Search This Blog

Monday, May 24, 2010

The all new smarter better Big Government

A brief video Based on Mark Fiore's smarter than you. A government that wont fudge up America. Certainly wont ruin our economy.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Failure of government health and nutrition mandates

A little something I would like to add on in light of government health mandates and the government failing. (not surprisingly) This concerns the failure of role of government as nutritionist.

Some of you who are old enough may remember old cartoons and commercials from your local dairy council and other nutrition advocates that were shown in the 70s and 80s as well as commercials from Bush the first's presidential council of physical Fitness that premiered on Nickelodeon advertising healthy living, exercise and nutrition.

The kind of nutrition advertised 30 to 20 years ago would be balked at today however. In the 80s and up until the late 90s the ideal diet was a diet of 5 servings of fruits and vegetables and a diet low in fat. (Not just animal and vegetable fat mind you but every kind of fat there is.) As well as a diet high in carbohydrates. You heard that right. The food pyramid of that era stated that we needed mainly a diet of grain cereal oatmeal and from it carbohydrates which was thought to be energy.

Today we know now that carbohydrates are as deadly as what we now call bad cholesterol. But it was not known then. As a result, obesity rates spiked. America became the fattest nation in the world. What was thought to be a crisis of calories and fat was really stemming from the advice our government, thought to know what is best was giving us. And the fed us the wrong information.

Carbohydrates it turns out was complex sugars that lowered metabolism, stored fat lay out bad cholesterol in your arteries and made cancer causing free radicals. Enter David Atkins and his Atkins diet which turned nutrition and the food pyramid upside down. Now, it was eating more meat and less grain. This diet though partly correct also fell flat.

Today government is sweeping its errors under the rug and advertising a new pyramid. Eat more vegetables and fruits cut out grain and meat as well as sweets. The liberals no doubt used their clout to advertise the cut back on meat in favor of animal rights activism. Still, it shows we can't always be dependent on government.

Today America still suffers obesity. The government is still advertising on media and in schools the above mentioned wisdom. Though one wonders if there may still be errors in what is being fed us by our government. worldnetdaily writer Doctor Arthur Robinson, Ph.D., explains more on how the government is corrupting science in his article. We highly recommend this and others for future reference as well as a similar article by Chuck Norris on government intrusion into how we eat.

Ray Stevens: Illegal immigration illegal everywhere but the USA

If you're thinking about illegal immigration be careful because in some nations breaking the law is frowned upon. IMAGINE THAT!

But as Ray Steven's new video points out, Its only racist when illegal immigration is banned in the USA. In fact we must reward them at our expense!

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Lee Doren on the Leslie Marshall show

Chef Ramsay, animal rights activists, envirowackos and communists want to mess up your kitchen and control your food.

In an article I posted on my blog and expanded on freerepublic I mentioned that Chef Gordon Ramsay demanded that government establish dietary standards and force people to eat what THEY thought was best and to punish them through taxes and other means. In particular he attacked parents of obese children. Many of these children in fact suffer from other problems genetic or organic that lead to their obesity.

For those unfamiliar, Gordon Ramsay is a world class chef and celebrity known for outbursts and a short temper as well as a filthy mouth. Lately he has also begun to show political clout demanding that government become every one's head chef. A politician running your kitchen essentially.

This mentality that government should control our food has also come out even more elsewhere from the liberal media. Time Magazine for example advocated government control over farms to curtail meat production and to focus more on organic growing. It decried meat production as unsanitary harmful and a cause of global warming and that we must go vegetarian for the sake of the environment.

I have come across similar arguments in other news sites and even in magazines. The articles reeked of animal rights activism and the myth of global warming. Environmentalists and their political allies want to butt into your kitchen and dictate what you can eat and when. The biggest arguments used involves the environment and global warming. The articles claimed that producing meat produces greenhouse gas not only from the animals themselves but in cooking them as well. Calls ranging from heavy taxes on meat to mandates for organic farming.

While it is true that some of the livestock in America could be raised and bred better, the solutions exclaimed by liberals would only make matters worse. Mandates for organic farming and raising taxes would lead to rising costs for food. Time Magazine even admitted that such policies meant we would have to sacrifice and tighten our budget for the sake of cows and the environment since organic food is more expensive. Not only that, environmental controls proposed all because of the unproven theory of global warming would cause food costs to jump even higher. Even the price for non organic food would jump.

The New York Times featured a similar article by MARK BITTMAN using similar slogans. Not only that comparing American meat consumption to oil consumption. Bittman, a vegan portrayed the American meat industry in a negative light. Not only that exaggerating the energy cost of meat as well that the fecal waste is bad for the environment and even COOKING IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT! In other words, simply BBQing a steak on your Weber is ruining the earth's ecosphere! NUTS!

The impact of following the environmental gurus and the socialists is worse than can be imagined. While wealthier countries would be eating less the 3rd world impact would be much worse. In fact the majority of starvation going on in the world whether in Indonesia or in Africa can be attributed to environmentalism. Children in Africa starve because they are not allowed to use pesticides to kill locusts that eat much of their crops. Not only that, many are dying from malaria infected mosquito's. Then there's the animal rights activism in India that has lead to over a third of lost food from rats and insects. In addition, Brazil and other countries are preventing grazing and planting for the sake of the rain forest. While it can be said that the loss of the rain forest is not so good, the policy of halting grazing and planting all together is even worse. That's not all. This as well as government subsidies for ethanol and synthesized fuels (Which liberals whine still create global warming.) Has inflated food prices in the third world.

The United Nations and the liberals however don't want to hear about it. In fact they want even more controls over our food supply. Controls that are eerily similar to what happened in Russia and China in the last century. This was when Stalin launched is 5 year plan to seize farm land and establish state control over food and when Mao did something similar with is great leap forward which converted farm land into industrial zones. All in all the 5 year plan was a five year failure and the Great leap forward was a great leap backward. Scores of millions died of famine and millions more were killed for resisting or suspecting of resisting. That and Both Mao And Stalin scapegoated others to deflect blame and had them killed. This has always resulted when the state controls food. But Liberals don't care. they want more control.

And it is already happening right now EVEN IN THE UNITED STATES. For the past century, American farmers many of whom used to be independent have lost their independence and even their farms. Big corporations have also used this opportunity thanks to support from big government to create an unopposed monopoly which if it continues could bottle neck the supply and inflate prices. Farms have also been under attack from massive local and federal regulations and taxes. Then there's health regulations. Bans against trans fat foods for example which may or may not be good for you. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats have also used the new Obama care mandate and their power grip to regulate food as well.

According to Worldnetdaily commentator Bob Unruh, Obama and Democrats passed several bills that would also ban salt in food (Even though new evidence proves it might not be that bad for you.) And have passed through the house a bill that would set up new fees and regulations that would bankrupt farms, supermarket chains and suppliers creating a food shortage and higher costs. H.R. 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 Would set up unnecessary unsound regulations that would regulate your food based on unscientific health findings. It could lead to a catastrophe similar to the famine in the Ukraine during the 1930s. All because of the false theory of global warming and for the sake of animal rights.

Other food regulations have cropped up quietly. For example Santa Clarita California is banning toys in fast food meals and Michelle Obama under her own liberal guilt is establishing a child hood obesity task force that wants to tax deserts. Not only that Democrats want the FCC to ban advertisements for meat and what they consider to be junk food.The liberal socialists are just getting started and already it looks as though America will be going hungry for sure. All for the sake of animal welfare, and so called global warming.

In light of these facts it shows once more, government doesn't know what's best. Especially in light of farming and nutrition. But the communist Democrats don't want to hear about it. It looks as though we will see famine here in America. Something unheard of till now all because of government regulation.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

New movies defending Capitalism by HTWW

Barking moonbat theater presents: Letters from a leftard

The following are from a series of letters that came from a youtube viewer named sherkey. A liberal nut job if ever there was.

