Category Archives: Authors

Authors Home

Did the Democrats take the high road?

When if comes to the dems, do they care about the clear truth, or is it just  something they say to play to their, furthering insane, base?

WTF has happened?

Do you realize that EVERYONE with an iota of common sense realizes you only care about maintaining power of the SCOTUS so you can legislate from the bench!!! IDIOTS, your blue wave is lost. TY for showing how far you will go to get your ends. You have no limits.

They believe there will be a blue wave, but after this dishonest slander-fest against a good man, the lunacy against Ted Cruz while simply trying to have a meal ( good job idiots, you screwed the restaurant owner) in  some absurd attempt to do what? Change minds?  ALL YOU DID WAS MAKE MORE PEOPLE HATE YOU!!!

WTF do the Dems stand for?

The American people, as a whole, see you for what you are! You only care to protect your power, nothing more. You have no ideas, you no longer represent the people, you are only concerned with flatulence… which makes perfect sense since you have become the biggest farts in any room.

All I see is divisiveness and hate!!!  This is not the party of the people anymore!!!  YOU SUCK!!!


Tell me I’m wrong!

I’m done with the swamp!

First: I’m a Libertarian

I am so sick of the swamp showing themselves to be exactly what Trump claimed them to be.  Keep in mind that I voted for Johnson because, well, I hold true to my beliefs.

With that said – I cannot, in good conscience, be silent on just how dumbfucked (sorry) the resist Trump herd has become. Seriously!

The left, no… the Marxists, have become so obviously insane that anyone who believes a blue wave is coming better seek medical help. How can anyone with a brain believe the nonsense at this point?

Trump said “MS13 are animals” and CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NYT, WaPo, among many others,  claimed he called all immigrants “animals”!  Are you tired of being lied to yet?

I am now a dues paying Libertarian that will vote R down the line.  Wanna bet that blue wave turns into a puddle?


United States

United States

The United States was not really united when it formed as a country. Citizens considered themselves more a part of their particular state than to the federal government. Therefore, we had what some call the Civil War or the War Between the States. The appellation that the war was “between the states” is probably more correct. The Southern States seceded from the United States to form individual countries. Their confederation made no pretense to replicate a country. It was only a way for these several individual states to fight a war. After, the end of that war the United States became more important than the individual states. If each state had remained independent, not one state would now be better off than as part of a united country.

People of the United States, rightly or wrongly, have strong feelings about specific issues. This article’s purpose is not to express an opinion such as: abortion or gay marriage. Its purpose is to point out that these issues motivate strong feelings; however, there are far more important issues that must be considered. There are health care issues, which will affect everyone sooner or later. Every religion, especially Christianity requires followers to aid the less advantaged. Jesus regularly preached that. How about the immorality of giving aid to people in Iraq and Afghanistan, but cutting back on aid to the less advantaged in the United States?

The point is that supporting a candidate on a single issue is wrong. Having strong feelings about abortion, but ignoring far more threatening issues such as a war, shows a lack of true concern. Those elected must discern that we object to paying the highest prices in the world for medicines that are made within the United States.

Another major point concerns the need to maintain balance in the U.S. at the Federal level. A one political party government has no controls. The ruling party does what it likes. Look at the twenty years of Democratic rule during the Roosevelt administration. The New Deal got just what it wanted, overriding the Republicans. Rightly or wrongly, the U.S. then got into another world war. Too many Americans were killed regaining our Pacific lands lost to Japan or defending our seaways to England. Congress needs to have at least one house in the other party’s hand – no matter how we feel about that party. The current local candidate may be the best one, but if he/she is a Republican, notice that much of the time Republicans vote without using their brains. They vote as the Republican Party dictates. Look in the media to see all the corruption and poor actions by incompetent Republicans who were appointed without question or opposition.

Americans need to unite in looking beyond less crucial issues to the critical issues or there may be no issues to concern ourselves within the future. It is possible to lose the United Sates.

Find More United States Government Articles

The Olympics And Political Protests

The Olympics And Political Protests


The Olympics is no place for political protests; sports and politics are totally different entities.

There is no doubt that this year’s Olympics have been one of the most politically heated topics in sporting history. The issue was sparked off by events in Tibet. Additionally there were claims that the Chinese government has been abusing its people’s human rights. These arguments have caused some countries to boycott the Olympics or to demonstrate in their respective countries about the Olympics. Such decisions necessitate a thorough analysis of the situation. The essay will examine whether the Olympics is the right scene for these political issues.

Arguments for using the Olympics as a platform for political protests

‘There is active discussion in China about how to proceed with Tibet, and a constant debate about political reforms.'(Buxi, 2008)

Some people believe that by using the Olympics as a platform for political issues, they exert pressure upon oppressive governments and such governments may be forced to change their regime. It is a fact that 2008 Olympics to be held in China has sparked lots of debate. The above writer believes that these protests are actually prompting the Chinese government to review their policies towards Tibet. The latter country is fighting for independence and in order to gain international support, there is a need to choose the right movement when all eyes are on the host country. Such people argue that if they were to choose another time like after the Olympics, very few countries will be interested in the problems of China. Also using sporting events as a platform for political issues allows other countries to demonstrate their disdain about the actions of those oppressive regimes.

