Open Letter to Willard Mitt Romney

Dear Mr. Romney,

Please forgive the formality, but even though you dominate the news on any given day, I don't hardly feel that I know you well enough to call you by your first name at this point in our relationship, you being such a formal and strait laced kind of guy, and all.

I wanted to introduce myself to you, since you've obviously never met someone like me. All of your statements and pontifications specifically spell out the kinds of people you know and are comfortable with and I don't see myself . I don't even see myself depicted in your campaign infomercials aimed at getting voters to like you.

What is it? You don't think people like me vote? Did Mrs. Romney not tell you that women come in all colors, ethnic and economic backgrounds, too, just like men? Has she told you yet, that women actually outnumber men?

Because I am female, Mr. Romney. I'm also not rich, I am successful and happy in my life, and happen to be Black and lesbian. But if it makes you feel better, I'm not really on this same sex marriage tip. Not that I don't think gay people should be married. I just don't think marriage works for women, gay or straight. It's an outdated institution.

But I guess that thought is a bridge too far for your traditional thinking, huh..

People like me do vote Mr. Romney. People like me do pay very close attention, Mr. Romney. We also have concerns for those not so fortunate. You know, poor people, those of us without trust funds, who have to work for a living.

I have to admit, I don't see any empathy or compassion leeching from your pores for the poor or swiftly disappearing middle class, and that causes me great concern. I mean, how can you be president of only some of the people? Isn't the presidency an all or nothing kind of job?

What are you going to do, on your first day in office....deport those of us who don't fit your ideal of American? You going to issue an executive order revoking our humanity like your Mormon forefathers did to my forefathers and me, prior to 1978? I was born in 1950, so you and your church didn't grant me human cred until I was 28.

Was that a christian compassionate move or merely a political one in anticipation of a Mormon takeover of the US of A?

By the way, I want to congratulate you on your overwhelming financial success in life. You've taken that leg up from your trust fund and turned it into millions, possibly billions of dollars and I can only guess how well it is compounding in those tax havens around the globe. We all know you're rich, but we can only guess at whether it is the “m” word or the “b” word since you still haven't gotten around to releasing your tax returns.

Blackmailing President Obama into keeping the Bush tax policies in place has really, really been good for you and your cronies. I can understand why you wouldn't want things to change too much.

From your earnings alone, it is obvious that for people like you, Obama's econ policy is on the right track. Why it's even trickling down to the rest of us. So why do you want to change policies? If we go back to the economic past, pre-Obama, like you say you intend to do, you won't screw yourself up much but you will mess up the rest of us, again.

Wouldn't it be better to continue on the current path, which is working for everyone and not just some?

But I guess if we did that, there would be no need for change in the White House. You could stay in Michigan, riding your new elevator up and down, and Obama could stay in DC. Obviously, since you've been running for president for 12 years, that is not the outcome that you have pictured mentally, is it?

Mr. Romney, there is an old saying about judging a person by the company they keep and I have to tell you that I am deeply concerned about the company in which you've placed yourself.

Clowns and crazy people, really?

You're running around the country doing fundraisers with Donald Trump, the on-paper millionaire and have selected Robert Bork as one of your chief advisers. Really? I mean Really!? In fact, all of your chief advisers come from Dubya, don't they, thus revealing your desire to turn back the hands of time. But you supplied the feminine touch by adding your wife to that mix, didn't you. How very diverse of you.

Question- other than your wife, are there no other women with whom you're comfortable? Phyllis Schlafley too old? That woman from NOM too crazy for the mix? What about Michelle Malkin, she's both brown, ethnic, and in denial.

Are there no other closeted Log Cabin Republicans hidden inside your campaign organization that you can talk out some of this angst you obviously have around the LGBT community? There are many gay republicans out there. Conservative ones too.

Are Herman Cain or Clarence Thomas, or Thomas Sowell, or Condi or General Powell not returning your calls? Don't Fiddy or Diddy or Kanye make enough money to be courted and invited to a Romney fundraiser? What about the Johnsons or Oprah? They are billionaires for goodness sakes.