You mean Bush that took a surplus from Clinton and tore up the country to financial ruin.that Bush. The one that did not have the honesty to keep war spending in the federal budget , but rather put it in a emergency supplemental bill that Bush who allowed schools, mosques and fir houses to be built in Afghanistan and Iraq While New Orleans burned. That Bush that did not have the balls to raise taxes for the two silly wars we were in, but borrowed from China, again and again and again. That Bush who signed a new prescription drug benefit that was not funded. that Bush who ignored pay as you and deficit neutrality that Clinton did to make a surplus. that Bush was declared business bankruptcy twice in his lifetime and went Harvard business school and still had huge deficits. Reagen = large deficits
Bush I = huge deficits
Bush Baby II= massive, massive deficits all on his watch

Little child, stand on the side of the road and let progressices run the country. If people wanted to get rid of social security, unemployment and medicaid, they would have voted in huge majorities of republicans again and again, but what happened democrats have enjoyed that luxury

Good luck teaturd and Drill baby Drill

That is so funny, you told me to spell correctly and you misspell yourself HAHAHAHHAHAHA

As opposed to Reagan 10.8% Unemployment double digit unemployment, and quadrupled the deficit, (you spelled deficit, deficient hahaha)

As opposed to Reagan who actually made millions of illegal aliens, American citizens in 1986 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

As opposed to The Bush clowns and Reagan who gave trillions and trillions to farmers for their crack welfare payments and their votes HAHAHAHAHA

As opposed to Reagan and the Bushes who failed to win the war of terror and drugs (ie crackheads like you ) HAHAHAHAHAHA and Bush baby II who took crack cocaine before he was 40. he was for it before he was against it HAHAHAHAHHA

Obama signed into law Guns in national parks, No republican can say that HHAHAHAHA

Reagan giving chemical weapons to Iraq early 1980's (Saddam Hussein) HAHAHAHA

Reagan = Selling arms to Iran, see Iran Contra our mortal enemy HAHAHAHAHAHA

Bush 1 and 2 like Reagan created massive massive deficits

Jimmy carter = A stump of a fool like the two Bushes and Reagan HAHAHHAHAHAHA

If the majority of Americans wanted no social programs like Social security, unemployment and Medicaid, they would have kept in republican majorities for a long long time Guess what? they did not HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

mainestategop = dumba**


If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one, but he is in praise that Obama signed a law allowing guns in National parks

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat, but he pokes his business into other peoples business, ie, The FISA act, and gay marriage

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks of ways to skew the intelligence i.e Weapons of mass Destruction

A liberal (Obama like Reagan, ) brings Russia to the table and reduces nuclear arsenals and takes his time and decides the surge in Afghanistan will work and does

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly bangs the door stalls ie Larry Craig (R) Idaho, and Mark Foley (R) Florida uses government computers quietly to solicit homosexual activities

If a black man and Hispanic are conservatives, they see themselves as independently successful, and uses the RNC general fund to go to strip clubs and spend money for conventions in Hawaii.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about Limbaugh who broke the law doctor shopping, and Nixon who broke thousands of laws.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he only watches fox news channel, and limits himself and the same fox news who are biased and set up the 912 project that is the Teabbagers org.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he becomes a democrat and believes in Jefferson separation between church and State

If a conservative decides he needs health care, and he is 65 years and older, he gladly puts his hands out for his social security and Medicaid. If he loses his job, he appreciates the unemployment that he gets from the Government.

If a Conservative is a farmer, 100% of farmers are conservative, he gladly accepts the welfare handouts that are in the trillions and trillions, while condemning the poor and minorities that get the welfare also
Fair enough on the spelling. You know you mentioned Libraries.......This is another taxpayer funded enterprise so you see government can work outside of the constitution. libraries are not mentioned in the Constitution so this social idea works out fine, agree?

If Government has no business in marriage, especially gay marriage, then Government has no business telling women what hey have to do with their bodies. that is why Roe V Wade is there, and I see that the republicans did not do anything to overturn it.

To me, anyone can exercise their first Amendment rights as far as parades are concerned, if this means having parades like the Irish, the Italians and the Mexicans do as well.

Reagan, granted did good in bringing Russia to the bargaining table, but can you praise Obama for doing the same thing last week?

As far as people getting their news from whatever ideology, to each its own, but if you just watch fox news then it is slanted. Are MSNBC and CNN slanted? Of course, but it is wise to shuffle through all the slanted stuff that ALL news does and seek the truth.

Sorry Fox news is slanted, because who sets up the 912 project? Glen beck and that becomes biased news. Sean Hannity, Neil Cavuto advertising the April 15th teabag project and then going live on April 15th last year at the teabag party that are only opposed to Obama. That is very very slanted. What if MSNBC did that or CNN, you would accuse them of slanted journalism. Also do you really think these newscasters care? No because, all they do is sell their wares and junk non stop to the teabaggers. If CNN or MSNBC newscasters sold their liberal crap, you would go off the head..

you cannot tell me there is a difference between welfare for the poor and welfare for the farmer? You generalize when you talk about the 8 kids that some one of color has. Welfare reform done in the 1990's by the republicans and Clinton gave them a 5 year window in their lifetime, and I am alright with that. the only difference is that generations of farmers love that crack welfare. there is no difference. period and taxes do not paint the picture. I am talking about the farmers who have distain for liberal governments but are not principled enough to send the money given to them back. that is hypocrisy plain and simple.

You say Social security is bankrupt. I remember All Gore talk about a lock box, and you all laughed at him and bush raided it and took a lot out. His policies that have got us into the depression in the first place did away with all the jobs that always put money into it. Bush = no lock box.

Also you lament about the government going bankrupt. bush funded the war by not raising taxes, and borrowed heavily from China to be precise. Bush kept the $2.3 trillion debt of the war outside of the federal process, i.e the emergency supplemental . Obama took that and put all the emergency supplemental into the actual federal budget for the first time thus raising the government debt in the federal budget.
You say families and churches need to be involved? Are you kidding me. Of course your Christian ideology leaves out atheist who are Americans also. typical reasoning. You people on the right do not believe in abortion, but you are all unwilling to help the ghettos of America deal with this problem. You say " the farmers work for a living as opposed to the 30 year old slut grandmothers and their 8 bastard kids with bastard litters of their own who refuse to work" Again, you oppose abortion, but condemn them and give them nothing. You say also "Families and churches need to be involved?" that worked out well in the States that got hit bad with hurricane katrina. bushes non response to katrina proved that that crap of families and churches do not work but the federal government has to be involved also. look at the flooding in the midlands currently. national Guard units and federal departments like homeland security are involved. please tell those people to just rely on their families and churches. tell then not to rely on rescue workers from FEMO and the helicopters, and boats and emergency medical tents set up to help the citizens.

You did not complain when the same government you do not want to help your fellow Americans spent billions building mosques, schools, and firehouse in Iraq and Afghanistan and the handing out of American taxpayer dollars to the warlords to bribe them. i would rather have waste spending it on Americans by Americans instead of over there too people who will always hate our guts. You see theocracies do not work over there and you want that to be the law of the land here in the United States.

You talk about China and we will become a fiefdom? Well thanks Bush for borrowing trillions and trillions from them. The gulags and stripped pajamas scare tactics you mention always, do not work as your kind tried that in the 1950's ala McCarthyism and it will not work now.

You say that I will have guilt because of what is happening? Why should I? I think the guilt is on your side. the hypocrisy that your side shows is quite amusing. I saw the Searchlight protest. the signs say "hands off my Medicare"? What ? So you accuse the government of socialism but yet you continue to take SS, unemployment and use Medicaid monthly? How is this principled? It is not. I would have more respect for your side when you turn back in all those social programs you denounced with your silly teabagger protest

you mean the illegal immigrant that Reagen naturalized? All those years that have passed by and the American people could have voted republican teabaggers in for as Rove said a permanent majority. Guess what you had power 1994-2006. You did not repeal those social programs such as social security, unemployment and medicare and only tackled sill y things like the Terry sciavo incident. You were immature and get drunk wit power. that is why for decades Americans have voted in democratic majorities. If they wanted change they would have kept you in power. guess what? They did not. Also drudge reports had a piece that 80% of teabaggers under the age of 65 years of age are taking unemployment checks. Go stand to the side clowns while this great President takes care of business.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Bear in mind folks THIS is the kind of constituency we have in America that voted for Obama. We are in serious trouble. Can't even spell right to.

Friday, May 7, 2010

Howtheworldworks Lee Doren exposes fraud and failure in stimulus bill

As it turns out the administration of Obama lied about the numbers and it turns out the stimilus wasted our money while producing no new jobs.




Dianne Feinstein:

views 5,571
views HowTheWorldWorks — April 21, 2010 — TWITTER: FACEBOOK: WEBSITE: http://www.LeeDoren.c... HowTheWorldWorks — April 21, 2010 — TWITTER:



Cooking the Books:


Global Warming Video Removed:

Gangster Gov't:

Who knew what?:

Media Keep Out:

Are They Racist?:

Donny Deutsch of Air?:

Ban Salt:

Monday, May 3, 2010

Welcome Back, Carter

The right to vote is more of a responsibility.

THis is a article I wrote 2 years ago. I thought I'd touch it up a bit in light of the elections coming up and in light of what's been going on.

A week ago I was at McDonald's ordering lunch. It was very busy and there was a large crowd present. I ordered the food and waited around for a few minutes. While I was doing so, a manager and another crewmemeber were getting ready to put the flags up on the pole. The manager showed him how to fold the flags up and they folded up old glory into a nice triangle with loving and patriotic care. While they were folding the McDonald's flag, a funny looking woman in her thirties with two tots in a carriage walked up to the counter where the US flag was and exclaimed in a squeaky and stupid voice, "Oh! That lookth jutht like the flag they give to famlieth of veteranth after Bush sendth them to die in Iraq and take away their benefits!"

Everyone nearby looked at her for awhile and then paid no attention to her. I began to ask myself, just where is the father of her kids and what does she do for a living anyway? From what I gather this dingbat is another one of Maine's many welfare recipients who can't amount to anything and are either too poor or too stupid to leave to get a better job and instead cancel out my vote and suck on the tit of Maine's enormous government. This woman was completely ignorant that the reason we are scaling back veterans benefits is to make way for massive social programs for lazy bums and housing projects filth like her who are idiots. I started to imagine just how the kids are going to grow up and cancel out the votes of my own children as well.

With that in mind I began to lay out the plans for this essay and thought, its time we go back to making voting a responsibility and a privilege rather than a right. One of my writers pointed out an 18th century quote from an English gentleman named Edmund E Blackadder the 3rd that sums it up:

Blackadder: Give stinking morons like Baldrick the right to vote and we'll all be back to worshiping druids, death by stoning and eating dung for dinner.

Baldrick:Oh! I'm eating dung for dinner tonight actually.

Blackadder:It hardly does sound fair, Look at Manchester, population 6000 electorial roll 5. Not a lot of people can vote, Women, peasants, the insane, lords...

Baldrick: That's not true, Lord Nelson has a vote!


In addition, one Lord Melchett (Or was it the Duke of Wellington?) Had this to say:

Give them an inch and they'll take a foot, maybe a leg.

Jokes aside there is some meaning in this. If we continue to allow people who are uneducated, immoral lazy byproducts of government schooling, secular humanism and pop culture to vote, we will be going bankrupt and have less freedom than we have now. Its already happening. The politicians and judges we elect share the same sentiments as the people before mentioned.

Long ago in America the founding fathers, men from different backgrounds were political and philosophical geniuses who recognized the necessities of religion, morality and responsibility and freedom against tyranny and dependence on government. They did little to debate on who should be eligible to choose their leaders. There were certain regulations in some states such as the poll tax and literacy tests but it was found that they were biased towards certain groups and they didn't last. One of my friends pointed out debates on other blogs that only those who pay taxes who are not mentally incompetent or of certain privilege be allowed to vote but also pointed out that Pelosi and Obama could use that to make conservatives ineligible to vote and take over the courts, the congress, the senate and oval office and drive this country to the ground. Just keep raising taxes and have the American psychiatric Association define conservatism, defenders of the constitution and opponents of large government and taxes to be a mental disorder and that's that.

There is naturally a better way to sort it out. Sensible solid criteria that can be given out to filter out those who are moral, educated and responsible from those who are corrupt, immoral and ignorant regardless whether they are rich and poor. Criteria I have mulled about. Bear in mind they are just proposals. I am not saying this is exactly how it should be done but close to it.

First of all, recipients of welfare, and government subsidies as well as certain people who work for the government should be excluded. If you are a single mother with 12 bastards living in public housing, you should not get to vote. Get a job, a husband, get your act together, and put some of your brats up for adoption then you can vote. If you are a business executive, CEO, manager, or executive of a company that receives subsidies, no vote. Get your act together, plow more of your profits into your companies and hire more workers, create more innovations and then you can vote again. In some cases employees can be exempted. If you are a case manager, bureaucrat, agent or politician, no votes for you. You can keep your job and work for the taxpayers, or you can get a new job and vote again.

This should also apply to others on the government payroll. Police officers, Firemen, doctors in state hospitals or beneficiaries of Obamacare, teachers, public defenders, judges, District attorneys ETC. You are receiving taxpayer money to do a job for we the people. You are receiving funds from our hard work. We don't trust you to vote for politicians who will give you a raise while our cities and communities are in the pits. We the people will decide if you deserve a raise. Also government employees should either be banned from forming unions or their unions should be severely regulated since they are getting their money from taxpayers, many of whom are in the rears.

The only exception I believe to this rule is the military. These men and women are doing more than receiving money they are putting their lives on the line to stay free. We don't want uneducated lazy parasites taking from defense to fund their laziness. Also some exceptions should be made for recipients of SSI and SSDI. Mainly elderly voters. Although it would depend on many factors. Then again its best to leave that alone.

Second of all people who are evil and corrupt should not be allowed to vote. I recall Sean Hannity interviewing college kids in Marxist universities who don't know a damn thing about how the world works. They know nothing about history, they don't even know what happened on December 7th or what the constitution says. They do believe that socialism is best, that 80% of the wealthiest Americans (Or for that matter anyone who works) Should be taxed redistributed to those who won't work, they believe that no one should be allowed to protest or publish without government approval, they believe religion is a mental disorder and that anyone who does not agree with them in even the tiniest way is a racist sexist fascist Nazi who should be put to death. I believe an written exam on the Constitution should be in order for these people. Immigrants and new citizens must learn it to become citizens. Those born citizens should understand how America works before taking up a ballot.

People from other countries such as Mexico, Brazil, China, the Ukraine, Poland, Germany, Japan, Algeria, Yemen, Portugal, Britain and Togo land and who become citizens are required to know, and many of these people go on to becoming outstanding citizens in the community. Meanwhile our own children grow up stupid, lazy and the most they can land is cleaning up puke, flipping burgers and mopping aisles. These kids who work retail use cash registers that tally up numbers for them since they are too stupid to count add and subtract, paid for by us thanks to Public school. Yet they get to vote for idiots who ruin our nation.

Again, one possibility should be a test given before anyone can register to vote. The test will be a sensible one, multiple choice. You need to know about how the government works, how our constitution works, why we have the freedom we have ETC. People who support gun control, speech codes, protest zoning, socialism, compulsory public schooling won't be eligible. When they get educated, when they learn to be wiser, then they can vote. Then again liberals could pull of the same thing.

Individuals part of organizations that are openly hostile to our way of life such as the Communist party, the Nazi Party, the Ku Klux Klan, Islamic Jihad, La Raza, Mecha and other trash should also not get to vote. Instead they should be considered dangerous individuals and a threat to freedom. There is a way to differentiate between which group is not of that criteria. Keep in mind I'm talking people who are openly hostile to us and our way of doing things. I'm not talking about people who show some leftist views that some people disagree with like Food not bombs or the council of conservative citizens or some other nutcase groups. They can vote if they are eligible. Were talking people who openly hate us and preach for our destruction. In the olden days communists and other people couldn't vote or work in government. We should go back to that.

Finally people who commit certain crimes should not be permitted to vote. People who are dishonest, who are unscrupulous and who harm innocent people should be barred for a long period or for the rest of their lives. A lot of felons don't want law abiding citizens to be armed or to be protected by the law. The reason criminals have more rights is because we let them vote for evil people who want to "understand them" or "have sympathy for them."

Please keep in mind this is not totally full proof. We planned this out to be fair and decent in allowing those who are qualified to vote without allowing for loopholes for evil to use to take away someones freedom. But if we did use this, we would have better people in office, less taxes, more freedom and more jobs while people like the stupid woman I mentioned would be staying in their public housing on election day fuming about Ronnie McBushitler, complaining that America is the worst place in the world, and how people of different races and backgrounds are of Satan.

In Conclusion, some sort of system must be in place to prevent America from descending into socialist despotism. Although it must be done carefuly.