Hopey-Changey Idiocy and The Liars of Academia

~Snooper~

In recent days I have had a blithering idiot trying to convince me that the United States of America was formed as a Democracy because, after all, the entire world thinks we are a Democracy and that the World Bank says that we are. This is a direct result of the lies that they tell, with the "they" being American Academia. I know...I practically live in American Academia.

Students are also poisoned by sycophantic buffoons that are so demented, they write complete and total idiocy and have no basis of fact to substantiate their inane mental illnesses. They claim President Bush should be imprisoned for crimes perceived to have been committed when there is absolutely no proof of the alleged crimes. They also claim some loyalty to the United States Constitution yet afford no Due Process for the man they hate. Krauthammer was dead nuts Spot On when he coined the phrase which described the mental instability now known as Bush Derangement Syndrome. I wrote about the resurgence of BDS not too long ago. A special song was written just for those that have no clue and it is indeed appropriate. For the news media and the BDS crowds, the world's woes will always be Bush's fault until they figure out what tools they have been for Czarbie.

As is now seen as a universal and well known fact, the vast majority of the Obama voters are quite dumb, ignorant and flat-out stupid with no repairs in the foreseeable future. Odolatry is infecting the emotionally unstable; hope and change has been redefined; hope and change will be decided by the new and real Decider; Obama denies his lies yet clings to them at the same time; Obama hopes to change his supporters' minds by selecting old school Clintonistra; the Leftinistra are having second thoughts now which should have been their first thoughts had they listened to us that already knew; veterans express concern over a Czarbie "presidency"; and a Democrat Civil War breaks out in DC.

With what we now know of the Messiah Hussein which is a lot less by light years what we don't know about the Messiah Hussein, isn't it much clearer now why our Founding Fathers made it clear that only the informed were qualified to vote?

The following are excerpts from links provided above...

[...] “Understand where the vision for change comes from, first and foremost,” [Obama] told reporters at his third press conference in as many days. ”It comes from me. That’s my job, is to provide a vision in terms of where we are going, and to make sure, then, that my team is implementing.” [...]

------

[...] Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International telephone poll shows. Only 54% of Obama voters were able to answer at least half or more of the questions correctly. [...]

------

[...] Barbara Walters asked Barack Obama how hiring current Defense Secretary Bob Gates and former Bill Clinton cronies constituted the “change” he pimped during the course of his presidential campaign.

Obama’s answer: his cabinet will bring the experience he lacks while he will ‘represent’ change.

Oh, goodie. Bait and switch, anyone? [...]

------

[...] The process proscribed within the Constitution allowed the document to be amended, and without the help of any judicial interpretation. The founding fathers believed, as I do, that the long term welfare of our nation is best served by an informed, invested electorate. Thus, I question the assumption that the original intent fails at all - not only for these reasons, but due to the fact that women were not allowed to vote then because they were not regarded as well enough educated or informed, and that only property owners were thought to have enough of an investment in the long term welfare of the state to qualify as voters. This was the framer's original intent - they believed that such a requirement to qualify to vote was not unreasonable. Would we not be better off today if that principle were applied? It might have been better if the Constitution were more clear, stating outright that only informed citizens with a vested interest are allowed to vote, but clearly, the idea as it was manifested at the time of the writing is a sound one. If anyone today is regarded as well-informed, and non-land owners as vested, let them vote. But preserve the integrity of the system and erect a bar over which people must climb before voting. We will all be better off. [...]

Can you smell the Revolution?