TO THE SOCIALIST REPRESENTATIVE, BARACK OBAMA:

To the Socialist Representative, Barack Obama:

After just a mere 6 months, what many of us knew about you has revealed itself. You clearly understand nothing regarding capitalism and the free markets. If you did, then you destroy it purposefully. You have distaste for the outcomes of the free market because you think people are victims; broken and disadvantaged in America.

To the contrary – Americans see themselves, for the most part, as self-reliant, self-governing folks who love individual freedom and free choice. These Americans understand that the more freedom they extend to others, the more freedom they themselves get to enjoy.

You have used your race to attempt to silence others, advance your political goals and appear like a victim.

Your elitist, self-congratulatory, sanctimonious arrogance speaks volumes.

Any delving into your history shows you are anything but a victim. Of course, your history is sketchy, too, since so much of your legal records are sealed for whatever mystical purposes only you know and, of course, all the other political hacks who signed onto your “misrepresentations”. Honestly? Everyone is endorsing you from a website clarification? Whatever, I digress.

I guess it would take a Constitutional lawyer to understand fully how to destroy our Constitution from within.

Responsibility & transparency? Clearly you have neither within you. Responsibility is the ability to respond. You don’t hold some of your own “swooners” to such a criteria of ownership, instead you attempt to enable their dependence – likely so you can control more of their lives over time.

Transparency is as foreign to you as the country you were likely born in. To be transparent means you have to own your choices and be honest, once again, a quality that eludes you.

Too often you have to utilize a teleprompter – this merely reveals your inability to have assimilated freedom here in America. Any American can speak about freedom, free markets, the Constitution, and easily so with no such prompting. Why, you ask? Unlike you, for us Americans, it actually lives within us.

You continue to reveal your inability to uphold the voluntary nature of contracts but instead seek to control & manipulate the American people in your thugsish ways. I would say your Chicago Style Ways, but I happen to like Chicago and wouldn’t insult its citizens.

In 2010 the American people will continue to speak out – in case you didn’t know it, you work for us – ALL OF US, not just the ones who happen to agree with you. It might do you well to remember that fact before you go popping off about us all shutting up.

With diligence, barring your corrupt ways, the American people will have you bounced from office by 2012 after having bounced those corrupt treasonous trogs who occupy the Congress & Senate right now.

In the meantime, try not to screw up America too much more than you already have. We’ve had to clean up the mess before; Americans are amazing and can do so again, we just rather not have to spend the next four decades doing so.

By the way, leave everything the way you found it – there are greater people than you that can support America towards its own self-correction.

Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Signed,
An American Citizen
Who wants his freedom & his nation back in the hands of those who support freedom!

PRECEDENT

Two very important observations to point out:

1) She would not answer the question of an individual's right to defend self

2) She kept citing PRECEDENT throughout the hearings

Citing precedent is a judge's or lawyer's avoidance of responsibility and here's why: if you point to precedent it is only to then draw attention to a previous case where the ruling POINTS TO THE RULE OF LAW WITHIN THE CONSTITUTION not as a substitute to the rule of law.

Pointing to precedent without pointing to the rule of law by which the case was determined, is avoiding responsibility to make a choice and own the choice.

Sotomayor cited precedent over and over and over and over again during the hearings without explaining the rule of law that the precedent was based on.

This is how she avoids making a choice and taking personal responsibility for that choice.

GREG ON THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW

I was a caller into Rush's show last October just before the election with the hopes of getting the message out that your life is predicated on the choices you make not on the handouts from government that BO was promising.

DECONSTRUCTING THE HEARINGS

This small phrase is actually a huge issue in our society. GOP says the Constitution shouldn't be a "living document" which is inanity. We abolish slavery, women's suffrage and other laws that discriminate - to keep saying this makes the GOP sound antediluvian.

The Constitution must continue to change and develop as our society develops to greater levels of understanding what true freedom really is about and how best to continue to overturn old laws that limited our freedoms.

It becomes an observation that people who are religiously bound to a book that is several thousand years old and don't want others to replace it, would demand the same of the Constitution since they see it as religiously intended, which is untrue. It's worth noting that no one lives by the bible completely and why? Because it's malleable like everything else that changes with a shifting zeitgeist of advancing and developing.

This stupidology of "secular progressives" only reveals the intent to impose religion as a subtext and/or subterfuge, which is against the Constitution, and progress as if advancing society is unworthy of the effort.