More Unfunny Pictures

And, again... here are some pictures that the right-wing emailers call "funny".

Why do you need to Lie about the Health Care Law?

It's about time I approached some of these "viral" attacks on the recent health care legislation.

Here's one:

YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS...
Obama Care Highlighted by Page Number
THE CARE BILL HB 3200 

Hmm... Let's take a look at HB 3200...

Oh, wait.  This isn't the health care bill that passed congress.  It never even came up for a vote.  The ones that passed congress were H.R. 3590 and H.R. 3962.

Oh, details, schmetails.  Fine.  Let's look at the bill.  Even if it didn't pass congress.

THIS IS THE 2ND OFFICIAL WHO HAS OUTLINED THESE PARTS OF THE CARE BILL.
Judge Kithil of  Marble Falls,  TX -  highlighted the most egregious pages of HB3200
Please read this........ especially the reference to pages 58 & 59
  JUDGE KITHIL wrote:   ** Page 50/section 152:  The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. 

The legislation reads, "...(T)he Secretary of Health and Human Services shall . . . promulgate such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to insure that all health care and related services . . . covered by this Act are provided . . . without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services."

It seems kind of weird that our emailer interpreted it this way.  At first glance, it seemed to me to state the obvious - that administrators couldn't make health care coverage decisions based on things like race, sex, religion, political beliefs, and so forth.

It makes sense.  And it stretches the imagination to think that this language would extend health care benefits to people who are in this country illegally, and subject to deportation.

But, in case you were wondering...  If our writer bothered to read ahead to section 242, he'd see that benefits are only available to "an individual who is lawfully present in a State in the United States."  So, it looks like our viral emailer wasted a good worry.

* Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. 

The sections included in page 58 and 58 refer to billing practices.  It ensures that, when you go to your doctor, you'll know as soon as possible if you're covered, and how much you will continue to owe the doctor after s/he's completed his or her services.  And it ensures practitioners that there will be consistent rules on how to do the billing.

As for the government having "real-time access to an individual's bank account" and having the authority "to make electronic fund transfers"?  Maybe our emailer was referring to the standard stating that these systems will "enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance."

Note the word "enable".  In my mind, that means, "make something possible."  Not "make it mandatory".  Or, "allow a biller to have unlimited access to someone else's bank account".

It means that, as a patient, you may choose to pay a copayment by bank debit.  If you and the provider want to.

And doctors and hospitals, if they wish, can receive payment electronically from insurance companies.

But I don't see how this would have allowed the government to grab whatever they wanted from your bank account.

** Page 65/section 164:  The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN).

This section reads, "The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish a temporary reinsurance program . . . to provide reimbursement to assist participating employment-based plans with the cost of providing health benefits to retirees and to eligible spouses, surviving spouses and dependents of such retirees."

So, when our viral emailer says that this is a "special" entitlement for unions and community organizations (particularly ones demonized by the right), it's an out-and-out lie.  These rules apply to any employment-based plan.

** Page 203/line 14-15:  The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax.  (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?)

The language is a little bit bizarre.

This refers to some taxes levied on high-income individuals to pay for the costs of the program.  Of course, congressional debate did change the parameters of these costs, which are detailed in plain English over here.  In the end, if you're making over $200,000 as a single taxpayer, you'll have to pay an extra 0.9% in payroll taxes.

This tax can't be used to offset the alternative minimum tax.  Thus, this tax is not considered "a tax" when it comes to calculating the AMT.

Hey, no one said that tax law made much sense to non-tax-policy wonks.

** Page 241 and 253:  Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.

These pages refer to payment to doctors under Medicare.  And, for as long as I can remember, Medicare has always paid physicians according to a government-controlled payment schedule.

If a doctor feels that Medicare is paying too little, they have the right to refuse Medicare patients.  And they can continue to do so after passage of the recent health care bills.  So, in the end, nothing has changed here.

** Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age.

Here's the text:  "The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine if, under the system under this subsection, costs incurred by hospitals described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) with respect to ambulatory payment classification groups exceed those costs incurred by other hospitals furnishing services under this subsection (as determined appropriate by the Secreretary. Insofar as the Secretary determines under subparagraph (A) that costs incurred by hospitals described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) exceed those costs incurred by other hospitals furnishing services under this subsection, the Secretary shall provide an appropriate adjustment under paragraph (2)(E) to reflect those costs incurred by other hospitals furnished."

So, how did "if we do a study and find out that cancer care costs more in certain places, we'll adjust Medicare payments to compensate" become "rationing of care due to age"?

