02/27/12

Will Panetta Help Accused Army Traitor?

Before getting into the court-martial at Fort Meade in Maryland, my photo I.D. was checked and a bomb-sniffing dog was led around my car. My coat, wallet, and papers were searched and I was subjected to magnetometer screening by Army authorities. Inside the courtroom, members of the media were warned not to make any noises. No cell phones, cameras or recording devices were permitted. Welcome to the arraignment of Private First Class Bradley Manning.

The security arrangements surrounding the legal proceeding make it absolutely clear this is a major trial of international significance that will determine if the U.S. Government has any ability at all to protect classified information whose release can endanger lives and result in American and allied deaths.

Interestingly, the trial itself has led to more disclosures, with U.S. Government attorneys accusing Manning’s defense team of “spillage,” releasing classified information in legal documents provided over unsecure networks.

The out-of-the-closet, cross-dressing, military homosexual wore his military dress uniform at the trial and said few words. He appeared frail and small in comparison to the other Army officers and soldiers in the courtroom.

Strangely, the death penalty has been taken off the table, but Manning is still facing life in prison because of the charge that his disclosures aided the enemies of the United States.

Far-left supporters of Manning, who regard him as a whistleblower, are asking Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta “to listen to our concerns about Bradley” and allow a special United Nations rapporteur on torture, Juan Mendez, “to have access to confidentially meet” with the former Army intelligence analyst.

Such a move would constitute unprecedented United Nations intervention into the U.S. military justice system.

They hope to make Manning into an international poster child for injustice at the hands of the United States military. They want the public to forget about the actual charges, including aiding the enemy and theft of public property and records.

They make much of Manning being held in solitary confinement. But Army officials say it is not uncommon for defendants to be held in their own cells.

As part of the pressure campaign against Panetta, who had a very liberal anti-defense record as a member of Congress from California, the Bradley Manning Support Network provided Panetta’s Pentagon telephone number so that its supporters could directly contact him. It is also suggesting an effort to “pressure his institute for public policy, which should certainly be educating people on the importance of whistle-blowers and fair justice.” This is a reference to the Panetta Institute for Public Policy at California State University, Monterey Bay.

Manning deferred a plea during the February 23 arraignment, leading to speculation that he may cut a deal with the U.S. Government and offer evidence against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Such an arrangement would leave prosecution of the case in the hands of Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department.

Manning had three lawyers—two military and one civilian. The civilian attorney, David E. Coombs, is paid for by contributions from the Bradley Manning Support Network, a virtual who’s who of the radical left that includes the son of convicted and executed atom bomb spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

If Manning gets off, it would mean that the greatest leak—and theft—of classified information in U.S history would go unpunished. It would mean that a possible espionage case against WikiLeaks founder Assange, now a de facto employee of Moscow-funded Russia Today (RT) television, would likely collapse. Assange is currently facing deportation from Britain on sex crimes charges and could be extradited to the U.S. to stand trial on espionage charges, if Holder ever decides to bring a case.

The Bradley Manning Support Network claims that, since June 2010, they have raised about $500,000 for Manning’s defense and that an additional $150,000 will be needed through the end of the court martial “to give Bradley every fighting chance both inside and outside the courtroom.”

It is deploying “Free Bradley Manning!” contingents at the G8 meeting in Chicago in May, where the Occupy movement is also planning civil disturbances, and “gay pride events nationwide in June,” when the actual court-martial might begin. The evidence in the case suggests that Manning leaked the information because he was angry over the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy. This is why he has become a hero of the homosexual community, which wanted access to the military on the grounds that they were just as patriotic as everybody else.

The Bradley Manning Support Network is also planning “solidarity events” outside of Obama campaign offices “to challenge the president on his handling of Bradley’s case so far.” They think Obama has prejudiced the case by openly declaring that Manning broke the law. They hope his statement will be perceived as “undue command influence” on the trial and lead to the charges against Manning being reduced or dropped altogether.

Supporters of Manning will also be “out in force at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Aug 27-30, and at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, Sept 3-6,” they say.

What was happening outside the courtroom, before members of the media were ushered in, was part of this on-going campaign. Supporters of Manning turned out to “brief” the press. These included Zack Pesavento of the Bradley Manning Support Network and Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR). Ratner, a veteran lawyer on behalf of Marxist causes, was there on behalf of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. The CCR is funded by George Soros.

As reporters for Reuters and Associated Press listened, Pesavento claimed Manning’s disclosures to WikiLeaks—some 700,000 documents—had no negative impact on U.S national security. When I asked him about WikiLeaks’ indefensible disclosure of technical details about devices used to disable IEDs in Afghanistan and Iraq, he said he knew nothing about it. WikiLeaks also released a list of installations considered important to U.S. national security.

Pesavento and his associates laughed at the allegation that Manning could have aided the enemy in any way. “Who’s the enemy?” they asked.

When I asked why WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was working for the Russians, he brushed this off, saying it was comparable to the Voice of America covering the case. Assange had promised to release documents about corruption in Russia but no such disclosures have ever taken place.

RT covered the arraignment by interviewing Kevin Zeese, the former marijuana lobbyist who is now with the Bradley Manning Support Network and the Occupy D.C. movement. He claimed Manning was “tortured” and the subject of a “kangaroo court.” RT also interviewed Jane Hamsher of the liberal blog Firedoglake. Hamsher, while taking Manning’s side in the case, has nevertheless noted in the past that explosive information indicates that Manning was in contact with “politically tied” people, including high-level Obama Administration and Pentagon officials, while he was stealing and releasing classified information.

The “only agency i cant get information out of at the highest levels is the FBI… i’ve never needed a source there,” says Manning in the incriminating chat logs released by a former associate.

Was Manning a pawn of high-level officials in the Obama White House? Who protected him? And why?

Since Holder is a partisan political appointee and cannot be counted on to pursue these leads, and Manning’s military trial will focus more narrowly on the Army soldier’s own personal responsibility in the leaks, it is up to Congress to get to the bottom of the wider scandal.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected].

02/27/12

Tancredo: Bigots vs. Pat Buchanan

By: Tom Tancredo
Gulag Bound

Pat Buchanan

MSNBC’s decision to dismiss Pat Buchanan shows the depths to which the mainstream media has caved to far-left pressure groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, the National Council of La Raza, Color of Change and Media Matters.

There can be no doubt that these smear operations were responsible for Buchanan’s dismissal. Color of Change claims to have sent 275,000 petitions through the group CREDO Action demanding Buchanan be removed, and says his firing was their “campaign’s success.” After Buchanan was let go, Media Matters tweeted from its official Twitter account, “Thanks to tens of thousands of MMFA members’ voices, also @ColorOfChange & @CREDOMobile — You all made Buchanan’s exit possible!” Buchanan himself blamed pressure from “the blacklisters.”

Some, such as media critic Howard Kurtz, argue that Buchanan’s dismissal is merely a product of MSNBC’s leftward drift. While this may have been a big factor, both CNN, which is relatively moderate, and Fox News, which is conservative, apparently dropped hosts Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck after similar pressure campaigns from the same groups.

That being said, Pat Buchanan’s dismissal is unprecedented for a number of reasons. First, while we can speculate as to why “The Glenn Beck Show” and “Lou Dobbs Tonight” ended, neither the hosts nor the networks ever explained what had happened. Pat is the only commentator, thus far, to acknowledge that these groups were responsible for his dismissal.

Additionally, while I am a huge fan of Beck and Dobbs, Pat Buchanan has been an institution on cable news since its inception. He was a founding member of three of the best-known news shows: “Crossfire,” “Capital Gang” and “The McLaughlin Group.” This is to say nothing of his several bestselling books, his three runs for president and his position as a close adviser to three presidents. MSNBC’s decision to fire such a highly esteemed commentator shows how powerful these smear groups are becoming.

Regardless of whether you agree with Buchanan’s positions on homosexuality, immigration or race, his views on these subjects have been open and unchanged for decades. Yet both MSNBC and the left-wing groups responsible for his dismissal are claiming what he wrote in his latest book, “Suicide of a Superpower,” somehow crosses a line. According to MSNBC president Phil Griffin, the book contained ideas that should not “be part of the national dialogue, much less part of the dialogue on NBC.”

What were these terrible ideas? Almost all the articles about Pat’s dismissal note that his book contained ideas chapters called “The End of White America” and “The Death of Christian America.” What they don’t mention is that he named these chapters after recent cover stories written by liberals in The Atlantic and Time. As Pat notes in “Suicide of a Superpower,” liberals such as Bill Clinton and Michael Moore have actively cheered the demographic changes caused by our immigration policies.

I don’t believe that these changes will necessarily doom America. In my review of “Suicide of a Superpower” last October, I wrote:

I believe that if we have a slowdown on immigration and we end multiculturalism — two policies that Pat calls for in the book — that immigrants of all races in this country will assimilate. However, when left-wing groups and politicians are openly stating that their numbers will lead to the destruction of traditional American culture and the Republican Party, no one can ignore the realities that Buchanan brings up.

Left-wing groups like Color of Change and Media Matters want Americans to ignore these realities, and that’s why they are trying to silence Buchanan.

They are the real bigots and extremists. Color of Change is headed by Van Jones, a man who described himself as a “communist” until a decade ago. Color of Change’s mission statement says the organization “exists to strengthen Black America’s political voice. Our goal is to empower our members — Black Americans and our allies — to make government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans.”

It’s a complete outrage that a group headed by a radical with such a blatant agenda can succeed in smearing a respected conservative as an “extremist” and a “racist.”

Fortunately, I doubt that Pat will be silenced. His dismissal came just days after The Daily Caller published a devastating and widely discussed exposé on Media Matters. MSNBC’s decision will help feed the growing backlash against these anti-free speech groups. Even many liberals have come to Pat’s defense, and his book sales have surged.

Color of Change wrote that it was “irresponsible and dangerous” for MSNBC to give Pat Buchanan airtime. What would be truly “irresponsible and dangerous” is for Americans to ignore Pat Buchanan’s much-needed message and allow anti-free speech extremists like Color of Change and Media Matters to strangle our public discourse.

It is our distinct honor to now carry the commentaries and reports of Tom Tancredo, former Representative to Congress of the State of Colorado and 2008 candidate for U.S. President. His CongressmanTomTancredo.com regularly features his articles, as does WorldNetDaily.

Former Congressman Tancredo currently serves as chairman of Rocky Mountain Foundation, co-chairman of the anti-illegal immigration Team America PAC, and honorary chairman of Youth for Western Civilization. He speaks frequently on cable news, talk radio, and on college campuses – where his mere presence has led leftists to riot on multiple occasions. His book, In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and Security was published in 2006.

02/27/12

Tancredo: Yes, Santorum Can Beat Obama

By: Tom Tancredo
Gulag Bound

“Put in the most simple terms, we are at a crossroads because Barack Obama has brought us there. He is the first genuine Marxist to sit in the White House, and his agenda is to dismantle our capitalist economy and destroy American influence in the world.”

One of the most reliable truisms in politics is full of irony: When it comes to predicting presidential elections, conventional wisdom is nearly always wrong.

Washington pundits talk and write mostly for themselves, and certainly not for the history books. If they were paid according to their track records as political prognosticators, they would all be on food stamps.

The conventional wisdom in 1960 was that John Kennedy could not win a debate against the experienced Richard Nixon. In 1966, the conventional wisdom said a lightweight movie actor named Ronald Reagan had no chance to unseat the popular incumbent Democratic governor of California. Conventional wisdom in 2008 said Barack Obama has no chance to beat the popular wife of a popular ex-president.
The conventional wisdom a year ago said Mitt Romney would run away with the Republican nomination.

Is there a pattern here? Politics is full of surprises, and 2012 is no different.

Forgive me if I am not impressed with today’s conventional wisdom about Rick Santorum and the handicap imposed by the so-called social issues: “A social-issues conservative like Santorum cannot win the presidency.”

Supposedly, social issues are “divisive.” So, this means economic issues are not? The class-warfare rhetoric of Barack Obama is the most divisive and demagogic rhetoric we have seen since the Progressive campaigns of the 1890s.

The rhetoric of the environmentalist lobby is not “divisive”? Oil companies who want to drill in the Gulf of Mexico are “raping Mother Earth”?

It’s easy in hindsight to see the errors in past predictions; their assumptions were all wrong. So, looking at Rick Santorum the candidate, let’s ask, how smart are today’s assumptions about his “electability”?

The first thing to understand about the 2012 presidential race is that it is unlike any other election in our history. It’s not comparable to 1948, nor 1960 or 1980, and not to the campaigns against incumbents in 1996 or 2004.

Our country is at a crossroads that is unparalleled in our history – and people know it. They may not understand why, but they know it in their hearts and feel it in their guts.

Put in the most simple terms, we are at a crossroads because Barack Obama has brought us there. He is the first genuine Marxist to sit in the White House, and his agenda is to dismantle our capitalist economy and destroy American influence in the world.

Obama’s policies place us at this crossroads of history. This year is different because there will be no turning back from the road to European-style socialism and Caesarism if Barack Obama wins a second term. Rick Santorum understands this.

Now, forgive me, but I cannot take seriously some celebrity pundit telling me Rick Santorum cannot beat Barack Hussein Obama because he has misgivings about the wisdom of schools distributing free condoms to 12-year-olds. And Santorum has the audacity to wonder aloud if rampant promiscuity promoted by popular culture might have a corrosive effect on our social fabric. As another prisoner of conventional wisdom once said in similar circumstances, “Please don’t throw me in that briar patch!”

The “social issues lose elections” mantra is historically ignorant and embarrassingly shallow in its political correctness. Ordinary folks understand that many issues dismissed condescendingly as “mere” social issues are in fact loaded with economic significance. Remember the “welfare reform debate” of the 1970s and 1980s? Was that a social issue or an economic issue? How about the civil rights revolution? Was that about jobs or was it about freedom and human dignity? The Vietnam War? Was that about oil or student loans?

Closer to home in 2012, how about the “jobs debate?” Is our ability to generate good jobs only a debate about the principles of economics? Is this not equally a religious debate between two contrasting worldviews? In truth, White House energy policy is not based on economics, Keynesian or otherwise. It takes the religious fervor of extreme environmentalism to block the Keystone Pipeline and offshore drilling while insisting on taxpayer subsidies for the Chevrolet Volt.

The unemployed pipe fitter or underemployed truck driver probably understands there is something deeper at work here. Obama’s ideology has abandoned economic development as a cornerstone of public policy: Obama simply does not give a damn about jobs in the energy sector unless they are taxpayer-subsidized “green jobs.”

And what happens if the economy continues to improve, gradually but steadily? Should the election be canceled and Obama declared president for life? Do these purveyors of moral myopia and intergenerational piracy have a “Plan B” for the Republican Party?

Come to think of it, why do so many self-styled “pragmatists” talk about the spiraling national debt as only an economic issue? Isn’t passing unsustainable debt to our children and grandchildren as much a moral issue as an economic one? Living in denial of approaching catastrophe is as much a case of moral indifference as it is economic sleep-walking.

What seems to upset so many Republican “strategists” is that Rick Santorum is as comfortable talking about these moral issues as he is discussing marginal tax rates or the cost of Obama’s failed stimulus program. Why is that a handicap?

When every pillar of American prosperity, every principle of American virtue and every article of constitutional liberty is under attack by Obama’s bureaucracy and its allies, why is it not an asset for a candidate to be able talk about all of these issues, not just unemployment trends? If “all of the above” is good energy policy, why isn’t it good politics as well?

02/27/12

Wyoming Advances ‘Doomsday Bill’ to Help Residents During Possible Collapse

IRS Coming Down on Tea Parties

By: James Simpson
Gulag Bound

Right Side News has reported on a disturbing request from the IRS that has been received by a number of tea party groups.

The IRS can doubtless defend it as I suspect they can and do ask such questions of any organization seeking or having 501c4 status. But they have requested an impossibly short turnaround time.

This action has doubtless been spurred by a letter sent to the IRS by a number of extreme leftist U.S. senators, although the letter is probably the pretext rather than the genesis of the action. In-other-words, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that the administration has planned a large-scale assault on tea parties. If so they would ask for some kind of inquiry from the senators to wash their hands of it and make it appear legitimate.

Notice in the letter that the senators fail to identify any particular group. It would be telling to know if they have asked similar questions of an equal number of left-wing organizations and demanded similar turnaround. Of course leftwing C4 groups like CASA de Maryland’s CASA in Action would probably have gotten a long-lead heads-up from their allies in Congress and given their resources and familiarity with the non-profit world would have been able to prepare their responses well in advance.

Remember this is one large, organic, mass movement. While they appear independent, they all speak with the same voice. And it is a uniformly anti-American voice.

Is The IRS Attempting to Intimidate Local Tea Parties?

Monday, 27 February 2012 06:15 Colleen Owens

Richmond, Va | RightSideNews.com | In January and February of this year, the Internal Revenue Service began sending out letters to various local Tea Party groups across the country. Mailed from the same Cincinnati, Ohio IRS office, these letters have reached Tea Party groups in Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio and Texas (we are hearing of more daily). There are several common threads to these letters: all are requesting more information from these independent Tea Parties in regard to their nonprofit 501c4 applications (for these types of nonprofit, donations are not deductible). While some of the requests are reasonable, much of them are strikingly onerous and, dare I say, Orwellian in nature.

continues

I would appreciate it if you could forward this, but read it first and make sure you smell a rat too.

02/27/12

Hillary 2003 vs. Hillary 2012

Hat Tip: BB

Media mocks Wyoming for preparation & ‘Doomsday Bill’

Louis Farrakhan: Obama’s life in danger

Van Jones is back; 100,000 training for ‘non violent’ for the ’99% Spring’

Obama’s Black, Jews, Catholic, & Seniors Apology

ChangingWind.org
By: Toddy Littman

“I just wanted to apologize to you for being such a steadfast ideologue.

“My goal when I came into office… Well… Actually, I didn’t have any goals (at least not the ones you thought). Many people knew this country was suffering from a great case of guilt, people like George Soros, Oprah Winfrey, Warren Buffett, and Bill Gates, as well as many other millionaires and billionaires were well aware of this educationally imposed sense of guilt. It is a guilt that was given a voice by my Community Organizer mentor, Saul Alinsky, who figured out how to articulate, package, and sell what Marx and Engels had written about in the Communist Manifesto of 1848.

“Bigger government, as was done during President Franklin Roosevelt’s tenure, created a myriad of traps upon the wealthy, as Progressivism has a duty and responsibility to minimize wealth under the guise of at least appearing to make things fairer. Centralized government power structures, by any name, have never been fair, and the United States deviated from this ancient model in recognizing and protecting Individual Liberty. FDR’s actions were to take the financial crisis of his day and use it to cause a variety of fundamental changes to government that, in the more Progressive day and age, naturally led to a need for that .001% of the people, those supporters and friends of mine of extreme wealth I named above earlier, to have done some things they feel guilty about to be so wealthy. This is why they support me so easily, as they use the very system of Capitalism to undermine it, while, I, by my physical appearance as a Black man, am able to drive the idea of another, collective guilt, race and the corollary of a collective solution, such as why most of you voted for me in 2008, you knew that I, Barack Obama, am your collective solution.

“Now in 2010, that I’ve been responsible for higher unemployment among Blacks, that I’ve proven I have no genuine affinity toward Israel, and that I have no trouble denying the oldest, as well as real estate wealthiest, institution on Earth, The Catholic Church, their religious liberty, irrespective of the limits of the First Amendment, and, as a crowning achievement, that my record shows that, I believe in fiscal responsibility by cutting $500,000,000,000 (yes that’s “Billion,” with a “B”) from Medicare through the Affordable Care Act, even if it leaves seniors literally at the hands of the Health and Human Services Secretary’s discretion if they live beyond a certain age, that I must now use a completely different tactic in 2012 that, of course, assumes you’ll vote for me because I know you will, just because I am Barack Obama.

“So, this time, I must keep you all from looking at my record, from paying any attention to how poorly I have treated you and the entire country in my tenure as President of the United States, as that is the only way I can keep you from realizing how I exploited you with empty promises leading up to the 2008 election, where, of course, you voted for me, Barack Obama, and I won.

“You’ve already seen some of this campaign’s strategy, where I claim that everything brought forward that disagrees with my policies are “an effort to create a wedge issue” and “divide the nation,” where I am claiming you elected me to do what I am doing, no matter how destructive it is to you, in a way that you’ll agree with me it’s the right thing to do. That’s how I have positioned myself as appearing to be the one being dominated by 1/2 of 1/3 of the government, a Black man as President being oppressed in doing what I claim you want me to do. I am truly brilliant at duping you into submission.

“Sadly, by my election in 2008, America showed there is no longer an institutional racism, at least of any national conscience and/or scale, and that means I can’t use the 2008 claim “that’s racist” when someone challenges one of my oppressive government policies anymore. This is only reinforced by my record which exacerbates the fact that I have abused my power. The last thing I need is you seeing how I alone am claiming certain prerogatives, essentially the prerogatives of Royalty over you, that I am asserting and using against you the same prerogatives as the Executive branch of government throughout the nations of Europe, and the rest of the World, because their people didn’t found their government subservient to them. I’ve made a calculated decision that many of the experts from universities I hired as czars has affirmed that you have no idea that you’re the Sovereign of America, that you have no idea how to stop me from using powers the Constitution never gave me. I am the embodiment of a coup to overthrow the lawgiver in America, to take this Sovereign Prerogative that belongs to you for myself, just because it should belong to someone like me, Barack Obama. My capabilities are of such power solely due to your belief that government has any of the powers they claim, and we just bypass you knowing that you, nor any other American, knows how to challenge that power without falling into one trap or another that allows us to stamp you as a criminal or threat to the United States Government.

“I mean, here you are considering voting for Mitt Romney, my Progressive brother, a man who has even come forward and said, “my views are Progressive.” Go, look it up, it’s right on youtube.com. What I would have given to be Mitt Romney, to have my father have been a Saul Alinsky student, raising me to be a Progressive with direct training from the Master, Alinsky himself. I can say, without any hesitation because I am Barack Obama, that, in that environment, I would have probably known before age 15 (the same age when Mitt Romney started campaigning for his father in Michigan) what my political views were, and been an activist in high school to make sure Progressivism’s root in America had, long before now, destroyed the sense of freedom and self-government that Americans believe in. Progressivism, taught by Community Organizers, is the sole force undermining America by undermining its values, its founding principles, all done by persistent perverse use of religious maxims of good.

“So I wanted to apologize to the Blacks, Jews, Catholics, and Seniors for having completely exploited you in 2008, but that’s just politics, and the way of power. I mean, if you don’t realize I lack transparency of any kind by now and don’t care about you, I know you’ll vote for me anyway merely due to your 2008 ego investment, and that well-taught stubbornness instilled in you by your NEA Progressive education. I know there is a persistent need for controversy in your need to be right. You show it even during the most insignificant conversations. Yours is the generation of Progressive chaos, to which I am here to bring Progressive Order, and that is why we created the chaos in you, and know how to make you do exactly what we want at any time. I am your Progressive Savior of you from yourself. Remember you did vote for me in 2008, and, as we all know most Blacks, Jews, Catholics, and Seniors, especially those Seniors in Progressive AARP, will vote for me even 10 years from now when our national debt is $30,000,000,000,000 and more, if America lasts that long, which my policies assure it will not unless the nation is willing to become part of a worldwide Progressive order of government. The benevolence of survival as a slave instead of death does appeal to most people, so again I, Barack Obama, win. Think about it. I already took out those who would be the biggest challengers to such a government, Osama Bin Laden, Al Awlaki, and Qaddafi, and I am poised to use the U.S. Military as an International Hit Squad to take out others, no one is stopping me.

“So, going back to my apology, as I’ve always said…. Well…. Actually, I’ve never said anything like this but you have to believe I did, so I say that I said that at the beginning of this sentence, to be boldly clear, it’s the following words you’ll never hear from me, ‘I am sorry my policies were wrong for America. I love America and believe each person is within their Individual Liberty to act and care for themselves, that government has no place in directing what private People or Institutions do.’ By reverse psychology, and leveraging against you your 2008 need-to-be-right ego investment from voting for me, I just guaranteed that you folks will vote for me in 2012 and I thank myself for that, because by being me I proved to you that voting for me again is just the right thing to do.

“I cannot wait for 2013 when I will have another super majority to further abuse you and the rest of America with. Just because of me, Barack Obama, and what I just said, how I said it, the timbre of my voice, cadence and other psychological manipulations I’ve used on you for years, I will be ruler again! Starting in 2013 I’ll be able to do more of what we did those first 2 years I was in office, and cease from focusing on jobs and making sure Americans are working thanks to you Blacks, Jews, Catholics and Seniors who have such an undying faith in me no matter how I exploit and abuse you. My ability to gain your willingness to be oppressed, to have your country destroyed from within, and your family, neighbors, friends, and relatives suffer, is remarkable isn’t it? I am the one and only Barack Obama.

“This fits so well with our plan. When Michelle runs to be the first African-American Woman President you’ll have me in the White House for another 8 years. A new family dynasty achieving what the Clintons and no others could because they don’t have me, Barack Obama, and my ability to ruthlessly exploit and abuse the American people for my own political purposes.

“Barack Obama 2012 and beyond.”

And now to emphasize the truth of the above letter parody:

And in a correlative point regarding this continued racism promoted by Barack Obama, imagine a Caucasian president launching “White Americans for John Doe”….

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman