MORE PROOF…. OF THE DECEPTION OF PRES.OBAMA?

The Vetting – Exclusive – Obama’s Literary Agent in 1991 Booklet: ‘Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii’

Note from Senior Management:

Andrew Breitbart was never a “Birther,” and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of “Birtherism.” In fact, Andrew believed, as we do, that President Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961.

Yet Andrew also believed that the complicit mainstream media had refused to examine President Obama’s ideological past, or the carefully crafted persona he and his advisers had constructed for him.

It is for that reason that we launched “The Vetting,” an ongoing series in which we explore the ideological background of President Obama (and other presidential candidates)–not to re-litigate 2008, but because ideas and actions have consequences.

It is also in that spirit that we discovered, and now present, the booklet described below–one that includes a marketing pitch for a forthcoming book by a then-young, otherwise unknown former president of the Harvard Law Review. 

It is evidence–not of the President’s foreign origin, but that Barack Obama’s public persona has perhaps been presented differently at different times.

***

Breitbart News has obtained a promotional booklet produced in 1991 by Barack Obama’s then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, which touts Obama as “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

The booklet, which was distributed to “business colleagues” in the publishing industry, includes a brief biography of Obama among the biographies of eighty-nine other authors represented by Acton & Dystel.

It also promotes Obama’s anticipated first book, Journeys in Black and White–which Obama abandoned, later publishing Dreams from My Father instead.

Obama’s biography in the booklet is as follows (image and text below):

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.  The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation.   He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago’s South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.

The booklet, which is thirty-six pages long, is printed in blue ink (and, on the cover, silver/grey ink), using offset lithography. It purports to celebrate the fifteenth anniversary of Acton & Dystel, which was founded in 1976.

Front cover (outside) – note Barack Obama listed in alphabetical order

Front cover (inside)

Jay Acton no longer represents Obama. However, Jane Dystel still lists Obama as a client on her agency’s website.

According to the booklet itself, the text was edited by Miriam Goderich, who has since become Dystel’s partner at Dystel & Goderich, an agency founded in 1994. Breitbart News attempted to reach Goderich by telephone several times over several days. Her calls are screened by an automated service that requires callers to state their name and company, which we did. She never answered.

The design of the booklet was undertaken by Richard Bellsey, who has since closed his business. Bellsey, reached by telephone, could not recall the exact details of the booklet, but told Breitbart News that it “sounds like one of our jobs, like I did for [Acton & Dystel] twenty years ago or more.”

The parade of authors alongside Obama in the booklet includes politicians, such as former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill; sports legends, such as Joe Montana and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar; and numerous Hollywood celebrities.

The reverse side of the page that features Barack Obama includes former Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader and early-1990s “boy band” pop sensation New Kids On the Block.

Acton, who spoke to Breitbart News by telephone, confirmed precise details of the booklet and said that it cost the agency tens of thousands of dollars to produce.

He indicated that while “almost nobody” wrote his or her own biography, the non-athletes in the booklet, whom “the agents deal[t] with on a daily basis,” were “probably” approached to approve the text as presented.

Dystel did not respond to numerous requests for comment, via email and telephone. Her assistant told Breitbart News that Dystel “does not answer questions about Obama.”

The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate. Moreover, several contemporaneous accounts of Obama’s background describe Obama as having been born in Hawaii.

The biography does, however, fit a pattern in which Obama–or the people representing and supporting him–manipulate his public persona.

David Maraniss’s forthcoming biography of Obama has reportedly confirmed, for example, that a girlfriend Obama described in Dreams from My Father was, in fact, an amalgam of several separate individuals.

In addition, Obama and his handlers have a history of redefining his identity when expedient. In March 2008, for example, he famously declared: “I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother.”

Several weeks later, Obama left Wright’s church–and, according to Edward Klein’s new biography, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House, allegedly attempted to persuade Wright not to “do any more public speaking until after the November [2008] election” (51).

