Bitter Clingers vs. The Mullahs

If you are a law-abiding Christian who supports the second amendment, Barack Obama believes you are a terror threat, a "bitter clinger", and has you living under severe ongoing sanctions.  If you are a Shiite Mullah with intercontinental ballistic missiles, thousands of spinning centrifuges, plans for a nuclear bomb, who chants death to Israel, death to America, and is in the process of gaining regional hegemony, you just had your sanctions lifted.  Take a moment to let that sink in.

Remember when Barack Obama referred to rural gun owners as "bitter clingers", bitter over their economic malaise and clinging to their guns and their religion?  These are the people being sanctioned by Barack Obama in numerous and diabolical ways.  They are being forced to pay for abortions, their groups are discriminated against by the IRS, the DHS targets them as a terror threat, their gun shops are sanctioned by Operation Choke Point, their legal right to purchase ammunition is thwarted by government bulk purchases and bans,  they are being forced to perform services against their beliefs, and they are mocked and ridiculed by Obama and his minions.

Meanwhile, Iran, a totalitarian theocracy, the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism, the most egregious rogue nation on the planet, fomenter of regional chaos, persecutor of women, gays, and minorities, a nation which seeks to bring about global armageddon, which regularly chants death to Israel and death to America, just got a green light to keep all their existing nuclear infrastructure, all their intercontinental ballistic missiles, and got all their sanctions lifted in exchange for some vague promise to allow limited inspections by some guys in blue helmets sometime in the future.

Seriously, you can't make this stuff up.

(UPDATE:  Remember when Obama declared, "We are no longer a Christian nation..."?  Meanwhile, David Cameron just declared that Great Britain still is.  Below is a video compilation of the two statements by the two leaders.  Incidentally, the US is about 80% Christian, while Great Britain is about 60%.  [VIDEO - 21 seconds])

WTF?

Wilco to play Klan Rally?

Barack Obama, Magician

"Great liars are also great magicians."

Barack Obama wants you to believe he is negotiating with Iran about nukes.  Pick up a paper, watch a news show, listen to the radio, wherever you are in the world, you will be told about an historic negotiation going on with the P5+1 talks, and it's all about Iran's nuclear program.

Truth is, these talks are nothing more than cover for lifting sanctions on Iran, many of which were preemptively lifted before the talks started.  The talks are Kabuki theatre, a magic trick, to distract you from seeing what's really going on.  This is a trade deal with the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism - a rogue nation bent on bringing about nuclear armageddon, wiping Israel off the map, and achieving regional Shiite hegemony.

If you have any doubts about whether or not this is about nukes, I advise you to read Dan Henninger's piece in The Wall Street Journal, "Why the Iran Deal is Irrelevant" from 4/2.   Mr Henninger chronicles the parallels between North Korea and Iran and the pursuit of nukes.  Iran cannot be stopped by talking.  Everyone knows this.  Talking had zero effect on North Korea over three presidencies.  Sanctions, and the perception that force is an option, are the only way to prevent a rogue nation from acquiring nukes.

Not only has Obama lifted sanctions and taken the threat of force off the table, he is guaranteeing Iran the right to spin centrifuges, enrich uranium, and follow through on their promise to nuke Israel off the map.  This trade deal does nothing but make Iran richer and accelerate their ability to achieve these goals.

Barack Hussein Obama, peace be upon him, apparently shares these goals.

Incidentally, the quote at the top is often credited to Adolf Hitler.  

Iran Names New Nuke

RFRA Hypocrisy

This whole #RFRA/Indiana kerfuffle is more blatant hypocrisy from gays and the left.   These people present themselves as paragons of tolerance and acceptance, while claiming anyone with beliefs at odds with theirs is a hater and a bigot.  Remember how the left mocked Mitt Romney and made an issue over polygamy in Mormon history?  I'll never forget the left's intolerance and bigotry toward Mormons during the last election.  That bigotry now extends to just about every religious person.  (Except Muslims, of course, which they are too cowardly to openly oppose.)  When the left gets all worked up about something like this #RFRA business, they are just exposing their hypocrisy and bigotry.

(I call the above symbol, The Utah Marriage Equality Symbol.   It strikes me as hypocritical to sanction gay marriage while discriminating against consensual adult polygamy, as the left, and most gays, currently do.  Opponents to gay marriage are at least consistent when they say "one man, one woman.")  

What does Obama know that you don't?

Turns out, Hawaii is about as far as you can get from Iran, still be dry, and remain in the Northern hemisphere.   

Would Ted Cruz have made the Bergdahl trade?

No matter your politics, I think you know the answer.

Ted Cruz is Awesome! V

Yesterday, Ted Cruz (insert lefty and pop media laugh track here) announced he is running for president.  He spoke at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University (insert secularist laugh track here) and gave a rousing, conservative, (insert establishment GOP laugh track here) thirty minute off-the-cuff speech (insert teleprompter apologist laugh track here).  There was no equivocation, vague hedging, weasel words, or doubt about what he would fight for with every fiber of his being (insert special interest and lobbyist laugh track here).

I hope Ted Cruz is successful in going direct to the people.  There just may be enough serious Americans who have their eyes open and cannot be convinced by a phony laugh track.

Here are links to the other four in the series:

Ted Cruz is Awesome! I  (Cruz takes on DiFi)

Ted Cruz is Awesome! II (Cruz takes on ObamaCare)

Ted Cruz is Awesome! III (Cruz is proven right for taking on ObamaCare)

Ted Cruz is Awesome! IV  (Cruz takes on Arab bigots)



 

Netanyahu Derangement Syndrome

It's one thing for Barack Obama, peace be upon him, to deliberately misstate Netanyahu's position on a Palestinian state.  It's another thing entirely for the entire US media to fall in lock step with Obama's deception.  Today's Wall Street Journal front page story is just the latest example: "Netanyahu Reverses on Statehood Again".

Obama's reason is simple.  He's been stabbing Israel in the back all along.  By misstating Netanyahu's position, he is trying to provide cover for his upcoming treachery against Israel, with Iran and at the UN.   Why the media goes along with this is not as clear.    

EXCLUSIVE! An Open Letter to Barack Obama from Bibi Netanyahu

(I have amazing sources in Israel and have been given exclusive access to this letter from Bibi to Barack:)

Dear Mr. President,

Now that the Israeli election is behind us, there are a world of possibilities in front of us.  I believe we both agree that it is our duty as our nation's respective leaders to choose the path which best leads to peace domestically and abroad.  Towards that end, I would like to discuss an idea about which much has been made of late:  a two state solution.

As has been reported, I did indicate that a two state solution will not arise during my term.  What was not reported was that this was within the context of the last few years experience.  The Palestinians have been in a constant state of war with my country and continue to deny our right to exist.  There can be no two state solution between Israel and the Palestinians without two peaceful partners willing to coexist.

But there is another path to a two state solution.  Allow me to explain.  

I have a unique proposal that will once and for all put and end to this conflict.  I know I can trust you and the American people to hear me out and give this some careful thought.  If we agree that peace is the desired outcome, and that neither side has been able to secure it after all these years, we must try something new.  Doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome is the very definition of insanity, right? 

Let’s look at some of the elements we can all agree on before getting into the specifics: 

1. Both sides believe their positions are correct, justified, and worth defending. 
2. One side has the military might and the other suffers disproportionately. 
3. Both sides would like to exist and govern themselves in a manner to their liking. 
4. The international community, including the US, has long thought that “land for peace” is the appropriate solution.

In light of the above, I do recommend swapping land to allow those without a country to establish their own self-governed nation.  They would be free to establish their own government, their own bill of rights, and their own laws.   They would be free to arm and defend themselves,  trade with other nations, and produce and export what they choose. We may not agree with how they treat others, what they disseminate, or what their Sharia laws say, but it would be their country, ruled by them, sovereign, free, and independent.

The key Mr. President is you.  You've said that you've got a pen and a phone.  The American people have granted you the power to act unilaterally on whatever you choose.  Whether that be healthcare, immigration, the IRS, internet regulation, prisoner swaps, etc., you have proven you do not need bi-partisan approval to achieve your goals.  Mr. President, you can singlehandedly establish a two state solution with just your pen and your phone!

Here's my plan:

I have done some research and found that your home state of Illinois is the most Muslim state in the US.  Therefore, I believe Illinois would be the perfect place to establish the new Islamic Caliphate, or “ISIL” (The Islamic State of Illinois)!  

If ISIL (The Islamic State of Illinois) were to adopt your own immigration policies, The Palestinians, al Qaeda, ISIS, The Taliban, Ansar al-Sharia, Hezbollah, The Muslim Brotherhood, etc., would all immigrate to the new nation of ISIL.  Not only would this bring lasting peace to the Mid East, but the conflict between America and the Jihadis would finally be over.   Imagine ISIS, al Qaeda, and America living side-by-side in peace!

All it would take is a simple trade of land for peace, which you can do today with your pen and your phone.   Join me Mr. President in this elegant two state solution.  Together we can stop the unnecessary fighting between America and the Jihadis once and for all.
  

Sincerely,

Benjamin Netanyahu

Prime Minister, Israel

P.S.  A majority of The UN has already seen this proposal and endorsed it.  You must use your pen and phone quickly if the US hopes to remain among the community of nations!

P.P.S.  I also believe that Khalid Sheik Muhammad, the political prisoner currently in your custody, should be freed at once like Nelson Mandela.   KSM would then lead the new nation of ISIL!  Moreover, I have taken the liberty to nominate KSM to the Nobel Committee for consideration for the Peace Prize.  As expected, they are onboard 100%.

P.P.S.S.  My understanding is that Illinois is currently bankrupt, so this plan is actually a threefer. Not only will it bring a two state solution and peace to the world, it's also a stimulus plan for your home state!    

P5+1= Death to Israel

Who are the P5+1?  P5+1 refers to the six countries currently trying to remove sanctions on Iran, while trying not to appear like they're signing Israel's death warrant.  The US, China, Russia, UK, and France are the P5, or five permanent members of the UN Security Council.   Germany is the +1.  In Europe they are referred to as the EU3+3.  The EU3 are Germany, UK, and France.  The +3 are US, China, and Russia.

But no matter how you slice it, five of the P5+1 countries are in this for one reason and one reason only:  money.  All except the US are the major trading partners of Iran.  Moreover, all are experiencing economic challenges.  Lifting sanctions on Iran would be a guaranteed boost.  Do you think these countries are concerned that Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off the map and is the world's number one sponsor of terrorism?  (Remember, even in the UK, the most common name for baby boys is... Muhammad.)  

So, what are the US interests in all this? Um, there are none.   Lifting sanctions on Iran and giving them legitimacy to pursue a nuclear bomb is just something Barack Hussein Obama really, really, wants to do.  Is he concerned that it would endanger Israel with an atomic holocaust?  The only thing that might concern Obama is if his party lost some votes as a result.  But Obama knows American Jews will still vote Democrat, because they are liberals first.

Kinetic Islam Déjà vu

In March of 2001, Mullah Omar and the Taliban destroyed two 1700 year-old stone Buddahs in Afghanistan.  One of them stood 165 feet tall.  At the time, few westerners understood that act.  Six months later when the twin towers of The World Trade Center were destroyed, we all got an education in how kinetic Islam feels about infidel idols and symbols. 

Fast forward to today, and the exact same thing is happening in Iraq.  Islamic State, or ISIS, or ISIL, is summarily destroying ancient churches, statues, artwork, and symbols of the infidels.  This time we have some perspective on why this behavior is occurring – Islam, or at least a fundamental interpretation of Islam, leads its followers to destroy these symbols.  Turns out the Quran, like the Old and New Testaments, contains a fair amount of idol destruction.  The difference is, Christians and Jews do not go about re-enacting these verses from the early days of monotheism.  Muslims do, particularly the kinetic radical fundamental type. 

What scares me is the timing of all this.  Six months after the Buddahs came down, we got 9/11.  I hope kinetic Islam has a different schedule this time.   

Why Were Cops Shot in Ferguson?

There is new blood on Barack Obama's hands as two officers were shot in Ferguson, MO last night.   Pretty harsh, right?  Does Barack Obama deserve blame for every act of violence against cops in the wake of Michael Brown's death?  Here's a brief history.  You can draw your own conclusions.    

(I put the above images together because you will not see them in the pop media.  But they are real and should be part of the record.  What they mean is up to you to decide.  Of note: neither was raised by his father, and all seem to have issues with authority.)

On 8/15/14, after Barack Obama made his first comments in the wake of the Ferguson riots, I wrote:

I have no idea what happened in Ferguson, MO, and neither do you.  And we all agree any unnecessary death is a tragedy.  But we have a judicial system to deal with bad cops, if that turns out to be the case.  Rioting, looting, Molotov cocktails, death threats, and the like, should be singled-out as inexcusable no matter what the facts turn out to be.  Justice can only be served through our judicial system and that takes time, patience, civility, and wisdom.  Instead of making that case convincingly and emphatically, as a president should,  Barack Obama spoke to the nation in bland platitudes and equivocated.
America, we have a problem.

Four days later, after he commented again, I wrote:

Obama spoke to the nation again yesterday (8/18) and again equivocated.  If he wanted to avoid further violence, looting, anger, and hate, he could have explained to those calling for "death to Darren Wilson!" that we have a judicial system and that the facts will come out as they do in every public case, especially when there are dozens of eye witnesses as there are in this case.  But this case should not be tried on TV, or in the streets,  or from the pulpit, or with molotov cocktails.  Instead he drew a moral equivalence between our judicial system and looting rioters.  Think about this America -- The President of the United States, for political reasons, does not want to prevent further violence, looting, anger, and hate.

Then on 11/24/14, the grand jury spoke and the case was closed.   The officer, Darren Wilson, was not charged with any crime because the jury believed he acted with justifiable use of force.  I wrote:

Again the president spoke and again mistook his role for that of agitator.  He accused the judicial system of racism.  He made no mention of the fact that Michael Brown would be alive today if he had obeyed officer Wilson.  He made no mention of his faith in the grand jury or the public servants who worked this case according to the law.  He made no mention of the officer whose life has also been upended by Michael Brown's belligerence.  He made no mention of the fact that moments before the incident officer Wilson had helped save the life of an infant.  And finally, he made only bland equivocal calls for peace and non-violence.

It's a shame this isn't baseball, because on Ferguson alone I count three strikes.

Finally, Obama's DOJ recently released two reports regarding Michael Brown.  The first one exonerated Officer Darren Wilson for the shooting of Michael Brown.  There was no violation of civil rights, no racism, and certainly no crime.  Michael Brown was not surrendering, "Hands Up Don't Shoot" was a myth, and the shooting was self-defense.  The second report nevertheless, indicted the entire police force as racists.  Based on the discredited notion of "disparate impact" and some racist joke emails which were forwarded by three specific employees, the Obama administration tainted the entire Ferguson PD and stirred the anger of the community once again.

Did Obama say anything to calm tensions in Ferguson?  Did he say anything to remind people that the shooting was justified?  Did he talk about how "hands up don't shoot" was a false narrative?  Did he point out how the system worked, and justice was done?  No.  Instead, he stoked anger, hate, resentment, and reprisals by calling the Ferguson PD's alleged racism "not an isolated incident".

Why would Obama do this and risk inciting violence?   I hate to go all "Godwin" on y'all, but this has happened before.  (Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies states that any heated online discussion will eventually lead to someone making a Nazi analogy.)

The race industry and the Democrat Party need division, passion, anger, hatred, and the threat of violence to continue enacting their agenda. 

Consider the following quotes:  

All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.

All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by... distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people.

Hate is more lasting than dislike.

It is not truth that matters, but victory.

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.

If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.

Great liars are also great magicians.

The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.

Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.

All of the above quotes are from Adolf Hitler.

No, I'm not suggesting Barack Obama is about to annex territory, build gas chambers, kill Jews and Gypsies, or launch a World War like Adolf Hitler.   But looking back on his embrace of the politics of deception and division as personified by ACORN, Alinsky Community Organizing, Occupy Wall Street, disingenuously crying racism,  stirring hatred and violence, etc., it is hard to discern any tactical differences.   

Ready for Hillary?

Hillary Clinton will answer questions today about why she conducted all her business as Secretary of State on a secret private email server, which apparently broke several laws and has thwarted multiple congressional investigations.   No doubt the questions will be pre-screened and the reporters all hand-picked sycophants.  Nevertheless, it will be good theatre.  But Hillary's no dummy - by controlling her own email server, she was able to destroy any evidence of corruption, malfeasance, incompetence, and criminal activity.  There is no way the Obama administration is going to pursue a criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton.  (Unless she goes all Menendez on Obama's Iran appeasment.  Not likely.) But regardless of how this latest scandal plays out, there's all the others, including the recent revelations about foreign money flowing into the Clinton Foundation and being traded for government favors.   The fact that Hillary still polls ahead of any other potential candidate for 2016 means two things:  fun times for bloggers like me, and sad times for America.

Here's my contribution to the Hillary mystique:  "NoMoreClintons.org" (Remember all those NFL ads about sexual abuse?)  Please watch this and explain to me why the Clintons should be back in the White House.  

   

Netanyahu Returns

For the first time in almost two and a half years, I am proud of a national leader in Washington.   Today, he went before congress and spoke with clarity about liberty, peace, security, and founding principles.   He was forceful, graceful, and articulate.  His reason was sound and his positions well thought out.  Too bad President Obama was out of town and missed Netanyahu's excellent speech. 

(I posted the above 5/24/11,  the last time Netanyahu spoke to congress.)  

Does Obama Love America?

Rudy Guiliani walked into a firestorm last week by stating his belief that Barack Obama does not love America.  The media and the left (but, I repeat myself) went four-alarm apoplectic.  Is Rudy wrong?  Is the left right?  Does Obama Love America?

That depends on what you mean by "America".   Is America the physical area within it's borders?  Is it the Grand Canyon, the Appalachian Mountains, California to the Gulf Stream Waters?   I have no reason to suspect Obama does not love this aspect of America.  He  certainly seems to love America's golf courses!  Or is America its people - the motley melange of the melting pot.   Obama sure seems to love those that support him.  Not so much those that don't.  I don't think Obama cares much for conservatives, tea party members,  Libertarians, Republicans, gun owners, "bitter clingers", Fox News employees, Fox News viewers, conservative 501 Cs, video-makers who mock Mohammad, Zionists, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Utah...well, you get the idea.   Though this amounts to about half the country, I still don't think this defines Obama's love, or lack thereof,  for his country.

In short, every country on the planet has interesting people and majestic physical features.  Having those things does not make America any more lovable than, say, Canada or Ethiopia.  I have no doubt Obama loves America the same way he loves Scotland with its great golf courses and iconic caddies.  But none of that really defines America and separates it from the rest of the world.   

There is only one thing that really makes America America and separates it from every other nation on the planet - the ideas on which we were founded.  Those ideas eventually led to the Declaration of Independence, The Federalist Papers, The Constitution of The United States, and the twenty seven amendments thus far.  All those ideas have been distilled into the living document that is the Constitution of the United States as amended.  Under our constitution, the federal government has very explicit limits on it's power and everything outside those powers belongs to the states and the people.  This had never been tried in world history.  The US Constitution is what makes America unique among nations and it alone is what constitutes "American exceptionalism".  

We’ve heard a lot about “American exceptionalism” lately, but most of it misses the point.  Barack Obama was asked if he believed in American exceptionalism early in his presidency.  “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism”, he replied.    Subsequently he amended that view on numerous occasions, only to reveal that he continues to misunderstand the meaning of the term. 

Last fall, the president stood in front of a group of healthcare workers who had recently returned from Ebola stricken Africa.  “That’s American exceptionalism!”, the constitutional scholar informed us, which was ironic because many of the care givers present were members of a French organization known as Medecines Sans Frontieres, known here as Doctors Without Borders.  Oops, maybe he meant French exceptionalism. 

No doubt, any person who goes to Africa to treat Ebola patients is an exceptional human being, but that has nothing to do with American exceptionalism.  American exceptionalism refers to our founding principles; never before in human history had a nation been formed with the central principle being the supremacy of the individual and deliberate limits on the powers of the state.  It made us an EXCEPTION among nations.  American exceptionalism does not mean that we are superior to other nations.  It simply means we are unique, different, an EXCEPTION to the rule. 

Those unique ideas are what made us great.  Everything we've achieved as a nation stemmed from our founding ideas:  outlawing slavery, creating the world's most successful economic engine, raising standards of living like never before, spreading democracy and tolerance,  helping defeat fascism and terrorism around the globe, and being a magnet for the world's tired, hungry, and poor.

Here are the six big ideas expressed in the Constitution of The United States: 

1. limited government
2. republicanism
3. checks and balances
4. federalism
5. separation of powers
6. popular sovereignty

After six years of Obama's presidency, he has demonstrated through his words and deeds that he has nothing but disdain for these six ideas.

No president has been more outspoken about his disdain for limited government than Barack Obama.  He has openly denigrated the concept calling the constitution a “charter of negative liberties”.  Ummmm, yes it is from the perspective of an all-powerful state.  But from the perspective of the individual it was designed to protect, it is a godsend.  Obama has explicitly stated that he'd prefer a constitution that says "what the government must do on your behalf" rather than one that says "what the government cannot do to you".  Obama went so far as to use the word "tragedy" in describing how limited government restricted the federal governments ability to redistribute wealth.   

Here's Obama in his own words:

Obama has been equally hostile to the other five big ideas in the constitution.  Here is a piece from Forbes in 2012 that nicely covers most of this.

Is there anyone who has ever heard Barack Obama speak in favor of "Republicanism"?  I doubt it.   The party by that name certainly gets no love.  Checks and balances may have gotten lip service, but his deeds indicate nothing but disdain.  Federalism ditto.  Separation of powers?  Don't make me laugh.  Popular sovereignty?  Obama's intransigence in the wake of the recent landslide mid-term election proves his disdain for popular sovereignty. 

To love America is to love the unique exceptional ideas on which it was founded and which became embodied in the US Constitution as amended.  Barack Obama has nothing but disdain for those ideas and the document they became.  So you tell me, does Obama love America?  Does Hillary?  How about any Progressive who wants to progress away from the six big ideas in The US Constitution?  

Jobs for Terrorists!

The latest moronic position from the Obama idiocracy is that barbaric Islamic behavior is the result of a lack of economic opportunity...and jobs.  Two things come to mind:  one is that of the many religions in that part of the world, all with equal opportunity, only Muslims are regularly behaving like sub-human animals; and the other is that their big target in the US was actually devoted to global economic opportunity - The World Trade Center.  This position could only be more risible if it had come from someone who speaks like a valley girl on a high-school model UN panel.  Oh, wait...

The Fifty Year Plan

Now that it has been revealed that illegals can vote and are eligible for up to $24,000 in bonuses, it is time to connect the Obama induced flood of illegals, Bill Clinton's 1993 "Motor Voter Law", and two prominent activists from Columbia University named Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, who conceived a plan fifty years ago that has way more fingerprints on recent history than most people realize.

In 1966, Cloward and Piven laid out a strategy for achieving what Karl Marx had proposed could only be done with a violent revolution.  Marx was writing in the context of a non-democratic society where the existing power structure had to be violently overthrown in order for his utopia to become reality.  Cloward and Piven envisioned a less kinetic approach in the context of a democratic society wherein the existing power structure could be overthrown by collapsing it after overloading it with dependents.

Barack Obama, Columbia University Class of '83, was taught the Cloward and Piven strategy during a time when, in his own words, he was steeped in Marxism.  Speaking of his college years he said,

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout,I chose my friends carefully.The more politically active black students.The foreign students.The Chicanos.The Marxist Professors...

Barack Obama from "Dreams From My Father"

Frances Fox Piven and Barack Obama are also linked by membership in the socialist New Party.  (more here.)  And both were adamant about eventually achieving socialized and nationalized medicine, AKA single payer healthcare, towards which Obamacare is but a stepping stone.

But the big one, which ties Obama's executive actions on immigration to Clinton's Motor Voter Bill with Cloward and Piven is this:

What many have probably forgotten, even those who are very familiar with the Cloward-Piven Strategy, is that this dynamic duo was instrumental in the enactment of one of the greatest vote fraud facilitation systems that this country has ever seen, the 1993 National Voter Registration Act aka “the Motor Voter Law.” Here’s a photo of them standing right behind Bill Clinton at the 1993 signing ceremony, Piven is in the green coat, and Cloward is in the light grey suit. - See more at: http://teriobrien.com/six-degrees-of-chuck-schumer-connecting-the-dots-between-amnesty-and-1993s-motor-voter-law/#sthash.bkmxmMUV.dpuf

As far as Cloward and Piven having fingerprints on recent history, what is rarely considered is that in 2008 we had a dress rehearsal for a Cloward and Piven type collapse.  Again Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were behind it.  Bill Clinton initiated a constellation of policies under the banner of "affordable housing" around the time of the Motor Voter Bill.  This is how Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the banking system eventually became loaded down with subprime mortgages, liar loans, Alt-A mortgages, no-doc loans, and risky mortgage derivatives.  Never before had these things been used for housing finance.   Barack Obama worked tirelessly for these redistributive policies as a Community Organizer,  ACORN associate, Illinois State Senator, and finally as a US Senator, where he took campaign cash from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at a higher rate than any other member of congress:  

Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

Name	Office	Party/State	Total
1. Dodd, Christopher J	S	D-CT	$133,900
2. Kerry, John	S	D-MA	$111,000
3. Obama, Barack	S	D-IL	$105,849
4. Clinton, Hillary	S	D-NY	$75,550

(Remember:  These are cumulative totals and Barack Obama served less than two years!)

Right on schedule, the whole thing collapsed in 2008 and brought down the global financial system along with it.  But that collapse was limited to the financial sector; we simply borrowed and printed our way out of it. 

The next collapse, the one Obama's illegals will help vote us into, and the one Cloward and Piven conceived fifty years ago, will be more transformative.
  
(UPDATE:  On 2/17 a judge temporarily stayed Obama's executive amnesty plan.  This may result in disabling Obama's scheme to create new laws singlehandedly like issuing work permits to illegals, but the Cloward and Piven goal of overloading the system with dependents will be unaffected by this ruling.  Those illegals are here now, more are on the way, the strategy is intact, and this ruling is nothing but a distraction on the road to a Cloward and Piven collapse. )    

Brian Williams vs. Faux News

The left loves to call Fox News, "Faux News", which is pretty ironic in light of NBC's embarrassing cover-up and promotion of serial liar Brian Williams, who  is not only their flagship anchor, but also the Managing Editor of NBC Nightly News!  Imagine if anything like that ever came out about a Fox News managing editor?  However,  it's not just the rank and file that mock Fox News, it starts with president Obama himself.  Why would a sitting president cross the traditional line by repeatedly singling out a private sector media company and setting a tone of derision and de-legitimacy?  Here are some hints:   

5.  “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

6.  “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.  

12.  “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” 

Net Neutrality Explained

Now that Obama's FCC has finalized their "net neutrality" rules, it's time everyone understood the full impact of bureaucrats micro-managing broadband.  Here's but one piece...

[VIDEO] Hey NFL, run this ad or shut-up!

If the NFL really has a problem with abusing women, they will run this ad during the Superbowl.   Otherwise NFL, please shut-up.

 

Football, Marx, Smith, Cloward & Piven, Alinsky, Greece, and Obama

It’s Superbowl week, Greece just elected a Communist government, and Barack Obama has indicated he has no intention of changing his strategy, even after his historic mid-term rebuke.  It’s a perfect time for me to bravely attempt to tie these disparate things up in a neat little bow.  What’s more, I will do it with fully inflated analogies and rhetoric.

Suppose there were two football teams, the Marxists and the Smithians.  Each team has adopted an opposite management approach.  The Marxists have policies wherein every player, coach, and employee is paid the same, every player is given the same amount of game time, and positions are decided by a committee of people who've never played football.  The Smithians have policies wherein every player, coach, and employee negotiates their own salary, and game time and positions are determined by ability, circumstances, and a football coach’s judgment. 

Now suppose you were a committed Marxist who inherited the Smithian team.  How would you convert them to your preferred system? 

Karl Marx addressed this dilemma back in 1848 and prescribed violent revolution.  Of course, his world was vastly different from ours (and I don’t think he was thinking about football!).  Modern Marxists have searched for a less kinetic approach.  This has split the Marxists into two groups, one that still favors violent revolution and direct confrontation, and another that favors democratic revolution and indirect confrontation. 

Among the thinkers who preferred the latter approach were two people at Columbia University, Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven.  Their theory was that if Smithian economies were overburdened by progressive Marxist redistribution, they would eventually collapse in on themselves and Marxists would become the democratic majority.  The spark for the strategy was a tactic from Saul Alinsky, “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”  In other words, load up on debt, dependency, and obligations, and then blame the Smithian system when it reaches a crisis.  This would achieve the same result Marx had prescribed, only politically and without violence.

This is exactly what has happened in Greece.  The Greek system collapsed in on itself because they had created a progressively redistributive system that resulted in a majority of the electorate being dependent on government.  This resulted in a massive debt burden that eventually became a crisis when the debt got downgraded to junk.  As a Euro member, Greece could not unilaterally print money to pay off its debt, a strategy countries have used throughout history.  Backed into a corner, the Greeks chose Communism, just as Cloward and Piven predicted. 

So, what’s this got to do with Barack Obama? 

What would a committed Marxist in the Cloward and Piven mold do if he obtained power in the US?  Would he work tirelessly for government rules to subsidize mortgages for those who cannot afford homes in the hope that it might collapse the system?  Would he maybe run up more debt in eight years than all previous presidents combined?  Would he reduce workforce participation and greatly increase government dependency?  Would he work tirelessly for progressive redistribution of wealth?  Would he avoid any direct Marxist or Socialist language and instead fall back on vague terms such as “hope” “change” and “fundamental transformation”?  Would he possibly nationalize healthcare, student loans, community colleges, daycare, etc. in an attempt to consolidate votes, and eventually collapse the system?  Would he try to flood the voter rolls with dependents and illegals? 

If you have followed Barack Obama and his past, you would know by now that he attended Columbia University and was introduced to the Cloward and Piven strategy there.  You might also know of his affinity for Saul Alinsky and his roots as an Alinsky Community Organizer.  You might also know that Frances Fox Piven was all but present at the signing of Obamacare.  You might also know that she is among those behind Obama’s recent executive action on immigration.   What you probably don’t know is that she, and the then living Richard Cloward, were present at the signing of Bill Clinton’s 1993 “Motor Voter” bill.

That's them right behind Clinton.  Do the math.   

Incidentally, which football team would you bet on long term, the Marxists or the Smithians?

(UPDATE:  An earlier version of this post placed Frances Fox Piven at the signing of Obamacare.  That was likely incorrect.)  

President Asterisk

Barack Obama did a lot of bragging last night in his SOTU.  Unfortunately, every one of his bullet points needs an asterisk – a big asterisk:  

·   On the Economy, Obama touted a host of positive economic results that have shown improvement since he became President.  *Unfortunately, what he will not mention is that he, or more accurately his philosophy, was to blame for the financial crisis that he supposedly “inherited”.  He did not inherit that mess, he caused it!  Redistribution of wealth, in this case redistribution of mortgage credit, was at the heart of the Affordable Housing Initiative that was begun in the 1990s by Democrats under Bill Clinton, and reached it’s apex in 2007 while Democrats, including Senator Barack Hussein Obama, ran congress.  No member of congress took more campaign money at a faster clip from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than Senator Obama.  Fannie and Freddie were ground zero in the subprime crisis, and Barack Obama was the subprime king.  This aspect of his past has been completely expunged from the historical record.  This is the mother of all asterisks. 

·   Two other big asterisks in the rosy economic picture:  Interest rates and debt.  *No president in American history has had an easier Federal Reserve policy, and no president was ever been given carte blanche to spend, borrow, and print money like Barack Hussein Obama.  Obama has borrowed, printed, and spent  $11 trillion appropriated from future generations - an unprecedented amount ($3.5 trillion from QE I, II, III, and $7.5 trillion in new borrowing).  If $11 trillion were distributed directly to the people, every family could be given $140,000 in cash!  And no president has had a 0% Fed funds rate for his entire presidency.  Not even close. 

·   There was a lot of bragging about helping the middle class.  Claims were made about rising wages.  None of it is true.  *Median wages have been falling since Obama became president, which is why polls show Americans still perceive we are in a recession. 

·   One of the biggest reasons for recent economic optimism is the decline in the cost of energy.  The asterisk:  *none of this is due to Obama, Democrats, or federal  policies.  It all came from private initiatives and state laws that permit fracking, horizontal drilling, and steam extraction. 

·   Obama wants more government intervention in childcare, education, and of course, healthcare.  The asterisk:  *the more government gets involved in childcare, the more kids grow up without families and end-up in a life of crime and dependency.  Government intervention in education and healthcare is precisely why both these areas got to crisis levels of inflation and mismanagement.  More government will lead to more of the same. 

·   Obama bragged about ending the war in Afghanistan. Afghanistan asterisk:  *actually, Bush had essentially decided that our goals were achieved in Afghanistan and he had already drawn down our forces.  Obama surged troops back into Afghanistan and nearly tripled our casualty rates (Bush = 630, vs Obama = 1726)!  Nothing more was gained from these additional deaths.  You probably didn’t know these numbers, right?

·   Obama bragged about a victory over terrorism (though he cannot get himself to admit that Islam has anything to do with it!).  The asterisk:  *really?  Anyone paying attention knows this is complete bullshit.  ISIS, Iraq, Libya, France, Yemen, Nigeria, Syria???  Hello… 

I could go on but what’s the point.  Obama still has about half the country mesmerized by his propaganda, which is aided and abetted by the pop media, pop culture, and pop academia. 

Obligatory Deflated Balls Meme

Dear Mitt, No Mas!

Dear Mitt Romney,

I’m done.  I will not support you if you seek the presidency in 2016, even though I did so quite enthusiastically in the past.  Look, I have nothing but respect for you.  I’ve even made phone calls on your behalf, donated to your campaigns, and argued your merits to anyone who’d listen.  And I still think you’d make an exceptional president!  But, the fact is, at least for this supporter, you have disqualified yourself as a candidate.  Here’s why:   

Mr. Romney, you’re a businessman right?  Let me pose some hypothetical questions to you:  Would you hire a CEO who had legitimate access to the trade secrets of his competitors yet refused to learn from them?  If you owned a football team, would you hire a head coach who had legitimate access to his opponent’s playbook but failed to study it?

Those trade secrets and playbook are readily available in the writings of Saul Alinsky.  Have you read them?  Have you studied them?  Have you devised counter tactics?  I seriously doubt it because you’ve been blind-sided time and again by Alinsky tactics.  Ever since Bill Clinton, Democrats have won every election in which they stuck closest to the Saul Alinsky playbook.  If you had absorbed those lessons and understood how to counter them you might have won.  Instead, you naively ran straight into an Alinsky buzzsaw.  To this day, I’m not sure you understand how you were Alinsky-ed.

Just about every turning point in the last campaign hinged on Alinsky tactics.  The “war on women”, binders full of women, dogs on car roofs, the 47% kerfuffle, ads about the woman who died of cancer, the haircut story, the car lift, the horse, and on and on were all straight out of the Alinsky playbook.  Even the Candy Crowley debate fiasco was manageable had you understood Alinsky.

Then there were the unforced errors, which again could have been avoided with a basic understanding of Alinsky.  “Obama’s a nice guy, but he’s in over his head.”  “Obama didn’t cause the financial crisis, he inherited it.”  “Obama deserves credit for getting bin Laden.”  All examples of huge unforced errors.  If you’d like a detailed accounting of why these were the wrong things to say, (aside from them being flat wrong!) please read my post mortem from December 2012, “Why Romney Lost”.

Here’s another hypothetical:  If you were hiring a marketing executive, would you hire someone who had unfettered access to free advertising but failed to use it? 

Ever since Ronald Reagan, Republicans have won every election in which they understood that the news media, entertainment media, and academia would be aligned against them, and that they therefore must go straight to the voters - especially to their base!  You sir had unfettered access to conservative talk radio, a medium that reaches millions of Republican base voters each day, and you gave them the Heisman! 

I witnessed you passing up these gimmees throughout your time on the national political stage, and it made me want to tear my hair out.  I simply can’t take it anymore.  (Plus, I’m running out of hair.)

Mr. Romney, you’re an amazingly accomplished person.  You are no dummy.  But you’re a “saint”, a Mormon Bishop, and you are ill equipped for the devils domain of today’s Alinsky politics.  Hillary or no Hillary, 2016 will be all Alinsky all the time.  Sorry Mitt, this ain't your game.  No mas.    

Regards, Ron Reich

undiepundit.com

P.S. Dear reader, please forward this to any Republicans you know in the hope that someone in Romney’s circle might perhaps see it and save us, and him, the humiliation of another embarrassment!  

Je Suis Nakoula Basseley Nakoula

Hey, I think it's great that so many are showing solidarity for free speech in the wake of the massacre at Charlie Hebdo by Islamic extremists. But, how many spoke out after Benghazi when those murders were blamed, not on the attackers, but on a guy who posted a video on YouTube? Obama made a speech at the UN and all but blamed Nakoula Basseley Nakoula in front of the world saying, "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam". Then he had him arrested and put in jail for a year. No one said a word.