There are also claims that host countries need to foster the image of the Olympics. This means that they need to portray the peace and unity that is synonymous with the event. If a host country has not been doing this, then it can be seen as a form of hypocrisy. The Chinese government has been criticized for its human rights abuses. There have reports about how the Chinese government prevents its citizens from discussing issues about their government. Furthermore, the Chinese government normally discourages most foreigners form discussing their problems claiming that it has nothing to do with them; they believe that they are the only ones with a right to solve their problems. In light of these arguments, it would be quite unfair for such a government to hold the Olympics and claim that they foster the spirit of unity that is synonymous with the torch. (Rice, 2008)

Some people believe that protests should be conducted in any platforms a long as there is room to be heard. Furthermore, they believe that sometimes members of the host country may not have the political freedom to do so consequently, the international community needs top help them in this. For instance, there are numerous goods in the US government that come form the Chinese government. But workers in that location have minimal access to basic resources. Most of them are subjected to harsh working conditions and low pay. They cannot complain about this situation because it may bring problems. Consequently, the international community needs to help the Chinese workers by voicing their complaints. These complaints will only be noticed when the country stands to loose something. For instance, if the international countries boycotts the Olympics, then chances are the Chinese government will loose a lot. It may therefore be promoted to change their worker’s conditions due to these changes.

Arguments against using the Olympics as a platform for political protests

‘Sport is sport and politics is politics. There has never been anyone who has belied the fact that sport is the best way of uniting peoples.’ (Brincat, 2008)

The above writer believes that the Olympic event is a sporting affair and not a political one. Consequently, all political issues need to be solved through discussions between the affected parties. The problem is between Tibet and China, therefore representatives from both groups need to negotiate. There is no need to waste efforts by protesting against injustices through sports. This writer also believes that there mediation and long term solutions will only come up when the parties are discussing the issue. So far, there have been no tangible results from the protests that we have seen so far. Some reporters have asserted that China will be pressured to improve its policies but no results are forthcoming yet.

Adherents to this view also believe that including political issues in this international sporting event only serves to undermine the main idea behind it; that is unifying all the people of the world. By introducing politics into the equation protestors may cause some countries to boycott the Olympic. This undermines the very purpose behind the sport.

Introducing politics into Politics is not something new; this has occurred in the past. During the year 1984, there were protests in Los Angeles. Also, in the year 1980, there were political issues in Moscow; there were no positive results that came from them. Instead, international sports were undermined. This is exactly what will happen when political issues continue ruling the platform. It should be noted that when countries choose to boycott sporting events, they deny very talented participants from joining the spots. This means that those who accept to do so may not be the best competitors. Consequently, armature athletes may win while the real talent may be forced to stay home. This devalues the entire event. (Barney, 2003)

One must not forget the fact that the Chinese government has gone through a lot of effort to prepare themselves for this event. Fir instance, it has first class facilities for the event like a stadium called Bird’s nest and a swimming pool called Water Cube. By brining in politics in sports, countries that have invested heavily in the sport may be forced to count their losses due to poor attendance though boycotts.

Adherents to the above view also assert that most of the issues that people protest about in politics have nothing to do with politics. For instance protesters against the Beijing Olympics argue that there may be environmental problems in China. The alter issues will not affect the events in the Olympics directly and this means that the latter should not be used as a scene for addressing them.

Lastly, there are numerous athletes that have dedicated so much time and effort top prepare for the vent. These athletes need to be given an opportunity to compete. By introducing politics in the equation, such athletes will not be given a fair chance.


Some people assert that there is no better platform to air out their political issues that the Olympics because the event attracts international attention. It will therefore allow other countries to join in the political issues causing tension. They also claim that using the Olympics as a platform for politics pressures oppressive regimes to change their policies. An example of these changes can be seen in China.

However, other people claim that it undermines the efforts of the sportsmen who put in a lot of time and dedication to prepare for the event. Besides that political issues have nothing to do with the Olympics. As if this is not enough, it causes a waste in resources since host countries invest a lot of resources to prepare for the event. Also, no tangible results are usually forthcoming through protests. Political issues are best solved on a round table. Lastly, protests in Olympics undermine the unity and peace; these are the main principles behind the event. In light of the latter views, it can be seen that Political issues should not be addressed during the Olympics. Citizens need to choose more appropriate platforms because they are the ones who stand to loose in the end.


Buxi, T. (2008): Two Chinese Protests two different reactions; retrieved from accessed on 30 May 2008

Brincat, H. (2008): Let the Chinese Olympics go on; Standard Publications Ltd

Rice, A. (2008): China Olympics; retrieved from accessed on 30 May 2008

Barney, R. (2003); The Olympic legacy of wealth: a double-edged sword, NY; Routledge Publishers

Author is associated with ResearchPapers247.Com which is a global Research Papers and Term Papers Writing Company. If you would like help in Research Papers and Term Paper Help you can visit Custom Essays> and Custom Research Papers> or Term Paper Help>


obama pointing finger

 Obama is Overwhelming the Economy to Destroy Capitalism in the U.S.



This is a must read, even if you disagree, as this is a pivotal point for our country. Once this transformation is complete, it will be impossible to reverse and I think you will find that you don’t like it. But by then, it will be too late. This is our future!

WAYNE ALLYN ROOT: Overwhelm the system

Barach Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos — thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.

Barack Obama is my college classmate (Columbia University, class of ’83). As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University. They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they’re alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival … and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

Universal health care. The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn’t care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?

Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama’s biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama “spread the wealth around.”

Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who’s asking for a 51st state? Who’s asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Obama’s plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

Legalize 12 million illegal immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America. But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security.

Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions — including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues). All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America . The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means.

Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition.

With the acts outlined above, Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system.

Add it up and you’ve got the perfect Marxist scheme — all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Obama using the Cloward and Piven Plan.

– End

I sent this out as an email.  If you agree with it’s content, please cut and past and send it out too.  November is just around the corner.  We can vote most of them out!  My email ended with the following: