Russ Gibb at Random


July 15, 2009

There is no center. That’s the problem. People often times wonder why our journalist, our lobbyists, our politicians are either on one side or another. Either they’re Democrats or Republicans. Republicans are on the conservative side. Democrats are on the liberal side.

But, there is no money in the center. You could try to write a fair story but then you’ll be condemned by the left and the right. Now if you write a story that is pro Obama, well the Democrats like you and you could probably get a job in their administration. If you write a story pro Bush, the Republicans will probably like you and you’ll get a job in the government as a lobbyist for Republicans. The whole thing is nuts!

When is the average American going to wake up? There is no money in the center that is why you don’t hear centrist views in this country. It is either propaganda by the liberal progressive Democrats or by the neo-con conservative Republicans. It is one side or the other.

The middle class, it is the middle of every argument. Sadly, it is hardly ever presented in our blogs, our newspapers, our television, or by our government.
Shame on us.



July 6, 2009


incredible shrinking cities

June 18, 2009

I read recently that some of the folks up in Flint had been talking to the Obama Administration about the idea of turning Flint into a city that has little cities within a big city. In other words, much of Flint is in decaying disarray. The city has lost a lot of citizens. There are hundreds of abandoned homes. Now they’re suggesting that they take great blighted plots of the city of Flint and downsize it, make green belts, and put new buildings into selective areas like planned little communities, which might rejuvenate them.

It has been suggested that Detroit may be a candidate for this type of shrinking of cities.The Obama Administration has picked up on it and I frankly think it’s not a bad idea. Although, I would like to remind people that Dearborn’s Mayor Hubbard tried that years and years ago when he attempted to condemn the Salina area around the Ford Motor Company, and make it into a green belt industrial park. The citizens of that area decided that it was an attack on their culture because many of them were minority folks who lived in the area. So they took it to court and they beat the Mayor.

Downsizing is not a totally American idea. They have been doing similar things in Europe for many years. If you look at the United Nations Habitat sites , they talk about shrinking cities and their idea of putting more bureaucratic planned cities throughout the world. Well, let’s see what happens.


Hello, here are some questions for you

June 8, 2009

How is it that Barack Hussien Obama was unheard of several months ago to most Americans, but is now the President of the United States?

Let me ask the question. Where did he come from? Let me ask it again. Where did he come from? Let me ask it again. Where did he come from?

Let me change the question. How did this happen? How did this happen? How did this happen? How is it possible that a practically unknown individual several months after his debut is the President of the United States? How did this happen? How did this happen? How did this happen? Oh, you think it’s a conspiracy? Oh, a conspiracy. Oh, a conspiracy…you bet!

Well let me ask you another question. Who is the money behind Obama? Who were the real money donators to Obama? It has now been announced, by the Obama campaign, that they did not make all their money from small individual computer donations. In fact, several billionaires - billionaires - billionaires were the main backers of Obama.

How could this happen that a practically unknown individual, Barack Hussien Obama, becomes the President of the United States in a very short time? There’s the question. Do you dare ask it? The question. The question. The question do - you - dare - ask?????


Here Is the Question for You

June 1, 2009

Now you’re all aware that I like to mouth off a lot on my website. I keep throwing out my opinions. Now it’s your turn.

Here’s a question I have for you. Why is it that our national politicians spend millions of dollars to run for an office that pays for a national representative $174,000 and a Senator $193,400 a year? Oh and by the way, House and Senate lawmakers are given an annual allowance of $1.3 million to $4.5 million a year to run their offices....?

Come on, tell me what you think. – russ gibb

Democratic Senator Carl Levin, and Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow


white honkies

May 30, 2009

Well, what can I say? Our Leader Obama nominates a woman, a Latino Judge, Sonia Sotomayer to the Supreme Court. We are told that her story is the American “dream” come true, except that she made a statement several years ago that she believes that a Latino woman would bring more understanding than a white guy to a judgment of the court. I’m paraphrasing that, but the bottom line is that it sounds like racism to me. Yes, racism. We are told by the media that that’s a no no. It can’t be racism if it’s a minority speaking.

It seems that today only white guys are fair targets for racism. Frankly, I’m tired of political correctness wherever I find it. I’m tired of being called a White this or a White that or a Black this or a Black that or an Arab this or an Arab that. It’s all nuts!

If you’re here in this country and you’re here legally you’re an American and that should be enough said. An American, with a capital “A”! You don’t have to keep perpetuating racism which a lot of our politically correct organizations seem to do everyday. Can you spell Acorn?

Frankly, I’m not impressed with her story, but our popular media are all swooning over her because they want to be seen as politically correct. So with that I say goodbye to the New York Times, LA Times, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, Time Magazine, and Newsweek Magazine. Because newspapers, magazines, and TV networks as you and I know them are all going to fold. It’s just a matter of time, a matter of time. Watch out , the internet is coming.

Have fun! - russ gibb


America's Nightmare: The Obama Dystopia

May 25, 2009

by: Andrew Hughes

After 8 years of the Bush-Cheney nightmare during which we saw the wanton destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, the cynical negation of centuries of Law designed to protect the most basic human rights and a foreign policy worthy of Genghis Khan, there came along the "Great Black Hope" in the persona of Barack Obama. The collective world consciousness turned uncritically to what was presented as a new era for peace, change and trust in Government.

Never before had one witnessed such an accomplished use of manipulation, propaganda, imagery and public relations wizardry to sell the public a man who was to take the baton from Bush and run with it in the race to destroy the economy, the rights of the people and help birth a nation totally controlled by those who have always lurked in the shadows of power. "Change" was promised and was delivered in the form of a deepening of the already Dystopic nightmare.

Promises were broken with no apology, the same creative legalese that infested the Bush administration, in the form of John Yoo and Alberto Gonzalez, was again used to deny justice to the inmates of Guantanamo, It was used to justify more torture, more destruction of the Constitution and more illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens.

The President that extended the hand of peace to the Muslim world has murdered hundreds of Pakistani men, women and children. The President who promised accountability in Government has filled his staff with lobbyists, banksters and warmongers. His Attorney General refuses to prosecute some of the worst war crimes committed in modern history and continues to give legal cover to criminals who tortured with impunity.

The country has been further bankrupted by the continuing theft of taxpayer money as the Wall St. campaign donors receive their quid pro quo. Obama has stood by idly as Bernancke states that the private Federal Reserve is not answerable to either Congress of the American public. The U.S. taxpayer is now on the hook for $14.3 Trillion and rising. Foreclosures and unemployment are rising with no meaningful efforts by the administration to alleviate the symptoms, never mind the cause. The new image of America is one of tent cities, lengthening soup kitchen lines, sherrifs evicting countless thousands of young and old from their homes, once prosperous towns descending in to an eerie stillness and an increasingly disillusioned populace.

The "War on terrorism" has mutated in to a control grid for an increasingly aware population. The foundation for this had already been put in place by Bush with the Patriot Act, Patriot Act 2, Military commissions act and numerous executive orders that strangled what was left of Posse Comitatus and the Constitution.

Homeland Security now defines "Terrorists" as those who believe in the Constitution, the first, second and fourth amendments. Returning veterans are being targeted for a denial of their second amendment rights. A "Terrorist Watchlist" of more than a million and rapidly growing, is being used as the basis for denying citizens the rights to travel and to work.

Obama is now mulling over the idea of indefinite detention without trial for U.S. citizens. This, from a teacher of the Constitution ! Bills are in congress to criminalize free speech on the Internet via the Cyberbullying Act which will make hurting somebody's feelings a felony. Just like the Patriot Act this will morph in to a criminalization of political free speech and any criticism of the Government.

"Cyberterrorism" is being used as a pretext to bring government regulation to the the last stronghold of unbiased information. Washington has realized that it's getting harder to get away with their Fascist agenda and are moving to control the field. The populace have become more aware of just what kind of "Change" Obama intended to deliver.

There has been a growing resistance on a state level with several invoking their 9th and 10th Amendment rights in a valiant attempt to stop the Federal Vampire from draining the last drops of blood, the last vestiges of Freedom and Hope.

This is the Dystopic Nightmare that America finds itself in today and each day brings new assaults on Freedom and Sanity. The framework for total control of the citizenry, the economy and the media is being built upon in a relentless aggrandization of Govermental power. Obama sits atop his new Empire still smiling that sickeningly disingenuous smile surrounded by his seasoned courtiers who have worked for decades to bring America in to this new era of the New World Order.

Andrew Hughes is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

I found this on Read it and think about it. Remember, I have voted for Democrats and Republicans. Today I am appalled at both political parties. God help our country.

- russ gibb


President Obama and the Unions

May 6, 2009

I’m a union teacher. Granted I’m retired now, but I still belong to the union and proud of it. In fact in my early days of teaching I got fired for starting a union in Romulus Michigan. It took men like Mike Berry and Roger Craig and the late Bernie Fieger to take the case to court and get me reinstated and then the next year I came to Dearborn. So don’t accuse me of being anti union. It just won’t stick.

Now I must say that I am a little concerned about President Obama and his cozying up to the union big shots. Now you got to know that there are business crooks, we’re told about that by the media all the time, but very little do we hear about union crooks. Some union leaders take the dues of there members and do what they want with the money. Frankley, this practice has been controlled under the Bush administration, but now under Obama, he’s loosening up these rules and the union bosses again will not have to disclose what they do with all the money. They’ll just say that we spent 60 million on “this” and not tell you exactly what “this” is, à la Bill Clinton

So much for Obama and his transparency. He’s paying back the unions for their support and they’re also working on the Employees Free Choice Act. Well the Free Choice Act really means that two or three union guys can come up to you in your home or anywhere and say “Are you for the union or not? “ Now in a public situation it is very hard to tell your fellow employees that you’re not for a union, or that you may feel better off without a union.

This is a strong arm deal that they are pushing. So much for fairness, and so much for Obama’s treatment of unions. If you haven’t figured it out, Obama’s in the union bag. Obama is paying back the unions for their support during his elections. No question. Now if you disagree with me fine, just write me and tell me your side of the story and I’ll be glad to put it up.


Allison, Take this !!!!

May 4, 2009


Obviously, you are caught up in the rhetoric of a rock star president.
Your ignorance of the direction this country has gone under democratic president’s shows.

Moderate thinking president? What are you talking about? Mr. Obama needs to have a teleprompter where ever he goes so he knows what to say. If he answers questions, he fumbles them. All presidents start out with high approval ratings. Mr. Obama has been president for over 100 days. What has he done? (1) He has increased government spending. (2) He has sold out the manufacturing sector to other countries. (3 ) He is cutting back on the military so that he can fund social programs and cut the debt he and the democrats are racking up. (4) Moderate thinking? It took him 4 days to decide to take out the pirates that were holding the captain hostage. Out of frustration, the Navy Special Warfare Officer in charge made the call and we got the captain back. (5) When he was a senator he voted for the TARP legislation. No oversight and no responsibility for paying back the money. (6) Just for the record, the national debt is such that every man, women and child are looking at a debt of $184,000 each. Can you write a check for that amount?

Something for you to consider, if Mr. Obama is such a sharp business man, then, why he is a politician and not in business? It seems that he can tell companies that they need to improve, etc but doesn’t give them any substance.

Ignored the warnings? The U.S. had the opportunity to get Bin Laden when Clinton was president. He declined, because he did not want to irritate all those people that have made him a millionaire since leaving office. Also, No one ever thought that a 747 would be used as a weapon. No one can plan against that type of weapon.

The current economic downturn that we are in is because of the lending practices that the Clinton administration forced on the banking industry in 1999.

Obviously, you in that79%. Look around you, the country is burning down and is moving toward a more socialist rather than democratic government. From the tone of your posting, it seems that you have never served in the military or left the U.S. You have no comprehension on what is to protect the rights that you have to post on a website.

--by Retired Military on 5/4/09 Lives: Detroit area


A reader asks, why ?

April 23, 2009

Mr Gibb, The question must constantly be asked:
Why have Democrats changed their tune?
Here's what Democrats were saying before the 2000 election of George W. Bush:

"[M]ark my words, [Saddam] will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them... Iraq [is] a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity... Some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal." - President Bill Clinton (D)

"[Saddam] will develop, deploy and use WMD." – President Bill Clinton (D)
"Our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program... Saddam must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons. Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological-weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors... I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again." – President Bill Clinton (D)

"Saddam's ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction poses a grave threat... to the security of the world." - Vice President Albert Gore (D)

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction... Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (D)

"[Saddam will] use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983." – National Security Advisor Sandy Berger (D)

"The problem is not nuclear testing; it is nuclear weapons... The number of Third World countries with nuclear capabilities seems to grow daily. Saddam Hussein's near success with developing anuclear weapon should be an eye-opener for us all. [Saddam] is too dangerous of a man to be given carte blanche with weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Harry Reid (D)

"If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." – Sen. John Kerry (D)

"Serving on the Intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it's just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons." – Sen. John Edwards (D)

"One of the most compelling threats we in this countryface today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threatassessments regularly warn us of the possibility that...Iraq...mayacquire or develop nuclear weapons. [Saddam's] chemical and biologicalweapons capabilities are frightening." – Sen. Dick Durbin (D)

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D)

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Sens. Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry in a letter to Bill Clinton (D) – All of them

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now - a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program." – President Bill Clinton (D)

"[L]et's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too." – President Bill Clinton (D)

"Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again." – President Bill Clinton (D)

"[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons; he poison gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people." – Vice President Al Gore (D)

"This is a man who has used poison gas on his own people and on his neighbors repeatedly. He's trying to get ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons. He could be a mass murderer of the first order of magnitude. We are not going to allow that to happen." – Vice President Al Gore (D)
Secretary of Defense Cohen appeared on ABC’s "This Week” in 1997 to talk about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. To illustrate the danger, he brought a five-pound bag of sugar.

Cohen: It’s important when we talk about weapons of mass destruction that we translate that into something that the American people, and hopefully, the world community can understand. If you take a five pound bag of sugar and accept – call this anthrax (holding up a 5-pound bag of table sugar). This amount of anthrax could be spread over a city – let’s say the size of Washington. It could destroy at least half the population of that city. If you had even more amounts ...

One of the things we found with anthrax is that one breath and you are likely to face death within five days. One small particle of anthrax could produce death within five days.

VX is a nerve agent. One drop from this particular thimble as such – one single drop will kill you within a few minutes.

Cokie Roberts: Would you put that bag down please.

Cohen: Now I want to point out – I will spill it on the table – point out that he has had enormous amounts and I’d like to go to some of the lies that have been told about this, because originally, if we could look at this particular chart, the original declaration of Iraq, he said he had small quantities of nerve agent for research. We found almost four tons of VX – that little vial I just showed you – four tons of it
Here's what Democrats were saying in advance of Operation Iraqi Freedom:

"Saddam has thumbed his nose at the world community and Ithink the President is approaching this in the right fashion." – Sen. Harry Reid (D)

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D)

"I will be voting to give the president of the U.S. the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands isa real and grave threat to our security... Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein... These weapons represent an unacceptable threat." – Sen. John Kerry (D)

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability,his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including al-Qa'ida members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons... I can support the President because I think it is in the long-term interests of our national security." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D)

"Hussein has chemical and biological weapons, there is no question about that." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D)

"According to the CIA's report, all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons. There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. John Kerry (D)

"In the four years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D)

"[It] is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States." – Sen. Chuck Schumer (D)

"We must eliminate that [potential nuclear] threat now before it is too late. But that isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow. ... [He] is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East. He could make these weapons available to many terrorist groups, third parties, which have contact with his government. Those groups, in turn, could bring those weapons into the United States and unleash a devastating attack against our citizens. I fear that greatly." – Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D)

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D)

"There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate. I also agree with President Bush that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must be disarmed, to quote President Bush directly." – Sen. Chris Dodd (D)

"We know that [Saddam] has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his Country." – Vice President Al Gore (D)

"Countering terror is one aspect of our struggle to maintain international security and peace. Limiting the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction is a second. Saddam Hussein's Iraq encompasses both of these challenges.” – Secretary of State Madelyn Albright (D)

"Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people." – Secretary of State Madelyn Albright (D)
The quotes above have been compiled from all over the internet.........It's not hard, since the Democrats made thousands of comments on the subject.

Again, why have they changed their tune?


Jump to Page:

Newest Webcasts




Copyright 2019