Gun bans, global government, NWO ... coming in November! Romney or Obama, does it really matter who wins?

I think it is imporat for all Americans to realize what is REALLY at stake here.  This is not just about an election; this post speaks to much broader issues. As I see it, we are damned if we do and damned if we don't, so election day 2012 is THE catalyst for something really big. Will America be ready?

According Merriam-Webster, the definition of fiat is:

fi·at noun \ˈfē-ət, -ˌat, -ˌät; ˈfī-ət, -ˌat\Definition of FIAT

1 : a command or act of will that creates something without or as if without further effort

2 : an authoritative determination : dictate fiat of conscience

3 : an authoritative or arbitrary order : decree fiat gt;

 My argument is simple.  I think that should bozo lose, he will sign away, give up everything, and bow "as a good faith gesture" in the two months of his lame duck sessioh before he leaves office as a final blow to the detriment of the US and will most likely proclaim a US a particpant (not leader) in the new world order in order to ensure the "anti-colonial" dream of his father comes to fruition. We will see things passed and signed for that will literally take an act of congress to undo, but only if congress and the American people have the will and the stamina to do it. It will take years to undo the damage it takes but a pen stroke to accomplish.  Is it Constitutional?  OF COURSE NOT, BUT THAT HASN'T STOPPED HIM YET!  Nor have the voices of our Congress, the Supreme Court of the United States, or the citizens been loud or forceful enough.  If not now, when?

On the other hand, if boz wins, over the next four years, he signs away everything, gives up everything to everyone, and bows as a "good faith gesture" to dictators, foreign leaders as his way out o to reach out the fig leaf in order to see the "anti-colonial" dream of his father comes to fruition.   He will rule by fiat, and November will be a huge date by which we, as Americans, must be prepared. It will be the defining moment for America, not in the winner/loser in the election sense, but who America is, what she stands for, what her citizens are made of, whether or not she will continue to be a beacon to the world, and most importantly, whether or not Americans become the labor force in a communist, socialist, facist, marxist, liberal, progressive commune or live in a free country.

I would like to remind each of you of the following:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” – Excerpt from the American Declaration of Independence, which was ratified on July 4, 1776.

And as for our Pledge of Allegiance and its history:

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It was originally published in The Youth's Companion on September 8, 1892. Bellamy had hoped that the pledge would be used by citizens in any country.

In its original form it read:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

In 1923, the words, "the Flag of the United States of America" were added. At this time it read:

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

In 1954, in response to the Communist threat of the times, President Eisenhower encouraged Congress to add the words "under God," creating the 31-word pledge we say today. Bellamy's daughter objected to this alteration. Today it reads:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Source: http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm

Today, we have a president and a seditious faction in our country; COMMUNISTS once again challenging President Eisenhower's response.  We must respond "to the Communist threat of the times" lest we lose America forever.

Romney's strategy (if he has one, I don't see it) is NOT WORKING. Can someone close to him clue him in PLEASE! And then, there's the Elizabeth Warren SCANDAL!!

I wrote this long before Laura Ingraham said anything on O'Reilly.

 

This is looking alot like the mealy-mouthed McCain strategy. I can't hear Romney! His voice and message are being silenced by the botox-face, prince of darkness, axlerod, greasy-haired wasserman, and by bozo himself screaming his 2012 campaign message.

 

Are Andrea Saul and the other inept campaign staff gone yet from Romney's campaign?  Why isn't someone out there explaining what "she meant to say," or what "she really meant?"  Bozo has so many people covering for him.  Romney needs some on his campaign staff who aren't afraid to get a little dirty and who have a little more savvy and much more common sense. He needs better spokespeople out in front talking about his issues, his solutions, his successes, and to do his dirty work if he won't do it himself. Hell, hire Ann Coulter for heaven's sake.

Romney s getting down to the wire. Once independents make up their minds, these independents will shut down and tune out. They are already deciding and it's not for Romney. Where is the indignance? Where are the Romney attacks? If you can't stand the heat, get out of the freaking kitchen. This not a Harvard gentlemen's club. We don't need another mealy-mouthed candidate in a debate. Call bozo what he is. Call him a liar. Call him a socialist. Stop dancing around; stop being PC. Romney is confirming my initial thoughts about him. He just doesn't have that "it" factor, and I don't care who his running mate is. Romney himself must do more!!! The simple answer is that he has lost control; control of his message, control of his campaign reps, control of his "brand," and basically, control of this election process. He becomes smaller by the day.

