There are many obvious and unsettling parallels between life in America under Barack Hussein Obama in 2012 and life in Oceania under Big Brother in George Orwell’s 1984.   

The deification of Oceania’s omnipresent leader, the overbearing intrusion of a socialistic government into the private lives of its citizens, the thought control implemented by the Inner Party, the denial of individual freedom and liberties in favor of collectivism, the propagandizing, etc. all have parallels in America today.

The mindless worship of The Anointed One, his socialistic obsession, his belief in hate (thought) crimes, his collectivist outlook on life, his commitment to an all-powerful pervasive central government are scarily reminiscnt of 1984.  

The only features missing from Obamaland are incessant wars, which may be in progress, and “the thing” in Room 101, “the worst thing in the world” for Winston Smith: rats. 

Rats may be on the agenda in Obama’s second term along with implementation of other horrors he pledged to effect when he has more “flexibility,” as he promised Medvedev-Putin, after he is re-elected in November.

The president and his henchmen have been tirelessly working on the propaganda aspect of their version of Oceania. 

With the unmistakable stench of electoral defeat in the air, a loss almost incomprehensible considering the culture of voter dependency carefully plotted by the administration and despite the all-but-universal support of Obama’s mainstream media, Obama and his lackeys have taken a new tack: linking his failed presidency with previous American chief executives. 

In a tactic that can best be described as Nixonian, Obamians have attempted to re-write history by appending Obama blurbs to the biographies of every American president since Calvin Coolidge. (http://fxn.ws/J0xYL6) 

Coolidge famously announced he did not “choose to run” again for president in 1928.  Obama has been running since kindergarten so it’s unlikely he will make a similar pronouncement.  

Unfortunately. 

Claiming “no biographies have been altered”, the Obama team simply distorted–rather than “altered”–the presidential biographies by adding revisionist and misleading “fact boxes” to the whitehouse.gov website pages.

The distortions included any number of debatable “facts.”

They incorporated suggestions that Obamacare was nothing more than an extension of FDR’s Social Security and Lyndon Johnson’s Medicare initiatives, that Jimmy Carter’s interest in civil rights was a prelude to repealing the Clinton military’s DADT policy, that Obama’s proposed, punitive tax codes coincided with President Ronald Reagan’s tax policies.

In the “Did You Know?” fact box addenda on the White House website, the president’s handlers also linked him to everyone from Herbert Hoover to John F. Kennedy to a man who thinks he’s an inept “amateur,” Bill Clinton,  and to their much-reviled, favorite scapegoat, George W. Bush.  

See all the Obama re-election presidential revisions at http://1.usa.gov/8908Xh. 

  Sixty three years ago, George Orwell published a novel envisioning a dystopian world of twisted politicians dedicated to perpetuating that sick world.  Sixty three years later, Americans are living that sickness.  Room 101 and the rats could be waiting in the wings.

  “Stuff” is happening in America today that our country has rarely witnessed in our 224 year old history and none of it is propitious for our future.  

True, we have suffered through other major crises, but never so many at the same time.  

We survived the Revolution and early wars and revolts against our nationhood; we weathered a bloody Civil War; we eventually overcame the Great Depression; we struggled through the upheavals of the Civil Rights Movement the Viet Nam War protests; we mostly recovered from the horrors of September 11th, 2001; we lost thousands of our brave troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and some believe we actually won those wars. 

However, we have never endured so many contemporaneous, dire threats to our national security, our fiscal future, our way of life, our cherished values, and our national character as we are witnessing today. 

America made a grave mistake in November, 2008, a terrible mistake which, in the brief span of three and a half years, has served to greatly intensify those dire threats. 

To be sure, the election of President Barack Hussein Obama did not incite crazed Muslim terrorists to launch an unprovoked war against the “Great Satan” and the entire Western world; that war has been ongoing for decades and has been smoldering for centuries. 

What Obama has done is to minimize the magnitude of the dangers posed by Islam and has catered to, literally bowed to, the very Muslim potentate whose country hatched and financed 9/11.

He declared that a war on terrorism didn’t exist and then announced that the non-existent war was over by virtue of the defeat of al-Qaeda and our supposed victories in Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of which is a valid assumption. 

He established domestic security measures which are more smoke and mirrors than actual safety nets.  Perhaps the most telling feature of this commander-in-chief’s perspective on Americans’ safety was his 2010 concession to Fareed Zakariah that we are “resilient” enough to “bounce back” after nuclear attacks.     

We were woefully unprepared for the Second World War.  We are far more vulnerable in this, the Third World War, thanks to our president. 

Should we somehow succeed in overcoming Muslim forces intent on destroying the America we love, we would still have to contend with the Great Recession, an economy which began to implode in 2008 and which shows few signs of real recovery.  

The Obama administration’s total disregard for fiscal sanity and racking up trillions of dollars in unprecedented national deficits and debt has already cost the United States its long-standing AAA credit rating with no hope of paying our bills in sight.  

The administration’s obsession with socialistic social programs such as food stamps, multi-billion dollar boondoggles and bailouts, and oppressive environmental regulations  have stifled job growth and fostered dependency among the millions of the poor and the unemployed.   

In brief, our economy and our society are a critical mess, a disaster as beneficial to Obama’s re-election prospects due to that widespread dependency as it is destructive of the human spirit.

Wars and rumors of war combined with economic malaise would be more than sufficient to effect America’s downfall.  Unfortunately, there’s much more on our  dismal plate: The social fabric which is supposed to bind us together and define us as a nation is  disintegrating as rapidly as the integrity of our borders.  

As great and exceptional as the United States is, our country never was perfect. 

We aren’t and never were a “melting pot” of assorted races and ethnicities.  We have never been a violence-free, hate-free, tension-free Utopia.  We were, nevertheless, still Ronald Reagan’s “shining city on a hill,” a grand experiment in capitalist freedom and prosperity, a democratic republic which, until very recently, had been the envy and model for countless failed imitators. 

But, our fabric is unraveling. 

The George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case most clearly capsulizes what’s wrong in our society.  A white man shot and killed a black man in obvious self defense and for political and propaganda reasons the tragedy was blown out of proportion by black agitators, by the mass media, and our Department of Justice, all committed to contorting the facts into an act of white racism.  

Even so, we didn’t need that debacle to tear us apart.

  We already had homosexual activists dedicated to subverting our age-old Judeo-Christian moral precepts and who are aided and abetted by the president.  

We already had thousands of Occupy malcontents working diligently and violently to undermine faith in the financial system which has been the basis of America’s success. 

  We already had an entertainment industry and “entertainers” that for decades have been producing and appearing in films, television shows more appropriate for Sodom and Gomorah than for Peoria and Tampa. 

We already had people more interested in revolution and social unrest than in perfecting our flawed experiment.

Add to our domestic trials a world on the brink of all-out mayhem that could make Americans yearn for previous conflicts to our domestic trials, anyone who continues to reside in Nirvāṇa and deny we are at risk should posthaste be confined to the nearest mental institution.

Emigrating to a foreign land has to be an intimidating experience for the émigré. 

Just think of it: Entering a country where you don’t speak the same language, don’t understand the customs or laws, and don’t have many if any friends or relatives to give you a sense of belonging must induce a certain trepidation.  

Of course, in America, land of the free, the brave, the swiss cheese borders, and tens of millions of illegal immigrants, those trepidations rarely apply.  By contrast, in virtually every other nation on Earth, illegal aliens strive to keep a low profile and avoid detection lest they end up in jail, deported and, in many nations, beaten, and tortured.    

Imprisonment and deportation back to whence they came are the fates of relatively few illegals caught breaking our laws.  The millions of others pretty much get a pass–until they are apprehended committing a crime–except in states such as Arizona where the citizenry and government believe they are compelled to enforce federal immigration legislation laws since the feds won’t.  

Decent foreigners follow procedures and wait their turn to enter America and should be welcomed to our land of immigrants.   Then there are people who have contempt for our laws and slither into our country illegally.  Some lucky souls are immune from any restrictions providing they have, shall we say, friends in high places. 

  A prime example of immigrants with connections is President Barack Obama’s “dear Auntie Zeituni,” as he referred to her in Dreams from My Father. 

She not only emigrated here illegally but lived on the dole for decades in the Boston area, defied repeated deportation orders, and then bitched about her treatment following a federal judge’s reversal of opinion after her nephew’s coincidental election as president. 

Obama’s Uncle Omar is no slouch either when it comes to illegally sneaking into the United States, setting up residence–also in liberal Massachusetts–and avoiding deportation.  Charged with a DUI in Framingham, his first words were, “I think I will call the White House.”  He beat the rap and is still working in a liquor store.  

For all the sordid details on uppity Obama-family illegals, see “Uncle Omar and Auntie Zeituni”, http://bit.ly/r1DnSR.

  The Kenyan native Zeituni Onyango, a dead ringer for “SNL’s” Kenan Tompson, full sister of Uncle Omar Onyango and half sister of the president’s reprobate-bigamist father, Barack Hussein Obama, Senior, has asserted herself once again in a memoir, Tears of Abuse.  

No, the book is not an account of the suffering inflicted on America by her nephew, Barack, but purports to explore “the timeless human issue of abuse in all of its forms.”  According to her website blurb, “this horrific topic raises many societal and moral questions, which explore and place value on a woman’s worth. . . [written by] a remarkable woman who decided to buck tradition and live life to the fullest.”   

Subtitled, “Her Struggle and Triumph,” the “remarkable woman” details her true life experiences, the abuse and hardships she endured both as a citizen in Kenya and as a free-loader in America.    

I haven’t read Tears of Abuse and don’t plan to.  I could be persuaded to borrow it from the library under certain conditions.

I would have to be assured “Dear Auntie Zeituni” covers the machinations of how an impoverished woman employed a hotshot lawyer to get a federal judge to reverse his deportation order, the rationale for why this remarkable felon lived “life to the fullest” by living off the public teat for years, and how she managed to cut the Boston public housing line and get a virtually-free apartment ahead of hundreds of other applicants. 

Most of all, I’d love to read her explanation of why she is a profound, uppity ingrate who, after all the benefits conferred on her, could say, ”I didn’t take any advantage of the system.  The system took advantage of me.  I didn’t ask for it; they gave it to me.” 

Booksellers are discounting Tears of Abuse even before its release.  It would make more sense to buy it for a quarter in a yard sale a few months from now and use it as tinder or to line a bird cage.     

  We already knew Barack Hussein Obama was America’s first semi-black president.  Now, according to Newsweek, he is apparently also our first gay president! 

I don’t know whether the editors at the magazine were trying to out our commander-in-chief as a homosexual or whether Michelle Obama was aware all these years that her hubby had been living in a closet. 

When the editors featured the president on the cover of their latest edition with his head crowned with a multi-colored halo, they may have been figuratively crowning him with the title of King of America’s gay community as an adjunct to his already well-earned titles of Nobel Peace Prize Winner, “the Anointed One,” “Master of the Universe,” etc. 

Unless it’s related to the president’s sudden, truly-miraculous, election-year evolution from being an adversary of same-sex marriage to finally comprehending the moraI and legal rightness of men marrying other men and women wedding other women, I really don’t grasp the editorial rationale of declaring Obama “The First Gay President.”

Perhaps if I read the leftist rag that is Newsweek, I’d comprehend more. 

I do know that the rainbow halo is a nice touch beautifully complementing all the other halos superimposed on his head by his mainstream media over the last four years. 

   WeaselZippers.us posted a nice collection of those evolving and suggestive media halos (http://bit.ly/JxJIWj) which some ridiculous,erted racist Obama-haters believe represent an MSM attempt to create a messianic Obamian aura to convince an ignorant electorate that he was and is “The One.” 

Much of America’s electorate is ignogorant–many proved that sad reality in 2008.  However, political ignorance induced by a concerted leftist propaganda campaign to distort and misrepresent political realities is much different from stupidity. 

God willing, after almost four years of this god-less, socialistic, leftist, gay-loving administration, voters will have the opportunity on November 6th to dispatch Obama and Company to the political oblivion it richly deserves.  If God is not willing, nothing else really matters, does it? 

The absurd, the ridiculously nonsensical, is obviously a staple of absurdist fiction, in the Theater of the Absurd, and in many political speeches.  Absurdity, however, is absurdly out of place when it emanates from supposedly reputable international bodies. 

  The United Nations has long been a prime example of the ridiculous to many Americans who regard that alleged “last, best hope for humanity” as an opulent haven for Third Worlders intent on compensating themselves for their lack of wealth, power, and prestige by stripping the USA and the West of theirs.    

Following a fact-finding investigation and tour, a senior U.N. official concluded there is only one clear-cut path to “reconciliation” with America’s Indian population, a reconciliation necessitated by centuries of ”subordination and domination of indigenous peoples in that country.” (http://huff.to/J38RL3)

A radical activist with the lofty title, U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples, James Anaya met with various Native American tribal leaders as well as White House big wigs before arriving at his condemnation of America’s “oppressive” history and his plan for rectifying it. 

Anaya will soon officially propose his scheme to his U.N. bosses.  It essentially boils down to America paying reparations for its wrongdoing.  See that document here http://bit.ly/HWQ5yV. 

    Anaya specifically focused on returning the South Dakota Black Hills, home to the revered Mount Rushmore tribute in granite to four, great American presidents, as recompense to Sioux tribes who hold the land sacred.  

If this U.N. brazen intrusion into our country’s domestic affairs is approved, which it undoubtedly will be, we can be certain it will merely represent a beginning rather than an end to efforts to totally dismantle the United States of America. 

Aside from Anaya’s skewed justification for us to abandon public land and resident American citizens and concede our “evil” past, and disregarding constitutional protections the land grab would entail, does anyone really believe the United Nations will stop at the Black Hills? 

In 2010, President Barack Hussein Obama, an avid United Nations’ supporter and confessed One-Worlder, reversed an earlier U.S. decision and signed on to abide by the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples thereby opening the way for our surrender of sovereignty as well as most of the nation’s territory to Amerindians.

After all, when Europeans first came to what was then uncharted territory inhabited by superstitious  natives who frequently engaged in bloody wars, cannibalism, and human sacrifice and who lived virtual Stone Age lives, didn’t the forebears of today’s Native Americans theoretically ”own” all of America? 

Why would the U.N. end its quest for reparations and retribution in South Dakota? 

The island of Manhattan, with that obscene tombstone spoiling New York City’s East River vista, is also fair game as are all public lands, cities, homes, and businesses in every other American state. 

That would include Alaska, allegedly stolen from Russia for $7.2 million in 1867 after Russia had stolen it from the Aleuts et al.  Based on U.N. logic, Alaska should be turned over to its native peoples.  Also, Hawaii, where residents replaced King Kalākaua with a constitution and later overthrew Queen Liliʻuokalani, should be returned to its indigenous inhabitants.  

At the same time it is funded primarily by First World countries, the United Nations has repeatedly proven that it is an institution dedicated to leveling the planet’s playing field.  And, what greater leveling could be achieved than by reducing the United States of America to a land of teepees, powwows, and casinos? 

Absurd, ridiculous, nonsensical?  It is, but only if one doesn’t consider the United Nations a grossly absurd example of a good intention gone bad thanks to members more interested in world unity than in world sanity.  

I don’t know about you but I was neither a perfect child nor an exemplary teenager. 

I did well academically but I was often disciplined by elementary-school nuns who thought my childhood antics were inspired by the devil or by a devilish new invention, television.   When I became a teen, I was even worse and engaged in activities which today would be  deemed typical but in the fifties were somewhat beyond the norm. 

Kids and teens say and do the darnedest things, even future presidential candidates.  

According to a new Rasmussen poll, presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney is currently running 7 points ahead of President Barack Hussein Obama and the president’s mainstream media is running scared, so scared that they are manufacturing absurd issues in an attempt to discredit Romney’s candidacy.  

Granted, the MSM didn’t just launch their smear campaign; they have been attacking the former Massachusetts’ governor ever since they perceived him as a serious threat to their hero.  

They have suggested Romney’s Mormon religion is nothing more than a cult, they have impugned his character, they have characterized his career in business as rapacious, they have misrepresented his political positions, they have gone so far as to demean his wife. 

Now the MSM has dredged up the dumbest accusation yet–that the teenage Mitt sometimes acted like a teenager.  

While ignoring Obama’s horrific teenage history, the mainstreamers ran with a story concerning Romney’s high school penchant for pranks and allegedly demonstrating Romney was a homophobic teen bully.  His “crime”?  He forcibly cut off the bleached-blond locks of a classmate who may have been a closeted homosexual–during an era when gays were rarities mostly ignored by heteros.      

Though Romney had forgotten about the unwelcome haircut, he apologized anyway after the muckraking Washington Post, figurative sharpened hatchet in hand, rooted out the story by contacting an old Mitt buddy almost half a century later. 

As ABC News subsequently pointed out, Stu White hadn’t even been present during John Lauber’s hair trimming and has no recollection of it any more than Romney or the now-deceased Lauber’s sister do.  Yet, WaPo‘s Jason Horowitz was able to somehow delve into White’s mind and write that he “has long been bothered by the Lauber incident.” 

Bothered by an incident he didn’t witness and didn’t recall?

After being exposed for its phony exposé, the Washington Post printed a correction, sans explanation or apology, for its outrageous lie. (http://bit.ly/Ji8Bc4)   

The 5400-word WaPo hit piece, published Thursday and corrected on Friday, most likely was composed long before Obama suddenly “evolved” into a supporter of same-sex marriage on Wednesday and was obviously shelved pending an opportune time to bash the  Republican. 

  The Obama camp’s desperation is understandable in view of the Rasmussen poll and revelations in Edward Klein’s The Amateur which quotes the president’s former personal physician, Dr. David Scheiner, as saying Obamacare is a “failure” and the president lacks “a sense of humanity,” among other blockbuster allegations including Bill Clinton  questioning his competence. (http://bit.ly/KMHy9n)  

Nevertheless, despite the MSM’s dedication to the re-election of the Anointed One, couldn’t they at least refrain from outright distortions or, if they can’t help lying, at least report some truth about Obama’s high school life to counterbalance the Romney fabrications?     

For more than four years, the MSM has accorded Obama an unprecedented pass on his radical affiliations and beliefs.  Likewise, his mainstreamers have rarely if ever  reported on then-Barry’s admitted cocaine use in high school, his constant boozing and  “enthusiastic” toking, his anti-white rants, his interest in black nationalism, or his insensitive humiliation, bullying, and shoving a little black girl named Coretta. 

None of the above was gleaned from 47 year old non-witnesses.  Rather, Obama (or Bill Ayers) conceded every detail in his best-selling memoir, Dreams from My Father, details amounting to a confession of a grossly-misspent youth which the media didn’t consider worthy of much mention in 2008 and worthy of less mention in 2012. (http://bit.ly/KOhftQ)

As I freely admitted, I wasn’t a perfect child, anymore than young Mitt and young Barry were perfect children.  Still, comparing the two, it would seem that a kid who gives another kid a haircut without otherwise harming him and plays tricks on his teachers was a more  honorable and decent teenager than a druggie, racist, radical boozehound who bullied little girls.

  Now that President Barack Hussein Obama has emerged from his political closet and announced he has resolved his long-standing confusion, indecision, and lack of surety regarding the morality–and  practicality–of same-sex marriages, his motivations should be examined. 

Republican low-lifes will no doubt attribute the president’s sudden, radical flipflop as concrete evidence that he has no core values and he “evolved” only because he needs both gay money to supplement his campaign coffers and gay votes to supplement the ballot box in November. 

They will say he has long favored men marrying men, women marrying women, and undermining the religious institution of marriage and was being coy about it all until he had “more flexibility” in his second term. 

They will say Vice President Joe Biden and Education Secretary Arne Duncan shamed Obama into his alleged epiphany by indicating they would be “comfortable” with gay marriage.  

They will say North Carolinianians forced his hand when they voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to join 38 other states in opposing  same-sex marriages and civil unions.  

They will say that since Obama’s Democrats have already repealed the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy and his DoJ secretary announced his administration would not defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court, the president would logically have to endorse homosexual marriage. 

And they would be absolutely wrong.

  In truth, what influenced Obama to change his mind were not political calculations or financial concerns or outside pressures or logic but his family, chiefly his daughters. 

In a confession reminiscent of Jimmy Carter’s 1980 admission that he conferred with his  13 year old daughter on the most important issue of that year’s election and Amy astutely advised that it was “control of nuclear arms,” Obama was persuaded to support gay marriage, and not simply civil unions which would confer the same rights to homosexuals, during a cozy family repast. 

During an interview with Robin Roberts on ABC, an interview which gave Ms. Roberts “chills,” the president said, “There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents, and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ [homosexual] parents would be treated differently.” 

He added, ”It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.” (http://lat.ms/JyZRfF)  

So, there you have it, folks.  Obama’s “perspective” on one of the most significant social issues of our time was not changed after carefully weighing the pro’s and con’s of same-sex marriage, or due to election considerations, and was not arrived at after extensive consultations with his many and varied handlers and advisors. 

He gained his new insight thanks to input from a thirteen and a ten year old. 

I’m not privy to information as to the number of Sasha and Malia’s friends who are living with homosexual parents.  Nor do I know the identities of their classmates at the exclusive Sidwell Friends School although I do know their father’s administration has been crawling with outed, activist gays such as Kevin Jennings.

I’d suggest that Obama’s “evolution” was less inspired by chats around the dinner table than by gay government employees who told him he had better “evolve” sooner rather than later on same-sex marriage or risk making liberals think he is hiding a nasty conservative  inclination toward normality and Christian religious beliefs.

Charles Krauthammer characterized the gay-marital flipflop as “surely the first time in scientific history that evolution has been accelerated by an upcoming election.” 

With all due deference to Mr. Krauthammer, I would characterize it as nothing more or less than Barry’s reverting to form by prevaricating in order to appear, like Carter, a doting dad who actually listens to his kids, in contrast to the insensitive Mitt Romney who straps dogs to the roof of his car with his children inside.  

  There’s a ton of money in doomsaying, predicting an apocalypse, naming the date for Armageddon, warning of the end of the world, identifying the Antichrist, describing the nature of The Rapture. 

Just ask Tim Lahaye or Jerry Jenkins, authors of the Left Behind series of 16 best-selling novels and beneficiaries from the receipts of 3 movies, videogames, and recordings all dealing with such subjects.    

