About Me

Name: thekeenobserver
Email: reallykeenobserver@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Obama's Hate Crime- banishing the truth

 
Harry "give-em-hell" Truman was known for his legendary temper, and could be less than temperate with his language.
 
Once, a Washington Post music critic- having reviewed a piano recital by Truman's daughter, Margaret - wrote: "Her voice was flat" and..."I was mystified by how people could even pay attention to her."
 
Upon reading this, Truman expolded in fury, calling the paper's editor, demanding that he fire the worthless *!^!#**%*, and "hire a critic who KNOWS something about music!"
 
Whenever anyone disagreed with Truman, he sought revenge - up to and including humiliation.
 
In a well-publicized conversation with General Omar Bradley about General Douglas MacArthur (whom Truman had dismissed as commander of the UN force in Korea) Truman was quoted..."This *#*!%!!* isn't going to quit on me...I want him FIRED"
 
During the election campaign of 1952, Truman openly expressed utter disdain for his Republican opponents, calling General Dwight Eisenhower a...*&%#*#* Army brat, and branding Richard Nixon as "squirrel head."
 
However, when Barack Obama gets perturbed, the "warning signs" are not as obvious: He'll begin his sentence with "look," and will jab his left index finger at the air.
 
And when our anti-president gets REALLY peeved, he'll begin his sentence with..."Make no mistake." Then, he'll throw down the gauntlet, citing the object of his anger.
 
But for the first time, Mr. Obama appears to be losing his cool - seemingly incapable of experiencing either defeat or embarrassment.
 
Ever since the health care issue went from simmer to boil, Obama finds himself in an unfamilair position - on the defensive. Could his political armor be sporting a few telltale chinks?
 
Might be.
 
Recently in Bristol, Virginia, Mr. Obama had chosen the unusual venue of a Kroger store to quash all the "scurrilous" rumors concerning his effforts to reform healthcare:

"Make no mistake" he began (in the canned vegetable aisle), “Nobody is talking about some government takeover of health care. These guys on the radio are the one's saying it; and I'm tired of hearing it..."
 
"...I have been as clear as I can be: Under the reform I've proposed, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan. These folks (talk radio) need to stop scaring everybody."  adding that... "scare tactics such as this burn me up."
 
While Obama was venting, you could see seething anger through his glowering eyes, and read his mind: "How DARE they interfere my right to lie! I want this #!#**%$#* talk radio nemesis off the air ASAP."
 
Ever since Mr. Obama began his presidentail campaign, he's been unchallenged by the mainstream media; obviously enjoying his "right " to say anything unobstructed by anyone.
 
But now, people realize government-controlled healthcare is going to directly affect everyone, and are listening intently to the so called 'hate speech' of right-wing talk radio - the purveyors of the truth. And Barack Obama wants them gone... and at once.
 
In Obama's mind, talk radio is “hate radio." But Obama is the one who hates:
 
He hates the way talk radio has grown from mere nuisance, to grave threat. Hence, in his vindictive scheming mind, it’s to be labeled “hate speech,” and thus considered outside the protection of the First Amendment.
 
There are ominous signs everywhere that talk radio is on every powerful democrat's radar screen: And what do all these liberals fear? The truth.
 
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has gone so far as to call conservative talk radio, “hate radio.” The drum beat is ever-increasing among liberal legislators (and Obama) for the FCC to institute the so-called requirement of localism, to provide “balance” on talk radio shows.

This means that the FCC willl now call for recommendations from local community boards (ACORN) to see if  "local radio is performing in the general interests of the community."

The conservatives should have learned their lesson by now: anytime liberals use the word "community" it implies some new form tyranny is on the way, to further erode our rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

But the reality is clear: conservative talk radio (and conservative values) are under siege in America by the left. Their method? Quash free speech by convincing everyone talk radio is hate speech - that free speech can only be free under the liberals' terms.

Even the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC) has become emboldened, petitioning the FCC to probe conservative talk radio.  Alex Nogales, NHMC's president, spoke at a recent news conference...“We are very respectful of the First Amendment, but the hateful rhetoric espoused by irresponsible radio talk show hosts needs to be addressed." 

Translation: The First Amendment should be abriged; minority groups can be criticized no longer by the "hateful right."

 
But who defines hate speech? Can it even be defined under the First Amendment?  It seems groups like the NHMC (and others) want to redefine what is - and what isn't -acceptable on our nation’s airwaves. 
 
