January 16, 2018

Why Constitutional Amendments to “Protect” Hunting Need The Correct Language

Many states have tried, some have succeeded, in getting a constitutional amendment to protect the right to hunt, fish and trap…or at least they think they have. Truth is, very few, and perhaps no state, has made a success out of actually protecting and guaranteeing the right to hunt, fish and trap. Essentially what they have done is end up with legalese, fit only for the law profession, that says the state recognizes that hunting, fishing and trapping are long held traditions and these activities have been used as part of a game management plan. The new laws then make people think this tradition is being protected, when it is not. And here’s why.

As an example of the wrong wording in a right to hunt, fish and trap constitutional amendment, the state of Maine, over the past few years, has bounced around half-efforts to get an amendment passed. However, I have opposed all wording of this effort because it’s fake wording that fails to provide the protection that I believe most sportsmen want.

Without the proper, tough and direct language, while there may be recognition of how hunting, fishing and trapping have been a part of game management and responsible use of natural resources, all attempts have failed to provide language that forces the state, along with their natural resources departments. or fish and game departments, to manage all game species specifically for surplus harvests. I might point out that this kind of tough language is generally opposed by legislators and in particular heads of fish and game departments. The biggest reason is because most fish and game departments have already morphed beyond sensible and scientific game management in favor of environmentalism’s “Romance Biology” and “Voodoo Science.”

Without this kind of tough and direct language, fish and game departments and/or state governments, can end hunting, fishing and trapping at anytime. With a growth and power of the progressive Left, a totalitarian social effort to end all hunting, fishing and trapping, mostly driven by an extremely perverse animal rights society, not only are fish and wildlife departments gradually, and sometimes not so gradual, are becoming more anti hunting, fishing and trapping, but the general electorate can end hunting, fishing or trapping with one effort at the ballot box with zero consideration for science.

An example of that is seen in British Columbia, Canada, where voters have decided to ban grizzly bear hunting because it doesn’t fit their ideological narrative. As was said by Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development Minister Doug Donaldson, “[It is]not a matter of numbers, it’s a matter of society has come to the point in B.C. where they are no longer in favour of the grizzly bear trophy hunt.”

Certainly this reflects the desires of the people, a product of a totalitarian democracy of sorts (two wolves and a sheep discussing what’s for lunch), where a simple vote can destroy long held traditions as well as making a mockery out of wildlife science.

While there never exists any true guarantee of a right to hunt, fish and trap, one does have to wonder if this same kind of referendum would have even been attempted if a true constitutional amendment existed with real power that said it is the mandated function of government to manage all game species for the purpose of surplus harvest and use of natural resources.

It is often argued about whether wildlife is part of the public trust. In my 65 years of life, I do not recall anyone suggesting that viewing wildlife, even out one’s back door, should be stopped or that managers should grow game species to levels that would be harmful to a healthy establishment of animal species. Why is it then, as seems to be the way of the “new” progressive society, that society has little interest in the aspects of the public trust when it comes to the public trust involvement of hunters, fishermen and trappers? In their pea brains, hunters, trappers and fishermen are excluded from any participation in a public trust.

A classic example of totalitarians at work.

Next time anyone begins talking about another proposed constitutional amendment to guarantee the right to hunt, trap and fish, please take a little extra time and honestly ask yourself if what is being proposed will do what it is being sold as doing and is worth any effort to get it passed. Contrary to what the politician will tell you. something is NOT better than nothing.

But, isn’t it now just too late? Does there even exist enough people who aren’t mentally destroyed and manipulated with animal rights and environmentalism, along with Romance Biology and Voodoo Science?

Share

When Lawmakers Strengthen Laws Against Hunters and Do Worse Crimes and Get Away With It Themselves

George Smith writes to clarify a new anti-baiting law for deer. Under current circumstances, I do not favor hunting deer over bait, although, like bear management, I think the decision should be based on the need to more effectively control the population of deer, of which Maine does not have a problem with, and that decision should be left in the hands of the commissioner. Why in one instance the commissioner knows best and in another he doesn’t?

According to Smith, a new law,  An Act To Increase the Penalties for Hunting Deer over Bait, was passed in the Maine Legislature that upon a second offense of baiting deer a person’s privilege to purchase a hunting license is revoked for the remainder of that person’s life.

Isn’t this just a bit draconian? In what direction is this Maine Legislature headed? We learned recently of the Legislature passing a bill that directs greater punishment against hunters as a group than any other group or individual in Maine. That is unlawful, and yet it passed and appears as though I am the only one who sees the new law for what it is. Maybe that’s why the Legislature gets away with their fascism.

And now we see the liberal, progressive mindset, that believes tougher laws stop criminals…or is it something else? Perhaps this is part of the brainwashing rearing its ugly head of the brainwashed masses targeting hunting simply because they have been taught to dislike and disapprove of the activity and will do what they can, outwardly and covertly to end the practice.

But that’s just one aspect of totalitarianism run amok. When you consider that at least one of the lawmakers, who is part of the whole Maine Legislative body, committed the crime of threatening the president and displayed his true colors as a bigoted, hate-filled, filthy-mouthed pervert, walks away after offering some kind of fake apology. Why doesn’t he lose his privilege to serve his state and country for life? Who wants a filthy hate-monger representing them anyway? But he keeps his job and can vote on and craft draconian laws like the one we see here.

Evidently, Maine is no different than any other state. Lawmakers, like all politicians, realize at some point in their careers that they are above the law and that the laws they make as fascists, to please the totalitarians for their votes, do not pertain to them. And so, Maine, like so many other places, is headed in the wrong direction.

There once was a day when any law was crafted around the seriousness of the crime. In this case it appears that it is more serious to put out some food for a deer than it is to threaten the life of the president. And in the other case, hunters are to receive greater punishment than any other group or individual.

Somebody’s got their heads inserted deeply where the sun doesn’t shine. And evidently we like it!

Share

Socially Acceptable Levels of Nonsense

It’s beyond foolishness that fish and game departments across this totalitarian nation – that thinks it’s a democracy – aim to implement “socially acceptable levels” of wild animals as it pertains to their legislative mandates to “manage” them. Wildlife management is a science – even though more often than not that science is severely fouled through Scientism, outcome-based pseudo science, environmental idealism, Romance Biology, Voo-Doo Science, or just plain political bias. Make way for “socially acceptable levels” of wildlife injected into what once was a scientific process formulated in the best interest of the people, the health of the animals and the desire to utilize a natural resource for the benefit of providing a food source and continuing a heritage that has been a part of human survival since The Great Flood.

In order to be transparent and forthcoming, let me say right up front that if the real, honest, scientific process determined that any and/or all hunting should stop, for the purpose of sustaining a game species, I would support that. I have in the past.

This “social acceptance” nonsense rose to recognition right along with Environmentalism and the perversion of Animal Rights. Much because the American person has been so misguided in their understanding as to what purpose animals have on this planet, that existence has risen to such a psychopathic level that we witness, as a common element within our society, of, not only humans living, eating, bathing, and sleeping with their pets, but offering these animals a perceived right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, equal to or greater than those of men. Utter nonsense and far beyond the realm of human intelligence.

Now we are witness to fish and game departments, caving in to the mental illness of equal existence of man and animal, that somehow it has become necessary to bastardize and pervert what was left of honest, scientific, wildlife management in order that people get to express their tolerance levels of wild animals – based on nothing but one’s manipulated perception, formulated on selfishness, greed, laziness and a myriad of other emotional factors and useless, non-redeeming social values.

Perhaps the only half-sensible level of tolerance that should be considered is that of public safety. However, are we to accept the idealism of some city slicker, who has never seen a moose, bear, turkey, deer, or downhill-side-badger, as a legitimate means of managing wildlife? Nobody wants to run the risk of running into a large wild animal with their car and getting hurt, even if they are too stupid to know when to slow down or to slow down at all. Few understand the real risk of confronting large predators due to distorted views allowed to be presented. Aren’t these issues something that should be decided by science and not socially progressive emotional clap-trap?

In what other things in our life are we asked of our “socially acceptable levels?” Please don’t confuse “socially acceptable” with economic tolerances, although in some wildlife management issues, some level of economic tolerance exists.

Does the EPA consult with the people, i.e. sending out surveys and questionnaires to get a sense of how much the public will stand for their fascists dictations?

Does the Department’s of Transportation, actively seek social tolerances with automobile drivers as to how many deaths by vehicular destruction is acceptable? Do they do the same before setting the speed limit, building or repairing roads?

Does the Department of Energy and Defense consult with you and I about our social acceptance of the number of nuclear weapons or the need for war?

Are we consulted with what our tolerances are with the military and U.S. Government spraying chemicals daily in our skies over us?

Even in fake, government shams like “Global Warming,” you and I aren’t consulted with as to what our tolerance level is as to the amount of carbon dioxide we are willing to “suffer” with.

We have been told for decades now that man explored space and landed on the moon. When was the last time you were probed as to your social acceptance of rockets in space and vast amounts of resources, time and money it took to pull this off?

Are we consulted for social acceptance as to how many trees get cut, fields get planted and harvested, or who gets to place their land in Tree Farm status?

This list is endless and yet, science be goddamned, it has become necessary for officials within our fish and game departments to consult with mentally ill animal perverts, even placing them on department committees, in order to figure out how much people can take. Who made that decision? What a joke. And how irresponsible can it be, to pretend to somehow balance sound and responsible wildlife management with the demands of environmentalists and animal perverts?

Maine is in the process of wasting time devising copy and paste game management plans so they can continue to be eligible for Federal funds. The latest laugh comes from plans to decide how many wild turkeys is “socially acceptable” to Maine people.

According to George Smith’s article, the Department wants to have enough turkeys for “viewing”: ““Ensure public satisfaction with the turkey population by providing hunting and viewing opportunity and minimizing conflicts with landowners.””

If you haven’t been to Maine recently, the traffic is extremely heavy with idiots wanting to view wild turkeys. Give me a break! Does anyone have a brain anymore? Are we so stupid as to forego everything sensible because we fear political correctness (censorship)? Cannot they see that this sham of “social tolerance” is nothing more than a guise to rid the world of the things environmentalists don’t like while protecting their own. This is totalitarianism and doesn’t even resemble the next worse thing – democracy.

If fish and game departments haven’t the collective brains to have an understanding of “what the market will bear” (no pun intended), then fire them…or better yet, don’t hire them to begin with. Science is first and foremost. To go out seeking public input about social acceptances within a scientific process is fools folly. They should be able to get a good sample of the real population’s tolerances by listening to the phone ring with complaints.

To pimp the rides of environmentalists is playing their totalitarian games. This nonsense needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. It’s a waste of time, energy and money. Fish and game departments should be applying the real scientific process to wildlife and game management, while considering the recreational value of such management, combined with public safety. If they haven’t figure this child’s game out yet, then what good are they? Get rid of all of them and find those who got a clue.

 

Share

Why Hunting is Doomed for Failure

To many, all things are relative. In other words, they are only capable of seeing the moment for what it is and without any kind of historic compass in which to gauge the direction of the wind, knows not the direction things are headed. I suppose there is something to be said about the eternal optimist, but then again there is a fine line between having a good outlook and burying your head in the sand.

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) emailed an announcement yesterday proclaiming that this coming Saturday, October 29, 2016, is opening day, for residents, of the annual deer hunting season. In that report, MDIFW tells readers that they think this year’s deer harvest might surpass last year’s – all because last winter wasn’t as severe as others – which sounds more like a sales pitch than anything scientific in which to hang your professional hat on. In addition, MDIFW appears to be proudly proclaiming that the average deer harvest for the past 8 years has been 20,900, as though that was something to be proud of. It’s dismal and we can expect to find more of the same, and worse, in coming years and I’ll show you exactly why.

Some hunters ask, what’s wrong with game management these days? This can easily be spelled out in a paragraph written by MDIFW in this press release. Perhaps some of you would like to print out a copy and carry it around with you. When, in the process of discussing why there aren’t any deer left to hunt and why in the past 20 years even spotting a white flag waving as it moves away is rare, you can pull out this statement by MDIFW and it answers all the questions as to why.

“The department manages white-tailed deer through regulated hunting, and controls the deer population in parts of the state to limit vehicle crashes, reduce instances of lyme disease and reduce property damage complaints. In other areas of the state, the department manages the deer population to increase opportunities for hunting and viewing.”

Several years ago a deliberate and planned event took place. It was an effort, by environmentalists, to take over fish and game departments nationwide. That is why “fish and game” in most state’s department titles have disappeared and have become, “fish and wildlife,” “natural resources,” etc. Game is not wanted in any titles as it signifies hunting, which in today’s totalitarian society of environmental fascists and animal rights perverts, is not wanted.

One of the leading culprits in this effort is the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA). What may have begun as an intention to pool resources for the good of state agencies, was soon co-opted by environmentalists who became successful in convincing Congress to give them a share of the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson excise tax money charged to those who purchase certain outdoor equipment, including guns and ammunition. They used this money for programs to end hunting, trapping and fishing. It became the goal of the AFWA to turn all state fish and game departments into managers of giant outdoor pet stores. Departments, complimented by newly brainwashed recruits from our institutes of higher brainwashing, took these environmentalist-trained rookies, and made them mostly view hunting, trapping and fishing as something to be tolerated because it paid their wages and took care of their retirement pensions. Through all of this, for the most part, it was, and still is, the license buyer who foots the bill and invests in a new entity of “natural resource” management, i.e. as is indicated in the paragraph above, everything but hunting, trapping and fishing.

Along with this, the outdoor sportsman has lost any consideration of input into the process of game management. Some believe they still have it, because they are promoters of environmentalism, and become a part of the rigged system actually believing they are contributing to the process of natural resource management and that this will somehow protect hunting, trapping and fishing. They are simply, contributing to the destruction of hunting, trapping and fishing.

I have always advocated for a separation of powers with state departments, including separating game management and administration from conservation. The license buyers will fund game management and the rest of the environmentalist-controlled world can fund “conservation,” thus protecting their piping plovers and ruby-throated cruple-poops anyway they want. This, of course, will never happen. One reason is because of the complete takeover of departments by environmentalists and animal rights perverts. In short, my investment in the process seems to be going everywhere except into deer hunting.

I no longer hold out any hope that this is going to change. There will be many more rounds of lawsuits and ballot initiatives that will result in more a more power granted the environmentalists. With that dismal prospect looming in my future, maybe it’s time for the environmentalists and animal rights perverts to pay up. They demand, and get, pretty much whatever they want, and I have to pay for it. If they don’t get it by directly lobbying our environmentally controlled fish and wildlife departments, because they can easily grab hold of a few million dollars, we (meaning hunters) are forced to spent even more money to fight these insane totalitarians in court or at the ballot box. They pay nothing and yet control fish and game management. I pay everything, and am at a point where there is nothing left for my investment. The price of my license inches upwards, while my opportunity to harvest a deer and fill my freezer continues to drop. And I am supposed to remain quiet and like it?

Nope! Sorry! Ain’t going to happen.

Most cannot, and will not, recognize what is known as incrementalism – that is a diminishing department one tiny bit at a time. They think all is well and good and that people like me are just complainers and should shut up and go away.

I, for one, am sick and tired of footing the bill and paying the way of the animal perverts, preservationists and environmentalists. I know that when the environmentalists are asking to pay up, they will demand more seats on committees and more power to control. They already have that. Recently we saw the MDIFW appoint the person who headed up the effort in Maine to ban bear hunting, to a seat on a committee that makes management decisions. This is insanity! What cost hunters millions of dollars to fight, they were rewarded by watching the leaders of the MDIFW hand over more control to these totalitarians. What’s the point anymore.

I am willing to say that the only reason hunters are tolerated is because they pay the bills. Yes, I know, the wildlife managers certainly don’t act like they know who pays their salaries and pensions, and as long as they don’t care, why should we continue to invest in something that soon will yield no return.

It’s a terrible business proposition with absolutely little future.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Share

Brady Campaign’s Lies About Toddlers and Guns, and Hillary Says “Heller” Was About Toddlers

Do you recall the Humphrey Bogart movie, Casablanca? In that movie is a scene in which German soldiers demand that Rick’s Cafe be closed down. In Rick’s, in a back room, gambling takes place. Rick makes sure that the head of the prefecture gets his share of gambling money.

During the scene in which the prefect, played by Claude Rains, blows his whistle and declares the bar will be closed until further notice, gets handed his gambling payoff and says, “Shocked! I’m shocked to find gambling taking place in this establishment.”

Some might be shocked but those of us with a smidgen of knowledge understand that totalitarian groups, such as the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence, lie, cheat and steal to get what they want. It certainly helps that they are supported by the U.S. Government to carry out their fascist agenda (did I ever tell you that historically fascism is the tool to achieve communism?).

It appears that in a brand new anti gun campaign launched by the puppets of the fascists, they use gun data of adults and claim it pertains to the number of “toddlers” killed or injured due to gun violence.

SHOCKED! SHOCKED I TELL YOU!

Meanwhile, the insane, cheating, lying, corrupt, murdering, sub-human Hillary tells people that the Heller v. District of Columbia Supreme Court case and ruling was about protecting “toddlers” from gun violence and that is why she says Heller should be overturned.

 

Share

How Much “Sacrifice” of “Liberties” is Too Much?

*Editor’s Note* – This is another example of the revelation to fascists and totalitarians as to the willingness to cede rights that some clown deems reasonable. I’ve written before that Maine’s Question 3 is, in fact, a referendum by the gun stealing lobby to determine how much Mainer’s are willing to give up, in order to keep some. Not so bright totalitarians have tried twice, unsuccessfully, we think, to ban bear baiting, hounding and trapping. But what have they learned? I’ll let you decide that. In their greed, they lost twice. They lost patience and perhaps for a good reason. They should have learned what Mainers are willing to give up in order to keep some of their bear hunting wishes. It’s no difference with guns and gun rights. Bloomberg and his coagulation of fools should be learning just how much of the Second Amendment – that amendment that offers no variations or concessions to practice – Mainers are willing to give up to keep some.

It always appears that in attempts to, not support the Second Amendment, but oppose those who hate it, perhaps in efforts to appear nice and reasonable, too often we read and hear their self-perceived reasonableness in restricting the Second Amendment. Is the same amount of reasonableness afforded other items on the Bill of Rights? This is the valuable information fascists like Bloomberg need to take into the next round. Instead of suggesting there is no need for “universal background checks” and that this proposal is complicated and unenforceable, why not a stand against background checks? We know they don’t work and what other constitutional right do we have to undergo a centralized government background check in order to exercise that right?

Instead, we compromise and will continue to compromise until there is essentially nothing left. In mathematics, if you keep halving a number, you never reach zero. However, if you take a perfectly good length of rope, a tool with many uses, and keep cutting it in half, eventually you end up with nothing worth keeping.

If you believe in your right to self protection and that you should have the choice to decide how you want to do that, then there is no need to be apologizing or seeking compromise.

“As a nation, we’ve already sacrificed too many liberties in the name of security to reasonably expect either. Mainers shouldn’t be willing to sacrifice any more of our liberties in the name of our own security, let alone to possibly, slightly increase the security of other people who are already pretty secure.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

If Someone Killed My Son, How Would I Feel?

Among the dense forest of facts, lies, opinions, propaganda, brainwashing, ideology, nonsense, ignorance and anything else that’s worthless, comes an opinion piece published in a Maine newspaper in which the author asks, “If there was only one firearm-related murder in Maine this year, and it was your son, how would you feel?”

That’s very easy for me to answer…and no I have not lost my son to being shot. The answer is simple and to the point. I would be extremely angry. Angry, yes, that I lost my son, but most angry because there exists totalitarian, non thinking, brain dead idiots, lead by fascists like Michael Bloomberg and blindly followed by those too ignorant to understand they are headed toward a cliff where they will be asked to jump off and they will gladly do it. Their actions forbid my right to choose. What gives them that right? It matters not what my choices are, the mere fact that such nasty, rotten people feel entitled to prohibit me or my son, or anybody else, from having the right to choose how they can defend themselves against savages, the product of an immoral, hedonistic, diverse, tolerant, secular society.

No laws, regardless of their intent, are ever going to stop the criminal. If you believe there are more criminals today than yesterday, do you think this is so because there are more or less laws? Are there more criminals because the existing laws are not enforced? Do you think there are more criminals because society produces criminals for various reasons? And, does it matter?

What matters is what I have the right to do. That right is the right to choose. Nobody should be able to prohibit my right to choose how to protect myself and my family. No laws are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals who want them. That is a fact. Denying it doesn’t change it.

Take away my right to choose, and I will be most angry at people like Michael Bloomberg and those who don’t think and will not think and will react to emotions thinking if they increase the chances of my son being killed with a gun is somehow the right thing to do.

Sometimes life sucks. Making it suck for everybody else doesn’t change your suck factor.

Share

It’s a Shame Really

I think that it is a shame that an organization like the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (SAM) is left with no money/resources to do the things a sportsman’s group should do. SAM was much bigger and better than fighting against animal rights and environmental groups, along with fascists like Michael Bloomberg. SAM used to have time and money to look after the needs of sportsmen, working with the fish and game department to make hunting, fishing, trapping, snowmobiling, ATVing, hiking, boating, wildlife management, etc. better and better all the time. No longer.

In the last ten years SAM has been zapped of all it’s resources and energy fighting against totalitarians who are convinced THEIR world would be better off by destroying the world so many Americans love and grew up with. Instead of making our outdoor recreation and sporting opportunities better, all that is left is the likeness of David and Goliath. As Goliath systematically weakens the little boy with the sling shot, until there’s nothing left to fight with, the giant, with much more powerful weapons, will prevail. Isn’t that all part of the plan?

Two anti-hunting bear referendums by hateful groups and now an evil man, who has surrounded himself with evil, brain-dead people, who are clueless as to what they are doing (most of them), want to further destroy your rights and freedom. What happened in this society that causes others to destroy that which is good, in the name of progress (that is what they call it)?

Bloomberg and others know that they have the money and power over little bothersome gnats like SAM. They will get what they want because they understand you better than you understand them.

In the meantime, SAM is hogtied, spending all it’s time fighting the fascist bullies. It is no longer a sportsman’s group but a small voice crying in a wilderness of Zombies.

What’s wrong? I just returned from a bicycle ride to Central Park (no not New York). I met perhaps a couple hundred people. I am not exaggerating when I say that not one of the people I saw was without a goddamn cellphone or some electronic device shoved in their faces – even all the Middle School children on their way to school. Zombies one and all. The world I live in, not theirs, that is the physical things around me, ain’t so bad. It’s interesting, sometimes pretty to look at. There are birds and other animals running about, and trees along with beautiful sunshine. The Zombies have left all that behind and cashed it in for their little mind-controlling toys – an instrument of destruction 100 times greater than the television set.

The fascists control those instruments of the Beast. They will convince the world that hunting, trapping and fishing are evil practices. They will convince the world that there is no need for guns. Central Government will prevail. They will control. Just keep watching your electronic device.

It’s a crying damned shame! We were told this would happen.

But don’t go look!

Share

ATF Chief Endorses National Database for Gun Owners

The deputy director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said this week that it was a crying shame that Washington politicians had failed to create a national database to track gun ownership in the United States. Thomas Brandon sat down for an interview with CBS’s Sunday Morning program and defended his agency against the claims of some who believe the Obama administration is out to destroy the right to bear arms.

“Public safety is the reason we exist; it’s not to take people’s guns,” said Brandon. “It’s to regulate firearms that can be misused. You know, we’re a small agency with a big job.”

Brandon said that job could be made easier if ATF officials had a searchable database of gun sales. Under current law, the development of such a database is prohibited. Critics say that a national gun registry could easily be the first step on the long road to widespread confiscation. Brandon, however, said that such opposition simply didn’t make sense.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Further Proof of the Totalitarian Dictatorship We Live In

Which will immediately be followed by responses of denial by the blinded masses!

If you have signed up for an account with “My Social Security,” undoubtedly you received an email from the Social Security Administration informing you that you will no longer be allowed to access your account unless you provide them with a text-capable cell phone number – and by the way the email also says: “cell phone provider’s text message and data rates may apply.”

At the least, this is an attempt to make sure the SSA has a copy of your cell phone number for whatever reasons you might choose to think they would actually need that other than “another layer of security.” (wink, wink)

At the meat of the issue is the lie that it has become necessary to “make sure you are the actual owner of your account.” They call this “multifactor authentication” (wink, wink) and we are told it is being done per “Executive Order” from the dictator.

Not only may “cell phone provider’s text message and data rates may apply” the dictator-in-chief is demanding that everyone has a cell phone. He must think everyone has one of his “Obamaphones” he has forced all other cell phone owners to pay for. This is simply another layer of forcing “free Americans” (wink, wink) into slavery – and you love it. Addicted to cell phones? Do you think that was simply happenstance?

So, what if you don’t have or don’t want to have or provide a cell phone number? Simple: “If you do not have a text-enabled cell phone or you do not wish to provide your cell phone number, you will not be able to access your my Social Security account.” For some reason the lying bastards fail to tell you precisely what that means.

“Where’s MY GOVERNMENT?”

Okay all you “Bread and Circus” monkeys! Give the crooks and criminals more of your personal information and bow down to the dictator’s executive orders. The bastards stole your money and called it Social Security Insurance. THE NEW DEAL! Now they are doing everything they can to make sure you can’t get any of it back.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK! JUST OBEY!

Share