 

I don't care if he can't spend money. He has himself.  If he calls out bozo, he will get the media attention.  And that television face time is free, silly!

****
The line from Romney headquarters last month was “every day we’re not talking about the economy is a day we lose.” This line, which came from the highest reaches of the campaign, was proffered to explain the unwillingness to provide substantive details on a host of policies besides the economy. Well, Romney HQ isn’t talking about the economy these days. It’s talking about the ad that all but accused Romney of murdering a woman with cancer. It’s talking about its vice-presidential pick. It’s talking about whether its ad accusing the president of gutting welfare-to-work laws is accurate. Guess what? It turns out you can’t just talk about the economy when people—and the media—want to talk about something else.

The polls suggesting he’s seven or nine points behind are surely wrong, but given that there is only one national poll that shows him ahead, we have to presume Romney is behind. He should presume he’s behind. And given that there’s no good reason whatever for Obama to be leading, one can only presume that Romney’s strategy in July and now in August is not working.

Which is why the “we only talk about the economy” line, while superficially clever, was and is so foolish—stupid, even. Of course Romney wants to focus on that one issue. It’s the one that hurts Obama the most, and the one on which he seems to score the best. He and his team have an idea about the campaign. They need to win independents to win. Independents are less ideological. So don’t press the ideological buttons. Keep it simple. Keep it plain. Obama has hurt you. I’ll help you. Fine.

But that’s not the only reason they’re doing it this way.

Romney and his people prefer this strategy because it’s what is most comfortable to them. He is not, at root, an ideological person. Neither, at root, are they. And the data suggest this is not a time for a sharply ideological campaign. The data suggest Romney needs to run as Mr. Fix-It. That is how Romney prefers to view himself. So the two match perfectly.
Alas for him, that’s not how it works. If conservative ideology is a problem with some independents, it also has the virtue of providing those who use it to discuss the nation’s problems with a pulse. Romney has just learned over the past few weeks that he cannot limit the discussion to the topics he wishes to talk about, especially when his rival is spending $100 million trying to destroy him in the swing states and when the media are largely serving his purposes by acting as though an increase in the unemployment rate and utterly unimpressive jobs-creation numbers are somehow good news.

So here’s why he should be talking about other things, releasing plans, giving speeches on big topics—because it’s the only way he can control the discussion. If he says the same thing about the economy every single day, he bores. He provides nothing new for anyone to fix on. He has to feed the beast. And it can’t just be that he puts his toe gingerly in the welfare-reform pool one day and then defend himself for three days after. It all has to keep moving.

In any case, if he doesn’t start putting things down on paper and develop the themes in speeches and get specific so that there is some meat on the bones of his policies, what on earth is he going to talk about for the next 88 days? Whether or not he killed a woman? This is a race he should be able to win, so if he loses, it won’t be because Obama won it. It will be because he lost it—and we’re seeing exactly how that might happen right now.
Source: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...-isnt-working/

 

And why is Elizabeth Warren's daughter repsonsible for sending out the voter registration to names on the welfare rolls with taxpayer money ESPECIALLY when the MA registration is already higher than the national average!! 72.6% to 71% nationwide, acording to Mark Trumbull http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Deco...en-Senate-race

And also, 6 senate seats to support ... Sorry, but I don't agree with Orin Hatch, nor do I agree with Romney's endorsement of him. Has Romney done anything right? Pun totally intended!!!!
1. Forget Hatch, don't like him, don't trust him ... nuf said.
2. Murdock in Indiana (formerly Lugar's seat, yeah!)
3. RINO Scott Brown (but he's our RINO!) is way better than Elizabeth Warren, and I will support him, again
4. Ted Cruz in TEXAS
5. Deb Fisher in Nebraska
6. And finally, Todd Aiken ... anyone but McCaskill (remember her HELLCARE vote ... didn't make her too popular with the voters in her state who are 72% against HELLCARE) in Missouri
Source (with added comments by me): http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...ent-entrenched

 

Please take a look at and support:  http://specialoperationsspeaks.com/