Obama has been known frequently to fictionalize aspects of his own life. During his 2008 campaign, for instance, Obama claimed that his dying mother had fought with insurance companies over coverage for her cancer treatments.

That turned out to be untrue, but Obama has repeated the story–which even the Washington Post called “misleading”–in a campaign video for the 2012 election.

The Acton & Dystel biography could also reflect how Obama was seen by his associates, or transitions in his own identity. He is said, for instance, to have cultivated an “international” identity until well into his adulthood, according to Maraniss.

Regardless of the reason for Obama’s odd biography, the Acton & Dystel booklet raises new questions as part of ongoing efforts to understand Barack Obama–who, despite four years in office remains a mystery to many Americans, thanks to the mainstream media.

Larry O’Connor contributed to this report.

h/t

DRUDGE REPORT 2012®

posted by Rightthingtodo in Chicago

OBAMA DECLARES JUNE GENDER CONFUSION MONTH AKA LGBT PRIDE MONTH

h/t The Patriot Post

President Obama is by far the worst president this country has ever had.  The article below illustrates this.  Let me make it very clear, I am a believer in Jesus Christ, plain and simple.  This article should be read by all who still believe in the un-compromising truth of the Holy Bible.

When it comes to sexual perversion, the Bible doesn’t mince its words. Leviticus 20, verse 13, makes it clear that homosexual acts are “detestable” to God. The New Testament is just as strong in its warnings. Jude, our Lord’s half brother, says that Sodom and Gomorrah engaged in “gross immorality” and their former inhabitants are being punished by eternal fire (verse 7). So what do you think will happen to America, where Obama has proclaimed June a month in which perversion is to be “celebrated.” Here’s a great comment, from The Patriot Post. AF

Alexander’s Essay – June 9, 2011

Obama Proclaims June ‘Gender Confusion’ Month

AKA: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month

BHO: Director of LGBT Public Relations

“Marriage is … in its origin a contract of natural law… It is the parent, and not the child of society; the source of civility and a sort of seminary of the republic.” –Justice Joseph Story (Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws)

“Gay” flag flies at the Fed

It is said that Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Barack Hussein Obama, likewise, has certainly been occupying himself with frivolity whilst the U.S. economy edges closer to collapse.

The community-organizer-in-chief took time out from his busy Memorial Day golfing schedule to proclaim June “National Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month,” as he has done annually since his election. “The story of America’s LGBT community is the story of our fathers and sons, our mothers and daughters, and our friends and neighbors who continue the task of making our country a more perfect Union,” said Obama, who apparently comes from both an odd family and neighborhood. He instructed all Americans to “rededicate ourselves to the pursuit of equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.”

That instruction prompted support from legions of his Socialist Bourgeoisie, including, for example, those at the Federal Reserve Bank in Richmond, who, as the central government freefalls toward insolvency, ordered the “gay pride” flag flown with our national flag.

Fed spokesman Jim Strader claimed, “It represents the bank’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.” The bank’s chief operating officer Sally Green added, “We strongly support a diverse and inclusive culture at the Richmond Fed and … the ‘pride’ flag as an example of our commitment to the values of acceptance and inclusion.”

Meanwhile, the economy continues to deteriorate. “We don’t know yet what happened in terms of this particular blip,” said Obama, referring to a shocking May jobs report that saw a paltry 54,000 new jobs created and the nation’s unemployment rate increase to 9.1 percent. That “blip” portends the sinking of the ship, but at least Obama and his flock of gender-confused sycophants can take comfort in knowing that our nation will have a “diverse and inclusive culture” when its economy collapses.

For all the attention the gender-challenged draw, one would think that they represent at least as large a constituency as the Democrat Party’s most devoted dependency — blacks — who make up about 12 percent of our population. But, despite Obama’s insistence that they are “our fathers and sons, our mothers and daughters, and our friends and neighbors,” according to reliable research and surveys, homosexuals compose less than 3 percent of the population. So, why all the attention?

The answer to that question is not readily available on the pages of most conservative political journals because rarely wade into the race debate. The exceptions, of course, are my conservative colleagues who happen to be black. Their skin color renders them relatively bulletproof from the Left’s “racism” canard, thereby allowing them to expose Democrat “plantation politics” without undue threat to their livelihood. Rarer still are analysts who take on the LGBT agenda. Those who do will most certainly be accused of “intolerance” and chastised for their opposition to “diversity and inclusion,” and their syndicators may be subject to commercial boycott (one more reason The Patriot Post does not accept advertising).

However, concerns about such accusations should not keep conservatives from “outing” the truth, so call me what you will — preferably after reading Gender Disorientation Pathology, my summary of how we should respond to the homosexual agenda.

Clearly, the “homosexual normalization” is a high priority for the Left, and they are focusing most of their energy on two fields of opportunity. The first is overturning federal laws which “discriminate against gays,” beginning with proscriptions concerning homosexuals in our military service branches.

Until 1993, when Bill Clinton instituted the so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy giving legal standing to homosexuals in our military and intelligence institutions, those organizations maintained long-standing moratoriums prohibiting homosexual employment because they posed a high risk of compromise, and moreover because of the obvious degradation of morale associated with homosexuals in military ranks. However, in 2008, Obama made it a “top priority” of his administration to repeal DADT and allow open homosexual access to any and all military operations.

In 2010, the United States suffered the largest intelligence compromise in history, by a disgruntled homosexual, Army PFC Bradley Manning. Devastated over news that his “partner” was leaving him, Manning attempted to win back his boyfriend’s affections by “heroically” stealing, according to allegations, some 500,000 classified documents and communiqués from the government’s SIPRNet and JWICS intelligence sharing networks. He then provided them to WikiLeaks for publication. Manning is now in lockdown at Ft. Leavenworth, charged with “aiding and abetting the enemy,” which is a capital offense.

Obama’s response? He has had scant to say about Manning’s treason, and just months after Manning’s arrest, and before Democrat congressional ranks were decimated by incoming Republicans from the midterm election, Obama had Democrats in Congress push through “Do Ask, Do Tell” legislation, which ended any proscription against homosexuals in the military.

This will open the gate for the other primary “gay agenda” items, such as legal recognition of their partners for insurance and other financial benefits. Obama already ordered Navy chaplains to perform same-sex unions, but Congress pulled the reigns back on that maneuver, reminding Obama that the Defense of Marriage Act is still intact.

The second field of opportunity for homosexual normalization is the indoctrination of children at ever-younger ages with homosexual propaganda. The Left subscribes to the Marxist model for success: Karl Marx wrote, “The education of all children, from the moment that they can get along without a mother’s care, shall be in state institutions at state expense.” His student Vladimir Ilyich Lenin concurred, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

They are aggressively engaged in re-education of the young, attempting to pass the “Student Non-Discrimination Act” and a myriad of other measures at the federal and state levels which force the implementation of homosexual teaching curricula in government schools.

So, why would Obama attend to the demands of a small Democrat protectorate by advocating such damaging and high profile legislation?

An indispensable common denominator upon each of these pillars is what Founder James Wilson called, “[T]hat important and respectable, though small and sometimes neglected establishment, which is denominated a family … the principle of the community; it is that seminary, on which the commonwealth … must ultimately depend.”

Marriage is the foundation for the family. As such, it is the fundamental building block of the Republic. Thus, the Left relentlessly chips away at this institution because it inherently challenges the authority of the state.

Obama and his socialist cadres seek to establish dominion over We the People by disuniting us according to race, creed, sex, religion, ethnicity, wealth, ad infinitum, and indoctrinating us with the pretense that we must depend on Democratic Socialism for our protection. By adding “sexual orientation” to the list, they seek to undermine the fundamental building blocks of our society — marriage and family.

The repeal of DADT was the cause célèbre for the Democrats’ “gender identity” constituency, and unless it is undone by the next president and Congress, it will prove a powerful tool for the state to institutionalize the erosion of marriage and family. As for Obama’s ongoing commitment to subordinate the authority of the family to the autocracy of the state, consider the length of his recent proclamations as an indication of his priorities.

In the last month, Obama’s presidential proclamations included Military Spouse Appreciation Day (502 words), National Day of Prayer (546 words) and Memorial Day (620 words and 18 holes).

However, Obama’s Proclamation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month was 826 words, not to mention all of his other comments and the launching of the new White House website, “Winning the Future for LGBT Americans,” ad nauseum.

Despite all the rhetoric, here are the quick and accurate facts about homosexuals and their behavior. There is no “gay gene,” no innate trait or brain distinction between heterosexuals and homosexuals. Homosexuality is not a “civil right” as identified anywhere in our Constitution or its amendments. Homosexuals experience substantially higher instances of mental illness. Homosexuals are, in fact, implicated far more often, per-capita, than heterosexuals in cases of child sexual abuse. The number of “hate crimes” directed at individuals because of homosexual proclivity is minuscule, totaling 267 among 860,853 aggravated assaults in the FBI’s most recent year of record. Homosexual orientation can change, and efforts to correct homosexual pathology are not “harmful” to the individual.

In regard to the homosexual agenda, its objectives must be understood and its actions aggressively halted.

In regard to homosexuals, I encourage you to read Gender Identity, The Homosexual Agenda and The Christian Response. I also suggest you read Advancing a Heterosexual Public Ethic With Grace, Wit, and Natural Law, and for an excellent booklet on responding to the secular challenges to traditional sexual morality, see “Gender Identity.”

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander

Our God is a loving and just God.  He loves us.  Why can’t we get it!

posted by rightthingtodo on Sunday June 12, 2011

Please God, Strengthen Us, Guide Us, and Save America

posted by rightthingtoso  May 19, 2010

IT’S A NEW DAWN IN AMERICA, LUIS GUTIERREZ!

Listening to Michael Savage explode over our dire situation with illegal aliens in America is better than eating a bowl of delicious lemon souffle ice cream!

REMEMBER REV. JEREMIAH WRIGHT’S GOD-DAMN AMERICA? OBAMA IS DOING IT FOR HIM

This article was published April 14, 2010 in Human Events. I think it should be printed every day until Obama is out of office.

Obama to the World: Damn America, Full Speed Ahead

by  Ben Shapiro 04/14/2010

In February 1945, three world leaders — FDR, Stalin and Churchill — gathered in Yalta, in Crimea, to discuss the fate of post-war Europe. At that conference, FDR signed away half of Germany, all of Poland, enslavement of the German population to the Soviet Union. While the conference suggested that liberated countries would be granted free elections, no enforcement mechanism was put in place, so the Soviets effectively annexed every piece of land they occupied.

FDR insisted he had not been duped. “Poor Neville Chamberlain believed he could trust Hitler,” FDR said days after the conference. “He was wrong. But I don’t think I’m wrong about Stalin.” FDR was wrong about Stalin, of course. But he had reason to be wrong — he had been misinformed by his own supposed allies. Soviet agent Alger Hiss worked as part of the American delegation at Yalta; communist superspy Kim Philby and the rest of the so-called “Cambridge Five” funneled papers from the British and the Americans regarding their positions on Poland.

So it’s fair to let FDR off the hook, at least minimally, for Yalta.

Not so with President Obama. He is busily Yalta-ing the United States and her allies knowing full well that the free world will suffer for it.

Take, for example, President Obama’s recent nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia. Obama championed it in order to set an example for the rest of the world: “With this agreement, the United States and Russia … send a clear signal that we intend to lead,” he said. “By upholding our own commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, we strengthen our global efforts to stop the spread of these weapons, and to ensure that other nations meet their own responsibilities.” How will we ensure that other nations meet their own responsibilities? He does not say (shades of Yalta).

What’s worse, though, is the fact that Russia gained more than the United States did in this treaty deal — the United States effectively revoked her right to create any sort of missile defense shield for Europe. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, front man for Vladimir Putin, told George Stephanopoulos on Sunday that if the U.S. pursued missile defense, Russia would pull out of the treaty forthwith. You can bet that President Obama will shelve missile defense as soon as possible based on the Russians’ baseless objections.

Even as President Obama hailed the deal as some sort of breakthrough for world relations, Russia maintained that it would not support heavy sanctions against Iran. Russia’s position completely undermines Obama’s credibility — it’s difficult to claim that arms reduction agreement somehow creates a united front against Iran’s nuclear development when Russia refuses to stand up against Iranian nuclear development.

And that still wasn’t the worst of it — the very same week Obama signed the arms reduction deal, Russia backed a coup in Kyrgyzstan. One of Russia’s conditions for supporting the coup? The new government’s destruction of the American air base in Manas, a crucial U.S. strategic asset used heavily in the Afghanistan war.

Notably, the Obama administration has yet to take a position on the Kyrgyzstan situation, allowing the Russian-backed revolution to continue gaining ground. The Obama administration was not nearly as shy with regard to the fully constitutional change of power in Honduras — that was an outrage, a coup!

That’s no surprise, of course. President Obama only backs policies that hurt the United States and her allies. He seeks self-flagellation of America before the world; absolution for American imperialism can only be found in purposeful self-subversion. Obama feels that America and its allies must be whittled down to its proper size as quickly as possible.

In that spirit, Obama is hosting the Nuclear Security Summit this week. He already opened it by bowing to Chinese President Hu Jintao, hugging socialist Brazilian president Luiz Lula, and pointing his finger angrily at Canadian Prime Minister and pro-Israel advocate Stephen Harper. He has alienated Israel to the point where they wouldn’t even show up — they suspect Obama will sandbag them rather than focusing on Iran. Obama has barred the media from all major meetings — no doubt he doesn’t want Americans to hear what he’s telling foreign leaders about us behind closed doors.

It would be comforting to say that President Obama is a victim of his own naivete and ego. There’s no doubt he loves hearing from human refuse like Medvedev that he is “a thinker,” unlike “other people” (read: George W. Bush). But there’s more to it than simple ego appeasement. There is a disturbing anti-Americanism that animates Obama and his policies. Rev. Jeremiah Wright famously said, “God damn America.” God doesn’t have to. Obama’s doing it for him.

---

Mr. Shapiro is a student at Harvard Law School. He is the author of author of “Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House”, “Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future”“Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctinate America’s Youth” (Regnery, a Human Events sister company and Thomas Nelson).

SENATE DEMOCRATS MEET TO CHANGE RULES TO ELIMINATE THE FILIBUSTER

This is posted on The Gateway Pundit Blog  Thursday, April 22, 2010  12:07 pm

The radicals in Washington are giving the Marxists in Venezuela a run for their money.
Senate Democrats have gathered in the Rules Committee to eliminate the filibuster.
Republican.Senate.Gov reported:

THEN-SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL): “What [The American People] Do Not Expect Is For One Party, Be It Republican Or Democrat, To Change The Rules In The Middle Of The Game So They Can Make All The Decisions While The Other Party Is Told To Sit Down And Keep Quiet.” “What they do not expect is for one party, be it Republican or Democrat, to change the rules in the middle of the game so they can make all the decisions while the other party is told to sit down and keep quiet. The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this Chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting, the bitterness, and the gridlock will only get worse.” (Sen. Obama, Congressional Record, S.3512, 4/13/05)

THEN-SEN. JOE BIDEN (D-DE): “I Pray God When The Democrats Take Back Control, We Don’t Make The Kind Of Naked Power Grab You Are Doing.” (Sen. Biden, Congressional Record, S.5737, 5/23/05)

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “The Need To Muster 60 Votes In Order To Terminate Senate Debate Naturally Frustrates The Majority And Oftentimes The Minority. I Am Sure It Will Frustrate Me When I Assume The Office Of Majority Leader In A Few Weeks. But I Recognize This Requirement Is A Tool That Serves The Long-Term Interest Of The Senate And The American People And Our Country.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.11591, 12/8/06)

•    REID: “Mr. President, The Filibuster Is Not A ‘Procedural Gimmick.’ The Filibuster Is An Important Check On Executive Power And Part Of Every Senator’s Right To Free Speech In The United States Senate.” (Sen. Harry Reid, “Reid Floor Statement On Nuclear Option,” Press Release, 5/17/05)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY) On Any Threat To The Filibuster: “The Basic Makeup Of Our Senate Is At Stake. The Checks And Balances That Americans Prize Are At Stake. The Idea Of Bipartisanship, Where You Have To Come Together And Can’t Just Ram Everything Through Because You Have A Narrow Majority, Is At Stake. The Very Things We Treasure And Love About This Grand Republic Are At Stake.” (Sen. Schumer, Congressional Record, S.4801, 5/10/05)

•    SCHUMER: “We Are On The Precipice Of A Crisis, A Constitutional Crisis. The Checks And Balances Which Have Been At The Core Of This Republic Are About To Be Evaporated By The Nuclear Option. The checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing it’s almost a temper tantrum by those on the hard right. They want their way every single time, and they will change the rules, break the rules, misread the Constitution so they will get their way.” (Sen. Schumer, Congressional Record, S.5208, 5/16/05)

SEN. ROBERT BYRD (D-WV): “I Believe That Efforts To Change Or Reinterpret The Rules In Order To Facilitate Expeditious Action By A Simple Majority, While Popular, Are Grossly Misguided.” (“Sen. Byrd Calls Proposed Democratic Changes To Filibuster Rules ‘Misguided,’” The Hill, 2/24/10)

SEN. CHRIS DODD (D-CT): “‘I Totally Oppose The Idea Of Changing Filibuster Rules,’ Dodd Said During An Appearance On MSNBC. ‘That’s Foolish, In My View.’” (“Dodd: Changing Filibuster Rules Would Be ‘Foolish,’” The Hill, 2/17/10)

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA): “Blinded By Political Passion, Some Are Willing To Unravel Our Government’s Fundamental Principle Of Checks And Balances To Break The Rules And Discard Senate Precedent. The nuclear option, if successful, will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of Senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next will be executive appointments, and then legislation.” (Sen. Feinstein, Congressional Record, S.5398, 5/18/05)

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL): “Those Who Would Attack And Destroy The Institution Of The Filibuster Are Attacking The Very Force Within The Senate That Creates Compromise And Bipartisanship.” (Sen. Richard Durbin, Congressional Record, 4/15/05, p.S3763)

•    DURBIN: The Filibuster Is “[One] Of The Most Treasured And Cherished Traditions Of The United States Senate.” “Many of us in the Senate feel that this agreement tonight means that some of the most treasured and cherished traditions of the United States Senate will be preserved, will not be attacked and will not be destroyed.” (Sen. Durbin, “Statement of Sen. Dick Durbin Regarding the Agreement on Judicial Nominations in the Senate,” Press Release, 5/23/05)

SEN. BEN NELSON (D-NE): “Filibusters … Give Small States Such As Nebraska An Important Tool To Protect Itself From The Will Of The Larger States.” “Filibusters also give small States such as Nebraska an important tool to protect itself from the will of the larger States.” (Sen. Nelson, Congressional Record, S.5917, 5/25/05)

SEN. MARK PRYOR (D-AR): “I Was Very Concerned That When You Looked At The Nuclear Option, If That Trigger Was Pulled, You Had A Nuclear Winter That Would Follow.” “But in a broader sense, I did this agreement for them because I was very concerned that when you looked at the nuclear option, if that trigger was pulled, you had a nuclear winter that would follow.” (Sen. Pryor, Congressional Record, S.6000, 5/26/05)