Wednesday, March 24, 2010


Many of you may have already been made aware of this, but in case you haven’t heard, the state of Arizona (a.k.a. Airheadzona) is attempting to do something right for a change . . . very late.

But as the saying goes, "Better late than never."

Here’s the story as reported by the Associated Press last month:

Ariz. Lawmakers: Verify Citizenship Of Candidates

Feb. 23, 2010

Associated Press

PHOENIX- Nearly half of the Arizona Legislature wants to force President Barack Obama to show his birth certificate to state officials if he runs for re-election.

A state House committee on Tuesday approved the measure sponsored by 40 of the state's 90 legislators. It would require presidential candidates who want to appear on the ballot in Arizona to submit documents proving they meet the requirements to be president.

All 40 co-sponsors are Republicans, comprising 75 percent of the GOP caucus. Two of them have since resigned to run for Congress.

The idea was proposed by Skull Valley Republican Rep. Judy Burges. She says if people have to prove their citizenship to apply for a job or get a passport, they should have to prove it to run for president.

Well, wouldn’t you have thought that a policy like this would have already been in place? No, No, No! That would have made way too much sense. We're talking politics here, people: "deception", "dishonesty", "democracy", "dipshitism."

I am fully aware, of course, that if the situation we have with USAP in the White House were exactly the same as it is now but USAP was a Republican rather than a Democrat, not one of the Republican Arizona legislators currently supporting this idea would be backing it. The question is never “What’s good for the country?” but it's “What’s good for my political party and bad for the other party?”

But nevertheless, if Airheadzona follows through on this idea (which it won’t because it makes way too much sense), it would be a very positive action, even if instituted solely as a partisan political weapon.

But it’s a disgrace to America that She elected that foreign-born Marxist to the presidency in the first place.

Don’t blame me! - I voted for Ron Paul. (Yeah, and because of that, Uncle Sam might call me a “Potential Terrorist” but He can’t call me “Un-American.” After all, mine was a “Pro-Constitution” vote.)

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Scroll down to "The USAP Deception" segment


  1. I went through a big hassle trying to get my birth certificate in order to get a passport (which I'll probably never use). When I got the birth certificate I had to file for a bunch of extra paperwork because I discovered my parents had not named me when the paperwork was issued. I'm surprised that I've been able to get drivers licenses and anything else over the years.

    There is definately something weird about the whole Obama thing anyway. He seems to have gotten a pass on a lot of things. He seemed to come out of nowhere and seemed like he was groomed for the presidency. A lot of Americans fell for it all far too easily. We'll have to see where this is all going.

  2. >>[He seems to have gotten a pass on a lot of things. He seemed to come out of nowhere and seemed like he was groomed for the presidency. A lot of Americans fell for it all far too easily.]<<

    Amen to that, Bro! We's a bunch-a chuckleheads is what we is.

    >>[We'll have to see where this is all going.]<<

    H - e - double toothpicks, I'm afraid.

    ~ Stephen
    "As a dog returns to his own vomit,
    so a fool repeats his folly."
    ~ Proverbs 26:11

  3. I think that you are too skeptical, but you have chided me in the past for having a too rosy view of things.

    You said:
    The question is never “What’s good for the country?” but it's “What’s good for my political party and bad for the other party?

    That is often true. I would even grant that it is mostly true. But it is not always true. As we have discussed before: the democrat party is the party of no principles. The GOP is the party that HAS principles, but usually does not stand on them.

    The issue of Obama's missing birth certificate is a funny one to me. Why not just show the damned thing if it is in order?

    I suppose I can answer my own question by saying that even if it is in order, he can paint the opposition as nuts for proposing such a silly notion that he is illegal.

    But I do think that there are always republicans that call for the law to be upheld even against their own side. It is one of the reasons that they typically lose. They hold themselves (and are held) to a higher standard because they actually see that principles matter.

    But, as I said, they usually abrogate them anyway.


  4. >>[the democrat party is the party of no principles. The GOP is the party that HAS principles, but usually does not stand on them.]<<

    Aww, no, Bro.
    The Democrat party is the party dedicated to the principles of Collectivism. The GOP is the party dedicated to the principles of Collectivism while telling The People they are dedicated to Constitutional principles.

    There is only one difference between us, Mr. Paulboy: You still believe there are two political parties while I KNOW there is only one political party pretending to be two.

    You haven't grasped the depth of this deception yet, that's all. It's all explained throughout this Blog of mine, but one would have to read this Blog to know that. And you being a "Conservative"... well... you'd rather listen to Limboob and watch Beck, right?

    [Don't get mad, get even!]

    ~ Stephen
    "As a dog returns to his own vomit,
    so a fool repeats his folly."
    ~ Proverbs 26:11

  5. Dear VIII#
    I once thought as you do when you state:

    "That is often true. I would even grant that it is mostly true. But it is not always true. As we have discussed before: the democrat party is the party of no principles. The GOP is the party that HAS principles, but usually does not stand on them."

    There is a book by one Carroll Quigley called Tragedy And Hope. In it he states:

    "The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern
    Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved
    closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and
    platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the
    revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back
    to the Civil War). … The argument that the two parties should represent
    opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left,
    is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers.
    Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people
    can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or
    extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired,
    unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every
    four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things
    but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies."

    Now Carroll Quigley was mentioned as a mentor in a speech given by one William Jefferson Clinton. And, Carroll Quigley describes in much detail how one Edward Mandell House (chief of staff to Wilson, advisor to FDR) started the CFR to help transform the U.S.A. to the point where it can be successfully integrated with the soviet union (aka, read world soviet style government). What Quigley describes above House describes here from his book "PHillip Dru Administrator" below.

  6. Chapter XIV - "The Making Of A President"
    Selwyn now devoted himself to the making of enough conservative senators to control comfortably that body. The task was not difficult to a man of his sagacity with all the money he could spend.
    . . .
    It was a fascinating game to Selwyn. It appealed to his intellectual side far more than it did to his avarice. He wanted to govern the Nation with an absolute hand, and yet not be known as the directing power.
    . . .
    "In the meantime his senators were being elected, the Rockland sentiment was steadily growing and his nomination was finally brought about by the progressives fighting vigorously for him and the conservatives yielding a reluctant consent. It was done so adroitly that Rockland would have been fooled himself, had not Selwyn informed him in advance of each move as it was made."

    In this book Edward Mandell House describes the over throw of the United States, and speaks of "Socialism as dreamed by Karl Marx." He was Wilsons chief of staff, and helped set the modern frame work of both political parties. It's a scam! Stephen is right there is only one party: The communist/fascist party. And as Quigley described they they have lots of compaign rhetoric but both push for the same goals once elected. What your seeing played out by the media is made for public deception.

    To summarize former govenor Jesse Ventura:

    " Politics is just like pro wrestling. In front of the camera they want to kill each other. But behind closed doors their all buddies and make deals with one another."

    maybe that's why former Nixon staffer Henry Kissinger had Obama work for him at one time.

    You truly are living in a world that doesn't truly exsist.

  7. Chapter VI

    " This feeling will grow, it is growing, and when it comes to full frution, the world will find but little difficulty in attaining a certain measure of altruism. I agree with you that this much to be desired state of society cannot be altogether reached by laws, however drastic. Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx cannot be entirely brought about by a comprehensive system of state ownership and by the leveling of wealth. If that were done without a spiritual leavening, the result would be largely as you suggest."

    Chapter XII - "Selwyn Seeks A Candidate"
    Selwyn then began carefully scrutinizing such public men in the States known as presidential cradles, as seemed to him eligible. By a process of elimination he centered upon two that appeared desirable.

    One was James R. Rockland, recently elected Governor of a State of the Middle West. The man had many of the earmarks of a demagogue, which Selwyn readily recognized, and he therefore concluded to try him first.
    . . .
    Selwyn settled back in his chair, nodding his approval and telling himself that he would not need to seek further for his candidate.

    At Rockland's earnest solicitation he remained over another day. The Governor gave him copies of his speeches and messages, so that he could assure himself that there was no serious flaw in his public record.

    Selwyn cautioned him about changing his attitude too suddenly. "Go on, Rockland, as you have done in the past. It will not do to see the light too quickly. You have the progressives with you now, keep them and I will let the conservatives know that you think straight and may be trusted.

    "We must consult frequently together," he continued, "but cautiously. There is no need for anyone to know that we are working together harmoniously. I may even get some of the conservative papers to attack you judiciously. It will not harm you. But, above all, do nothing of importance without consulting me.

    "I am committing the party and the Nation to you, and my responsibility is a heavy one, and I owe it to them that no mistakes are made."

    "You may trust me, Senator," said Rockland. "I understand perfectly."

  8. Yo! BR'ER MARC ~
    About two weeks ago, I sent our friend and fellow patriot Mr. Paulboy VI two books: "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by Griffin, and "The Naked Capitalist" by Skousen. He'll be one of us soon. Muah-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha!

    Yup, he's a-gonna be a crazy, conspiracy kook jus' like you 'n' me very soon. You wait and see.

    Mr. Paulboy already has great respect for Skousen. In fact, it was Paulboy who recently turned me on to Skousen's excellent book "The Making Of America: The Substance And Meaning Of The Constitution." So, Mr. VIboy is already a Skousen fan and knows that Skousen is a trustworthy authority. And after he's read Skousen's conspiracy stuffs, Mr. Paulboy will be a crazy conspiracy nut like "you, me, and WP." We're like vampire zombies and we'll make Paulboy one of us. ;o)

    ~ Stevieboy
    "As a dog returns to his own vomit,
    so a fool repeats his folly."
    ~ Proverbs 26:11

  9. On April 7, 2010; 9:43 PM, the following comment was submitted here:

    Part 1 Of 2
    FFF-F #MMCLXXII said...


    Well, this is very amusing, in a truly disturbing way.

    I have just returned last night from the Galapagos Islands. I read most of "The Naked Capitalist" while away. (I realize that it is a small book, and there was plenty of time to actually finish it... but I was too busy looking at boobies. Blue-footed Boobies, that is.)

    There is much to say and learn and discuss on these subjects. Way too much to handle in this posting forum. But a few things now, anyway:

    1) I did not realize until now that I was dealing with a group of nutballs of this proportion. No offense intended, as I consider myself a nutball. Apparently just a smaller one.

    2) As implied in your response StMcC, I admit having NOT read most of your FFFF blog... only parts of it, and none regarding any of this material. What I have read in the past I have agreed with.

    3) my exposure to Skousen has been long, but not on this subject matter. I was reading his "gold bug" investment advice 40 years ago, as well as his survival manual, which I still own. This analysis of the Constitution was something I found recently. One of the guys you hate - Glenn Beck - said everyone in America should own it and read it. More on that later.

    4) I loathe the Fed, and have long thought it perhaps the biggest thing screwing up our economy.

    5) I was - and am not still - especially familiar with HOW the Fed was created. I am learning more, however.

    6) As a person of reasonably high intelligence, and fairly well read - yet, having never read or learned any of this material before - then you must admit that If there is indeed a global conspiracy by bankers, then they have done a great job at concealing it. That is indicated in the Skousen book.

    7) If THAT is true, then it also follows that not everyone in the public eye already knows this stuff. I will now come back to Beck. Now, he MAY be fully aware of a global conspiracy and want to deceive the nation into thinking he is really fighting socialism while he is not. But he also may just be like me: either completely unaware, or only so vaguely aware that the issues are not important to him because he does not realize their importance. Why on earth would he suggest that everyone rise up against socialism and buy and read the Skousen book (and his other one, The 5,000 Year Leap) if he wanted us to eventually end up as sheep under control of the banking confab?

    Continued Below...

  10. `
    Part 2 Of 2
    FFF-F #MMCLXXII said...

    8) StMcC: you were kind to me in your response above, saying essentially that I only responded the way I did because I was unaware. It follows (to me, at least), that it is unfair to bash others who are unaware of this stuff. Perhaps I remain a hopeless nincompoop, but I just don't think that when you become a radio personality or prominent politician that someone suddenly sneaks up behind you and whispers all the secrets of the universe in your ear. People like Beck rise pretty fast from obscurity, become caught up in the pace of TV and radio, and I just have a hard time believing that they CONSCIOUSLY are undermining our country.

    9) I LOVE our country - as founded - and cry for its downward spiral. That I have missed a cryptic, behind the scenes plot that 99.99% of everyone has missed, does not make me bad. Stupid, perhaps!

    10) now I better comprehend why you want people to read THIS blog and don't care much about the other one.

    11) I do not YET accept all of this as true. Skousen moves very quickly with references and quotes from books as proof, but of necessity does not include the ACTUAL proof, because it is a "review book" and not a scholarly investigation.

    12) If you accept all this as true then it must become impossible to have a normal conversation with anyone about ANYTHING! Everything you know is wrong. It is like the f-ing Matrix!

    13) thank you all for your comments. I will keep reading. It is fascinating stuff, and depressing as hell.

    14) And thanks again, Stephen, for sending the books to me. The Skousen one was even signed!

    April 8, 2010 2:09 PM

  11. Part 1 Of 2

    Welcome home, MR. PAULBOY PRODIGALMAN #6.
    Glad to know it was a successful trip and that you made it back safeboy.

    I’ll briefly reply to some of your numbered points below:
    "All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed.
    Second, it is violently opposed.
    Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

    2) Yeah, I think I may have assumed that you had read more of F-FFF than you in fact had. But I’m to blame, really. I should have taken into consideration that you’re a registered Republican and so naturally you would be more attracted to the stuffs at ‘Stuffs’ than the really hardcore political truth posted in large chunks here at ‘F-FFF.’
    Hey, that was just a joke meant to enliven this dialogue, Brother. Joke! Joke! Jocularity! Jocularity! Don’t take it seriously! OK, now that I’ve got your attention and your relaxed vacationboy blood boiling - but seriously now . . .

    4) No “perhaps” about it, Brother. Excepting our new collective Godless mentality, it is this country’s biggest problem, and has been since it was established in 1913.

    5) “The Creature From Jekyll Island” will be most eye-opening for you, Bro.

    6) Mmmm… Well, they are brilliant and they have concealed it at times through obfuscation and censorship. But, in truth, it’s actually shocking how much they have revealed and how many loose lips have still not sunk their ship. (Which clues me in that there’s an ungodly spiritual aspect to this which protects their endeavors.) The conspirators have alluded to their conspiracy countless times and many of them are so brazen and arrogant that they have often spoken pretty directly about it. The American People have simply chosen not to see it. The bankers and their comrades in the media and in Washington have hidden it all in plain sight and are not all that shy in boasting about it.

    Link: ‘See The New World Order In Black & White’

    7) Paulboy, first of all, Beck knows damn good and well that few of his viewers are really going to go out there and read the books he recommends because . . . MOST REPUBLICANS DON’T READ BOOKS! They listen to Rush and watch Beck; digesting long written pieces is not their forte. Hell, you can’t even get ‘em to read the Constitution itself!!! Secondly, the books he recommends don’t reveal much about the Fed and nothing about the CFR, Bilderbergers, Trilateralists, etc. Even Skousen’s Constitution book glossed over the damage the Fed has done to this country. Although Skousen did address the issue, for a 775 page book, I felt he should have spent much more time hammering home that point.

    But most importantly, the really effective lies contain a lot of truth. No one can tell all lies all the time and think that their lies will go undetected for long. A good lie must have enough truth to keep the people fooled, and a bad poison doesn’t have to be administered in large doses to kill. It’s the same way the devil has fooled the New Agers by mixing a good amount of truth with his lies (although I realize you don’t believe in a “devil”). And Beck’s lies of commission are fairly few; he more often commits lies of omission.

    Continued Below...

  12. Part 2 Of 2

    8) Of course that’s not how it works. Methinks you’re trying to make light of it? But do people like Beck really rise pretty fast from obscurity? And Obama, didn’t he too seem to come out of nowhere? No, Brother, just beccause these people seem to suddenly explode on the scene before us does not mean that they have not been watched and groomed for their places by people behind the scenes for a long time. They either get onboard with the program or they don’t receive the support they need from their political party (think: Ron Paul), and if they do get elected despite being a maverick, they will be completely marginalized, ignored, not placed on any important Congressional committees, etc.

    Glenn Beck would not have been given such an influential position at a news network founded by Rupert Murdoch (hardly a Conservative Constitutionalist) unless he was “with the program” and could be trusted to misdirect the sheeple.


    Link: ‘The Congressman’s Confession About The New World Order’

    9) You’re one of the brightest individuals I have ever personally known. I believe that people don’t see what they don’t want to see, and as you’ve said here, this is “depressing as hell.” You’re neither bad nor stupid, but perhaps you’ve subconsciously chosen blindness for the sake of your sanity. In the words of Patrick Henry:

    “It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth ... For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it.”

    11) After you’ve finished Skousen and Griffin, if you want me to recommend more books on this subject, I will gladly do so. In fact, the one book I really wanted to send to you, I haven’t yet. It addresses the New World Order from its more spiritual perspective. If you want to read it and I still can’t acquire a copy for you, I can loan you my own personal copy.

    12) Yes, what you’ve said is pretty accurate. I wouldn’t say that I can’t have a conversation with anyone about ANYTHING, but there’s a reason I rarely discuss politics with registered Democrats or Republicans. As I’ve written: “Anytime you find a Democrat and a Republican arguing politics, you can be sure that neither one of them actually knows the truth . . . unless they're professional politicians.” And I have indeed referred to our situation as “The Political Matrix.”

    14) Your very welcome, Paulboy Brotherman. And yeah, I saw that the copy of “The Naked Capitalist” I acquired for you was actually autographed. An omen maybe? Hmmm…

    To you or anyone else who doubts, I say this: Explain to me the Republican party’s dismal success rate in reducing the size and cost of government even when they have had the upperhand in Washington. Why do their words and their actions NEVER seem to match?

    ~ McStephenboy
    "As a dog returns to his own vomit,
    so a fool repeats his folly."
    ~ Proverbs 26:11

  13. #VIII,

    Truly I understand your train of thought. At first I even thought Glenn Beck would be beneficial to America. Just as I had once thought Michael Savage was prior. I have been an avid listener (and in Becks case watcher) of both in the past. Plus to be honest I don't want to believe this stuff is true. If it could be disproven tomorrow I would be over-joyed. Having young children I would never want this to be true.

    Concerning Glenn Beck I agree with 80 to 90 percent of what he says. I've read a good deal of it before, and many of the books he recommends would be beneficial to anyone if they read them. Having said that, it is not what Beck says but what he doesn't say (or avoids/glances over) that started to make me question him. A couple of examples: When a young black women who worked for campaign for liberty started to mention the Fed Reserve beck stated, "I don't want to get into that right now." WHAT??? The Fed has so much to do with the trouble were in today. You can tie just about anything going wrong to the Fed or the men who helpled establish it. How can you, "not get into that right now." But see Beck will do some good, have people hacking away at the leaves of evil but never expose the roots. While were hacking on one branch the others on the tree of evil are flurishing. A major rule in medicine is FIND THE UNDERLYING CAUSE of the disease and TREAT IT. If all your doing is treating symptoms and not the cause the disease will eventually get you. Something I've seen with my own eyes as a nurse. Our political system is no different.

    I listened to Michael Savage religiously for awhile. Voted for Bush against Gore. I really sang the Republican praises against those Clinton Democrats. After being exposed to some of the information (meaning read a lot of books from many different sources and checked those sources) I started to see something in him. When a caller asked about Carroll Quigley's book on his show (the same one your reading about now in Skoussens book) Savage cut him off in less than a second, bashed him, insulted him for mentioning someone else's book, and moved to the next caller. Of course others have mentioned other books and Savage did no such thing. I've also heard Savage briefly mention the Bilderberg Group in passing but won't let anyone talk about it on his show. Accident? Hardly. If none of it is true why not just dispell the vicious conspiracy theories and get on with better things?

    Plus, I honestly used to think half the things Stephen said were totally nuts when I first met him on Amazon. That is until I started doing my own research. That's what I encourage you to do. Please don't take anyones word for it. Look it up yourself. An amazing thing will happen.

    May God Bless You In the name Of Jesus Christ,


  14. Thanks, Marc.

    I will continue to examine and think. We'll see where I end up. In terms of choices I'd make, in terms of opinion of values and morals, and in terms of thoughts about our Constitution and Founders, I think all of us blogging here would agree.

    The two points at issue with me are: the depth of conspiracy (vis a vis the Fed) vs. just a general drift towards socialism, and the fairness and value of bashing people who would agree with you 90+% of the time.

    I am not much of a conspiracy person. I think most of them require too many factors to fall in place to be any more than coincidences that APPEAR the result of conspiracy. And I am not saying that nobody tries to implement a conspiracy... just that as a general rule I think they are not successful. At this point I am not sure about this one. Reading more.

    And as for the other issue: OK, then knock Beck for the 10% of material you disagree with, and give him credit for the 90% of issues he is correct on.

    On a daily basis he bashes communism and socialism, praises our Founders, warns of hyperinflation, suggests buying gold, and earns the condemnation of people that I KNOW are truly evil people. When I find people I know and respect that seem to revile him also... well, that troubles me and strikes me as a bridge too far, and unfair.

    Anyway, I have a capacity to learn, as well as the ability to decide for myself and state my opinions. If I cannot agree with you and Stephen on these two points... then I will rejoice that we agree on so much else, including the embracing love of God for His children.

    And I may indeed come around on all this stuff. I'll pursue it further.

    Thanks for all the time you've spent tutoring me!


  15. Paul,
    My problem with Beck is not with what he says but what he doesn't say. Lies of omission are in many cases more dangerous as bold faced lies. For example, Beck was right on in mentioning Carroll Quigleys book on his show this week (The skoussen book you just read is a review of that book). However, beck just mentions that its a book about M.A.D. Or mutually assured destruction. The concept being that if our economies were all tied together they all fall together. Fair enough. However, this thousand plus page book states so much more than that. No mention of Edward Mandell House, no mention of how Houses book wrote about all these events in 1911 (books called Phillip Dru Administrator). No mention of Bretten Woods, or how the book talks about many of the wars we've been in. How about the fact that this book was magically pulled from the shelves for many years after it came out. I watch Beck. However, since his boss is a CFR member (Edward Mandell House set up that little group). Every once in awhile you'll hear Beck admit his boss doesn't want him talking about so and so. He may very well be trying to do the right thing (Although there is overwhelming proof of the exsistance of FEMA camps which Beck dismissed).

    Lets put all that aside. Beck himself mentioned the very book we've been talking about here.

  16. Dear MousieM -

    I understand what you are saying about omitting material.

    Hmmm. My natural inclination is to look for another reason - one that helps me give him a pass - for his refusal to discuss the NWO aspects of the Fed, et al.

    1) He could just be waiting until he thinks the time is right to mention it. After all, he is already labeled a crackpot by 60% of the country. If he lept right into that detail he would be immediately dismissed AND marginalized. It is just like StMcHim's Joe McCarthy stuff: I didn't know anything about it before meeting him, and I fancy myself way more up on things than most people. The public lore about JoeM is simply cast in stone, at this point.

    So, maybe Beck will hit the Fed creation subject later, when the ideas might find traction.

    2) He may think it true, but feel he does not have actual proof to present, which he knows would be required in the face of such allegations.

    3) He may think the truth he can prove is too HARD to show an audience with a short attention span.

    4) Maybe he thinks that subtly mentioning all these various books that contain the truth will lead people to the truth without him taking the bullets as messenger. "Thanks, Rosencrans!"

    5) I don't know... maybe he is just in on it, and is mentioning this stuff to appear more fair and lead people on when he is in reality a NWO toadie. I have no idea.

    It was interesting at the end of the Naked Capitalist, reading Skousen's take on what we all could do to prevent the U.S. drifting past the point of no return. He thought we had time left to turn things around... but not much time.

    Well, that was a LONG TIME AGO, and I am thinking it is way past the point of no return. I can see it now: the fall elections will be a big clobbering for the democraps, and many people - including me - will rejoice that the double-time march of Marxism has been slowed. Then the GOP jackasses will only undo a small portion of what Obama has done. (This may be further indication that the parties are virtually the same, only differing in the speed of their slide to socialism.)

    Then the public will be mad two years later that things still suck and throw out the new GOP politicians. We'll run again instead of marching slowly off the cliff.

  17. Paul,
    I honestly think you have the right idea. I too gave Beck the benefit of the doubt for over a year (even after reading many books on this subject). Plus, your right he could be planning to release it later, or not have the whole picture. To be honest with you it really doesn't matter if he's waiting, doesn't know the whole picture, or is giving us just enough truth to keep us distracted away from other patriotic news sources. Heres why, the result is the same. If Beck doesn't know we can hope he will piece the rest together. If FOX won't allow him to say certain things (alex jones stated he was offered a similar deal if he toned down his show) we have to really listen to what he's not saying.

    This is what I do know. Mr. Beck works for a network whos owner is a CFR member. House and the socialists started the CFR in the 30's. Most of the people who have come from the CFR (at least those in congress and the white house) have been the ones leading us down the road to a socialist world government. Plus I do believe Beck is totally wrong on his assessment of the events of September 11th. I'm currently reading a book called Crossing the Rubicon (suggested by our mutual friend) that is giving facts that are hard to dispute.

    Having said all of this ultimately you have to come to your own conclusions through your own research. I will give you a few suggestion on some semi quick videos to watch.

    On You tube look up: G. Edward Griffin interview with Norman Dodd. It will take about an hour but once you hear what he has to say it will blow your mind. Plus thinking of 9/11 differently starts with understanding world war 1 and the Wilson administration.

    Another You tube video: historic interview with Aaron Russo. Conducted by Alex Jones prior to Russos death the whole thing is good. However, the ten minute version will suffice if time is limited.

    Books: The Creature From Jekyll Island By G. Edward Griffin

    The Book of Revelation in the bible (look at Rev 13:6 after the watching the Russo video)

    A casual book is one called, "Confessions of An Economic hit man" by John Perkins. I would also look up an article on The New Americans site regarding Kermit Roosevelt and the Shah if you read that one. They really go together.

    Take Care Paul and God Bless you.



All submitted comments that do not transgress "Ye Olde Comment Policy" will be posted and responded to as soon as possible. Thanks for taking the time to comment.