In 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) was leaving office. During his presidency he had  presided over the largest defense cuts in history. The preceding President, Harry S. Truman (D), had increased post-war defense spending by over 100% and when Eisenhower took office it was a staggering 70% of the total budget. By the time he left office he had reduced defense spending to just above 50% of the budget. Something the incoming President, John F. Kennedy (D), had attacked him for. On the eve of leaving office President Eisenhower gave his farewell speech. Two lines in that speech changed US History forever:

 

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist...”

 

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

 

Dwight D. Eisenhower (January 1961)

 

Following the warning to guard against the “military industrial complex” every President in both parties continued the process of relieving the military of its political power by relieving  it of it financing.  Except for a few small blips during Vietnam and  near the end of the Cold War, defense spending continued on a steady decrease until resent years under Bush and Obama where it has gone up ever-so-slightly.Our current percentage of spending for defense (just over 20%) is at its second lowest level since before the Lincoln administration and the Civil War.  JFK, who focused on maintaining a strong defense while running for President,  would be rolling in his grave if he could see what percentage of the budget is currently spent on defense.

 

Sometimes political rhetoric used during a campaign, said with tongue firmly in cheek, lead to almost comical actions years later when determining policy.  This was realized last week when President Obama, after pointing to the military as one of our biggest financial drains during his run for President, announced new “cuts” in defense that he claims will have a profound impact on our current financial crisis and help us to “get our financial house in order”.  Its comical when you consider that according to the US Department of Defense the whole military budget for 2011 was relatively small  $666 billion dollars. If you compare that to Medicaid ($269 Billion) and Medicare ($468 Billion) as scheduled for 2012 it might put things in prospective. Another way of looking at it... if you cut defense by 70% you would not have enough money to pay the interest on our $15 trillion debt for one year.

Source: US Office of Management and Budget - Historical Tables

The graphics provided shows a very interesting reality that Obama and the Occupied Democrat leadership do not want you to understand. On the left you can see total defense spending as a percentage of the budget (period 1950 -2011). On the right you can see over-all government spending as a percentage of GDP (note same time-frame indicated by box). It can clearly be seen with these two graphs that over-all government spending has continued to grow, while defense spending has been declining. This shows our current financial crisis has nothing to do with defense spending.

 

While I think we can all agree that the percentage of the budget going to defense under Truman (70%) was obscene, the reality is, what took place after he left office may indeed prove to be just as obscene... if not more so.  What other department in government shows such steady and dramatic decreases in their piece of the pie than does defense? The answer: NONE. Oddly, the cuts in defense spending over the last 40 years were not used to save the American people one dime. Instead our government bureaucracies were increased,  the welfare state was expanded, and to a large extent it was done at the expense of national security. I think 9/11 speaks volumes to this point. These cuts as prescribed by President Obama will be exactly the same.

 

Look at the graph on the right and take note of  the mountain of spending in 2010 and 2011.  What Global Warming scientists might call a “hockey stick” rise in expenditures, represents new commitments in spending made by the Obama administration.  That mountain is not only  new bureaucracies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and new monies for the  first small fragments of Obama-care, but most importantly... it’s all deficit. The reality is that in this election year Obama is trying to cover his @#$% by softening the blow of his policies. He is showing himself willing to risk national security and the quality of life for our military personnel and their families in order to gloss-over the destructive realities of his presidency.

 

When I was a Democrat campaign worker we used to have a saying when facts did not match our ideology... we used to say; “Remember the idiot mass.” . This was designed to remind us that most folks will believe anything you tell them. I can see that Obama himself must believe this too. After-all being the same age we cut our teeth on the same Democrat philosophies.

 

Mark Rader

 

I normally try very hard to keep my stands on political matters from being categorized as righteous or from being presented as the proper “christian” position. I have done this because I understand that many Christians are very willing to see government as a kind of god that is all seeing and all knowing and all powerful, as a tool to do good in the lives of those who need help. There are even those who argue that the communal existence utilized by Christ and his followers during his ministry is a good model for government... even though Judas was looting the treasury.  But seriously, I too believe that there has been and will continue to be a role for the government of the USA in enabling a better life for individuals and a higher standard of living for multitudes around the world. During the Christmas season there is always a renewed focus on giving so when I was asked recently during a stirring debate on government spending how I can possible reconcile my political view-point with my christian beliefs (in answer to the popular "What Would Jesus Do" mantra of the last decade) I was taken-a-back. I am going to try and explain MY position here, because I have no idea what Jesus would do. But I  will express how, as a Christian, I can feel comfortable with my position and why.

 

The Department of Management and Budget estimates that in 2009 the federal government collected more that $533 Billion in taxes that were targeted to help the truly needy (this doesn't include  Medicaid, educational assistance,  grants, or research studies targeting the poor which alone added up to another $700 billion). It's also estimated that of those monies [the $533 billion] only about 35% around $191 billion actually made it into the hands of the poor. The other 65% was vaporized by the bureaucracy. It is important to note here that if a private charity was to use 65% of its revenues on the administration of their programs they would be held up publicly for scorn and perhaps even prosecution. But in the world of Big Government these numbers are celebrated and there is constant pressure for even more money.

 

Liberals attack private corporations for their “obscene profits” but pay little attention to the 60 to 70% taken off the top by Big Government in programs intended to help the poor. Studies conducted by Robert L. Woodson Jr., on behalf of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, utilized government accrual records to show that government programs when compared to private charities where feeding the federal bureaucracy to the tune of 75% of budgeted expenditures.  It was noted that this is almost exactly the opposite of the 20 to 30% operating averages of private sector charities. In short this study proved what had been suspected for 30 years and that is monies intended for the poor are actually being used to support ever increasing government bureaucracies while the truly needed often go unserved.

 

So given these circumstances what might Jesus’ ministry show us? Well I think it is fair to assume based on Jesus’ words and actions we could equate such things as on par with the money changers in the temple who were attempting to line their own pockets in the name of spirituality. Only in this case we have Big Government  bureaucrats lining their coffers in the name of helping the poor. I just can't see that pumping more money into such a system is good stewardship of the hard earned money of our citizens or the prosperity that this nation has been given.

 

As Christians we are given the delicate chore of reconciling the Biblical teaching that …”if a man will not work he will not eat... with the larger calling to help the poor and to …”give to those who ask of you”...  It is true that Jesus told us directly to render unto Cesar what is Cesar's (pay our taxes) he never once however instructed us to petition Cesar for more social spending. Jesus’ solution to the challenges of the poor was a challenge to each of us individually. It was a challenge that you and I should reach into our own pockets and help those who we know are in need directly without expecting anything in return. But instead, what we have in the United States is a situation where Big Government is taxing a man’s work and supposedly redistributing those funds to the truly needy. In fact the current way of doing things has short-circuited what I feel was the intent and the blessing of giving.

 

Subliminally this process has eroded “giving”. Statistics show that individuals who support Big Government handouts have a tendency to give less in their personal lives. Oddly, or perhaps not, some studies have shown that those who have a socially liberal political world view actually give less than do those who are socially conservative in attitudes. In his book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, Arthur C. Brooks sites 15 studies that show that Liberals are about 10% less likely to give money out of their own pockets to help others than are Conservatives. Further the data showed that those who are religious are 25% more likely to volunteer their time to help the less fortunate.  Its important to note that this disparity is not related to income. Brooks also states that “In fact, most statistical analyses of the last several years show that Liberals on average earn more than do Conservatives who are thus giving from a less beneficial tax position”. Further, religious conservatives likely give even more that goes unrecorded because often their belief system causes them to give in private and in less public ways. Liberals on the other hand have a tendency to target their giving toward non-profits that are focused politically on causes they care about instead of organizations that are dedicated to helping the needy. [Note: Brooks numbers did not include money given to churches for building or in support of operations.] Surveys have shown that individuals who classify themselves as liberal have a tendency to think that solutions for the poor is a government responsibility thus they don’t feel compelled to give. This is the erosion I speak of.

 

Its not only Liberals who look to governments to address these issues. As a Conservative, and a religious one at that, I too find myself at times pointing to government solutions to address the immediate needs of the poor. But the truth about these solutions is really breath-taking in its level of misrepresentation. It is no less than FRAUD in the open light of day. WWJD?... I have no idea... but I do know that he would want us to REALLY help the poor instead of pretending that we do. Unfortunately, the reality is, that government programs while created with the best intentions usually quickly become all about preserving the bureaucracy instead of helping those who need it or doing the job for which they are created.  Therefore I support less government spending and more private giving because it is clear that Big Government has no self-control. The priority of governments will always be self-preservation, not helping the individual.  The bigger the government the smaller the individual and the way our government divvies up the money proves that.

 

Mark Rader

 

Back in 2007 I wrote an article focusing on the Iraq war and how successful it had been as of that date. (The article is here: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=106610242738456) While the article did not focus on it, there is a fact that I noted in the article that is very apropos for the recent announcement by the Obama administration that the US will totally leave Iraq, except for Embassy personnel, by year’s end. That reference in the article was this:

 

“Insurgency Fact (Italy): Fascist insurgency ended on Aug 02, 1980 with the bombing known as the Bologna massacre. The insurgency lasted 32 years. Also, we never left Italy, our military is still there.”

 

If history can be relied upon as a kind of evidence of what might happen in the future, then the removal of all US forces from Iraq will likely snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. While it is uncomfortable for us to look at these things in the context of winners and losers, it is a clear fact of history, going back 2000 years, that only losers leave.  But I will focus just on America’s experiences as examples and discuss the downside of leaving.

 

Let’s look at the major military conflicts of the United States during and since its founding and look at when we stay and when we leave and what happens:

 

Revolutionary War (Win) - The Revolutionary War was indeed the founding battle(s) of our nation in support of the Declaration of Independence. We all know how it ended. 25,000 US conscripts died during the war. Imagine what would have happened had the Revolutionary Forces withdrawn after the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown. (Short Answer: There never would have been a United States.)

 

The War of 1812 (Win) - This was actually Revolutionary War II. The British took Washington DC when US troops withdrew. What would have happened had the US forces not returned? What would have happened had the English forces not withdrawn?  Bottom line... the eventual loser ultimately withdrew and the winner stayed.

 

The Civil War (Win) - I think it is clear that had the Union simply withdrawn after the surrender of Robert E. Lee, the United States would have been plunged further into war or the South would have been victorious in their desires after all. Today there are actually more military bases and personnel in the southern states than in the rest of the United States. The US won because it did not leave.

 

Spanish-American War (Win/Lose) - The results of this war are very mixed, but if you study its outcomes you will see that when the US remained and did not withdraw they had a lasting victory. Where they withdrew, the ultimate outcome was a net loss.

 

World War I (Net Loss) - The complexities of WWI are immense, however, it is a very good example of what could happen in Iraq after a US Withdrawal.  No matter how you slice it, after the victorious powers withdrew, Germany rose to dominate the region and eventually went to war with her neighbors and sparked WWII. We withdrew and really bad things happened.  We returned to clean up the mess we made 20 years later.

 

World War II (Win) - WWII marked a lesson learned after the Spanish American War and WWI. When you win you do not leave. It also shows that by staying you are not in anyway occupying those nations, but you are actually helping them to succeed by maintaining their stability. Today, 60 years later, we are still in these countries in great numbers:

• Germany : 52,440
• Japan: 35,688
• Itally: 9,660
• United Kingdom: 9,000
• There are 820 military installations in 135 countries, most of which represent military gains during WWII. The winner did not leave.

Korea (Win) - After 50 years, 26,000 US personnel are insuring our victory in Korea. Imagine if we were not there. What if we had withdrawn?

 

Vietnam (Net Loss) - We can debate if we should have ever been in Vietnam at all. But the true tragedy of Vietnam was when we withdrew. Literally millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians were slaughtered. History calls it the, “Killing Fields”. We sacrificed too many men, but it pales in comparison to what happened when we left. It might be a window into what could happen in Iraq.

 

The Cold War (Win) - We have approximately 80,000 troops in nations that are former Soviet nations to insure our victory in the Cold War.

 

The First Gulf War (Net Loss) - Oddly, this mirrors the mistakes we made after WWI. General Norman Schwarzkopf was on the verge of seizing Baghdad and eliminating, once and for all, the threat that was Saddam Hussein. However, General Colon Powell convinced President HW Bush to turn and withdraw. This gave Hussein a stronger hold on the region and allowed him to proceed on many fronts for the next decade. With a history of killing even his own citizens and his vendetta against the Kurds it was no surprise there were 20,000 violations of the peace accords signed by Iraq after the US withdrawal. Iraq went on to create both an illegal air force and a long-range missile battery in violation of UN agreements. In the 90’s Hussein provided a safe haven for an injured Kolic Sheikh Mohammed who was the mastermind of 9/11. Hussein also paid award money to the families of killed suicide bombers and 9/11 terrorists. We would return to clean up this mess as we did after WWI.

 

It is easy to see, sadly, the reality is that Obama’s decision to withdraw from Iraq leaving only 160 Embassy personnel is very likely to fail. Since the defeat of Saddam Hussein, our real enemy in Iraq has been Iran. History shows us that when we withdraw a void will be left and someone will indeed fill that void. After WWI that void was filled by Adolf Hitler. In Vietnam and Cambodia it was Pol Pot and his killing fields. After the first Gulf War, Hussein endured and continued to plague the region and one might argue the US itself. Who will fill the void in Iraq this time?

 

The utter vulgarity of this decision is testament to the small regard Obama has for the blood, sweat, and tears of the US Military and the families of those who lost loved ones. If it fails, this will be a failure that the liberals will celebrate and blame on George W. Bush. But the reality is, the indignity of the 6000 dead is being perpetrated by one man and that man is Barrack Obama.  

 

Mark Rader

 

"The US government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone," -Chinese Government Offical Statement as presented  by the Xinhua News Agency.

 

You know you are in trouble when a communist nation is lecturing you on economic issues. Even the communists are not dumb enough to pretend that borrowing money when you are in $14 trillion dollars in debt is a good idea. In fact no one with a brain is willing to support "publicly" such a juvenile approach to economics as the approach the Obama administration has been following for 32 months. This administration, no matter how you slice it, is guilty of adding obligations, in their first 10 months, equaling more debt than Bush added in eight years and that includes two wars.

 

Now with everyone talking a good game, actions will speak louder than words. The sad thing is the Democrat party is closing its eyes and hoping it just goes away. The proof of this is that they have not even tried to pass a budget (even when they controlled all three legislative segments of government) in over two years and I suspect they will fight every budget attempt through the 2012 elections. They want to continue to promise a Cadillac, pay for a Ford, and deliver a Yugo. They are continuing to repeat the lie that soaking the "rich" will save us even though the IRS reported last week that even at an income tax rate of 50% all millionaires could only save us 24 days of debt (millionaire  incomes added up to just over $300 billion in 2010, current debt is $14.5 Trillion). They continue to refuse to face reality. They just can’t bring themselves to even offer a working plan.  Just this weekend Democrat talking heads were still saying we need to "raise taxes and increase spending to solve our problems". They don’t seem to understand that there is only about $17 to $20 Trillion dollars of US currency in the whole world! They have lost touch.

 

This nation is being slapped in the face with the failure of Big Government. It’s like a bad Halloween movie… the idea was shown to be a failure in the Jimmy Carter years, but it keeps coming back. They can try and blame it on Bush and on the wars but the reality is; Obama’s obligations, since taking office, have dwarfed both Bush’s deficit spending (which was too much)  and would pay for “Bush’s”  wars three times over, with money left over. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that if all the spending that Obama has signed off on is allowed to move forward, the deficit will add up to $26.3 Trillion.  Under Obama we are spending $3.95 Billion a day.

 

Repeat whatever rhetoric you have heard about … Big Oil… Military Industrial Complex... Evil “for profit” Corporations… none of them come anywhere close to the damage done by BIG GOVERNMENT. The reality is, if the CBO has their numbers right, every man woman and child in this nation owes $46,869.19 on the debt, all 311,000,000 of us. The debt ceiling “deal” next year will not even save us 3 days of deficit spending, it saves us less than ½ of 1% of spending for 2012. This is why the bottom is falling out of the Stock Market. This is why the US has lost its AAA rating in the world markets.

 

Recently a commentator quoted a line from the movie “An American President” when Michael J. Fox’s character said “The American people are so desperate for leadership they’ll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there’s no water, they’ll drink the sand.” .  It’s time to open our eyes as a nation and realize the promise of Big Government that Obama, Reid and Pelosi, offer is a mirage. I just hope we are not so stupid that we will just mindlessly go along and drink the sand.

 

Mark Rader

Read More Like This At:

RealityIsTruth.org

Having been a Democrat campaign worker and having been taught to lie and misrepresent our “enemies” character and positions. I am not surprised a bit that lies about the Arizona shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, being a conservative, or a Republican, or a Tea Party Member... whatever, has already incited violent threats from the left.  The most recent threat has come from shot victim James Fuller,  who threaten an Arizona Tea Party co-founder saying; “You're Dead!” and later calling the whole gathering a bunch of  "whxxxs".  Mr. Fuller had been following precisely the Democrat strategist handbook over the last several days when on Friday he said;  "It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle, and the rest got their first target,".  When he said this it had already been established that at best Mr. Loughner  was  non-political and at worst he was a pot-smoking, anti-war, truth-er who had a crush on the Congresswoman and became insulted when she did not think his mindless musings brilliant the one and only time he got to speak to her.

It is becoming apparent that the Democrat establishment is doing everything it can to irritate and exasperate an already volatile situation. Having set the groundwork with the lies about Loughner’s affiliations,  if and when new violence comes from either the Left or the Right they will be able to continue to blame everything on Conservatives. In fact this was one of the #1 lessons I was taught as a young Democrat... Just before you do something negative, accuse your opponent of doing it, then you have justified your own actions without your opponent having done a thing.

The reality is the Democrat Party’s propensity to lie as part and parcel of their political strategies are the single largest causation of the so-called “increased temperature” of political discourse in this country on both sides. A little Common Sense folks... you can’t calm the pot by stirring it!

Mark Rader

Read More Like This At:

RealityIsTruth.org

"The Nazi Party should not become an enforcer of public opinion, but must dominate it. It must not become a servant of the masses, but their master!"

(Adolf Hitler)

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...” (The Declaration of Independence, 1776)

In this age of “change” where every legal decision of the federal courts and every Justice of the Supreme Court is scrutinized to the Nth-degree it is important that each year we focus on the founding document of this nation The Declaration of Independence, something that never changes.

The true importance of this document is lost on most people and is rarely if ever thought of as something that is even relevant for today. But even after 234 years there is no document that is more important to our Republic. Why? Because every document created by our government, every decision made by our courts, every law passed by our legislatures, every proclamation of our Presidents, every dollar spent by our institutions, and indeed the Constitution its-self must be filtered through the precepts of the Declaration to find their validity.

Just before his death Thomas Jefferson wrote: “This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion.” (May 8, 1825)

That document, intended by our founders, to be the “...expression of the American mind...” represents, even today, the mind of the citizenry. Current polling shows that the vast majority of Americans today agree with each of the precepts espoused:

1. All are created equal.
2. All have “God-Given” rights that can not be taken away by men or institutions.
3. All have a right to Life.
4. All have a right to self determination or Liberty.
5. All have the right to pursue happiness without interference.
6. Government derives ALL of its power from the governed.
7. The people have a right to alter or abolish this government if these aspirations are denied.

Today in the year 2010 there is a small vocal minority of people who hate these aspirations and are constantly working to weaken or eliminate them. There are groups who want some people to have “special” rights under the law.  There are those who want to drive God behind closed doors and out of the public discourse. Still others who wish to deprive life to the most innocent and helpless among us. There are many elites who want to dictate how we live our lives. They want to tell us how to spend our money by forcing us to purchase things we may not want or need. They want to use the legal system to requiring that we think, feel, and believe things that we may not agree with, all of which violate our right to Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

It is important that we the people, of all political persuasions, require that our judges, our Legislators, and our Presidents understand that we “require” them to use this filter. That every decision they make, every action they take, every bill they propose, and every document they sign MUST meet the aspirations of this ageless and timeless Declaration. Each year we should use July 4th as our annual Declaration of Independence from obsessive, oppressive, and controlling government. We must exercise our right to alter and abolish the directions of our government as we boldly act with the most powerful weapon given us by our founders...our vote.

Not since the Nixon administration has there been such a high level of dishonesty by an American President. Even in the last few days there have again been examples of how this President and his Congress have decided that the average American is so stupid that they can just say anything and it makes it a reality.

This President is of my generation and he cut his teeth on the same rhetoric and misconceptions of the Democrat Party that I did. He obviously believed every word while I on the other-hand rejected them as an affront to the liberty envisioned by the founders of this nation. We were told that: 1) Its not what you know it is who you know; 2) Its not what you do it what you appear to do; and 3) The average American is uneducated and thus unable to consider, understand, or have valuable input into the complexities of a modern Social Geo-political life. If you watch you can clearly see that these precipices that are so deeply intrenched in the Democrat party produces a self-important elite class who feel they have the right and the responsibility to control everything in society, even if this means you have to lie, cheat and steal to get it done.

In the last week there have been two examples of this Democrat mentality that is so smoothly executed by the President. On March 26th the President announced what he called "...the most comprehensive arms control agreement in nearly two decades". On March 31st the President announced "...the expansion of offshore oil and gas exploration...". However in the tradition of "Its not what you do its what you appear to do" these two events show clearly how stupid the average American is perceived to be.

Comprehensive Arms Agreement

The most comprehensive arms agreement in two decades appears to reduce nuclear weapons but the reality is that is reduces only American stockpiles. Annalists believe, and have reported for 10 years, that more than 60% of Russian stockpiles are inoperative, have been disassembled or are in various levels of disrepair. As the Soviet Union crumbled so did the funding for the vast Soviet arsenals. Nuclear weapons are very sensitive and require a high level of maintenance to keep them functional. The Russians have not done this maintenance and it is generally belived that they have already decommissioned and warehoused more than half their stockpiles. This was indeed one of the benefits of winning the cold war. Fundamentally what this means is that these so-called "arms control agreements" cost the Russians nothing because they are negotiating away weapons that have already been decommission while at the same time the cost for the US is real. The only thing these agreements accomplish is making the US weaker.

Expansion of Offshore Drilling

The President listed a host of areas that will be opened to new drilling. Including areas up and down the East Coast from Delaware to Florida, along the eastern Gulf of Mexico and even in parts of Alaska formally off-limits (except for Alaska its worth noting that these areas are being drilled by the Chinese and other country's in International waters already). It sounds great right? Well kind of. The reality is that this plan actually bans drilling in these areas until 2012 (ironically the year President Obama will be running for reelection) and reiterates long held prohibitions in the areas with the largest oil reserves New Jersey to Canada in the east, the Pacific coast from Mexico to Canada in the west and the Reserves that are larger than any in the world (including Saudi Arabia) at Bristol Bay in southwestern Alaska. It is almost assured that there will be NO drilling in the planned areas before the 2012 elections and it is likely that Obama will resend his plan in order to solidify his base in that election year.

We must stay alert and see through these smoke-and-mirror games that are an intricale part of the Obama administration. As Harry Blackstone Sr. , an early 20th century magician, perfected the art of provide his audience a distraction to the eye so they did not see the trick unfold this administration invariably will do the same to distract the uneducated, idiot mass. As we watch the distraction we turn a blind eye to his efforts to turn control of ever increasing segments of society to the government.