Surely there are some Hispanic former immigrant types who have turned against their people and become republicans. Marco Rubio can't be only brown fat cat in your social circle, can he.

Don't you feel the ethnic bond with your brown brothers, Mr. Romney, since we are all African on this planet regardless of the color of our skins and the continent we call home.

Shouldn't the 21^st century be about inclusion rather than exclusion, especially since the biggest lie of all creation, that being that your people are the majority in this world, is about to be exposed and disposed of permanently?

Something to think about Mr. Romney.

You take care and have a great day. I do believe in karma, so I won't wish anything on you that I wouldn't want for myself.

Respectfully yours

Jo

Glen Beck

I never write about nor do I try to read anything about Glen Beck. He long ago proved to be an insult to my intelligence and I try never to insult myself by being bothered with anything he chooses to allow to come out of his mouth. He is in fact, in the top five on my list of "walking wastes of oxygen, along with Rush, Ann, Michelle and Michelle (Sarah registers like a child on my scale of grownup WWO).

They are all uniformly bigoted, thoroughly unpleasant individuals, who masquerade as thinking and intellectual human beings. They are intelligent, however, I question they're human-ness. Their distorted and bigoted view of the world has corrupted the thinking of whole segments of the population to the detriment of all. They don't care about this country or the people in it. Calling them racist is an insult to rednecks. So,I try to keep their vitriol out of my world as much as possible because constant ignorance is bad for your health.

Ignoring them is problematic, however, given the MSM's penchant for stirring up useless controversy by giving these people airtime instead of reporting stories of real import.

Which brings me to Beck. This week on his program, apparently he tried to "interpret" the United States Constitution's "three-fifths clause." This is the clause that referred to slaves as three fifiths of a person, essentially writing Black inequality into the document. It is why the House of Representatives has the number of Congressmen that it does. But according to Beck this clause was inserted into the Constitution by the founding fathers because they were actually all abolitionists instead of slave owners that we know them to have been, and were actually attempting to covertly rid the country of slavery. You can read it here.

The way it is written, the three-fifths clause applied to women, Native Americans, The Chinese, as well as Blacks, because what it did was elevate white men to superior status. America's first drug laws were written to "protect" white women from Chinese men, but that's another topic for another day. Back on topic.. If this clause had not been enacted, white men and whites in general would have been outnumbered dramatically because at that time in this country's history, there were more slaves in America then white people.

So the men in power acted the way they always do...protect their power, their property and their women, in that order.

To give you an example, white people in South Carolina were outnumbered by their slaves by about 6 to 1. Further, there had been a slave revolt prior to the constitutional convention that scared white people. The revolt was put down, the slaves brutalized and killed in horrible ways, and the history buried. It's not taught in schools. If you look at history as taught in schools, slave rebellions began and ended with Nat Turner and John Brown. Rebellion history is always ignored in favor of perpetuating the happy darkie mythology where uncivilized negroes were happier being cared for by their white owners then living free lives, doing their own thing.

And, unlike what is taught, slavery was not just a southern problem for white men. There was an internal slave trade in America, in addition to what came over the ocean from Africa. In fact, at one point, the state of New York had more slaves than any state in the South, including South Carolina.

Another reason was to control the numbers of free men of color in America, as well, since all Blacks in America were not slaves and never had been. The three-fifths clause stripped them of their human-ness too, opening them up to the whims of their white neighbors.

The founding fathers...and I hate using that term....were not abolitionists....they were slave owners....they were not Christians....they were white men of power acting like white men of power do...for their own benefit. Their actions back in the day continue to affect us, here in the 21st century, where it is institutionalized and ingrained making it nearly impossible to root out.

Real history reveals that slaves built this country and are the roots of America's foundation. No distortion...no lie.....just fact..

A truth the Glen Becks of the world can't handle.