Thomas Sowell: “In liberal logic, if life is unfair then the answer is to…”

Random Thoughts

By Thomas Sowell | June 22, 2012 | American Spectator

Liberal logic has become a contradiction in terms.

Random thoughts on the passing scene:

Many people may have voted for Barack Obama in 2008 because of his charisma. But anyone familiar with the disastrous track record of charismatic political leaders around the world in the 20th century should have run for the hills when they encountered a politician with charisma.

What is scarier than any particular political policy or issue is the widespread tendency to treat political issues as personal contests in talking points — competitive skill in fencing with words — rather than as serious attempts to find out what the facts are and what the options are.

Victor Davis Hanson: The Liberal Super Nova

By Victor Davis Hanson | June 11, 2012 | PJ Media

Two parties, left and right, are central to good consensual government — one the perennial check on the other, both within the general boundaries of constitutional free-market capitalism.

Yet the hard-Left takeover of the Democratic Party has meant that there is no longer a credible balance in our system, as almost all the tenets of contemporary left-wing ideology are blowing up, imploding super nova style — unsustainable ideas that are contrary to human nature and demand coercion for their implementation, given that they are increasingly anti-democratic and have to be implemented from high by an elite technocracy whether in Brussels, Sacramento, or Washington.

Far too much is always seen as not enough: Greeks are angry that there was too much “austerity” and not enough of the old borrow and spend; Obama is blamed for only borrowing $5 trillion for too “little” stimulus; Democrats threaten to withhold from the community-organizer Obama because he was not hard enough on “fat cats” and the capitalist state; in California, a 10.3% income tax is too low, not too high. When the remedy is seen worse than the disease, then the patient is indeed terminal.

Let me do a brief survey of the fissuring liberal world in which we live:

Where Greed Meets Envy — the Structural Foundation of the Political Left

The Left: Where Greed Meets Envy

By David P. McGinley | June 17, 2012 | American Thinker

In ascertaining the general hierarchy of sins, a good point of reference is the Ten Commandments.  While the Decalogue is not all-inclusive, God dictated these specific directives to Moses as the basis upon which His people should live.  Among the ten is the command not to covet: “You shall not covet … anything that belongs to your neighbor” (Ex. 20:17 [NIV]).

Covetousness (or envy), meaning the possession of a strong desire for what another has, does not get the attention that its close relation “greed” gets.  Greed, of course, is greatly derided in scripture, and for good reason, but God did not see fit to include it in the commandments He set out on Mt. Sinai.  Why?

For one thing, greed is not always destructive, while envy is.  Greed is the desire to have more and, depending how that desire is acted upon, can be beneficial or detrimental.  The profit motive has made the United States the most prosperous nation in history; but, conversely, the abuse of that motive was greatly responsible for the September 2008 financial collapse.  When envy, on the other hand, is acted upon, there is no good, only bad.  At its worst, it leads to mass theft and murder.

Liberalism Is Terminally Ill

By J. Matt Barber | June 11, 2012 | CNS News

It’s been a pitiful sight – a sad week for progressives and “Big Union” Democrat-shilling thugs. In the wake of last Tuesday night’s devastating recall smackdown in Wisconsin, tens of thousands of “Occupy” hippies across the nation have simply been too depressed to get stoned and not look for work.

On Wednesday the White House released President Obama’s detailed itinerary through October:

1. Worry

2. Lie

3. Obfuscate

4. Golf

5. Fundraise

6. Worry

Indeed, the president has much to worry about. No honest politico can deny that liberals’ Wisconsin debacle likely represents a shadow of things to come – a precursor to November.

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea [PDF]

View this document on Scribd

Marx’s Ghost

By Ion Mihai Pacepa | June 9, 2012 | PJ Media

I grew up with the picture of the U.S. president hanging on the wall of our house in Bucharest. My father, who spent most of his life working for the General Motors dealership in Romania, loved America, but he never set foot in this country. For him, America was just the place of his dreams, thousands of miles away. For him, the American president was its tangible symbol. At the end of WWII, we had President Truman on the wall. For us and for many millions around the world, he had saved civilization from the barbarism of Nazism, and he had restored our freedom — for a while. From the Voice of America and the BBC we learned that America loved Truman, and we loved America. It was as simple as that.

A few days after the 2004 Democratic National Convention ended, Teresa Heinz Kerry, the wife of the Democratic contender for the White House, stated that four more years of the Bush administration meant four more years of hell for America.[i] Like Teresa, I am also an American immigrant, and I have spent my 34 American years under six presidents — some better than others — but I have always felt that I was living in paradise.

I still keep the picture of the American president on the wall in my home, and I will continue to keep it there until the end of my days. To me, the meaning of his office transcends the views of its occupant. The president of the United States symbolizes this greatest country on Earth, and he embodies the essence of our unique democracy: a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. He is also the leader of the free world, and the commander-in-chief of the most powerful military and intelligence force on Earth.

Global Governance Utopianism and the Threats to Freedom

By Avi Davis | June 10, 2012 | Breitbart News

It does not take much to trace the lineage of the global governance movement.  Beginning with the very first work on international law, written by Herman Grotius in 1623, down through the philosophical writings of Immanuel Kant and Karl Krause and to the mid- 20th century novels of H.G. Wells, a line can be drawn threading together advocacy of intellectuals and political leaders for the establishment of some kind of global authority to be placed in charge of governing mankind’s work and activities.

Legislative Lowdown: The secret plan to raise your taxes

By Brian Darling | June 8, 2012 | The Daily Caller

Republicans are secretly negotiating with Democrats to raise your taxes after the election.

“A dozen senators ranging from Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn to Delaware Democrat Chris Coons have begun to organize closed-door briefings with leading economic experts to prod Congress into action,” Politico reports.

Evidently these leading experts include Robert Zoellick of the World Bank and William Dudley, president of the New York Fed. These guys are experts in fear-mongering. Unfortunately, members of Congress, motivated by fear, will likely cut a terrible deal for the taxpayer.

Congress is taking action to address “the year-end fiscal cliff” set up by the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, cuts to defense spending, a possible debt ceiling hike and a scheduled Obamacare tax increase. Details are scarce, but we know these squishy members want a deal after the elections so they can feel free to violate Americans for Tax Reform’s Taxpayer Protection Pledge not to vote for tax hikes.

What do historians really think of Obama?

By Edward Klein | June 8, 2012 | FoxNews.com

2012 Getty Images

On the evening of Tuesday, June 30, 2009—just five months into his administration—Barack Obama invited a small group of presidential historians to dine with him in the Family Quarters of the White House. His chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, personally delivered the invitations with a word of caution: the meeting was to remain private and off the record. As a result, the media missed the chance to report on an important event, for the evening with the historians provided a remarkable sneak preview of why the Obama presidency would shortly go off the rails.

The Socialist Mask of Marxism

By Ion Mihai Pacepa | June 4, 2012 | PJ Media

History usually repeats itself, and if you have lived two lives, as I have done, you have a good chance of seeing that re-enactment with your own eyes. In 1978, I paid with two death sentences from my native Romania for helping her people rid themselves of their Marxist dictatorship, carefully disguised as socialism. Thirty years later I witnessed how the same Marxism, camouflaged as socialism, began infecting the shores of my adoptive country, the United States, which had just won a 44-year Cold War against Marxism and against its earthly incarnation, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

In a 2008 column titled “Big Political Shifts Are Underway,” Joelle Fishman, chairman of the Action Commission of the Communist Party USA, strongly endorsed the Democratic Party’s candidate for the White House, appealing to all working people in the United States to back Senator Barack Obama, in order to provide “a landslide defeat of the Republican ultra-right.”

George Will Schools Krugman on Gov. Walker: $3 Billion Deficit ‘He Inherited’ Has ‘Become a Surplus’ [Video]

By Noel Sheppard | June 03, 2012 | Newsbusters

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman got another much-needed education from syndicated columnist George Will on ABC’s This Week Sunday.

After Krugman impugned Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wisc.) for his so-called “fiscal irresponsibility,” Will simply and quite accurately responded, “A more than $3 billion budget that he inherited, a deficit, has now become a surplus” (video follows with transcript and commentary):

Winning Battles, Losing Wars

By Victor Davis Hanson | May 20, 2012 | PJ Media

Can We Still Win Wars?

Given that the United States fields the costliest, most sophisticated, and most lethal military in the history of civilization, that should be a silly question. We have enough conventional and nuclear power to crush any of our enemies many times over. Why then did we seem to bog down in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan? The question is important since recently we do not seem able to translate tactical victories into long-term strategic resolutions. Why is that? What follows are some possible answers.

No—We Really Do Win Wars

Perhaps this is a poorly framed question: the United States does win its wars—if the public understands our implicit, limited strategic goals. In 1950 we wanted to push the North Koreans back across the 38th parallel and succeeded; problems arose when Gen. MacArthur and others redefined the mission as on to the Yalu in order to unite the entire Korean peninsula, a sort of Roman effort to go beyond the Rhine or Danube. Once we redefined our mission in 1951 as one more limited, we clearly won in Korea by preserving the South.

1996 AD: Obama Event Sponsored by Socialist Group

By Aaron Klein | May 24, 2012 | WND

A 1996 print advertisement in a local Chicago newspaper shows President Obama was the speaker at an event sponsored and presented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA.

Buzzfeed.com reporter Andrew Kaczynski posted on his Twitter account an image of the Hyde Park Herald ad for the Feb. 25, 1996, DSA event, billed as “the first townhall meeting on economic insecurity.”

WND first reported on the event in 2008.

Obama has shown evidence of a larger relationship with the DSA.

It’s the Culture, Stupid

By Tom Tancredo | May 25, 2012 | WND

Exclusive: Tom Tancredo asserts election is about worldview clash, not economics

There is a growing realization in political quarters that there’s more to the resiliency of the Obama regime and his re-election chances than voters’ shifting priorities or occasional upticks in the nation’s economy. But the resiliency of the Obama constituency should not be a mystery: It’s the culture, stupid.

Some very large segments of the population are immune from any evidence or real-world news of Obama’s failures. The challenge for Republican strategists and Romney advisers is that this problem is far deeper than traditional Democratic constituencies such as organized labor and ethnic minorities. The problem for Republican strategists is that they have great difficulty thinking outside the box of conventional economic issues. They fear “social issues” – which are, of course, cultural issues – and have no contingency plan for dealing with them.

The bad news for Romney is that at least 40 percent of the electorate shares much of Obama’s worldview; their support for Obama does not depend on the direction of the monthly unemployment numbers. That’s not a weak base to build on, and the Republican task of finding 51 percent who will resist the free-lunch demagoguery of the left grows more difficult with each election cycle.

Winston Churchill and Milton Freidman on Capitalism Versus Socialism [Video]

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” ~Winston Churchill

The World Wildlife Fund Targets Humanity

By Robert Zubrin | May 23, 2012 | National Review

To save the Earth, the WWF urges us to adopt the living standards of Chad or Sudan.

The World Wildlife Fund, the posh flagship of the global environmentalist movement, has just released its biennial publication assessing “the state of the planet.” Entitled “Living Planet Report 2012,” the publication bemoans alleged catastrophic effects that humanity is inflicting upon the Earth, and calls for drastic curbs on civilization as a necessary corrective measure.

According to the WWF, the human race is currently consuming at a rate that would be sustainable only if we had 1.5 Earths. Since we do not, overall human activity needs to be reduced by 33 percent to put mankind “in balance with the Earth’s biocapacity.”

45 Signs That America Will Soon Be A Nation With A Very Tiny Elite And The Rest Of Us Will Be Poor

By Staff Report | April 2, 2012 | End of the American Dream

The middle class is being systematically wiped out of existence in the United States today.  America is a nation with a very tiny elite that is rapidly becoming increasingly wealthy while everyone else is becoming poorer.  So why is this happening?  Well, it is actually very simple.  Our institutions are designed to concentrate wealth in the hands of a very limited number of people.  Throughout human history, almost all societies that have had a big centralized government have also had a very high concentration of wealth in the hands of the elite.  Throughout human history, almost all societies that have allowed big business or big corporations to dominate the economy have also had a very high concentration of wealth in the hands of the elite.  Well, the United States has allowed both big government and big corporations to grow wildly out of control.  Those were huge mistakes.  Our founding fathers attempted to establish a nation where the federal government would be greatly limited and where corporations would be greatly restricted.  Unfortunately, we have turned our backs on those principles and now we are paying the price.

The Left’s War on Language

By Timothy Daughtry  | March 14, 2012 | Townhall.com

Though we may be tempted to laugh at the silliness of the Democrats’ recent accusation that the Republican Party is waging a “war on women,” mainstream Americans need to brace themselves: This is but a mild example of the kind of tactic we can expect from the Obama forces during the 2012 campaign, and the left uses tactics like that because they work. As skyrocketing gas prices combined with unemployment and underemployment to trap American workers in an economic vice-grip, this administration cannot afford to campaign on its record, so out comes the community organizer playbook. For voters who think political campaigns should actually discuss issues, things are going to get even more bizarre in a hurry.

The particular tactic in play here is simple: Convince one group that the liberal politician will make things right by defending that poor, helpless group. Think “transfer payments with a little vengeance thrown in,” and you will have the essence of the tactic. This tactic is political gamesmanship at its worst, and it works.

Progressing Toward Moral Darkness

By Gary Horne | May 19, 2012 | American Thinker

 A fashionable name for the left these days is “progressive.”  The use of this word hints that the progressive has already passed the rest of us and is moving on to some place where the normal rules of reality don’t apply.  Is it the Garden of Eden?  Atlantis?  Oz?

What will life be like in this destination?  Will the moral standards be compatible with the society we want?  How do progressive values compare with the traditional American ethical standards from the founding of the United States and from the major religions?

From the Founding:

The moral underpinnings of the United States of America were beautifully and concisely expressed in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Can we rely on the progressives to protect those unalienable rights derived from our nature as human beings?  Will they uphold the standards in the Declaration of Independence: Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness?

Agenda 21: Conspiracy Theory or Threat

By Tom DeWeese | May 12, 2012 | American Policy Center

The battle over Agenda 21 is raging across the nation. City and County Councils have become war zones as citizens question the origins of development plans and planners deny any international connections to the UN’s Agenda 21. What is the truth? Since I helped start this war, I believe it is up to me to help with the answers.

The standard points made by those who deny any Agenda 21 connection is that:

• Local planning is a local idea.
• Agenda 21 is a non-binding resolution not a treaty, carries no legal authority from which any nation is bound to act. It has no teeth.
• The UN has no enforcement capability.
• There are no “Blue-Helmeted” UN troops at City Hall.
• Planners are simply honest professionals trying to do their job, and all these protests are wasting their valuable time.
• The main concern of Agenda 21 is that man is fouling the environment and using up resources for future generations and we just need a sensible plan to preserve and protect the earth. What is so bad about that?
• There is no hidden agenda.
• “I’ve read Agenda 21 and I can find no threatening language that says it is a global plot. What are you so afraid of?”
• And of course, the most often heard response – “Agenda 21, what’s that?”

And after they have proudly stated these well thought out points, they arrogantly throw down the gauntlet and challenge us to “answer these facts.”

Well, first I have a few questions of my own that I would love to have answered.

Enviro-Idiots: Two Earths Needed by 2030

By Rush Limbaugh | May 17, 2012 | RushLimbaugh.com

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I have here, ladies and gentlemen, a full-fledged story at the Huffing and Puffington Post: “WWF Living Planet Report Warns That By 2030 Two Earths Will Be Needed To Sustain Our Lifestyles.” There is a single reason that they give this warning.  And while I read this I want you to ponder what that single reason might be.  Why might we need two earths by 2030?  That’s just 18 years from now.

“Humans will need two Earths to support our lifestyles by 2030 because we are draining the world’s resources so quickly, a new report has warned.  Produced by the World Wildlife Fund, the Zoological Society of London, the Global Footprint Network and the European Space Agency, the 2012 Living Planet Report measures humans’ ecological footprint on the planet. At the moment, the picture is bleak, according to Jim Leape, Director General of WWF International, with resources being drained 50 per cent faster than they can be replenished. He said: ‘We’re all familiar with the stories of what we’re doing to Planet Earth, the ways in which we’re changing the climate, depleting the world’s fisheries, destroying the world’s forests.'”

None of that’s true.  There is more forest area in this country than at the time of the founding.  Each time that stat is mentioned, the left goes nuts.  But here we get to the real reason this is happening.  Mr. Leape, Jim Leape, director general, WWF International, says, “The starting point for reducing our impact on the planet is to end our love affair with fossil fuels — ‘the energy technology of the 20th century’ — and switch to renewable energy.” That shift alone will make a huge difference on our footprint on the planet.  So once again an all-out assault on fossil fuels and oil.  You know, it could be argued — no, I don’t think it is arguable.  Life on earth has never been better, has it?  For more people on earth, life has never been better.  It’s never been more full of opportunity. It’s under assault, of course, but the life expectancy, medicines, never been better.  This is typical bunk.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I want to beg your indulgence for just for a second.  I kind of glossed over this story that’s on the Huffing and Puffington Post from the World Wildlife Fund. I want to go back to it for just a couple of points.  And I want you to stop when I read this opening sentence.  I want you to realize that the people behind this are dead serious.  “Humans will need two Earths to support our lifestyles [in 18 years] because we are draining the world’s resources so quickly,” according to a new report.

Now, to you and I, this is pure bunk.  It’s insane.  But college professors, high school teachers all over the country will likely pick this up, and it will become part of the daily lesson plan.  It will be added to, just like Lexis and Nexis is a massive database of news stories, and whatever is published today on AP, say about me, will end up in LexisNexis and will be there forever.  Lazy journalists will cite it, go back and look, “Oh, a story about Limbaugh?  What else is there.” They’ll find stuff that’s been in the database for 45 years and they’ll run it.  Same thing here.  Need two earths.  I want you to stop and think how literally ridiculous this is, but these people, and they are full-fledged liberals, leftists, whatever, they mean it.

It is another in a never ending series of crises that the people of this country are inundated with practically every day now in the media.  Now we’re going to need two earths.  It’s all about climate change. It’s all about global warming. It’s all about our sinful, unacceptable use of oil and fossil fuels.  We are destroying the planet. We are using up this planet’s resources so quickly we’re gonna need two planets to handle our needs.  These predictions have been made for over a hundred years, that we’re running out of resources, that we’re gonna deplete the world of natural resources, minerals, food, and none of it has ever been true.  None of it.

They have a statistic in this story that is just patently ridiculous.  We are using 50% more resources than the earth can provide.  That is not possible.  If the earth can’t provide the resources, how can we use them?  The simple fact of the matter is, the earth is providing the resources.  Paul Ehrlich back in the seventies predicted that by now there would be war, pestilence, famine because of too many billions of people.  We have shot past his prediction.  We have not run out of anything.  We continue to produce enough and more for what everybody needs.  Look at the growing countries of China and India.  Without getting into why, their economies are growing.  People there are buying cars.  They’re driving cars.  They’re buying gasoline.  They’re not having any problem finding gasoline.  If they can afford it, it’s available.  We’re not running out.

Whatever the demands, economic or otherwise, lifestyle, they are met, be it food or what have you.  Now, you might be able to go to a country and say people are starving, but that’s not because the earth is being depleted.  That’s because there’s a dictatorship likely starving his people in order to maintain power.  Or you have a socialist or communist government which has no idea how to create wealth and doesn’t really want to.  The only thing in short supply in the world is capitalism.  We have an unequal, unfair distribution of capitalism.  There simply isn’t enough of it.  There’s way too much socialism in the world.  There’s way too much Marxism.  There’s way too much communism.  There is way too much dictatorship, which, by the way, is the way humanity, for the most part, has lived since we first began walking the earth.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• WWF: Two Earths Needed By 2030 (huffingtonpost.co.uk)
• Living Planet Report Highlights Alternative Energy For Sustainable Future (energyrefuge.com)
• US lifestyle would need 4 earths to sustain: WWF report (mytechnologyworld9.blogspot.com)
• WWF report criticizes Canadians’ ecological footprint (canada.com)
• Report: ‘Over-Consumption’ Threatening Earth | Common Dreams (2012indyinfo.com)
• The world is not enough: soon we’ll need three planet Earths (scotsman.com)
• Australia seventh-worst polluter on Earth: report (eco-business.com)

The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House

By Ed Lasky | May 14, 2012 | American Thinker

Edward Klein’s new book on Barack Obama,The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House, is a withering portrayal of a radical adrift, in over his head, drowning in his own incompetency — while being weighed down by a small circle of “advisers” who are compounding the problem of the Amateur in the White House.

Klein’s book begins with a talisman-like quote uttered by Barack Obama when his recently appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to boost Obama’s ego by telling him, “Your legacy is going to be preventing the second Great Depression.”  To which Barack Obama responded, “That’s not enough for me.”

As all of America knows by now, Obama has aggressively sought to “fundamentally transform” America — one of the few promises he has kept from the days of 2008.  Five trillion dollars of borrowing, ObamaCare passed over the objections of the majority of Americans through legislative legerdemain and special deals made with resistant politicians, failed stimulus, green programs failing left and right as taxpayers are left holding the bag, a recovery that is the most anemic on record, an America that has been sundered by the man who promises to unite us, America weaker abroad and at home — yes, America has been fundamentally transformed.  Mission Accomplished.

But how and why did Obama succeed in such a catastrophic way?  That is the question that Klein successfully answers in his extremely readable and enjoyable book, with enough spicy details to satisfy the craving of anyone interested in how President Obama and those closest to him have driven us to the condition we find ourselves in as we approach November.

One of the motifs that runs throughout the book is Barack Obama’s sheer level of incompetency.  He has the fatal conceit of many politicians: an overweening ego.  That may be a prerequisite for politicians and leaders, but when it is unleavened by a willingness to consider the views of others, it becomes a fatal conceit.  And Obama has that trait in abundance.

Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but omniscient — unwilling to give any credence to the views of others (especially but not limited to those across the aisle).  Experts in management are interviewed who point out that he lacks essential qualities of leadership.  Indeed, the book gets its title from an outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to encourage Hillary to take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012:

Obama doesn’t know how to be president. He doesn’t know how the world works. He’s incompetent. He’s…he’s…Barack Obama’s an amateur.

But Klein does not rest there.  He delves into associates from Obama’s career in Cook County politics, his stint as a state senator, and his rise to the United States Senate.  There is a common pattern: Obama likes to campaign, but once he is elected and actually starts working, his interest flags, and he starts looking for the next “big thing” — electorally speaking.  He had few if any accomplishments or professional standing in any of his previous positions.  Even when he served as a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, he avoided any encounters with other faculty who enjoyed discussing the law.  His reluctance to engage them is revealing in and of itself, suggesting he had a reason for his lack of confidence.

His disdain toward working with others is manifest.  He has gained a reputation over the last few years as being cold and distant, refusing to engage, as have other presidents, in the give-and-take of politics, in the social niceties that help grease the wheels in Washington.  Liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen recently advised him to read Robert Caro’s newest volume on the life of Lyndon Johnson as a primer on how to be president.  Johnson, of course, was a master at pulling levers of power, but he also knew how to persuade individual politicians on both sides of the aisle to work with him on legislation.  But, of course, LBJ also had the common touch and, having risen from humble beginnings, never considered it beneath him to work with those underneath him.  Not so Barack Obama.  He complained to foreign leaders that he had to waste time talking with “congressmen from Palookaville.”  At another time, he switched locales and said he was tired of dealing with people from “Podunk.”

His campaign trail comments regarding small-town America as being populated by “bitter” people who cling to guns and Bibles was not a one-off.  They are reflective of his views.

But the high and the mighty also come in for the Obama treatment.  Klein reveals dismay among former Obama supporters who feel they have been mistreated, maligned, and thrown under the bus.  Obama’s most generous early donors have been all but ignored; early mentors in the black business community have been sidelined if not completely ditched; people don’t hear from him or his staff unless a fundraiser is coming up.  But there is more: Caroline Kennedy is angry at the way she and her family were used for campaign purposes in 2008 and then summarily dismissed and stored away like so many movie props have been (the latter is my description).

Even Oprah Winfrey has been stiff-armed by the Obamas.  According to the book, Oprah took a big risk in supporting Obama in 2008 and campaigning for Obama in Iowa, being a big boost in his campaign.  The ratings for her show weakened significantly (and her new network has been a huge disappointment).  But when she has tried to visit the White House, she has been all but treated as persona non grata.  Apparently, Michelle Obama is a possessive person who fears the influence Oprah may have over Barack Obama (more on this below).  Oprah blames it on Michelle’s anti-obesity campaign.  She is quoted as saying, “Michelle hates fat people and doesn’t want me waddling around the White House.”  Klein digs up a quotation of Michelle Obama’s from a White House source that seems to confirm Oprah’s suspicion:

Oprah only wants to cash in using the White House as a backdrop for her show to perk up ratings. Oprah with her yo-yo dieting and huge girth, is a terrible role model. Kids will look at Oprah, who’s rich and famous and huge, and figure it’s okay to be fat.

Oprah, Caroline Kennedy, Pastor Jeremiah Wright (who merits a chapter), and Obama’s former long-time doctor (who feels Obama is distant and lacks feeling, passion, and humanity) all join a long list of people whom the Obamas have used, abused, and then cast aside once they moved into the White House.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Book Claims Oprah and Michelle Obama Are Feuding With One Another (inquisitr.com)
• Book says U. of Chicago medical center VP bribed Jeremiah Wright (dailycaller.com)
• Oprah And Michelle Obama HATE Each Other?! Bogus Reports Surface Suggesting Feud! (perezhilton.com)
• How Oprah fell from favour at the court of the Sun King, Barack Obama (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
• Is Michelle Obama a ‘Bunny Boiler’? (ibtimes.com)
• Obama’s Fear of Hannity, and Wright Hush Money (spectator.org)
• Jeremiah Wright claims Obama ally offered $150,000 bribe in 2008 to shut up (hotair.com)
• Girl Fight: Explosive New Book Claims Michelle Obama And Oprah Were Beefin’ And Fighting Over Barack (bossip.com)

House Dems Receive Training on Portraying Conservatives as Racist

By William Bigelow | May 13, 2012 | Breitbart

Maya Wiley is the founder and President of the Center for Social Inclusion. (photo via website)

In the latest transparent attempt by the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party to make the 2012 election a referendum on supposed racism and not Obama’s dismal performance, House Democrats received training this week on how to portray neutral free-market rhetoric as racially charged.

Maya Wiley of the Center for Social Inclusion, whose statements were distributed at a meeting of the House Democratic Caucus, cynically called conservative messages “racially coded … right-wing rhetoric has dominated debates of racial justice – undermining efforts to create a more equal society, and tearing apart the social safety net in the process” for over 25 years.

Wiley was invited to the caucus by Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif  to run the Democrats “through their strategy and how they message and talk about stuff” pertaining to race and fiscal policy.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Report: House Dems trained on how to use race against the GOP (theblaze.com)
• Federal Elected Democrats had training on how TO make Race an Issue this Election. They are to “Call negative comments as ‘Racist'” (sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com)
• House Democrats trained on how to play the race card (twitchy.com)
• Key Soros Ally Provides Race-Rhetoric Training Session for House Democrats (spectator.org)
• It’s All Racism , All The Time (youviewedblog.wordpress.com)
• Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism – 2010 (biggovernment.com)
• Allen West and His Critics (spectator.org)

A New Declaration of Independence

By Eileen F. Toplansky | April 28, 2012 | American Thinker

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary to ensure that a President, who has led the country to near ruin and who is working to discard the basic principles upon which this Great Country rests, be peaceably removed it is incumbent upon us that we submit the reasons to the people.

Without any in-depth research or vetting about his background, Barack Hussein Obama was elected the 44^th president of the United States.  There were voices of caution who early on exposed Obama’s connections to former terrorist Bill Ayers, anti-American vilifier Reverend Wright, crook Tony Rezko, and anti-Semite Rashid Khalidi, but they were laughed at as the people allowed themselves to be demagogued on hope and change.  Evidence continues to suggest that Barack Obama’s long-form birth certificate is, indeed, a forgery.  This would make his presidential eligibility suspect.

Thus, the American people are at a critical watershed moment in our history.  The facts are in; Obama’s ideology and core principles are now public and exist for all to see.  We can no longer claim ignorance; we can no longer be naïve; we can no longer deny what is patently before us.  The record of this current president is a “history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these United States.  To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

Mr. Obama has “given himself the powers to declare martial law[.]  It is a sweeping power grab that should worry every American.”  Thus, “Barack Obama is very dangerous, the apotheosis of an insidious strain of authoritarianism that destroys from within.”  In a statement published on December 31, 2011, Mr. Obama states that “[t]oday I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012.”  Though he claims that he has “signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists,” it was Mr. Obama who “demanded the removal of any and all protections for US citizens and legal residents.”

And like King George III, Obama has now established the distinct possibility of placing “[s]tanding armies without the Consent of our legislatures” — although sadly, in this case, the Senate passed this unwholesome disgrace.  King George III would be pleased.

In fact, Mr. Obama sees fit to bypass the “pesky” Constitution whenever it suits him, thus ignoring limited-government tenets which were at the core of the Founding Fathers’ belief system.  Thus, the NDAA detention mandate allows indefinite military detention not just to foreigners; now “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

In fact, should Mr. Obama be re-elected to a second term, “our rights to speech, religion and property, and to privacy in our persons and homes, will be transformed.”  Mr. Obama has already “hectored Christianity on matters of conscience.”  Through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as ObamaCare, Mr. Obama is forcing Catholic institutions to pay for insurance covering contraceptives.  Why, when “religious liberty was weighed against access to birth control, did freedom lose?” — a clear intrusion into the first of the five protections of the First Amendment.  Bishop Daniel Jenky has likened President Obama’s health care policies to the attacks on the Catholic church by Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin of yesteryear.  Dare we go down that totalitarian road again?

The onslaught against free speech has been heightened because of the “cooperation between [Mr. Obama] and the OIC or Organization of Islamic Cooperation.”  The “Obama administration stands ‘united’ with the OIC on speech issues,” thus silencing Arab reformers and anyone who makes any allegedly negative remarks about Islam.  The “repressive practices” of the OIC member-nations speak volumes about their restrictions on free speech.  Hence, “the encroachment of de facto blasphemy restrictions in the West threatens free speech and the free exchange of ideas.”  That an American president would threaten this most fundamental right is yet another resounding reason why he needs to be removed from office.

In December of 2009, Nat Hentoff, a nationally renowned authority on the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights, asserted that “[i]f congressional Democrats succeed in passing their health-care ‘reform’ measure to send to the White House for President Obama’s signature, then they and he are determining your health decisions[.]” Thus, “these functionaries making decisions about your treatment and, in some cases, about the extent of your life span, have never met you[.]  Is this America?”  Hentoff concludes his piece with the revelation “I’m scared and I do mean to scare you.  We do not elect the president and Congress to decide how short our lives will be.”

Thus, we still hold “these truths to be self-evident, that all [people] are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  And “whenever any Form of Government becomes  destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles … as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”  We do not declare violent revolution but do demand the secure right to change the government through the ballot box.

But even this fundamental right is being seriously eroded as the Department of Justice openly and arrogantly dismisses genuine cases of voter intimidation with nary a word of concern by Barack Obama.  Although there is visual proof and  evidence of threats to the voting public as well as exhortations of death threats to a man on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder turns a blind eye.

By his selective indifference, Mr. Obama has created a racially divisive atmosphere in America.  He continues to promote this hateful attitude wherein the civil rights progress made in this country for all its citizens is ignored.  Surely, Mr. Obama has “excited domestic insurrections amongst us” as he engages in racial division, class warfare, and phony gender wars.  If Mr. Obama is, indeed, so interested in the rights of women, then why does he support Islamic sharia law, which demands second-class status for women?  These diversions serve to stir up resentments; unfortunately, they are successful in obfuscating the shameless actions of this 44^th president.

Mr. Obama is not content with taking the country down the path to “European socialism.”  His centralized control of the health care industry, his increases in entitlement programs, his redistribution of capital — in fact, his sweeping regulations that give the government new authority to control the entire financial sector — are reminiscent of Karl Marx’s 10-Point Agenda, and although communism was unknown in 1775, the signatories of the Declaration knew of the absolute power of the monarchy and would see through the oligarchic nature of this “ism.”

Amazingly, Mr. Obama has assured Russian leaders (who have gained their power through rigged elections) that American concessions are coming their way, but they [the Russian leaders] must wait because he is seeking re-election and he dare not tell his own people of his true intentions.  What credible reason would a loyal American president have for weakening American and allies’ defense systems?  During the open microphone conversation between Obama and Medvedev, a puppet of KGB Putin, the world learned whose interests Obama was truly serving.  Surely, this is “enough to chill friends and allies, democrats and dissidents, all over the world.”

Furthermore, Obama has “obstructed the Administration of Justice[,]” instead pitting one group against the other through “waivers.”  If ObamaCare is so laudable, why extend waivers in the first place?  In fact, it is yet another example of how manipulative Mr. Obama is when he tries to make the people “dependent on his will alone.”

Mr. Obama has ignored the laws of our country to impose an arbitrary and capricious rule of law by outside forces.  He finds it more expedient to pit the federal government against an American state which is trying only to enforce federal immigration law.  To this end, Mr. Obama has seen fit to “subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution[,]” which was so clearly enumerated in the Declaration of Independence as reason to reject King George III.   By issuing a Universal Period Review (UPR), the first of its kind, Mr. Obama has given the United Nations the right to dictate to Arizona.  Thus, the “stakes for our national sovereignty have just been raised.”  Despotic countries of the United Nations have now been empowered to dictate how Americans should conduct themselves.  Is this not reminiscent of King George III “waging war against us”?

Moreover, the Obama State Department ordered the “suspension of routine border inspection procedures in order to whisk (Muslim Brotherhood) Islamists into our country.  Thus, Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party did not have to go through the normal procedures of inspection.  Recall that the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission statement is “Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, Jihad is our way, and dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!”  Negotiating with the Muslim Brotherhood is akin to negotiating with the dictator Hitler.  It is appeasement all the way.  Why does the Obama administration cavort with such people?  Does this not make him unfit to defend the interests of America?

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Romney Silent As Woman Says Obama Should Be Tried For Treason (buzzfeed.com)
• Obama: ‘2012 is Make or Break for American Marxism’ (gulagbound.com)
• Dictator Obama Issues New Threat to Supreme Court over ObamaCare (johnmalcolm.me)
• Barack Obama speaks out and declares support for same-sex marriage – The Guardian (guardian.co.uk)
• The Supreme Bureaucrats’ Decision on ObamaCare (johnmalcolm.me)
• Lawmaker’s ‘How to Slap Washington’ Strategy (johnmalcolm.me)
• Obama’s Second Term Transformation Plans (mb50.wordpress.com)
• #NDAA: This is happening in America? (alexanderhiggins.com)
• Obama Mentor Wanted Americans Put In Re-Education Camps (musicians4freedom.com)
• From Communism Day to Government Loyalty Day (musicians4freedom.com)
• In my humble opinion (100wnayelli.wordpress.com)
• Tennessee Sheriffs Cracks Down On Obama Federal Agents Gone WIld: NDAA Nullified And Kidnapping Charges Against Feds.. (12160.info)
• Nat Hentoff: I’ll vote for Romney … (wnd.com)
• A long way from ‘hope’ and ‘change’ (wnd.com)
• Virginia State Senate Passes Bill Forbidding Indefinite Detention of Americans: ‘Council of Governors’ member McDonnell could try to sabotage anti-NDAA law (destructionist.wordpress.com)
• Impeach Obama 2012! Join the National Campaign! (musicians4freedom.com)
• Chicago: the cesspool that gave us Barack Obama (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• ObamaCare Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics + More (papundits.wordpress.com)
• Judicial Watch’s ‘Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians’ for 2011: Executive Edition – Big Government (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Obama Gives Coal Miners the Shaft (gulagbound.com)
• Obama: More Flexibility After Elections (myfoxphoenix.com)
• The NDAA Provision for Detaining Citizens is Waived! Spread! (disclose.tv)
• The Revolt Against the NDAA Hits Congress (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Virginia lawmakers agree to reject NDAA (12160.info)
• Obama Sets NDAA Detention Guidelines (todaysnews4you.wordpress.com)
• Corporate Media Silent On Lawuit Over NDAA Being Used To Silence Journalists (jhaines6.wordpress.com)
• ‘Obama signed US into Police State’ [Voltaire Network] (powersthatbeat.wordpress.com)
• Obama Worse than Bush on Civil Liberties – Romney No Different From Obama (ronpaulnews.net)
• Pulitzer Prize journalist Chris Hedges suing Barack Obama for NDAA (vaticproject.blogspot.com)
• Piracy vs Privacy: Obama may ‘oppose’ CISPA but still sign it like NDAA (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
• Romney & Obama, the NDAA & Ron Paul (revolutionarypolitics.tv)
• NDAA lawsuit – update from RT (video) (occupyblogosphere.wordpress.com)

Obama to officially begin 2012 campaign on Karl Marx’s birthday [Coincidence? Nah.]

By Joe Newby | May 4, 2012 | Examiner.com

President Obama and the First Lady will officially kick off the 2012 campaign with with rallies at Ohio State University in Columbus and Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond on Saturday, May 5.

It turns out, however, that May 5 also happens to be the birthday of Prussian philosopher Karl Marx, the man who wrote the Communist Manifesto.

An item posted this week at the Freedom Post blog noted:

First, we learn that Earth Day was started on the birthday of Vladimir Lenin, the Communist butcher and founder of the USSR, now we learn that Barack Obama, America’s first Marxist president, is launching his campaign on the father of communism’s birthday?  Come on, now.  This is just too appropriate!  How fitting!

Recently, Obama chose the slogan “Forward,” for the 2012 campaign – a slogan that has deep roots in European marxism and communism.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• What’s A Marxist Supposed To Do: OBAMA TO OFFICIALLY LAUNCH CAMPAIGN ON KARL MARX’S BIRTHDAY (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• Obama To Officially Launch 2012 Campaign On Karl Marx’s Birthday (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
• Unreal. Obama to Officially Launch 2012 Campaign on Karl Marx’s Birthday (thegatewaypundit.com)
• From the cradle to the grave, Obama says the government should control your life. (gulagbound.com)
• From the cradle to the grave, Obama says the government should control your life. (trevorloudon.com)
• On Karl Marx’s Birthday Bash: Fitting the Stands were Half Empty (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• We Were Warned (askmarion.wordpress.com)
• Marxism, Obama’s Motto (conservativetickler.wordpress.com)
• Barack Obama Is A Communist (theroycroftreport.com)
• ‘Forward’: President Obama’s new slogan for 2012 is horrendous (examiner.com)

Tennessee Passes Resolution Slamming “Socialist” UN Agenda 21

By  Alex Newman | April 25, 2012 | The John Birch Society

Even as the United Nations prepares to massively expand its “sustainable development” agenda at the upcoming sustainability summit in Rio de Janeiro, lawmakers in Tennessee approved a joint resolution blasting the global body’s controversial Agenda 21 — adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit — as an “insidious” socialist plot. All across America, opposition to the UN schemes is building quickly.

The popular measure (HJR 587) in Tennessee was passed by a bipartisan 72-to-23 landslide in the state House of Representatives last month. And on Tuesday, it was overwhelmingly approved in the Senate with 19 in favor and 11 against.

A broad coalition of activists from across the political spectrum came together to support the resolution, urging lawmakers to stand firm in the face of attacks to protect the people of Tennessee. And the efforts paid off: Supporters celebrated its passage Wednesday as another small victory for liberty, private-property rights, and national sovereignty.

Despite being non-binding, analysts said legislators in Tennessee sent a powerful message by recognizing the “destructive and insidious nature” of the controversial UN scheme. The resolution, among other points, urges the public and policymakers to reject Agenda 21, which it describes as “a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control.”

Echoing a similar measure adopted earlier this year by the Republican National Committee (RNC), the resolution approved in Tennessee cites the UN’s own documents to expose the global plan. Agenda 21 policy describes “social justice,” for example, as “the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment,” lawmakers observed.

Such a “radical” vision would have to be accomplished by what the resolution describes as “socialist” and “communist” means — “redistribution of wealth” from U.S. taxpayers to governments around the world. Meanwhile, the legislation points out, Agenda 21 considers national sovereignty to be a “social injustice.”

In other words, if the UN has its way, Americans would be forced to submit to global authorities as opposed to governing themselves under the framework established by the Constitution. And everything would have to change — education, the economy, policies, taxes, consumption, production, and more.

“This United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called ‘sustainable development’ views the American way of life of private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms all as destructive to the environment,” the resolution explains. “We hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it.”

While the 20-year-old global plan has never been formally adopted by the U.S. Senate — which must ratify all treaties — it is still being implemented across the nation by stealth. “The United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America,” the measure notes.

Aside from the federal executive branch, one of the main forces working to foist the scheme on Americans is a global organization named ICLEI (formerly known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives). And it uses a variety of innocent-sounding terms — “Smart Growth” and “Green,” for example — to advance the controversial agenda, the resolution states. As such, the legislature of Tennessee resolved to warn America about the “dangerous intent” of the plan.

Facing a tidal wave of anti-Agenda 21 activism, an assortment of extremist pro-UN groups and tax-funded propagandists have attempted to downplay the significance of the global agenda, portraying it as a harmless environmental initiative. But experts and lawmakers were not convinced, and opposition to the schemes continues to grow.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• EPA’s Plans for Implementing UN’s Agenda 21 (johnmalcolm.me)
• City Council Awakens to Agenda 21 Evil and Defeats It (gulagbound.com)
• Primary Day: One-World Governance Policies Begin in New Rochelle, NY (gulagbound.com)
• Nancy Pelosi Pushes Agenda 21 On House Floor (gulagbound.com)
• Agenda 21: The Blueprint for the End of Freedom (greenconduct.com)
• Prison Planet.com ” Arizona Bill Would Ban UN Agenda 21 Within State (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Agenda 21: The End of Western Civilization (Part One) (johnmalcolm.me)
• Tennessee Joins Texas in Fight Against UN’s Agenda 21 (musicians4freedom.com)

Chief of Obama’s Atrocities Board Believes in Redistribution of Sovereignty

By  Joe Wolverton, II | April 30, 2012 | The New American

As reported last week, President Obama has created a new government agency tasked with identifying and combatting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other such atrocities.

Appropriately, this new committee is called the White House Atrocities Prevention Board (APB) and it will be headed by President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Samantha Power (pictured).

Exercising the powers he created for himself in Executive Order 13606, President Barack Obama established the Atrocities Prevention Board, whose formation was announced by the President during his remarks at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum marking Holocaust Remembrance Day.

The goal of the APB is to first formally recognize that genocide and other mass atrocities committed by foreign powers are a “core national security interest and core moral responsibility.”

The APB, will be comprised of senior government officials across nearly a dozen government agencies, and will conduct regular meetings in the White House to identify and combat these atrocities occurring overseas that pose a significant threat to America’s national security.

According to a statement issued by the White House, the APB will also be charged with coordinating the actions of other agencies and departments with similar mandates so as to prevent ineffective and untimely responses to the various actions it highlights as threats. That is to say, President Obama has created a new government agency to make sure the work of existing government agencies is efficient and not duplicated.

Apart from the unconstitutionality of this use of the executive order, there is something sinister in the selection of Samantha Power to spearhead the search for atrocities.

One source claims that the very existence of the APB is due to Power’s own persistence in convincing the White House that discovering atrocities should be a “core national-security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.” The statement released concomitant with the issuing of the executive order evinces Power’s remarkable power of persuasion.

Samantha Power rose to prominence in government circles as part of her campaign to promote a doctrine known as the Responsibility to Protect. Notably, this philosophy was also espoused by Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestinian lawmaker who has publicly questioned the reality of the Holocaust and who was a dedicated lictor of the late leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization — Yasser Arafat.

Responsibility to Protect (also known as Responsibility to Act) is a doctrine advanced by the United Nations and is predicated on the proposition that sovereignty is a privilege not a right and that if any regime in any nation violates the prevailing precepts of acceptable governance, then the international community is morally obligated to revoke that nation’s sovereignty and assume command and control of the offending country.

There are three pillars of the United Nations’ backed Responsibility to Protect are:

• A state has a responsibility to protect its population from mass atrocities,
• The international community has a responsibility to assist the state if it is unable to protect its population on its own.
• If the state fails to protect its citizens from mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.

Records indicate that the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, of which Samantha Power is a co-founder, participated in the advisory board of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty that was established by the Canadian government in September 2000 to address the growing problem of “mass atrocities.”

It was this “independent” commission that coined the term “responsibility to protect.”

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• I Guess Staffing Isn’t Obama’s Expertise Either… Or Is It? (askmarion.wordpress.com)
• Not kidding: Obama has new ‘atrocities czar’ (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Samantha Power to head Obama’s “Atrocities Prevention Board” (bellalu0.wordpress.com)
• Sri Lanka: Samantha Power to chair US genocide prevention effort (tamilnet.com)
• Obama Misses the Mark on Military Interventionism (spectator.org)
• Krauthammer castigates Obama on ’embarrassing’ Syria policy: ‘Be quiet’ (dailycaller.com)
• Not kidding: Obama has new ‘atrocities czar’ (wnd.com)
• The Atrocities Prevention Board Badly Needs a New Name (businessweek.com)
• For Holocaust Day This Year, Obama Puts Jew-Bashing Crackpot On Atrocities Board (Video) (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)

How Liberals Successfully Silence Dissent

By Phil Elmore | May 3, 2012 | WND

Exclusive: Phil Elmore challenges conservatives to start fighting for keeps

Liberals adore the idea of silencing dissent. To this end, and because they believe they hold the moral high ground when contending with heartless, selfish, benighted conservatives, liberals will use a combination of intimidation, threats and dishonesty to destroy or remove any and all critics.

The Obama administration has tried several times to exploit this tendency among its more ardent followers. There was the White House email hotline, flag@whitehouse.gov; there was the running joke that was “AttackWatch” and its Twitter account; more recently, Obama’s flacks have been pushing the Orwellian “Truth Team.” Liberals are also abusing Twitter’s spam-reporting system to trigger automatic blocking of conservative Twitter accounts.

The goal, in every case, is to respond to the outrage that is political dissent in Obama’s America. The means is to threaten, to shout down and to shut up. Dare to express an opinion counter to Dear Leader’s Democratic Party line? Obama demands his violent and foul-smelling Occupy Wall Street rabble “get in your face” and yell at you until you stop talking. This is the “Coming Obama Thugocracy” Michael Barone predicted almost four years ago.

There was a time when liberals told us that criticizing judges for their extra-constitutional interpretations of the law was tantamount to agitating for those judges’ assassination. Today, those same liberals attack the United States Supreme Court if they suspect there exists even the possibility some of Obama’s unconstitutional legislation may be found so. When Democrats did not hold the White House, no less a lib luminary than Hillary Clinton famously screeched that we are Americans, and we have the right to disagree with any administration. Today, if you disagree with Obama, Democrat thugs are supposed to “get in your face” and explain to you the error of your ways.

There is no room for debate; there is no opportunity for discussion; there is no way even to argue, no matter how passionately. No, if you are a conservative, you are supposed to close your mouth-hole, and if you don’t like it, Obama voters can find some union thugs, some club-wielding racists, or some mob of whining communists to beat you until you can’t speak.

Conservatives and libertarians are in part to blame for this wretched state of affairs. We don’t fight well. We don’t stand up for ourselves, nor protect our own. We harrumph and we cluck and we shake our heads, refusing to challenge the logically flawed premises the libs foist on us. We agree with liberal useful idiots that Rush Limbaugh should not call a slut a slut, that what Mitt Romney does with his money is a greater outrage than what Barack Hussein Obama does with your money. We let the enemy frame the “debate.” We let our opposition set the terms. We never simply stand up and say, “I reject your flawed premise … and if you don’t get ‘out of my face,’ I will drop you where you stand.”

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Bill Maher adjusts himself (dailycaller.com)
• Liberal Website Looking To Get Out The ‘Slut’ Vote In November (washington.cbslocal.com)
• Liberal Silence: We Don’t Need To Talk About That Despicable Idiot Who Almost Became Vice President Anymore (minx.cc)
• With ‘Tyranny of Clichés,’ Jonah Goldberg Delivers a Second Triumph (johnmalcolm.me)
• Mark Steyn: The Liberal Enforcers (minx.cc)
• Rock The Slut Vote mobilizes for liberals (dailycaller.com)
• Huffington Vs. Obama? The Five Co-Hosts Ponder: ‘Trouble In Liberal Paradise?’ (mediaite.com)
• Derrick Bell, Critical Race Theory Pioneer, Remains a Hero to His Students (johnmalcolm.me)
• Civil Unrest: Liberals Most at Risk (johnmalcolm.me)
• This season of SNL won’t feature Mitt Romney (theblaze.com)
• Pointless quote of the day, 05.03.12 (theblaze.com)
• This shirt with a bird graphic cost Ann Romney $1K (theblaze.com)
• Everyone Booze Up and Riot (canadafreepress.com)

The subversive network taking over America

By Wes Vernon | April 30, 2012 | Renew America

The time has long passed when we could afford to look the other way on the extent to which subversive influences — communist and jihad-oriented Islamists — have for years been worming their way into the high councils of our government.

So let’s say this again: When the Cold War ended, the enemies of America did not just go away. America is under attack from Communists (with both a large and small “c”) and Jihadists.

These two threats to America (by violent means if necessary) have philosophical differences, but they are bound together by an identical ultimate goal: a one-world dictatorship where they can rule forever by the threat of death for dissenters. Recall this column reported a meeting where supposedly “intellectual thinkers” seriously contemplated the incarceration of 100 million Americans and killing 25 million of them — all in order to complete the takeover. (See “Hollywood’s red stripes” — 10/31/11.)

No congressional committee is investigating this threat to kill Americans and rule the world — a scandal in itself.

Priorities, please

So why on earth should we become embroiled in an out-to-lunch debate over whether every conspirator in this plot carries a Communist Party card in his pocket? Who cares? What matters is that they are moving closer and closer to our destruction and we’re demanding that a congressman who sounds the alarm can produce photocopies of the Communist Party USA cards (complete with official membership numbers) of the plotters. Have we lost all sense of proportion?

Earlier this month, as Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) was asked by a constituent, “What percentage of the American legislature do you think are card-carrying Marxists or International Socialists?” Congressman West answered that he believed “there are about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party that are members of the Communist Party.” When asked to name them, the freshman lawmaker replied, “It’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus.”

Combination: Uproar and….silence

Because West used imprecise language with the term “members of the Communist party,” critics took the opportunity to nitpick. The head of the Communist Party itself said West “didn’t know what he’s talking about.” Politico— the de facto magazine version of the Washington Post — called West a “McCarthyite.” Chicago Tribune columnist and editorial writer Steve Chapman demanded that House Republicans “either condemn West and expel him from the caucus or else confirm that his views are perfectly acceptable.”

Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media sent Chapman a video of Rep. Danny K. Davis, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, following the latter’s cheerful acceptance of an award from The People’s World (longtime Communist organ) at a meeting of the Chicago headquarters of the Communist Party USA.

Since Chicago is the neighborhood of Chapman’s newspaper, one would think he could easily access (right under his nose) the goings-on of a local congressman’s award possibly just a stroll down the street from the Tribune Building. But the video is available to the world via “Rebel Pundit” Jeremy Segal, a disciple of the late Andrew Breitbart. On the tape, Davis sheepishly evaded Segal’s persistent questioning. (Breitbart’s fight for America lives. Right on!)

No small matter

But here is the more alarming angle to this story — one worthy of a storied media outlet that in better times dubbed itself “the World’s Greatest Newspaper”: This same Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.) is a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security. Talk about the proverbial fox in the henhouse.

That is the committee whose investigations inevitably lead it into the inner workings of the infrastructure (human and otherwise) required to see to it that we are protected from those who want us dead. And a member of that sensitive panel says (as Davis does in the video) that citizens should not be concerned with communists.

Beyond that, Davis is a mere reflection of the mindset that dominates the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The group is chock-a-block with members who have given aid and comfort to America’s enemies. We do not claim to read their minds to determine what motivates them. It is their records that matter.

What is a conspirator?

Back to the question: Was Congressman Allen West off base when he called out the Congressional Progressive Caucus? Answer: No.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Communists and Progressive Liberals: Comrades for Life (thecollegeconservative.com)
• Don’t Let the Organized Left’s Charges of “McCarthyism” Deter You – Allen West Is Right (nicedeb.wordpress.com)
• Allen West Says Congressional Progressive Caucus Is Communist But Won’t Name Names (thinkprogress.org)
• NAACP ousts Allen West after ‘Communist’ quip (rawstory.com)
• Congressman says 80 fellow lawmakers are communists (firstread.msnbc.msn.com)
• Brown: Is Progressivism the new Communism? (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Communists, Hiding in Plain Sight……? (icanbeatobama.com)
• “Allen West is denigrating the millions of Americans who voted to elect Congressional Progressive Caucus members…” (althouse.blogspot.com)
• Rep. Allen West goes too far in Commie comment (miamiherald.com)
• Allen West says many Dems in Congress are communists (kaystreet.wordpress.com)

Wealth Gap in America Caused by Federal Reserve, Not Capitalism

By Jed Chancey | April 26, 2012 | Policy Mic

When most people hear about the redistribution of wealth they think of welfare payments and health care for the elderly, but the real redistribution of wealth is from the 99% to the 1%, not the other way around. The rapid expansion of the money supply by the Federal Reserve does not flow into the economy evenly, but is added in at distinct points.

The most distinct of these points is through the too-big-to-fail banks. Access to the new money first means these banks can buy assets and drive up prices in the stock market, benefiting themselves and the 1% that make up their best clients. By the time this new money has time to flow out into the broader economy; the 99% see no benefit and in fact suffer from higher prices.

The real cause of the increasing disparity in income levels in the U.S. is not capitalism, but central planning from the Federal Reserve. Continuing expansion of the money supply and artificially low interest rates are maintained by a process in which the Fed buys assets from the major banks and the richest Americans at inflated prices, or lends money to them at low rates that they can then use to buy assets at inflated prices.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• R. Wenzel: Federal Reserve An Unmitigated FAILURE (senseoncents.com)
• Does Quantitative Easing Benefit the 99% or the 1%? (zerohedge.com)
• Forget Competing THEORIES about Quantitative Easy … What Do the FACTS Show? (washingtonsblog.com)
• Robert Wenzel’s ‘David’ Speech Crushes Federal Reserve’s ‘Goliath’ Dream (zerohedge.com)
• Walking Into a Den of Thieves (theburningplatform.com)
• Federal Reserve Corruption Coming To Light (inspired-weightloss.com)
• Guest Post: Wealth Inequality – Spitznagel Gets It, Krugman Doesn’t (zerohedge.com)
• Robert Wenzel’s Speech to the NY Fed: ‘The Noose is Tightening on Your Organization’ (silverdoctors.com)
• Robert Wenzel Addresses The New York Fed, Lots Of Head-Scratching Ensues (zerohedge.com)
• My Speech Delivered at the New York Federal Reserve Bank (economicpolicyjournal.com)

The Ryan Test: Demagoguery Versus Ideas

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Jonathan S. Tobin | August 11, 2012 | Commentary Magazine As John wrote earlier today, liberals are convinced that Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan to be his running mate offers them a golden opportunity to savage the Republicans about the Wisconsin congressman’s budget plans. Predictably, the New York Times delivered one of the first such salvos in its editorial posted […]

Smoking Obama’s Crack and Yearning for the Mud

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Vanderleun | August 10, 2012 | American Digest [From 2008. Only the names have been changed because the target has changed.] This downward flight of intellectuals has been going on ever since the Romantic movement began its counter-revolution a couple hundred years ago. No matter how much they flap their lips it’s a fall, not […]