Many Americans are currently all abuzz because the ancient, semi-extinct Mayans calculated that December 21st, 2012–not the 20th or 22nd, and not November 6th, 2012 but precisely 12-21-12–would be the last day of mankind’s existence on the Earth as we presently know it. 

The primitive Mayan calendar, based on very subjective and disputable data, may have been one of the earlier recorded prognostications of worldwide cataclysm but it was hardly the last. 

  Michel de Nostredame, the 16th century French apothecary, (a pharmacist, druggist), better known as Nostradamus, is the world’s best-known and most prolific prophet of doom.  Among his 6,000 mostly apocalyptic prophecies, he allegedly predicted everything from Napoleon’s defeat to world wars to JFK’s assassination. 

For all we know, he may have foretold the invention of Bisquick and Rubik’s Cube since no one knows for certain exactly what he was foretelling due to the mysterious complexity of his cryptic quatrains.  They all could have been inspired by his interest in the occult, by sniffing too many of the potions he concocted, or a combination of both.  

Chances are he was as insane as Timothy Leary and Charlie and Marilyn Manson. 

Although the Mayans didn’t profit monetarily from their calendar and Nostradamus didn’t earn any francs from his doom and gloom, Messrs. LaHaye and Jenkins have grown wealthy as a result of their revivification of a worldwide angst that has scared people for millennia and hundreds if not thousands of others have handsomely capitalized on the Mayan and Nostradamus folderol. 

The History Channel could barely exist without them.   

Most recently, out of a sense of civic-planetary duty, an 80 year old, retired New York MTA train engineer, Robert Fitzpatrick, called on expertise culled from many decades of operating trains and blew virtually his entire life savings to place a thousand ads on NYC subways and bus shelters to alert the city of the impending Apocalypse on May 21st, 2011. 

It’s not known whether Mrs. Fitzpatrick agreed with her hubby’s decision to put their future in the hands of the Social Security Administration either before or after May 21st came and went without incident. 

In any event, it was back to the drawing board for the venerable Mr. Fitz and another disappointed negatavist, Harold Camping, who was also sure as shootin’ that the Rapture would occur on 5/21/2001.  He hastily changed the date to 10/21/2011, and is presently recalculating. 

(See “Prepping for Apocalypses,” http://bit.ly/KGThpR.)

  Mr. Fitzpatrick and Mr. Camping could take a great deal of solace from a Reuters report that one in seven, or 14.2% of  earthlings, concur with their belief that the world will be an imminent wrap. 

They might also be encouraged by a recent L.A. Times story indicating that a solar storm will hurl “a stream of highly charged particles from the sun straight toward Earth, threatening to plunge cities around the world into darkness” and a Reuters report that 14.2% of earthlings anticipate that the final end is nigh.    

Probably the worst End Times’ profiteers are Rapture entrepreneurs who have latched onto the near-hysteria by assuring the ultra-rich that when the inevitable comes to pass they will be exempted from the horrors. 

That assumes they have the foresight to lay out a million or so to set up residence in refurbished missile silos or quadruple concrete-reinforced, fully-stocked, air-conditioned, state of the art bunkers somewhere out in the wilderness.   

There are inherent assumptions in accepting any or all of the above prognostications. 

Before anyone cancels Christmas shopping and buys that Swiss chalet, a requisite for adherents to the Mayan prophecies would have to assume the Mayans knew what they were predicting since they also made predictions for the years 2017 and 2025. 

Before accepting the views of Nostradamus and futilely head for the hills, you should be aware that Michele de Nostradame is widely regarded as a crackpot whose ambiguous  predictions could relate to almost any historical event of the last five centuries.  

Prior to setting up a fortified Apocalypse-protection home in the middle of nowhere, consider how many people you could have to kill to get there and to secure your getaway, what family and friends you would leave behind, whether you would even arrive at your sanctuary in time, and–if Apocalypse-affiionados are correct–the world you would behold after exiting your rathole.  

A final suggestion: Think about what chutzpa, what arrogance, what hubris motivates anyone to believe they know more about the timing of the end of the world than Jesus Christ or any of the real prophets–and make money on it!

  Question: What’s the difference between members of the Democrat National Committee and the cast of “Saturday Night Live?” 

Answer: Not much, except that the people on the DNC get paid a lot less than the comedians on ”SNL.” 

I used to enjoy watching ”Saturday Night Live.”  I mostly liked the bride’s eye-rolling and feigned shock at some of the sketches.

When it debuted on NBC in 1975 featuring ”not ready for prime time players” such as John Belushi, Jane Curtin, Chevy Chase, Gilda Radner, et al., the show was usually funny if occasionally off-color and edgey.  ”SNL” was always politically correct back then yet it poked caustic fun in almost every direction. 

  No more.  The show has repeatedly demonstrated it has the same goals as the DNC, re-electing President Barack Hussein Obama.  It simply employs one-sided, partisan humor to advance that aim as opposed to directly funding Democrats.    

Times and “SNL” have radically changed, especially since the appearance on the political scene of Barack Hussein Obama. 

Aside from regularly ridiculing the presumptive GOP nominee for president, Mitt Romney, just as their cadre of late night comedians like Letterman, Leno, Fallon, Stewart, et al. incessantly do, “SNL” has now apparently upped the ante by allowing Obama and Company to censor its content. 

In deference to complaints by arch-racial agitator Rev. Jesse Jackson and in conformity with a concerted effort to compensate for alleged discrimination toward African-Americans in the entertainment industry, Hollywood and television producers caved and today blacks are more than well-represented on the silver and TV screens.

They bent over backwards, upside-down and every whichway to assure blacks that the entertainment industry was not only not racist but that they would slander conservatives in the process in order to prove their how liberal they were. 

DailyCaller.com revealed that “SNL” has caved again, this time to advance the Obama 2012 re-election campaign.  

Last Saturday, Lorne Michael scrapped the show’s planned and written opening skit mocking the president’s shameless efforts to suggest he was primarily responsible for killing mastermind 9/11 terrorist Osama bin Laden last May in Pakistan.  

  In Obama’s historical revisioning, SEAL Team 6, then-CIA director Leon Panetta, Admiral  William McRaven, and a host of other advisors became secondary to his incredible courage in ordering the assault on bin Laden’s Abbotabad compound–after months of indecision. 

Truth is usually less humorous than fantasy so “SNL” opted to go with fantasy and dumped that very amusing script on Obama’s braggadochio in favor of tearing into one of their hero’s most prominent whipping boys.      

Playing Obama, Fred Armisen opened the scrapped skit with the greeting, “I hope you had a safe and joyous first anniversary of his killing.” 

Armisen-Obama continued, “Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to be at home this year, as I had to fly to Afghanistan, to remind President Karzai that, exactly one year ago, we killed Osama bin Laden, and that the decision to do so was a gutsy one.  And was mine.” 

It seems that when edgey involves ridiculing Obama’s taking virtually exclusive credit for dispatching bin Laden and politicizing the event, edginess extends beyond the purview of satire.

Nothing was off limits for “SNL” when criticizing George W. Bush but a brief bit portraying Obama as an egomaniacal fraud must have been considered un-American since it  was  shredded in favor of mocking what Obama would have appreciated, an attack on his nemesis, the FOX News Channel.

In lieu of using reality to portray the truth, “SNL” parodied “Fox and Friends” personalities as ignoramuses who questioned  whether bin Laden was really dead, had no clue as to what presidents, if any, had their images chiseled into Mount Rushmore, and said Obama would never have launched the raid on his own, (which he didn’t). 

See “The Man Who Shot Osama bin Laden,” http://bit.ly/JaOid5. 

The discreet Daily Caller contends, “It is not clear why the skit was scrapped.”  In this observer’s humble opinion, “SNL” declined to run the skit either because neither Obama nor the DNC would have cared much for it, or because someone in the White House gave them a call.   

See the article and the full text of the non-PC script at http://thedc.com/IOiPRE.

Fred Armisen concluded his Obama portrayal by saying, “The president then outlines what gifts are appropriate on the anniversaries of ‘Killing Osama bin Laden Day,’ and reminded  voters  that ‘heavy drinking, and Killing Osama bin Laden Day, are never a good combination.’ “

A comedy show incorporating outrageous political propaganda while deleting content displeasing to a presidential candidate is a far more offensive combination in a supposed democratic republic.

At one time or another, most of us assume and presume too much but few of us ever envision the United States of America collapsing as a great nation.  Historically, such a presumption was not uncommon.

The thought of ancient Rome being overrun by barbarians had to have been unfathomable to the average Roman in the street, until it happened.

The idea that Russians would be ruled by Lenin and his Bolsheviks after Czar Nicholas II must have seemed beyond the pale of believability, until it happened.

Most Germans were unaware that Adolph Hitler would initiate one of the most brutal genocides in human history and precipitate a world war leading to Germany’s near-extinction, until it happened. 

And, thanks in large part to the complicity of the mainstream media which prefer to  liberally slant news and ignore what is the most dire threat to America’s existence since Hitler and the USSR, the presumption that we will survive the insidious Occupy Wall Street movement aimed at undermining the capitalist foundations of our prosperity and success, could very well come to fruition in the not too distant future.

The mortal sin of presumption is a Roman Catholic doctrine which essentially holds that to arrogantly believe and trust in one’s own merits to the exclusion of any divine intercession  can lead to salvation is the road to perdition. 

Whether or not Americans accept that religious teaching, vainly presuming the United States will exist indefinitely, that we as a country are immune to forces which can effect our dissolution, that we are impervious to external and internal threats, is not only presumptuous but reflects a dangerous ignorance of the history of all great nations and empires. 

Those nations and empires have had an average life-span of two centuries.  As of 2012, the U.S.A. will be 223 years old.

  The reality of presumption, that Americans and America will continue to regard the OWS, the Occupiers of Wall Street and everything else they choose to occupy, destroy, and desecrate as just another protest group, is beyond foolhardy.  In fact, they are busily plotting the overthrow of government and institutions which have served us, never perfectly, but satisfactorily, for centuries. 

An extreme scenario?  Please read on. 

In existence less than eight months, OWS was initially a small group of predominantly young, disorganized, dissheveled, disenchanted malcontents who gathered in New York City’s Zuccotti Park and claimed with no substantiation to represent the 99% of America’s masses. 

Indulged by Mayor Bloomberg until they deteriorated into unsanitary public nuisances, they illegally camped, loudly demonsrated, and stood and slept arm and arm in opposition  to ”demonic,” wealthy bankers and other corporate “fat cats.” 

They demanded jobs that didn’t exist, relief from the burden of student loans they had incurred, an end to the country’s perceived “income inequality,” and, in its stead, insisted on a more equitable “income redistribution.” 

  They echoed the campaign rhetoric of one of their principal supporters, President Barack Hussein Obama.

OWS dissidents are still dissheveled and discontented but they have devolved even further.

Thousands have been arrested, some have been murdered, a number of women and young girls have been raped, thefts have become rampant–all at the hands of fellow OWSers who blame the NYPD for all their crimes.

They have also been infiltrated by professional agitators from the ranks of the Communist Party USA, mindless Fascist skinheads, professed anarchists. and assorted perverts who prey on them.   

Occupy Wall Street is no longer merely an insignificant, ragtag, dirty faction composed of pissed-off malcontents too lazy to get jobs they feel are beneath their dignity, the frustrated unemployed annoyed with society and themselves, and some distraught victims of the Obama economy.

Nor are they still disorganized and isolated troublemakers. 

.  The OWS conducts regular meetings to discuss tactics and strategies to achieve their radical goals;

.  They are generously funded by extremist, leftist organizations such as George Soros’ MoveOn.org;

.  They are aided and abetted by radical labor unions like the SEIU and the pre-bailout honorable UAW; 

. They have been joined by a huge contingent of hypocritical, millionaire one-percenters from the entertainment world including George Clooney, Barbra Streisand, and the bloated, bloviating Michael Moore;

.  They have won the attention and admiration of  various Democrat politicians, from the  dopey Nancy Pelosi to the oblivious Harry Reid to the soul-less Barack Obama.

  The Occupy Wall Street movement no longer consists of just filthy malcontents.  It has become a major  influence to be reckoned with if Americans want to preserve the America that used to be.     

Feeding on the confusions and fears generated by a severe worldwide economic downturn which shows few signs of improving, Occupy Wall Street has blossomed.  

More aptly, OWS has metasticized like a deadly cancer into a fearsome, global phenomenon mimicking the upheavals of the Arab Spring with the potential of similar consequences–unless it is checked.  

Due to its leaderless and amorphous nature, there are no reliable estimates of OWS participation although its website alleges a presence in more than 82 countries and 1000 cities throughout the world.

Granted, the world and the United States have witnessed worse insurrections but never have those revolts been so strenuously supported by the mainstream media and the so-called intelligentsia.

Never have previous protestors received the financial backing and morale-boosting of  supposedly law-abiding individuals.  Never, during the Second World War, the Cold War, or even the Viet Nam protests have so many ostensible Americans rejected our basic values and beliefs by endorsing an organization dedicated to chaos and mayhem.

Never has our country been threatened by such an internal peril as we are now.  Worse, we don’t even know it!   

As long as Americans suffer from the grave sin of presumption and trust that the United States is far too powerful, far too rich, and far too confident to succumb to extremist radicals in our midst, we are in danger of believing what France’s King Louis XVI and his consort, Queen Marie Antoinette, once thought. 

Louis’ constitutional monarchy ended when his head fell into a bucket.  Our democratic republic could end if we presumptively think Occupy Wall Street poses no danger.