U.N. DESTROYS NATIONS AND PEACE

In 2004, former ambassador to the U.N. Dore Gold published a book called Tower of Babble: How the United Nations Has Fueled Global Chaos.
The book criticized what it called the United Nation's moral relativism in the face of (and occasional support of) genocide and terrorism that occurred between the moral clarity of its founding period and the present day.
THAT IS PUTTING IT MILDLY! THE UNITED NATIONS HAS SET THE WORLD ON ITS EAR AND INTENDS TO SUBJUGATE EVERY NATION ON EARTH TO FORCE ITSELF ON US ALL AS THE MASTER OF THE WORLD!

What prompted this blog was an article in TIME ,
<<A senior U.S. diplomat has gone on record chastising his international colleagues at the United Nations for being guilty of D.W.I. — Diplomacy While Intoxicated.
Joseph Torsella, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. for management and reform, has complained that delegates from other countries have been turning up drunk for delicate budget negotiations. One anonymous diplomat was quoted by AFP describing envoys who turned up for sessions “falling down drunk,” while another said how “on one occasion the note-taker who was meant to be recording the talks was so intoxicated he had to be replaced.”>>
Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/03/06/u-s-diplomat-slams-u-n-colleagues-for-drunken-debates/#ixzz2MothIDyW

Well, a shallow dive into the scandals that have come out of the U.N., and before that the "League of Nations" will make you cringe! That group has always been known for alcohol and drug abuse, for sex crimes, for corruption, for underhanded dealing with the poorer nations, for anything you may care to list! IT IS AN ORGANIZATION OF INHERENT EVIL! IT IS A BLIGHT ON THE WORLD! But, with "diplomatic immunity" some of its members have even gotten away with murder! LITERALLY!

There has been controversy and criticism of the U.N. and its activities since at least the 1950s, charges that the UN's aim was to establish a "One World Government."
Charles de Gaulle of France criticized the UN, famously calling it "le machin".
It's been called much worse by nations who have experienced the "peace and help" of this accursed "organization" run by the world's most powerful nations, at the expense and demise of nations that can find no way to single-handedly combat the U.N. within their borders. For many, U.N. involvement in their countries' affairs has brought mass murder, mass rape, mass torture, and massive loss of land, people, natural resources, water, and self-identification and basic human rights. The U.N. has trashed nations since its inception, and continues to in "new and improved" ways!
FEWER THAN 1/3rd OF AMERICANS WANT THE USA INVOLVED IN THE U.N., AND THAT POLL IS 6 YEARS OLD!
Controversy occurred in 1992 when U.S. Army medic Michael New protested the United Nations by refusing to wear the UN insignia on his uniform during a peacekeeping mission to Macedonia. Michael New faced a court martial and was subsequently discharged for his disobedience to his commanding officer;BUT to this day he (AND MILLIONS OF AMERICANS) still has the belief that he was correct to refuse service under the United Nations.
[SEE, AS ONE OF MANY REPORTS, http://www.wnd.com/2000/02/4019/ ]

OUR MILITARY MUST SWEAR ALLEGIANCE TO THE U.N. IF THEY ARE "CHOSEN' TO WEAR THOSE U.N. BLUE HELMETS!
Following are just some of the "policies" of the United Nations:

• Control of all zoning matters in the United States and the control of our national parks, rivers and historical sites.
• Control over whether women are allowed to have babies.
• Control over the economic and judicial policies of all nations.
• Programs are being processed to create a tax on citizens of the United States as a permanent method of UN funding.
• The United Nation has its own Army and United States soldiers must swear allegiance to this foreign government. Remember Michael New.

The United Nations Population Fund (UNPF) has been accused by MANY different groups of providing support for government programs which have promoted forced-abortions and coercive sterilizations.
The UNFPA provided aid to Peru's population control program in the mid-to-late '90s, when it was discovered and proven without a doubt that the U.N.'s Peruvian program had been engaged in carrying out coercive sterilizations. Other nations have accused the U.N. of the same thing!

There has been criticism that the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States), who are all nuclear powers, have created an exclusive nuclear club whose powers are unchecked. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) does not have true international representation. This has led to accusations that the UNSC only addresses the strategic interests and political motives of the PERMANENT members, especially in SO-CALLED "humanitarian interventions": for example, protecting the oil-rich Kuwaitis in 1991 but poorly protecting resource-poor Rwandans in 1994. Similarly, UN was quick to take a military action through NATO against Libya in 2011 against WHAT IT CALLED "a repressive regime", but as of November 2012, it still hadn't made any decision on whether to take any action against Syria.
The practice of the permanent members meeting privately and then presenting their resolutions to the full council as a fait accompli has also drawn fire. As  Erskine Childers said, "the vast majority of members – North as well as South – have made very clear...their distaste for the way three Western powers behave in the Council, like a private club of hereditary elite-members who secretly come to decisions and then emerge to tell the grubby elected members that they may now rubber-stamp those decisions." [See:  Empowering the Peoples in their United Nations – UN Reform – Global Policy Forum. Globalpolicy.org (1994-12-02).]
Another concern is that the five permanent members of the UN Security Council are five of the top seven largest arms exporting countries in the world.
IF THE GOAL OF THE U.N. REALLY WAS "WORLD PEACE", WHY GIVE 'PREFERRED STATUS' TO NATIONS WHO TRAFFIC IN ARMS?

Other critics and even proponents of the United Nations question its effectiveness and relevance because in most high-profile cases, there are essentially no consequences for violating a Security Council resolution. An early example of this was the Bangladesh liberation war and the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities committed by the Pakistan Army on Bengali Hindus. Critics of the UN argued that the UN was completely ineffective in preventing the genocide, and that military intervention by India was the only thing to stop the mass murder.
Another such case occurred in the Srebrenica massacre where Serbian troops committed genocide against Bosnian Muslims in the largest case of mass murder on the European continent since World War II. Srebrenica had been declared a UN "safe area" and was even protected by 400 armed Dutch peace keepers, but the UN forces did nothing to prevent the massacre. In the 21st century, the most prominent and dramatic example is the Darfur crisis, in which Arab Janjaweed militias, supported by the Sudanese government, committed repeated acts of ethnic cleansing and genocide against the indigenous population. Thus far, an estimated 300,000 civilians have been killed in what is the largest case of mass murder in the history of the region, yet the UN has continuously failed to act against this severe and ongoing human rights issue.

The U.N. has been accused by Dershowitz, human rights activists Elie Wiesel, Anne Bayefsky, and Bayard Rustin, historian Robert S. Wistrich, and feminists Phyllis Chesler and Sonia Johnson of tolerating antisemitic remarks within its walls. Israeli delegates to the UN "have been treated to a sickening litany of anti-Semitic abuse at the General Assembly, in the UN Human Rights Commission, and sometimes even in the Security Council" for decades.
UN conferences throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s often passed resolutions denouncing Zionism. These conferences often did not have anything to do with Middle East politics. UN documents of the period denied the existence of the Jewish people, the history of ancient Israel, the Holocaust, and the notion that Jews deserve the same rights granted to other groups.

TO NOT ONLY ISRAEL, BUT TO MANY OTHER NATIONS, IT HAS BEEN MADE CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THE U.N. WILL NEVER ACT TO DO ANYTHING TO BETTER THEIR CAUSE. ASK AFRICAN NATIONS WHO HAVE PLEADED TO GET THE U.N. OUT OF THEIR NATIONS BECAUSE U.N. TROOPS HAVE BRUTALIZED THEIR PEOPLE! ASK HAITI! THE U.N. DENIES TRUE EQUALITY AND COMPASSION TO TOO MANY!

READ THIS CAREFULLY, PLEASE!
Reporters witnessed a rapid increase in prostitution in Cambodia, Mozambique, Bosnia, and Kosovo after U.N. and, in the case of the latter two, NATO "peacekeeping forces" moved in. In the 1996 U.N. study The Impact of Armed Conflict on Children, former first lady of Mozambique Graça Machel documented: "In 6 out of 12 country studies on sexual exploitation of children in situations of armed conflict prepared for the present report, the arrival of peacekeeping troops has been associated with a rapid rise in child prostitution."

In 2011, a United Nations spokesman confirmed 16 Beninese peacekeepers were barred from serving with them following a year-long probe. Of the 16 soldiers involved, 10 were commanders. They failed to maintain an environment that prevents sexual exploitation and abuse. Sexual misconduct by United Nations troops had earlier THAT YEAR been reported in Congo, Cambodia and Haiti, as well as in an earlier incident involving Moroccan peacekeepers in Côte d'Ivoire

<<Soldiers linked to crimes are often repatriated. In April, 16 peacekeepers from Benin were sent home from Ivory Coast — more than a year after Save the Children U.K. found that the soldiers traded food for sex with poor, underage girls. More than 100 troops from Sri Lanka were sent home from Haiti in 2007 because of widespread accusations of sex with minors.>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/world/08nations.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 <<a string of sex scandals from Bosnia to the Democratic Republic of Congo to Haiti involving peacekeeping missions has forced the United Nations to change the way it handles accusations of trafficking, rape and related crimes. But the issue still bedevils the institution. The issue has certainly not gone away.
 The United Nations has focused serious attention on addressing sexual crimes among the more than 120,000 personnel it has deployed in 16 peacekeeping missions globally, including widespread training. But the question that diplomats, advocates and even some United Nations officials ask is why the efforts still lag in terms of investigating accusations and, most important, making sure those who send troops and contractors abroad hold them accountable.
Human rights experts and some member states fault the United Nations for leaving too much of the job of enforcing its “zero tolerance” policy announced in 2003 to the countries contributing troops. Individual cases and any disciplinary action are rarely made public.
 But more than 200 such accusations remain unresolved, and the United Nations annual report on such crimes for 2010 noted that sexual activity with minors and nonconsensual sex represented more than half of reported accusations, little changed since 2008. Cases have come to light where peacekeepers paid children $1 or with candy to make a rape seem like prostitution.
Finally, efforts to gather information from troop contributors about legal or disciplinary action are often ignored.>>
IGNORED!

The "Oil-for-Food Program" (OFF), established by the United Nations in 1995, under UN Security Council Resolution 986, became a scandal of global proportions.  The program was de jure terminated in 2003 and de facto terminated in 2010. As the program ended, there were revelations of corruption involving the funds.
Before this, Security Council Resolution 706 of 15 August 1991 was introduced to allow the sale of Iraqi oil in exchange for food. The program used an escrow system. Oil exported from Iraq was paid for by the recipient into an escrow account possessed, until 2001, by BNP Paribas bank, rather than to the Iraqi government. The money was then apportioned to pay for war reparations to Kuwait, ongoing coalition and United Nations operations within Iraq. The remainder, the majority of the revenue, was available to the Iraqi government to purchase regulated items.
Shortly before US and British forces invaded Iraq, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan suspended the program and evacuated more than 300 workers 'monitoring' the distribution of supplies. On 22 May 2003, UN Security Council Resolution 1483 granted authority to the Coalition Provisional Authority to use Iraq's oil revenue. The program's remaining funds of $10 billion were transferred over a 6-month winding-up period to the Development Fund for Iraq under the Coalition Provisional Authority's control; this represented ONLY 14% of the programme's total income over 5 years.
Throughout its existence, the program was dogged by accusations that some of its profits were unlawfully diverted to the government of Iraq and to UN officials. These accusations were made in many countries, including the US and Norway.
In 2000, Dileep Nair, the UN corruption watchdog, wanted to determine the program's level of vulnerability. Sevan, along with UN Deputy Secretary-General, Louise Frechette, rejected any such investigation, claiming that it would be too expensive to be worthwhile. Benon Sevan of Cyprus, who headed the program, ORDERED THE SHREDDING OF YEARS' WORTH OF DOCUMENTS ABOUT THE PROGRAM! Accusations were made that skimmed profits were being used to buy influence at the UN and with Kofi Annan himself.
According to an interim report released on February 3, 2005, by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker's commission, much of the food aid supplied under the program "was UNFIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION" . The report concluded that Sevan had accepted nearly $150,000 in bribes over the course of the program, and in 2005 he was suspended from his position at the United Nations as a result of the investigation of fraud in the program,
One of the earliest allegations of wrongdoing in the program surfaced on January 25, 2004, when al Mada, a daily newspaper in Iraq, published a list of individuals and organizations alleged to have received oil sales contracts via the UN's Oil-for-Food Program. The list came from over 15,000 documents which were reportedly found in the state-owned Iraqi oil corporation, which had close links to the Iraqi Oil Ministry.
Named in the list of beneficiaries were British MP George Galloway and his charity, the Mariam Fund; former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua; and Shaker al-Kaffaji, an Iraqi-American businessman, India's foreign minister, Natwar Singh, was removed from office because of his role in the scandal. Many prominent Russian firms and individuals were also included on the al Mada list. Even the Russian Orthodox Church was supposedly involved in illegal oil trading. The former assistant to the Vatican secretary of state, Reverend Jean-Marie Benjamin, is said to have received rights to sell 4.5 million barrels (720,000 m3). The president of Oilexco Ltd, Arthur Millholland, whose name also appeared on the al Mada list, denied any wrongdoing, but confirms the charges that illegal surcharges were being paid to the Iraqi government by contractors. However, the al Mada list does not discuss bribes paid TO IRAQ – it discusses bribes paid to INDIVIDUALS so that they would support Iraq. Few deny that in Iraq, like in many third-world countries, bribes and kickbacks were regularly paid to the leadership in order to get contracts, but even those types of kickbacks should NOT occur in when a UN-run program was involved!
On 14 June 2005, two 1998 memos surfaced that appeared to link Kofi Annan to Cotecna Inspection S.A.
The scandal engulfing the United Nations Procurement Department and the Oil-for-Food Program allegedly involved Al-Qaeda finance operations. Fox News broke the story that Alexander Yakovlev, a Russian official in the UN Procurement Department, was involved; he later resigned and pled guilty to corruption charges. A report by UN investigator Paul Volcker, released in October 2005, found that the Australian Wheat Board, later AWB Limited, was the biggest single source of kickbacks.
UPI PUBLISHED SOME OF THE LIST OF THOSE WHO BENEFITED FROM THE OIL/FOOD PROGRAM, THOSE WHOM THE U.N. REWARDED, THOSE WHO LEECHED OFF THE IRAQI PEOPLE, THOSE WHOSE THIRST FOR OIL KNOWS NO SHAME, NO LIMIT! GO READ!
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2004/01/29/Iraqi-paper-publishes-list-of-oil-bribes/UPI-56141075412387/

WHY DID THE U.N. ENGAGE IN KICKBACKS, BRIBES, THEFT? SAME REASON ITS BLUE HELMENTS ENGAGE IN RAPE, TORTURE, MURDER, HUMAN TRAFFICKING?
USA TODAY PUBLISHED A 'THEORY' ON 02/13/2005 ... "A core of corruption"  :
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-02-13-un-edit_x.htm
<<It's time to wake up to reality: The U.N. scandals are not unfortunate accidents. They are not incidental blots on the reputation of an otherwise idealistic organization. The scandals are inherent in the very structure of the U.N. It could be said that the U.N. itself is the scandal.
Since the 1990s, the United Nations has aspired to larger and larger responsibilities. From Bosnia to Cambodia, from Iraq to the Congo, U.N. officials have...sometimes even taken over the functions of governments.
But these officials don't answer to taxpayers or voters. They answer to the U.N. secretary-general — who, in turn, answers to dozens of different governments. Many of these governments are authoritarian, corrupt and unaccountable themselves.
And their dirty ways of doing business are almost inevitably absorbed by the world bodies in which they are given a decisive role.>>

Google "UN Peacekeeper 'sex for food' scandal", see how U.N. "peacekeepers" were withholding food from starving, under-aged girls in the Ivory Coast, until sexual acts were performed to as "payment" for food, or search for "United Nations Pedophilia Scandals", or for "Tech for Tyrants scandal",  involving the quiet transfer of computers and related technology to Iran and North Korea by the UN’s World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and the UN Development Program was caught transferring cash and dual use technology to the government of North Korea.
Google "abuses suffered by an Italian intern at the hands of officials of the UN Secretariat, UN-WFP and WHO". These allegations are contained in a criminal complaint made on 25 March 2008 to the Office of the Attorney-General of Italy against a senior UN-OHRM official. Google "U.N. sexual harassment".

