Monday, December 31, 2012

Think You Live in a Free Country? NEW UPDATE

Think You Live in a Free Country? NEW UPDATE:

This post has nothing to do with numerology, but is too important not to talk about.

If you think you live in a free country, check out website by E.J. Moosa at THE NAKED TRUTH. Read the Comments, they give important information on how to combat this Orwellian intrusion of personal information and liberty. Some of it is wrong. Like the fact that the Census Bureau must go onto another group of 250,000 people every month. This seems not to be true. They just keep coming.

If you haven’t received this monthly "rotating" "random" Census in the mail, you will. They contact 250,000 every month. It is addressed to Resident. Some comments from the above blog tell of people being called on the phone by name four times a day for an entire month. How is this random selection? It sounds like the Census Bureau knows very well who lives at the residence and might be targeting people. Is this being used like a modern Nixon Enemies’ List?

Since this American Community Survey (ACS) rotates every month when the unelected bureaucrats finish, do they begin again until time for the regular 10-year census? Their own website says all citizen are contacted every five years. AND, the questionnaire gets bigger all the time. It is up to 78 questions.

Census Bureau doesn’t want to rely only on the constitutionally mandated ten year Census when it means creating permanent government jobs. One has to wonder why it was enacted in the first place. Much of the information is good for corporations to know, so they know who to target for their products. AND, the information is not private. It is public information.

Congress passed the law in 2002 Title 13, U.S. Code, Sections 141 and 193 as changed by Title 18. It imposes a penalty for not complying that is up to $5,000 and jail time. This was signed under G.W. Bush’s watch. Under President Obama, the bullying and intensity to pursue our personal information that leaves citizens open to identity theft and home-invasion. The questionnaire asks what time do you leave for work and what time to you come home, and how long does it take to get there.

One mailing on top of the other comes to homes, letting no time pass when received. According to comments from victims at the above website, phone calls and home visits deluge citizens. Some workers are understanding about those who do not wish to participate, but others are outright bullies. Who is to say that nefarious individuals will not join the forces of Census Takers/Information Collectors in order to get useful information that allows them to break into homes while residents are away.

This is what big government brings. Are we to have the world of Orwell’s "1984," where no private jobs exist, only government jobs? Only two classes: government workers or ex-Proletariats. A world where workers like Winston Smith are kept in line using his most feared phobias? In his case it was putting his face into a rat cage so they could eat it off. He complied.

Putting pressure on Congress may stop it. My retiring U.S. Representative’s office told me that they tried to end funding because of how it is being used against Americans. Unfortunately, with the new Congress, the Bills must be readmitted.

If you want to keep America free, you need to contact all of your members of Congress, Senators and Representatives to tell them to repeal this Orwellian law. Is this, yet, another law that Congress had to pass so they would know what is in it?

Get your Senator (202) 224-3121 to vote YES on Rand Paul’s bill H.S. 3079, and your Representative (202) 225-3121 to vote YES on Ted Poe’s bill H.R. 931. Also, ask them to become co-sponsors. These Bills may be under new numbers since Bills must be readmitted with each new Congress.

Below is the list of invasive questions compiled on THE NAKED TRUTH website by columnist E.J. Moosa: However, the questionnaire is up to 78 now.


Questions to the American Community SurveyPhone Number including Area Code
Age and Birth Date
If I am of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin
My race
What type of house I live in
When my house was built(year)
When I moved into this house(year)
How large is the lot?
Is there a business on this location?
How many separate rooms are in this house, apartment, or mobile home?
How many of these rooms are bedrooms?
Do I have
Hot and Cold Running Water?
Flush Toilet?
Bathtub or shower?
Sink with a faucet?
Stove or Range?
Telephone Service?
How many vehicles of 1 ton or less are kept at this address?
What fuel is used to heat this house, apartment, or mobile home?
What was the cost of electricity last month?
What was the cost of gas last month?
What was the cost of water and sewer for the past twelve months?
Did I receive Food Stamps?
Is my house, apartment or mobile home part of a condominium, and if yes, what are the fees?
Do I own the house with a mortgage?
Do I own this house free and clear?
Do I rent?
Do I occupy without rent?
What is the monthly rent for this house, apartment, or mobile home?
How much do I think this house, apartment, or mobile home would sell for?
What are the annual property taxes?
What is the annual property and flood insurance?
How much is the regular monthly mortgage?
Does that include the property taxes?
Does that include the insurance?
Do I have a second mortgage on this property?
How much are the monthly payments on all second and junior mortgages?
Where I was born?
Am I a citizen?
Have I attended college or school in the last three months?
What is my highest degree or level of school completed?
If I have a bachelor's degree, what is it in?
What is my ancestry or ethnic origin?
Do I speak any other languages besides English at home?
How well do I speak English?
Did I live here 1 year ago?
Do I have health insurance?
What type?
Do I have difficulty hearing or am I blind?
Do I have difficulty doing physical, mental, or emotional conditions that make it difficult for me to do
   errands alone, such as shopping or visiting a doctor's office?
Am I married?
Did I get married, widowed, or divorced in the last twelve months?
How many times have I been married?
What year did I last get married?
Am I a grandparent responsible for a grandchild living here?
How long have I been responsible for the grandchildren?
Have I ever served on active duty?
If so, when?
Do I have a VA service-connected Disability rating?
What is that rating?
Did I work for pay last week at a business?
Last week did I do any work for pay?
At what location did I do this work?
What is the address?
How did I get to work last week?
How many people rode with me to work?
When did I leave my house to go to work?
How many minutes does it usually take?
Who was my most recent job with? Name and location
What kind of work do I do?
What are my most important activities or duties?
What are my wages for the last twelve months?
What is my self-employment income for the last twelve months?
What are my interest and dividends(even small amounts)?
What are my social security or Railroad retirement amounts?
What are my Supplemental Social Security Income amounts?
Did I receive any public assistance or welfare payments from state or local welfare offices?
If so, how much?
What was my total income in the last twelve months?"


I’ve attached a copy of a letter that I sent my three Congresspersons. I go into great detail how this is destroying America. The above the questions have nothing to do with apportioning Congressional representation.


Dear ________:

The Census Bureau is turning into a worse bully than it has ever been. I reedited this letter after reading all 78 questions. Initially, only the few I read were upsetting. After reading them all, I’m furious. Many of the questions are simply inane. The questions speak in third-person as if one is informing on one self, or soliciting a second party as The Agency threatens to contact neighbors if "Resident" does not answer this surveillance form. For example:
Question 2: "How is this person related to Person 1?"
It has an "X" already marked in a box, saying that it is Person 1. The stupidity of this is obvious. It doesn’t state that it is an example. It is serious.

Furthermore, question No. 6 is racist. The questionnaire is extremely detailed about ethnicity, but when referring to Anglo-Americans, Caucasian-Americans it only asks if they are White. Doing this began in 2010. This shows the level of hostility that those who are coming up with the questions have against people referred to as White. No one on this planet is white. Even Albinos have a pinkish blush to their cheeks from blood running through them. It seems to be reverse racism being used to offend those who really had nothing to do with their angst, but only institutionalizes hostilities with vindictiveness to past injustice.

Many of the questions Person 1 would not even know, nor the other five Persons, or would the neighbors who the Agency threatens to use as informants on Person 1 if he or she does not respond or fully do so. The Agency threatens to use this information to confirm what other Agencies know about "Resident."

Below are examples of other questions that have no relevance to a legitimate Census:
Question 7b: How many of these rooms are bedrooms?
Question 8: Does this house, apartment, or mobile home have -
a. hot and cold running water?
b a flush toilet?
c a bathtub or shower?
d a sink with a faucet?
e a stove or range?
f a refrigerator?
g telephone service from which you can both make calls and receive calls? Include cell phones?
This is the 21st century. Homes not having such items are extremely rare, if they exist at all. Mobile homes would not be built without them. And, if "Residents" live in one-room shacks without such amenities then they choose to do so. I’m not going to get into details on other questions, but briefly, Citizens are questioned about computer and Internet usage, for how much would their dwelling sell, how much is rent and property taxes, the size of their property? How many separate rooms are in this house, apartment, or mobile home? Has the Person attended college or other, where did this Person live a year ago, how many times has Person been married, if Person is female between 15 and 50, is she pregnant? What time does Person leave for work and how long does it take? Many questions could leave "Residents" open for home-invasion if the information was sold or stolen.

You need to get copies of this questionnaire and all of the mailings leading up to it and read them for yourself to see just how intrusive and bullying people in government are becoming. [I do not use the term Government as it is not an entity unto itself. People make it what it is.] Because if this is not checked, nosey bureaucrats will make it even more intrusive to validate extending their entrenched jobs. The more rights people willingly relinquish, the more will be taken. This questionnaire was updated in June 15, 2012. It asks even more questions than prior questionnaires. It is an appalling invasion to privacy whether or not other State or Local agencies already have this information. It looks like the Census Bureau is expanding the Agency to make government overreach even more so to create a centralized database on all Citizens.

When Citizens get letters threatening maximum fines of up to $5,000, imprisonment, and going to neighbors for gossip to force "Residents" to fill out invasive personal information from government officials, Citizens rightly get their hackles up. To threaten people, in the first place to give over something like this, those who are doing so must know what they are doing is wrong. Congress knows this project is wrong or else wouldn’t sponsor Bills to curb or not fund such a project that collects private information that can be used as an arm of a corrupt government. Citizens certainly know that it is wrong. The threats to obtain this personal information might even violate the 14th Amendment for starters. When those in government begin to think they can do anything they wish to Citizens, those who seek to control others are getting out of control. The Census Bureau of the Department of Commerce is using the ACS as the guise of being helpful to local communities. Whether threats have any teeth is irrelevant. They are wrong. But, one day a very corrupt government might just push the limit to see what they can get away with and begin arresting those who refuse to comply. And local communities and States are responsible for much of what this survey says it is to obtain for Citizens, not the Federal Government.

Occasionally, people who are drawn to positions of authority have an axe to grind. They see their newfound dominance as a means of getting back their respect and in ways hurtful to innocent people who had nothing to do with their original pain. When these people are in government, they can abuse this power over tens, if not, hundreds of millions of innocent people. Like many in the TSA are doing. [I met a man in the stationary store who told me not to answer the ACS form. He now is furious with government. He has to go through TSA pat downs often as he travels frequently. When he takes his four daughters, ages 16 and 23, he is sickened by 19-year-old boys groping them and ogling their genitals in the x-ray machines, telling others to "come look at this."]

When these authorities are in government-sanctioned jobs, they are safe from accountability because the jobs are often unionized, making it impossible to fire them. I’ve seen union workers in the private sector play the "breaking rules" game. They take infractions right up to the limit and run out the clock until the cycle begins again. In the private sector, only the company is hurt. In the public sector, Citizens and the Country get hurt. If in government they are there forever unlike the private sector where bad companies can go under. But, to avoid going under, private companies are responsive to consumers. A corrupt fascist government is unresponsive.

When government jobs become the norm, where is America headed? Orwell’s 1984 is a warning. Read it or watch the film and see how close Orwell got to what is happening today. Before 1949 Orwell envisioned the flat screen television monitor with two-way communication. We have them now. Like today, he envisioned the private sector losing jobs to the public sector: the Government worker versus the Ex-Proletariat when there was no more private industry.

The bureaucracy seems to be extending the Federal jobs of Census Takers from every ten years to make them permanent positions. The ACS contacts 250,000 new "anonymous" households every month. In order to make their jobs permanent, they give undue weight to answers as though this information is important for funding projects that State and Local governments fund. In a time when the Federal budget is strapped, it couldn’t fund them anyway. This seems irresponsible and unreasonable.

And, I say anonymously because people have reported that their households get barraged with telephone calls when not immediately responding. Sometimes as much as four calls a day for 30 days. How do these government employees know the names and phone numbers if these forms are sent randomly to "Residents"? And, why do they want to know this information if they are not going to keep centralized details on Citizens?

When getting the forms, the first questions are what is their name and telephone number. People in government want to know personal information about "Residents" that will leave them open to identity thefts and home invasions should nefarious people realize they can make much more money from this information than their salaries. No one can assure that citizens’ information can ever be secure. To try to do so is absurd. Just asks the Pentagon, Banking Institutions, etc., when hackers broke into their databases and Internet sites. Stealing and selling information is not something new to Washington. To note just one, remember the Clinton years and the security problems?

The Department of Commerce Census Bureau American Community Survey data-mines Citizens. Corrupt Administrations can use this information as an "Enemies List" of voters critical to their policies. This country has endured neurotic, paranoid, and corrupt Presidents and Administrations before. Also, corporations or other people with something to sell can buy this information should the government become so financially strapped that they need to find funding to perpetuate their existence. The DMV sells phone numbers and addresses. Why would not people in the Census Bureau do the same? If it is illegal now, Congress only has to change the law that it seems more willing to do in favor of more powerful Government.

Prior to 2010, Citizens simply got one form in the mail, filled it out, and returned it. That was the end of it. In 2010, the Census Bureau began aggressively harassing Citizens. During the regular Census, they also sent continual threats immediately on top of previous mailings before the deadline dates were even near. They sent agents to homes even after Citizens already returned filled-out forms. (I know this personally and I have friends who do.) The Bureau gave no credible amount of time between harassment mailings. This belies the statement that they want people to respond on line in order to save money on postal and print costs. They are wasting money on continuous mailings, notifying "Residents" that there is going to be something to look forward to in the mail like it is a bloody Publisher’s Clearing House prize. It is anything but something pleasant. It is as if those in Government think Citizens should kiss their boots simply because they exist. The ACS project shows contempt and disrespect for Americans.

This form is 28 convoluted pages and 78 questions for just Person 1 of a "Twister" game. It will make even those with a modicum of intelligence cross-eyed. It shows what is the worst in a government that doesn’t educate citizens properly, but puts them in positions of authority who tell the rest of us how to live.

Congress needs to resubmit Bills to either end funding to this ACS program, terminate it altogether, or at the very minimum, if they cannot prevent themselves from expanding government, make it clearly voluntary without the harassment.

This project began in 2002 as an overreaction along with the TSA and Patriot Act. I don’t care which Administration started this invasion of privacy, beginning in 2009 the bullying has ramped up to the nth degree, and it is no longer used as intended by the Constitution. Read Internet accounts of furious Citizens.

What kind of world are we leaving our children? Do we really want this one?



Feel free to use portions to contact your Congresspersons to end this Orwellian Invasion of the Information Snatchers.

Since I’ve written this, I’ve received many more mailings threatening me because they haven’t received their form back. All of them were within days of each other. Finally, someone came to my door. The first time, he woke me up and by the time I got to the door he was gone. He returned the very next day: Sunday. Turns out he was a religious person. I will not invade his privacy by saying how I knew this. I’d had a dream about educating anyone who came to my door to take my personal information that I do not wish to give. So, I went to the door with that intent. I smiled and told him that I knew why he was there. He smiled back. Lucky for me it turned out that he was an extremely nice person who simply couldn’t find private sector work and had a family to support. I told him almost everything that is in the above letter to my Congresspersons. He was in disbelief that citizens are threatened with imprisonment. Yes. They are, I told him. I had the mailings, but burned them. He knew about the fine, but assured me no one, but no one has ever been actually fined. So what. The next despot or desperate President we have since Peloci and Dean took Impeachment off the table to signal that our Country is ripe for the taking, might just be brash enough to do just that.

The gentleman who came to my door ignored the No Trespassing sign that websites suggest we put up because he felt he was doing nothing wrong so knew he would not be arrested. It isn’t only for home invaders, but he didn’t understand that. The first woman who drove by that I recognized from 2010 when I’d already sent in my Census form who came to take my personal information saw the sign. I happened to be looking out the window. The look on her face said she was really pissed, but stopped to write in her book and drove on.

The gentleman, who is now my new BFF, told me that "They" won’t stop until "They" get what they want. Wow! That sounds aggressively mean. He also told me that he tried to call me, but had the wrong number. See, it is not random! They know who they are contacting. We’d been talking for about an hour as I took the time to educate him. He was shaking his head about what he is doing before I let him go. Turns out he was wrong that citizens can get an exemption from their Representatives. Citizens can get an exemption for some other voluntary Census. But, my Congressperson’s office is looking into how abusive the Census Bureau is becoming and this expansion of data-mining.

At least the Census Taker who came to my door was a decent person. I hear some are not. But, they are probably your neighbors though unknown to you because fewer and fewer private sector jobs exist, depending upon where you live. So, my advice is to be nice, make a friend, and for their benefit, educate them.

AND, call and write your Congresspersons to end this abusive data-mining expansion of Government that has no real purpose except to have a centralized data base on all Citizens.

Please share this on Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc., to help the Country.

Monday, October 22, 2012

How Did 2008 Help Obama Be President?

Barack Hussein Obama: (08/04/1961) = Life Path of Two (2) + Year 2008 One (1) = Three (3)

Adding the Life Path number to the yearly number give the lessons and obstacles for that year. The year allows all of us to experience each number in a 10-year cycle. Numbers challenge and show us their meanings. We learn from each number to achieve its negative or positive side and how to transition to the positive side if on the negative.

The race for the top prize of POTUS in 2008 added Number One (1) to candidates Life Paths. With McCain (08/29/1936) having a Two (2) Life Path plus the year 2008 equaling One (1), we’d think he was a shoo-in with all that (Luck) (Lucky You) (Your Luck) on his side of Three (3). Wait one moment! So does Barack Obama have a Two (2) Life Path, giving his 2008 year a Three (3), and making the stars fall favorably on him as well. Both men won their party’s nominations.

In 2008 how did Barack Obama beat out the favorite, Hillary Clinton in the primary when her Life Path was Three (3), numerically speaking? Her yearly number in 2007 was also Three (3), i.e., 2007 equals Nine (9). When adding 3 + 9 they equal 12 and 1 + 2 equals 3. That seemed an unbeatable combination. The polls and pundits concurred. Then came the year 2008 to make them eat their words. 2 + 8 equals 1. Adding the year 1 to her Life Path Three (3) gave her a Four (4). It seemed no sooner did January ring in the New Year than Hillary fell out of favor. Four (4) even has (Made Victorious) and (Victory Made) as tiers. However, so does it have (Doom Victory) and (Victory Doomed) as tiers representing the yin and yang elements. The other tiers may give clues about what slipped her up, but the entire election was complicated. Karma may have been in the mix as she has Eight (8) as her Attraction number, putting having tests into her Subconscious. It was clear by the gracefulness she exhibited when losing that she looked to higher reasons for her loss. Also, being that she has two Sixes (6) as Conscious Direction numbers, when she isn’t lying, others seem to perceive her as doing so. The negative Four (4) year tiers of (Victory Doomed) seemed to thwart a (Made Victorious) ending to her campaign.

The Numbers favored both Barack Obama and John McCain with (Luck). Ultimately, however, lessons and choices may have had something to do with who won. We do learn more from bad presidents than good ones as we often sit back and ride the wave.

Sometimes, however, America needs a respite from bad ones. America is long overdue for a good POTUS.

[If anyone has questions or comments, I hope you will make them.]

Monday, August 27, 2012

Numbers Open a Window Into Obama

Barack Hussein Obama II = One (1)
Barack Hussein Obama = One (1)
Barack Obama = Five (5)
Barry Obama = Six (6)
Barry Soetoro = Nine (9)
(08/04/1961) = Attraction is Four (4) and Life Path is Two (2)

[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my post entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will mention them as they come up in analysis.]

Of the names he now uses, Obama’s main Conscious Name Direction number is One (1), and his subordinate Name numbers are Five (5), Six (6), and Nine (9). His Name as Number One (1) reflects either, naivete’ of a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for advice or (A Sage) who has learned from life. Do his policies reflect well-thought-out wisdom or do they pander to his base of voters and financial backers? All presidents have advisers to whom they can turn. Most, if not all, politicians indulge those who buy them off. Nevertheless, other Presidents spent countless hours ruminating over and engaging in policies, not vacationing, swinging golf clubs, or endlessly campaigning for a second term. President Obama parties and vacations (at taxpayer expense) more than he governs. President Obama’s predecessor did the same, setting a precedent for allowing this leeway because the Presidency is such a "stressful" job. When we have enough life experience, we are not as anxious, knowing how to connect unrelated matters to solve current problems that a well-developed Number One (1) learns to do. Is the job of the presidency for a newbie?

At gen44-obama-names-entire-generation-after-himself-whether-they . . . . The link is confusing and you’ll have to search to find the YouTube posting on the page where President Obama names a generation after his 44th presidency, thus himself. Going to my twitter account @nnnTheCode or @NoNonsenseCode will get you the posted link.

I knew by President Obama’s actions, statements, and demeanor that he had to have an arrogant (I Are) better than others, Nine (9) in his arsenal. Yet, it just wasn’t there. Where is the arrogance he shows in his numbers? How could I be so wrong to view him that way when he doesn’t have a Nine (9)? I’d have to do some hard reflection to understand from where this trait in him arises.

One day, one of my Twitter followers @ACollinsByrnes a.k.a. TappyWise tweeted that Obama’s name under his stepfather was Barry Soetoro. I checked it out. Evidence exists that he went by Barry Soetoro in his youth. This gives him a Nine (9) as a subordinate Name Direction number. Love to be right. Hate crow pie.

Obama’s Life Path Number Two (2) tier of (Take Back) reinforces the (Jackass) (Just Ask) tier of his Direction Number One (1). As with other Presidents, he took back campaign promises. However, did he really believe his rhetoric or was he deliberately lying to get votes? Is he clinging to the (Be Too Constant) tier of Two (2), making him wedded tightly to ideals? He allowed the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to continue when he promised otherwise. His rhetoric about millionaires and billionaires paying their "fair share," seems to pander to his base. Since 2010 President Obama, however, is now part of the top 1% he criticizes at his current worth of $11.8M from a $400,000 a year job. Does he really empathize with the middle and poor income classes, or is he chomping at the bit to become an elite billionaire?

Who would blame him for not wanting to be poor? Yet, he seems to bite the hands of those opening the door where he wants to enter. Being good at politics and by definition a liar is not necessarily being a good president. This might be where Obama calls upon his Six (6) (Fox Of) Conscious Direction number, calculating everything he does. Is he helping poorer classes or succumbing to the (Ask For) greed of Six (6)?

Obama has both Conscious Direction Name numbers of Five (5) and Six (6). During the 2008 debates Obama admitted being lazy. He was being honest, however, as with postponing and obfuscating about his stance on same sex marriage, he avoids candor unless it benefits him. Nevertheless, the remark reveals he doesn’t operate under the (Of Ox) hard-working tier of Six (6). By his actions, he seems not interested in the seriously hard work this office requires, but prefers the luxuries that benefit him.

If Obama is an advanced Number One (1) we’d expect him to (Just Say) the truth and be honestly direct. He doesn’t always do this. When he appeases his base, his speech is often awkward and stilted while searching for the right words. The whole having done cocaine business never sat well with many people no matter how forthright Obama seemed. It seemed more like a tactic to deflect it from being an election issue so that opponents couldn’t use it against him. He was successful at deflecting a questionable past. Yet, was he also appealing to young "hip" voters? No one said he is stupid. He knows how to manipulatively get his way. Look at what he did with the healthcare bill. President Obama purposefully said it "was not a tax." If naive’ legislators thought it was a tax, fewer would have voted for it.

Barack Obama’s Conscious Direction subordinate Name Five (5), shows he can learn from experiences. This gives him instincts to know what is (In You), so that he can relate with other people. This is a good trait. Relating and caring are different matters however. Is he understanding what is (In You) for others’ benefit or his own? This shows how one can develop into the crafty (Fox Of) nature of the subsequent Six (6). For all his rhetoric, no genuine feelings for citizens come from him, except contempt when he disparages religious gun owners.

Five (5) is the most enigmatic or puzzling number to define. (From Wanting New) experiences, Fives (5) can become easily dissatisfied. If they aren’t problem-solvers, they can easily dismiss problems rather than solving them thoroughly. Obama has already admitted during 2008 debates that he isn’t into details. He’d rather let others trifle with weighty matters. This gives the impression of aloofness or disengagement.

Obama’s Subconscious Attraction number is Four (4) that if negative can brew to (Do Venom), becoming vindictive or if positive is (Made Victorious) by rising above personal animosities. On History Channel’s, It’s Good to Be President, journalist Richard Wolfe said, President Obama is vindictive on the golf course when he doesn’t get his way: Also, that it was especially visible when he’s tired. This kind of temper over a simple golf game shows a spoiled nature. This is not a temperament of someone who is mature. Obama can let animosities brew into a (Wen) of Five (5) that is a boil or cyst of mental agitation. When he confronts them, however, his famous temper comes into action.

The website reports, "Remember last week, when President Obama threw a fit and stormed out of budget negotiations with the House Republican leadership? Do you recall what made him blow a fuse? It was when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor suggested a short-term deal to raise the debt limit a bit, because Democrats and Republicans could use more time to settle their differences." Have we ever seen President Obama on Capitol Hill, engaging Congress in negotiations for a piece of legislation? He uses Executive Orders to get his way as he did with an illegal immigration issue.

Wesley Pruden reports in The Washington Times about Obama’s famous temper tantrums, calling them sometimes effective strategy. Frustration from partisan gridlock makes this temper understandable. Jay Newton-Small reports at about Obama’s temper. He justifies it that when he’s tired he snaps at people. However, maturity would temper his temper. Not getting what he wants seems to anger him. Followers don’t mind this if he is fighting for them, but overall, an ill-tempered leader is not a positive trait. Obama’s temper is so famous that several articles explore it. One was the liberal magazine, The Nation. Their in-house laureate Calvin Trillin put it into poetry. Being that Four (4) is his Subconscious Attraction number, a quick temper may be his character.

Number Four (4) paired with Five (5) can be a chilling combination. Five (5) can have issues in a (Wen) tier of unresolved emotional angst. When combined with (Do Venom) tier of Four (4), the Five (5) (When) bursting can be spontaneously vindictive. However, once Five (5) confronts animosities, he or she forgets them unless paired with Six (6) who might calculate revenge. Unfortunately, Obama does have a Four (4) and Five (5) pairing that can be volatile, and Six (6) in his subordinate Conscious Direction can make him calculatingly vengeful.

Candidates have surrogate Super PACs for trashing opponents so that their hands appear clean. Obama is not the only president to take advantage of the system. Does this, however, bring the "change" he promised? He was never specific, so many voters projected the change they wanted onto his campaign rhetoric. This was a very clever tactic.

During the 2008 primaries, Obama wasn’t someone to go against. He was the one who played the race card then turned it to Bill Clinton’s problem who never played it. He also played it against Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Now he is playing it again every chance he gets using his surrogate Eric Holder and others. Many websites chronicled Obama playing the race card when he insinuated:
"So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know. He’s not patriotic enough. He’s got a funny name. You know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He’s risky. That’s essentially the argument they’re making."
Were opponents playing the race card or was Obama painting it that way? He campaigned dirty in 2008 and is heightening it for his 2012 reelection campaign. Candidates must ask themselves how much of their souls are they willing to relinquish for the job to be the most powerful man in the world? What kind of ego must one have to want to be in charge of everyone else and to fashion the world to their view? One could say, it is a lack of self worth that propels one to savage another’s character with lies to gain this job. Saying that it’s just politics elevates it to something noble: when the definition of a politician is "chiefly a person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, typically to gain advancement."

That is how clever political operatives work. Is it underhanded? Voters didn’t care. They voted their hearts, not their minds. The country has paid the price because we’re deeper in debt with no real solutions to fixing the problems that Obama himself continues to blame on predecessors. In 2000 voters also elected a candidate with whom they wanted to share a beer. We’re in the exact if not worse situation in 2012 that he promised to fix in 2008 when he said opponents could not. Nevertheless, he can blame the obstructive GOP Congress. Yet, the Democrats, including then Senator Obama, went along with what Bush wanted to do, giving him expensive wars and tax cuts for the wealthy. Obama now distances himself from the very policies for which he voted.

An inexperienced Five (5) longs to find (New) experiences. This attests to his unpreparedness for the gravity of the position. Just because one thinks an idea is good, doesn’t mean it will work as imagined. This is where idealism and practicability butt heads. Weekly "date nights," costing taxpayers $ ½ M each attests, he is a nine-to-five President, preferring to clock out as an hourly employee than work as a manager with long hours. Who were the date nights to appease? Barack and Michelle Obama aren’t newlyweds. To be so cavalier with taxpayers’ monies during difficult financial times in America shows a "Let them, eat cake," attitude. The President does seem to enjoy campaigning. He could be in Washington, but was on the campaign trail long before the General election when he has no Democrat rivals. This shows his priorities. Being president seems more important to him personally than concerning himself with the problems of America.

His Life Path of Number Two (2) puts him in conflict with his stubborn Four (4). Neediness in his Two (2) (Be Too Constant) tier makes him give in on principles rather than fight for them because his desire for personal aggrandizement is paramount. Needing to be liked can go against duties of the Office. He is good at speaking up for poor Americans on the campaign stump, but not so good at applying them when it matters. The PPACA may be more about securing globalization and benefitting Medical Insurance industries than getting low income earners medical care. The poor can get onto Medicaid so would have coverage without the Healthcare Bill. It also seems for some vocal Legislators and Pundits that it was about getting their personal premiums lowered by mandating that those who don’t pay for coverage do so. After all, modern politics, for some, is about personal aggrandizement.

No rumors exist that Barack Obama is not faithful, therefore, we can assume he is on the positive side of (To Be Constant) and (Constant, Be Two) regarding relationships.

President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with provisions authorizing detention of any American by the military without a habeas corpus or due process. His signing statement seemed politically expedient that while he is in office, he won’t enact those provisions, which sounded like extortion. When he is out of office, any despot can carry out the provisions unless Congress repeals it or courts overturn it. One federal court did strike that provision as reported by Democracy Now!

A federal judge has struck down part of a controversial law that allows the government to indefinitely detain anyone it considers a terrorism suspect anywhere in the world without charge or trial, including U.S. citizens. The ruling came in a lawsuit challenging the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, filed by a group of journalists, scholars and political activists. Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York struck down the indefinite detention provision, saying it likely violates the First and Fifth Amendments. Judge Forrest rejected the Obama administration’s argument that the NDAA merely reaffirmed an existing law recognizing the military’s right to perform certain routine duties.

If President Obama were certain about the provision’s constitutionality, why did he pen an Executive Order saying that he would not enact those provisions while he’s President? He must have known that they weren’t constitutional, but he signed the NDAA with those provisions anyway.

President Obama took credit for ending the Iraq war when it wasn’t his to take. His predecessor George Walker Bush made an agreement with Iraqi officials to end it on that date, and though the Obama Administration wanted to continue, Iraq said No. Iraqi Officials wouldn’t continue giving American soldiers amnesty for actions.

Since President Obama is hanging his presidency on the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) examining it for its veracity is fair. The PPACA takes $500 billion from Medicare over a ten-year period. Obama also authorized other cuts of $50 billion to get the debt extension enacted. Various sources estimate that the PPACA cuts more than $700 Billion from Medicare. PPACA does not eliminate preexisting conditions. It only shortens the time before treating them: 18 months to 9 months and 12 to 3 months. Private health insurance companies do not necessarily ban pre-existing conditions either. Depending on the provider has short or long waiting times for pre-existing conditions. Some have shorter periods than PPACA has to begin treatment once signing on the dotted line. People are so uninformed that they buy the lies about the preexisting condition clause of PPACA, thinking all health insurers disallow them.

Medicare is not the end-all-be-all of healthcare. It is exactly like private insurers who charge premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, and chooses what conditions it will pay for or not. Only those who fall below guidelines for income get everything paid for by the government on Medi-Cal and Medicaid. PPACA may very well force more people onto those programs, but state governments impose limits on conditions and medicines for which they will pay. The economy is no longer in the same condition as when those programs were first enacted.

What people don’t know about those programs, is that they allow government agencies to monitor recipients’ incomes. They watch every penny they have. Is that freedom? The government doesn’t give anyone anything, but in some states, recipients must bequeath property over to the government to repay the debt. If individuals want to get off those programs, they must repay the debts. Legislators seem to have designed these programs to keep people under government’s thumb. PPACA forcing patients onto Medicaid, is forcing them into subserviency to the government.

This bill was unnecessary when we have Medicaid and Medi-Cal, and other programs for the poor. Congress could have simply opened up Medicare for anyone who wants it, not forcing everyone to buy insurance. Yes, they would pay a premium, but it’s according to their income level. Media reported that Obama met with health insurance providers to get provisions for his bill. One could conclude that he is paying off contributors rather than looking out for citizens.

Also, PPACA will gut or eliminate Medicare Advantage programs where seniors buy outside Medicare, forcing half of them to return to Medicare. It also guts the program’s benefits. See the Heritage Foundation web site at for details or search "Obamacare cuts to Medicare Advantage" for other information. Other than PPACA, he mostly governs like a conservative. PPACA raises taxes on middle income earners since Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the mandate is a tax, making it legal.

The Obama Administration has also cut Planned Parenthood funding that helps women’s health. Early in his term, Obama continued the Bush tax cuts without a fight. He has also continued the Bush wars.

Is Obama out of touch with his green agenda? He manipulated the public to enact it, without really selling its good points. The price of gas is devastating middle and lower income households. His Energy Secretary Chu even said that Obama’s Administration wants the price of gasoline to reach $8 a gallon. I forget where I heard him say it, but I heard him say it. The "Cash for Clunkers" program helped higher income earners, and did nothing for poor people to get newer cars. Dealers were forced to crush trade-ins, cars that poor people could afford to buy that would be an upgrade in miles per gallon for them. Poor people can’t afford to buy expensive tiny green cars. Ranchers would never buy them. They need their tattered trucks to haul hay and dogs. People living in rural areas where they must drive 25 to 50 miles for groceries wouldn’t buy them. They’d have to make several trips to get groceries to last the month. How is that saving gasoline energy? Poor people don’t have outlets to charge 40-mile batteries. Are apartment owners going to build them for each tenant? Obama lets ideology cloud practical judgment. He is the one who is out of touch with poor Americans. Poor people can’t afford loans for $15,000 to $30,000 cars, nor the more expensive insurance they would need. They need to buy basics like gas and food. Instead, he lets these commodities rise in price, trying to force consumers to buy his "green" cars. Where is the compassion in this? Nevertheless, he travels around in the official luxury limo for date nights and campaigning rather than staying in Washington, working.

I must be honest. When Obama sang the half bar of Al Green’s song, I would have melted if he’d gone on longer. That was the first time I ever regarded him as sexy when media spun that as his quality. I never found him sexy, but rigid and artificial, trying to appear authoritative when he was probably uncomfortable. He seems more like a little boy trying to fill daddy’s shoes when mom was left alone. I don’t fault him for that. He is too young and inexperienced for the position given to him.

[Please Tweet, send to Facebook, email, comment, etc., if you think this is helpful.]

Monday, April 16, 2012

Ann Romney Proves a Positive Case for These Numbers

Ann Lois Davies = Original Conscious Name Direction = Nine (9)
Ann Lois Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Three (3)
Ann D Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Six (6)
Ann Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction  = Two (2)
04/16/1949 = Subconscious Attraction = (7) Super-Conscious Life Path = (7)

I just found out that today is Ann Romney’s birthday of 04/16/1949. So I looked up her numbers for the heck of it. I’m not going into deep analysis as Mrs. Romney is not a presidential candidate.

As you can see, Ann Romney has Seven (7) in both Attraction and Life Path numbers. It’s almost not even a surprise. Nevertheless, she clearly remains on the positive side of numbers. Ann Romney comes across as a positive person. Nothing exists to say that she is otherwise. Through her adversities of multiple sclerosis and breast cancer she remains strong and positive. She also remains positive through grueling and often hostile campaigns. Also, nothing exists to show her to be an "in transition Seven (7)," who has a troubled past that she is overcoming. This makes Mrs. Romney a Pure-Heart who never went to the negative side of numbers. A positive Seven (7) is someone who would not cheat or lie to gain.

Ann Lois Davies' Original Conscious Name Direction number is Nine (9). She shows to be a positive and confident Nine (9) in how she consciously comports herself.

Another subordinate Direction Number is Two (2). This gives Ann a familial bent, meaning that family is important to her. This is clear, i.e., working outside the home was not her priority. The obviousness of the Romneys’ love, affection, and loyalty for each other shows Ann to be a positive Two (2) as the highest tier of (To Be Constant).

The Romneys share Six (6) in common for their Name Direction numbers. If Mrs. Romney passed through to Seven (7) on the positive side, she has to be a positive Six (6) as her subordinate Conscious Name Direction number. She is honest and works hard. This seems a trait Mitt and Ann share. One being negative while the other is positive would be impossible to have their marriage survive this long and well no matter how opponents want to paint Mitt.

The Romneys also have numbers Three (3) and Nine (9) in common. His Life Path is Nine (9), possibly making their union from his Super-Conscious Life Path and her feelings for him from her Conscious Direction. His Three (3) is in his Attraction number, making his desire for her from a deep Subconscious level. Numbers show Ann is drawn to Mitt from a Conscious level, being that Nine (9) is in her Direction number. It is clear that they are (Lucky) to have each other.

Numbers that I’ve studied of Presidents and First Ladies all have compatible numbers. The reason seems obvious when considering the gravity of the position.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Numerology Confirms Why Sponsors Rush Away from Limbaugh

Rush Hudson Limbaugh III = Four (4)
Rush Hudson Limbaugh = Four (4)
Rush Limbaugh = Four (4)
01/12/1951 = Attraction = Three (3) and Life Path = Two (2)

[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my post entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will mention them if they come up in analysis. Not everyone has all tiers. These numbers only confirm character that is observably verifiable.]

Searching the Internet for "Rush Limbaugh scandals" reveal what we already know. His Oxycodone and Viagra scandals are legendary, as well his diatribes against anyone who challenges him, especially spewing venomous language toward women and minorities. He uses the airwaves to vent his personal hatreds, rationalizing that he’s an entertainer who thinks he’s funny. Funny? Seriously? What low bar do his listeners set?

It takes a callously corrupt personality to kick someone while he’s down. Ask Michael J Fox whether Limbaugh was being a funny entertainer or not when he mercilessly mocked Fox for having Parkinson disease.

Who is laughing, except those who agree with Limbaugh’s hateful rhetoric? Limbaugh cannot take any criticism. According to a recent news clip, he screens callers who would rebuke him. This reveals a fragile ego unable to discuss issues calmly and intelligently. He isn’t alone on the radio airwaves of shock jocks who are unable to calmly exchange ideas, but instead vent their personal brands of hatred.

I confronted a neighbor who had a radio show poster for Rush Limbaugh in his window. When challenged on listening to Limbaugh, his embarrassed excuse was that "He’s funny." As time reveals all wrinkles, he turned out to be just as hatefully-minded. I’ve done business with people who’ve had Limbaugh blaring from radios. As time passed, I learned they too had just as meanspirited attitudes. I no longer do business with people who have their radios tuned to Rush. Since water seeks its own level, that’s a clue to their character. Limbaugh feeds into the worst traits of humanity. Without his loud and aggressive timbre would Rush have a job?

Past comedians who were as acerbic and crude instigated pubic outrage. According to Wikipedia, "[Andrew Dice] Clay is known for a style of comedy that has sparked controversy and much media coverage. He is loved by some and reviled by others, who feel that his act is crude, misogynistic, racist, homophobic and degrading. Clay has been widely opposed by women's rights groups and he has been banned from many radio and television shows for his explicit language and socially and politically charged humor. MTV banned him for life in 1989 for reciting what he called ‘adult nursery rhymes’ during the annual Video Music Awards ceremony (September 6, 1989). In 2011, he was [reinstated] by MTV. The Biography Channel refuses to produce a biography of him." Clay, however, did not have the political clout of Limbaugh.

Lenny Bruce’s vulgar haranguing paled in comparison to Limbaugh’s crude mouth although he used shocking words. Only those, sitting in boozy smoked-filled bars were subjected to his rants. It was by choice. Innocent people didn’t have to hear him through overplayed media clips to make political points.

Rush Hudson Limbaugh with or without the III or minus his middle name Hudson, can’t escape the Conscious Name Direction Number Four (4). This Significancy consciously completes the Life Path Significancy. (The Name is the only number that is immutable so represents Conscious awareness.) His Life Path is Number Two (2). He consciously uses vitriol of to (Do Venom) to get supporters (To Back) him. Limbaugh seems a negative (Be Too Constant) Two (2) in that he clings tightly to this method without self reflection that what he is doing is destructive to society. If he knows it is destructive, then he makes the Conscious choice to be so. He might even take pride as a child would do toward the destructive mess he’s helped make when feeding off the worst in human character.

Instead of being (Moved) to change his routine Rush doubles down to (Do Venom) even more by slamming more women with vicious language when criticized for his hateful comments. This proves Limbaugh cannot be (Made Victorious) over his personal animus, putting him on the negative side of numbers. He stubbornly clings to his addiction of spewing hate speech. Not being introspective, he does not heed the warning of what (Venom Do) causes. Rush is determined to not be (Victory Doomed) in endeavors that benefit him. Negative Four (4) can be a force for destruction.

Conversely, being (Made Victorious) over personal angst and animus is the positive goal of Fours (4). They can be very uplifting when overcoming personal obstacles to inspire others to also reclaim their Life Forces in positive ways.

Being that Four (4) is in his Conscious Direction number, Rush chooses to project negativity in what he calls entertainment. A few other pundits have said that in private, he is a pleasant person.

An unfortunate part of being an "entertainer," however, is that the entertainer can become his or her act. Entertainers both dead and living have transformed themselves into their acts by carrying them over to their personal lives. Some to their detriments, others become successful. Unfortunately those who are successful can lose touch with their genuine self when playing a character for a long time. Or, conversely, they really are that character, it just slipped into their acts. Hollywood is very good at type casting.

Limbaugh’s Subconscious Attraction Three (3) embeds into his psyche that (Luck) is on his side, making him inherently believe he has no responsibility to answer for actions by changing them. He seems not to (Cull) a (Clue) about his personal shortcomings when he continues down the same road that got him into hot water in the first place. This lands him on the negative tiers of Three (3). His Conscious Direction of Four (4) amplifies his being unable to be (Moved) to change, landing him on the negative tiers of that number as well.

Rush’s Life Path of Two (2) gives him the opportunity of learning (To Be Constant) in relationships of (Constant, Be Two). With so many marriages behind him, this seems not to be his strength. What he does not do is (Take Back) anything he says except begrudgingly. When he apologizes, he then becomes more virulent in his vitriol, making slanderous personal attacks toward detractors. He gives bogus apologies, determined not to be (Moved), thus standing by his negativity.

Those in Two (2) Life Paths learn (To Back) others. With his massive wealth, Limbaugh may feel he is supporting his spouses as a good provider. Surely he has alimonies to pay, therefore, massive wealth is important to him.

"The Daily KOS," reported, however, that Limbaugh is willing to give his show away free as sponsors flee. "KOS" asked what this makes him. Though I wouldn’t return one attack with another, in my view, it makes him addicted to vitriol. Unable to give it up, Limbaugh’s negative show is who he is and not an act. He may want to prove critics wrong by changing tactics, but should we hold our collective breaths?

In the end, people must ask themselves whether they want a hateful and hostile society, or a pure and polite one. Limbaugh may realize he has no career if he changes his tune to a kinder, gentler Rush. So, his discourse changing anytime soon is not likely. Rush Limbaugh must also decide how he wants people to remember him. People only know him by his on air persona.

My theory is that everyone on this planet has a fragile Life Force. Some attempt to recover it by hurting and demeaning others, thinking this elevates them by stepping on and over others. They have made it a competition. Others with tentative Life Forces recover them in positive ways, helping to uplift humanity rather than diminish it without being in competition with anyone but themselves.

Because derogatory language, is commonly used, must we make ourselves common by using it?

We should commend commentators like Keith Olbermann, who humbly recognized his hurtful words and vowed to change his ways to uplift public discourse, even relinquishing his "Worst Persons" category. Liberal entertainers and commentators like Bill Maher and Ed Schultz, who also verbally attack women with whom they disagree with disgusting and degrading characterizations, should follow. Again, we should keep breathing.

Every one of us who writes books, articles, blogs, or tweets are as guilty as pundits and commentators of wanting to influence society. How we want to influence it is the question: for the better or for the worst?

Even if it’s free, hate speech is costly to society.

[I welcome your comments and if you agree with this, please tweet on Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, etc. so we can spread understanding.]

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Romney - Good Qualities Media Ignores - UPDATE

Willard Mitt Romney = Six (6)
Mitt Romney = Eight (8)
(03/12/1947) = Three (3) Attraction and Life Path of Nine (9)

[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my blog entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will only refer to them in this blog as they come up in analysis.]

By the look of Former Governor Mitt Romney’s numbers, he really is who he is. He confirms my number theories.

Willard Mitt Romney has both Six (6) and Eight (8) as his Conscious Direction numbers that he uses to fulfil his Life Path Number Nine (9). Using the subordinate Name Direction of Mitt Romney, however, makes his Conscious Direction of Eight (8) more prominent.

Can we assume that presidential candidates with Six (6) stretch the truth or out-and-out lie when on a (Fox) or (Fox Of) tier? How much they do this depends upon their expectation of achieving power from the Office to use for personal aggrandizement, or to genuinely help the Country. Politics, after all, does not require hard manual labor that one on an (Of Ox) tier might need. Governor Romney, however, does work hard for votes as @nyformitt, whom I follow on Twitter shows in their links.

Willard Mitt Romney has Six (6) as an original Conscious Name Direction number. The press considered him "squeaky clean" until they turned from him and on him. Personally, I’m tired of media selecting winners and losers instead of voters doing so. Nevertheless, Romney’s fibbing under the (Fox Of) nature amounts to embellishments on his hunting "record" to appeal to the NRA in the 2008 presidential elections. In 2012 debates, he has owned up to and clarified his hunting abilities this time around. Also, he seems to think of his job-creating differently than do media and opponents. However, when trying to clarify his record, media seems not to want to hear or report that he has helped companies survive. When checking the Internet, he nets very little controversy compared to the selected frontrunners. (See posts titled Newt GinGRINCH on the Numbers Couch, Is It Time to Define Santorum, and Copycat Cowboy.)

Those on the (Fox) tier of Six (6) can work to broadened intelligence, using it to outwit opponents. Romney does appear to cleverly use his intelligence. Despite media spin, he is very articulate and no more boring than any other candidate. Personally, I don’t find President Obama to be all that spellbinding. Not many have the oratory expertise of Bill Moyers or former New York Governor Mario Cuomo. If it were up to me, however, I’d suggest Romney use his hands less when speaking.

Sixes (6) can (Ask For) things, making them materialistic or they can (Ask Of) themselves to achieve to their highest nature, making them more spiritual. Thanks to my Twitter follower Linda @committedvoter, I discovered a side of Romney that I didn’t know exists. Checking out her tweets, I discovered that he often didn’t take salaries for his work. According to Romney never took a salary as Governor of Massachusetts, but donated it to charity. Also, he pledged to do the same as President. This philanthropy puts former Governor Romney on the positive (Ask Of) tier of Six (6).

Though I could not definitively find that he didn’t take a salary as head of the Olympics, through I discovered that Romney returned to them respectability. It was sinking with corruption scandals when he restored integrity. Would the Olympic committee have turned to someone who was corrupt to restore integrity? No. Opponents and left wing pundits leave out these facts about him as they try to smear him as some "vulture capitalist," an unfitting term when examining the complete record.

Last night on Coast-to-Coast AM on the George Knapp show, fearless award winning BBC journalist Greg Palast commented on Bain Capital. He described it as a "benign" company, meaning, "genial or kindly and favorable, not harmful." Palast is a very credible source. He is forthright when uncovering corruption. If he regards Bain as benign, most likely the American media is showing bias by their excessively negative characterizations. The media vilification of Bain came before they did any investigation. Pundits say that they await information on Bain. If unbiased, wouldn’t they do their investigations first rather than putting negative stereotypes into voters’ minds?

One thing he does not do, is to brag about his personal philanthropy. Some of his opponents cannot say this. By their actions, if they were as philanthropic, they clearly would let us know.

Also, for the media to play the sibling rivalry card pitting people against each other is what is really despicable. As I’ve said in my Twitter feed, the size of one’s pocketbook does not determine the size of one’s heart. I’ve known good rich people and bad poor people and vice versa. The media spinning that people deserve jobs even when they are negligent is ludicrous. Does anyone think that the Captain of the cruise ship that he ran aground is worthy of continued employment?

Media opponents hammered the spin that Romney is in the privileged class because he bought a bigger house on the west coast. Personally, I don’t fault him. He has a very large and close family. Staying at his home rather than in motels while visiting him isn’t out of the question, so he would need larger digs. Did pundits criticize Reagan or Bush for having multiple homes and ranches across the country? They are using this to pit citizens against citizens for their political purposes.

I didn’t condemn John Edwards for the $400 haircut either. Cheating on his ill wife was another matter. This is something no one has ever accused Mitt Romney of doing. In Edwards’ case regarding the haircut, the Stylist would have to go to him. Secret Service security sitting in salon chairs would have been awkward for other customers and stylists, perhaps, worrying them needlessly that something could happen with Edwards at the salon. Having to go to him, the Stylist would most likely lose a day’s pay. It would only be fair that he compensated the Stylist for that potential loss of earnings. This might explain why the actual haircut didn’t look special or worth the price.

When we are searching for the truth and not just spinning biased stories, we come to different conclusions than media hands us to promote their agendas. What could be their agenda in smearing Governor Romney? Can it be to keep Obama in the White House, perhaps? Are they trying to give voters such reprehensible candidates that President Obama sees a second term?

His subordinate Name as Mitt Romney equals Eight (8), testing him on material and spiritual matters. Often those with Eight (8) relinquish cherished material aspects of their lives when seeking spirituality. Romney won the governorship of Massachusetts, so he is a political winner. His losses in 2008 for president and for Massachusetts U.S. Senator has not embittered him, showing him to be a positive person. Also, he is not without personal struggles. His wife, Ann diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998 also fought a battle with double breast cancer. To Mitt Romney’s credit, he did not leave his wife and genuinely seems to love her. During his runs for public office, no one has come forward to claim he is anything but a loyal and loving husband.

Also, Romney does not harp on this nobility of character during debates to exploit them. To the contrary, Gingrich uses such personal circumstances to gain what respect he thinks it will garner him. Romney not only comes across as calm, but noble unlike some opponents who come across as so desperate that they would bring down their party rather than lose gracefully. This is not showing us the best candidate, but the most desperate for power. Mr. Romney has lost elections for both the Presidency and the United States Senate. Unlike Gingrich, Romney’s demeanor is not of someone who is bitter and vindictive with disappointment. Romney comes across as someone who takes losses in his stride, and someone who is willing to learn from circumstances. He humbly admits his mistakes, making him credible when he does tout his strengths.

On Chris Wallace’s Sunday show, Wallace asked Romney about his 10 percent tithing. Romney said that if he didn’t give the full 10 percent that would not be living up to his agreement. This is someone who works at being honorable. He also talked about being tested. He seems to rise to the challenge as the tier (Question Hard Unknown Quantity) in Number Eight (8) that embraces challenges.

An effect of Six (6) in his Conscious Direction seems that he learns from his Subconscious Attraction number of Three (3) to (Cull) a proper (Clue) to gain his (Luck). He doesn’t sit back idly wallowing in his wealth, but puts his talents to use. Yes, he may have been (Lucky) to be born into a wealthy family. This family, however, was not from established wealth and earned their fortunes. He points out that his father George Romney taught him good work ethics. Voters can connect with that. Many parents taught good work ethics.

Romney’s Life Path number is Nine (9). Our traits in this number come from learning or not learning our lessons in previous numbers. Romney exudes good-natured confidence even when facing down confrontations during debates. He does not exhibit one iota of maliciously angry (Ire) or vindictiveness. Pointing out opponents’ records is fair game if the media deems it such, but is it negative campaigning? Bad-mouthing opponents seems more like negative campaigning. When Romney does defend his record or points out the records of opponents, it is direct and with good-nature. He is like a Saint Bernard gently nuzzling away a sniping Chihuahua from his heals, making a scolding from Romney almost desirable. This trait surely would be more handy when negotiating with other countries rather than Newt Gingrich’s "it’s my way or the highway," attitude. Isn’t that the attitude that diminished America’s standing in the world from the Bush Administration?

The lessons that Nine (9) learns, lean toward full confidence as the (I Are) tier, equaling the "I Am" precept. Is Romney completely there yet? He is not. He does seem a bit insecure as the (Are I) tier of Nine (9) when explaining himself. It is a matter of perspective how people view this. This may come from reluctance to brag about his good qualities. When doing our ethical best, to have motives questioned really hurts. Romney’s confidence seems genuine rather than bluster. Countering this to Gingrich’s disrespectful nose-in-the-air F U attitude makes Romney easier to warm to than GinGRINCH. Other world leaders would probably prefer Romney’s style. However, when, push-comes-to-shove, resolve that makes him successful kicks in.

When campaigning among voters, he seems to genuinely like people whether or not he personally relates with all of them. Who can? He stops to listen to them. He does not "glad hand" people. This is something I noticed about John Edwards when he campaigned. He glad-handed voters. While shaking their hands, Edwards looked past the immediate voter to the next person without genuinely connecting. Romney looks in peoples’ eyes, signaling that the person matters.

Whether he learned this or whether it comes naturally is irrelevant. If his upbringing didn’t prepare him to understand all classes of people, I’m not sure that is a mark against him. Most of us don’t understand others from different backgrounds. Romney earnestly seems to like people. Romney does not come across like an angry person that the negative tier of (Ire) can, keeping him on the positive side of numbers. In fact, when he does get confrontational, he does so with good nature. A 180 from Newt Gingrich, Romney doesn’t come off as unpleasant, meanspirited, or vindictive.

Personally, I want the best candidate possible, to have the best world possible. I would have been happy with Huntsman or Roemer, but that isn’t going to happen. Initially, I wasn’t a Romney fan, but having kept an open mind, I watched and learned. Voters need to stop relying on the party label next to candidates’ names and examine the candidates for their personal qualities. If the bought-and-paid-for media help to pick Gingrich or Santorum simply for ratings to keep viewers hooked, heaven, help us.


Thanks to a retweet of @Slone on Twitter whom I follow, @nyformitt, an article by PolitiFacts confirms that while Romney headed Bain, he did save a partner’s missing daughter’s life. Upon hearing that the daughter was missing, he immediately shut down the company. Romney hired detectives, got the police department and employees involved and found her before she died of an overdose from a rave party. Apparently, he didn’t give it a second thought. He went into action to get the job done.

The title of the article is, "Viral Internet Story Says Mitt Romney Helped Locate Missing Teen Daughter of Bain Capital Partner." The article’s anonymous author wrote: "So, here’s my epiphany: Mitt Romney simply can’t help himself. He sees a problem, and his mind immediately sets to work solving it, sometimes consciously, and sometimes not-so-consciously. He doesn’t do it for self-aggrandizement or for personal gain. He does it because that’s just how he’s wired."

Mitt Romney was born into wealth, but he also earned his own. Because he learned to attain "the American Dream," isn’t a mark against him in my book. He can show us how to achieve the best in ourselves through his actions. I do not think he is an ideologue who thinks only he has the answers for others to live their lives. He has never held himself up as an icon of virtue only to fall through the holes as his opponent Newt Gingrich fell into that trap.

My Twitter tweeter @MittforPres2012 sent a link to an article by anonymous writers from These writers described why Romney voters are passionate about him. Read their comments in, "Newsweek/Gingrich: Romney’s ‘Perfect Family’ is a Liability." I sense Romney supporters see him as the closest America has to Jim Anderson, the dad in Father Knows Best, or Ward Cleaver the father in Leave it to Beaver.

What makes people live their faith? This doesn’t mean that their brand of religion is correct, but that the individual’s willingness to believe encourages them to be good.

Indeed, Romney may be the closest resemblance we have to an iconic father figure as he seems like a good one. Other candidates seemed also to be good examples, but they dropped from the race. Romney’s steadiness reassures people. He doesn’t come across like a heartless autocrat as biased media would have us believe. He comes across as warm and caring. The media took, the "I don’t care about poor people," entirely out of context. If biased pundits played the entire comment, we would know otherwise.

I heard Romney’s entire statement regarding supposedly, not caring for the very poor. He talked about their safety nets that if they have holes he’ll fix them. He never came across as someone who is heartless. Romney could have phrased the statement knowing opponents and pundits will crop it to use anything he says against him to weight the election. He is right about conditions of both poor and middle class. Government offers the poor everything, while the middle class has no safety net. When prices rise as gasoline has done, budgets suffer. Rents have continued to rise ever since President Jimmy Carter said he’d put a federal rent control in place, but never did. After he publically stated that, rents skyrocketed and never fell to earth. Some rents increased 300% overnight. Some parents had to move in with their kids and some kids couldn’t afford to leave home.

More to Romney exists than merely his wealth. His optimism is infectious to those willing to see beyond negative Media spin that pits Americans against each other for ratings. By the way, these tactics garner them, big bucks. The blindness concerning former Governor Mitt Romney is a real concern. Those, who support an obviously negative nabob like Newt GinGRINCH, are scarier than he is because they control the outcome of elections.

[If you agree with this, please Tweet, Facebook, Google, and e-mail to others.]

Friday, January 6, 2012

Is It Time to Define Santorum? UPDATE

Richard John Santorum = original Direction = Four (4)
Rick Santorum = subordinate Direction = Nine (9)
05/10/1958 =  Attraction = One (1), Life Path = Two (2)

[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my post entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will mention them as they come up in analysis.]

Go to the bottom of the page for the update if you’ve already read this.

It really doesn’t take doing his numbers to understand him. The Internet has already done a very good job of defining Santorum when doing a search. His words alone give light to his true heart as he spews racist, bigoted intolerance with impunity, but then lies about doing so, even when caught on tape. His rise in the polls has brought him media scrutiny where he now skirts his own statements.

By that fact that he denies what his own words say, one might think Rick Santorum has Six (6) in his Significancy numbers. Rachel Maddow of the same show name does a good job pointing out his hypocrisies. The video clip is at She talks about "family values," Santorum tipping off Senator John Ensign that his marital indiscretions were heading toward being exposed all while he [Santorum] was condemning Rep. Anthony Weiner.

An example of how he thinks is at "I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people who are not people.’"

This Santorum comment alone shows his perceptions of what he thinks it is that "black" people represent. Also, he does not seem to recognize that what he is saying, is that he [Santorum] finds it "remarkable" that a black man is a person. Going to the site shows other outrageous closed-minded comments from someone who seems to think all thoughts coming out of his head are right—not just extremely Right.

Santorum’s "Freudian slips" aren’t petticoats. They are windows into his subconscious of, who he really is by what leisurely spews from his mouth.

The subordinate name Rick Santorum gives him the Conscious Direction of Nine (9). Santorum bounces between insecurity and confidence that are hallmarks of the number. Being confidently wrong, however, is still being wrong. This makes him more the (I Are) tier of arrogance as someone who thinks he is better than others rather than of someone who is genuinely confident. His demeanor is of someone who is not surefooted, but sheepish. He seems like the lowly employee who finally gets his chance to be in charge, but inwardly knows he is ill-equipped. This also lands him on the (Are I) tier of insecurity, putting him in conflict with confidence that he works to emulate. The problem is that he does not attempt to change himself. He wants to change everyone else, preferring others live in his narrow-minded world.

Richard John Santorum as an original Conscious Direction Name of Four (4) comes off like someone stuck in his convictions without the ability to change or be (Moved). It is laudable that he is working toward spirituality, but his world isn’t in this modern diverse one, but from centuries past. Visualizing him as a past-life magistrate during the Salem Witch Trials is easy. Even if not directly showing anger, but hiding it, his passive-aggressive comments and policies show anger. This also puts him on the (Ire) tier of Nine (9) from his original Name. Santorum’s policies are vindictive toward people he deems as lesser than he, making him a (Do Venom) Four (4) as though he has some inexplicable grudge to settle. This may only come from his religious ideologies. Nevertheless, he chose the interpretations of what to believe.

Determination from the (Made Victorious) tier of Four (4) will make him a formidable foe. Though some use it for winning, it is for overcoming personal angst. This tier surely benefitted him as an attorney. Wikipedia reported: "Representing the World Wrestling Federation in one case while with K&L, Santorum argued professional wrestling should be exempt from federal anabolic steroid regulations because it was not an actual sport, rather, entertainment." Santorum’s ideologies seem flexible to what is his benefit.

With a Subconscious Attraction of One (1) Santorum wants to teach and longs to be the (Sage). His comments, however, show him to be a know-it-all rather than someone who is all-knowing. His remarks that "people make bad decision," regarding their health, is a good example. How does he know this? Life is too complex regarding health for him to be so glib and belittling toward people he’s never met. He makes up statements based on ideology rather than facts. At times when not confronted, he seems truthful as someone who does (Just Say) what he thinks no matter how odd his remarks. When confronted, he later denies his wrongheaded remarks, putting him in conflict with honesty. Becoming honest can be a long process for the (Sage) to (Just Say) the truth.

CNN reports and shows videos of Santorum saying how proud he is of a billion dollars worth of earmark pork for himself while in the Senate. This is in direct conflict with Tea Party values. Nevertheless, as a candidate, he is against spending that reinforces the social safety net.

I have no doubt that he is not a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for advice. He seems to rely solely on his own opinions.

He was born to an Italian immigrant father and his mother is half Italian and half Irish. His upbringing seems conventional. He graduated college to become an attorney. Perhaps, he practiced so early in life that his world view comes not from experience, but from books. Lack of life experience except as an attorney to prepare him seems to have honed inflexibility to (Adjust) to a myriad of circumstances. This makes him less than qualified in a turbulent world for such a high office when flexibility is a needed quality for Commander and Chief.

Santorum’s Life Path is Two (2). The positive lessons he is to learn are (To Be Constant). In his core beliefs, he does seem rooted. He also appears faithful in relationships as the (Constant, Be Two) tier.

He seems to dismiss the (Be Too Constant) warning when concerning his ideals, i.e., he sees no other points of view than his own. His stubborn streak of not being (Moved) in Four (4) reinforces this inability to change. He also seems to (Take Back), his comments by denying that he made them. (To Be Constant) is a two-edged sword that needs balance with not to (Be Too Constant).

Voters have come to expect politicians to renege on promises. This is a problem, however, for one who touts, being a paragon of virtue because of his religious beliefs. He literally diminishes religion, i.e., no one can live up to the dogmas, especially, when a paragon cannot. This seems a good reason to keep religion out of politics. If Santorum now says he is fallible, what is the reason for him running, if he is not the paragon he professes by his arrogant attitude, comments, and policies?


Since writing this analysis, my Tweetie Pies on Twitter sent many Santorum statements and videos. He seems to think that he is Elmer Gantry, the Evangelist. Elmer Gantry is a novel by Sinclair Lewis published in 1927 and turned into an award winning movie by Richard Brooks in 1960, staring Burt Lancaster. Elmer Gantry was a con man selling evangelism to small town America.

Many examples exist of Rick Santorum unabashedly showing the world how crazy he is. The fact that he seems clueless is distressing. Below are a few examples, however, many more exist.

At is more than 44 minutes long. In the link @gtomase sent, Santorum calmly discusses that sex is for procreation purposes only.

At titled "Mainline Protestants are Not Christian," tweeted by @ EVK1908, Santorum disparages those who are not Catholics. He calmly and comfortably shows his intolerance for anyone who does not think as he does. His comfort in doing this shows something chilling about Santorum that should disturb reasonable people.

One of the most profound condemnations of Santorum comes from The article exposes his vulnerabilities. However, clicking on the video next to the blog, "Sh*t Santorum Says," that is 4:05 minutes long is the most revealing as it comes directly from Santorum’s own mouth. He yells on the Senate floor with the passion of Elmer Gantry, trying to convert "The Stupid." At least he acts like he thinks Americans are stupid to fall for his "sh*t." And the word "sh*t" puts it mildly. To say that Santorum is a nutcase, puts it kindly. He is certifiable. He seems like someone who came directly from the Dark Ages into this era.

After seeing more of Santorum, I have reassessed his actions and statements. He is worse than I initially suggested. His Four (4) and Nine (9) in his Conscious Direction numbers make him dangerous. His actions confirm naked arrogance and contempt for anyone thinking differently than he does in his angry (Ire) and (I Are) better than others, tiers of Nine (9). This makes him scarier than I originally assessed when trying to be fair to him. Santorum, being on the (Ire) tier combined with (Do Venom) is clear in his actions and statements. He seems conflicted or he blatantly lies to get his way. Since numbers Four (4) and Nine (9) are  in his Conscious Direction numbers, he clearly knows what he's doing. Regarding his statements over the years regarding sexuality, we should take him at his word. He isn’t comfortable living is a sexual world. Perhaps, he’d feel more comfortable with women in barkas, or barefoot and pregnant.

His record is both conservative and liberal. Nothing is wrong with this because people really don’t think along the rigid dividing lines of the extreme wings of the two parties. He lies, however, to get his way, making him not the paragon he pretends, but corrupted and definitely on the negative side of numbers.

Voters forget that Santorum was a practicing attorney. I like attorneys, but face it, they can be persuasive. Which side of the argument are they on? He seems able to flip with ease when watching him on the campaign trail. Nevertheless, the bought-and-paid-for media isn’t going to point this out. They want a Republican who can’t beat Obama.