Of course any speech can be highly offensive, but it must remain free. To set aside protected classes - free from criticism - is the first step toward tyranny.
 
Defining "hate speech" is inherently impossible. It presupposes what's in a person's heart. And where does it end? Does our Constitution guarantee the freedom from being offended?
 
Freedom of speech does not include freedom from offense. But it only becomes only hate speech when the radical left doesn't agree with it.
 
Recall the famous words of Voltaire: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
 
Indeed, Voltaire was correct; and so are committed talk radio hosts when they use THE TRUTH to expose the callous lies of these leftists, revealing their underlying goal to impose fascism upon an unsuspecting, ill-informed nation.
 
Hate speech is nothing other but a liberal construct - that there are a certain words and phrases that are indefensible; thus, should be subject to government regulation.
 
This is why liberals will go to no end to ban talk radio: It isn't about hate speech; it's about controlling what people THINK, rather than just defeating conservative ideas.
 
Liberals understand that is doesn't take long for traditional freedoms to be lost to "changing ideals." It takes but a generation or two for pop culture to steam roll tradition into oblivion. If the left can succeed at keeping competing ideologies (talk radio) out of the main stream,  then our concept of limited government gradually becomes as foreign as a second language.
 
Allowing government to determine what is "hate speech" or a "hate crime" is akin to dictatorship. Conservatives must realize that banning talk radio is this president's next priority. A tyrant like Obama will permit no opposition to stand in his way. 
 
America's economy can be rebuilt. Home prices will eventually go back up. Jobs will be created again. The stock market will find equilibrium and eventually stabilize.
 
But freedom of speech, once lost, may never be regained.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Unplugging talk radio- the FCC's fascist plot for censorship

 

Here are two interesting quotes from none other than Thomas Jefferson:

 

(quote) "There is an enemy somewhere endeavoring to sow discord among us: To buy off one lie is to give a premium for the invention of others."

 

(quote) "There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible as that which permits one to tell a lie."

 

 Here is yet another --and MORE interesting-- quote from Joseph Goebbels (Hitler's fabled "communications" director):

 

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it,  people will eventually come to believe it...The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the consequences of the lie...Thus, it becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent... for the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” (circa 1936)

 

Now let's take a qoute from Barack Obama, as he directly addresses the Iranian government for the first time, after a day of violence in Iran:

 

(quote) "We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and FREE SPEECH must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights."

 

But what does all this have to do with talk radio? Simple; Obama intends to kill freedom over the public air waves-- a right he staunchly supports in Iran. But at home? Well, that's quite another story. 

 

Obama makes noble statements projecting First Amendment rights to the Iranians; but at the same time, he launches a covert plot to crush all political dissent in America. Make no mistake. Conservative talk radio is now an endangered species.

 

On Feb 18, 2009, Obama himself stated, (quote) "I do not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be re-instated.” But it's what he DIDN"T say that portends his ominous trap.
 
Having watched Obama rise through the ranks in Illinois, he always prefers to eliminate competition whenever possible. So now, as President, why would it be any different?

 

Localism will be Obama's contrivance to rid his world of the last bastion of political dissension...Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other mainstays of conservative talk radio.

 

If Obama truly wanted "fairness" it would also apply to TV, newspapers, and news magazines. But all of these mediums are overwhelmingly liberal, serving the big-government, freedom-killing agenda of Obama and his cadre of leftists in Congress.

 

Now, with Mr. Obama's appointment of his double-talking, Harvard law school buddy, Julius Genachowski as new head of the FCC, Obama has no doubt anointed him as another star addition to the democratic liars' club-- the ability to state one thing but imply another.

 

Recently, Mr. Genachowski told  Kay B. Hutchinson-- a member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee-- (quote) "No, Senator, I don’t support re-instatement of the Fairness Doctrine"...."I feel strongly about the First Amendment, and I don’t think the FCC should be involved in censorship of content-based limiting of political speech.”

 

Conservatives brace yourselves-- it's all a decoy; an ambush.

Genachowski's "denial" is yet another Trojan horse concealing the evil of Obammunism. His
 repudiation of the Fairness Doctrine is seen as proof positive that the FCC intends to sneak it in under the innocuous-sounding name of "localism."

 

If "right-wing" talk radio is a cancer for these liberals, localism is their form of "chemo-therapy".

 

Obama knows if censorship is disguised as something other than the Fairness Doctrine, then he can champion it without changing his position. By stating his "opposition" to the "Doctrine", Obama's leftist minions will do the dirty work-- giving Mr. Obama the appearance of being "Mr. Forthright."

