I could see a *major* plot afoot taking place with this whole debt crisis, but this is not *just* about the debt crisis. I see three legs to it, all needing to happen pretty much simultaneously to ensure Barack Obama‘s continued quest to stay in power.

Read on to find out about the three different legs, and why I feel we should be more concerned about what is taking place in Washington right now:

1) The debt crisis itself. As far as solutions go, America could handle it quite easily. The crisis is only what Obama makes of it. What he makes of it is dependent on how it goes for him. If he gets his way, he will fix things--his way. But it will not bode well for America, in the long run.

What I see him doing is with his holding the economy down even longer is take advantage of money big corporations are racking in right now. Corporations are hanging on to their money, instead of using it to hire new workers and invest in new equipment. That makes for even more money that Obama can plunder and spend.

Additionally, I think that Obama is also forcing economic change in this country by forcing companies to move out of New York and relocate elsewhere. He wants “drain the economic swamp” that he sees New York having become, and he has political supporters in power there to help him with whatever vision he has for the place.

With the recent re-emergence of the Ground Zero mosque, I have to suppose that changes in New York will be tied to Moslems and making it the world power base with the United Nations centered there.

Obama does not necessarily seem to be anti-business to me. He does not at all mind hanging around people with money, and spending money. He does not complain about China’s economic push, or having any problem with the wealth of middle east shieks. Does he talk down to the building in the United Arab Emirates? Not at all.

With his constant referral to “shovel-ready” jobs, it would seem Obama is trying to get Americans to accept the idea of accepting those kinds of jobs instead of the good jobs Americans used to have that made this country so great.

I listen to the liberal news media--people like “thrill up my leg” Chris Matthews--and while they are all so enthralled with Barack Obama because of the change he strives to bring about, I find them all turning a blind eye to the exact kind of change he wants to bring. And because they do not bother to ask this man the pertinent questions that they should in what his intents are, rather than trusting him emphatically, I do believe they, and others who support him, will eventually wake up to a world they do not care to have, and will miss the one they did. By then, however, it will all be too late.

If this country, as I have heard for years now, is to be divided into seven separate nations, then forcing this kind of economic re-location makes some sense. It also divides the economic power that New York held in the world so things can be more spread out and even, as they would want things to be among nations.

2) Fox News. The news stories about Rupert Murdoch’s phone hacking of people’s voice mail. The scandal has its roots more in Britain, but 9/11 victims have been made victims of him, as well. However, my sense is the story itself is based on a scandal, and is meant to bring down Fox News, which he owns.

Make no mistake about it--Obama means to bring Fox News down. It has been a thorn in his side since the beginning. As it is, I have already seen the changes that have been taking place there. Fox News is not becoming more “fair and balanced”--Obama is taking advantage of it by having people like Alan Combs, Juan Williams, and Bob Beckel there. I tend to believe the whole NPR thing was a scheme to get Juan in there, because Fox liked him so much. But since his coming to Fox, Juan has changed and become more vocal about his views, challenging others there more fiercely.

The end result is that things are becoming a shouting match there. That will only turn off viewers. O’Reilly has said that he cuts people off the way he does because his guests start saying something stupid. Well, Bill, let them say it! Let them get their views out there in a forum that allows them to do so. Then come back, and tear their arguments to pieces if they are incorrect!

But, just as with the Ground Zero mosque (which is also now coming back into the news again, interestingly enough), and the Gulf oil spill, Obama separates himself from things he does not want to be seen as a part of. And that is just what he is doing to Fox now--while the destruction of Fox takes place over in Great Britain, out of the mainstream news.

And Fox has not been covering the story themselves much--but I think they should. Unless, of course, they are being told not to some how. They should be defending themselves. Here is my feeling about it:

A large part of the commotion over in Britain revolves around the voicemail hacking of a murdered schoolgirl, a Milly Dowler, as well as victims of the 7/7 London bombings, and up to 7,000 other Brits. So far, however, I have not seen any specific information on the nature of the hackings and why it was done. The outcry may be huge in Britain, but a person is innocent until proven guilty, and we need to find out what exactly took place and why.

There may be much larger part of the story, with the FBI here getting involved on (only the possibility) of misconduct done here. What I find very suspicious is that there is a report of only one single New York police officer/investigator being contacted concerning phone records of 9/11 victims.

It may be a police officer that has been contacted, but police officers are not above being corrupted, and with Eric Holder initiating this investigation, I get more the feeling that it is a setup to help bring down Fox News here in America. And to keep people from seeing the setup, these kinds of things have to be done in such a way that people do easily see the relationship between the different pieces. What I offer here in the following is not what I feel is the accurate picture, but merely a good possibility of something that should be investigated, as well.

Earlier in the year, when Obama went to lay a wreath at Ground Zero after the death of bin Laden, he held a closed-door meeting with only a carefully selected group of 9/11 victims. The email sent to them from the White House was only addressed “'Dear 9-11 family member”. The White House said they “personally invited a group of 9/11 family members who we believe represents a cross section of family members from various 9/11 organizations”, but the invitation contained no names. No one can know who exactly was invited.

I would hardly be one to say anything bad about the 9/11 survivors, but any time Barack Obama holds a closed-door session of any sort, it leads me to wonder just why, and why, in such a ceremony, all 9/11 survivors were not invited, if they could make it. It would be much simpler. In an email to the journalist who wrote the article, the White House responded that “If that personal touch did not come across, it was only as a result of technological and time constrictions in pulling together such an important discussion on such short notice.”

Technological constrictions? What does that mean. And when the President is coming to meet with them, why should the White House state that it involves“…such an important discussion”. Why a “discussion”? What about? And why behind closed doors? Maybe I am making a mountain out of a molehill here, but it sounds rather suspect here.

Were the selected people all ones that the White House somehow knew back then News of the World had succeeded in tapping into their voicemails? Or maybe it is because all these people were Obama supporters, as Obama has done in many of his town hall meetings).

I have no idea what could have taken place that day, but my bloodhound sense about that meeting says there *may* be some connection here that the public is not being made aware of.

The public reaction to Rupert Murdoch is growing, both here and abroad, with very little of the actual facts behind the story having come out. To me, it appears this story is

being almost intentionally enflamed in the media, and I think it may well be to help bring not only Rupert down, but Fox and the Wall St. Journal as a result of it.

Knowing the antagonism the White House has had toward Fox, which it is just now attempting to smooth over, one has to wonder if it is, as I have said, Obama’s way of distancing himself from this story…

http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-family-unhappy-about-obama-visit,0,3130114.story

3) Lastly, the death of Congress itself. If Obama gets his way with this debt crisis, he will blame the Republicans, turn people against them, and turn the tide of the election to himself. If he wins, the Republicans could be tossed out, Democrats will stand aside for Obama, and Congress, as we know it, will be done away with. Sound too implausible? Maybe so, but if we care about America, we must learn to look at the worse case scenarios so we can guard against such things from happening when our way of life is being threatened.

Much has been said about Obama, that he does not know what he is doing, that he is a narcissist, and just ruining our nation. After all, he is just a “community organizer”. But I think he is, as I have heard some refer to him, a visionary. The question is, what kind of visionary is he, and what exactly is his vision?

Well, if his vision was a good one, he would not be as controversial as he is. He would actually lead this nation and take it to a better place. But everything he does is forced, and done with deceit and behind closed-door meetings. Those kinds of things should tell us that he cannot be up to anything good--for America, as we enjoy it now, at least. We must get a fighting spirit back in this country to keep him from getting his way, and with this debt crisis, my feeling is that it may well be our last chance to stop him, and the 2012 elections will hang in the balance.

If he gets his way, in his vision, I can imagine that he will see himself bringing a lot of other changes that he may have in his “vision”. But what those are, exactly, is probably anyone’s guess. But before he can restore the kind of order that he things Washington needs to have, he has to remove the power base that is already there, and this would be the way to do it.

Does this seem too implausible? I do not think so. Obama has gained strength with each and every political victory he has made. And he is looking to get his way in this huge battle over the debt crisis, as well. It is not about serving the American people. This administration is about “fundamentally changing” the United States, and we should know through all his strong-arm tactics and lies that he means to do it any way he can.

We have seen how he plays to the Republicans and the American people. We can only hope that Boehner, Cantor and McConnell have seen his lies and deceit, know how much is at stake here, and have enough courage and fortitude to keep from caving in to Obama’s tricks.

4) An additional, but rather separate part to this will be Obamacare. With Obama succeeding in accomplishing the above tasks, he will also ensure that Obamacare will never be repealed. He will have the power to prevent it from happening. I always felt that Obama’s strategy with keeping it from going right to the Supreme Court was that he was hoping to have to replace another retiring SC judge.

But he might have been seeing this thing with the debt crisis being all he needed to keep it from going to the Supreme Court because if could preserve it that long, the Supreme Court would be a moot issue for him.