Breaking News: Walk to War Inside the White House

Breaking News: Walk to War Inside the White House

FEATURED EDITORIAL - The Post & Email
FEATURED: TOP UTAH POLITICS TODAY "WORLD" Section

One of the most disturbing statements I have ever heard President George W. Bush (GWB) make was I think just before the 2012 election when he said and I may be paraphrasing just a little bit but basically, “It doesn’t really matter who the next President is”. I remember thinking when I heard that “Holy Cow, if I were Mitt Romney I think I would have taken an offense to that”.

The statement has continued to vex me, and popped up again to my memory when Sen. Hillary Clinton echoed the forever noted words to Congress speaking about the events she surmised on Benghazi, “What difference does it make”.

I mean with the Country wobbling and weaving in the gallows of debt one would think to expect better out of former President George Bush’s mouth than what anyone would call a ‘tacit’ endorsement of the opposition, for the likes of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, but it does beg curious contimplation as to what difference a different President can make, and what difference even a qualified President makes?

I didn’t know how to take that coming from GWB as the last qualified Commander-In-Chief. Does he know something we don’t? I’m sure he does, but from the perspective of the President and your actual ability to make a difference, how far does that ‘bully pulpit’ go?

As I went to research that statement hoping to find it blogged or something a lot of different things come up. One article that was quite enthralling was written by John Maulden and his focus in the article was really about offending everyone. I really identified with that as I often have a tendency to do, which is probably why I classified it as enthralling. Different takes do help us think outside the box we sometimes find ourselves in, which is why I tend to take in many different perspectives and enjoy that opportunity as “American”. We try anyway.

Mr. Maulden’s points really stem from the perspective of the economy and how given a shade here or a dollar there, imagining what would have been all that different with the various 2nd place finishers in the Presidential contest since Ronald Reagan who he agreed had indelibly made a mark on the economy. Perhaps this was GWB’s slice of reasoning with the statement?

1984 was the first election I was eligible to vote in being one of the older ones in my graduating high school class in the same year I recall voting for Reagan. I was in more of an abyss to politics back then but recall clearly the devastating feeling around 1980 with interest rates jumping up to 20% and what that felt like and by the end of Reagan’s 8 years feeling like we could breathe again.

If there were coattails to ride for a V.P. there were none so long for incoming 1988 President George H.W. Bush. He was a shoe in with everyone wishing Ronald Reagan could have run for a third term. He certainly proved he was no Ronald Reagan though after he reneged on his campaign promises signing an increase of taxes a Democratic-Party-controlled House-and-Senate-combining as Congress had sent him. Reading George H.W. Bush’s lips proved memorable political fodder when he flubbed “No new taxes”.

I remember former Pres. Bill Clinton in the hazy fog of all the Democratic Party contenders in the beginning of his campaign. He was indeed like a mist in the fog barely noticeable at all as a Governor from Arkansas. Of course as he ran around the track people really begin to like what they saw and he steadily passed one after the other after the other till he became President winning two terms and with it leaving a surplus he felt very accomplished with but also opening the Pandora’s box which would create the sub-prime mortgage crisis by repealing 1933 Glass-Steagall albeit to the clapping hands of the Republicans in Congress. This basically combined the separation independent investors enjoyed from corporations and allowed Wallstreet to get their hand in on Main-street for a profit combining the “speculative’ with the “commercial” as in days of old memory before the 1930 great depression.

Of course the “hope” was we knew better and would not make the same mistakes that happened causing the great depression because we had “control’ levers in place that would prevent that from ever happening again, while still allowing some big money to be made. Of course we are living the adverse affects of that hiccup; and the hardest hit was the common people who saw their homes devalued sometimes by half! That’s about like saying 15 years had just been thrown down to the tube and you were starting over.

From John Maulden, author of EndGame, there is an interesting article on the line of thought from the words I recalled from President George W. Bush ‘that it really doesn’t matter who the next President is’:

http://www.businessinsider.com/mauldin-the-truth-is-it-doesnt-matter-whos-president-wed-be-screwed-regardless-2012-2

Quoting from that article “It seems we accept change only in the face of necessity and see the necessity only in a time of crisis”, he references one Italian as saying, and recalls a dinner that he sat down to with now House Speaker John Boehner who turned and looked at him and said with some passion, "Harry? [rising voice] Harry? Hell, Harry (Referencing NV-D Sen. Harry Reid) ain't the problem. If it was just me and Harry we could sit down tomorrow and get it done” in a reference to the problem being Barack Obama coming back and wanting 400 Billion more on a deal Boehner had already stuck his neck out on in the stimulus packages.

Maulden’s trend is to collapse the Presidency to a relegation of economic events and circumstances that he sees little difference in the ability to handle differently and thus surmises “What difference does it really make” echoing the sentiments of President George W. Bush that I’ve been pondering for years now. Did he mean ‘Economically’ speaking there are very little choices a President has when it comes to what he’s thrown into the den with when it comes to budgets from Congress the likes of which have the ability to chew you up and spit you out as had happened with his father? Perhaps.

While there are many, I picked up two other nuggets from Maulden’s musings in that particular read that I think are valuable:

#1-“Not dealing with the deficit runs the very real risk of the bond market treating us just as it is treating Italy and any other country that gets to the point where its debt is unsustainable. Not this year or the next for the US, but almost certainly before 2016. And once the bond market loses faith in a country, it takes a massive restructuring to restore that confidence. And we can see how that is playing out in Europe.”

#2-Oddity of sorts but true to the rebellion, “people respond to higher taxes by making less.”

This scenario plays right into what I’ll reference as the Communistic Playbook to first “Demoralize” and then “Destabilize”. Raising taxes above the 35% level into the 50% and 60% levels brackets is simply a great way to “Demoralize” and reduce incentive to even go out and make more. There’s a breaking point of productivity as the tide is turned ever so slightly with higher taxes as a weakening process. One thing I also recall with Reagan’s era is while we had a propensity to spend, with a lot of money going into defense which indeed ended a version of the cold war, boy did we have the courage to work! Americans were digging in and when that happens BIG THINGS happen!

LOOKING AT THE PERSPECTIVE FROM A DIFFERENT FIELD


Now there is another line of thought that is creeping into a clearer and clearer picture I believe we must consider in, “What difference does the President or Qualified President make?”, and it has to do with political perspectives changing and pivoting to meet the man’s needs rather than the Countries. This is where the common man is completely abandoned in concern economically and actually stomped out and killed. I’d say that is a concern, because after impoverishment the wolves are not satisfied, the idea becomes extermination in a glorified depopulation agenda. This is where we walk into the mine fields of war.

With sneer and with glare was Charleston Hesston’s hands coiled around the rifle and with his shout, “From My Cold Dead Hands”… -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ju4Gla2odw



…We understand that power is not easily given up. It was from the wisdom of our Founders who had felt trouble near all their days upon the earth from despotic systems of governments that the Constitutional restraints of power were formalized in our United States Constitution.

Amazingly a four year term was chiseled in the term of the President, two years for U.S. Representatives, and six years for a U.S. Senator shackling and pulling the cold gripping fingers off those emblems of power we call Offices in the Constitution, from those who had either lost elections or had come to the end of their allotted hand on an office of power.

Contriving the wisdom of our Founders in their life long quest for a better system providing a better opportunity for us isn’t it amazing that the restraints on the Office of the President were checked at two terms while the body of Congress had no checks as far as terms set inside the U.S.C?

Many have argued that this lack of term limits for the U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators has not served us well what with corruption mounting or being seen but that is easier to point out of course then the fact that elections provide an opportunity for every runner in the race to start afresh and as subject or servant to the People and for the People. If of due course a politician has run amuck we see examples like Eric Cantor and Bob Bennett unfold, and a blood path of political change might just be starting with the 2014 election nearly upon us.

Elections are not givens, if as a matter of course they are run by the rules set for and in the race; if one person one vote is upheld and protected as well the qualifications for the Offices checked. If either of those two are lost in anyway a balance is lost in a Constitutional Electorate that actual mires a democracy and can really wreck a Republic!

George Washington argued that term limits on Congress would or could actually withhold from the Union an able and healthy body because it would lower the incentive for people to get into Government who were well meaning men, great at politicking, and good for office, as well possibly reining away good men from getting in with the spoiled thought it would disrupt their life dissolving especially in adulthood.

I mean think about it, “Why do so many Americans not want to bother running for political offices in races now?” Placing term limits in Congress really increases the incentive not to bother from those who we’d say are ‘quality people'. I always ask those disagreeing if they have ever actual ‘run for office’? It’s an insanely time consuming, life altering, near cruel and unusual punishment affair, that is never really compensated for and that goes for the winners and losers that endure the hell I have known mostly from the losing perspective.

I don’t like to swear, but I’d come near it in stating God is the only one who knows the love in my heart that persist for our Constitution and thus my running the tar and feather process for an office of election. If for some odd and indescribably reason people think I like running they are very confused about the positive incentives for doing so. Let me get back on point.

Who at the age of 25 for U.S. Congressmen and 30 for a U.S. Senator might not participate if he knew the term limit was so little that he must be forced to think about an entirely different school or practice and never have the opportunity to return or race again? Yes, the incentive must be kept in place to attract descent people capable of wooing their constituents who undoubtedly do retain the check and balance of not electing them in the prescribed two and six year terms. I’ve said if the people can’t elect a decent representative that’s entirely on them and if they suffer enough undoubtedly they will get their torches and pitchforks out come election night.

Indeed the wisdom of the two year term for Congressmen meant he’d better get in and fight hard and fast for his District, while the wisdom of six years on a Senator allowed a more modest check to hasty decisions that might not prove wise in the long term in comparison to the short quick fix the House was geared for.

Though no check was required for terms on the House or the Senate, there was much greater concern for national security and what a disloyalty could mean in the Office of the President. So we see an older age as a requirement for the Office of the President added by 6 years to that of a U.S. Senator, and while first generation Americans filled the U.S. Representative’s office and U.S. Senator’s office with the term “Citizen” that requirement increased to a two generation American citizenship extended as ‘natural born Citizen’ (NBC); the requirement for the Office of the President considered by both place of birth and parental citizenship inherited. (Minor v. Happersett U.S.S.C.)

Born in the United States to Citizen Parents removes with certainty what second generation Americans in the Office of the President would call “alien-ship” or “foreign-citizenship”. Most certainly can a “natural born Citizen”’s children fall back to “Citizen” status with a marriage to a alien-ship or a birth outside the United States because it brings back into compromise the alien or foreign power which was forbid in the Office of the President in the first place, and by the way has endured through time until this Barack Obama and his minions of unreasonable minds thought to pervert the Constitution with twist and contortions of evil prodigy. In their own rite they have claimed themselves “whores” of the Constitution letting basically anyone inside the Office of the President and that might even include a 5 year old with their rhyme and reason.

The compromise of reason defaults upon their lust for the controls of power the United States of America has accomplished by what? By the intelligence granted the Almighty Creator as reward for holding on to the Standard of the United States Constitution? That is the difference a President can make! You pervert the Constitution, you remove the said blessing that comes with its statute or principle. George Washington referred to the Divine Providence countless times in the forging of this nation and to assault that dream, the American Dream, comes with the price of a heavy toll.

Conversely, with that bearing in mind, opportunities and claims of riches can be made upon the principles of untold treasure in holding to the principles of the Constitution. There is a positive incentive and reward unaccounted for so assuming your choice for a President does not matter is naive at best, and in that reward we see it does matter and is of significant interest!

No such NBC requirement existed for the House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate and the age for the Office as well the time spent within the States was different also. With Barack Obama the breach of foreign rule in the Office of the President has been swept in under the auspices of voiding out the particulars of either “Where you born” or “What citizenships you inherited from either of your parents”.

Respect, Respect, Respect.. is all you hear at times from the Democratic Party. Respect the earth, respect the environment, respect animals, respect people’s rights, and respect their individual sexuality , respect clean water, respect clean food, but the one thing they don’t want to respect is the Constitution’s Qualification for the Office of the President when it comes to Barack Obama. Why?

By the way, the Constitution does do a pretty good job of respecting all of the other “respects” they hopefully stand for when it’s actually respected. That in a nut shell is why I left the Democratic Party. You cede the Office of the President to a foreign power our three branches of Government falls on its behind.

What is the danger of that? I don’t know but I know who you can ask who will know? Begin your query by asking Al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood, I would tell you to ask the Libyan revolutionary and politician Muammar Gaddafi but I think Barack Obama was backing Al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood revolutionaries instead of him; yes, I’m quite certain of that and I do recall SOS Hillary Clinton stating she was tickled to death he was dead dead dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_x04Gn3-2g



Now I have to ask myself in the wake of Iraq on its heels reeling in the blood bath from Al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood yoked in a new acronym called ISIS, the Islamic State of Syria and Iraq

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/21/world/meast/iraq-crisis/

,who armed those guys so well? Oh yeah, it was Obama!

Sunni Tribes are aiding ISIS and this is where Islam parts into two different denominations of Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia%E2%80%93Sunni_relations

This is actually pretty well understood in America with different religions branching off from one religion or another. The Sunni Denomination of Islam believes authority after the death of their Prophet Muhammad should have been taken from the many of his companions or disciples in an election between them.

While Shiites or Shia denomination of Islam believes it should have stayed within his family blood lines in their belief his cousin/son-in-law Ali bin Abu Talib should have become the new leader. So,the big question for you Americans is what denomination are you pouring money into and who are you arming? Breaking in the USA TODAY we see a trail of money.

Obama’s roots in Kenya and Indonesia point towards supporting the Sunni denomination of Islam, so why the interest now in opening the door with Shiites in Iran? Yes you heard that right. This is not a question of Obama's religion as much as it is a question of where's the money going and to which denomination? After that you can decide where Obama's tithes are going I guess and can ask yourself whether Obama consulted Congress before his tithes with your money were made?

From our new SOS John Kerry we’re hoping to back up “The Islamic Republic of Iran ”?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmh7sK3BKAM



I suppose the USA teaming up with Iran was Israel’s idea? Wait a minute, no I’m pretty sure Iran stated that any attack on Iran from the USA would lead to the annihilation of Israel. I’m sure that was a really old report though right? Nope, actually it was May 30th, 2014-

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/181232#.U6YmcpRdWSo

Understanding that getting ‘armed’ and procuring weapons is the goal to benefit alliances, there is a very big incentive to “play” America’s possession of coveted weapons, so they can indeed be used against us. Al-Qaida provided a big opportunity in Libya to procure weapons from Obama over-turning Gaddafi’s revolutionary vision of a ‘gold standard’. You may recall we lost a U.S. President with the same ‘lofty idea’ with President John F. Kennedy. Its a rather interesting oddity to think Gaddafi was killed following Glenn Becks advice to invest in gold dont you think?

Surmising the snuggling up process with Al-Qaida lasted about as long as it took to get weapons that were then used to kill Ambassador Chris Stevens, how might that concern Americans in the snuggling up process with Iran?

People need to start considering the lengths and breadths and depths of opposition against the Constitution presented by someone who is indeed willing to pass out a fabricate forgery of his own long form birth certificate as an identity right smack in front of all America in the White House press core room and the line that is drawn straight to arming militants capable of a full invasion of the United States of America where your sons and your daughters are mowed down and slaughtered in the streets just like what is happening in Iraq right now.

If you don’t think that is the line being drawn right now, then I suppose you need only wait for the point to reach your neighborhood and oh yes, it will reach your neighborhood and then what law shall you cling to? Will it be the Constitution you have forsaken and thought so little of that then will suddenly become vitally important to you?

What point of history will you look back upon saying “I wish I had known, I wish I had shouted from the housetops, I wish I had supported a man who stood up for the qualifications for President irrespective of political party, because that would have made a difference?”

How many will needlessly die and be buried of our sons and daughters because we did not defend our United States Constitution? I implore your help as always and thank those who with courage that have begun to wake up their neighbors.

God Bless America.

In a Matter of House Keeping:
I would really like to thank every person who tunes in and shares my blog. We have sailed right past 140,000 to 141,378 today! Thank you and keep passing it on.

Cody Robert Judy

If you think “Truth” is worth it, support it and quit supporting the lie. That is the beginning of change, or we can just keep on going down this road and see where it leads with Obama. Which is it going to be?

TRUTH IS REAL

Post by Cody Robert Judy.

I'd sure appreciate your helping me out in the American Birther Campaign (ABC) Campaign for Cody Robert Judy for President 2016. Thank you for your consideration.

Cody Robert Judy
www.codyjudy.us
www.codyjudy.blogspot.com
YouTube: Code4Pres