Beats me.

** Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception.

This is a (very slight) expansion to current anti-kickback law.  In order for doctors and hospitals to receive Medicare funds, they've needed to comply with anti-kickback provisions for quite some time.  Because Medicare felt it was unseemly to refer patients to hospitals that they owned, and services provided at these hospitals that they are subject to profit from.

They granted some exceptions to rural hospitals.  These rules tighten the anti-kickback rules governing such exceptions.  But it doesn't prevent the vast majority of hospitals from expanding as they please.

** Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations.  Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. (Death counseling..)** Page 429,  line 13-25:  The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.

Oh, yes.  "Death Panels".  The proud recipient of Politifact.com's "Lie of the Year" in 2009.

For those who haven't kept up:  This version of the health care bill ensured that physicians who discussed advanced directives and living wills with their patient could be paid for this service.  It was never mandatory.

And these "end-of-life" orders?  They're signed by the patient.  The doctor only serves as a witness.

But, no matter.  None of these provisions made it into the health care bills passed by congress.

HAD ENOUGH????  Judge Kithil then goes on to identify:"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill will not apply to members of Congress.  

Funny how he suddenly stopped citing sections of the health care bill when he made this claim.

That's because... there's no exemption.  Members of congress are subject to the individual mandate requiring that they obtain health insurance of a minimum standard.  Fortunately for members of congress, most of the health plans that they're eligible for (as a virtue of their employment) qualify.

Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick 'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."  -    Honorable David Kithil of Marble Falls,  Texas

This lie is so prevalent, I gave it a special article.

All of the above should give you the point blank ammo you need to support your opposition to Obamacare. 

There are lots of reasons why it's reasonable to object to the recently passed healthcare legislation.

These "facts" aren't among them.

It must be stealth humor. Because I can't see it.

And, once again:  Here's an example of what right-wing email forwarders call "funny".

Crappy graphics are courtesy of the originator of this email.

Congress Has Committed a lot of Crimes - In My Imagination.

And, once again, another email decrying the congresspeople that other people elected:

Even if you aren't a Sports Fan this is Very Interesting!

****************
36 have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71, I repeat 71
Cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
14 have been arrested on drug-related
Charges
8 have been arrested! For shoplifting
21 currently are defendants in lawsuits,
And
84 have been arrested for drunk driving
In the last year !

Can you guess which organization this is?
Is it the NBA Or NFL?
Give up yet?
Scroll down,



Neither,
it's the 535 members of the
United States Congress
The same group of Idiots that crank out
Hundreds of new laws each
Year Designed to keep the rest of us in line.

You gotta pass this one on!

First of all, even if this was based on actual research (rather than just making things up), it's been circulating around folks' email boxes since 1999, originating from a set of articles in "Capitol Hill Blue".

But, if you look at the articles online, you'll notice a very important thing:  These statistics aren't in the article anymore.

As it turns out, a lot of people wrote to "Capitol Hill Blue".

It seemed a little funny - the previous articles cited sources, and named names.  This list did not.

And a lot of journalists asked for Capitol Hill Blue to do so.  Each time they were asked, they refused.

Finally, according to FactCheck, these "statistics" suddenly disappeared.  When FactCheck asked Capital Hill Blue about this, the proprietor replied, "I did not double check the facts (which I should have done), nor did I write or edit the stories. But they are still my responsibility."

So, there you go.  Even the original author won't stand by what he said.  And neither should your email forwarders.

How hard will YOU lobby to get your $118 back?

After a lot of hand-wringing, congress has finally agreed to raising the debt ceiling, and passing $2.4 billion in cuts to the federal budget.

But not all tax hawks are happy.  They see easy ways to make further cuts.

Well, they're easy until you actually sit down and think about them.

Here's one viral email:

U N B E L I E V A B L E ! ! Read and scroll all the way to the bottom. What is wrong with us??
How they vote in the United Nations: 

Below are the actual voting records of various Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:  

Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time 
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time 
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time 
United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time. 
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time. 
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time. 
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time. 
Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time. 
Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time. 
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time. 
India votes against the United States 81% of the time. 
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time. 
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.  

U S Foreign Aid to those that hate us:
Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States,still receives $2 billion annually in US Foreign Aid.

Jordan votes 71% against the United StatesAnd receives $192,814,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.

Pakistan votes 75% against the United StatesReceives $6,721,000,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.

India votes 81% against the United StatesReceives $143,699,000 annually.

WHY?WHO IN THE HECK STARTEDTHIS AND WHY?THEY ACTUALLY BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS THEM.
Perhaps it is time to get out of the UN and give the tax savings back to the American workers who are having to skimp and sacrifice to pay the taxes. 
Pass this along to every taxpaying citizen you know.

Of course, when complicated statistics are involved, it's always best to check them.

In the case of these countries' voting records, the viral email author doesn't explain his methodology.  Fortunately for us, Snopes made an attempt to compile the statistics.  Fortunately for our email author, they come to similar results, for roll-call votes.  Most "votes", however, are not by roll call (making it impossible to determine who voted with and against the United States), or are voted in by consent (where no one objects).  So, when someone says, "This country has voted against us x% of the time", they're only counting the most contentious issues, for which a roll call was ordered.  Not that it's unusual to disagree with the United States on the most contentious issues - allied countries such as England and France vote against us about 40% of the time.

Now, as for the notion that we should "get out of the U.N. and give the tax savings back to the American Workers"?  Well, our foreign aid to these countries isn't set by the U.N.  They're decided by congress and approved by the president.

And, quite frankly, when even our allies, in the most contentious issues, are voting against us 40% of the time, it's probably in our best interest to be able to cast veto votes in the United Nations.  A power that we'd lose if we left.  A lesson that the U.S.S.R. once learned the hard way.

And if we explicitly tied our foreign aid to U.N. votes... well, I'd hate to see how that would "spin" against us.

But let's take a look at some of these foreign aid figures:

For Egypt - Yes, we are paying two billion dollars annually in aid.  However, the vast majority of this is military aid.  In exchange for this aid, the United States is getting priority passage through the Suez Canal.  And, unofficially, when we're Egypt's biggest arms dealer, the Egyptians have a very good reason to maintain a peaceful relationship with Israel.

In Pakistan - again, most of the money is for military aid.  In exchange, they've pledged to support our actions in the region.  And, as their support has weakened, so has our aid.

And, in Jordan, we're seeing the same trend.  Most of the assistance is military.  With the expectation that they'll maintain peaceful relationships with Israel, that they will provide logistic support to our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that they will make efforts to stop militants from attacking Israel.

Now, the wisdom of these schemes are certainly areas of reasonable debate.

"But," our viral emailer writes, "American workers are forced to scrimp and sacrifice to pay" for these programs.

Well, let's take a look.

The IRS says that, in 2009, they processed 144,103,375 individual tax returns.  In 2007, they processed 14,752 corporate returns, and 3,989,893 S-Corporation returns.  And, in 2008, they processed 3,146,006 returns for partnerships.  In total: 151,254,026 entities filed income tax returns.

Okay, not every person or entity filing income tax returns will be required to pay taxes.  Let's suppose that only half of them do.  That would create 75,627,013 taxpayers.

So, if you divide the costs of foreign aid to Egypt, Jordan, and Pakistan amongst that tax base - these efforts are costing an average of $118 per taxpayer.

I never said that military hardware was cheap.  But it's not bankrupting too many taxpayers.

He's Not a Psychologist, But He Plays one on the Internet.

Here's a longwinded diatribe on Barack Obama's (supposed) mental health.  I reprint it here for sake of completeness.  But, readers who value their own sanity will probably just skim it, and move on to the history of this (ahem) interesting bit of viral email.

Take the time and read this important message...

  ----- Israeli Psychologist on Obama 

Be sure to read all the way to the end. 

Dr. Sam Vaknin is an Israeli psychologist. Interesting view on our president. Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism. 

Dr. Vaknin States "I must confess I was impressed by Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident -- a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi "religious" impact on so many people. 

The fact that Obama is a total incognito with Zero accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is quite ignorant on most important subjects." 

Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist." Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest friends suggest that the man is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). 

Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple, the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom. 

When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse "Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations,"says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant two years old. Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia, a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. "She died of cancer in 1995." 

One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention. 

If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him.Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. The University of Chicago Law School provided him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book "Dreams from My Father". 

Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still a nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? 

Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.. A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself.This election was like no other in the history of America . The issues were insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? 

I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others. They are simply self serving and selfish. Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. 

This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. 

Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous. Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks voted for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. 

The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites. The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites. The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.Obama will set the clock back decades. America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America , and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations. It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists, and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. 

America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.

The origin of this email is interesting, to say the very least.  Snopes attributes this email to a web posting by Ali Sina.  Although Mr. Sina's writings are prefaced by requests to be cited for his original work, I find very few differences between what Mr. Sina has to say, and what Mr. Vaknin has publicly said during interviews.

They both seem to make the same incoherent arguments, and come to the same conclusion:  That President Obama is mentally ill, and that Joseph Biden should relieve him of duty under the 25th ammendment.  Hallmarks of the recent recent campaigns by perennial presidential candidate, Lyndon LaRouche.  (See the caption under the photo of page 45 of the Vaknin interview.)

Do you find yourself agreeing with Lyndon LaRouche?  Perhaps you'll agree with more of his theories.  Including:

• Adolf Hitler was put into power by the British monarchy.  (And I'm sure that the bombing of London was just a little quarrel amongst friends?)
• The Beatles were created as a British psychological-operations unit.
• Henry Kissinger served two terms as acting president of the United States, and created government programs for genocide under the auspices of the National Security Council and State Department.
• Judaism never existed before Christianity.
• "A journalist not on someone's intelligence-service pad is the rarest of all species, perhaps as rare as the Dodo."
• "From its beginnings under Quaker-linked Attorney General J. Mitchell Palmer, the FBI was intended to become a political 'Gestapo,' serving the interests of foreign supranational powers dedicated to subverting and taking over the United States."

So, you can see why the "argument" for Barack Obama's insanity, itself, seems like insane prattle.  Because there's a lot more of it where Lyndon LaRouche came from.

Okay, maybe Lyndon LaRouche isn't the most reliable source of facts.  But our email author says that Sam Vaknin is a world-respected psychologist and expert on narcissism.

Really?

First of all, in order to call yourself a "psychologist", in any clinical sense of the word, you must complete an accredited Ph.D. program in Psychology, as well as an accredited internship.

According to Sam Vaknin's resume, he attended "nine semesters in the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa".  Over 8 years.  His resume does not mention anything about completing a bachelor's degree.


Pacific Western University gave him a Ph.D. in Philosophy.  Which is interesting - because the business activities he cites in his resume brought him nowhere near California.  Pacific Western University is not an accredited institution (several citations here).  And in a film documentary, he outright admits that the diploma is fraudulent.


As for his "extensive writings on narcissism"?  He did self-publish a book.  It's no longer in print.  If you're really motivated, he'll sell you an electronic copy of all of his writings on narcissism, for the low, low price of $79.90.


Meanwhile, according to a search on Google Scholar, his book has been cited by 44 authors since it's publication in 1999.  Only three of these citations are from peer-reviewed psychological journals, and these, in turn, have been cited by less than 5 authors each.  This is shockingly few, compared to more recognized experts in personality disorder treatment.

Okay, maybe he's not a world-recognized authority on the diagnosis and treatment of "psychopathic narcissists".  Could he still be right?

Well, first of all, he doesn't use standard diagnostic criteria.  He uses his own.

And, if you watch the documentary about Mr. Vaknin, he repeatedly diagnoses himself as being a psychopathic narcissist.  I'm not sure about his diagnosis - but he does openly talk about his past convictions for fraud, as well as engaging in a business model of providing bogus "psychological treatment" to "people who've been victimzed."

Oh, and in his documentary, he also says that one of history's great psychopathic narcissists is - Jesus Christ.

The official diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder (synonymous with "psychopathic personality") are published here.

And, unless you're a rabid anti-Christian or anti-religion freak... I doubt you'll think he qualifies.

Okay.  I've beaten him up enough.

The Communists Took Over in 1934. Too Bad You Missed It.

Right wing emails have a tendency to be overdramatic.  Usually, any idea that doesn't fit within extreme right-wing dogma is decried as a step toward socialism.

This email took it a step further.

Obama must have seen this and is taking it literally.
FYI THIS IS ALSO VERY SCARY!!! Sound familiar??!!
Cartoon from 1934       
 
This cartoon was in the Chicago Tribune in 1934. Look carefully at the 'Plan of Action' in the lower left corner.

"Those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it."

The date on the lower right corner is probably from a reprint.  But, yes, during the days of the new deal, many folks were declaring that government spending and new social programs would end life in the United States as we know it.

Let's see how accurate these predictions were.

Money spent on recovery - check.  Plenty of "make work" programs were created.

Government bankrupted - Nope.  Still had money to fight World War II, which was even more expensive than any "recovery" spending.

Constitution junked - Nope.  It's still there, and still the law of the land.

Dictatorship declared - Nope.  As of this writing, the government is still arguing about the debt ceiling.  There is definitely no dictator in charge.

We've joined the Soviet Republic - Oh, wait.  They aren't even around anymore.

Seems to me that if you're going to be a "chicken little", you wouldn't want to point out how wrong you've been before.