 

And having taught Constitutional law, Obama knows localism cannot easily be challenged by the Supreme Court. So now, the handwriting of censorship is on the wall-- only it's been written with invisible ink:

 

POINT- Obama's continual references about how Fox News won't give him "a fair shake"

 

POINT - Obama's inference that people should not pay attention (listen) to Rush Limbaugh

 

POINT-- on the campaign trail last year, his repeated references to Sean Hanitty

 

Obama's latest big lie (through Genachowski) is akin to waving a white flag to the Republicans, but all the while he digs a tunnel to subvert them politically. Barack Obama is about fighting dirty, preferring to "clear the field" of competition (dissent) whenever possible; and lying and doublespeak have been his most effective strategems.

 

Once anyone within the Obama administration vows something they absolutely will NOT do, rest assured that it's exactly the course of action they've planned. And Genachowski is no different; as head of the FCC, he'll lie to no end to support what Obama wants-- absolute control of the mainstream media.

 

Mr. Obama is a Saul Alinsky student-- the end justifies the means; hence, the plot will be couched within his seemingly benign support for "community programming" on local radio stations. 

 

To date, Mr.Obama has been mum on localism. But his silence is the "tipoff": he'll soon coyly announce..."I support it." Obama knows better than to take on Rush Limbaugh headlong with his 22 million strong audience-- the courts wouldn’t uphold it.

 

Localism applies only to radio, and the stations/programs that are political in nature. This leaves the bulk of FM programming out of the equation.
 
However, conservative airtime is the much larger percentage of AM political commentary. Hence, Obama (and his sneaky FCC chairman) are going to try and go a different route, but achieving the same end result:

 

-The FCC will start a movement (behind the scenes) to start a “Fairness in Ownership Doctrine"- making a "case" for minorities to own radio stations, and staging it as a "community concern."

 

--The FCC will denounce those "corporate power elites" that have acquired a monopoly of talk radio outlets across the country over the last 16 years (i.e. Clear Channel & CBS). 
 
After the above "groundwork", the process of censorship will be introduced in stages through a series of Federal Communication Commission "decrees:"

 

Stage 1) an entity can only own 1-2 stations; thus, Clear Channel and CBS will be forced to sell all their radio outlets on the "cheap."

 

Stage 2) the "monopoly" break-up will result in stations being sold to minority owners at bargain prices. Obama-connected 'friends" will constitute the mainstay of the new ownership

 

Stage 3) local-broadcast "advisory boards" (ACORN) will be formed to hold radio owners responsible to uphold "opposing opinions" OR, their broadcast licences will not be renewed. (Obama will claim he has no control over what local communities do)

 

Stage 4) more diversity (localism) program will be instituted-- a requirement to provide "X" hours of local programming

 

Stage 5) leftists groups (Media Matters) will a file a blizzard of anti-localism "complaints" against all remaining conservative-owned stations

 

Stage 6) the final result-- veiled censorship. Conservative stations -- knowing they'll go broke defending all these "complaints" in court-- find it cheaper to broadcast music/sports than to keep Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. on the air

 

Obama abhors dissent; he will waste no time in placing localism into action. It'll soon be bye-bye to your favorite talk radio shows-- there will no longer be a way to hear the truth.

 

But Obama will couch it all in noble phrases, declaring: "It's about progressing to a more egalitarian society"...and..."Divisive, hateful, irresponsible speech over the public airways is unacceptable; therefore, is not protected by the First Amendment."

 

Before we know it, talk radio will vanish, and with it, our ability to speak out against Obama's bold tyranny, as he fully intends to shut down ALL political opposition... PERIOD!  

 

And once talk radio disappears, the ability to post our thoughts and opinions over the Internet will be the next freedom taken from us in the same underhanded manner.

 

Independents, Republicans, Conservatives; we must unite and publicly speak out against these egregious tactics!

 

If we choose not to oppose the assault these insidious leftists have declared upon our Constitution, then we deserve the very tyrrany they seek to impose upon us.

 

Just keep in mind this ominous reminder from the Nazi fanatic-- Joseph Goebbels..."truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”  

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Driving the EPA bulldozer over America's fragile economy

 

Get your motor running...head out on the highway! Everyone has heard "Born to be Wild", the classic 60's hit song. Especially Barack Obama, and his radical leftist cadre of cabinet appointees.

You can almost read their minds:

Taking a cue from the "first 100 days" of Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1933 presidency, the Obama administration seems to believe in striking while the iron is HOT, and--like the words of the classic song --firing all of their guns at once.

But will all the new radical Obama measures eventually "explode into flames"?

Right now Obama is rattling off one leftist declaration after another, in conjunction with enough deficit spending to defy description. First it was mandatory "no-choice" abortions; next was the anti-stimulus bill; then a spending bill; then educational reform... nationalized health care... renewable energy...card check. Now we have talk of another second stimulus bill.

You name it, and Mr. Obama is planning to "bring it on" before the ardor for his anti-presidency cools off and falls back to reality.

America is about to realize that Obama's Kennedy-esque speeches (and soaring rhetoric) were not of the heart, but from only a teleprompter screen. Now he's removed his campaign mask and assumed his true socialist identity.

And next on comrade Obama's target list: destroying the energy industry.

Despite the fact that America uses gasoline and diesel to run 95% of its transportation needs, Generalissimo Obama has decided to make war on fossil fuels, and has wasted no time in reversing a decision that would have allowed oil exploration offshore, and opened up new exploratory leases within public lands in our interior.

Remember last year's horror of seeing, "regular 4.29", posted on street signs of gas stations? Just keep Mr. Obama's reversal in mind the next time pump prices head back up to 4 bucks/gallon.

But Obama would like to arrive at the European levels of 6, 7-- even 8 dollars /gallon. After all, didn't he accuse America as being wasteful and profligate? And that we are a nation comprising 5% of the world's population, yet consume (hog) 25% of the world's energy?

Mr. Obama will soon remedy that! How? By what he's about to do-- cleverly restrict our energy supply. And all under the masquerade of saving the environment, and halting the decline of the polar bears before its too late.

Despite the fact that we have a huge tracts of land containing an estimated 1.8 trillion barrels of oil (in the shale of our western states), America keeps getting drilled again and again.

First it was Nancy (Nazi) Pelosi, who has prevented every Republican domestic drilling bill from even reaching the House floor. And now our leftist
Interior Secretary, Mr. Ken Salazar, is putting the brakes on a Bush administration plan to open 77 new parcels of land to oil and natural gas drilling, while instead promising a “new way forward” for offshore wind projects. 


Salazar criticized the
Bush administration’s “drill-only approach,” saying the U.S. needs a "comprehensive energy" plan that considers all the "potential resources" in the oceans.

Great. Marvelous. No new oil drilling, no new domestic supply, and an open invitation to the commodity traders to again bid up the world price of petroleum back to $144/barrel -or even higher-- once the world economy revives.

Obama and the dumbo-crats keep lecturing about renewable and alternative energy (the justification is always environmental); but they're openly hostile to cheap and readily available fossil fuels, and are more than willing to treasonously allow us to send $700 billion a year to OPEC than drill our own oil and keep the money at home.

Yes America-- elections do have consequences.

And at a time when proposals for higher taxes are politically unpopular, the radical leftists in Congress have decided to thumb their noses at the average Joe, and are about to spring another cleverly disguised way to squeeze even more tax money from Americans.

Right now, Congress is debating legislation that would create a European-style scam that "caps" the maximum allowable amounts of CO2 from power plants, heavy industries, manufacturers, and you guessed it-- our vehicles.

So once it passes, everytime we get our motors runnin', and head out on the highway, every American driver will not be victimized as a taxpayer--but as a consumer.

This cap and trade system is "designed" to give companies incentives for reducing emissions; but unsuspecting Americans will soon realize it's nothing but a hidden tax in the form of higher utility bills (natural gas & electric) that will jack the prices of everything, including gasoline, food and consumer products.

Obama and his Stalinist minions claim that, "Cap and trade is there for a reason...you cap and trade to pay for investments in renewables, which will lead the country to energy independence."

Energy independence? The arrogance of the democrats know no bounds! And it's all courtesy of an American electorate that is so dumbed-down scientifically, that they know not the difference between harmless CO2 (carbon dioxide ) and poisonous CO (carbon monoxide).

So who was it that said, "We get the government we deserve?" And its a treasonous one indeed. 

 

Realistically, by collecting cap and trade fees from American companies--with the cost borne by consumers-- we are in effect, subsidizing our foreign competitors (China, India, et. al) who have already stated that they're placing economic development above any environmental considerations

It's economic war on every working American who uses energy, and will reduce our economy into a miasma of plunging competiveness, lost jobs, and foolishly misplaced alternative energy investments.

Now let's introduce Dr. Steven Chu, (aka "Dr. No"- no new drilling)  Obama's Energy Czar, who doesn't have "faith" in nuclear power, has called coal, "his worst nightmare," and predicts "dire consequences due to global warming".

But meanwhile, Sweden is "warming" to nuclear power, because in their misguided lengthy attempt to be a leader in alternative energy, they've discovered it's extremely difficult to replace conventional energy with solar and wind. So the Swedes will set aside a 30 year ban on nuclear reactors, and are joining a rapidly growing list of nations who view emission-free nuclear as the best way to deal with "climate change".

 

But predictably, the Obama administration has lent a deaf ear to all this, and has taken an opposite tack-- no nuclear-- at least  for now.

 

Expansion of nuclear power could create tens of thousands of badly-needed U.S. corporate jobs (such as with GE and Westinghouse) and would require a multitude of construction workers to erect new reactors. And these would be high wage jobs--not just some make-work stimulus proposal. And more importantly, it would put America on track to returning to the 90's when the country last prospered as a full-wage economy.

But leftist Chu (and comrade Obama) are having none of it, and have rejected the already agreed-upon desert site at Nevada's Yucca Mountain for nuclear waste storage, saying... "that it's too close to the water table and could harm the environment."

So another solution to America's energy (and employment) problem literally "bites the dust."

Next in line for battle is the EPA's attack on coal, which will be led by Climate Czar, Carol Browner, who recently declared..."The Obama Administration will soon make an "endangerment finding” on carbon dioxide"...and that..."The next step is a notice of proposed "rule making” for new regulations on carbon-dioxide emissions".

 

An "endangerment finding?" Rule making?

Translation: Coal companies --prepare for chapter 13. Consumers --prepare for a 100% hike in your electric bills; and America-- get ready to turn out the lights.

How much more insanity can our country endure! This will turn out to be the ultimate attack on all of America-- the EPA determining that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant-- and setting off the most extensive set of costly regulations in American history.

So you think insane too strong of a word? Hah!

 

Browner's new clean air decree will tag any source as emitting more than 250 tons of a "declared pollutant" as being subject to regulation, potentially including schools, hospitals, shopping centers-- even commercial hog farms and bakeries.

So if you like to eat meat, or enjoy an occasional donut or a fresh loaf of bread, get ready to go vegetarian, unless you want to pay dearly for your dietary staples-- they're gonna cost a lot more once Ms. Browner gets through with her destruction of America's standard of living

So prepare for a revival of that the beloved tradition, "Depression Era cooking". Beans and greens anyone?

The EPA's so called "registry plan" would cover about 13,000 facilities that account for 85 to 90 percent of the nation's greenhouse gas output. EPA Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, in a recent statement, crowed..."This is a critical step toward helping us better protect our health and environment -- all without placing an onerous burden on our nation's small businesses".

 

But unless you push a hot dog cart or have a roadside hamburger stand, count on the EPA breathing down your neck with these so-called "reporting regulations". Even a farm with more than 25 cows would have to document their "emissions" of methane and other greenhouse gases.

 

Got milk? Maybe not for long--this portends more small farms closing down, and permanently higher dairy and meat prices.

It's all part of the cover-up to restrict supply, and drag America down to an energy-starved, tax-burdened, third world socialist nation, with Obama and his Politburo of cabinet members proudly beaming..."mission accomplished."

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The new Amerika? Obama's neo-communist revenge.


Okay boys 'n girls, let's get out our dictionaries and learn an important definition.
 
SEDITION: a term of law which refers to covert conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order.
 
And right now, a treasonous, vicious, seditious, covert action is underway to dissolve what's left of self-government-- right underneath our unsuspecting noses!


Anti-president Barack Obama is punching the buttons as fast as he can to fire off his executive order torpedoes, and sinking our democracy beneath an ocean of government induced socialism--the Obama revenge.
 
As far as comrade Obama is concerned, he's voted "nyet" to our democratic tradition and "da" to his peculiar brand of American neo-communism
 
Is it treason? Sedition? Take your pick; it's Obammunism on its most dastardly obsessive mission; changing the face of America to a nation that won't even recognize itself by the time Obama is done serving his presumed second term.
 
And predictably, we should have known:
 
Mr. Obama has been publicly quoted as saying... "that generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties..." a remark that revealed a shocking disregard of the intent of our Founders- to limit central government.
 
Of course this was a only a preview of the other troubling signs demonstrative that Obama was indeed a presidential candidate who despised America. Recall how Obama refused to wear a flagpin; or pictured where he brazenly declined to hold his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance
 
While these may seem trivial, they reveal the true nature within--Obama may be the first truly anti-American president in history; and sought the office to "get even" with America.
 
But "why" you say? Well, as the old saying goes, "the child is father to the man."
 
Obama may not even have been born in America. His father wasn't American.

In his early formative years, he spent time in Indonesia-- a Muslim nation. Then, after moving in with his grandparents in Hawaii, he spent his later formative years under the tutelage of Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed member of the communist party, and certified hatemonger against America.

Obama was mentored by a communist who claimed that "true patriotism" consists of trying to ensure that America loses wars. Thus, Obama, as an adolescent, adopted Davis as the father figure he never had.
 
By the time a young Obama applied to college, he was full blown anti-American in his attitude toward the country where he may have already been planning to "even up the score".
 
Could this be why Obama's entrance records at Occidental college have been barricaded; or maybe eradicated? What student groups did he associate with there? What were his elective subject choices? Where are his admission records? Why does he persist in hiding these?
 
And could this also be why Obama's transcripts at Columbia and Harvard are non-available to the public? Was it because of his Marxist associations...or the anti American theme of his thesis? Did Obama associate with radical student groups as rumors suggest?
 

Columbia and Harvard were schools steeped in leftist radicalism, exposing their students to an ideological liberal bent, and painting America as racist, rife with injustice, and in need of drastic, fundamental change-- a theme Obama took to heart
 
Yes, Obama is the most learned, well educated, well spoken president since John F. Kennedy; but one thing Mr Obama may have never learned in his entire lifetime is patriotism-- love of country-- an appreciation for all America stands for: the opportunity; the freedom: an individual's option to pursue any type of life he or she so desires
 
And Barack Obama’s lack of a parenting American father is coming to the fore in spades during the first months of his anti-presidency.
 
America is more than a country; it's a unique experiment in human history; an idea enthusiastically embraced by immigrants and native-born alike; and it gets passed along from generation to generation
 
But Mr Obama, fatherless during his youth, didn't get the memo; and like his wife, he grew up learning that America is “just downright mean", and must be dealt with in a way he feels is deserving of a people who get bitter, cling to guns and religion, and express antipathy to people who aren’t like them
 
It's Obama's typical liberal elitism-- viewing the average Joe as cattle to be managed--and a desire to defy traditional American government and ideals.
 
Obama is pro-abortion; anti-God; anti guns, and anti-Old Glory. But he’s pro-big government, pro-big spending, and pro-Marxist--punish the achievers and subsidize all the slothful government-dependent leaches. And his his pro-socialist revolution is but a glimpse into Obama’s plans for more Stalin-esque destruction yet to come.
 
Thus we now we face the full wrath of Obama's anti Americanism: trillion dollar deficits...massive tax increases; military cuts...socialized medicine...welfare explosion, and basically, overturning the Constitution's theme of a limited federal government to guard against the one thing the Founders greatly feared --tyranny
 
And tyranny comes in many disguised forms; and Obama is a master of disguise, who's hollow rhetoric belies the true devious objective that lies within: the bleeding of the middle class, and transferring its wealth to the underclass
 
As Lenin wrote, "The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation."
 
Now that Obama is in the Whitehouse, his antipathy for the Constitution, the country, the people, and our traditional way of life has found a wide open avenue of expression
 
Obama has his sights set on an accumulation of power that will continue to go unchallenged as long as the media remains an accomplice-- and they seem quite content to comply
 
And the Obama "push" to end democracy is unrelenting: he's literally peripatetic in his pursuit of a Marxist agenda to destroy, one by one, our Bill of Rights, and establish a new communist order within our country: "Da, Comrade.. .welcome to UNITED STATES of AMERIKA"
 
But predictably, our treasonous media has chosen to masquerade this travesty, going so far as likenening Obama to Abe Lincoln. Yes of course!  And Dick Cheney was the second coming of Thomas Jefferson
 
But the true presidential comparison of Obama will never be spoken by the media. His election is more aptly compared to another anti American president-- James Earl Carter
 
Yes; the Democratic liberal, Jimmy Carter — Mr. Human Rights--with his body of work that decimated the US economy, emasculated our once highly-effective CIA, and embarrassed the U.S. time and time again with his blundering pro-Islamic foreign policy

Almost single-handedly, Carter destabilized the Middle East by working to allow the overthrow of the pro-American Shah of Iran, in order to create a power vacuum that permitted radical Islamists to take over that country.
 
Carter was also instrumental in causing radical Islam to seize the U.S. Embassy and its staff in Iran, which resulted in the 14-month Hostage Crisis. This Carter-created hostage disaster ended only after Republican Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States—replacing the reckless, naively-dangerous Carter.
 
Jimmy Carter, with all of his actions taken during his single-term presidency — and beyond — could also be considered as our first truly anti-American president.

And if so, then Barack Obama is well on the way to proving to be our second.

 

Obama's presidential "thesis" seems to be a take-off from Carter-- a theme of punishment-- getting even with America for all her past sins of racism, imperialism, and taking advantage of the poor; a radical leftist agenda that would have sent shivers up the spine of Thomas Jefferson. 
 
And it should do the same to all thinking Americans, who know that without the intent of our Constitution-- to protect our rights and liberties-- we would be at the mercy of a powerful and unrestrained federal government, ruled not by law, but by power-hungry men like Barack Obama.
 
So a big dose of patriotic reality is urgently needed; we need to start getting loud, REALLY LOUD, to warn of the creeping cancer of Obammunism.
 
Only a few years ago, people thought that this ultra-liberal socialist push was just a fear of the conservative right. Now it is not only on our doorstep, it has seated itself at our dining table.
 
Obama may or not be a Christian, but he never seems to be able to forgive America for her so-called past sins, and he’s out to condemn a death sentence upon the country we all know and love as patriotic Americans, who will fight Obama to the end.

 

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Barack Obama...President of the world?


Well lookee-lookee! Did the cat slip out of the bag? Carol Browner, Obama's proud choice for climate Czar, was recently "unearthed" as a member of the radical socialist (Stalinist) organization known as "Socialist International" (S.I.). And these people aren't exactly your basic local rotary club, but rather a leftist hardball group determined to put forth their radical environmental agenda upon the ENTIRE world.

S. I. calls for the, "redesign of the international rules on intellectual property." That's bureaucrat lingo for compelling an inventor to surrender property rights in order to "share" technologies with less-developed countries. So Ms. Browner--can we get any more socialist than compelling all U.S. inventors to "share" with less developed countries? What in the name of Thomas Edison are you planning?
 
Despite the controversy, president elect Obama, who chose the ex-60's radical Browner for this all-important cabinet position, staunchly supports the nomination, declaring that, "Climate change will be a priority of my administration". Supposedly, in the name of stimulating the economy, Obama plans to spend at least 500 billion dollars (which the government does not have) to convert the economy from carbon-based fuels, to greener alternatives. 
 
The main focus of Socialist International centers on America, as the world's largest energy user, must shrink its economic output (energy usage) in conjunction with the smaller countries of the world increasing theirs. And the mechanism for this philosophy is based not upon climatological factors, but on economic ones-- a third world wealth transfer done incognito through the U.N.
 
An in-depth look at Socialist International would reveal that the organization is pushing hard for "global governance", and that America must shrink its economy, whose energy usage emits far too much Co2, in deference to smaller nations, which emit miniscule amounts of Co2. 
 
But looking inward, this climate change guilt trip is really nothing more than an excuse to tax energy users and providers, and send the money to the U.N. to be distributed to third world dictators abroad. The goal? Increasing the political power of the Obama administration to all continents....i.e. Barack Obama-- president of the world!
 
Socialist International purports all the shop-worn liberal mantras: peak oil; co2 is a pollutant; we've reached the verge of irreversible climate devastation; and the U.S. is poisoning the atmosphere. And all this can only be "counteracted" by cap-n-trade. But why would S.I. wish to shrink the U.S. economy in favor of third world countries, such as Zimbabwe, or even Venezuela?
 
First, let's shed all the arguments about human-generated global warming.This brand new theory postulates a more plausible (and diabolical) presentation of the real underlying agenda of Socialist International, Carol Browner, Obama, and all the other enviro-marxists, They're all actually hiding within a "smokescreen", under the guise of saving the environment.
 
So why do they purport this Machiavellian masquerade? Lets officially brand it as, "The smoke screen theory". 
 
The foundation of this theory rests upon the conservative right always thinking, "You liberals  ARE really stupid, believing that man can change the climate".  But herein lies the brilliance--who are the ones ACTUALLY being stupid? 
 
One thing you cannot deny is that many liberals are decidedly brilliant, and politically astute about obtaining positions of power-- which begs the question..."What if these liberals actually realize that global warming via mankind is sheer scientific folly, but they're cleverly using it as a 'cover story' for obfuscating their real agenda, wealth transfer, and the worlwide consolidation of their political power.
 
Therefore, the smoke screen theory can be explained like this: These enviro-marxists use global warming as a way to hoodwink all the world from their true intent---cementing  cap and trade laws into permanent existence, which will produce giant sucking sounds of seemingly boundless money flowing to the government, via the environmental taxation of all the energy producers and energy users in the United States.
 
Its almost like a plot from the old "Batman" TV series of the mid 60's... "We environmentalists feign stupidity, and outsmart all those on the right who think we're the fools"...ha-ha!
 
The smokescreen theory is designed to turn the tables, and outfox the right..."Go ahead and argue with us, you foolish conservatives; we, the liberals, have the media on OUR side...we have the school children on OUR side; we have assumed the moral majority of an ignorant American electorate over to OUR side. And because of all this, we intend to keep it this way!"
 
"And beginning this January 21, we will get our climate change legislation railroaded  through congress, and tax the heavy industries, coal companies, and utilities out of existence; and then, put forth our green agenda. And you cannot stop us, because socialism is now mainstream".
 
So is the smoke screen theory sounding pretty clear now, or do we need some further explanation?

Socialist International, the people who feed us all this alarmist B.S., is treating Americans as if they are too foolish to know what the REAL political spectrum is about-- subversion of the capitalist system, and advancing the cause of socialism by whatever means necessary (i.e. artificial environmentalism to obtain political power over the entire world).
 
NEXT: let's introduce the future icing on the enviro-marxist cake--senate bill s1389; a bill to authorize a National Science Foundation Climate Change "Education Program". Look for it to be introduced first thing into the senate on Jan 22.
 
Of course any proposal with the phrase "education program"  sound innocuous enough, but what is even more interesting, Senate bill 1389A was authored by no less than His Highness, Barack Obam-0h.
 
And the nuts and bolts of bill 1389 requires the establishment of an education program to:
(1) broaden the understanding of the possible consequences of climate change,
2) apply the latest scientific discoveries to provide "learning opportunities"
for people (brainwashing);
(3) emphasize "actionable information" (more leftist brainwashing) to help people promote implementation of energy conservation, renewable energy, and greenhouse gas reduction.
(4) postulate potential solutions to the "problem." 
 
So who's going to pay for all these directives to fight climate change? WE will. How? The Obama administration will tax the coal companies, power plants, steel companies, and all of heavy industry according to their usage of fossil fuels; they will be required to buy carbon credits, and trade with nations that produce no energy or emissions .
 
"No business will be allowed to emit any greenhouse gases for free,” Obama declared. “Businesses don’t own the sky, the public does, and if we want them to stop polluting it, we have to put a price on all pollution.”

Perfect! Why has a politician not thought of this before? Only someone as diabolical as Obama could have thought of charging for pollution, and be clever enough to sell it to America.
 
Obama's plan would require all credits to be purchased at auction, rather than allocated by industry -- a move ensuring that all "polluters" pay for every ton of emissions released. It's also a move that would massively increase the political power of his administration and go along way toward international wealth redistribution to the third world--a cause Obama and Browner fanatically (but esoterically) have supported for many years.
 
And by appointing Browner to a White House post, Obama has at least implicitly endorsed an utterly radical socialist agenda for his administration's environmental policy.

The incoming chief executive stands at the very foundation of the smoke screen theory--environmental policies aren't really about protecting or preserving the earth, but rather expanding government power and limiting individual freedom.

This enviro-radicalism of the Chosen One could push the nation so far to the left, we will never again recover the right path to sound energy policy, and get back to the economic expansion America has always enjoyed, because of the freedom we once had from government restriction.
 
And with the huge, predictable price increases of energy as a result of this enviro-radicalism, everytime we fill up our tanks, or mail in our electric bills, it'll be us--not business-- who'll really be paying the so-called price for pollution.
 
The smokescreen theory will go along way explaining how a scientifically challenged American electorate supports Obama's green-leaning rhetoric- which is nothing but a half veiled attempt to implement a clearly ideological, leftist agenda.
 
This is all part of an even more hidden agenda-- an undeclared war on capitalism; and its implementation will significantly alter the fabric of American society, as we have known it for decades.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »