

  10. Michael Eden Says:

    J. Gorman,
    My view isn’t that “they are out to destroy the country” per se, but that they are WILLING to do so.

    The way I see it, Obama is employing a “Win we win, lose we win” strategy. If they pass all this crap, and somehow there isn’t a disaster and we get growth, they win – and of course will claim credit over the Republicans who opposed it. [I don’t believe that will happen, but apparently many Democrats do].

    If, on the other hand, what I think happens and the U.S. implodes, Democrats believed they are positioned to take advantage of the catastrophe that THEY CREATED. How? Because people will be desperate, hungry, and scared. And what party will say, “The GOVERNMENT will help you! WE’LL take care of you!” You guessed it.

    Win, they win; lose, they win.

    My hope is that the American people not only reject Democrats, but reject big government “Government as God, Obama as Savior” politics. And I hope that they not only embrace Republicans, but embrace (and the Republican PARTY must embrace) SMALL government policies.

    We are DEFINITELY heading for a collapse and unless we make a major course change, we will experience that collapse.

  11. Blad_Rnr Says:

    Thank you, Michael, for pointing out the facts of the Clinton administration. All along I thought he actually DID balance the budget (by reducing the size of the military and reducing the terms for welfare recipients), but it appears he did nothing of the sort; typical of the Left. You also make good points for what Bush II inherited. I agree that the oncoming recession (Dot Com Bust plus 9/11) made things very bad initially for his presidency. I still question his decision to sign the TARP funding. It was a horrible decision and questions his fiscal conservatism.

    The truth is we are in a war of ideologies right now and the average American is either in denial or is just starting to awaken. We couldn’t ask for a more radical president who has no respect for our military, no respect for America and truly wants to sink our freedoms and way of life. Thanks for a great post!

  12. Michael Eden Says:

    Clinton certainly DID reduce the size of the military. He made HUGE cuts that made it all the harder for Bush II to rebuild the military. Jimmy Carter did the same thing to Reagan. And, after being FORCED to do so by the Republican majority that swept into power in 1994, Clinton began to reduce welfare.

    But Clinton’s biggest “budget reduction” gambit was to reduce the size of his budget by an act of accounting deceit. He lowered the size of the public debt by increasing the size of the intergovernmental holdings (i.e., e.g., by ‘borrowing’ from Social Security). Our actual debt NEVER went down, as this site shows.

    And the Dot-com/tech bubble implosion that Clinton left Bush (it continued into 2002) was bad. Real bad. It cost the economy over $5 TRILLION dollars. And then you add 9/11 – which had a catastrophic impact on our economy – and the wars which resulted, and Hurricane Katrina (the worst national disaster in the history of the nation), and you have the makings of a massive deficit increase.

    And Obama is taking the huge Bush deficits and exploding them like no one ever dreamed possible. Obama will equal Bush’s entire EIGHT years in under TWO. And we are just doomed if he gets his way.

    Obama deficits in one scary picture

    At the time the housing-mortgage market imploded, I personally didn’t know WHAT to do. And I let the “experts” fix the mess, rather than come out against them. I didn’t SUPPORT them, but I didn’t say much.

    Then we find out that, under Obama, our exposure is FAR higher than the $700 billion TARP (which Obama was given half of). We are on the hook for as much as $24 TRILLION dollars.

    In the aftermath of that fiasco, I wasn’t going to be fooled TWICE. So when the so-called “stimulus” came around, and Obama’s “experts” said it would fix everything, I was wiser. What will it really cost? Well, the CBO said the REAL tab was $3.27 trillion.

    And now we’re just seeing gimmick after gimmick. Health care? They come up with numbers based on massive trickery and deceit and more smoke and mirrors than average Americans can ever hope to find.

    I’m with you, Blad. I just want us to go back to fiscal sanity.

  13. Charles Foxworth Says:

    Help! I need to warn everyone… “the socialist are coming”

  14. Michael Eden Says:

    For future history books:

    “The midnight ride of Charles Foxworth.” Has a nice ring to it.

    SOMEBODY’S sure got to warn the American people about what’s happening.

  15. Stanford Linzey@gmail.com Says:

    It would seem to me that even some good level-headed democrats would see through the sham we are going through and wake up to reality to the economic situation we are in. Economics are just that no matter what party a person belongs to. Mathematics are a science to itself. 2 PLUS 2 eaquals 4 for all hands. We can’t give away the store and get rich. Somebody (we and our children) will endeavor to do so. Hey, let’s wake up. Let the press tell the truth. And so it goes;

  16. stanford Linzey Says:

    A problem we have at the moment involves that of truth. Math is Math no matter who discusses it. If we over spend we shall go broke. <Math will not lie. No matter which party over spends. However those in power now realize they will be dead before the moment of reality arrives and will not be here to pay off the debt. So, they carry on. It is not a matter of knowledge, it is a matter of personal rivalry. greed, and unconcern for the general populace. If fact those in power seem to have no concern for the American public. The public be damned, "full steam ahead."

  17. Michael Eden Says:

    The only thing I can disagree with in your post is that I believe that Obama and the people that are now creating our future financial and economic ruin will be very much alive when it all comes crashing down. Because I don’t think it’s all that long away.

    Other than that, we both understand the urgent need to obtain some kind of sanity. If Bush and Republicans were psychologically unbalanced in THEIR spending, Obama and the Democrats are full-blown psychotic mass-murdering demented nutjobs in theirs.

    Democrats are insanely trying to use the language of “fiscal responsibility” and claiming that – unlike Republicans – they are PAYING for their massive spending with massive new taxes. But these lunatics don’t understand that they will never get more than a FRACTION of the taxes they think they’ll collect in the future. You watch the deficits explode beyond any bureaucrat’s wildest dreams.

    We need to cut spending. And then we need to cut it some more. And then some more after that. But instead, on every level and in every sphere of government, we are increasing spending in a way that has never before been seen in human history.

    And this house of cards will soon come crashing down.

  18. Jack Says:

    I just hope that the Republicians can delay as much as possible before the midterm elections so we can vote out as many liberals as possible and put a stop to the lunacy in Washington.

    Obama is a marxist and we don’t need anymore of the backdoor BS!

  19. Kevin Cooley Says:


    First off, great post. I am so glad to see others who have been paying attention and are as appalled as I am about what’s happening.

    I am reminded in recent events of Clinton’s term, or rather the events that surrounded his term. While US military secrets were sold to China andlegislation was moved forward which lead to our jobs going overseas, we heard about Monica Lewinsky. We were told about those issues, but it was mentioned in passing as if it were no big deal. I view this as a diversion.

    Make no mistakes about it, if we hadn’t allowed our industries to go overseas where labour was cheap and profits were large, the recession we just went through would not have been so bad. We would have the industries to put people back to work. But recently we are hearing about one sex scandal after another. Is this another diversion? And if so, from what? From the fact they are screwing the citizens with this health care “reform” is my guess.

    If you look at the Cloward-Piven strategy (crisis strategy), you see it was talking about welfare and how to “mobilize the poor.” And when their scheme was exposed they moved on. If you break their strategy down to it’s basic elements, it is a plan which uses the fears of the target population to achieve a specific goal. Fear is the biggest motivator of mass populations that I am aware of. Fear creates panic, and panic creates the sense of urgency. Now you run into phrases like “something must be done now!” This basic concept is being used on a global scale as well, (the most recent and obvious being the topic of a confernce which happened in Copenhagen.) but I’ll try to stay on topic.

    This can be achieved rather easily. “Everyone has a price” the saying goes. Flash enough money around any group and someone WILL take it regardless of political beliefs, social standing or corporate position. This was made perfectly clear with the “sweetheart deal” which allowed the senate to achieve the needed 60 votes. The sense of urgency was verbally emphasized by Mr. Obama himself throughout the whole “debate.” ( And I chose my prefix for him carefully. )

    Now, just to back up my belief this is a completely socialist direction we are being lead in I decided to do some research. There was a book written by Karl Marx called ” The Communist Manifesto” which was supposedly the Soviet plan to take over the United States. These basic ideas were echoed in a book entitled “The naked communist” which was written by a former FBI agent. These basic ideas were later admitted to the congressional record. It’s funny how we’re seeing those basic ideologies showing up in our leaders’ attitudes and legislation.

    I can NOT believe these jokers used OUR taxes to buy controling stock in 6 companies. When has it ever been the resposibility of the government to manage or direct corporations? Is it even constitutionally legal? Since they’ve used taxpayer money to purchase these controling stocks, does those stocks not belong to the taxpayers? Then sell my share of those stocks and put that money toward paying off our national debt.

    Anyway, I have been paying more attention to the global arena and the events taking place right now. It wasn’t until the “avian flu scare” and the following H1N1 “pandemic” that I turned my attention to what was happening nationally. I am almost certain that the plan is to completely collapse the dollar. This has to be done for certain events to take place on the global arena. I am sickened to think of what is coming if our national legislation, such as this healthcare reform and cap and trade, are actually passed. This is the last point of contention for the global scheme. A certain statement echoes in my ears “We will achieve a one world government. The only question is whether it will be by consent or conquest.”

    Well, it looks like we are about to find out which way it’s going to go. People are getting anxious and want this to happen as quickly as possible. Hence the rush to push through this healthcare takeover…I mean reform. Geesh, silly me… And the cap and trade scam…I mean bill. Darn! There I go again. If only my backspace button worked.

  20. Michael Eden Says:

    Health care is a nation-killer. We have to stop that insanity, or else the country is just done.

    The Democrats are now talking about using secrecy and the nuclear option to ram their agenda through. The shame of it is that the American people set up their collapse by voting in Democrats to begin with.

    Joe the Plumber was right: it “sounded like socialism” because it WAS socialism.

  21. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Oh yeah, I just thought someone may like to see this:

    1. US acceptance of co-existance as the only alternative to atomic war.

    2. Create the illusion that total disarmament of the US would be a demonstration of moral strength.

    3. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not the items could be used for war.

    4. Provide US foreign aid to all nations regardless of communist domination.

    5. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representaion in the United Nations.

    6. Promote the UN as the ” only hope for mankind.”

    7. Resist any attempt to outlaw the communist party.

    8. Do away with loyalty oaths.

    9. Capture one or both political parties of the United States.

    10. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

    11. Get control of the schools. Use them as trasmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda. Get control of teachers associations.

    12. Gain control of all student newspapers.

    13. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writings, and policy making positions.

    14. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and motion pictures.

    15. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a religious “crutch.”

    16. Discredit the American constitution by calling it inadequate and out of step with modern needs, a hindarence to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

    17. Discredit the family as an institution. Promte promiscuity and easy divorce.

    18. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of their parents.

    These are just a few of the notable ways in which the communist party was planning on taking over the United States. This can be found in a book entitled “The Communist Manifesto.” written by Karl Marx. It is echoed in a book entitled ” The Naked Communist” written by a former FBI agent in 1958.

    We could go right down the list and see these ideologies being pushed on us over the course of several decades:

    #1 has been accomplished. I think everyone agrees that coexistance seems to be the only alternative. This understanding came about during the Cuban missle crisis.

    #2 We keep hearing about new treaties of disarmament between the US and Russia. Though I view this as a good thing, it does play in to this whole scenerio.

    #3 Welcome the legislation of the Clinton administration. Not only did we get NAFTA, but we got Chinagate as well.

    #4 We provide foreign aid to Russia each year. With the agreement made at the Copenhagen conference, we are looking at an extra 100 billion dollars which will be paid out to poor nations every year. That is on top of the already massive amount we are already giving out in humanitarian aid.

    #5 Okay, let’s look at this. With the Soviet Union as a nation, they were only allowed a set amount of representatives in the United Nations. But if the USSR were to disolve, then each of those communist satellite nations would have individual representation. This would give the communist party a much larger voice within the UN. Whether or not this was the reason behind the fall of the Soviet Union is debatable. But it does make one wonder.

    #6 How many ads were ran promoting the Copenhagen conference as mankinds only hope of combating climate change? Next year you will hear the same thing. If you tell someone something enough times, pretty soon they will believe it, right?

    #7 Can’t really speak on this one.

    #8 I cannot personally speak on this one either. There are rumors, but that is not what I’m interested in.

    #9 In my personal opinion, this seems to have been accomplished. At least with the democratic party. Possibly into the republican ranks as well though.

    #10. This is happening all the time. Homeland Security act has given the government the right to eavesdrop on any US citizen it deems as a threat. This is clear violation of our civil rights, but we are told it is keeping us safe. Most people believe this and take it to be fact. I do not. Enter Infragaurd (sp?). This organization was created afteer the Oklahoma City bombing. It’s goal is to gaurd the nations infrastructures. They do this by encouraging citizens to spy on their neighbors under the perfect disguise of national security. In this way they have expanded the homeland security network to include your neighbor, your boss, anyone who participates in this program. The actual mission of the organization is respectable. By all means, protect our infrastructure. But not by trampling on the Bill of Rights.

    #11. Once again, I cannot comment factually on this.

    #12. Refer to #11.

    #13. I can see this clearly happening. However, convincing anyone of it is something of another story. This is done through “peer reviewed” journals of a scientific, or medical nature. Whenever something doesn’t fit into the lie which is being given, simply change the criteria for acceptance into the peer reviewed journals. Without publication in said journals, the theory which you are trying to promote holds no weight and cannot be used as a valid arguement. But… as I said, this is just my opinion on the matter based on my own personal research.

    #14. Once again, to me this is so obvious. All one has to do is watch a couple different news channels to realize we are being manipulated by the press. It has happened in the past. Most noticably in the case of former President Clinton. While the press was all over Monica Lewinsky, you only occasionally heard about the deal being signed which was going to send our jobs to China. Which was bigger news; “President recieves oral compensation”, or “President outsources millions of jobs to communist China?” I find myself once again in the same situation. We are hearing about Tiger Woods constantly. So what are they doing they don’t want us to know? Or is this just a diversion to draw attention away from the purposed socialized health care reform (which is, by the way, the flagship for socialism.)?

    #15. This one really bugs me. Since when has atheism been a valid belief in any argument? When has it ever been a belief? Is it not the lack of belief? So why are we now hearing of the atheist groups pushing (and in some cases winning) to have religion removed from religious holidays? It is imposing on your rights for me to have an angel on my Christmas tree? You find it offensive? MOVE! Get the F!*k out of my town, my state, my country. We were founded on judeo-Christian beliefs. We were given the right to worship whoever and however we wanted. Atheism is NOT a belief but a lack of beliefs. Therefore you worship NOONE. YOU HAVE NO SAY IN THE MATTER! The fact you can state your position is testimony to our rights. You have the right to state your opinion at anytime. But when you start forcing your beliefs on myself or others, you are crossing the line.

    #16. I refer you to recent comment by House speaker Nancy Pelosi. When asked what gave her constitutional rights to force everyone into health care her response was: (in a tone of complete disgust.) “Are you serious? Are you serious?” Well, Mrs. Pelosi, yes we are serious. You had better get that through your head. Some of us take the Constitution very seriously.

    #17. How far back do we need to go to see an example of this going on? Everytime you turn around another Hollywood personality is getting divorced Next week they will be remarried, only to be divorced again six months later. Or how about Tiger Woods? I could waste all kinds of space here just listing all the examples of this which we are constantly being bombarded with in news and magazines.

    #18. Once again I can clearly see this. I can use my own story as it pertains to my kids as an example. I will not do this however. I will say this, it is NEVER better to raise the child outside the childs own family. Only in the case of abuse or neglect should removing the child from his/her home ever be considered. But when a father and mother decides to pull a prank which put noone in harms way, the first thing that is brought up is the fact that the children should be taken away. Now I agree it was a deplorable prank to pull and for such a trivial cause, but does it warrant destroying the children’s mental health? Does it warrant destroying the family? Despite the fact that “resources which could have been used elsewhere” were pulled in to help rescue the balloon boy; I for the life of me cannot see where the children have been abused or neglected in any way. The parents made a poor decision, but destroying the family is cruel and unjust punishment for such a crime. I am disgusted it is even considered to remove the children.

  22. Michael Eden Says:

    You highlight the rampant use of “something must be done now!”

    From Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism, p 42:

    The utility of terror was multifaceted, but among its chief benefits was its tendency to maintain a permanent sense of crisis. Crisis is routinely identified as a core mechanism of fascism because it short-circuits debate and democratic deliberation. Hence all fascistic movements commit considerable energy to prolonging a heightened state of emergency.

    What we are seeing from Obama is a hybrid of Marxism and fascism (which is basically what China did).

    What Obama did with the car companies and the banks and other industries was fascism (which is a socialist-style takeover of the means of production by using regulation, government coercion, or actual ownership, versus Marxism which simply nationalizes all the means of production. In both cases, the government has control). His overall agenda is more akin to Marxism. And of course both the Marxists and the fascists wanted to have control over the health care system.

    Cloward and Piven as a strategy, I would argue, is based on more than merely fear. It is the actual swamping of the economic system by overwhelming the system with spending, deficits, and debt until it collapses under its own weight. And like falling a tree or demolishing a building, the left believes they can direct the fall to favor themselves and their agenda. And it’s not far now from succeeding.

  23. Michael Eden Says:

    That’s pretty much the United Nations agenda, almost to a “T”.

    And Barack Obama would joyfully hand the American people over to the UN agenda.

  24. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Exactly. Now let me ask you, did our founding fathers not say it was the responsibilty of every citizen to defend the constitution from all enemies whether they be foriegn or domestic? Or am I thinking of the oath I swore when I joined the military many years ago…heck I don’t know. What I do know is simply this:

    It is not our job to make anyone believe. Only to make them aware.

  25. Michael Eden Says:

    I took that oath myself, and I suppose I consider myself “still under oath.”

    The Constitution doesn’t make its citizens swear to ANY oaths. But I sure think the founding fathers would like it if their progeny still considered their Constitution worth fighting to preserve.

    PS I recently wrote an article on how our founding fathers undoubtedly feel about how things are going in the nation they founded.

  26. Kevin Cooley Says:

    I also still feel obligated by that oath. Those who have the ability also have the responsibility right?

    I have been trying my hand at blogging every since the swine flu scam. My area of strength is in science and I have been studying the safety of vaccines since the birth of my son 4 years ago. As you can see, I am not of political mind. It has only been realatively recently that I started paying attention to our leaders’ political agenda. So why am I studying vaccines but sticking my nose into politics? Because it is all linked. What is happening goes deeper than most people would care to discuss. Everything has been done incrementally so noone would realize what was going on. This is part of the global plan which I speak. Every once in awhile we are given a very important piece of information which we hear once or twice and then never again. Example would be this:
    http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbS5hcG5ld3MuY29tL2FwL2RiXzE5ODg2L2NvbnRlbnRkZXRhaWwuaHRtP2NvbnRlbnRndWlkPTFSUTlzdGNI (wow, that doesn’t look right. Let me know if it doesn’t work.)

    Yes, I have read many of your articles. We are on the same page and share the same views. I was actually going to ask you for permission to link to you with my posts. You have alot of information in one place. I like that.

  27. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Sorry about that link. I posted it as a note to myself for future reference. (Also apologize for the spelling errors.) Therefore it asks you if you wish to go outside myspace. It is to an AP article which sheds a little light on the depth of the deception. Here is a more direct link so you won’t have to go through the myspace thing:

    That looks better.

  28. Michael Eden Says:

    So we’re oath keepers alike, then. Good!

    I’m thinking the link didn’t work, as it took me to a “warning” page with a link to a guy named “Tom” and an article about phishing.

    I think that we should all use the gifts and interests God gave us. And if you’ve got an aptitude in science, we need plenty of help exposing lies and myths in the field of science.

    I have found “global warming” to be a nexus between science and politics. And “scientists” have demonstrated themselves to be naked political ideologues willing to throw their science aside.

    A guy who can read and understand the scientific literature in “climate change” can be very helpful.

    I had the H1N1 shot after my doctor (who initially was skeptical) said he thought it was now a good idea. But I’ve always wondered about these flu shots.

    Barack Obama “inspired” me to get into blogging. I didn’t know an awful lot about politics, but when I saw that racist, unAmerican, Marxist, and evil church he’d been part of for 23 years and a member for 20, I knew he was an evil man who would be a disgrace and a clear and present danger as president.

    You most certainly have my permission to link to me, and to use my articles. My purpose in blogging was twofold: 1) I want to leave a record; and 2) I want to educate and inform people. That’s why I use as many links and quote as many articles as I do.

  29. Michael Eden Says:

    I’ll copy that article to a file for reference.

    My own brother had a terrible staph infection which he got during a routine surgery in a hospital. It messed him up big time. And I now regard the bugs one is exposed to during a surgery as more dangerous than the surgery itself.

    So I’m sure with you there.

    Here, too, is a nexus between science and politics. The damned liberal mindset is to be a nannystate, and protect us from everything under the sun. So they mandate that we be pumped full of antibiotics to protect us.

    Many times that strategy ends up hurting us far more than helping us.

  30. Kevin Cooley Says:

    You are correct. Global warming is just a vehicle. It’s a scam. I mean think about it, they held a global warming conference in the middle of a snow storm. My part of the nation was rather cool all summer. And we have been getting hammered by cold fronts and snow storms all winter. To me it would seem like we are going through a cooling trend. But it’s not just in our part of the world. It’s happening across the northern hemisphere.

    Which brings me back to your statement about the H1N1 vaccine. You must understand that while we were in our summer months the southern hemisphere was going through it’s winter. Therefore they were already in the height of their flu season. How many deaths did you hear being reported from Australia, S. America or any of those other countries in the southern hemisphere? Not an unusually high number I can assure you. And when you take into consideration WHO was supposedly not prepared for such an outbreak, therefore did not have the vaccine supply to protect those populations; you have to start realizing that fear is being used to manipulate you. We were hearing of all the deaths racking up in the western US and Mexico where it was summer, but hardly anything from the southern hemisphere. Why?

    Because if you knew that this “swine” flu was a scam, you wouldn’t get the vaccine. Now I’m not saying it can’t kill. Even common flu can kill. But I am saying it was already known the strain was not as deadly as WE were being told. It was a campaign of fear. I would love to go more in detail on this with you, but it is getting late and I (fortunately) have work in the morning so I must end this for now.

  31. Michael Eden Says:

    The worst winter in 25 years – all caused by the uncontrollable warming of our planet due to CO2.

    I read a book called “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years.” And I mock the self-professed geniuses who claim human beings are responsible for a phenomenon that we can demonstrate millions of years before there WERE any human beings. Not to mention on most of the planets in our solar system.

    Liberals – even if they have PhDs in science – have willed themselves to be utterly stupid.

    As to the H1N1 vaccine, I was skeptical, but not skeptical enough to ignore my physician’s advice. He had nothing to benefit from it (his office didn’t even HAVE any H1N1 vaccine); and he was initially skeptical, but changed his mind after reviewing the medical literature for his patients.

    Which doesn’t guarantee that he’s right. But he is my doctor, and I do trust his medical advice (I’ve had some clown doctors; but I’m truly happy with the doctor I have now).

    There are more and more parents saying that their kid got autism from a vaccine. And I hear these stories, and the sincerity of these parents (and some medical experts), and realize they may be right. In particular, because children have fragile developing immune systems.

  32. Kevin Cooley Says:

    I was writing a response for you but was jumping back and forth between tabs to paste links and completely erased what I was writing. The story I was painting is rather long and drawn out. I will give you a link to one of the blogs I have written which will paint the same basic story.

    What I will say here just to shorten things up a bit is if you look closely you can see the Cloward- Piven stategy being applied at the global scale:

    First you create the crisis

    You hype it up for awhile and just when you have the population really scared you release it on them to create hysteria and the cry for help


    If you are caught, you simply change the approach, or in this case change the virus. One month after the last article “swine” flu hit the scene. And immediately scientists were screaming:


    The motivation behind everything which is going on is power. Not profit as everyone believes. Once you have more money than you could possibly spend what do you wish for? Life then becomes a game. Instead of dealing in money the game changes to dealing in populations. And when that is no longer enough and the power completely corrupts, one might try to replace his own beliefs in place of God’s laws:


    Notice how we have ten guidelines instead of the ten commandments. (I don’t like to use wikipedia as a reference, but it will suffice in this case.)

    As for the H1N1 vaccine, the problem is that most doctors have not thouroughly researched the vaccine controversy. They rely on what they are told is safe by the CDC and other organizations. It is NOT the fault of the doctors. I believe they use the information being given to them to the best of their abilities to help us in our times of need. But whatcha say we do a quick bit of research ourselves.

    The first thing we learn about when we hit the work force is the MSDS. We are taught that if we ever have any questions about a chemical to consult the MSDS. So let’ s take a look at the most controversial additive ( or presevative to be more precise.) Thimerosal.

    Out of aggrevation I will not paste all the links and just tell you, the original manufacturer and patent holder of thimerosal was a company called Eli-Lilly. We will compare the MSDS from Eli-Lilly with those from a couple other companies.

    Click to access Eli_Lilly-Thimerosal_Material_Safety_Data_Sheet.pdf


    Click to access wcd026b4.pdf

    What I am showing you is what is being planned for the population. You see we are being told the population is outgrowning the abilities of the earth to sustain everyone. So we need to thin things out. Yes, we are talking genecide. The UN definition says that I don’t have to kill you or you children. Only prevent you from reproducing. Now look again at those MSDS sheets very closely. Read everything. Are you reading what I am reading? Now I refer you to the first “guideline” as given by the above link. How else are we going to go from 6.5 billion to 500 million?

    What was the targeted group of people for the H1N1 vaccine? It was women and children. Yet I have in front the vaccine packaging where it says it is NOT reccommeded for use on pregnant or nursing women. Unfortunately, this is not a digital copy and I am technically not supposed to have it. It is the batch insert which only the doctors see. I can assure you I have spread copies around.

    I had better post before I erase again…

  33. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Wow, that last paragraph was choppy. What I was saying was I have the batch insert for one H1N1 vaccine. This is not the pakage insert which comes with the doses and which you are given when vaccinated. These are the inserts which the doctors see when the batch arrives. I recieved it from a friend of ours who is a doctor herself and had previously been completely unaware of the other side of the controversy. I was happy to enlighten her enough to prompt her to do her OWN research instead of relying on the word of the CDC. As far as I know, her beliefs have completely changed. But that is the problem you see, people would rather rely on others to tell them what is truth and what to believe. But not everyone is honest. Just because you have a title in front of your name and wear a fancy suit does NOT mean you are an honest person. How many times do we have to be shown this before it finally sinks in?

    Just a few days ago a former CDC director was hired in to a large pharmaceutical company at 5 million bucks a year. I can’t remember who it was or the company they went to. My wife sent me the text when she heard it on the news. It has never been mentioned since.

    Here is the link to my blog on vaccines. Please forgive my grammar and spelling, my english teacher would be disgusted with me.


  34. Michael Eden Says:

    Works for me.

    I’m a Christian, so I have had a sense of what was going to come for quite a while. The Bible made quite clear that in the last days, initiated with the reviving of the state of Israel, we would build up to a point when a global dictator known as the Antichrist or the beast would promise a heaven-like utopia, but literally bring hell on earth.

    I don’t believe Obama is the Antichrist, but I DO believe that he is one of many false messiahs in the world today who will plunge the world into disaster, such that the Antichrist can come riding in on his white horse and convince a God-denying world that he can save the day.

    And we are truly on the cusp of the disaster that will bring about Revelation 6.

    And I certainly do see the secular humanist left willing to use any device that will further their advance of a global agenda.

    You mention a movement to reduce our population. People might say that is a load of hogwash – until they see what at least three OBAMA APPOINTEES say.

    Look at John Holdren, Obama’s “science czar,” has to say about forced abortions and giving women drugs to prevent birth, in the name of population control. Look at Cass Sunstein and Ezekiel Emanuel and what they have said about medical rationing, the Complete Lives System, and the mass death by medical neglect of senior citizens.

    Population Control has been a dream of the left since Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood (not to mention the National Socialist German Workers Party). And there are environmentalists galore who have said that we need to exterminate 2/3 of the population to save the trees.

    So mass population control isn’t so much of a theory, given the past and the present efforts to accomplish it. Another demonic agenda, yours courtesy of the left.

  35. Kevin Cooley Says:

    You are correct in your thinking.

    Obama is not the antichrist. He is just a puppet upon the global stage. Even without the special interest groups such as CFR and the Trilateral Commission backing him up (I don’t even know if I spelled that right…) Obama would still be carrying out this whole takeover. He is setting the stage for a much larger takeover.

    Just to back up the belief that we are living in the final chapter, once again let’s take a quick look based solely on our knowledge. The Mayan calander runs out 12/21/12. Therefore most people believe this to be the end of mankind. But from all of the research I have done what they actually said was this would be a time of great spiritual enlightenment and time as we know it would cease to exist.

    The first thing that jumps out at me is “great spiritual enlightenment.”
    This literally means spiritual awakening or…revelations…the revealing of truths. So we now have the last book of the Bible referenced by a people who were supposedly unaware of the Bible.

    And the last part, “time as we know it would cease to exist” could mean nothing more than our preception of time changes. What they do NOT say is that it will be the end of mankind. So there is hope…if you see it as such.

    As I stated in an earlier post, it is not our job to make anyone believe this, only to make them aware. I say that because this is the time when everyone must decide where they stand on so many levels. Not everyone will wake up. We were told that. But if the effort isn’t made to make others aware we would be a guilty as those who were commiting these atrocities.

    I will have to admit that I was a skeptic of religion for most of my life. I needed to see proof. I was interested in what could be proven. All else was controversial. At some point in my research I ran across something called sacred geometry. After many months of studying it I finally came to realize what I was looking at. What is sacred geometry? Basically, it is the design. Da Vinci knew this and tried to convey that knowledge in his portrait of man. That famous picture was done using sacred geometry. It demonstrates that by the time an embryo is 8 cells (known as the seed of life in sacred geometry)it contains within it the exact representation of your ADULT form. This is a little hard to understand, and I am not articulate enough to explain. But once you realize what it all means it will open a persons eyes. Why is this not being taught? We can find the seed of life on almost every ancient temple and in every ancient culture. This has been know about throughout history. Da Vinci, Einstien, Plato, Nostadamus (sp?), they all knew about it, and studied it. Yet we are lucky if it is even mentioned in our culture. This is the design, plain and simple. Not only can you find within it the blueprint of man, but of everything we know to be “real.” Right up to the positions of the stars in the sky.

    And…if there is a design, there must be a designer. That realization was like a kick in the stomach for me. A skeptic I am no more. I KNOW there is a God. I would suggest to anyone who has doubts to do research into sacred geometry. You may be suprised.

  36. Michael Eden Says:

    On my view, belief in a Creator God isn’t an act of faith. It is an act of common sense.

    What takes faith is believing that this awesome, infinite, Creator God actually cares for us, loves us, and has a plan for our lives.

    I was raised to believe, but when I went in the Army, I experienced a lot of nasty things that put me into the “how can God allow this to happen? if He exists?” camp.

    Ultimately, I regained my faith (plus more besides) primarily through 3 things:

    1) that abiogenesis (life from nonlife) was impossible. Life had to come from a Creator. You can mix chemicals until doomsday, and add lightening or whatever you want, and you will never get to a living cell – much less human minds.

    2) that the disciples were in a unique position to know whether Christ had really risen from the dead, and they clearly believed in His Resurrection from the dead. A survey of secular encyclopedias demonstrated to me that the disciples all (with the exception of John) died as martyrs for what they believed. These men wouldn’t have knowingly died for a lie, without any renouncing the faith.

    3) that the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 predicted with uncanny accuracy when Messiah would appear. I did a study on it which I shall have to write into an article. But it was on the basis of that study when I fully and absolutely realized that there was an infinite God who knew the end from the beginning.

    And, yeah. Design doesn’t just happen from chaos. Design means there is a designer. We also find that the Big Bang demands a Big Banger. According to science, all of matter, space, energy, and time erupted into being caused by nothing. We are inescapably led to God.

  37. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Maybe faith would be a better word for it. Weren’t we told our faith would be tested though? Funny how pieces are starting to fall together.

    I believe Everything I have been through in my life has been for a specific reason. We thought we had graduated from school. As it turns out, we’ve been here all our lives.

    We have really strayed from topic haven’t we? Sorry about that. I could talk about this stuff for days.

  38. Michael Eden Says:

    People have their own views, and want to talk about what they want to talk about.

    I get upset when someone essentially attacks one of my articles without ever getting specific about what it allegedly was that was wrong about the article (that’s your liberals who don’t bother to read and learn, but just emote and rant).

    Otherwise, I just go with the flow.

  39. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Okay, okay, I have one more comment to make. I would not swear to this, but I believe the first seal has already been broken. The description matches up perfectly. A pale horse and rider I believe is symbolic for vaccines containing thimerosal.

  40. Michael Eden Says:

    I’m not quite ready to agree with you without a lot more evidence – but you may very well be right.

    History is filled with things that most people missed, but a wise few pointed at and said, “This will destroy us unless we stop it now.” And then, of course, it wasn’t stopped and it DID destroy them.

    Certainly, over-vaccination and over-reliance on antibiotics and the like can establish the massive die-out due to disease and plague that we see coming in the future in the Book of Revelation.

  41. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Did it again! I keep forgetting to open pages in new tabs and it erases my work.

    Anyway, I do not blame you a bit for being reluctant. When I first started looking into vaccines I was completely convinced there was nothing to the few parents who were claiming their child had been affected by the vaccine. My wife and I actually argueed about whether my son would be vaccinated. I got my way. My son is now on the autistic scale. That little boy means more to me than I could ever begin to describe. And I hurt him. I hope you never have to experience the anger and pain I feel for that.

    However, my son is doing better (chelation thereapy) and my daughter, who was born 2 years later, has never been vaccinated. She is doing wonderful.

    I could post link after link of studies which have been done on vaccines that show there is a link to developemental problems and thimerosal. Heck, they even tested monkeys:


    My understanding of politics leaves much to be desired and I am trying to learn as much as possible. I do not claim to know everything there is to know about vaccines, but in the four years I have spent studying the vaccines and then the pharmaceutical companies, I came to the realization that nothing was being done because of political reasons. I literally followed the trail right to our leaders. These people I am refering to are the ones who are orchestrating the political meltdown as well as the global warming scam.

    Have you ever wondered where the AMA came from? Perhaps who it was who started it? It was an oilman. A well known family in the US and abroad. Why would an oil man have intrest in medicine? Maybe because the father of the man in question sold oil on the streets as a cure all. Or it could be that drilling for oil produces a waste product called coal tar and he had to pay maney to dispose of it. So instead he changed what we thought of as medicine, which used natural substances to treat sickness. We call this alternative medicine today all because of this one man.

  42. Michael Eden Says:

    I’m sorry to hear that your son has autism. I’m sending a prayer your way, that the Lord bless your son with recovery.

    I can understand why you are so angry about vaccinations and the entire industry. Fifty years from now, we might still not know for sure to what extent vaccinations were responsible for all these cases of autism.

    There are so many things that go into our bodies that we really have no idea about. I drink diet coke, but you know what many say about that. Then there’s cell phones. There’s a million billion things. We’ve come a long way from simple snake oil. Or you could say that snake oil has been diversified into a billion different product lines.

    I’m frankly shocked that pharmaceutical companies would be testing monkeys when there are so many liberals around.

    Vaccinations have done a lot of good, but too much of most things becomes a bad thing.

    We can go back to the progressives and prohibition, when liberals decided alcohol was bad for us, and we were too stupid to make a personal decision for ourselves. So – in the liberal tradition – they decided for us. We’ve seen that mindset ever since. And now they are forcing people to have vaccinations many people don’t want.

  43. Kevin Cooley Says:

    No, it’s not exactly autism. It’s delayed speech, and other neurological disorders. Nothing which should be too severe, but they still put him on the autism scale.

    Have you ever heard of the Simpsonwood summit? This is where CDC, FDA, PHARMA, and govrnment officials met in a little town in GA to discuss the results from a set of tests they had conducted to prove there was no link between autism and vaccines. But there was a problem, the tests proved there was a strong relationship between the two.

    “the number of dose related relationships [between mercury and autism] are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.” – Dr. William Weil, American Academy of Pediatrics. Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000

    Not enough to be certain vaccines definately were causing the problems, but enough to warrant further studies. It was enough to warrant this response from one of the other doctors attending the meeting:

    “Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out at eight o’clock for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by c-section. Our first male in the line of the next generation and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meanwhile I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines.” – Dr. Robert Johnson, Immunologist, University of Colorado, Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000

    Three days into the meeting the lead researcher (let’s call him Dr. V.), who was working for the CDC announced to the board that he had just accepted an offer to work for GlaxoSmithKline. From there the discussion turned to how the data could be manipulated to get any result they wanted. When the report was released by Dr. V. two years later, he claimed to be a CDC representative and that there was definately NO relationship between vaccines and autism.


    The whole transcript, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, is over 200 pages long. In it they discuss how they planned to manipulate the data to filter out a large number of adverse reactions. This information was reviewed by congressman Dave Weldon (FLA) and he was disturbed enough to write a letter to the head of the CDC.

    The people who are doing this are the ones who have bought the votes for this healthcare reform. They use the lobbyists to do their bidding. That’s why they were willing to do whatever it took, including sexual favors, to get the votes that were needed.

  44. Kevin Cooley Says:

    The reason they need this healthcare reform to go through is for the tort reform… among the obvious reason of socialist transformation. You hardly ever hear about that. This tort reform is going to offer some protection from malpractice suits for physicians, but the pharmaceutical companies will no longer be liable for any bad drug they release. That is why we are not hearing about it. If it were going to protect the doctors we would hear more physicians speaking for this reform.

    Now, I have absolutely NO evidence to support this claim. On just about everything else I can show articles to back up my statements. The only other opinion

  45. Kevin Cooley Says:

    lol, I just keep having problems with posting.

    (to continue…)

    I think the only other opinion of my own which I have stated so far has been the one about the first seal having already been broken. And I admit that may be way out in left field, but having followed the global scene for the past few years I have came to this conclusion MYSELF. If I am wrong I will have noone else to blame. The same goes for this claim about the tort reform to be included in this healthcare bill. I have no solid evidence, it’s just a hunch so to speak.

  46. Michael Eden Says:

    Or as John McCain put it:

    I don’t know what deal has been cut in Senator Reid’s office as the deal was cut with the pharmaceutical companies and the deal was cut with the AMA and the deal was cut with the hospital association …

    MCCAIN: I don’t know what the deal was, but we’ll find out what the deal was just like the deals were cut with all these other organizations …


    MCCAIN: I can’t walk through the hallway here without bumping into one of their lobbyists.

    BAUCUS: Does the senator want to hear the deal?

    MCCAIN: If the senator keeps interrupting, he is violating the rules of the Senate. I would thought he would have learned them by now.

    Obama promised an end to lobbyists, but the number of health care lobbyists have more than doubled since Obama took office.

  47. Michael Eden Says:

    The Democrats’ health care bill does not and never has – in any of its iterations – had anything that would in any way reduce lawsuits. There is no tort reform in the Democrats’ bills – only in the bills/measures/amendments that Republicans have repeatedly offered only to be turned down.

    Lawyers are a protected class of the Democrat Party.

    It MIGHT be that Obama has made a deal with the pharmaceuticals limiting lawsuits. The White House DID make a secret deal with them, and we don’t/can’t know all the details.

    But they haven’t done a damn thing to protect anybody else from every lawsuit under the sun.

  48. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Yeah, how many lobbyists was it per Representative again? I can’t remember now, but the money that was being used to pay these lobbyists salarys was probably nothing to sneaze at. That’s not to mention all the bribes…I mean strategic lobbying… that was being paid out. Of course these pharmaceutical companies are going to make a hefty profit, but it is the people behind the pharmaceutical companies which has the most to gain. Those which sit on the board of these companies, whose financial power is enough to sway decsions, who needs to be watched closely.

    As I said, I have always believed Obama to be nothing more than a puppet. Your description of him as one of the false messiahs makes better scense though. This family which I speak of ( research oil monopolies of the early 1900s and the subsequent congressional order circa 19…11 I think …to dissolve that monoploy, then follow that family’s timeline and history.) is the one which is pulling Obamas strings. He is a prominent figure in the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, honerary Chairman of the Board for the Federal Reserve, sits upon the board of the World Bank, Owns controling stock in at least 12 major newspapers, owns publishing companies which print school text books, and the list goes on and on…

    This is who I came to believe to be one of the false messiahs. (There is over 100 other families involved) But Obama better fits the description of messiah…

  49. Kevin Cooley Says:

    lol, well I am proven wrong.

    I think I will still wait and see what kind of deal the phamaceutical industry lands in the end. I’m betting it’s gonna be a doozy.

  50. Michael Eden Says:

    Glenn Beck has more than once recently said that all the garbage we are seeing is the result of a 100-year progressive/liberal plan.

    We’ve seen it on a number of levels.

    The Trilateral Commission is a puppet of the Council on Foreign Relations, which has been doing damage for generations. Then there’s the Rothschild Group – which was instrumental in the creation of the Federal Reserve.

    Secular humanists pushing for a secular humanist agenda, all.

    By the way, Obama’s White House has been called the “CFR administration” because of all the CFR people he’s picked.

  51. Michael Eden Says:

    There are reasons to protect the pharmaceutical industry from bogus lawsuits, as well. We need a thriving pharmaceutical industry, if we ever hope to have cures for things like cancer, et al.

    At the same time, there’s a right way and a very wrong way to do it.

    You can bet the Obama administration will choose the very wrong way.

  52. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Here’s another wild theory of mine, this film “Zeitgeist” which has been circulating around the internet. This is obvious socialist propaganda in my opinion first of all. A utopian world in which there would be no personal possessions but community holdings instead is socialism. Am I wrong abot that?

    Here is something else which jumps out at me, not only is it socialist propaganda which is trying to convince you there is no God, but it does this in an intresting way. It tells you the truth about several other things which has been taking place. This will gain your trust. If am telling you the truth about A and B then you just may believe me when I tell you the lie C. Or move the lie into any position you want, the inclusion of several truths in order to mask a lie will be enough to sway those of weak faith.

  53. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Forgive me if I have no sympathy for the pharmaceutical companies. They use a very simple marketing technique. You go to the doctor because you’re sick. That doctor then presribes you a drug. This drug has side effects. Now the chances of you having those side effects is very very low. With the first dose you take that is. With each dose following your chances increase as the targeted organs are assaulted by the drug. Over the course of your life you will more than likely go to the doctor several times. Each time you do you break down the ability of certain organs, depending on the drug, to function properly. This is a large reason we have the health issues as we age. We are over medicated in order to sell us more medication.

    The SV40 virus is a virus which was transfered from the Arfican geen monkey to humans by way of the polio virus. This virus has shown up in ALL cancer cells and is believed to be linked if not the cause of cancer. It is also remarkably simular to HIV.

    Once you reseach these drugs and their histories, you will never see pharmaceutical companies the same way again. These people have CAUSED more damage than they have done good. But then again…did I mention the above stated family founded the AMA? See before we have “modern” medicine we had other ways to heal people which did not involve the use of chemicals and toxins. Today this is called “alternative” medicine.

  54. Michael Eden Says:

    Satan masquerades as an angel of light. And telling just enough truth to sell the giant lie at the end of it is very “Satan-like.”

    Then again, there’s also Hitler’s Big Lie, which is another leftist tool. Just tell a lie – and repeat it so often – that is so outrageous that people say it must be true because they can’t believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously” (Hitler’s words from Mein Kampf).

    I think in this case you get the worldview of socialism – which is government as God. And the perfect socialist government is presented as a utopia. Once that vision is implanted, the liberal will believe all the lies necessary in the path toward that utopia. But of course, the whole thing is a lie, justified by lies.

    Or as G. K. Chesterton put it, “When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing— they believe in anything.”

  55. Kevin Cooley Says:

    excuse me, I need to correct a couple things, The SV40 virus was transfered by the polio vaccine, not the virus. And it has not shown up in ALL cancers…I got a little dramatic there. LOL

  56. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Yes, the Rothschild group is another one to watch. This is another one of the families which are controling politics on a global scale. The CFR is nothing more than a think tank for the family controling our region. And they in turn work hand in hand with the trilatteral clowns.

    I have to laugh about, it I can’t help it. I have to. It was a brilliant plan. These people didn’t think in terms of what they can achieve in their lifetime. More like what would they have to do, over the course of several generations, in order to accomplish this goal. When they realized they could achieve this goal rather easily using their financial clout, they set about on this plan to overthrow God himself and replace Him with their own “laws.”

    And so many are buying into it all. It stuns me.

  57. Michael Eden Says:

    My mother had breast cancer last year. She probably would be on her way out if it weren’t for drugs manufactured by the pharmaceutical industry. And, for that matter, there are a great many people with a great many diseases and illnesses that would be dead if it weren’t for the pharmaceutical industry.

    For that matter, there are quite a few diseases that would have continued to kill countless millions of people had it not been for VACCINES, such as polio.

    So I would submit that you should at least have SOME sympathy for the pharmaceutical industry.

    And if you got your wish and all those drugs were to disappear tomorrow, I think there’d be a whole lot more dying because we didn’t have medicines than would be living because we didn’t have the pharmaceutical industry.

    These days, the pharmaceutical industry does a lot of harm, but don’t overlook that they do an awful lot of good, too.

    That’s just my two cents worth.

    As for the last days, I believe the coming Tribulation will accomplish something major. It will give the atheists and the secular humanists and the Marxists and the socialists and the fascists their chance to prove that their ways work and God’s way doesn’t. They think their giant government bureaucracies are the answer: this will be their shot. They think they don’t need God: God will give them their shot.

    The Antichrist will be every leftists dream come true. And within a few years, we will have hell on earth as a consequence of the left finally completely getting their way. When Christ returns, He will literally have to stop the world from destroying itself.

    Why? Look at Proverbs 8:36

    But whoever fails to find me harms himself; all who hate me love death.

    That’s the nutshell version: the left love death, and all of their “solutions” lead to it or outright embrace it (such as abortion).

    And they love death in health care, if you listen to them. Here’s Robert Reich:

    “Thank you. And by the way, we’re going to have to, if you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive…so we’re going to let you die.”

    You first, Bob.

    And you get more of the same if you consider Obama appointees like Cass Sunstein, Ezekiel Emanuel, John Holdren, and the almost-Obama appointee Tom Daschle. These guys have all said awful things about letting people die for the sake of their utopia. You look at other famous leftists: Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il – you are all about a terrible, terrible vision that they see as marvelous.

    They love death, because their father the devil loves death.

  58. Kevin Cooley Says:

    I am sorry to hear that your mother has breast cancer. And I am glad to hear she is still with us.

    I dare not say the pharmaceutical companies have not done any good. However, I have studied the histories behind these vaccines. You have not done a comparison study on the disease flow chart (which looks like a wave) and the release dates of the vaccines meant to treat them. They claim the vaccines were responsible for the decline of these viruses, but that is far from the truth. In almost every case the vaccine well after the peak was over. CDCs own records will confirm this.

    But, as I said, these are my views only and I respect yours. I will not try to sway you either way.

    We at least share the same beliefs that these jokers in the whitehouse are out to destroy this country. Possibly hand it over to someone else in my opinion. And there are higher powers at work at work as well. We may never know the true extent this all goes until the very end, but I do know these are exciting times to be living in.

  59. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Oh, as for the polio vaccine, if you only knew what came out of it you would probably see why I believe THAT to have been the first seal. That would’ve been circa 1937 I believe.

  60. Kevin Cooley Says:

    Okay, let me explain my last post. I am not real certain of the date, but I believe it was ’37 like I said. What happened was through the polio vaccine, millions of people worldwide were infected with what is known as the SV40 virus (Simian Virus 40). This was discovered after the fact several years later in the early 40s. Despite the fact that the vaccines were contaminated with this simian virus (which by the way is a Simian Immune defficancy Virus, or SIV) they continued to distrubute it.

    The SV40 virus is what is now being called the “cancer virus.” Once you become infected with it it mutates to hide itself. It is called a supervirus if I remember right because of these capabilities. You can not be treated for it and there is no cure. Not only yourself, but your children as well. Because it attaches itself to you own DNA and is passed to offspring.

    For this reason you are now starting to hear of cancer “vaccines.”

    Now, it has never been Proven, but as I said this is also been linked to HIV. The simularities are remarkable. There is little doubt it was transferred from monkeys to humans. It has just never been proven it was through the vaccine. SV40, on the other hand, was proven.

    It is also unknown whether any other viruses were passed to the human race with these vaccines. Instead they have a long history of cover up and denial. This continues to this day with all sorts of drugs. They claim it is for the best, even when they know it is causing problems. Two more recent incedents of this happening are:


    and the little deal with Bayer releasing AIDS on foriegn populations…

    Everyday we are hearing of these drugs being recalled. These drugs are rammed through the FDA solely for financial gain. Vaccines are no different. And they realized that back when they discovered what they had done with the polio vaccine. They evidently also realized how easily this had been done and the fact that the people of the world had BEGGED them to do it.

    Do you understand? Cloward and Piven were not the originaters of the crisis strategy. They were just the first ones foolish enough to put it on paper.

  61. Kevin Cooley Says:

    I thought you might find this intresting. You and I both know the Rothschilds have enormous power on the global scene. Here is the list of the worlds most powerful people according to Forbes


    Our own Obama is the most powerful man in the world! That is hilarious. The mans’ head is going to swell to unmentionable proportions.

    What is more intresting though is who you DON’T see on the list.

  62. Michael Eden Says:

    I truly don’t know what bad things the pharmaceutical industry is doing that would characterize them as particularly nasty. Nor do most other people. Clearly they want to earn a profit; otherwise they wouldn’t be in business.

    And I don’t know how bad the FDA is, although I DO know that too often the doctors who serve at the head and at the actual evaluation level have had sweetheart deals with companies they were regulating.

    I would suggest that you start a blog and really go to town on pharmaceutical companies and vaccines. It’s not hard to do, and you’d be able to get your message out.

    As for me, I’m probably going to just have a healthy dose of skepticism that can periodically be overcome by my doctor, as he prescribes me medications he believes I need, and explains them to me.

    The Rothschilds, the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and others. The liberals, the Marxists, the socialists, the secular humanists, and others. All are trying – via one or another version of the Cloward and Piven strategy – to overwhelm this country with debt to the point where we end up having to fold into the other nations as they push for a one-world government.

    A one-world government which Antichrist will soon rule.

  63. Jan Moon Says:

    Is it possible that the Cloward-Piven Strategy could cause a meltdown of such proportions that it couldn’t be handled by the left-wing, Marxist radicals and they would have to concede to the last guy standing? I can’t see where the healthcare reform travesty can go anywhere but down. But how far down can it go? As a senior citizen I may not have to worry about it; I get to choose which pill I take. But I worry about my kids. I wonder if today’s up and coming, government school educated citizens will even know what it used to be like.

  64. Michael Eden Says:

    That’s a VERY good question, Jan. And it gets to the heart of how utterly depraved this “strategy” of Cloward-Piven truly is.

    Essentially, liberals (including the man we elected as president?) who embrace this strategy believe they can steer the societal implosion to favor their agenda. Like a demolished building imploded by a demolition expert; or like a tree cut down by a professional logger. Partly, this view stems from the overarching arrogance that liberals have toward “big government,” i.e., that they can control things.

    But yes, their agenda could utterly blow up, and tens of millions of Americans could literally die. And liberals could likely care less. If they can “fundamentally transform America,” as Obama told us he’d do, they will say that it was worth it.

    I remember the words of Michael Scheurer, the CIA analyst. He was speaking about immigration policy that leaves the country terribly exposed and vulnerable to the next major terror plot, but his words resonate here, too:

    They want to play games at home. They want to stay in power forever. They want their office. They don’t want to protect the United States. They somehow think that America is eternal and can never be defeated. Well, they’re going to be in for a great wakeup call, Sir.

  65. Dan StPeter Says:

    Good news. On January 19th, here in Massachusetts we had an election annd….the American people won! Scott Brown is on his way to Washington DC to push the reset button on the 100 mph race to bankruptcy. Once again the citizens of Massachusetts take the lead in the Revolution…but this one needs to be peaceful….don’t want to give those in charge any basis for declaring martial law and suspending future elections.

  66. Michael Eden Says:

    That election was so big that we ever heard about here in the People’s Republic of Kaliforniastan.

    As big as Brown’s win was in becoming “41,” it may have an even bigger impact in the longer run of encouraging Republican candidates to run in districts that were previously believed “safe.”

    The Brown win shouts, “There IS nowhere safe if you are an Obama progressive Democrat.”

    If voters keep showing up and throwing off Democrat domination, the only people who will think about resorting to violence is liberals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: