Trisomy (technical term), or Down Syndrome (widely known), comes in many forms. The most common are Trisomy 13, 18, and 21. German technology in 1934 dictated only the strong should live. Right now, over 90% of those with Down Syndrome are aborted/killed. Over 99% of adults with Down say they are happy with their lives, but vast amounts are killed because their care is deemed too much of a bother for their parents.

We know Down Syndrome (Trisomy 21), has an abortion rate of about 90%. Trisomy 13 &18 are aborted at a much higher frequency because their likelihood of death soon after birth is much higher.

In a 1/12/11 ABC World News exclusive, Diane Sawyer discusses a New Prenatal Test for Down Syndrome Could Cut Baby Deaths From … .  Dr. Rossa Chiu, study author published in the Journal of British Medicine (BMJ), and “>Dr. Brian Skotko, (clinical fellow/genetics) Children’s Hospital Boston, both hail killing babies if Down is known. (1)

Diane Sawyer boasts this new Down test could cut healthy baby deaths. “Cut deaths” is quite a spin. She, and many others, want to terminate (abort) an early pregnancy just because they think the baby will be unhealthy?  The baby’s done nothing wrong. But many parents don’t like the baby’s disability, and probably the child might not live the normal 70 years a human would.  Let’s abort it.

How Nazi-like.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Wikipedia reveals physical defects some don’t feel its necessary to live with:

Characteristics               Percentage        Characteristics            Percentage

mental retardation                             100%                 small teeth                                    60%

stunted growth                                    100%                 flattened nose                              60%

atypical fingerprints                            90%                  clinodactyly                                   52%

separation of the abdominal muscles  80%              umbilical hernia                              51%

flexible ligaments                                 80%                  short neck                                   50%

hypotonia                                                  80%                  shortened hands                        50%

brachycephaly                                           75%                  congenital heart disease              45%

smaller genitalia                                  75%                  single transverse palmar crease       45%

eyelid crease                                          75%                  Macroglossia (larger tongue)     43%

shortened extremities                        70%                  epicanthal fold                                  42%

oval palate                                               69%                  Strabismus                                       40%

low-set and rounded ear                    60%                   Brushfield spots (iris)                     35%

———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

How soon many of us forget how the Nazis were famous for their race-based eugenics programs throughout their history. In “Anti-Papal Catholicism & the Rise of Hitler”, Anne Gardiner describes how many Nazi programs were based on US  forced sterilization already in existence, and eugenics laws practiced in California.

Many Germans conceived of a pagan-oriented movement using “race-based eugenic measures” to remove any “non-Aryan” influences from their population. If the Germans had won WWII, America would be practicing eugenics freely.

But the concept has been raising its ugly head again. It’s amazing how many people still believe killing the suspected inferior human will keep the human race flourishing.

The start—numerous statements of discrimination toward kids with Trisomy 13/18 by doctors. For example, a  letter  about cardiac surgery for a child with Trisomy 18, Dr. Praveen Kumar (Chicago) wrote about the surviving child, “Most people will consider this outcome extremely suboptimal if not completely futile.” (2)

In Canada, a senior ethicist asked a trisomy mother, “So what is better–abortion by dismemberment at 16 weeks or ask the mother to wait and we remove the baby to let it die in its mothers arms….that is not abortion.”  The mother was obviously horrified.  (3)

Genetic counselors in Canada say “almost everyone” terminates when the baby has a condition related to disabilities. The system is geared to identify, and terminate “imperfect” unborn lives.

Amniocentesis, an invasive test usually given at 18-20 weeks, carries a 1% risk of miscarriage. But companies like Sandisk and Sequenom have already been perfecting a 7-week non-invasive test for Down Syndrome. A simple blood test having a 98% accuracy for detecting Down, and a >90% death sentence for the baby.

They are talking major profits in this business of human perfection.

Even in Australia, another mother’s narrative was published in the British Medical Journal. In her case, she chose to carry her baby with Trisomy 18 to term. She had major problems just finding a hospital that would let her deliver the baby.

“Unacceptable morbidity” is typically used by doctors, but is always highly subjective. Some children born with Trisomy 13/18 are severely afflicted and are best treated with comfort care, but others live very happily for many years. Parents just want their their child be treated as an individual, not a genetic defect. (4)

The Nazi euthanasia program evolved from considering some lives unworthy to be lived. The Obama Administration is dangerously close to incorporating the same schemes.

That idea was eugenics, which actually heralds better living through genetic intervention. It is an idea fomented by  abortion and euthanasia.

If the mother decides to abort based upon the child’s imperfections, what road will humanity take?

From here, the future can be seen: what will happen to those depressed? To those with ADHD? To those with a very dark future, laden with poverty, a broken home, or no home? A humanity that chooses to reject children for their imperfections has either lost hope, the ability to accept suffering, or perspective.

If the mother makes the decision to abort based upon the imperfection found in the child, what road is legal abortion enabling humanity to take?

If we, as a nation, re-elect the Obama Administration, we may have turned down a road from which we can never turn back.

(1) http://seekingalpha.com/article/308172-sequenom-ceo-hosts-2011-analyst-and-investor-day

(2) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/4/754/reply#pediatrics_el_51619

(3) http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/dec/08121111

(4) http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/122/18_suppl_3/S665.short

———————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter

A fear has been implanted in uninformed America–Chemophobia-the irrational fear of chemicals.

“Trike” was a normal degreaser used for various metal parts. Many panicked over the thought of getting cancer from a common degreaser used in thousands of locations. Trichloroethylene (C2HCl3) was used so frequently, that typical names such as Trichlor, Trike, Tri, or Tricky were commonplace.

The big stick was the ominous label CARCINOGEN.  Of course, the documented TLV (Threshold Limit Value) is 200ppmillion. But the ACGIH classified it as cancer “not suspected for humans”.  To date, there has been no change to the exposure limit because the EPA cannot prove TCE exposure to cause cancers.

But 1 mile away, in sight of the writer’s house, lies a Superfund Site in Skyland (Asheville, NC). CTS of Asheville manufactured hearing aids and automotive parts. Before plating, parts were cleaned using TCE. CTS, vacant since the 1990’s, still worries about TCE contamination exacerbating the cancer scare.

The  site was assessed by the EPA in 1985, 2001, and 2006. In each instance, they concluded the site did not warrant qualification as Superfund. Finally, in soils under the building, the EPA found the highest TCE concentration (830ppm).

As a result, in 2008, EPA sampled 72 private wells. Continued samples of these wells revealed no  TCE results. Today, over 105 private wells are being monitored. Seven of those are considered to have TCE. However, the acceptable lower limit for TCE is 5 pp[billion], and is significantly lower than 20 years ago (200pp[million]). But there still has been no cancer.

Back in 1930, Wikipedia reports that for 20 years, TCE was used as an inhaler (tradenames: Trilene & Trimar), and an analgesic for millions. The maximum dose was ~1000ppm. This was extensively used in obstetrics, and especially during pregnancy. Taking these dosages relieved pain, but never resulted in cancer in any of the millions inhaling it. TCE was substituted for earlier anesthetics such as chloroform and ether.

Bioassays by the National Cancer Institute showed kidney cancer in some mice and rats. It was therefore reported TCE was “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen”, based on animals. One review of kidney cancer rated obesity and cigarette smoking as higher risk factors for kidney cancer.

“Reasonably anticipated” doesn’t square with “cancer not found”. To date, ACGIH has carcinogenicity “not suspected for humans”; mutagenic—not available; teratogenic–not available; developmental—not available.

US Superfund Sites (2010). Red: National Priority List, yellow: proposed, green: deleted (usually cleaned up).

The health risks of TCE have been studied to excess.

Here is a classic example of the EPA spending almost $50 million to cleanup the Skyland, NC, Superfund Site–unnecessarily. Multiply that by ~100x for all the TCE Superfund Sites that have been, or will be, cleaned up. Could a transparent case of chemophobia be worth that to allay misguided fears?

Looking at chemicals we see daily can be eye-opening:

Ethanol (grain alcohol) is manufactured, and has an LD50 (50% rats given 7060 mg ethanol/Kg weight–was lethal dosage).

Marijuana (Delta 1-3,4 trans-tetrahydrocannabinol) has an LD50 for rats at 42 mg/Kg.

Caffeine in coffee (3,7-dihydro-1,3,7-trimethyl-1-H-purine-2,6-dione), and has an LD50 at 355 mg/Kg.

Horse radish (allylisothiocyanate)has an LD50 at 339. Ibuprofen [2-(4-(2-methylpropyl)phenyl)propionic acid]has an LD50 of 1050, and is manufactured.

Exoplanet (for astronomers) is simply any planet not in this solar system.  Are any in that “goldilocks zone”, which give the capability of harboring life as we know it? Can we even see it, given its immense distance?

One must define “goldilocks zone” properly: [Habitable zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ].  That zone is considered the habitable area just far enough away from its sun, where it’s warm enough life can flourish, but not too cold to freeze water.

Astronomer Michael Hart’s computer simulations describe a habitable planet in the “goldilocks zone”. Its orbit must be almost circular, and must make the right sized orbit. Calculations indicate a 5% smaller orbit point to a runaway “greenhouse effect”, or a 1% larger orbit would have resulted in a glacier effect—the freezing of all oceans.  

The solar system must be free of large planets with elliptical orbits, which would eject or destroy other planets. Large planets with circular orbits are needed to clear out rogue asteroids that would strike inner planets much more frequently.

An inhabited planet has to be large enough to hold an atmosphere, while small enough so its gravity doesn’t crush inhabitants. The planet must have a moderate temperature. The planet must have a mass between 0.85 and 1.33 of earth’s mass, or within 2 billion years temperature variations would render the planet uninhabitable. [Extraterrestrials, Where Are They?, Second Edition, Edited by Ben Zuckerman and Michael Hart (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 217].

More importantly, a habitable planet must have some mechanism to keep CO2 from disappearing from the atmosphere. Liquid water begins a chain reaction depleting the atmosphere of CO2 [Ron Cohen, “Interplanetary Odyssey”, Science News (September 28th, 1996), p. 205].

Parts of earth’s surface continually sink where carbonate decomposes to CO2. It then recycles to the surface from volcanic activity, where it refills the atmosphere. We haven’t observed any other planet with similar tectonic activity.

Most extrasolar planets are too distant to detect their weather. Because exoplanets are invisible to the telescope “eye”, any atmosphere is examined by its infrared light, or heat. Infrared measurements are used to map the temperature of the entire surface.

But an observable exoplanet has got to be a transiting planet—it has to cross directly in front and behind its star when viewed from Earth. As an extrasolar planet passes in front of its star, it blocks out a small fraction of the star’s light, and a host of information about the exoplanet can be learned: size, temperature, orbit, etcetera. Because of their location in the plane of sight relative to their orbited star, billions of exoplanets cannot be detected yet.

Over 300 extrasolar planets have been located and measured by this method, and are called “hot Jupiters” for a reason. Jupiter has many characteristics similar to exoplanets. It is a gas giant, with a crust far beneath the surrounding gas.

The Coriolis Effect cause cyclones and anti-cyclones on Earth. Greatly magnified on Jupiter, these cyclones have a revolution 2.5x faster than Earth’s cyclones. Sheer distance makes cyclones on any exoplanets invisible.

Jupiter has many atmospheric disturbances, with stronger ones absorbing the weaker ones. This may explain the size of the largest spot on Jupiter—the Great Red Spot (GRS). Man has observed this spot for almost 400 years, or as long as the telescope existed. Over two earths would fit within this storm.

The GRS is anti-cyclonic in Jupiter’s southern hemisphere, and high pressure. It seems to be about 5 miles higher than other cloud tops. A hurricane on earth rotates clockwise, being low pressure. GRS however, has been shrinking at 230 miles/yr. But at half the size of the GRS, Jupiter also has the “Oval BA”, which appeared in 2000. This was the result of three smaller spots merging. Scientists determined the Oval BA has winds up to 384 miles per hour.

Jupiter’s Three Red Spots (5/23/08)

CreditNASA, ESA, M. Wong, I. de Pater (UC Berkeley), et al.

All three spots are in this image made on 5/9/98 (Hubble Space Telescope). Jupiter’s spots are probably indicative of large scale climate change. It is getting warmer near the equator. The GRS is also warmer. “Warm”, in this case, translates to      -250 oF. Surrounding temperatures are colder at -256 oF. Even that difference generates questions concerning global warming. Changes in Jupiter’s weather give rise to debate over perceived climate change on earth. 

In 1998, scientists decided to launch an atmospheric probe into Jupiter . It finally crumpled in 23x higher pressure than earth’s.

On Earth, anticyclones usually indicate fair weather. Jupiter’s anticyclones are also high pressure centers, while cyclones are low pressure. Jupiter is shrinking in size due to gravity. Actually a heat source, it radiates 1.6x more energy than it receives from the Sun.

Juno launched from Cape Canaveral on 8/5/2011, to begin its five-year journey to Jupiter. In 2016, many questions will be answered from Juno’s Jupiter encounter.

Is climate change a normal result of CO2 activity on Jupiter? Obviously not because of CO2, with essentially “zero” content. Runaway “greenhouse effects” can occur with a 5% smaller orbit in a “goldilocks zone”, but it’s never due to CO2. It’s always due to orbiting distance.

One almost has to be an exo-atmospheric-meteorologist to understand planetary weather. Likely, the science may have changed in the past few years.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Kevin M. Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net.

The Congressional Budget Office figures emerged Friday, and offered a far more dire outlook for Obama’s budget than the  administration predicted last month. The Projected deficit threatens Obama’s plans – politics – White House …, and is accurate even for a liberal Associated Press.

Auditors say this budget would produce $9.3 trillion in red ink over next decade. However, Budget Director Peter Orszag decided to spin the Congressional Budget Office’s economic projections: “they are probably more pessimistic than those of the President”. However, Orszag acknowledged, “…if the CBO projections are correct, Obama’s budget would produce unsustainable deficits.”

It’s almost impossible eliminating a $9.3 trillion dollar debt in ten decades. But Obama is not worried about total debt.

In his mind a debt will not be a problem if Socialism is there to save the day. The World Book Dictionary defines socialism as “…a system of social organization by which the major means of production and distribution, are owned, managed, or controlled by the government”. In other words, a total rejection of the US Constitution.

When the debt hits $9.3 trillion, each person in America will need to pay $31,000 just to eliminate the debt. Certainly, government can’t pay it. Obama won’t touch certain items for deficit reduction:  e.g., a) United Nations, b) 15 major US Departments (e.g., DoJ/27.2 billion/yr), c) anything providing abortions. 

Recent actions show exactly where Obama wants to go:

Obama is telling his audience that he will bypass Congress to enact as much of his agenda as possible through executive orders. He wants to implement policies through his (appointed) czars, and mandates issued by federal agencies. These strategies supposedly can get around any checks and balances established by the Constitution. Obama has already exclaimed publically: “We can’t wait for Congress to do its job, so where they won’t act, I will.”

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have committed unlimited amounts of taxpayer money to defend the unconstitutional Obamacare.  Now Dr. Donald Berwick (England’s National Health Service, appointed to run Obamacare), says rationing is inevitable. Obamacare is an unprecedented expansion of federal power and regulation.

Young people, and first-time voters were key to Obama’s victory in 2008. Stating “we can’t wait,” Obama announced executive plans for helping graduates with student loans. Current Unpaid student loans top $1 trillion. That debt will surely double with the relaxed restrictions. It seems obvious: News: Obama wants student loan payments lowered to shore up voting bloc .

Liberty Counsel shows many special interest groups (i.e., ACLU, Planned Parenthood (PP), GlSEN (Gay-Lesbian-Straight Education Network) etc., seem to continually get handed public funds. Planned Parenthood just hired Dana Singiser as VP for Government Relations. She had worked previously as a special assistant to the President in the White House.

Department of Energy’s (DoE) $535 million loan to bankrupt Solyndra. Another “green” company, First Solar received two loan guarantees just before the loans expired. Shortly thereafter, DoE sent an additional $4.7 billion in “green energy” loans to four other companies, and over $10 billion to 16 others.

Include a $529 million DoE grant to Fisker Automotive to build hybrid cars. But the cars are being assembled in Finland. In Massachusetts, Beacon Power received $67 million in assistance from the DoE, but has filed for bankruptcy protection.

Socialism forgets four things. 1) You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity. 2)  What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. 3) The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. And, 4) You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

                                                                                                               
The real questions are why Obama is spending huge amounts of taxpayer money, with little hope of receiving any back. It seems we’ve been on the road to Socialism for a few years now. Can anyone say “World Bank”?

Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net.

How could a valued breast cancer opponent morph into a charity not to get donations from those wishing to improve the outcome of breast cancer? Somehow, Susan G. Komen, turned into something feared deeply in pro-life circles—namely, death.

First, Komen is a huge contributor to Planned Parenthood (PP). In the last 5 years they have given over $3 million to PP.

As anyone in a corporation knows, all money donated goes directly to the company’s output. For PP, that output is abortions and contraceptives. Both kill a young life. Even if that money does not go to abortions directly, it frees up other PP monies for their abortions.

Second, Komen supports Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR). The Catholic Church has only 5 “non-negotiables”. Those are evil acts of which there are no mitigating factors. They are highly serious all of the time. One is ESCR. Another is abortion. They both take a life every time, and Komen Sends Millions to Embryonic Stem Cell Research Centers .

Third, there is strong evidence for at least a 40% increased risk for breast cancer from abortion, but Komen won’t admit it. Abortion and the birth control pill, sold by PP, are both risk factors for breast cancer. It is disheartening to see an organization allegedly searching for a breast cancer cure, supporting two sources linked directly to the disease.

With the Abortion-breast cancer link still being ignored , PP is making money from abortions as they skyrocket, and other services dwindle. It’s not good for business to tell women the truth about the abortion-breast cancer link.

     o   In 1986, scientists wrote a letter to the British journal Lancet, and acknowledged that abortion is a cause of breast cancer: “Induced abortion before first term pregnancy increases the risk of breast cancer.”  (Lancet, 2/22/86, p. 436).   

     o   The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, issued a statement in 2003 telling doctors to inform patients about a “highly plausible” relationship between abortion and breast cancer.

     o   Even in 2006, eight medical organizations recognized that abortion raises a woman’s risk for breast cancer, independently of the risk of delaying the birth of a first child.

     o  The Mayo Clinic shows oral contraceptives increase breast cancer risk 44% (Gundren Schultz; 10/25/06).

     o  In the 2003 NCI Workshop on Breast Cancer Risk, the study author Louise Brinton concluded that there was no association between breast cancer and induced abortion. But In 2009, Brinton admitted, there was a 40% statistically significant increase of breast cancer with induced abortion.

Does your cancer fundraising group tell women that the female breast does not fully mature from cancer vulnerable lobules, into cancer resistant lobules until a woman has a full term pregnancy? If not, they likely have no understanding as to why abortion and breast cancer seem to mix.

Per the Guttmacher Institute and Planned Parenthood, PP did over 25 percent of all abortions in 2008, a total of 324,008. In 2008, they performed zero mammograms.

Fourth, Komen has not been truthful with saying women can get breast health services including mammograms at PP. Many surveys have been conducted, and show no PP affiliates have the machines to do mammograms. Almost everything PP does revolves around abortion and contraception—the killing of human life.

The Catholic Health Association, and a so-called Catholic who supports Komen, offer a course on semantics to justify that support. Unfortunately, they need to look at the Respect Life Apostolate and their Position Statement on Susan G. Komen for the Cure. The real injustice is being done by those alleged Catholics misrepresenting the truth–what Pope Paul VI alluded to in 1972: “The smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.” 

Those who wish to donate to breast cancer research, have a plethora of smaller foundations that are pro-life, and do not support the destruction of embryonic human embryos used for research:

  o  National Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc.
  o  Vera Bradley Foundation for Breast Cancer Research
  o  Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
  o  Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer (ABC)
  o  The Polycarp Research Institute
  o  Click here for more options for breast cancer treatment.

Bottom line, the unsavory color “pink” seems to be plastered all over many products, because this is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. That will be the first sign Komen is involved, who provides funds to PP, which are used for abortions, and the pill. A definitive link from abortion, and the pill, to breast cancer has been established.

Can anyone say oxymoron? A breast cancer antagonist promoting causes for breast cancer? Sounds like the ‘smoke of Satan’.

We hope all who ignore the scientific research, including every fallen-away Catholic with a deaf ear to God’s obvious signs, come around to the truth.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has told the Obama Administration they’ve found enough oil under US territory that estimates 163 billion barrels of recoverable oil and enough natural gas to meet the country’s demand for 90 years. [Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/10/new-report-says-u-s-has-largest-fossil-fuel-reserves-in-world/#ixzz1ZAKRYXDD.]

Back in 2006, the Department of Energy (DoE) and the Mineral Management Service (MMS) both revealed the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) had enough oil to last at least another 50 years [Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf, 2006 (Summary Brochure)].

The map above is from a 2006 MMS titled “Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf”. Additional details are here.

That was well before the CRS report. In fact, the CRS report shows how the US leads all nations in World Fossil Fuel Resources. That includes Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran–everyone.

Obama’s plans seem to be perfectly outlined in the video provided by Prof. Terry Lovell of the Patriot Network. [Patriot Network Debunks Obama's Claim of 2% Fuel. | Barack ...]

The president of Chevron, Gary P. Luquette: Deciding Today on Energy for Tomorrow, gives a realistic approach to how we should proceed with these oil and gas finds. He knows that the oil industry already provides jobs to 2.1 million Americans directly, and supports another 7 million indirectly. Even though developing the OCS has been almost off limits, it could  create 160,000 new jobs–and provide up to $1.7 trillion additional government revenue.

Luquette doesn’t even mention the expected GDP increase, increased income tax revenue, reduced national unemployment and unemployment payments, decreased (or elimination) of potential terrorist threats, decreased (or elimination) oil dependence on other countries, generation of thousands of jobs dependent on the oil industry, and additional time to perfect energy sources such as fusion, fission, algae resources, solar, geothermal, and many others.

President Obama has been given this information. It seems his long-range economic plans may be somewhat different. They seem to fit into 3 major categories:

1) Plans for US to continue superpower status in the world are to be erased. The Founding Fathers’ intentions to establish a government that is a Representative Democracy have been nullified. Government now employs 16% of the people with almost 45% getting paid some monies, income tax is a certainty for a smaller and smaller percentage of the population, and more and more citizens now work for the government rather than the government for the people.                       

2) Plans for US to continue to be a leader in finding and refining gasoline continue to be diminished. The US is the only country in the world building no new oil refineries nor fission atomic reactors in the last 30 years. Obama has refused to drill in Alaska, and has curtailed all drilling in the OCS after the recent BP oil spill.

3) For The Claremont Institute – Edward J. Erler states that one of the proofs given in the Declaration was King George’s attempts to establish an “absolute tyranny” over the American colonies. He erected a multitude of new offices, and sent masses of Officers to harass our people and establish sovereignty over them. The number of regulations and administrators necessary to execute his plans are quite overbearing.

Under the Obama Administration, new regulations have become more than obsessive. In Obama’s boom in job-killing jobs – New York Post, Ramesh Ponnuru discusses how the regulatory burden is growing drastically. The New American illustrates how Obama’s Seven New Regulations Would Cost U.S. Economy Billions. And, when U.S. Senator Pat Toomey Delivers Weekly Republican Address …, it became painfully obvious that since Obama had become president, the number of regulations increased drastically. Regulations in the Federal Register now totals a humongous 49,000 pages.

In this new country, government first got its just powers from the consent of the governed. As a turning point in world historical consciousness, sovereignty no longer only belonged to governments or kings. Only a small portion of sovereignty was ceded (relinquished) by the people. It was the very origin of the idea of “limited government”.

Per Ehler, “The people always reserve (and can never cede) the ultimate expression of sovereignty–the right of revolution.” The Founders believed this right secures every other right.

Over 250 years ago, America was truly dedicated to limited government–the true legacy of the Founders. If Obama is re-elected, we all better be prepared for World Government.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net.