Since Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama (among other aliases; see more on which later on), is about to become king of America, perhaps it is a timely time to think about what we would do if we were in the same position. I have a few ideas along that line.
One that springs immediately to mind has to do with what can be called 'family life'.1 Some background:
I first fully realized how off its path the country had gotten when a buddy from work2 happened to tell me in a passing conversation (I think it was while we were bowling one night for our company team; a very typical middle, or at least working, class activity) that his sometime girlfriend was going to have a baby. Not his; he didn't know who the father was. He only knew what she had told him: that 'the government' was going to pay her to have it; and that that would put her on the top of the list for paid-for (or at least, subsidized; I didn't catch the details) housing as well.
What?! I exclaimed in my mind. Yes, indeed. Big Brother had crept into position, under the rather more benign identity of Big Daddy.3
The inevitable outcome was echoed, to my awareness, years later when I was living in the UK, and The (London) Sunday Times happened to carry a story about a youngish guy, living on welfare, who spent some of his rather extensive spare time impregnating mostly young females, so that they could do the same thing in that country. So it was an infectious disease - and actually originated there; and in other socialist countries, on the Continent proper; where the citizenry are taxed, to carry on with such outrageous, and immoral-inducing, activity, to an extent that the U.S. - the last, best hope of mankind for Freedom from such an overseer, and underachiever, mentality - hasn't reached. Yet.4
I could go on. But you get the idea. But just to wrap up from here; having an example of a direct experience of a king, the British way, of mere subjects, showing us how to really 'do it' - the dependency mentality thing:
The state has no business encouraging fathers not to take responsibility for their actions, and especially in the matter of their progeny, by paying women to have babies on the taxpayers' dime. Can you imagine a child visiting Washington, D.C. with its single mom and seeing the Capitol Building and exclaiming excitedly and affectionately, "Daddy!"?? I can't either. So let's stop this nonsense; and put an end to the rancid business - and 'business' meant literally as well - that has grown up in this country, of the state paying females to have babies on the taxpayers' dime, and thus having created at least a couple of generations of feral youth, being a terrible danger to themselves and to others, and therefore to society at large. (The 'game' of 'Knockout,' anyone???) So, that potential-become-real has got to go. Next, I would…
…well. Enough on the examples stuff, If I Were King.
As for the king-in-waiting. And not long in coming, now.
He talks a good talk. But it is all part of a deception shtick. He says he wants jobs for the "middle class," and wants to strengthen in other ways "the middle class". But it's all smoke and mirrors; with the likes of his Obamaphones, and totalitarian-minded ObamaCare. He is a Marxist; and Marxists can't have competition to their rule. In the Marxian classless society, there is the official elite, and then there is everybody else.
The sheep.
The cattle.
And speaking of the games that people play:
David Kupelian, editor of the 'whistleblower' monthly magazine, says, in the opening article to its November issue (titled 'Games Obama Plays'; subtitled 'Unable to admit his true agenda, he resorts to constant deception and trickery' ):
"This [the 'need to be needed' becoming a compulsion to promote ever greater dependency] is how the Democrat Party operates today, and it is why more and more people are dependent on government than ever - because the Obama crowd secretly wants it that way, since the more people depend on government, the more powerful and more entrenched such government will be. And to them, power is all that matters.
"In trying to compute all of this, our minds reel as we confront the fact that we're dealing with real evil in high places. In deep desperation, we may resort to searching out alternative explanations. Maybe Obama really means well, but is in thrall to an overly idealistic ideology. Maybe he really believes abortion-on-demand is necessary for the health of women. Maybe he and his advisers are just naive and think it's smart to make nice with the Muslim Brotherhood. Maybe he really believes it's necessary to block U.S. energy companies from making America energy-independent to protect the environment. (Emphasis in original.] We entertain these nonsensical explanations in our minds because facing the truth can be painful - for some of us, too painful, so we live in denial.
"But the plain truth is that we twice elected as president a man in the grip of dark forces. For whatever reasons, he displays a mysterious aversion to what is good, and an equally mysterious attraction to what is bad.
"Thus, in his attempts to' transform' America to match his inner delusions as to what a just society should look like, he constantly plays games with us - 'damn games' as [House Speaker John] Boehner complained5 - which in reality are a form of warfare aimed at bringing about revolutionary change."
And it's the old, fundamental warfare on planet Earth. A realm of duality, of the play of light and dark on the subtle skein of life; of the playing out, ultimately to Unity and Wholeness, of the exercise of one's free will. Wherein a voice has been murmuring seductively to Barry Soetoro-cum-Harry J. Bounel6-cum-Barack Hussein Obama: "I will set you up and make you King of the World. Just follow my promptings, in your left ear."
Which is, to say, the sinister one.
---
footnotes:
1 It comes to mind because of a large billboard sign in the neighborhood where I landed when I moved back to my old home town, in Southern California, from having spent over 35 years living overseas. It was a picture of a smartly dressed middle-aged black woman looking resolutely down at us - with, as I seem to recall, a fridge in the background - with the caption, 'My budget. My rules.' The ad paid for by whom, I don't recall. Just that it was some do-gooding agency of the government.
2 at a small furniture manufacturing company. This was in the early '70s, in the East Bay area in northern California.
3 The process also hit rather closer to home for me around that same time, when my sister-in-law had occasion to need help when my brother died, leaving her with four children and one on the way. (The reason for my ending up moving to that area: to lend a hand, however I could.) They were devout Mormons, which church has a strong family orientation, and she was going to be able to get some solid help from that source, along with the financial and other assistance of her brothers and a sister and brother-in-law. The plan was to help her get back in school, to get a teaching credential, for a source of income, while life worked its way out in her life. (With the Mormon Church having such a strong family orientation, the general feeling amongst her family members was that she was going to find a good mate in the Church before long. I made a preliminary offer to her siblings to marry her and be the kids' daddy - I was very close to them anyway, for having been a live-in uncle for many years previously - but being no longer a member of the Church, I quickly realized, with her siblings' gentle agreement, that I was not going to be the ideal candidate for the job.) But there was another potential source of support; and, although her family were all staunch members of the Mormon church, and would come to her assistance as they could and would, one of the brothers pointed out that there was a newish form of governmental support for citizens called AFDC - Aid to Families with Dependent Children - and she would undoubtedly qualify for some assistance from that program as well.
It was a point of a little debate amongst the siblings, about going that route - the Mormons being very against government 'welfare,' being, rather, a very self-reliant bunch, with a philosophy, or rather religion, of 'looking after/taking care of your own'. But the discussion veered into the argument area that the AFDC was paid for by everybody's taxes, including their own…and so the deal was struck: a partly - largely - family thing, with some assistance from 'the government'.
And just so do these things take on a life of their own…
…if not watched closely. Very closely.
Very closely indeed.
(P.S. Just to finish the story: She did, indeed, enroll back in school, to get a teaching credential, in large part with the help of her family (and my mother and stepfather), and also with the help of the university, particularly with respect to housing; and to some extent, with the help of the AFDC program. Which I was very happy to find out, many years later - after it got sorely abused, along the lines indicated herein, with females HAVING babies on the taxpayers' dime, and setting up house as a member of a permanent welfare class - had been phased out, under bipartisan welfare reform measures under Clinton, and replaced with a program invoking in its very nameTemporary Assistance. But that bullet hasn't fully been bitten yet. More on which, below.
Oh - and just to report that a clear happy ending ensued, in this particular instance, when, after teaching for awhile, my sister-in-law in fact did find a good man in the Church - or rather, he found her - and, together with his children, they moved on in their joint lives.
So, just to clarify: I know personally 'what it's like' to be needing assistance in life. And, there's a difference - a huge difference - between offering a hand up, and providing a handout.)
4 It turned out - as chronicled as well in the same story - that the fellow had a reputation in his general area for being a willing sperm donor (and not delivered to their doors, but directly in their bedrooms). Whether he charged for his servicings - or just settled for the momentary thrills - I don't recall from the story.
5 on the occasion of being told by a senior Obama administration official, boasting about their position on the government shutdown, "We are winning…It doesn't really matter to us [how long the government shutdown lasts] because what matters is the end result." At which point Speaker Boehner angrily responded, 'This isn't some damn game!'
6 See, e.g., theobamahustle.wordpress..com, overall article entitled 'The Obama Hustle,' specific article headed 'Breaking News - Obama Caught Using Stolen Social Security Number'. Which includes evidence of Michelle's attempts to access the original files of the person whose Social Security number Obama stole - or, more accurately (since he was just a teenager when it first became associated with him), which was stolen for him. Undoubtedly by his grandmother. His white grandmother. In Hawaii.
But all of that is another matter, to the gist of this one.
No comments:
Post a Comment