GO LOOK AT WHAT THE U.N.'s DEMAND THAT ALL THE WORLD GET ONBOARD THEIR "CODEX ALIMENTARIUS" WILL DO...IT WILL ANNIHILATE BILLIONS! IT WILL TAKE AWAY A NATION'S RIGHT TO GROW AND CHOOSE AND CONSUME WHAT IT DEEMS BEST FOR ITS PEOPLE, AND THE USA SIGNED INTO THAT!
READ HERE: 'Codex Alimentarius More Evil Than Evil'
http://www.examiner.com/article/codex-alimentarius-more-evil-than-evil
<<To avoid opposition Canada secretly approved ‘Codex Alimentarius’ behind closed doors. The Federal Government, Health Canada, medical establishment and national media have worked together to deliberately keep the entire Canadian population (over 30 million people) in the dark. For this reason, the majority of Canadians have no idea that from this year (2010) forward, we no longer have the freedom-to-choose natural health products or have the right-to-decide what we wish to eat, drink or medicate – in order to manage our health. Therefore, thousands of beneficial natural foods, proven safe & effective for centuries and still commonly used today (to combat serious illness or to maintain overall health) are being banned or their potency drastically reduced, making them virtually ineffective. Whilst ancient cultural traditions (such as African, Chinese, Indian, ‘Ayurvedic’ and other indigenous practices), also developed and used successfully for centuries will be lost forever.>>

DOES THAT SOUND LIKE THE U.N. WANTS TO "HELP" THE WORLD'S POOR? THE IMPOVERISHED CAN'T AFFORD TO COMPLY WITH SUCH IDIOTIC DEMANDS, BUT THEY MUST, OR DIE!

FOR A REALITY CHECK, GO READ THIS 11-PAGE PDF, SEE IF YOU THINK THE CODEX CAN POSSIBLY BE GOOD FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY.
http://xstatic99645.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/nutricide.pdf

A HANDY RUN-DOWN HERE:
http://www.rawfreedomcommunity.info/forum/showthread.php?t=3202

MIKE ADAMS, OF NATURAL NEWS, AND GREENMEDINFO, ALL SITES WHICH KNOW THAT FOOD IS LIFE AND OUR PERSONAL CHOICES ARE OUR RIGHT HAVE HAD NUMEROUS ARTICLES TRYING TO WARN ABOUT THIS ATROCITY....TOO LATE...NO ONE CARED ENOUGH TO RAISE AWARENESS TO A HIGH ENOUGH LEVEL TO SAVE US FROM IT! OUR CONGRESS ACCEPTED THE CODEX FOR AMERICA BY SENATE BILL S510... WE HAVE A U.N. CODEX GOVERNING OUR FOOD CHOICES!
S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of AMERICA...AND OUR CONGRESS SAID YES TO IT! The bill passed 73 to 25...73 VOTED YES, BOW TO THE U.N., TAKE AWAY AMERICANS' FREEDOM TO CHOOSE!

NEXT? WATER! WATER, THE "BLUE GOLD"....WATER, THE ONE THING WE CAN'T DO WITHOUT FOR MORE THAN A FEW DAYS! WHO IS GRABBING WATER SUPPLIES, DEMANDING THAT THE NATIONS THEY HELP TURN OVER THEIR WATER RIGHTS? THE UNITED NATIONS, THAT'S WHO...WHO..."WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION', INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND, THE WORLD BANK, ALONG WITH THE U.N., WHOM YOU'VE BEEN TAUGHT TO THINK OF AS THE 'SAVIOR OF THE WORLD'...NO, NO, THESE ARE THE KILLERS, THE MARAUDING MURDERERS OF HUMANITY!
AND WHO IS HELPING THE HELPERS? ONE GUESS!
<<The online publication Market Oracle reported in December, 2012, "Profiting from Your Thirst as Global Elite Rush to Control Water Worldwide" that “[t]he new ‘water barons’—the Wall Street banks and elitist multi-billionaires—are buying up water all over the world at unprecedented pace.” The report reveals two phenomena that have been gathering speed, and that could potentially lead to profit accumulation at the cost of communities and commons —the expansion of market instruments beyond the water supply and sanitation to other areas of water governance, and the increasingly prominent role of financial institutions.  Familiar mega-banks and investing powerhouses such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, UBS, Deutsche Bank, Credit Suisse, Macquarie Bank, Barclays Bank, the Blackstone Group, Allianz, and HSBC Bank, among others, are consolidating their control over water. Wealthy tycoons such as T. Boone Pickens, former President George H.W. Bush and his family, Hong Kong’s Li Ka-shing, Philippines’ Manuel V. Pangilinan and other Filipino billionaires, and others are also buying thousands of acres of land with aquifers, lakes, water rights, water utilities, and shares in water engineering and technology companies all over the world.>>
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/article38167.html

READ NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC'S TAKE ON IT: 'Grabbing Water From Future Generations'
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/12/121218-grabbing-water-from-future-generations/

Documents from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund reveal that the IMF required nations:
1. to sign secret agreements of 111 items
2. in which they agreed to sell off their key assets - water, electric, gas, etc.
3. in which they agreed to take economic steps which are devastating to the nations involved
4. in which they pay politicians billions of dollars to Swiss bank accounts to do this transfer of a country's "fixed assets".
THEY REQUIRE NATIONS TO DO THIS! NO COMPLIANCE, NO FINANCIAL "HELP".
BUT THE NATIONS WHO HAVE DONE SO REGRET IT! ASK INDIA! ASK ANY NATION THAT HAS HAD TO SIGN OVER THEIR WATER TO THE IMF/WORLD BANK OR TO GET U.N. "AID"

NO, NO, THE UNITED NATIONS IS AN ABOMINATION! IT WAS CONCEIVED BY "SUPER-POWERS', IT IS MAINTAINED BY A RULING ELITE, AND IT IS DEDICATED TO LAND-GRABBING, WATER-OWNING, AND ENSLAVING US ALL TO ITS 'POLICIES'. IT THUMBS ITS NOSE AT THE IMPOVERISHED, AT THE LAWS OF NATIONS, AT HUMANITY IN GENERAL! IT SHOULD BE DISMANTLED, IT SHOULD BE ERADICATED LIKE A PLAGUE, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IT IS, A PLAGUE AGAINST HUMAN BEINGS, A PARTNER WITH THOSE WHO ARE DESPERATELY SEEKING GLOBAL POPULATION REDUCTION, WHERE ONLY THE "CHOSEN FEW" REMAIN! FIGHT AGAINST THE U.N. WITH ALL YOUR MIGHT!

 I HOPE YOU MAY WATCH THE FOLLOWING VIDEOS TO SEE FOR YOURSELVES THE DOCUMENTATION OF JUST A FEW OF THE U.N.'s ATROCITIES THAT HAVE BEEN INFLICTED UPON US ALL. WHEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN TO ONE NATION, TO ONE MEMBER OF A NATION, IT HAPPENS TO US ALL!


1st Video~ RAPE OF HAITIAN MALE TEEN BY U.N. TROOPS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBln0imJblk

2nd Video~ Blue Gold: World Water Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKcf-RBHirw

3rd Video~ Nutricide - CODEX ALIMENTARIUS, Criminalizing Natural Health, Vitamins, and Herbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z6lZ8q3Z_o

'NIGHTMARE BACTERIA', 'SPREADS LIKE WILDFIRE'

CDC REPORTS 'NIGHTMARE BACTERIA', 'SPREADS LIKE WILDFIRE'! BE AFRAID!
NO, DON'T BE AFRAID OF THIS ONE NEW "SUPER-BUG", PLEASE! REMEMBER THE OTHER "NIGHTMARE PANDEMICS"? REMAIN CALM...TRY FACTS FIRST!
THEN, BE VERY AFRAID OF THE CDC AND ITS 'PARTNERS'!

THE HEADLINES AT NBC VIRTUALLY SCREECHED: "More bad news about 'nightmare bacteria', CDC says"!!!! BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID....AGAIN...AND MORE THIS TIME...NO, SERIOUSLY, THIS IS HORRRRRRENDOUS!

"'4 percent of U.S. acute-care hospitals and 18 percent of long-term acute care hospitals reported at least one case of dangerous CRE bacteria .... '"
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/05/17195353-more-bad-news-about-nightmare-bacteria-cdc-says

LET'S DO THE MATH? IF ONLY 4% OF ONE TYPE HOSPITAL REPORTED ONE CASE, AND 18% OF ANOTHER TYPE OF ONLY 3900 TOTAL HOSPITALS THEY "CHECKED" REPORTED ONE CASE, THAT MIGHT BE HOW MANY CASES IN ALL OF AMERICA?
Yeah, yeah, sure, sure, and 1000 times that number of American females got
"serious infections" from wiping their behinds the wrong way LAST YEAR, you fear-mongering bunch of vipers! More Americans get food poisoning and WORSE at picnics every year here! WHY NOT MENTION THAT?

"'CRE infections can spread like wildfire through a hospital.'"
SO DOES 'MRSA', WHICH KILLS THOUSANDS, ABOUT 18,000,  EVERY BLOODY YEAR! WHY NOT GO APE OVER MRSA? WHERE'S YOUR WONDER DRUG FOR THAT BAD BOY KILLER? OH, THERE ISN'T A "PERMANENT CURE" FOR THAT TYPE STAPH INFECTION, IS THERE?

NO, HERE'S WHAT "CDC" AND OTHERS CONNECTED TO THE 'PHARMACEUTICAL/HEALTH INDUSTRY" SEEM TO LIKE TO DO MOST: "RESEARCH AND DEVELOP" NEW "KILLER VIRUSES", NEW "PLAGUES", NEW "INFLUENZAS", NEW BACTERIAL STRAINS, THEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOP NEW "VACCINES" FOR THOSE NEW 'BOOGIE-MONSTERS' AND SELL THOSE VACCINES, SELL 'EM! MAKE NEW AND IMPROVED WAYS TO COMMIT GENOCIDE ON UNSUSPECTING POPULATIONS, YOU WHO SENT SADDAM HUSSEIN BACTERIAL AGENTS BY THE BOX LOADS!

YOU THINK THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN? THE ASSOCIATED PRESS MADE THE MISTAKE OF PRINTING THE FACTS OF THOSE SHIPMENTS!

 Published on Tuesday, October 1, 2002 by the Associated Press, and titled
"Records Show US Sent Biological Weapons Germs to Iraq"
by Matt Kelley.

KELLEY WAS RIGHT! IT'S IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! BUT "AP", CHICKENS THAT THEY ARE, AS THEY DO SO MANY TIMES, "SCRATCHED" THAT "PDQ"! GO TRY TO FIND THE ACTUAL ARTICLE NOW!

Congressional Record: September 20, 2002 (Senate)
Page S8987-S8998
GO READ! http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s092002.html
HERE'S A WEE TASTE OF WHAT YOU MAY FIND THERE!
<<It is hard to believe that, during most of the 1980s,
     America knowingly permitted the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
     to import bacterial cultures that might be used to build
     biological weapons. But it happened...
A letter written in 1995 by former CDC Director David Satcher to former Senator Donald W. Riegle, Jr., points out that the U.S. Government provided nearly two
dozen viral and bacterial samples to Iraqi scientists in 1985--samples
that included the plague, botulism, and anthrax, among other deadly
diseases.
  According to the letter from Dr. Satcher to former Senator Donald
Riegle, many of the materials were hand carried by an Iraqi scientist
to Iraq after he had spent 3 months training in the CDC laboratory. >>
THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE REPORTED IN JULY 2007 THAT CDC HAD TO SHUT DOWN A "'bioweapons research at Texas A&M University, after the school failed to report four workers’ exposure to biological agents'". THAT ARTICLE (GO TRY TO FIND IT!) WENT ON TO REPORT THAT CDC
"'University officials waited one year to report the Brucella case to the Centers for Disease Control. The Q fever case still has not been reported.
Federal law requires quick reporting of incidents.'"    "The A&M
problems, I think, are symptomatic of a larger problem, and that’s that we are putting literally thousands and thousands of people behind the wheel of this apparatus to study biological weapons agents," said
Edward Hammond, director of the Sunshine Project. "They don’t have the experience, and we don’t have the proper legislative framework to do it safely. A lot of this is done on an ad hoc, and sometimes even unsafe, basis."   
"'Universities, consortia, and even private organizations are climbing over one another trying to get government money to work with biological agents.'"

SO, IF YOUR SON OR DAUGHTER IN COLLEGE SOMEWHERE SUDDENLY DROPS DEAD, OR GETS PERMANENTLY DISABLED, LOOK FOR A LETTER FROM, OH, MAYBE "CDC" THAT SAYS, "OOPSIE! SORRY, YOUR KID WAS WORKING ON BIOWEAPONS RESEARCH, AND, UMMM....THEY GOT A BIT CARELESS..."
YEAH, WELL, THERE ONCE WAS A "WATCHDOG GROUP" REPORTING ON THE CDC! NOT ANYMORE (SHUT DOWN IN 2008...NEED WE WONDER WHY?), BUT HERE'S ONE FOR YOU:
http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/pr/pr310105.html
<<The Sunshine Project, News Release, 31 January 2005

Tularemia Outbreak: CDC Refuses Rapid Response
Cold Comfort for Communities Confronting Biodefense Labs

(Austin, 31 Jan 2005) - Don't count on the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to tell the public about biological weapons accidents. CDC's refusal to divulge information about the Boston University tularemia incidents will come as cold comfort for the tens of millions in the US who live close to (proposed) biological weapons labs, according to the Sunshine Project.

Tularemia infections related to NIH-funded bioweapons research at Boston University have recently made international headlines; but last week CDC refused a legal request to divulge what it knew, and what it knows, about the circumstances that led to the biological weapons accidents.

On January 22nd, the Sunshine Project filed an Expedited Freedom of Information Act Request that asked for the dates on which Boston University researchers and labs were first permitted to work with virulent strains of tularemia. It also requested immediate release of CDC correspondence with Boston University during May and June 2004, when the first, apparently undetected, tularemia infections occurred. Understanding the dates of permits under the US select agent rules and Boston University's relationship with CDC might reveal important information about the accidents.

But CDC rejected the request on January 25th. It sent its reply by US Mail, which took four days to arrive. In its refusal, CDC made a dubious determination under the law. In order to delay its response for months or more, CDC determined that there is no urgent need to inform the public about the tularemia accidents nor a reasonable expectation that release of the requested information would ameliorate a threat human life and safety - namely, Boston University's biological weapons research.

CDC (Atlanta, GA) and the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities (OBA) in Bethesda, MD, are the two US government offices that are, insofar as rules exist, in charge of the safety of civilian biological weapons research. Unlike many aspects of laboratory biosafety, permits for work with virulent tularemia are a legal requirement. The United States does not have comprehensive biosafety and laboratory accident reporting laws.>>

WOW, YES? HOW MANY SUCH LABS DOES CDC ET AL RUN? ARE ANY NEAR YOU? GO SEE!
http://www.sunshine-project.org/biodefense/blsmapside1.jpg
AND THAT WAS WAAAAY BACK IN 2006! IMAGINE HOW MANY NOW!
DID YOU SEE THOSE "CLASSIFIED AND/OR SECRETIVE RESEARCH" ONES? HOW'S THAT FOR "TRANSPARENCY"? HOW DOES THAT GRAB YOU, YOU WHO LIVE NEAR THOSE FROM WAY BACK THEN? COULD YOU HAVE BEEN "LAB RATS" TOO?

Saaaay, it just so happens I have a saved article by that same AP writer, Kelley,  about how America uses its citizens like guinea pigs....in "only" 4 states for this article, but who knows? WHO KNOWS HOW MANY MORE? HERE'S A HINT: SO FAR, MANY HUNDREDS OF SUCH HAVE BEEN REVEALED/DECLASSIFIED! BUT...HOW MANY MORE WILL NEVER BE?

<<From the Associated Press, 10-8-2002, By Matt Kelley, Associated Press Writer
``WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States held open-air biological and chemical weapons tests in at least four states - Alaska, Hawaii, Maryland and Florida - during the 1960s ...

A series of tests in Alaska from 1965-67 used artillery shells and bombs filled with the nerve agents sarin and VX, the records show ...
[ PLEASE TAKE NOTE! NERVE AGENTS SARIN, AND VX!!! GO GOOGLE THOSE!]
In response to pressure from veterans and Congress, the Pentagon began releasing details of the tests last year. Earlier this year, the Defense Department acknowledged for the first time that some of the 1960s tests used real chemical and biological weapons, not just benign stand-ins ...

'Big Tom' [was] a 1965 test that included spraying bacteria over the Hawaiian island of Oahu to simulate a biological attack on an island compound, and to develop tactics for such an attack. The test used Bacillus globigii, a bacterium believed at the time to be harmless. Researchers later discovered the bacteria could cause infections in people with weakened immune systems.'' >>
YESSIRREE, YOUR UNCLE SAM LOVES US! AS EXPERIMENTAL MICE, MAYBE?

THE "TESTS" IN ALASKA...THAT NERVE GAS THING....IT WAS CALLED "PROJECT 112"...& THE 'DOD' FLEETINGLY ADDRESSED THAT LITTLE ISSUE:
<<PRESS ADVISORY from the United States Department of Defense
No. 173-P
PRESS ADVISORY October 8, 2002
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) William
Winkenwerder, Jr., will hold a news conference to release 28
detailed fact sheets on 27 Cold War-era chemical and biological
warfare tests identified as Project 112.
The briefing will take place tomorrow, Oct. 9, 2002, at 1 p.m.
EDT in the DoD Briefing Room, Pentagon 2E781. These documents
will supplement information already posted on the World Wide Web
at
http://deploymentlink.osd.mil/
Point of contact is Jim Turner at (703) 697-5135.
[Web version: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2002/p10082002_p173-02.html]
The tests were part of Project 112, a military program in the 1960s and 1970s to test chemical and biological weapons and defenses against them. Parts of the testing program done on Navy ships were called Project SHAD, or Shipboard Hazard and Defense.
The tests were directed from the Deseret Test Center, part of a biological and chemical weapons complex in the Utah desert.>>
READ MORE HERE: http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-1756.html

OH, BTW, SORRY OKINAWA! YOU GOT SOME OF THAT PROJECT 112, OR PROJECTS 'AGILE', 'OCONUS' AND 'SHAD' , TOO, BUT NOBODY TOLD YOU, DID THEY? AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OTHER NATIONS WERE INVOLVED, SO I SUPPOSE YOU'LL HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT YOURSELVES. GOOD LUCK!

IN PLAIN VIEW FOR AT LEAST 11 YEARS NOW...BUT WHO MISSED THAT ONE?

SO, WHEN THE CDC, THROUGH PATSIES LIKE NBC, ET AL, TELL YOU "'CDC has launched an all-out campaign -- a "detect and protect" strategy'"...YOU'D BETTER GET READY FOR THE WORST CASE SCENARIO, FOLKS! "PROTECT" MAY NOT BE UPPERMOST IN THE MINDS OF GOOD OL' CC, RECKON?

OH, ALL OF PHARMACEUTICAL LAND, ALL OF CDC, ALL OF OUR LOVING FEDERAL "WATCHERS-OVER-US" WILL SWEAR IT'S JUST FINE TO GIVE OUR CHILDREN, OUR TROOPS, AND THE REST OF US MERCURY/ALUMINUM-LADEN "VACCINES", OR "OOPS! THAT BATCH WAS ACCIDENTALLY CONTAMINATED!" VACCINES AND DENY IT WHEN PEOPLE DIE FROM THEM! SURE, GO AHEAD, AMERICA TRUSTS YOU! THEY TRUST ALL YOU GUYS ENGAGED IN THE PHARMACOLOGICAL ANNIHILATION OF MANKIND AS A SPECIES...EXCEPT FOR THOSE "CHOSEN FEW" WHO WOULDN'T ALLOW ONE SINGLE INJECTION OF ANYTHING YOU COOKED UP INTO THEIR SYSTEMS!
(REMEMBER WHEN HOSPITALS WERE FIRING THEIR NURSES AND SOME DOCTORS WHO REFUSED THE SWINE FLU VACCINE? EVER WONDER WHY SO MANY KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE IN THE 'MEDICAL PROFESSION' REFUSED THOSE?)

A BIT OF "TRIVIA" FOR YOU....DID YOU KNOW THAT NBC CAME OUT OF RCA, AND DID YOU KNOW OUR GOVERNMENT FUNDED RCA?
"'In 1917 the U.S. Government took charge of the patents owned by the major companies involved in radio manufacture in the US to devote radio technology to the war effort. All production of radio equipment was allocated to the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and the U.S. Coast Guard. The War Department and the Navy Department sought to maintain a Federal monopoly of all uses of radio technology. The wartime takeover of all radio systems ended late in 1918, when the US Congress failed to pass a bill which would have extended this monopoly.
The ending of the Federal Government's monopoly in radio communications did not prevent the War and Navy Departments from creating a national radio system for the US. On 8 April 1919, naval Admiral W. H. G. Bullard and Captain Stanford C. Hooper met with executives of the General Electric Corporation (GE) and asked them to discontinue selling the company's Alexanderson alternators (used in the high-power AM radio transmitters of that era) to the British-owned Marconi Company, and to its subsidiary, the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America.
The proposal presented by the government was that if GE created an American-owned radio company, then the Army and Navy would effect a monopoly of long-distance radio communications via this company. This marked the beginning of a series of negotiations through which GE would buy the American Marconi company and then incorporate what would be called the Radio Corporation of America."

SEE WHAT YOU CAN FIND IF YOU LOOK?

REAPER DRONES IN CHAD

FEW TOOK IT SERIOUSLY WHEN I WROTE THE FOLLOWING BLOG:
http://havacuppahemlock1.blogspot.com/2013/02/america-invades-34-36-african-nations.html

WOULD I LIE TO YOU?
OUR BLOODY 'WALL STREET JOURNAL' (OR 'WALL STREET SUCK-UP', THAT NAME WORKS, TOO) HAS EVEN PICKED UP THE PROPAGANDA...ALL AMERICA IS TRYING TO DO IS "HELP HUNT DOWN TERRORISTS", "HELP THE FRENCH FIND" AND KILL MORE OF THOSE CURSED AL-CIA-DA, I MEAN "AL QAEDA" MONSTERS, AND FOR SURE THEY AREN'T TAGGING THE TUAREG, NO SIRREE! THE TUAREG ARE BACK IN MALI, AREN'T THEY? FIRST MALI, NOW CHAD, ONWARD GOES AMERICA TO HELP SWEET FRANCE NAIL THOSE YUCKY JIHADISTS AND RUNAWAY AL-CIA-DA (OR 'AL QAEDA', IF YOU MUST) OH, HANG ON...MAYBE NOT! MAYBE THERE'S NEW AND IMPROVED "AL Q" IN  CHAD...OR MAYBE AFRICA IS SUDDENLY OVERRUN WITH AL-CIA-DA, I MEAN AL QAEDA!I HEAR IT'S SORT OF LIKE HAVING FLEAS, AFRICA...BUT ONLY AMERICA CAN DETERMINE THAT WITH OUT AMAZING "INTELLIGENCE SEERS"....LIKE THE ONES WHO SAID SADDAM HAD "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION"....YEAH, REMEMBER THOSE GUYS? SO, LET OUR SEERS GET TO WORK ON HOW BAD YOUR PROBLEM IS, AFRICA, AND THEY'LL GET BACK TO YOU.
EITHER WAY, AMERICA HAS DESCENDED UPON YOU, O', AFRICA, YET AGAIN! REMEMBER EGYPT, LIBYA? COVER YOUR HEADS! DRONES MAY TARGET YOU! WELL, LIKE THEY'VE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE IN PAKISTAN, AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, QATAR, EVERYWHERE IN THE MIDDLE EAST EXCEPT GOOD OLD BUDDIES, 'SAUDI ARABIA', (FOR WHOM AMERICA 'PLAYS' "WHORE OF BABYLON" ???)AND THAT WINSOME JEWEL, KUWAIT..."OOPS! SORRY! WE DIDN'T MEAN TO KILL YOUR INNOCENT CIVILIANS THERE, PALS! PARDON OUR...UMMM...DUST! WE WERE AFTER AL-CIA-DA, I MEAN...OH, NEVER MIND!"
HAS ANYONE BESIDES ME NOTICED HOW AMERICA SEEMS TO MOVE IN WHERE THE FRENCH HAVE "LED"? VIETNAM, AFGHANISTAN, AFRICAN NATIONS NOW....HOW SWEET, EH? MUST BE LOVE.
SAAAAAY! HOLD ON! COULD IT BE...DARE WE IMAGINE THAT FRANCE AND THE USA ARE COMING IN TO HELP YOU, AFRICA, BECAUSE CHINA...C-H-I-N-A...HAS GOTTEN SUCH A NICE FOOTHOLD THERE? CHINA'S PRESENCE IN OTHER NATIONS (TO "BOOST THE ECONOMY") SEEMS TO SORT OF SET FRANCE AND AMERICA OFF, HAVE YOU NOTICED THAT? I MEAN, IT WAS SORT OF, MAYBE IN A "SMALL" WAY, THAT CASPIAN SEA OIL PIPELINE THING THAT CHINA LOOKED TO BE GETTING CLOSE TO THAT TICKED MORE THAN A FEW OFF IN WASHINGTON, D.C., YES? NO? THEN FRANCE GOT MIFFED AT US FOR HORNING IN ...AGAIN...IT WAS A MESS, TRULY.

BACK TO THE WALL STREET 'JOURNAL' ARTICLE....(HOLD YOUR NOSES)
<<Administration officials initially cited concerns that furnishing actionable intelligence to the French would spur the affiliate, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM, to start targeting American interests in the region. They were also concerned the move would make the U.S. culpable for lethal operations that it wouldn't control.
Advocates of helping the French locate targets for strikes argued that providing the information was in the U.S. interest because it would bolster a key ally, reduce the risk that the French offensive would drag on and help eliminate militants of increasing concern to the U.S., including Mr. Belmokhtar.
[SURE SOUNDS LIKE WHAT 'WE' SAID ABOUT VIETNAM, DOESN'T IT? ALMOST VERBATIM! LIKE WHEN EISENHOWER FIRST SENT IN AMERICAN "OBSERVERS"? EERY!]
A senior U.S. official said the Americans ultimately decided they weren't cobelligerents because the U.S. was supporting the French rather than joining the campaign.>>

HUH? EXCUSE ME, WE'RE NOT "COBELLIGERENTS", EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE AMERICAN BOOTS ON THE GROUND IN AFRICA, AND A NICE SWARM OF REAPER DRONES AND HAVE BEEN "DRONING" OUT OF AFRICA SINCE THE IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN "WARS" FIRST RAGED? OH, OK...SURE, NO BELLIGERENCE THERE! <siiiiiiiiiigh>
(REMEMBER WHEN THE SAUDIS GOT THEIR PANTIES IN A WAD WHEN AMERICA SUGGESTED THEY ALLOW US TO HIT A FEW NATIONS FROM THEIR 'HOLY' GROUND? YEAH, SOME PALS THEY ARE!)

SAY HELLO TO "AFRI-COM", TO "EXERCISE AFRICA ENDEAVOR", PEOPLE OF THAT CONTINENT. YOU ARE SOOOO SCREWED....AGAIN! LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE HEAED BACK TO THE COLONIALISM YOU HAVE SO FOUGHT AGAINST...DO SOMETHING, QUICKLY! I HOPE YOU CAN...GOOD LUCK!
LOOKS LIKE AMERICA IS ABSOLUTELY DETERMINED TO BRING YOU "PEACE", TO HELP YOU "LIBERATE" YOURSELVES, AFRICAN NATIONS! YOU SEE WHAT THAT GOT THE REST OF THAT REGION, DON'T YOU? TAKE NOTES!

WELL, THE RAG SHEET, I MEAN, "WSJ" WON'T LET ME SEE THE WHOLE ARTICLE I WANTED TO READ UNLESS I SUBSCRIBE, SO BEST I CAN OFFER IS A FEW QUOTES, SINCE I WOULDN'T SPEND A PENNY ON THAT PIECE OF 'JOURNALISM'! BUT I WAS ABLE TO READ ALL THIS "BULLY FOR AMERICA" TYPE ARTICLE IN THE WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324539404578338590169579504.html
<<The U.S. is markedly widening its role in the stepped up French-led military campaign against extremists in Mali, providing sensitive intelligence that pinpoints militant targets for attack, U.S. and allied officials disclosed.>>
[ I CAN HEAR WALL STREET CHEERING NOW! "KA-CHING! KA-CHING! WAR IS PROFIT!"]

NOW THE NEW YORK TIMES IS A BIT MORE FREE WITH THEIR 'ARTICLES' (AS MOST OF OUR AMERICAN MAINSTREAM MEDIA ATTENTION WHORES ARE WHEN THEIR CORPORATE OWNERS SEND THEM OVER WHAT THEY WANT PRINTED TODAY) AND HERE'S SOMEONE'S TAKE ON THAT "AMERICA HELPS THE FRENCH" THING, THO' THE PIECE IS MAINLY COMMENTS BY A GUY NAMED "Jean-Yves Le Drian"...WHO SAYS:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/world/europe/mali-an-unexpected-mission-for-french-defense-minister.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
<<Being responsible for the lives of others at war “is not a burden, but a permanent tension,” he said. “I don’t see it as a burden, but as a duty. That’s a help.”

But obviously it is Mali, where French troops are doing nearly all the fighting, that preoccupies Mr. Le Drian. The effort has begun well, but it must end well, too, he said, unlike the chaos in Libya, where a weak central government cannot control regional militias and arms are flowing freely across borders, including to the Islamists in Mali.
[OH, NO IT'S NOT! IT'S THE TUAREGS "FLOWING INTO MALI, WITH FRANCE AND NOW THE USA IN HOT PURSUIT!]

The intervention in Libya did not finish properly, he said. “We can’t allow ourselves this in Mali.”>>["WE CAN'T ALLOW THIS IN MALI"? WHO IS HE TO SAY THAT? HOW DARE HE SAY SUCH A THING? WHAT HAPPENS IN AFRICA IS THE BUSINESS OF AFRICA, NOT OF ANYONE ELSE!  WHAT AFRICANS DO, WHAT ANY NATION IN AFRICA DOES IS THEIR BUSINESS TO ATTEND TO! BACK OFF AND LET THEM HANDLE THEIR OWN AFFAIRS, FRANCE, AMERICA, CHINA, EVERYONE! STAND BACK AND LET ALL NATIONS DO THE SAME AS THE "BIG" NATIONS DO...EXACTLY AS THEY PLEASE TO DO! ]

AS IF THAT WASN'T FOOT-IN-THE-MOUTH ENOUGH, THE FRENCHMAN CONTINUED:
<<France wants a new United Nations Security Council resolution to rebadge the African force as blue-helmeted peacekeepers and has been pushing for new elections in Mali, now scheduled for July 7.

[ MORE U.N. TROOPS? REALLY? MORE RAPES, TORTURES AND MURDERS BY THE "BLUE HELMETS" ALSO COMING BACK YOUR WAY, AFRICA! REMEMBER HOW THE U.N. HELPED OTHERS GET THOSE "BLOOD DIAMONDS" OUT OF YOUR EARTH? YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED! FRANCE WANTS THOSE GUYS BACK IN THERE THAT MANY OF YOU FOUGHT SO HARD TO KICK OUT! ]

All this will take many months and require stability, Mr. Le Drian concedes, and while the French express hope that African forces will pursue the Islamists into the mountains and deserts of the vast north, it is highly likely that French special forces will have to continue to operate on their own and alongside the Africans, with the help of American surveillance drones.

One of the most shocking lessons for him from Mali, Mr. Le Drian said, was the lack of French surveillance drones, which he called “incomprehensible.”
Similarly, he said, France lacks adequate air refueling capacity, for which again he thanks Washington, which after some hesitation agreed to provide refueling planes. As for air transport, France would always rely on its allies in NATO, he said. “That issue we finally fixed without too much trouble because we were supported by the British, the Americans, but also the Spanish, the Germans and the Canadians.” >>

HE HOPES AFRICAN FORCES WILL PURSUE THE ISLAMISTS??? REALLY? NO, REALLY? IS HE COMPLETELY DAFT? 41% OF AFRICAN PEOPLE ARE "ISLAMISTS", ARE MUSLIMS! WHAT IS HE DOING, THE SAME AS WE'VE DONE? PITTING SUNNIS AGAINST SUFIS AGAINST SALAFIS AGAINST AHMADIS, AND ALL AGAINST EVERYONE ELSE ON THE PLANET? ALTHOUGH THOSE GUYS HAVE BEEN GOING AT EACH OTHER FOR QUITE SOME VERY LONG TIME...EXPANDING THAT RIFT IS A TACTIC USED BY FOREIGNERS AGAINST THE MUSLIM WORLD FOR AGES! 

Here's a little HISTORY for you, anyone NOT from Africa...
Most of Africa spent two generations under colonial rule! TWO GENERATIONS!
By analysis of what was there BEFORE Africa was "divvied-up" and what is there NOW, one can prove without a doubt that this 'colonialism' severely retarded economic development across the entire continent of Africa! The Berlin Conference of 1884-1885 formalized what was known as the ‘Scramble for Africa’. European powers, without one shred of right to do so, divided up Africa between themselves and started "administrating" their new colonies. They "administered" them almost to utter ruin!  Seventy years later they "bequeathed" their colonies back to native Africans, BUT those countries and everything in them looked remarkably different from how they looked in 1880! With some exceptions, these countries are among the poorest in the world today, and how can the global elite, the bankers who rule nations, afford to have Africa come out of their economic slump? they're already fighting the ASIAN RISING ECONOMY, but add AFRICA? NOOOO! They can't have THAT!
Picture how the Amazon looked BEFORE the rush by OUTSIDERS for its resources....go look up images from the late 1800s, the very early 1900s, then look at photos of the SAME areas now....get the picture? And wherever European powers have had holdings, their friend and ally, America, was right there with a big spoon for a heaping taste of the "African natural resources SOUP"!
If the Europeans had just brought technology or educational institutions, MINUS COLONIALISM, Africans could have adopted or innovated EVERYTHING themselves, don't you imagine? Isn't that how REAL progress works? Isn't that how the "Super Powers" got so super...education, technology development following that?
Didn't America FIGHT LIKE HELL WAS AFTER THEM AGAINST COLONIZATION?
DIDN'T WE CALL THAT THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION?
But none of that for Africa!

Some studies point to three types of European "colonies" in Africa:

• Those with a centralized state at the time of the "Scramble for Africa", such as Benin, Botswana, Burundi, Ethiopia, Ghana, Lesotho, Rwanda, and Swaziland;
• Those of white settlement, such as Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, and probably Angola and Mozambique;
• And then "everyone else" ... colonies which did not experience significant white settlement and where there was either no significant pre-colonial state formation (like Somalia or South Sudan) or where there was a mixture of centralized and uncentralized societies (such as Congo-Brazzaville, Nigeria, Uganda and Sierra Leone).
  
  It seems logical/reasonable to assume that all groups, WITHOUT colonialism, would have had the VERY SAME contacts with the rest of the world. WHAT might have happened IF "missionaries" had ONLY gone to actually convert people and had JUST built schools, if the damnable "League of Nations" would have tried to ABOLISH coerced labor instead of perpetuating it, and if the abomination known as "WHO", the "World Health Organization",  would have tried to disseminate REAL medical technology instead of perhaps CONTRIBUTING TO AFRICAN GENOCIDE? Wouldn't African countries have continued to export all their incredible natural resources, as many HAD, PRIOR to 1885, PRIOR TO BEING CUT UP AND PASSED OUT LIKE SLICES OF A JUICY PIE?
  Can we even imagine that everywhere the sticky fingers of "progress, a la colonialism/interference" have poked, things have gone down the tubes rapidly?
  NO? YOU DON'T THINK SO?  I point you to the near extermination of the American Indian, the South American, especially Amazon Indians, the aboriginal population in Australia, even Tibet! Go see what "outside help" has done! Go ask the ones who have had such "help"! GO ASK IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, LIBYA IF THEY ARE BETTER OFF NOW AND LISTEN CAREFULLY TO WHAT THEIR PEOPLE TELL YOU!
  
  WELL, IT DOESN'T MATTER, DOES IT? THE MEGA-POWERS, THE RULERS OF THE WORLD HAVE SPOKEN! "SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE DONE!"
  BY ALL THE GODS THAT ARE, THE NATO ALLIES ARE DETERMINED TO "HELP" AFRICA YET AGAIN! AND IF YOU COME UP MISSING TONS OR ALL OF YOUR RICH SUPPLIES OF OIL, GOLD, DIAMONDS, COBALT, URANIUM, COPPER, BAUXITE, SILVER AND SUCH, WELL, YOU KNOW WHERE TO LOOK! THE ALLIED NATIONS RUNNING TO "HELP" YOU ARE RAPIDLY RUNNING OUT OF ALL THAT AND THEY KNOW WHERE YOUR SUPPLIES ARE!
  AND, BY THE WAY, DO NOT BORROW MONEY FROM THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF), OR MAKE DEALS WITH MONSANTO!!! THOSE GUYS WILL EAT YOU ALIVE! ASK INDIA!
  
  I AM TRULY SORRY, AFRICA. MANY OF US HERE WILL BE SORRY TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU NEXT.
  GUARD WELL WHAT YOU HAVE LEFT, AND KEEP AN EYE TO THE SKY! INCOMING! INCOMING!
  

             

                                Colonialism in 10 Minutes: The Scramble For Africa

AMERICA IS NO LONGER 'LAND OF THE FREE, HOME OF THE BRAVE' !

WE HAVE LOST OUR LIBERTY, AMERICANS! WE LOST IT WHEN TOO MANY IGNORED THE SURE SIGNS THAT STARTED APPEARING OVER 100 YEARS AGO THAT OUR GOVERNMENT INTENDED TO TAKE AWAY OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, OUR  INDIVIDUAL INDEPENDENCE, AND OUR FREE CHOICES. YOU WERE LULLED TO SLEEP BY EMPTY PROMISES, OFTEN REPEATED, AND NOW, BECAUSE YOU SLEPT AND FAILED TO BE WATCHERS ON THE WALL, AMERICA HAS BEEN SACKED BY THE VERY ONES YOU'VE ELECTED TO YOUR HIGHEST OFFICES! CONGRESS HAS BETRAYED US, PRESIDENTS HAVE BETRAYED US, THOSE PLEDGED TO UPHOLD OUR CONSTITUTION, TO SERVE AND PROTECT US HAVE TURNED AGAINST US AND BETRAYED US, AND MOST OF AMERICA HAS BETRAYED THE TRUST OF OUR FOUNDERS, WHO WARNED US WE WOULD HAVE TO GUARD OUR FREEDOM, EVEN AGAINST A RISE OF TYRANNY FROM WITHIN!
WE ARE LIVING THE NIGHTMARE OF GEORGE ORWELL'S '1984', AND TOO FEW OF OUR POPULACE IS CAPABLE OF ANOTHER 1776!
YOU BLEW OUR CHANCES, AMERICANS, BY YOUR APATHY AND YOUR BLIND LOYALTY TO 'PARTIES' AND TO SELF-INTERESTS. YOU DIDN'T 'GUARD WELL YOUR FREEDOMS', AMERICANS, AND THEY ARE GONE!

YOU'RE STUCK IN SELF-CREATED RUTS! YOU WHO SLEPT AND IGNORED WHAT WAS HAPPENING DUG THIS GRAVE WE'RE ALL IN BY CONTINUOUSLY SPINNING YOUR WHEELS IN THOSE STUPID, BASELESS RUTS! YOU REFUSE TO LOOK, TO QUESTION, TO DEMAND ANSWERS, TO THINK ABOUT NECESSARY CHANGES TO SAVE THIS NATION AND HOW WE CAN MAKE THOSE CHANGES, NO MATTER WHAT IT TAKES, TO GET RID OF THE FREEDOM-KILLING SCUM THAT HAS SURFACED AND SPREAD TO SUFFOCATE THIS NATION!YOU DON'T EVEN WANT TO ADMIT THERE IS A GROWING, STIFLING PROBLEM, AMERICANS!

THE MAJORITY OF YOU CAN'T EVEN EXPLAIN HOW LAWS ARE MADE IN THIS NATION, CAN'T NAME ALL THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, NOT EVEN ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE, NOR THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, NOR THE MEMBERS OF YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS, CAN'T RECITE THE CONSTITUTION, THE BILL OF RIGHTS, CAN'T EVEN SING ALL THE STANZAS OF THE NATIONAL ANTHEM!
(HOW ABOUT THIS PART:
"'And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:'"
NO? YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT ONE? NOT SURPRISING! ) 

HOW MANY OF YOU CAN HONESTLY SAY YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR OWN LOCAL ABOMINATIONS CALLED "COUNTY/CITY ORDINANCES" ARE, REPEAT TO OTHERS WHAT YOUR STATE CONSTITUTION IS? CAN YOU TELL ANYONE WHAT OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS ARE, HOW A PERSON CAN BECOME A CITIZEN?
I'D CONFIDENTLY WAGER $100 THAT MOST OF YOU COULD NOT PASS A CITIZENSHIP TEST! DO YOU KNOW WHICH NATIONS OUR TROOPS ARE IN TONIGHT? THERE ARE ABOUT 150 NAMES OF THOSE! DO YOU HAVE A CLUE WHY WE'RE THERE, EVEN IN NATIONS WE CALL FRIENDS AND ALLIES? DO YOU KNOW THE NAMES OF THE HEADS OF THE FBI, CIA, FEMA, "HOMELAND SECURITY" <I SPIT ON DHS!>, EVEN YOUR LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS? DID YOU KNOW THERE ARE STILL LAWS ON THE BOOKS OF A FEW STATES THAT MANDATE PEOPLE BE ARMED AGAINST INDIAN UPRISINGS, THAT ONE CAN SHOOT AN INDIAN ON HORSEBACK, THAT MORE THAN 5 (OR IN ONE STATE, 7) INDIANS TOGETHER ARE CLASSIFIED AS A WAR PARTY AND CAN BE SHOT, THAT AS LATE AS THE 1950s LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS WERE TOLD TO SHOOT DRUNK INDIANS ON SIGHT? DO YOU KNOW WHAT HAS DEFINED A "POTENTIAL TERRORIST" SINCE 2003? IF YOU HAVE SPOKEN OUT FOR THE CONSTITUTION OR AGAINST ABORTION, IF YOU SO MUCH AS USE CASH TO PAY FOR THINGS, ATTEND ANY PROTEST, YOU ARE A POTENTIAL TERRORIST! YES, YOU ARE! THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYS SO, AND CONGRESS AGREES TO YOUR BEING ARRESTED AND HELD WITHOUT CHARGE...SINCE 2003! REALLY, SINCE 1979!
BUT YOU AGREED TO ALL THAT TOO, YES, YOU DID, IF ONLY BY YOUR SILENCE!

YOU ARE CLUELESS, APATHETIC, SELF-CREATED GULLIBLE SHEEP, AND THOSE WHO STEER YOU TO SLAUGHTER, THOSE WHO USE YOU AND ABUSE YOU, KNOW WHAT YOU ARE AND THEY ARE VERY HAPPY WITH HOW EASY YOU ARE TO MANIPULATE AND MANAGE! THAT IS HOW THEY'VE TRASHED OUR CONSTITUTION, OUR BILL OF RIGHTS, TAKEN AWAY OUR FREEDOMS, FRIGHTENED US INTO SUBMISSION, AND RENDERED US IMPOTENT TO STOP THEM! YOU ARE UNEDUCATED AND TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON OTHERS TO TELL YOU WHAT TO THINK, BELIEVE, AND DO. YOU ARE AS HELPLESS AS BABIES, AS 'DANGEROUS' AS A SQUEAKY TOY TO THOSE WHO HAVE FOOLED YOU, AMERICA! THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RESPECT FOR YOU, NOR FEAR OF ANY TYPE OF UPRISING OR REVOLUTION! YOU ARE PENNED AND AWAITING PROCESSING! YOU ARE NO LONGER "WE, THE PEOPLE", BUT SIMPLY "SHEEPLE"!

For the hundredth time in 2 days, I got an email that wanted to inform me our food stockpiles can be taken by our government. HOW could the senders NOT know that's been the case since about the time of the Revolution and the Civil War! It was certainly the case during WW1 and WW2. The backs of Americans were almost at breaking point when the adulterous general who allowed Operation Keelhaul that sent 20,000 of his own troops to Russia to die, and gave other troops the go-ahead to commit mass rape in Europe, Eisenhower, got into power. In the end, like other presidents before him, he MAY have seen the stark truth of who was controlling him, but he did nothing! We were all but lulled or scared into complete silence by then! American complacency and ignorance have been the norm since that peanut farmer, Carter, who French-kissed all of Arabia and tried to destroy Israel, enacted FEMA. It got worse, much worse, when the womanizer, JFK and the actor, Reagan,  signed their Exec Orders, gave us Iran/Contra, when the mindless, illiterate Bush2 who kissed Saudi Princes in the mouth and tenderly held their hands in garden strolls, danced with them in their sword dances, and fed you the fairy tale of WMDs and the Iraq menace, handed Congress his Patriot Act and they bowed and scraped and agreed to it.
It's nothing new at all that Obama has kept ALL these shady little things going! He hasn't the power to change much of anything, America! He's just the last in a long line of puppets! BUT, Obama hasn't added squat to what ALL his predecessors did and you'd bloody well KNOW that, America, if you would READ HISTORY & CONGRESSIONAL BILLS, AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS instead of watching TV or playing games, or worrying about how to get what you want.
THERE IS NO NEW ABOMINATION BENEATH THE AMERICAN SKY, NOR COMING FROM ITS WHITE HOUSE! IT HAS ALL BEEN DONE BEFORE! AND AS LONG AS YOU SLEEP, IT WILL ALWAYS BE DONE THE SAME!

YOU'VE DUMBED YOURSELVES DOWN, AMERICA! YOU'VE TRIED TO IGNORE THE HELL THAT'S BEEN CREATED FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU JUST DIDN'T WANT TO READ, NOR LEARN THE TRUTH, NOR ACCEPT THE FACTS, NOR REALIZE YOUR DAMNABLE 'PARTIES' HAVE SCAMMED YOU, LIED TO YOU, AND USED YOU TO BRING THIS NATION TO ITS KNEES! TRUTH WAS TOO SHOCKING, TOO SCARY, AND YOU ARE A NATION OF SCARED LITTLE SHEEP! YOU HAVE BECOME STUPID, AMERICA, FOR THE MOST PART...MOST OF YOU ARE SIMPLY STUPID! YOU'LL FALL FOR ANYTHING!

Also for the 100th time in a day, I got emails warning me about "OBAMA'S SECRET PLAN"...
SECRET?????
YOU WHO NEVER READ THE WEBSITES OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER, THE THOUSANDS OF GOVERNMENT WEBSITES THAT RECORD EVERYTHING, THE NEWS AGENCIES OVERSEAS WHO WATCH OUR GOVERNMENT LIKE HAWKS WATCH FOR PREY, AND REPORT WHEN THE PRESIDENT SO MUCH AS PASSES GAS, WEBSITES AND "TATTLER/WHISTLE-BLOWER" SITES THAT JUMP ON EVERY WEE 'E.O.' OR BILL THAT IS WRITTEN THAT LOOKS A LITTLE "CROOKED", YOU KNOW VERY LITTLE OR NOTHING!
IF YOU READ/WATCH ANYTHING BUT THE CORPORATE-OWNED MAINSTREAM MEDIA YOU LOVE BECAUSE THEY PLAY WHAT YOU LIKE TO HEAR, AMERICANS, YOU WOULD KNOW MUCH! IF YOU DARED TAKE OFF YOUR BLINDERS, UNSTOP YOUR EARS, WANT TRUTH MORE THAN FOOD OR WATER, YOU WOULD KNOW...THERE ARE NO SECRET EXEC ORDERS, NO SECRET BILLS, NO SECRET LAWS! THEY'RE IN PLAIN SIGHT AND YOU HAVE BLINDERS ON, AND YOU REFUSE TO TAKE THEM OFF TO GO LOOK FOR TRUTH!

YOU WHINING, COMPLACENT COUCH POTATOES, YOU'LL SWALLOW ANYTHING THAT'S FED YOU FROM YOUR FAVORITE "CHANNEL" LIKE IT'S CANDY! YOU NEVER GO DIG AND CHECK OUT ONE SMALL THING, DO YOU? IF YOUR 'BUDDY' SENDS IT, OR EVEN SOME HIGH-SCHOOL DROPOUT FAMILY MEMBER , YOU'LL SWALLOW IT, HOOK, LINE AND SINKER! IF YOUR POWER-MAD, LYING POLITICAL PARTY FEEDS IT TO YOU, YOU EAT IT UP LIKE A LAST MEAL! YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE TO START TO ACTUALLY VERIFY ANYTHING, DO YOU, YOU SILLY SHEEPLE! YOU WOULDN'T KNOW A VALID PIECE OF NEWS FROM A PROPAGANDA PIECE IF THE PROPAGANDA  BIT YOU ON YOUR BEHIND AND SCREAMED, "I'M FAKE! THIS IS A LIE TO DUPE YOU!" YOU HAVE A CLOSED MIND, AMERICA! YOU HAVE ROBBED YOURSELVES OF INDEPENDENT THOUGHT AND THE NEED TO VERIFY EVERYTHING! INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LEARN TO DOUBT, TO REQUIRE PROOF, AND INDEPENDENT PEOPLE NEVER ACCEPT ANYTHING AS LAW AND GOSPEL WITHOUT DIGGING AROUND TO SEE IF WHAT THEY'RE TOLD IS CORRECT! YOU ARE A NEW GENERATION OF THE BLIND, THE DEAF, THE DUMB, AND YOUR SELF-INFLICTED APATHY AND TOTAL DEPENDENCE ON SELF-PROCLAIMED, OR PARTY-PROCLAIMED "EXPERTS" HAVE RENDERED YOU STUPID! SURELY YOUR ANCESTORS WOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOU! SURELY THEY DIED FOR NOTHING SINCE YOU'VE GIVEN AWAY ALL THEY FOUGHT FOR YOU TO HAVE!
YOUR ANCESTORS RELIED ON THEMSELVES, WHY CAN'T YOU? WHY DON'T YOU?

WHY DON'T YOU ASK YOURSELVES WHAT YOU CAN GIVE TO SALVAGE LIBERTY, AND STOP ASKING WHAT YOU CAN GET FOR DOING NOTHING TO SAFEGUARD IT?

ANOTHER HORRID FACT ABOUT AMERICANS IS THAT WAY OVER HALF OF YOU ARE STILL RACISTS, STILL BIGOTS, STILL CHAINED TO THAT OLD AMERICAN MANIFEST DESTINY MANURE THAT HAS MADE YOU NOT ONLY RESENT BUT ABSOLUTELY HATE ANYONE WHO IS NOT YOUR DEFINITION OF "AMERICAN"!

YOU RESENT IMMIGRANTS, THOUGH YOUR OWN ANCESTORS WERE "ILLEGAL" IMMIGRANTS THAT STOLE AN ENTIRE NATION FROM ITS INDIGENOUS TRIBES! YOU RESENT "PEOPLE COMING HERE AND MAKING FORTUNES", BUT YOUR ANCESTORS DID JUST THAT AND DID IT BY MEANS OF GENOCIDE AND TRICKERY AND THEFT! YOU RESENT OTHER NATIONS "TRYING TO TELL THE USA WHAT TO DO", BUT YOU OKAY WARS THAT WERE BASED ON THE LIES OF YOUR ELITIST, SELF-SERVING SCUM WHO PROFITED GREATLY FROM THOSE WARS. ONE LOOK AT CHENEY AND HALLIBURTON, THE BUSHES & THE CARLYLE GROUP (http://www.economist.com/node/1875084) WILL TELL YOU MUCH IF YOU EVER HAVE THE GUTS TO SEE IT! HELL, THE PATRIARCH OF THE  BUSH FAMILY, OLD MAN KENNEDY AND THE ROTHSCHILDS AND ROCKEFELLERS HELPED FUND THE NAZIS, EVEN RESCUED A LOT OF THEM AND PUT THEM IN BUSINESS HERE AND IN EUROPE, BUT YOU WON'T EVER LET YOURSELVES BELIEVE WELL-DOCUMENTED FACTS IF THEY MAKE YOUR BELOVEDS LOOK BAD!
YOU HAVE A SERF'S MENTALITY, AMERICANS! YOU NEED A "LORD" TO TELL YOU WHAT TO DO! YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE IT THROUGH A DAY ALL ON YOUR OWN! YOU HAVE TO CHECK WITH THE 'PARTY', OR A 'BOSS', OR SOME 'EXPERT', YOUR FAVORITE TV PERSONALITY...ANYBODY BUT YOURSELVES, BECAUSE YOU REALIZE YOU ARE SIMPLY 'OUT OF TOUCH', YOU DON'T KNOW JACK NOR SQUAT, AMERICANS!

YOU'RE RACIST TO THE BONE, MOST AMERICANS!
YOU'RE BIGOTS TO THE CORE, THOSE OF YOU WHO LOOK DOWN ON ANYONE NOT LIKE YOU!

I HAVE A HUGE FILE OF EMAILS THAT DAMN OBAMA TO THE DEEPEST PITS OF HELL, AND ACTUALLY CALL HIM AN "UPPITY N----R"! THOUSANDS OF THEM CALL HIM THE "N" WORD! THOUSANDS CALL HIM A MUSLIM "N"! NOT ONE HAS EVER BEEN ABLE TO SHOW ONE OUNCE OF PROVEN FACTS THAT HE IS A MUSLIM, THEY JUST WANT TO BELIEVE HE'S A "N" AND A MUSLIM! NOT ONE OF THESE IGNORANT EMAILS HAS EVER SAID THE MAN HAD A WHITE MOTHER! NOT ONE HAS EVER RECOGNIZED HIS GENE POOL ON THE MATERNAL SIDE IS THE SAME AS THEIRS, THAT THE MAN IS AS WHITE AS HE IS BLACK! NOT ONE RECOGNIZES THAT HE'S EVEN HUMAN! NONE WHO SEND THESE "HATE-MAILS" HAVE EVER ONCE SENT ME EMAILS ABOUT THE PRESIDENTS BEFORE HIM DOING THE VERY SAME THINGS, THE SAME! WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? "COLOR"!
BUT ANOTHER THING IS CLEAR...NOT ONE SENDER HAS SPENT  YEARS ON RESEARCH INTO THOSE POINTLESS ALLEGATIONS OF HIS BEING BORN IN KENYA.
I HAVE, LIKE HUNDREDS OF OTHERS HAVE! BUT HAVE ALL OF YOU? OH, NO! THE ONLY THING MOST AMERICANS SEE WHEN THEY LOOK AT OBAMA OR ANY OTHER "NON-WHITE" ELECTED OFFICIAL IS THAT THEY ARE NOT THAT WONDERFUL LILY WHITE COLOR, THEY ARE BLACK, 'YELLOW', 'BROWN', NOT WHITE, NOT WHITE, NOT THAT GLOWING, BEAUTIFUL, NECESSARY, WONDERFUL WHITE! I SAY THAT WITH "WHITE" DNA IN MY BODY! I SAY THAT AS SOMEONE BORN AND REARED IN THE SOUTH! RACISM AND BIGOTRY LIVE!
ROMNEY'S FAMILY SPRANG FROM POLYGAMISTS, WERE HUNTED BY AMERICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT, HAD TO RUN AND HIDE IN MEXICO, BUT THAT'S OKAY, THAT'S FINE. THE BUSHES AND KENNEDYS HAD PATRIARCHS/FAMILY MEMBERS WHO AIDED THE NAZIS, WHO WERE BUSINESS PARTNERS WITH MEMBERS OF THE BIN LADEN FAMILY, WHO WERE GIVEN TO LECHEROUS WOMANIZING, ALCOHOLISM, DRUG ADDICTION, WERE AWOL FROM THE MILITARY, WHO WERE ANYTHING BUT "FINE, UPSTANDING CITIZENS", BUT THAT WAS OKAY, BECAUSE THEY WERE "THE RIGHT COLOR", ISN'T THAT IT, AMERICA?
YOU ARE MOSTLY RACISTS, AMERICA, AND YOU CAN DENY IT ALL YOU WANT, BUT JUST LIKE A RED DOT ON A WHITE PAGE STANDS OUT, YOUR RACISM STANDS OUT TO ALL THE WORLD, IN SUBTLE WAYS AND FLAGRANT WAYS! YOU CAN'T HIDE AN ELEPHANT BEHIND A MOUSE! YOUR RACISM AND DEEPLY INGRAINED BIGOTRY IS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, AMERICA! NO ONE ABROAD DOUBTS THAT AMERICA LIKES ONLY "WHITE AMERICANS", THAT WHITE IS THE QUALIFIER FOR BEING A "REAL AMERICAN", A "REAL PATRIOT", A "REAL HUMAN BEING"! A BIT LESS THAN HALF OF OUR OWN CITIZENS RECOGNIZE THAT THE OTHERS OF YOU ARE RACIST! YOU'RE ONLY FOOLING YOURSELVES, BUT YOU'RE GOOD AT THAT!

IF OBAMA HAD BEEN WHITE, IF HE HAD COME FROM THE "RIGHT" FAMILY, HE'D HAVE BEEN MOSTLY IGNORED, OR AT BEST CARPED AGAINST LIKE CLINTON WAS, LIKE JFK. HE'D HAVE BEEN JUST ANOTHER DEMOCRAT! I DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE MAN, NOR WOULD I , BUT TO ME, HE IS JUST ANOTHER MAN! WHAT IS HE TO MOST OF YOU, AMERICA?

SHAME ON YOU, RACIST AMERICANS! YOU WERE NEVER THE "ORIGINAL COLOR" OF THIS LAND! YOU WERE "BRIGHT WHITE" AMONG THE "RED" ORIGINAL, INDIGENOUS RACE, MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF THEM! YOU WERE "THE WRONG COLOR" THEN!
CONNECT WITH THAT! TRY TO IMAGINE HOW 'SCARY', HOW THREATENING YOUR WHITE-BODIED ANCESTORS WERE TO THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF BOTH "AMERICAN" CONTINENTS! YOUR KIN WERE THE SCOURGE OF SCOURGES THEN! YOUR KIN WERE THE "INVADING HORDE", YOUR 'KIND' WERE THE ENEMY! YOUR ANCESTORS WERE THE ILLEGAL ALIENS INVADING THIS CONTINENT! YOUR ANCESTORS WERE THE VERY LEECHES WHO BEGAN SUCKING THE BLOOD OUT OF THE EARTH ONCE THEY "SWAM" THE PONDS THAT LED THEM HERE TO CONQUER! HOW DOES THAT SIT WITH YOU, RACISTS?

THESE EVER-FLOWING RIVERS OF EMAILS ALWAYS POINT TO WHAT OBAMA HAS DONE TO AMERICA. HE'S DONE NOTHING NEW, NOTHING! HE IS GUILTY OF DOING THE SAME!
WHERE WERE THE EMAILS ABOUT REAGAN, THE TWO BUSHES WHEN THEY DID THE VERY SAME THINGS? OBAMA HAS NEVER DONE ONE ORIGINAL THING THAT I CAN FIND IN MY MANY GIGABYTES OF THE "SINS OF PAST PRESIDENTS"! HE HAS MERELY RE-STATED AND RE-INSTALLED WHAT PRESIDENTS SINCE THE DAWN OF THE USA HAVE DONE AND WRITTEN! HE HAS NOT BEEN THE ORIGINATOR OF ANYTHING! I AM A DEVOTED STUDENT OF AMERICAN HISTORY AND AMERICAN POLITICS, HAVE SPENT ABOUT 50 YEARS STUDYING THOSE FOR 8 TO 14 HOURS EVERY SINGLE DAY, ALMOST ALL MY LIFE,THANKS TO INSOMNIA AND A DRIVE TO KNOW.

I HAVE BEEN DEEPLY INVOLVED IN AMERICAN POLITICS, KNOWN HUNDREDS, IF NOT THOUSANDS OF POLITICIANS WHOSE NAMES YOU MAY BE QUITE FAMILIAR WITH ,OF ALL PARTIES, FROM ALL DECADES SINCE 1950. I AM DEVOTED TO STUDY AND RESEARCH LIKE MANY OF YOU ARE DEVOTED TO 3 MEALS A DAY! I HAD RATHER READ THAN EAT, AND DO! I AM DRIVEN TO KNOW THE TRUTH, EVEN IF TRUTH KILLS ME, AMERICA, AND IT VERY WELL MAY! AND AS I'VE SAID BEFORE IN THIS BLOG, I'VE REGRETTABLY BEEN REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, LIBERTARIAN, GREEN PARTY, ALL OF IT! I KNOW THEIR PLATFORMS AND IDEOLOGY BETTER THAN YOU KNOW THE FACES OF YOUR OWN CHILDREN! I FREED MYSELF FROM ALL THAT!
THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME CORE...WIN AT ANY COST, POWER, POWER, POWER, AND MAKE MONEY WHILE IN OFFICE! THEY HAVE ALL LIED AND THE LIES ARE RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU, DAY AFTER DAY, TERM AFTER TERM, CONGRESSIONAL SESSION AFTER CONGRESSIONAL SESSION, OVAL OFFICE PUPPET AFTER PUPPET! NOT ONE "PARTY" IS DIFFERENT AT THE CORE THAN ANY OTHER! THEY ALL WORK FOR THE SAME BOSSES THAT HAVE CHAINED AMERICA TO THEM SINCE 1776! MONEY IS POWER, MONEY CREATES POWER, MONEY CONTROLS AMERICA!

OH, THE EMAILS THAT SCREAM ABOUT DEBT CEILINGS!
SINCE 1981, REPUBLICANS HAVE RAISED THE DEBT CEILING 32 TIMES, REAGAN ALONE RAISED IT 17 TIMES, AND YOUR DARLING BOEHNER AND MANY OF HIS COMRADES VOTED MERRILY FOR A LOT OF THOSE ONCE THEY CAME UP TO THE HILL! THEIR VOTING RECORDS ARE  RECORDED, AND YOU CAN LOOK THEM UP, DID YOU KNOW THAT? DEMOCRATS RAISED THE DEBT CEILING 7 TIMES IN THE SAME 32 YEARS, AND WHO YELLED AND FOAMED AT THE MOUTH THEN? THE VERY ONES WHO VOTED YES WHEN A REPUBLICAN DID IT! WHY DIDN'T I GET EMAILS WHEN IT WAS REAGAN, OR ONE OF THE BUSHES?

EMAILS WAIL ABOUT TAX INCREASES.
WHERE WERE SIMILAR EMAILS WHEN REAGAN RAISED TAXES ELEVEN TIMES, WHEN BUSH1 RAISED THEM? WHERE WERE EMAILS WHEN BUSH2's LOWERING THEM LOST US 8 MILLION JOBS, WHEN THE SURPLUS LEFT TO HIM BY CLINTON WAS SPENT IN BUSH's FIRST TERM, WHEN BUSH DOUBLED THE NATIONAL DEBT? DID YOU FORGET THAT, ALL OF THAT?

AND ABOUT THE DEBT, REAGAN MADE HISTORY BY TRIPLING THE NATIONAL DEBT, THEN BUSH2 DOUBLED IT! WHERE WERE THE OUTRAGED EMAILS THEN?

WHERE WERE YOU, AMERICA, WHEN CARTER CREATED FEMA...FEMA WHICH CAN COMPLETELY SUSPEND OUR CONSTITUTION AND CONGRESS CAN'T STOP FROM DOING SO, FEMA, THAT CAN RELOCATE ALL OF US IN A DAY, TAKE OUR HOMES, CARS, TAKE OUR CHILDREN TO UNDISCLOSED LOCATIONS ON A WHIM, CONFISCATE OUR FOOD, OUR BUSINESSES, OUR WATER, OUR MONEY, SEND OUR NATIONAL GUARD AGAINST US LIKE THEY DID IN NEW ORLEANS AFTER KATRINA? WHY DIDN'T YOU HOWL LIKE BANSHEES ABOUT FEMA'S CREATION? BECAUSE YOU NEVER, EVER READ ALL OF THE FEMA DOCUMENTS, DID YOU? DON'T LIE!

 I READ EVERY SINGLE WORD OF THAT MASSIVE ABOMINATION!
I READ EVERY WORD OF THE HEINOUS PATRIOT ACT, EVERY WORD OF EVERY EXECUTIVE ORDER BY EVERY PRESIDENT THAT HAS EVER BEEN RECORDED FOR US, EVERY WORD OF EVERY BILL THE TRAITORS ON CAPITOL HILL HAVE PASSED. THEY HAVE TO PASS THOSE BEFORE, BEFORE, BEFORE ANY PRESIDENT CAN SIGN THEM INTO LAW! YOUR CONGRESS SENDS THOSE "SECRET BILLS" UP TO THE OVAL OFFICE! THERE ARE NO "SECRET BILLS"!
I READ BECAUSE I MUST KNOW, I CAN'T EXCUSE MYSELF BY SAYING I DON'T HAVE TIME TO READ! I MAKE TIME!

YOUR CONGRESS CAN VOTE TO DISALLOW ANY EXEC ORDER! DID YOU KNOW THAT? DID YOU BOTHER TO FIND THAT OUT? WHY DON'T THEY JUST CANCEL THOSE "SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDERS"?
BECAUSE THEY AREN'T SECRETS! THEY KNOW THEY'RE THERE AND CONGRESS ALLOWS THEM! AND YOU ALLOW CONGRESS! YOU ALLOW IT ALL BY YOUR VOTES, OR LACK OF VOTES! ALMOST HALF OF AMERICANS WHO COULD VOTE JUST DON'T! THERE'S YOUR BIGGEST PROBLEM, AMERICANS!  YOU! Y-O-U! YOUR SELF-CREATED IGNORANCE OF WHAT'S GOING ON UNDER YOUR NOSES, RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU, NOT "IN SECRET" BUT OPENLY, AND YOUR FEAR THAT KEEPS YOU SILENT AND IMPOTENT!

NO! YOU DON'T READ, YOU DON'T QUESTION, MANY WON'T GET OFF YOUR BEHINDS AND GO VOTE THE BASTARDS OUT, NO! YOU JUST SIT THERE AND WHINE, OR SIT THERE AND HATE THE MAN IN OFFICE, FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHETHER BECAUSE HE'S THE "WRONG" PARTY, THE "WRONG" COLOR, OR THE "WRONG" FAITH!
IT'S NOT THE LONE MAN IN THE OVAL OFFICE, HE'S JUST DOING WHAT HE'S TOLD BY THE REAL POWERS IN AMERICA! HE'S A SAD PUPPET, NO MATTER WHAT HIS NAME HAS BEEN! HE'S NOT CONGRESS, HE'S NOT THE VOTING PUBLIC, HE'S A SOLITARY MAN ON A CHAIN, AND HE JUST DANCES TO THE TUNE THAT'S PIPED HIM! CONGRESS PIPES THE TUNES, BUT THEY DON'T WRITE THE SONGS! CONGRESS TAKES ITS MARCHING ORDERS FROM THE REAL POWERS THAT RULES US, THAT RUNS THE "GLOBAL ECONOMY", BECAUSE, IF THEY DON'T PLAY THE GAME, DANCE THE DANCE, THEY'RE AFRAID THE  MONEYED ONES WILL JERK THE RUG RIGHT OUT FROM UNDER US ALL, CREATE GLOBAL HOLOCAUST, CREATE ANOTHER "GREAT DEPRESSION", BRING AMERICA TO ITS KNEES TO GROVEL BEFORE THEM. DON'T WE DO THAT ALREADY, EVERY DAY?

MOST ARE SCARED TO DEATH OF THAT BUNCH! SCARED...TO DEATH!
JFK SPOKE OF THEM, AND DIED. WOODROW WILSON, EISENHOWER, EVEN FDR REGRETTED BEING OWNED BY THEM. EACH HAD WEAKNESSES, AND THE REAL POWERS KNOW HOW TO FIND WEAKNESSES AND USE THEM AGAINST THE WEAK!
THE ONES WHO LEAVE THAT OVAL OFFICE LEAVE GRAY-HAIRED AND HAGGARD, PREMATURELY AGED FROM THE THINGS THEY'VE FOUND OUT, VISIBLY SHAKEN, AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, MORE AND MORE OFTEN, JUST QUIT AND GO HOME.
THEY'RE ALL AFRAID, AS YOU'RE AFRAID, BUT YOU'RE DUMBED-DOWN, YOU DON'T GO LOOK FOR WHAT IT IS THAT SCARES THEM, AND YOU'RE GIVEN TO MINDLESS APATHY, AMERICANS, FOLLOWING THE JUDAS GOATS TO MARKET!
YOU'RE BEING PROCESSED DAILY, CLOSE TO THE END OF YOUR ALLOTTED TIME, WALLOWING IN THE DEEP GRAVE YOU DUG FOR YOURSELVES, AND I AM DONE WITH YOU!
YOU WHO CHOOSE TO BE BLIND, TO DO NOTHING TO SAVE THIS NATION, TO JUST SIT AND WHINE AND CONDEMN OTHERS, DON'T COME HERE TO READ ANYMORE, DON'T BOTHER! NOTHING WILL BE HERE FOR YOU WHO REFUSE TO SEE OR LEARN EVER AGAIN!YOU CHOSE NOT TO LEARN, AND SO A NATION PERISHES BECAUSE OF YOU!
GO ON TO YOUR DESERVED DEMISE, GO ON TO YOUR PATHETIC END!
I WASH MY HANDS OF TRYING TO AWAKEN YOU TO YOU HOW BLIND YOU'VE BEEN!
THE STENCH OF THE TOMB IS ALL OVER YOU!
I WALK AWAY!

15 Things the GOP Doesn't Want You to Know About Taxes and the Debt

15 Things the GOP Doesn't Want You to Know About Taxes and the Debt
            August 30, 2012, by JON PERR

[REPRODUCED HERE BY AUTHOR'S EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT AND WITH MY THANKS]
Copyright © 2004 - 2013 PERRspectives.com. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/002575.htm#one

The experience of the past three decades shows that for the GOP, there are only two certainties in life: debt and tax cuts. But you'd never know that watching the Republican National Convention, where a massive ticking debt clock and obvious falsehoods like "President Obama has doubled the national debt" nevertheless dominate the proceedings.

Of course, the Not Intended to Be a Factual Statement Party long ago concluded that the truth will not set them free. So when Romney pollster Neil Newhouse insisted "We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers," he was merely confirming the Republicans' standard operating procedure now in place for over 30 years.

So, as the Republicans make Mitt Romney their official nominee for President of the United States, here are 15 things the GOP doesn't you to know about taxes and the debt.

(Click a link to jump to the details for each below):

    1~President Obama Cut Taxes for Almost All Working Americans
    2~Ronald Reagan Tripled the National Debt
    3~George W. Bush Doubled the National Debt
    4~Reagan Raised Debt Ceiling 17 Times, Bush Seven
    5~Tax Cuts Don't Pay for Themselves
    6~Almost All Working Americans Pay Taxes
    7~ The GOP's "Job Creators" Don't Create Jobs
    8~Low Capital Gains Taxes Fuel Income Inequality...
    9~ ...But Not Investment
   10~The Estate Tax Has Virtually No Impact on Family Farms and Businesses
   11~Income Inequality Has Reached an 80 Year High...
   12~...While the Federal Tax Burden Has Hit a 60 Year Low
   13~ Romney-Ryan Plan Another Massive Tax Cut Windfall for the Wealthy
   14~Romney, Ryan Won't Say Which of the $1 Trillion in Tax Breaks GOP Will End
   15~Romney-Ryan Will Add More Debt Than President Obama

[PLEASE NOTE: TO VIEW THE MANY CHARTS, ETC, CONTAINED AND REFERRED TO IN THIS AMAZING PIECE, YOU WILL STILL HAVE TO GO TO MR. PERR'S LINK. YOU WILL DO THAT IF YOU WANT TO SEE HOW MUCH WOOL HAS BEEN PULLED OVER YOUR EYES ALL THESE MANY YEARS.]

1. President Obama Cut Taxes for Almost All Working Americans

Back in April, Bloomberg News correctly reported that "Obama Delivers on Tax Cut Promises as Increases for Rich Blocked." Of course, you'd never know if you listened to Mitt Romney, who claimed that the President "has already raised taxes on millions of Americans, but he won't stop there."

During the campaign four years ago, then-Senator Barack Obama called for families making over $250,000 a year to return to their Clinton-era of income tax rate of 39.6 percent, up from 35 percent under President Bush. With his stimulus program in February 2009, President Obama as promised delivered tax relief for 95% of working families. As Steve Benen noted at the time, it was the largest two-year tax cut in American history. But thanks to the jet-engine decibel level of right-wing rage, a cacophony willingly amplified by the media, that accomplishment was drown out. As the New York Times asked just before the 2010 midterm elections, "What if a president cut Americans' income taxes by $116 billion and nobody noticed?"

    In a New York Times/CBS News Poll last month, fewer than one in 10 respondents knew that the Obama administration had lowered taxes for most Americans. Half of those polled said they thought that their taxes had stayed the same, a third thought that their taxes had gone up, and about a tenth said they did not know.

And that was before President Obama and Democrats in Congress secured a two-year reduction in Americans' payroll taxes.

What Americans may also not know if that both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan plan on delivering another windfall for the wealthy (below) even as they hike taxes for working Americans.

2. Ronald Reagan Tripled the National Debt

Among the Republicans who prophesied the default doomsday scenario that almost unfolded last summer was none other than conservative patron saint, Ronald Reagan. As he warned Congress in November 1983:

    "The full consequences of a default -- or even the serious prospect of default -- by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and the value of the dollar."

Reagan knew what he was talking about. After all, the hemorrhage of red ink at the U.S. Treasury was his doing.

As most analysts predicted, Reagan's massive $749 billion supply-side tax cuts in 1981 quickly produced even more massive annual budget deficits. Combined with his rapid increase in defense spending, Reagan delivered not the balanced budgets he promised, but record-setting debt. Even his OMB alchemist David Stockman could not obscure the disaster with his famous "rosy scenarios."

Forced to raise taxes eleven times to avert financial catastrophe, the Gipper nonetheless presided over a tripling of the American national debt to nearly $3 trillion. By the time he left office in 1989, Ronald Reagan more than equaled the entire debt burden produced by the previous 200 years of American history. It's no wonder Stockman lamented two years ago:

    "[The] debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."

It's also no wonder the Gipper cited the skyrocketing deficits he bequeathed to America as his greatest regret.

3. George W. Bush Doubled the National Debt

Following in Reagan's footsteps, George W. Bush buried the myth of Republican fiscal discipline.

Inheriting a federal budget in the black and CBO forecast for a $5.6 trillion surplus over 10 years, President George W. Bush quickly set about dismantling the progress made under Bill Clinton. Bush's $1.4 trillion tax cut in 2001, followed by a $550 billion second round in 2003, accounted for the bulk of the yawning budget deficits he produced. (It is more than a little ironic that Paul Ryan ten years ago called the tax cuts "too small" because he believed the estimated surplus Bush eviscerated would be even larger.)

In words and pictures, the New York Times tells the tale of what transpired:

Like Reagan and Stockman before him, Bush resorted to the rosy scenario to claim he would halve the budget deficit by 2009. Before the financial system meltdown last fall, Bush's deficit already reached $490 billion. (And even before the passage of the Wall Street bailout, Bush had presided over a $4 trillion increase in the national debt, a staggering 71% jump.) By January 2009, the mind-numbing deficit figure reached $1.2 trillion, forcing President Bush to raise the debt ceiling to $11.3 trillion.

4. Reagan Raised Debt Ceiling 17 Times, Bush Seven

"Reagan," Vice President Dick Cheney famously declared in 2002, "proved deficits don't matter." Not, that is, unless a Democrat is in the White House.

For their part, Republicans want to pretend history began on January 20, 2009. While Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling claimed last year that for Republicans raising the debt ceiling is "contrary to our DNA," House Minority Leader Eric Cantor protested during his party's debt ceiling hostage-taking, "I don't think the White House understands is how difficult it is for fiscal conservatives to say they're going to vote for a debt ceiling increase."

As McClatchy showed, Republicans are as bad at genetics and history as they are at economics:

As Donny Shaw documented in January 2010, Republican intransigence on the debt ceiling only began in earnest when Bush left the White House for good.

    The Republicans haven't always been against increasing the federal debt ceiling. This is the first time in recent history (the past decade or so) that no Republican has voted for the increase. In fact, on most of the ten other votes to increase the federal debt limit that the Senate has taken since 1997, the Republicans provided the majority of the votes in favor.

As it turns out, Republican majorities voted to raise the U.S. debt ceiling seven times while George W. Bush sat in the Oval Office. (It should be noted, as Ezra Klein did, that party-line votes on debt ceiling increases tied to other legislation is not solely the province of the GOP.) As ThinkProgress pointed out, during the Bush presidency, the current GOP leadership team voted 19 times to increase debt limit. During his tenure, the U.S. national debt doubled, fueled by the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, the Medicare prescription drug plan, TARP and the unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor voted for all of it and the debt which ensued because, as Orrin Hatch later explained:

    "It was standard practice not to pay for things."

5. Tax Cuts Don't Pay for Themselves

In his version of the Republican myth that "tax cuts pay for themselves," President Bush confidently proclaimed, "You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase." As it turned out, not so much.

This chart shows just how dire the tax revenue drought has become. For those Republicans who claim "tax cuts pay themselves," it's worth noting that federal revenue did not return to its pre-Bush tax cut level until 2006. (While this graph shows current dollars, the dynamic is unchanged measured in inflation-adjusted, constant 2005 dollars.)

As a share of American GDP, tax revenues peaked in 2000; that is, before the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concluded, the Bush tax cuts accounted for half of the deficits during his tenure, and if made permanent, over the next decade would cost the U.S. Treasury more than Iraq, Afghanistan, the recession, TARP and the stimulus - combined.

As the Washington Post summed up the CBO's conclusions regarding the causes of the nation's mounting debt earlier this year, "The biggest culprit, by far, has been an erosion of tax revenue triggered largely by two recessions and multiple rounds of tax cuts." The analysis by the Times echoed that finding:

    With President Obama and Republican leaders calling for cutting the budget by trillions over the next 10 years, it is worth asking how we got here -- from healthy surpluses at the end of the Clinton era, and the promise of future surpluses, to nine straight years of deficits, including the $1.3 trillion shortfall in 2010. The answer is largely the Bush-era tax cuts, war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and recessions.

But as Ezra Klein explained in the Washington Post, the revealing Times chart doesn't tell the full story of the impact of Bush-era policies on future debt facing Barack Obama:

    What's also important, but not evident, on this chart is that Obama's major expenses were temporary -- the stimulus is over now -- while Bush's were, effectively, recurring. The Bush tax cuts didn't just lower revenue for 10 years. It's clear now that they lowered it indefinitely, which means this chart is understating their true cost. Similarly, the Medicare drug benefit is costing money on perpetuity, not just for two or three years. And Boehner, Ryan and others voted for these laws and, in some cases, helped to craft and pass them.

Nevertheless, as the Republican Party waged its all-out attack in 2010 to preserve the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, the GOP's number two man in the Senate provided the talking point to help sell the $70 billion annual giveaway to America's rich. "You should never," Arizona's Jon Kyl declared, "have to offset the cost of a deliberate decision to reduce tax rates on Americans." For his part, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell rushed to defend Kyl's fuzzy math:

    "There's no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject."

That may have been a view universally shared by virtually every Republican, but it happens to be wrong.

6. Almost All Working Americans Pay Taxes

Going back to the 2008 campaign, Republicans have kept up a steady drumbeat that "half of Americans don't pay taxes." That claim is no more true now than it was then.

In 2010, New York Times columnist David Leonhardt urged Americans to "look closer":

    With Tax Day coming on Thursday, 47 percent has become shorthand for the notion that the wealthy face a much higher tax burden than they once did while growing numbers of Americans are effectively on the dole.

    Neither one of those ideas is true. They rely on a cleverly selective reading of the facts. So does the 47 percent number.

Labeling the 47% argument a "distraction" from "who really pays what in taxes," Leonhardt explained:

    Even if the discussion is restricted to federal taxes (for which the statistics are better), a vast majority of households end up paying federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data suggests that, at most, about 10 percent of all households pay no net federal taxes. The number 10 is obviously a lot smaller than 47.

    The reason is that poor families generally pay more in payroll taxes than they receive through benefits like the Earned Income Tax Credit. It's not just poor families for whom the payroll tax is a big deal, either. About three-quarters of all American households pay more in payroll taxes, which go toward Medicare and Social Security, than in income taxes.

(Over the years, the Earned Income Tax Credit has enjoyed bipartisan support from the White House. Among its admirers was Ronald Reagan, who praised the EITC as "the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.")

As Ezra Klein explained in April in the Washington Post:

    But when we focus on the federal income tax, we miss all the taxes that low-income Americans do pay. The payroll tax, for instance. And state sales taxes. And lots of local taxes. Indeed, Citizens for Tax Justice, a left-leaning tax policy group, produces a study every year showing the total tax burden for different groups once federal, state and local taxes are taken into account. And when you include all the taxes people pay, then, as you can see in the graph atop this post, it turns out that most Americans do pay taxes, and they in fact pay about as much as the rich.

7. The GOP's "Job Creators" Don't Create Jobs

For years, Republicans have warned that President Obama's proposal to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the top two percent of taxpayers would crush "job creators." As Speaker Boehner protested:

    "The top one percent of wage earners in the United States...pay forty percent of the income taxes...The people he's [President Obama] is talking about taxing are the very people that we expect to reinvest in our economy."

If so, those expectations were sadly unmet under George W. Bush. After all, the last time the top tax rate was 39.6 percent during the Clinton administration, the United States enjoyed rising incomes, 23 million new jobs and budget surpluses. Under Bush? Not so much.

On January 9, 2009, the Republican-friendly Wall Street Journal summed it up with an article titled simply, "Bush on Jobs: the Worst Track Record on Record." (The Journal's interactive table quantifies his staggering failure relative to every post-World War II president.) The meager one million jobs created under President Bush didn't merely pale in comparison to the 23 million produced during Bill Clinton's tenure. In September 2009, the Congressional Joint Economic Committee charted Bush's job creation disaster, the worst since Hoover.

That dismal performance prompted David Leonhardt of the New York Times to ask last fall, "Why should we believe that extending the Bush tax cuts will provide a big lift to growth?" His answer was unambiguous:

    Those tax cuts passed in 2001 amid big promises about what they would do for the economy. What followed? The decade with the slowest average annual growth since World War II. Amazingly, that statement is true even if you forget about the Great Recession and simply look at 2001-7...

    Is there good evidence the tax cuts persuaded more people to join the work force (because they would be able to keep more of their income)? Not really. The labor-force participation rate fell in the years after 2001 and has never again approached its record in the year 2000.

    Is there evidence that the tax cuts led to a lot of entrepreneurship and innovation? Again, no. The rate at which start-up businesses created jobs fell during the past decade.

The data are clear: lower taxes for America's so called job-creators don't mean either faster economic growth or more jobs for Americans.

It's no wonder Leonhardt followed his first question with another. "I mean this as a serious question, not a rhetorical one," he asked, "Given this history, why should we believe that the Bush tax cuts were pro-growth?" Or as Mark Shields asked and answered in April:

    "Do tax cuts help 'job creators' or 'robber barons'?"

Just days after the Washington Post documented that George W. Bush presided over the worst eight-year economic performance in the modern American presidency, the New York Times in January 2009 featured an analysis comparing presidential performance going back to Eisenhower. As the Times showed, George W. Bush, the first MBA president, was a historic failure when it came to expanding GDP, producing jobs and even fueling stock market growth. Apparently, America's job creators can create a lot more jobs when their taxes are higher - even much higher - than they are today.

(It's worth noting that the changing landscape of loopholes, deductions and credits, especially after the 1986 tax reform signed by President Reagan, makes apples-to-apples comparisons of effective tax rates over time very difficult. For more background, see the CBO data on effective tax rates by income quintile.)

8. Low Capital Gains Taxes Fuel Income Inequality...

For years, Republicans have also wanted to slash capital gains taxes. (The 2011 and 2012 House GOP budgets authored by Paul Ryan would eliminate them altogether.) Predictably, that would only serve to make the very rich much, much richer.

In September, an analysis by the Washington Post concluded that "capital gains tax rates benefiting wealthy feed [the] growing gap between rich and poor." As the Post explained, for the very richest Americans the successive capital gains tax cuts from Presidents Clinton (from 28 to 20 percent) and Bush (from 20 to 15 percent) have been "better than any Christmas gift":

    While it's true that many middle-class Americans own stocks or bonds, they tend to stash them in tax-sheltered retirement accounts, where the capital gains rate does not apply. By contrast, the richest Americans reap huge benefits. Over the past 20 years, more than 80 percent of the capital gains income realized in the United States has gone to 5 percent of the people; about half of all the capital gains have gone to the wealthiest 0.1 percent.

This convenient chart tells the tale:

As the New York Times uncovered in 2006, the 2003 Bush dividend and capital gains tax cuts offered almost nothing to taxpayers earning below $100,000 a year. Instead, those windfalls reduced taxes "on incomes of more than $10 million by an average of about $500,000." As the Times explained, "The top 2 percent of taxpayers, those making more than $200,000, received more than 70% of the increased tax savings from those cuts in investment income." It's no wonder that between 2001 and 2007- a period during which poverty was rising and average household income had fallen - the 400 richest taxpayers saw their incomes double to an average of $345 million even as their effective tax rate was virtually halved. As the Washington Post noted, "The 400 richest taxpayers in 2008 counted 60 percent of their income in the form of capital gains and 8 percent from salary and wages. The rest of the country reported 5 percent in capital gains and 72 percent in salary."

It's no wonder Mitt Romney, who thanks to the "carried interest exemption" pays the low capital gains rate for most of income, told Newt Gingrich during a GOP debate:

    "Well, under [your] plan, I'd have paid no taxes in the last two years."

9. ...But Not Investment

Much lower tax rates for capital gains than income earned through labor, conservatives claim, spur investment, catalyze economic growth and fuel job creation. But if that Republican theology isn't true, then the United States has for decades done nothing more than deliver a massive windfall to the wealthiest Americans needing it least. Unfortunately, that's precisely what the data show. As it turns out, lower capital gains taxes increase income inequality - and not investment - in America.

As Paul Krugman recounted, the historically low capital gains rate enjoyed by the likes of Mitt Romney hasn't always been 15 percent. In the not-too-distant past, it reached 39.9 percent and before the Reagan tax reform of 1986 was the same as the top tax rate on income. But successive presidents of both parties lowered the capital gains rate on investment income because they believed, the Washington Post explained, "it spurs more investment in the U.S. economy, benefiting all Americans."

But as Jared Bernstein demonstrated with the chart below, there's no evidence to support that claim.

Bernstein found that that the business cycle, not acts of Congress, drive investment in the U.S.

    Hard to see anything in the picture supporting the view that either the level or changes in cap gains taxes play a determinant role in investment decisions.

    Remember, the ostensible reason for the favoritism in tax treatment here is to incentivize more investment and faster productivity growth. But that's not in the data and the reason it's not in the data is because investors aren't nearly as elastic to cap gains rates as their lobbyists say they are (more precisely, they'll carefully time their realizations to maximize their gains around rate changes, but that's not real economic activity-that's tax planning).

Reviewing other analyses, Brad Plummer of the Washington Post concurred with that assessment that low capital gains taxes don't necessarily jump-start investment in the economy:

    The top tax rate on investment income has bounced up and down over the past 80 years -- from as high as 39.9 percent in 1977 to just 15 percent today -- yet investment just appears to grow with the cycle, seemingly unaffected...

    Meanwhile, Troy Kravitz and Len Burman of the Urban Institute have shown that, over the past 50 years, there's no correlation between the top capital gains tax rate and U.S. economic growth -- even if you allow for a lag of up to five years.

Billionaire Warren Buffett, the inspiration for the "Buffett Rule" advocated by President Obama and his Democratic allies, couldn't agree more. As he told the New York Times last year:

    "I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone -- not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 -- shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off."

But if lower capital gains tax rates have had little impact on investment, they have had an outsized impact on income inequality in the United States. As the Congressional Research Service (CRS) explained in December

    Capital gains and dividends were a larger share of total income in 2006 than in 1996 (especially for high-income taxpayers) and were more unequally distributed in 2006 than in 1996. Changes in capital gains and dividends were the largest contributor to the increase in the overall income inequality. Taxes were less progressive in 2006 than in 1996, and consequently, tax policy also contributed to the increase in income inequality between 1996 and 2006.

10. The Estate Tax Has Virtually No Impact on Family Farms and Businesses

The Republican scam over the so-called "death tax" is as bogus now as it was when President Bush first perpetrated it during the 2000 election. Both Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney want to eliminate the tax - and the billions in annual revenue it generates for the U.S. government - altogether.

As former Nevada Senator John Ensign griped, "It destroys a lot of small businesses and a lot of family farms and ranches in America," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) groused:

    "People who aren't wealthy, who may have built up value in land over generations and many family farms find themselves in situations where they've got to sell the farm in order the pay the taxes."

Sadly for conservative myth-makers, that claim, too, is completely false.

That tax is currently paid by less than a quarter of one percent of American estates each year. Despite Republican mythology to the contrary, the Tax Policy Center reported that in 2009 fewer than 2,700 family farms and businesses owed the tax to Uncle Sam. But thanks to successful Republican brinksmanship, the December 2010 tax cut compromise lowered the rate from 45 percent to 35 percent while boosting the estate tax exemption to $10 million per couple, dropping the number of families impacted to just 40 a year. Now, Mitt Romney wants to make sure those 40 richest estates estimated to now pay the tax each year could keep billions of dollars away from the federal government.

And among those 40 estates would be his own. With President Romney zeroing out the estate tax, his five sons and 18 grandchildren would get a golden shower when their grandparents Mitt and Ann leave the scene. Their payday courtesy of all other American taxpayers could reach $84,000,000, that is, 35 percent of $240 million. (The Romney clan's winnings courtesy of the U.S. Treasury pale in comparison to the billions to be saved by the billionaires who back Mitt Romney and his Super PAC.)

11. Income Inequality is at an 80 Year High...

As ThinkProgress demonstrated (see charts above), historically lower tax rates for the richest Americans did not produce either more job creation or faster economic growth. (In fact, the Bush years produced what Leonhardt rightly labeled as "The decade with the slowest average annual growth since World War II.") But what the conservative cornucopia for the gilded-class does reliably produce is unprecedented income inequality.

A report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) found a financial Grand Canyon separating the very rich from everyone else. Over the three decades ending in 2007, the top 1 percent's share of the nation's total after-tax household income more than doubled, from 7.5 percent to 17.1 percent. During that time, the share of the middle 60% of Americans dropped from 51.1 percent to 43.5 percent; the bottom four-fifths declined from 58 percent to 48 percent. As for the poor, they fell further and further behind, with the lowest quintile's income share sliding to just 4.9%. Expressed in dollar terms, the income gap is staggering:

    Between 1979 and 2007, average after-tax incomes for the top 1 percent rose by 281 percent after adjusting for inflation -- an increase in income of $973,100 per household -- compared to increases of 25 percent ($11,200 per household) for the middle fifth of households and 16 percent ($2,400 per household) for the bottom fifth.

As economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty documented, income inequality isn't just as it highest level since the Great Depression. The rich, it turns out, have already more than recovered from the impact of the Bush recession which began in late 2007:

    They have found that the trends have mostly continued. From 2000 to 2007, incomes for the bottom 90 percent of earners rose only about 4 percent, once adjusted for inflation. For the top 0.1 percent, incomes climbed about 94 percent.

    The recession interrupted the trend, with the sharp decline in stock prices hitting the pocketbooks of the rich. But the income share of 1 percent has since rebounded. Data that the two economists released in March showed that the top 1 percent of earners got nearly every dollar of the income gains eked out in the first full year of the recovery. In 2010, the top 10 percent of earners took about half of overall income.

12. ...While the Federal Tax Burden is at a 60 Year Low

During the height of the Republicans' debt ceiling hostage-taking last summer, Speaker Boehner said the road to a compromise was my way or the highway:

    "Medicare, Medicaid - everything should be on the table, except raising taxes."

Which purely by the numbers (if not ideology) is an odd position to take. After all, as a percentage of the U.S. economy, the total federal tax bite hasn't been this low in 60 years.

As the chart representing President Obama's 2012 budget proposal above reflects, the American tax burden hasn't been this low in generations. Thanks to the combination of the Bush Recession and the latest Obama tax cuts, the AP reported, "as a share of the nation's economy, Uncle Sam's take this year will be the lowest since 1950, when the Korean War was just getting under way." In January, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) explained that "revenues would be just under 15 percent of GDP; levels that low have not been seen since 1950." That finding echoed an earlier analysis from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Last April, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concluded, "Middle-income Americans are now paying federal taxes at or near historically low levels, according to the latest available data." As USA Today reported in May 2010, the BEA data debunked yet another right-wing myth:

    Federal, state and local taxes -- including income, property, sales and other taxes -- consumed 9.2% of all personal income in 2009, the lowest rate since 1950, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports. That rate is far below the historic average of 12% for the last half-century. The overall tax burden hit bottom in December at 8.8% of income before rising slightly in the first three months of 2010.

    "The idea that taxes are high right now is pretty much nuts," says Michael Ettlinger, head of economic policy at the liberal Center for American Progress.

Or as former Reagan Treasury official Bruce Bartlett explained it in the New York Times:

    In short, by the broadest measure of the tax rate, the current level is unusually low and has been for some time. Revenues were 14.9 percent of G.D.P. in both 2009 and 2010. Yet if one listens to Republicans, one would think that taxes have never been higher, that an excessive tax burden is the most important constraint holding back economic growth and that a big tax cut is exactly what the economy needs to get growing again.

13. Romney-Ryan Plan Another Massive Tax Cut Windfall for the Wealthy

Both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would reduce corporate taxes from 35 to 25 percent. The top marginal income tax rate would be slashed from 35 percent to 25 percent (for Ryan) or 28 percent (for Romney). But while the former Massachusetts Governor is offering a 20 percent across-the-board cut to all of the current tax brackets, Ryan wants to move to only two: 10 and 25 percent. Ryan-Romney also ends the AMT and by repealing the Affordable Care, the taxes on higher-earners used to help pay for it. (Both men also want to eliminate the estate tax, a move which could theoretically deliver the Romney heirs an $80 million windfall.)

The result of the Ryan plan is predictable. As ThinkProgress explained:

    In all, those tax breaks amount to a $3 trillion giveaway to the richest Americans and corporations, according to the Tax Policy Center. Repealing the repatriation tax would add roughly $130 billion to that.

At a time of record income inequality and the lowest federal tax burden in 60 years, Mitt Romney would produce a similar payday for those who need it least. Again, ThinkProgress:

    Romney's claim that his plan would promote job and economic growth while reducing the deficit is also likely false. The Bush tax cuts were promoted under the same guise, only to blow a $2.5-trillion hole in the federal budget that was accompanied by worst performance of any post-war expansion" for growth in investment, GDP, and job creation. Romney's tax cuts are even more expensive, clocking in at a cost of more than $10.7 trillion over the next decade and reducing revenue to a paltry 15 percent of GDP, according to Linden. Balancing the budget on those terms, as Romney claims he will do, would be next to impossible.

In a nutshell, Romney's massive tax cut windfall for the wealthy makes George W. Bush look like Karl Marx.

But as a recent analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center revealed, that chart actually understates just how regressive Romney's tax plan really is. Even after assuming the closure of tax loopholes and deductions which disproportionately favor the rich (see below), TPC forecast that President Romney would cut taxes for the richest five percent of earners while increasing the tax bill for the other 95 percent of Americans.

It's no wonder Ezra Klein concluded that "'broadening the base and lowering the rates' is anti-family tax reform," adding:

    "The size of the tax cut he's proposing for the rich is larger than all of the tax expenditures that go to the rich put together. As such, it is mathematically impossible for him to keep his promise to make sure the top one percent keeps paying the same or more."

14. Romney, Ryan Won't Say Which of the $1 Trillion in Tax Breaks GOP Will End

Republicans Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have promised to slash tax rates and yet still balance the budget by getting "rid of the special interest loopholes, special deductions, lower everybody's tax rates, bring in at least as much revenue to the government." But because neither Romney nor Ryan has had the courage to publicly state which loopholes and deductions they would end, the inevitable result (see 15, below) would be trillions in new national debt.

But their cowardice is to be expected. As the New York Times recently revealed, that trillion dollars in annual tax expenditures is now larger than Uncle Sam's take from the income tax each year. And as the Washington Post highlighted last year, "ever-increasing tax breaks for U.S. families eclipse benefits for special interests"

It's important to understand that much of the estimated $1.3 trillion in annual tax expenditures in 2015 (a figure larger than the entire 2012 budget deficit and equivalent to about a third of the $3.8 trillion in federal spending next year) benefit working and middle income Americans. For example, the home mortgage tax deduction was worth $89 billion in 2011. Tax-deferred 401K accounts cost the Treasury $63 billion. The Earned Income Tax Credit had a similar $63 billion price tag last year.

Yet, as Paul Krugman pointed out in "Pink Slime Economics," the deductions and loopholes are the mystery meat in Paul Ryan's budgetary dog food:

    We're talking about a lot of loophole-closing. As Howard Gleckman of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center points out, to make his numbers work Mr. Ryan would, by 2022, have to close enough loopholes to yield an extra $700 billion in revenue every year. That's a lot of money, even in an economy as big as ours. So which specific loopholes has Mr. Ryan, who issued a 98-page manifesto on behalf of his budget, said he would close?

    None. Not one. He has, however, categorically ruled out any move to close the major loophole that benefits the rich, namely the ultra-low tax rates on income from capital. (That's the loophole that lets Mitt Romney pay only 14 percent of his income in taxes, a lower tax rate than that faced by many middle-class families.)

In April, the New York Times put Krugman's question into a handy chart of "Who Gains Most from Tax Breaks":

15. Romney-Ryan Will Add More Debt Than President Obama

Mitt Romney may "love data", but he has a serious problem with math. He has simultaneously promised to (a) extend the Bush tax cuts and then slash all rates by an additional 20 percent; (b) keep Uncle Sam's total take "revenue-neutral" and (c) eventually "Cut, Cap and Balance" the budget while (d) ensuring "that high-income people would continue to pay the same share of the tax burden that they do today." Like guaranteeing that the sun will rise in the west and set in the east, Romney's pledge is literally impossible.

His running mate does little better. That may seem like a surprising result, given Rep. Ryan's declaration that his mission is to "prevent an explosion of debt from crippling our nation and robbing our children of their future." But even with his draconian budget blueprint that cuts Medicaid by a third, ends Medicare as we know it, adds 48 million people to the ranks of the uninsured and by 2050 would result in ending all non-defense discretionary spending, over the next decade Ryan would unleash torrents of red ink from the U.S. Treasury. Ezra Klein explained how Paul Ryan came up $6.2 trillion short:

    The Tax Policy Center looked into the revenue loss associated with House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's plan to cut the tax code down to two rates of 10 percent and 25 percent. They estimate the changes would raise $31.1 trillion over 10 years, or 15.4 percent of GDP. That's $10 trillion less than the tax code would raise if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire, and $4.6 trillion less than it would raise if all of the Bush tax cuts were extended.

    The Republican congressman says he'll "broaden the tax base to maintain revenue...consistent with historical norms of 18 to 19 percent." So let's say Ryan needs to find close-enough deductions and loopholes to hit 18.5 percent of GDP. That means he'd need to close about $6.2 trillion in tax deductions and loopholes over 10 years.

But Ryan evades the responsibility for making the numbers work and taking the heat for ending popular deductions, a role he punts to the House Ways and Means Committee to "show how they would go about doing this." It's no wonder Greg Sargent said Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" plan simply "is not serious" while the New York Times called it "careless."

And one other thing. Over the next 10 years, the Ryan House budget would add substantially more to the national debt than President Obama's proposed 2013 plan.

As the Center for American Progress explained, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) assessment of the Ryan budget "did not test Rep. Ryan's claims about how his policies would actually affect spending or revenue," but "merely showed what would happen to the debt if his claims were true." In a nutshell, they are not:

    But the House budget's entire claim to deficit reduction is built on the foundation of those fantasy revenue levels. Without them, the debt goes up, not down. In fact, with all the House budget's tax cuts properly accounted for, revenue would average just 15.3 percent of GDP from 2013 through 2022, not 18.3 percent. The result: deficits would never drop below 4.4 percent of GDP, and would rise to more than 5 percent of GDP by 2022. The national debt, measured as a share of GDP, would never decline, surpassing 80 percent by 2014, and 90 percent by 2022. By comparison, President Barack Obama's budget proposal, released in February, would stabilize the debt by 2015, and bring it down to 76 percent by 2022.

If this all sounds familiar, it should. Because in February, Mitt Romney also rolled out a new economic plan, one which similarly hemorrhages red ink.

As it turns out, Romney's scheme to "Cut, Cap and Balance" the federal budget does nothing of the sort. For starters, while gutting the social safety net in order to fund yet another tax cut payday for the gilded-class, Romney also wants to expand U.S. defense spending to its highest level in decades. All told, he would lavishly expand Pentagon spending by $2.1 trillion over the next decade:

As the Washington Post explained in its discussion of an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, "until the campaign offers a more specific plan, Budget Watch analysts said Romney's entire framework would add about $2.6 trillion to the debt by 2021." (As ThinkProgress and the Washington Post's Lori Montgomery and Ezra Klein all explained, that's likely a conservative estimate.)

In words and in pictures (above), CAP put it this way:

    The various fiscal promises Gov. Romney makes simply cannot work together. He cannot simultaneously cut taxes as he's proposed, increase defense spending, protect Social Security and Medicare for current and near-future retirees, and also balance the budget. It is mathematically impossible.

Mathematically impossible and, for the American people, catastrophic.

REPRODUCED HERE BY AUTHOR'S EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT AND WITH MY THANKS
Copyright © 2004 - 2013 PERRspectives.com. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/002575.htm