About Me

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

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Boy Scouts to Brown Shirts? Yes we can!


Remember the Hitler Youth? It was not just a German version of the Boy Scouts.
 
As early as 1934, Hitler sought to indoctrinate Germany's young to perpetuate the "1,000 year Reich," emphasizing activism, physical training, NAZI ideology (especially nationalism) and absolute obedience to Hitler and his NAZI Party.
 
The indoctrination of children in National Socialist ideology was a key goal of Hitler. He demanded that membership be made compulsory.

Seig Heil! Long live the Feuhrer!
 
And once the Feuhrer (Hitler) assumed control over the German state, he used the government to make the Hitler Youth into an all-encompassing movement, realizing that total indoctrination of young Germans was of critical importance to the long-term existence of the Reich-- which lasted only until 1945-- far short of a thousand years.

But thankfully, one need not any longer travel to South America to hunt down the remnants of the Nazis-- they're alive and well in Washington D.C-- the radical House Democrats of the 111th Congress.

Seig Heil (again).

Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D- NY) is sponsoring a bill, with 37 co-sponsors (aka co-conspirators), calling for Congress..."to establish the NCCC " (National Commission on Civic Service) and..."provide recommendations to Congress on improving opportunities for individuals to VOLUNTEER, or perform national service."

Among needs to be met under the NCCC program: infrastructure improvement; environmental and energy conservation; urban and rural development, and (ominously) "emergency" disaster relief.

So it's goodbye, National Guard, and hello, NCCC.

The official title of this soviet-style mandate is "The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act." But predictably, its Stalinist sponsors have propagandized the name by calling it the "Give Act" -- and it is anything but giving.

Yes, the H.R. 1388 bill, the so-called "GIVE Act" makes "volunteerism" mandatory. And according to language contained within H.R. 1388...“the Director determines the "appropriate uniforms”.

Appropriate uniforms? Seig Heil! Don't forget the armbands.

And who'll be named this so-called Director? And how will he (she) be chosen-- by "party loyalty"?

And by being mandatory then it isn't volunteering, is it? It's involuntary servitude for 3 years. Much of the bill sounds more like it's creating something analogous to Hitler's creation--the Obama Youth Corps-- only these so-called ‘volunteers’ shall be called, ahem-ahem, the “National Civilian Community Corps.”

And it's no better than a draft.

Obama’s plan is as nefarious as it is genius: gut the purpose for the national guard, create a new "youth" army, and get your own cadre of SS (secret service) uniform-wearing guards in the process. These are the next priorities Obama will attempt to stash away into his Fascist-Marxist basket of “change”.

Basically, the congressional proponents of the "Give bill" exhort its passage by proclaiming... "National and community service can help make Americans part of the solution to get our country through this economic crisis."

National and community service? What happened to the Boy Scouts? And what's to become of the Red Cross?

Is this the "well-funded as the military" organization Obama kept talking about during his campaign?

Basically this "give act" will take away options that our young people have always had, forcing them to forgo other possibilities (employment, travel, educational) in lieu of "volunteering" for Obama's brown-shirtist paramilitary force, supposedly in charge of intervening in "emergencies".

And WHO determines what are "emergencies"-- handing out "information" at local polling places during election time? Could that be considered an emergency?

Hope ACORN doesn't get jealous.
 
Obama can call any of his programs anything he wants, but they all come down to him doing everything he can to create a nationalist socialist (Nazi) atmosphere; and he's hoping to accomplish all this before the 2012 elections, as he seeks some excuse (economic crisis) to get rid of the Constitutional restraints he views as “quaint.”

This plan is a cover for Obama's intentions to construct his 'glorious utopia' before any Congressional opponents can mount an effective counter. In other words, he’s going at 'warp speed' to remake this country into a national socialist party nation, with more emphasis on "socialist" and less on party.

No one in America, especially our youth, is accustomed to being controlled. But anti-president Obama is the biggest control freak since Saddam; only instead of a Baathist in charge, it's Obama at large!

So what's next, a mandatory act of Congress-- H.R. 1389: "We Revere Barack"-- to erect pictures and statues of our savior in all prominent public places? Maybe it'll be part of the second stimulus bill. It would certainly create a lot of inner city jobs, and remind everyone of who's making it all possible-- Obama-- our new Feuhrer! SEIG HEIL.
 
And like the Hitler Youth, this is also beginning rather innocently, using Marxist-style deceptive language (‘volunteerism’ and ‘give’) to describe what will undoubtedly become a mandatory form of servitude, and recruitment into the Obamian army.
 
This is the equivalent of brown shirts and the “Arbeit Macht Frei”,” the words above the gates of Auschwitz--“work will set you free”.

And once the government has the right to require individuals to give 3 years under the guise of “volunteer” service, are we all then heading toward what... a fourth reich?

In order for Obama to fashion his own personal Socialist Brownshirt Army - and force  American youth into a controlling arm of government-- he must first destroy those institutions standing in his way: the free market, corporations, small business, then health care and the existing military.
 
But according to the Constitution, we already HAVE a civilian defense force... it’s called the MILITIA (national guard).

But Obama is having none of that. His treasonous pals in Congress plan to cut the defense budget 25% (the economic crisis thing) and make this Civilian Security Force "as powerful and as well funded as the military".

And for what? His "Elite SS"? His domestic secret police force?
 
Finally, Obama will complete his sneaky, back-door demagoguery by undermining the 2nd Amendment (disarmament via "ammunition control"); and in conjunction with his youthful brown shirts, Barack will celebrate his Hitlerian triumph - the US of A --United Socialists of America...the 100 year 4th Reich.

Seig Obama! Yes we can!


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

War vs. peace-- the Republicans under fire


War? It's hell- literally! And throughout history, in all the annals of warfare, there has never been a weapon so feared or as devastating for its time as the 6th century development of "Greek Fire"...a hellish weapon that to this day remains a mystery of history.
 
Greek Fire was thought to be an ancient mixture of sulfur, petroleum and "pitch" (asphalt), very similar to our modern napalm, only much, much more potent. It would adhere to surfaces, ignite upon contact, and water alone would not extinguish its flames. It was so feared by those who faced it that soldiers would flee their posts; sailors would rather jump ship and face drowning at sea rather than endure the gruesome, intensely painful death.
 
How the term “Greek Fire” was attributed to the concoction is unknown. It was not used until the time of the European Crusades. Its formula and most of its history has since been lost.
 
One of the few known documented battles was when the Byzantines used Greek Fire in 678, when they annihilated an entire Saracen (Muslim) fleet -- it is believed over 30,000 men were "roasted at sea".

Soldiers would fill small glass jars with the dreaded substance, allowing them to hurl it by hand at their opponents. Arrows and spears would be used to fling the mixture around the battlefield.  Gigantic "war engines" (ancient pressurized pumps) were utilized to thrust large amounts over a castle wall, and upon landing, its devastating adhesion enabled it to consume almost anything to which it clung.
 
The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville, a thirteenth century French nobleman, include personal observations of Greek Fire during the seventh Crusade..." Every time they hurl the fire at us, we go down on our elbows and knees, and beseech Our Lord to save us from this danger."
 
Those were the battle tales of yore.
 
But nowadays, there's been a revival of "political Greek Fire" from the democrats, that could be best described as a non-stop stream of devastating partisan accusations -- doggedly sticking to their opponents-- and have the Republicans "on their knees" and "beseeching the Lord to save us from this danger"
 
The Republicans have been burned over and over again,  but meekly, they refuse to fight back. But given the grievous damage that they've suffered for nearly a decade, the overriding question is "WHY?"
 
Indeed...why are the Republicans reluctant to retaliate, and as the old saying goes -"fight fire with fire?"
 
Jesus said, "the meek shall inherit the earth"...but certainly not the Whitehouse, and certainly not the two houses of Congress-- especially since the devastating Republican losses in 2006 and in the last general election.
 
Over and over the Republicans are getting roasted in Congress by either Nancy Pelosi, or Harry Reid, or Obama in the Whitehouse. The democratic party have become such polished experts at rallying uninformed voters that many believe the Republican party is in danger of extinction--including some Republicans themselves.
 
But all this would be impossible without media support.
 
It appears that the old GOP elephant is dying from1000 small cuts, and seems to be hemorrhaging toward a passive, self-induced political state of obsolescence.
 
Today, there are just 175 Republicans vs. 255 Democrats in the House, and 41 Republicans to 58 Democrats in the Senate (with 1 seat yet to be decided). This means that the Republicans are in danger of being marginalized into political impotency--unless they can come up with an offensive strategy-- fighting fire with fire!
 
Given the complicity of the media, the only political arrow they've got left in their quiver is to answer back with a steady stream of accusations of their own.

Ask any coach-- the best defense is a good offense.
 
Political offensive strategy is like football; you must outhit, outblock, and outlast your opponent until the victory is won. But the Republican playbook is reminiscent of the days when players wore leather helmets.
 
And mandatory on the list--job #1-- is a Republican coach that can literally "fire up" the party. But Michael Steele (too passive) nor Rush Limbaugh (too overbearing) will not adequately fill the bill.

If only the Republicans could "poach" someone from the other side with the cunning of a James Carville; or the political guile and belligerence of a Rahm Emanuel...or the steely-nerved smoothness of a David Axelrod, then the worm would turn.

But instead we have the meek and mousy Mitch McConnell; and Mr. nice guy himself, John Boehner. These minority leaders are honest, straightforward Republicans, but are made to appear --by the magic of soundbites--as lily and lukewarm, and regarded as "typical Republicans"... out for the wealthy, and who care not about the common working man.
 
And the repressive-oppressive media manipulation goes on & on, with no limits. It's always censorship of all democratic misdeeds, and one-sided coverage of "unpopular" Republican policies. Yes, when it comes to political fire in the news, it’s democrats exempt...Republicans-- lookout!

But like all good political battles, the key to present victory is to look to the past--the 1980's; and we're not talking about Reagan, but Micheal Dukakis, who was governor of Massachusetts at that time, and was the liberal-minded democratic candidate for the Whitehouse in '88.

During the campaign, George Bush Sr-- and by virtue of his political mastermind Lee Atwater (now deceased)-- the polls were dead even.  But the election turned on one masterstroke from Atwater: he exploited Dukakis' one vulnerability, the crime issue-- which was the political "hot button" of the day.

It was the "Willie Horton story", a TV commercial that turned an expected horse race into a near landslide election.

After stabbing a defenseless gas station attendant 19 times, Willie Horton was sentenced to life with no possibility of parole. But 11 years later, Mr. liberal himself, Governor Mike Dukakis, decided to be "fair" and grant Horton a weekend prison pass; but Horton's unexpected freedom resulted in yet another sadistic rampage.

Ultimately, Dukakis lost his presidential bid because Atwater's commercial revealed that he "heartily supported" a supposedly rehabilitative weekend furlough program for convicted felons. But the opposite proved true--Horton had gone free to kill again.
 
But since that time (and again & again) the Republicans continue to be "scorched" by their opponents, whether it's about social security, or health care, or taxes, or whatever-- they're ALWAYS on the defensive!

And the partisanship of today's media reveals why Republicans need to get fired up--and fast. In terms of political party affiliation, 56 percent of journalists said they were Democrats, but only 18 percent said they were Republicans; not real cheery odds for the GOP.

This means one thing--the Republicans face two opponents --the democrats, and a media so liberally biased that most of the television stations and newspaper chains that gave political cover to Obama in '08, will now be even more hard-pressed to go after Republicans, rather than face criticism about the disastrous results for the country from last November.

Despite the fact that the Republicans have a lethal amount of political ammo at hand, even a casual observer cannot fail to see that they're virtually incapable of fighting back.

But again it begs the question of why?

Why can't the Republicans talk about current "hot button" issues: Obama's earmark flip- flop from the 2nd presidential debate; the reckless democratic spending to oblivion; the "re-invention" of the welfare state, the attack on entrepreneurship, the attack upon the middle class via the proposal for carbon taxes, cap and trade, and all the other subtle ways the democrats are "wealth-transferring" to their constituents-- the leeches-- who loyally support them as a voting block.

The democrats can be attacked via a multi-front war, but the Republicans keep retreating and repeating the words of Lord Joinville... "every time they hurl their fire at us, we go down on our elbows and knees, and beseech Our Lord to save us from this danger."

So how do the Republicans return fire, instead of flinching? Re-incarnate the strategy of Atwater: hit below the belt where the enemy is most vulnerable!

The Republicans must implement the "Three L's Strategy". The democrats are the party of liberals, liars and leeches, sitting smugly in Washington, protected by the media...wreaking one tax hike after another, and attacking the middle ground-- the working families for whom they supposedly feign support.

And the Republicans have got to stop this defeatist attitude about liberal bias in the media. People looking for a political bias will always be able to find one; but the true bias in media will always be about cash.

Since the Republicans have no one within the party with enough political moxie or resourcefulness, they must resort to their last resort--money, and hire "mercenaries"--an experienced political ad agency.

After all, it's an obvious given that anti-president Obama was all speeches and no solutions, so why wait for this next election? Start the media crusade now!  Craft another Willie Horton type media attack...raise campaign contributions...then splash it on the airwaves!

Spread the news that the national media absolutely will dare not reveal: the Democrats are the ones who're pulling the wool over the eyes of America!

Democratic lie # 1- the stimulus bill: Nothing but a vote-buying scheme to keep the democrats in power for the next  20 years.  It will only expand welfare; it primarily supports union and illegal alien jobs, empowers ACORN, and does virtually nothing to help the average middle class family.

Republican response: this alone would make a devastating 30 second TV or radio spot; and it should be produced and run immediately to put the democrats on the defensive.

Democratic lie # 2-- immigration: The democrats are going all out to coddle the immigrant vote. They refuse to talk about closing open borders; they refuse to talk about their plans to allow aliens to have driver's licenses; or the fact that they'll be granted amnesty (and given the vote) during Obama's expected 2nd term-- a subversive plot to keep the democrats perennially in office.

Response: The Republicans must be smart...turn the tables; put forth a media campaign that will recover the immigrant bloc by advertising... "We welcome those from the other countries of the world who blaze the entrepreneurial trails, and arrive "unblinded", seeing all the opportunity America has to offer. These are the people who would start businesses in our inner cities, and who could revive our downtowns, and spark a badly needed American urban revival. Yes, the Republican party welcomes all who seek to improve America!"

Democratic lie #3: ACORN is nothing but a neighborhood "community outreach" volunteer organization; when actually, they are a government-funded group of thuggish democratic operatives who register fraudulent voters and swing close elections.

Response: the Republicans must alert America to ACORN (Association of Community Outreach for Reform Now). They must fire back with CAUSE--an anti-ACORN activist counter group. CAUSE (Citizens Against UnAmerican Subversive Expression) forms local groups (via the internet). These groups man phone banks that call local constituents about how their local congresspeople in Washington voted on EVERY bill.

CAUSE also goes door to door and passes out literature informing constituents of democratic efforts to subvert American values & freedoms, and empower those who do not pay taxes--the leeches of society--who  would rather collect a monthly check than be "man enough" to support themselves through gainful, private sector employment

Democratic lie #4: The U.S. needs national health care reform. This is indeed the grandpappy of all democratic lies. National healthcare is about as antithetical to America as you can get. It would stop virtually all medical and pharmaceutical research. It would literally ration all expensive health procedures...6 month to 1 year waiting periods for transplants, hip-knee replacements etc.--even MRI's.  All costly operations would be left up to the discretion of a nameless, faceless, distant bureaucrat. It would do as much or more to destroy the quality of American life as any tax hike or recession.

In other countries that have national healthcare, the citizens universally rail against it. Shoddy care is the norm. There are no malpractice suits. Botched operations --even deaths -are not "gotten after" by their governments. Only the costs are what matters; not the patients quality of life afterwards... or even if they die!

Republican response? So far, despite all the opportunities, the Republicans have been about as vocal opposing Obama’s socialist health proposals as a bunch of little hamsters, as they continue to "spin their wheels"--unable to contrive an attack-- and ironically, are depicted as "obstructionists" to this "vitally needed" measure to control health care costs and "take the pressure off of employer-provided health insurance."

Democratic big lie #5- Climate change... green energy economy...global warming, etc. The biggest democratic scam of all; and potentially, the most economically devastating, virtually guaranteeing America's descent into a third world nation in one generation. And all the above are nothing more than a scheme to demonize fossil fuels, payback the environmentalists, and promote carbon dioxide as a villain to the environment--therefore, its producers (virtually all heavy industry, manufactures, and utilities) must be punished with a cap and trade tax.

The Republican response: America must not be waylaid into the fantasy world of renewable green energy. Other countries (Sweden) have tried wind and solar for almost a generation and realize that it's virtually impossible to replace their transportation needs with something other than fossil fuels. Plus the United States has the majority of the world's coal, and what is the sense of leaving it lie fallow for the cause of the false environmentalism of the Democrats. Global warming is unproven, untrue, and completely beyond the control of mankind.

In the final analysis, the Republicans have got to stop relying on their heroes-- the conservative radio talkers, and the ghost of Ronald Reagan,

They must realize America has changed-- even 49% of Catholics voted Obama, who’s staunch support of abortion did not phase them. It's the economy stupid --not  conservative morality, or the need for a strong defense.  Most Americans can only see as far as their TV sets, and into the contents of their checking and 401K accounts.

Conservative principles are important, but it's still the "pocketbook issues" that will garner the undecided votes 95% of the time.

But will the Republicans ever learn? We'll have to wait until November, 2010 to find out, and see if they get burned again.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

Obama (ala' Carter) turns the other cheek


1976-1980: The Carter years. It was when the Alaska pipeline opened; it marked the brief 4-year reign of the disco era. And it also marked a not so amazing run of some of the most ill-conceived and embarrassing presidential decisions in U.S. history. 

It was in 1980 that the Haitians increased their desperate attempts in rowboats to make it to south Florida-- then disappear into the immigrant underground-- thus setting the precedent for the uncontrolled immigration that plagues our southern borders today.

1980 was also the year of the infamous Miami "Liberty City" riot, stoked by the exoneration of four white policemen who had killed a black insurance man riding a motorcycle. When President Carter visited the riot-torn area a few weeks later, the residents angrily booed him and threw rocks and bottles at his motorcade.

But mainly, 1980 was the year of Fidel Castro's great revenge on America:

After a bus carrying Cuban citizens intentionally crashed into the gates of the Peruvian Embassy in Havana, the passengers claimed asylum. Within days, 11,000 Cubans sought refuge at the Peruvian Embassy. President Carter announced that the U.S. would accept 3,500 refugees if they were first processed in Costa Rica.

Not to be outdone, Castro announced that any Cuban who wanted to leave could do so by boat through Mariel harbor.

Carter, feeling empowered, foolishly proclaimed: "We welcome the Cubans with an open heart and open arms!" The result? It was the 'Mariel Boatlift,' that eventually brought 150,000 "happy-go-lucky" Cubans to Florida, most of them the dregs of society.

Unbeknownst to the naive Carter, his open arms-open borders policy proved disastrous (and to this day its effects are being felt).

It provided the Cubans a welcome relief valve for all their prisons, insane asylums and the wandering homeless, as Castro opened the doors to his most desperate criminals and lethal felons, bidding them..."adios" -"see ya"--"don't forget to write!"

Then the "law of inintended consequences" (the result of Carter's naive liberalism) took hold.

By the reckoning of Lieutenant Mike Gonzalez, who back then was the head of  Miami Police's homicide bureau, ''In that one year (1980), we got 50,000 additional killers and thieves.''

The effect of the so called "Mariel invasion" can be told in the statistics. In the first half of 1980, Miami had 75 murders. Then in the last seven months, there were 269 murders. In 1980-81, Miami had the highest murder rate of any city in the world! So many bodies piled up in the morgue that the Dade county coroner had to rent a refrigerator van to handle the overflow.

The Marielitos had indeed made quite a splash.

Of course back then, Carter "doggedly" chose to stick to his liberal dogma of equality and human rights, which had already led to the overthrow of the Shah, and cascaded into 444 humiliating days of America's bowing to Iran during the hostage crisis.

But liberals never learn; they always put idealism ahead of patriotism... and sanity itself.

And Carter's record was unblemished...he batted "1,000". Throughout his presidency, he was liberal putty in the hands of Torrios from Panama, Khomeni from Iran, Breshnev from Russia, and finally Castro--always giving our enemies the benefit of the doubt-- and receiving a foreign policy black eye in return for the favor.

And the icing on the cake was unleashing the Marielitos upon an unsuspecting America, who wreaked their murderous havoc upon every city where their nationwide migratory path descended.

And who was it that said history repeats? Now 3 decades later, the parallels are eerie, almost uncanny in resemblance. And once again the problem concerns Cuba.

Barack Obama now faces many of the same sort of radical Islamist problems that Carter did, but has thus far demonstrated no concrete capacity to govern within the best interests of the nation, because it's that same liberal compulsion-- to be fair-- that's paramount in his mind.

And like Carter, will he unleash another callous group of unscrupulous killers upon us--who's sworn objective is their jihadistic exhortation: "Death to Satan America?" 

But according to a spokesmen in the Obama administration: "Promptly determining the appropriate disposition of those detained at Guantanamo Bay is a high priority for the president." 

Attorney General Eric Holder has submitted a legal declaration outlining President Barack Obama's efforts to close Guantanamo Bay within a year, and "determine" where to place the 240 people held there.

Translation: "We think releasing these "freedom fighters" will look good before the eyes of the world".

In his brief, Holder maintains... "It is still unlawful to hold people indefinitely without charge. The men who have been held for more than seven years by our government must be charged or released."

Translation: We're gonna let these terrorists slide, because to hold them "without charge" would be a violation of their human rights.

Obama (in his best Carter imitation ) seems to be saying, "So we welcome to America all you terrorists with open arms; what can we do to make you more comfortable?"

And as Carter disastrously once beckoned the Marielitos, Obama, in closing a facility harboring some of the most murderous psychopaths on the planet--without first knowing what he's going to do with them-- seems to be courting déjà vu.

Is Obama inviting another Marielito-style debacle? In an obvious bowing to the left, it was his decision to close Guantanamo in the first place.

And while we're at, let’s do it "right", and go way-way far left! Why not invite the head honcho--Osama bin Ladin himself --to the White House in an "outreach to the enemy" gesture? Put down new prayer rugs in the East Room. Invite him to stay overnight in the Lincoln bedroom.

And in a "further outreach", why not also invite all the soon-to-be freed Gitmo "ex combatants" to the White House, like a victorious world champion sports team? After all, according to anti-President Obama, these were the people who were captured and victimized by our racist, imperialist, and oppressive invading American soldiers, and who were unjustly captured and held against their will, and had to suffer everyday in Gitmo with three square meals, library, exercise courts, and endure the warm, breezy, subtropical climate-- and were provided the freedom to practice their Muslim religion--and secretly plot the demise of the USA (in their cold-blooded minds) upon release. 

So Obama is giving them their wish and will have his attorney general grant them all hearings. And the ACLU will defend them in court.

Yes we can! We will turn the other cheek.

And what this all (in effect) amounts to is a tacit "declaration of abandonment" of our own soldiers, who's buddies were those attacked and killed by these same people, and who heroically risked their lives to capture and imprison these Islamist desperados in the first place.

So it's high time we apologized and "made up for it", and hope the rest of the world gets the "Everybody is supposed to love us now" memo.

And ironically, bolstered by a supremely stupid decision by our leftist-leaning Supreme Court, this whole filthy mess could have been avoided were it not for a 5-4 decision by the treasonous judicists who voted for the legal rights of these radicals. Maybe now they'll help them to get jobs in the Obama administration.

 Yes-- it's all in the name of "detente" with the Muslim world, as we eliminate the term, "war on terror", and replace it with a Carter-esque policy of appeasement.

Like they say: "Carter' was so devoted to peace, that he risked a big war." And Obama seems to be following the script.

And by inviting bin Ladin into the Whitehouse, maybe Obama could bypass the war with the Taliban, withdraw from Afghanistan, and resolve the nuke problem with Iran. And who knows? Maybe Hamas might switch to launching peace feelers instead of rockets at the Israelis!

Who are our major enemies in the Middle East? Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas. What are we doing about it? Be nice!  And by making nice to our enemies now as Carter once attempted to do, surely all the nice Muslims will return the favor.

And now let us all "outreach" to the enemy and close with the Obama creed:


I am Obama, champion of the meek;
Attack America, and I will turn the other cheek.
We will appease rather than take a stand;
while I transform America into a socialist land.
Long live Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes;
as I uproot the Constitution, and reinterpret what it means.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Disgusting arrogance of the Democrats: stamping out the Senate worms

 

Once upon a time there were 2 worms serving in the Senate, a big worm and a small one, both slithering their way around the democratic caverns within Capitol Hill.

 

Each would stay hidden in its slimy earthy burrow, and would emerge to poke up their peering heads only when they thought the political coast was clear enough to lay their eggs. And despite their slimy outward appearance, the worms were indeed very clever.

These 2 worms were plenty shrewd enough to never leave themselves vulnerable to their many natural enemies who sought their demise, and who would squash them to oblivion if only given the chance.

After all, Senate worms have only a limited life expectancy, especially if their party were to become the minority in 2010, when the Congressional midterms are to again occur.

But the worms--protected by their political surroundings--give them enough safe harbor to conceal their coveted objective: attacking the U.S. Constitution as if were some gnarly old parchment, and targeting the 1st Amendment as if its validity were somehow open to debate.

These worms seek to defy democracy...forever plotting stealthy attempts to use partisan politics to deny Americans their freedoms, and make a mockery of the phrase, "limited federal government."

Right now the worms' number one mission is to eliminate their natural predators --the conservative radio talkers.

And as sitting committee chairmen, these worms have few checks and balances; and by residing on these committees they're busy away crafting legislation that would do exactly that: revive the Freedom Doctine (a.k.a. the censorship manifesto) borne straight from the playbook of Karl Marx.

Never mind that 40 million Americans listen to talk radio and enjoy the format. Never mind that this medium is upheld by the 1st amendment, and is the last bastion of unbiased news that keeps this country from becoming Cuba-- a totally propagandized socialist dictatorship.

 

So this burns the worms to no end. They want it gone.

Worm energy is boundless... and for this one they have chosen to emerge and expose themselves to the number one threat of all senate worms-- being hung out to dry by their congressional opponents-- those who seek to uphold the Constitution. 

As the slimy Chuck Schumer ( Democrat--NY) recently put it, (quote) "Do you think we should allow people to put pornography on the air? Absolutely not! But the same people who don't want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC to limit pornography on the air. That's not consistent" (unquote).

Not Consistent?

 

As previously mentioned --the big worm is not lacking in cleverness-- banning talk radio in the vein of "being consistent with porno censorship" requires a certain degree of political guile while keeping a straight face.

But despite this illogical inference, the media chose to give the big worm a pass, and he was not called out to defend his stupendously leftist-biased statement-- as if the Founding Fathers were just as concerned about porn as they were regarding open political discourse.

Shrewdly, Schumer is positioning politically unsophisticated Americans to the left, calculating that many will equate talk radio's "divisive" speech with watching porn movies, and something to be delegated as "irresponsible" and therefore, to be regulated.
 
But Schumer has always been a snaky, sneaky worm.

True to his species, as a congressman serving in the House, Schumer was censured by the Ethics Committee for having used his taxpayer-paid office staff to conduct political campaign operations. But this is SOP (standard operating procedure) for any political worm: Care not about the people-- just worm your way back to office every election!

 

Staying permanently in Washington is what matters most to the worm population.

But as if one slimy Senate worm wasn’t enough, an even slimier, more slithery little worm lurks beneath Washington’s political landscape . And the little one from Illinois may turn out more lethal than the big one from New York.

Example: Recall the recent Senate Bill 160 (S.160--to consider statehood for the District of Columbia). Republican Senator Jim Demint had successfully filed an amendment with S.160 to oppose any return of the Fairness Doctrine (abandoned in the late 80's) after the Senate itself had agreed upon that the doctrine suppressed free speech.

Surprisingly, the Senate ended up voting 87 "YEA" - 11 "NAY" to pass DeMint’s amendment-- a rare victory indeed for the conservatives.


But unbeknownst to Demint, a "counter amendment" was being drawn up by Dick Durbin (D- Illinois) and it was drawn up well before the vote on Demint's amendment.

But the wormy Durbin did not officially file the amendment until AFTER the Senate had first voted to pass Mr Demint's  proposal--a typical liberal backdoor dirty trick, and going against all Senate parliamentary procedure.

Predictably Durbin's amendment-- a back door attack upon free speech-- grants the FCC the power assuring "diversity" in local radio markets. But Durbin is an innovative worm. And his amendment proved it, because it takes a decidedly different "tack" (attack).

With Durbin's proposal, ANY talk radio show "opposing amnesty" for illegal aliens could now be canceled and replaced by shows with "different" viewpoints that are government-mandated, instead of being from the viepoints of the listeners.

So the final result? After Demint's amendment had been voted on favorably, the dastardly worm Durbin then filed his counter amendment, with it passing as well by a vote of 57 "YEA" - 41 "NAY". So we're still in limbo regarding the future of the Fairness Doctrine and the future of talk radio.

So as it turned out, Durbin is not only a sneaky worm, but a fascist one as well.


Durbin  supports the "Open Borders Lobby", a leftist organization that's doing everything in their power to hinder free speech on the internet and talk radio, as a prelude to an all new amnesty attempt.

 

It seems that the worms are always burrowing away through the dirt of their liberal politics, never tiring of their treasonous task at hand.

And these worms could care less about the First amendment! They've become so bold now that they are in as much--in political wormspeak-- all but telling everyone they are going to trash all our rights (as evidenced by Durbin's sneaky trick).

 

So have no fear; knowing the minds of these worms, they'll use every dirty little scheme in the worm handbook to eliminate all opposition, and keep control of Congress in the hands of the radical left.

Somewhere down in the deepest bowels of Hades, the original fascists-- Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels-- are grinning widely.

Zeig Heil! 

Yes-- lie, cheat, sneak around beneath the surface (which is what these leftist-fascist worms do), ultimately trying to convince Americans that censorship in the name of fairness will actually be a good thing for the country.

So here they come!  The worms are coming for our wallets, our right to speak out, and our freedom to live under a government by-- of-- and "for" the people. 

 

As far as the worms are concerned, its "power to us and government against the people."

And where would the "fairness" of these worms end? Would the Fairness Doctrine be limited only to the radio?

How bout a Schumer-Durbin worm attack on free enterprise? It may be coming.

 

How about if the federal government could now tell Coca Cola that they must promote an equal amount of Pepsi products in Coke's home city HQ (Atlanta ), because it would only be "fair." What would bar these power hungry worms from trying that?

And what other sneaky legislation lurks within the wormy senate dens of Schumer and Durbin? They will never stop until they've destroyed the Constitution, because it restricts and goes against every last tenet in the bible of every slimy fascist worm everywhere.

But Rush Limbagh's candid admission--invoking the failure of Obama-- couldn't have done more to play into their slimy hands if he had tried on purpose.

 

It's given the worms an unlimited playing field to ban talk radio and free speech --because they'll use Limbaugh to convince a politically dumbed-down America that he (et.al.) be put off the air because his statement was "divisive, irresponsible, and hateful--and therefore-- not protected by the First Amendment".

 

And these 2 senate worms are both clever enough and slimy enough to pull it off.
 

Then the floodgates to fascism will break wide open. And then it's bye bye democracy, and good night America--thanks to the worms.

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

Will Obama and hyperinflation destroy this nation? Yes he can!


Get out the wheelbarrows. Prepare for heavy lifting. Congress is setting us up for 1920's Germany, and the hyperinflation that once destabilized that country-- leading to the rise of a Austrian lad who's grandfather went by the name of Shicklegruber (Adolf Hitler).
 
In only the last five months, the U.S. overall money supply (M-I) has nearly tripled. M1 includes cash, total demand and government deposits with commercial banks, and money in all the federal reserve banks. And according to best current estimates, M2 (the current money supply in circulation) is hovering at just around 7 trillion dollars--give or take a few hundred billion.
 
But ho hum--a hundred billion here and a hundred billion there-- no big deal to a Congress bent on keeping themselves in power, while they simultaneously destroy every American wage earner's standard of living-- perhaps permanently.
 
Our hallowed 111th Congress is acting like a college freshmen who's just received his (her) first credit card, deficit spending as if they were awarded some unlimited ethereal financial prize, to be spent as one sees fit --with no accountability--and no consequences.
 
To an extent this is true.
 
Yes, long after the inevitable hyper-inflation overcomes America- perhaps ten, fifteen, or even 20 years down the road, the recklessly-spending Congressional perpetrators can choose not to run, and retire on federal pension worthy of a monarch.
 
But does anyone realize that this money the Congress is now delegating for stimulus, supplemental budget expenses, etc. isn't real money, or in fact, that it is not OUR money?

The money is not borrowed. The money is PRINTED.

Current amount of money in circulation (M2) = 7 trillion. Now add the 1 trillion anti-stimulus bill Obama signed into law recently, and every dollar American workers will now earn is worth 14.2% less-- just like that.
 
Now add the 410 billion supplemental budget federal spending bill (earmark-laden) that has just passed, and do the math again: $410 Billion divided by $7 Trillion = 5%. That's right sports fans, in just 3 weeks, your buck has just turned into little more than 6 bits...an inflation rate of almost 20% in less than a month!
 
And the wheelbarrow is getting heavier --basically amounting from more debt to pay off debt. Such fiscal brilliance! The "big money" liberals trying make the impossible possible-- printing money backed by nothing, pretending the interest is free (non-existent).
 
Nancy Pelosi wants a second anti-stimulus bill; Fed chairmen Bernacke says the first one "may not have been enough". Barney Frank is calling for more stimulus. Obama wants 600 billion for revamping (socializing) health care...a Congress running rampant with earmarks...Hillary wants almost a billion to rebuild Gaza. And always accompanied with that ad-nauseum exhortation: "We need to act now."
 
Sure: Act now-- but pay later-- and to what disastrous end?

But mysteriously this fiscal recklessness is never called into question by the media. Even Herbert Hoover would probably know that to add more debt onto an already growing $12.4 trillion existing pyramid of financial obligation would invite catastrophe.

The annual debt interest payment right now is at $600 billion--and growing--an unsustainable amount. Yet Obama and the Congress want to add another 3.4 trillion in deficit spending to fund a boundless plethora of unending federal programs--fiscal insanity on steroids!

Meanwhile, "the bearded one"- Ben Bernacke-- will be toiling away, printing all this "new money" in the fed basement.

And it matters not when Bernanke injects this newly printed money into the economy—it’s how much that counts, because all fed injections immediately act to distort the nation's production structure. The larger the injections (and the longer they continue) the larger will be the distortions. These "funny-money" injections equal more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and services-- ergo...inflation-- which exerts downward pressure on the value of the dollar.
 
With the eventual surging of prices at home, and a depreciating exchange rate, foreign holders of greenbacks might one day decide that they have had "enough"-- starting a run on the currency by dumping their dollar balances-- forcing the Fed to raise interest rates ever higher, and triggering a more devastating recession; or a scenario even worse than the original Great Depression-- a second hyperinflationary depression-- 1920's Germany revisited.
 
In a more simple analysis, let's say we've been building a debt pyramid over the last decade, and now we'll be adding huge new amounts to the base at the bottom, while all the while, the interest will be coalescing at the top. And given time and the continuation of reckless deficit spending, the debt pyramid may become distorted in shape-- growing top heavy-- and at last, it tips over.

Ergo...hyperinflation.

But our beloved anti-president, Mr. Barack Obama, will be long gone out of office when and if that occurs; and of course, living large on his ex-presidential pension.

So should the "average Joe" be mindful about WHEN and IF we do run out of the printing option? And how much of a concern should it be now for all Americans, who already have more than enough to worry about concerning the economy?

Could the world eventually become so flooded with PAPER dollars, that some of our lesser foreign creditors begin to say: "Okay Meester Bernacke...we hold enough of these flimsy dollars now, so if your foolish American Congress wants more credit, we'll need something more solid than all this paper currency in return."

So bye bye Fort Knox...hello national insolvency. And then what?

Then it'll be time to break out the Kruggerands (gold coins) hidden in the cellar, because American money won't be worth the paper it's printed on-- and the Fed won't even have enough credit left to purchase the the green ink.

And the OPEC countries and the Chinese (previously reluctant to dun their number one trading partner) will then be forced to pull their "debt  triggers", and deliver the final coupe de' gras. Then its turn out the lights America-- the party's over. We'll have descended into the financial nether existence of a third world nation, totally bereft of all liquid assets, with liabilities extending "as far as the eye can see..."

So Mexico-- prepare for a taste of your own medicine: Americans might one day be reverse-migrating into your territory, with all of them seeking a sense of survival after hyperinflation comes to the fore, and completely destroys the affluence of a once-proud and powerful nation.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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 Great pseudo-Depression of Barack Obama...will it get worse?

 
Economic malaise. Severe downturn. Wealth destruction. Foreclosure. Crisis. The rhetoric is getting tiresome. Ever since the middle of September of last year, Americans have been bombarded with nothing but a 24/7 menu of impending doom.
 
Welcome to "Depression Watch"-- brought to you by the bombastic, negative oratory of our first ever anti-president-- Barack Obama!
 
Ever since the economy and stock market began to plunge last fall,  Mr. Obama has been about as uplifting as an airliner crash. Instead of encouragement, he offers discouragement; it's as if he’s celebrating the economic reversal, realizing that it'll present him the opportunity to play his socialist savoir role, and enable him to "seize this historical moment," while touting his never-ending message that... "only the government can save us"…and... "the end is not in sight."
 
Oh sure.
 
Americans are starved for something positive. But like the 1965 Rolling Stones classic hit song..."they can't get no satisfaction". In fact, people would probably declare it a national holiday if only Mr Obama would utter something concrete about how all this will somehow cease before this worrisome slide cascades into a REAL 1930's style disaster.

So could this be 1929 all over again?
 
Many Americans are in the most dispirited state in their lives--they've lost confidence. And lost confidence translates into no consumer spending: no new cars; no new washing machines; no new apparel --nothin'--just the necessities.

And no discretionary consumer spending means companies do not make money--leading to layoffs.

A downward spiral? Yes we can! But Mr Obama is certainly 'on top of it'.
 
Yet Obama's "loose-lips sink-ships" rhetoric pesists. Obama might as well just come out and say it..."C'mon America, follow me-- let's have another depression!"

Mr. Obama knows the more he can talk the economy down, the greater the crisis. And the greater the crisis, the more freedoms Americans will likely be willing to cede. It's fascist rule # 1… the size of the crisis is proportional to the power you can seize...so bring it on!
 
And staying on script, comrade Obama is encouraging that "we depend on the government to get us through the worst crisis since the Great Depression". But dependency breeds anxiety; and anxiety is contagious-- it leads to fear. And fear leads to, well--to what we have today; let’s call it a pseudo-depression.

And It helps to have a memory-- a real memory-- a deep sense of what happened once upon a time when there was a true crisis: the time during the Great Depression, when a 3% unemployment rate literally imploded along with the stock market in 1929, and went up to 25 percent by 1933.
 
Similar to the early 2000's, back in the 1920's, people were spending too much and saving too little. Then, in 1929, people suddenly feared losing their jobs, so they stopped spending. This meant businesses stopped making money. So it became a self-fulfilling prophecy-- people lost their jobs.

But unlike now, in 1929 people couldn’t sign up for unemployment compensation, and perhaps retrain for something new. And there were no food stamps; people tended back yard gardens and subsisted on cabbage, greens, and beans.

And with no medicare, or medicaid, people had to act as their own doctors and rely upon home remedies. Public assistance was done largely because of the goodness of local charity organizations.
 
And many pepole, not content to wait in bread lines, became hustlers- the entrepreneurs of that era. They stood on corners selling  pencils, apples, and shoelaces. Other people resorted to more aggressive methods, and hustled well dressed people on the street, asking them..."brother, can you spare a dime?"
 
Homeless people?  Not too many back then. The destitute actually formed into Hooverville-type "edge city" settlements. Shelters made out of cardboard and orange crates sprang up on the outskirts of towns everywhere.
 
Haircuts were 25 cents. The movies were a nickel.
 
In 1933, despite the pall the hung over the land, people still felt that they would survive. Although hope wasn’t exactly rampant, people refused to give up.
 
Hobos and restless young men hopped freight trains, hoping to find something (anything) somewhere. Nature and man conspired and turned the Great Plains into the great Dust Bowl which devastated the prairie states.

But determined people migrated to California, and lived in labor camps, and  were paid 2 1/2 cents per bushel picking fruit for 12 hours a day. They survived with both their pride and independence intact.

On Saturday, people would stay in a theater for the entire afternoon, watching a double feature movie for 10 cents. Then for a nickel, they rode the trolley car over to "the mall," which was Main Street. On Saturday nights the stores would be open, but shopping was little more than a wistful charade. People could not even afford necessities, let alone even the smallest of luxuries

Television was years away. But the movies at the theater provided a bit of hope, and a lot of distraction from the misery at hand.
 
On  Sunday after church, families gathered in their living rooms and sat looking at the radio, using their imaginations to picture the performers who tried to cheer them up.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in his first inaugural address on March 4, 1933, tried to rally the country with the ringing declaration, "Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear, is fear itself... nameless, unreasoning fear."

After FDR declared his famous banking holiday, all the bank runs stopped that were panicking the nation. Then he wisely gave them a “stress test” before letting the solvent banks reopen.

About 50% of the mortgages were delinquent during the Depression (compared to about 12 percent now) with the foreclosure rate peaking in 1933. And Until 1933, there was no Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Another complicating factor with the Great Depression was the U.S. banking system lacked the safeguards we have in place today. As a result, thousands of financial institutions became insolvent. Anecdotal reports around the country told of people returning to their local banks armed with guns, after they had first been refused the withdrawal of their savings.

The nation was on the verge of financial collapse, had not Roosevelt stepped in with his message of optimism.

One of the biggest problems leading up to all the bank failures was that various states had "unit banking" laws. There were no branch banks to spread out the depositors, so loans had to be concentrated in the local service area of each bank to "confine the risk".  Thus loans over a wider economic/industrial/geographic area were unheard of back then.

And because just one bank could only serve customers within a certain radius, the result was, that if a local industry failed-- or crops in that location failed-- there would be a run on the bank, and it would fail.

Contrast that with today: We have branch banking with established FDIC insurance; so even if your bank fails, your money will be delayed but you’ll get it back.
 
As the thirties progressed, Roosevelt's New Deal could best be stated as being only moderately successful. By 1938 unemployment still was near 20 percent. This continued until the United States entered World War II in 1941, and became "the arsenal of democracy," and unemployment dropped below 2%.

This was a snapshot of the Great Depression of the 1930s -- a time of uncushioned despair, opposed to the "cushioning" we have now. But a second depression? We aren't even close to that yet here in 2009.

But will anti-President Obama keep up his scaremongering? And that..."unless my rescue plan goes through, our economic crisis could become a national catastrophe”. Stay tuned.

And for all those who're starting to fear we are heading into another Great Depression, there is a rising tide of protests that profess it is not going to be-- the American revival of the tea party!

Where the country is now is about parallel with the Reagan recession of 1982-- not with the Hoover Depression of 1929! And we'll surely know if we are in a full-blown depression when people everywhere begin using that word as a matter-of-fact.

SCOREBOARD: In the first quarter of 2009, business is way down, dividends are being cut, profits are way off, and expansion is nonexistent. But things are not as bad as in 1933-34 when breadlines were everywhere, World War I vets were marching on Washington, and families truly did not know when they would see their next meal.

We are nowhere near that state. But the big difference between now and then is troubling.

Today's American cities have no pall of smoke over them--no steam curling skyward.  So even if we had to, we could not be an arsenal of democracy. Since all we have left now is a service economy, we could soon become the arsenal of poverty if the U.S. doesn't find a way to get a capital-starved economy back to employing people who actually make something.

Example:  What would happen if everyone went out today and let loose with a spending spree, and bought a new pair of shoes, a coat, a washer, and a TV? Answer:  the money would make its way back to China where the coats and shoes were made; and also to Mexico or South Korea where they made the washers and the TV.

This is the reason why economists are at odds of what to do. America has never faced anything like this before-- we have no manufacturing base left to be the engine of our recovery!

Americans are literally living on borrowed time (our fast-rising national debt) and have no idea what a depression is really like. We have only our grandparents left to explain it to us.

And like that famous country song, Mr. Obama is "looking for a recovery in all the wrong places," such as nationalizing health care, educational reform, and establishing a renewable "green energy" economy.
 
So Mr. Obama, what about that 4 trillion dollars of offshore oil we have sitting in the ground adjacent to our coastal states? How many millions of people could be put back to work drilling our own oil, and keeping the money for ourselves--and for reinvestment in new industries and services?

What about that?

And what about those high speed rail line corridors you once promised during your campaign? How many people could be put back to work building them, and supplying steel for them; plus the millions of other permanent jobs that would go along with starting up and maintaining that industry?

But instead we continue to send OPEC $65 billion a month, and discuss the measly possibilities of green energy jobs. But does Obama realize that windmills and solar panels are not labor-intensive industries? Instead they are just what America doesn’t need: they are labor-passive, capital-intensive industries, requiring huge sums of money to construct, and would employ zero people after they’re up and running.

So as long as America (and her slew of  economic “experts”) refuses  to wise up and is seemingly content to be led asunder, we best keep the money in the ole mattress, because with our great mis-leader in Washington --Barack Obama -we could be in for some tough times to come, and remain a nation that can get no satisfaction.

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

The "Judas syndrome"...why liberals love to betray America


Ah the paradox that is Barack Obama:

He has stubbornly refused to acknowledge the triumph of the 2007 surge in Iraq, but is now calling for an "instant replay' of that wildly successful strategy in Afghanistan... (quote) “There may be some comparable opportunities in the region," Mr. Obama said.

So he has decided to employ his "outreach" strategy and write a love letter to the 'moderates' in Taliban-land. Too bad it wasn’t a month earlier. Mr. Obama would have been able to include a valentine card.

Now all of a sudden, we’re to kiss and make up-- forget that the Taliban has been providing Osama bin Ladin with safe harbor, and that the Taliban professes to be perhaps the hardest of the hard core factions of any Muslim extremist group that exists. So no moderates need apply.

Of course liberals are always doing paradoxical things to surrender to the enemy. They would rather appease than take a stand. And appeasement is provocative--it invites attack. And time and time again, history has proved it.

Remember that long forgotten organization, "America First"? America First-ers were the group that ran Wendell Wilkie as their anti-war candidate vs. Franklin Roosevelt in the 1940 election.

This once-influential leftist group, headed by Charles Lindberg as its unofficial spokesman, sought to appease and surrender to a sworn enemy of America ---the Nazis! They were hard-core isolationists-- vehemently opposed to any involvement with the goings-on in Europe in the late 1930's.

When the war clouds were gathering back then, it was Lindberg who unilaterally took it upon himself to send out "peace feelers" to Germany. He had arranged an audience with Herman Goering, the ever-pompous and arrogant chief of the Nazi Luftwaffe (air force).

Goering decide to make a pigeon of the naive Lindberg, and "revealed" to him fake plans of "experimental" German planes, such as a six-engined massive German bomber, with a 6000 mile range, supposedly capable of bombing America's Eastern coast, and then return safely to the Fatherland.

Lindberg meekly returned home with grave reports of Nazi military superiority --that the U.S. could never catch up-- and that America must at all costs avoid the coming war in Europe, should it occur.

Yes, like a liberal deer in the headlights, Charles Lindberg was blinded by fears of Hitler's supposed invincibility. And like Neville Chamberlain, he had in as much declared "peace through weakness". And reports of America First's near-treasonous activities in the United States that had filtered back to Germany, proved to be instrumental in Hitler's surprise declaration of war on America three days after Pearl Harbor

Which brings us to England's capitulation to Hitler in1938.

Neville Chamberlain was your classic liberal appeaser. He had served as British Minister of Health from 1924 to 1929. After he become Prime Minister in1937, he too surmised Hitler as invincible, and called for an appeasement foreign policy, culminating in the signing of the infamous Munich Pact in 1938, selling out Czechoslovakia to Germany, and along with that --the Skoda Works.

The Munich pact enabled Hitler to realize his most coveted European objective-- Czechoslovakia's famed Skoda Works. It was the worlds largest armaments factory; it produced heavy guns for the Nazi navy; heavy mortars and the fearsome M-42 machine guns for the Wermacht (German army), as well as locomotives, aircraft, ships, machine tools, steam turbines, and equipment for Germany's power utilities.

The Skoda Works gave Hitler and the Nazis their amazing armament capability to literally take on the entire world, and hold them at bay for the first four years of the war.

Nice job, Nev.

And the world will never forget (or forgive) Chamberlain for his calamitous "containment" policy of Germany, that in 1939, culminated in the official declaration of the Second World War.

Even after WW2, the liberals were at it again, working their devilish best to capitulate to America’s enemies. This time it was Julius and Ethel Rosenberg—America’s favorite historical couple. 

The Rosenbergs--who were the duo complicit in passing our original atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets between 45-47-- arguably could be stated as the cause that emboldened Stalin to close off 1948 Berlin, because he now held an equal hand in weaponry. Thus Stalin attempted to squeeze the Allies out of East Germany, thanks to the dastardly liberal deeds of Julie and Ethel Rosenberg. But Truman's famed Berlin airlift foiled everything.

Next on the liberal “most-wanted” list was Alger Hiss, who viewed spying against his home country as little more than ‘youthful  idealism', and who would be convicted of a only a minor charge (lying under oath)  for the small infraction of surrendering America's hydrogen bomb secrets to Russia, and prolonging and escalating the cold war for another 35 years!

Arguably, the damage from Hiss changed the course of world events (for the worse) more than any other individual in American history.

And were it not for the ultra rightist, Senator Joe McCarthy, who knows how many more communist sympathizers could have been organized into a faction and possibly seized control of the democratic party, just as the liberal leftists in congress have done today.

If it hadn’t been for McCarthy, there may have been no John F. Kennedy as president, but instead a radical democratic socialist candidate (ala’ Obama) opposing Richard Nixon in1960. And after the leftist attitudes from the Vietnam era in late 60's had taken hold, this ultimately led up to the election of another liberal apologist-- Jimmy peanut-farmer Carter.

For many years after World War II, the U.S. intelligence forces had done their job well. The CIA had succeeded in stalemating the KGB during the early Cold War years .But then came the election of Jimmie Carter in 1976, and the rise of Senator Frank Church.

Carter, like all liberals, believed in being "fair". On September 7, 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed a Treaty with Panama 's strong man, Omar Torrijos, to transfer the Panama Canal to Panama, and it became one of the most heated treaties ever debated in the Senate. With a two vote margin, the transfer agreement was passed in 1978, thanks to the Senate lobbying of Frank Church.

And presently, our good friends the Chinese are seeking to aggressively expand in the isthmus country, and already own a major interest in port operations on the east and west sides of the canal. So in the event of war, the U.S. navy might be cut off from reaching our east and west coasts.

But Panama was but the least of Carter’s disastrous liberal legacy.

1977 also can be noted as when Carter made one of the most ill-conceived presidential decisions of all time: He issued an executive order that placed all nine U.S. intelligence agencies under one man: CIA Director Stansfield Turner; and If anyone wishes to seek the origin of the 9-11 attack, a good place to start would be right here.

In October of 1977, Turner decided to curb many of the clandestine practices that had brought the CIA much of its criticism from the liberal members in Congress, which were led by Idaho Senator Frank Church. In the" Halloween Massacre" of '77, Turner circulated an Oct 31st photocopied memo informing 800 CIA staffers (mostly Republicans) of their dismissal. To the joy and disbelief of our enemies, word spread quickly around the spy community that the U.S. had decided to delegate its intelligence priorities to non-human means, such as satellite observations and listening posts.

It has been noted by many historians that..."Stansfield Turner has been the single worst senior appointment in US history... and..."In eliminating virtually all human intelligence on the ground, he put the  U.S. at a strong disadvantage, especially in the Middle East and Afghanistan."

Now 32 years later, can any one dispute this most-scathing of historical criticisms?

Whatever his intentions, what Carter (and Turner) accomplished amounted to aiding and abetting the enemy, which resulted in our humiliation in Iran in the 1979 hostage crisis, the Russian war in Afghanistan in1980, and the bombing of our marines’ barracks in Lebanon in1982

And thanks to the liberal insanity of Jimmy Carter's dismantling of the CIA, we’ve lost control of our destiny in the Middle East-- giving impetus to the revival of Islamic fundamentalism-- which ultimately gave rise upon the world's stage to all of Islam's most infamous stars...Khomieni, Arafat, bin-Laden, Akmadinejad, and untold others -- including the 20 airliner hijackers who were responsible for 9-11.

Yes; the liberals--upholding the biblical inspiration of Judas--have always been seeking ways to betray the one who’s been good to them…their homeland—the United states of America!

And next in line to wear the mantle of  betrayal was another leftist America-hater, the convicted spy, John Walker, who  sold top-secret classified Pentagon information to the Soviets for 18 years. Among the secrets were keycodes being used by American ground troops fighting in Vietnam , and details about the Navy's most sophisticated nuclear submarines.

Since 1969, Walker had worked as a radio operator on a Navy supply ship (a job that gave him easy access to Pentagon keylists). And had the Cold War ever escalated to the real thing, the Soviets, knowing the locations of all American nuke subs, would have been able to destroy them all within days.

But what if there had not been any bleeding heart liberals around during the20th century? Had Lindberg and Chamberlain not been the men of their time, there may have been a European war… but a World War II?  And had it not been for the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss, would there have been the 40-year Cold War? And were it not for John Walker, the latter half of the Vietnam war could have taken an entirely different course-- the United states may have actually triumphed by the early 70s.

And of course without Carter in the Whitehouse in 76-80, who knows?  The entire mess in the Middle East, culminating in 9-11 may never have taken place.

But through out our history, whenever liberals have had their chance to deliver a black eye to their homeland, they're of the mindset..."There! That's what you deserve...you racist, bullying, militaristic, imperialist, expansionist, United States of America!”

The point is, liberals ALWAYS want to give our enemies the benefit of the doubt, figuring that even if they ARE liars, America (in the parlance of Michelle Obama) is a downright mean, racist country, and deserves not her status as a free prosperous nation, because it was built upon the backs of "oppressed” people, and foreign, "jingoistic" imperialism.

And to make a counterpoint: In modern American history, has a conservative ever been known to be a traitor to America 's best interests, either at home or abroad? Is liberalism some kind of insidious cultural disease? Or are certain individuals born with it-- an organic physiological affliction-- a sort of “left” brain vs. ”right” brain type of thinking?

Only God knows for sure.

But with the situation America faces on the foreign front, and with a Marxist-socailist anti-president running things on the homefront, America will need God's help more than ever to get us out of this one.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It's as true as ever: As GM goes, so goes America--bankrupt!


The timing was perfect. In fall of 1976, GM had introduced their long awaited new line of B-bodied cars.

Back then, TV commercials splashed the news all over the airwaves..."GM introduces its downsized Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac full-size and luxury cars; so visit your nearest GM dealer-showroom today!" Then the commercial would fade out showing the once-famous GM-Fisher body logo.

This was all in conjunction with the ending of the harrowing OPEC oil embargo (which had started in October, '73) when the nation realized that it could no more be complacent about its transportation's lifeblood--cheap gasoline- which no longer could be taken for granted.

The GM engineers and designers had done their homework; the B-bodied cars were a smash. They were all newly-designed. They all had gorgeous back-pillared roof lines, with opera-style rear windows. They were well-engineered; they ran beautifully.

Americans responded in droves; they flocked into GM showrooms. Everyone wanted a new GM car. Teenagers saved their paper route money. GMAC couldn't make the loans fast enough. All five GM divisions boomed; factories hummed . GM towns across the country, such as Pontiac and Flint Michigan, and Southgate California were prospering as never before.

The entire auto parts industry and all the automotive spin-off supplemental suppliers boomed as well.

And in conjunction with GM's new auto introduction, America also welcomed the opening of the Alaska Pipeline, and two million barrels/day of new domestic oil came on line and quickly dropped the price of gas, bringing the economy completely out of its OPEC- induced 1974-76 recession; and bringing the onset of the disco era "hey day".

Who was it that said, " As GM goes, so goes America"? And in the late 70's this  proved to be "right on" brother!  It was when America still had its full manufacturing base, and we still had a prosperous middle class, and the entire world still looked upon the U.S. as the "economic colossus" and manufacturing power of the universe.

And for GM it was a pivotal time. The company hired thousands of new workers; new plants were opened. Others were expanded. It seemed as though America would never experience another recession.

But after just 4 glory years, GM caught the "disease" and became obsessed with profit margins. Flushed with success, the GM executives decided they would go for broke--literally-- by appointing Roger Smith as CEO, who proved to be a turnaround expert in reverse.

What else beside greed could have caused General Motor's board to break a sixty year tradition, and pick a non-engineer, bean-counter accountant as its head honcho?

Smith was a no-nonsense type, who had started with GM back in1949. So "Mr. Bottom Line" then decreed... "We shall wringeth the maximum profit margins out of our customers! We shall charge premium price for shoddy designs. And make 'em smaller; make 'em cheaper; and make all the models look alike from the same basic body shell; and power them with engines worthy of a sewing machine."

"And damn the 50,000 mile warranty! Let the repair aspect prosper, along with the company-dealer profits! And damn the long time customers-- it's shareholder value--that's the bottom line."

And then there was the UAW...the cancer within the assembly lines. If you could peer into the mindset of the UAW, they seemed to have had some brain-addled idea that they would be an adversary to GM-- and bite the hand that fed them so generously.

Auto assembly-line work is hell; it's loud; it's monotonous...and it's back breaking. You must walk along with the moving line, and do strenuous work simultaneously; and because it's "one after another", there is little satisfaction; as soon as you complete your assigned task, here comes yet another car--for an eight hour shift.
 
There is a peculiar, indefinable, "mental-physical wear-down" aspect to the job. Thus early retirements are the rule, rather than the exception.

But the UAW members, misled by their own union bosses, were somehow driven to believe that the company was to blame for the difficult job that all auto assembly work entails.

Union disputes over assembly line speeds; strikes; threats; discipline problems; absenteeism; drunken, hung-over workers; deliberately shoddy workmanship-- all began to take its toll on the final products.

GM began to acquire its fateful reputation:

Unreliability; poor fitting parts; frequent breakdowns. But customer's complaints went unheeded. And getting no satisfaction caused Americans to abandon the company in droves, as word quickly spread-- the Japanese had the answers to the GM " junk syndrome".

And the rest is History.

Yes; it was under the "misguidance" of the bean-counting Roger Smith, who reigned during the time when those horribly designed, front-wheel-drive, X-body compact cars, the Buick Skylark, Chevrolet Citation, Oldsmobile Omega and Pontiac Phoenix, were in the process of quickly destroying the 75 years of goodwill that GM had built up with America.

These were the models that were hailed by the company as being "perfected" by computer; but were rejected by the auto-buying public en masse.

The cars were the polar opposite of what Americans wanted --certified rolling junk on wheels.

Even worse, the American buying public had been duped by all the phony publicity.  The cars turned out to be not at all what the magazines (such as "CAR and DRIVER") had been all a-twitter about-- GM’s "fabulous" X-Body platform. The X-car proved to be not fabulous-- but disastrous-- for both the customers and the company.

Its front-wheel drive and transverse engine broke down frequently; the engine made a peculiar whirring sound-- you could actually tell them apart by just listening. Its so-called “sleek styling” and “intelligent hatchback design,” were flops -an abject failure. And the price tags were on the moon.

And they were ugly--so ugly that it was if the company had deliberately designed them as sort of some weird joke on the American auto-buying public. And nothing turns off Americans from buying cars more than ugly--or having bad heaters.

GM X-body heater cores were made of plastic that easily fractured from hitting a deep pothole, or even a minor fender-bender. When they broke, they dripped smelly anti-freeze into the passenger compartment . Then you had to pull the engine to replace them. Huge repair bills were an anathema to all customers who owned the little devilish demons on wheels.

Long time GM customers were alienated, often having to spend their money two, or even THREE times to replace the insidious heater cores.

So predictably, another recession hit America in 1981, as car sales tanked, and the disaster of Jimmy Carter's economic policies had taken full hold.

But Roger Smith was undeterred, doing just the opposite of what was called for. Instead of going back to its roots and redesigning a good reliable new line of models, Smith, in 1984, foolishly recommended  a "new organizational structure" for GM's North American Passenger Car Operations.

And even after it was formed-- it again proved to be another huge misstep. Instead of learning his lesson, the complacent Smith persisted in his bean-counting, and insisted GM go onward with the re-organization. Two integrated car groups, Chevrolet, Pontiac, GM of Canada, and Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac, were to each have complete responsibility for their respective products, including engineering, manufacturing, assembly, and marketing.

But what good is reorganization if your division is assembling junk?

Predictably, 4 years after the 1984 directive; the "re-reorganization" in 1988 also fizzled when GM introduced its 'GM 10' family of newly redesigned midsize cars -- the Buick Regal, Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, and Pontiac Grand Prix.

These cars were also ugly, unreliable, and to the fast disappearing customer base--unacceptable.

In 1989, even uglier four-door sedan versions of the 'GM 10' Pontiac Grand Prix and Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme were introduced. And predictably again, GM market share began to plummet; and GM factories closed down; and the once prosperous GM towns did likewise.

But despite the all the reorganizations, the redesigns, the new divisions, etc., the problems remained -the cars were ugly, unreliable, and decidedly overpriced.

So is it any wonder that throughout the 80's, GM market share went south as Americans turned to the imports in droves? And word of mouth was proliferating--Japanese cars don't fall apart-- and they're actually fun to drive...another nail in the GM cofffin.

But GM fought back with even uglier, flimsier, and more plastic-laden vehicles-- the Pontiac Trans Sport and Oldsmobile Silhouette "all-purpose" minivans. These models featured the large plastic panels, that made the cars resemble some alien design from perhaps some other planet from another universe.

The OLDS Silhouette in particular seemed to be inspired by its similarity to a dustbuster hand-held sweeper. And it had these incredibly stupid, elevated tail light panels that marked it as something from yet another alien planet- the most bizarre looking minivan ever made.

And speaking of other planets,  GM introduced the "Saturn"-- yet another, plastic-bodied disappointment.

By the mid 90's with total sales tanking even further, GM continued to go the cheapskate, bean-counting route again and in 1996, Pontiac and GMC marketing divisions were merged to form Pontiac-GMC Division.

Bob Lutz, another, so-called turnaround expert from Chrysler, was then hired to revitalize the company. Lutz (the father of the Dodge Viper) had the right idea, but he too suffered from greed, and decided to turn another good idea into a misguided reality-- the concept of a world car-- the revitalizing of the famed original muscle car...the GTO.

Lutz proved to be a swaggering, self-confident arrogant CEO. But Maximum Bob, as he was called, once again got everything flat out wrong;  His “world car” idea was as old the auto industry itself. Had Lutz not been busy being greedy, and had gone retro and designed the GTO to resemble its '64- '69 predecessors, the cars would not have been able to have been made fast enough.

But GM decide to go for a "world look", and made the car in Austaralia to save money.

But the hideous-looking Australian-built GTO was an abject failure. The GTO lost GM tens of millions of dollars, squandered precious development resources, and drove yet another Lutz-shaped nail into GM’s coffin.

Contrast this now with the gorgeous retro-designed Ford Mustang, a direct knock-off of the classic '68 model year. And then there are those hot-selling, muscular looking, Dodge Challengers, which are a direct knockoff of the 1970 model of the same name.

Retro 60's and early 70's has always been the classic way to go; but GM never could reconcile their greed for something that would have worked magnificently--but was rejected by GM because "it would have cost too much to retool".

Yet Ford will survive, and Chysler-Dodge along with them; and the retro-GTO might have saved GM .

But in retrospect how could GM think that a car company, that would dare sell such poorly engineered automobiles, could survive while realizing that the American people knew that someone else (the Germans-- the Japanese) made a better product.

Today (and again misjudging the market) GM has a gigantic backlog of hybrids; further testimony that Americans still demand conventional cars that look good, run on gasoline, and come equipped with engines suitable for safe freeway driving.

And looking into the near future, if GM somehow can survive, they should learn a lesson from the free market itself.

Americans do not want the silent (but deadly) electric cars, whose drivers risk freezing to death in the winter should you get stuck in snow, and your batteries (and heater) go dead before you can get moving again.

And Americans don't want the ugly, insect-like "green cars of the future," where if you get smashed an intersection, you'll not go to the hospital, but be taken to the cemetary.

But with the government now about to take control of the auto industry, they'll be telling us what kind of cars we'll drive; how many we can own; and with the mandatory installation of GPS-- how far we shall drive them.

And the public will revolt en masse. The auto industry will never recover. The economy will stay in recession. And Americans will continue to worship the classic cars of the 50's and 60's, and wonder how such a technologically advanced industry could have been so irresponsibly greedy over one generation, and throw it all away for the sake of "progress"-- in reverse.



www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

Ah, the tumultuous joy of shared misery in the Obama White House


Memo from a guy with a new loaded limo, an Oval Office hot enough to raise orchids, and who just finished throwing a 150 million dollar inauguration ( the most expensive in the history of the United States): "We all need to sacrifice."

Yes, times are such that many people are struggling to eat. The American food banks cannot keep up. But surprise, surprise - the Obamas are eating the world's most expensive steak, washed down with cocktails, while working Americans make ends meet with meatloaf, rice, mac-n-cheese, hamburgers, and hot dogs.

But dear oh dear Mr. Obama? Did you not get your own memo saying that the economy is in dire straits, we're in a crisis, and we all need to pitch in?
 
Apparently not.

And on Jan 29, just one week after his inaugural blow-out, it was Obama's White House Wagyu Steak Celebration.

Mr. Obama had invited some influential "A" list politicians to the White House for drinks and a steak dinner; and the Emperor and his guests savored not only the $125/lb imported Japanese beef, but also Chesapeake Crab Agnolottis with Roasted Sunchokes.

Doggy bags anyone?

During his primary campaign, Obama painted himself as a man of the people from common roots...a neighborhood community organizer from lowly south Chicago.

But apparently, since coming to Washington, Mr. Obama has risen a notch from his days in the 'hood'. So he and Michelle had their own private chef (back in Chicago) flown in to be their own personal chef in the White House; and they decided to sacrifice even further and retain George Bush's chef---who already worked in the White House-- before Barack and the missus took up residence there. So it was double or nothing!

Now, that's sacrifice-- and clearly the Obamas know about "sacrifice" in a down  economy.

And Mr.& Mrs. Obama, harkening back to the days of Andrew Jackson in the 1820's, have declared the White House is the People's House. So every Wednesday, they've announced it as a new party night. And they prove it. They dance the conga, use taxpayer dollars to hire the best performers, and sip on cocktails.

A recent Wednesday night guest appearance included music legend Stevie Wonder--at taxpayer's expense of course! So obviously, it's no "wonder" why the media hasn't reported too much about that one.

And Barack Obama's luxurious tastes know no bounds. "The president loves healthy food -- creamed spinach, scallops sauteed in olive oil, shallots, "watermelon" radishes, oranges, and grapefruit", according to First Lady Michelle Obama. "And another of his favorite dishes is Maryland Crab Cakes with Lemon Caper Sauce".

Mrs. Obama is fond of a White House soup that "tastes creamy without being creamy" says assistant White House Chef, Cristeta Comerford. And White House Pastry Chef William Yosses revealed, "The White House Huckleberry Cobbler is one of the First Family's favorites."

Wine anyone? Spottswoode Sauvignon Blanc 2007 (California) seems to be the preferred choice during these sacrificial days at 1600 Pennsylvania.

The White House chefs always stress the American ingredients whenever they announce the daily menu:

-Wagyu Beef and steamed Marylannd blue crab
-Nantucket Scallops with Glazed Red Carrots
-Portobello Mushroom and Creamed Spinach
-Winter Citrus Salad with Pistachios and Lemon Honey Vinaigrette
-Huckleberry Cobbler with Caramel Ice Cream

And not to forget-- the obligatory wine pairing-- Archery Summit Pinot Noir "Estate" 2004.

This is food and spirits fit for the Chosen One, who usually manages to get himself into the Oval Office by 9 am.

And then there are the preferred centerpieces by Michelle Obama:

Three types of gilded metal stands, six in bronze and two in silver, feature the classical female figures known as the Three Graces-- the Greek goddesses who presided over banquets, dances, and all other pleasurable social events-- who brought joy and goodwill to both gods and mortals.

Ah, and lest we forget: the King Charles Flatware and Lennox China, an assembled service emblazoned with the Great Seal of the United States, to add their own special touch to all the regality.

But after such a long, hard, two year campaign slog, how much more of this pressure can the Obamas take?

Is Mr. Obama up to 4, or possibly 8 more years, spending his evenings swilling cocktails and chowing down on the most expensive steak in the world, while overtly burdened taxpayers can only dream of such an unbridled luxurious lifestyle?

Stay tuned.

Obama whines about CEO pay; yet he just went from $175,000/year as a senator to $400,000/year as president. And he gets about half that for the rest of his life as a pension.

Yes, it was four hardscrabble years as U.S. senator, get elected to be president for four more, and then get stuck with a $200,000/year pension for 8 total years of work. Poor Mr. Obama.

Kindly address all sympathy cards to: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave Washington, DC 20510-1501

But before we go off labeling our hardworking president as a hypocrite, don't forget how he took the trouble to preach to us on the campaign trail that we shouldn't crank up the thermostat, or eat what we want, or that we drive the wrong cars. So we mustn't begrudge any of our beloved politicians their favorite foods or luxuries--especially the Obamas.

But Does Obama, (who's never held a real job) have a clue about how hard the average American is working just to keep a little of what they earn? Try 46% combined state & federal income tax, gas tax, capital gains tax, sales tax, local tax, property tax, plus motor vehicle fees and fines, and then see what luxuries one can afford after that!

And adding insult to injury is that the President would have such a tin ear as to serve a super-expensive meal to his congressional guests, a little over week after being sworn in.
 
Americans are losing their jobs while Obama spends millions on his crowning, then gives billions to his buddies that put him in power, and splurges on drinks and feasts alike for everyone in the Obama  inner circle.
 
Now, that's some sacrifice!

Yes Mr. Obama, it appears your snobbery is showing. Wasn't that little get together America threw for you last January 20th enough? Even FDR toned his inauguration down during the Depression.

We all  heard a lot about hope and change; and after Obama's egregious tax hikes kick in, Americans are hoping they will have some CHANGE left from their paychecks in the next four years.
 
So just what in the world are the Obamas thinking?

Try: "We are the aristocracy. Let the peasants struggle for the crumbs!"

We are in a horrible economic mess, and the Obamas are having Black Tie dinners and flying around the country and vacationing. They have already spent an inordinate amount of tax payer's money to go to Camp David; and then back to Chicago for two more vacations; and Obama's term is but a month or two long.

Hypocricy? In the Obama family? It's limitless!

Modesty? Limos? Obama is intoxicated with his own importance. He rides around in a new $550,000 "Caddy like no other"; his own bubble-within-the-bubble "primped out" presidential ride.

Thrift? He likes to spend big on himself, especially when someone else( the taxpayer) is paying the tab. Obama recently commandeered the entire floor of a luxury hotel for his family while on his Hawaii vacation. He’s certainly not averse to living "la vida loca" while the American people (by his own admission) are suffering through a horrible economy.

Time to celebrate the Age of Obama!

And Obama is planning to bankrupt the nation. Thrift is not something we associate with Obama. By the time the American people eject him from the White House, he will have bankrupted Fort Knox.
 
Our country is facing a very serious recession-depression, unemployment in some states is 10%. Millions have lost their jobs, homes, car, retirement funds, and their child's college funds. California is broke. People there may be getting  I.O.U.s  instead of their state refund checks.

Meanwhile, Mr. & Mrs. Obama have their two private chief's cooking for them in the White House, claiming to relate to poor people living on a shoe string and food stamps.

So as we listen to Barack Obama scolding Wall Street executives for their bonuses last year, keep thinking about all the swank dinner parties that the Obamas throw nightly-- celebrating the passage of his massive "no earmarked" spending bills.

This is change we can depend on for sure!

And let's not forget the Obamas' secret Valentine's Day splurge; an event where the news media was playing hooky again.

Mr. Obama flew with the family (including Grandma and White House staff members) on the presidential jet to Chicago, so that he and First Lady Michelle could have dinner at the posh restaurant owned by Oprah Winfrey’s personal chef. It was a last-minute decision that cost local businesses thousands of dollars in restaurant bookings.

Not only were aircraft grounded or delayed because of his arrival to the Chicago airport, but dozens of hapless restaurants within the perimeter of his romantic dinner were blocked off to the public.

However, this is the way it always goes with a socialist. The heads of government  and their cronies live in the lap of luxury, while the peons suffer, do the work, and pay the tab.

The state of our newest political circle in DC could be reminiscent of the old, Cold War Moscow. Blatant hypocricy, lying, media censorship, and total corruption. Nothing new in this administration; the same old inner circle in Washington living it up like kings at the taxpayer's expense.

The campaign rhetoric has changed; Obama no longer consider himself as the servant of the people, but their master.

Obama believes it's his just reward. Now that his despotic regime of the Marxist/fascist state has come to fruition, he and his power elite will be part of the group chosen to live in luxury at the expense of the peon class who will serve them.

And Obama and his circle of liberals truly believe their intellectual bearing is far above that of the people over whom they shall now rule. They truly believe that the "average Joe" American citizen is but common cattle to be managed, due to their superior liberal intellects.

Today Marxist Obama (and those who hate what the United States Constitution stands for) will continue to celebrate, but will also continue to hate the true reason that permitted their celebration to take place at all--the freedom that enabled the United States to prosper as a capital-driven, free market nation.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com


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

Saving America from ACORN-- An open letter to all conservatives


Here's a suggestion for the Republican party: Instead of trying to re-organize nationally, why not just surrender unconditionally to the democrats now, and admit they're
too wily to be defeated?

Just kidding.

But will they ever learn? How many times will the Republicans continue to be "outfoxed"? Are they about to evolve into a modern day revival of the19th century "Know Nothing" party?

EXAMPLE: The midterm elections are only in 18 short months; and instead of capitalizing on the political vulnerabilities of the spend-till-the-end democrats, the Republicans have again taken the bait, and allowed themselves to become embroiled in an insipid, media-manufactured, divisive argument over Rush Limbaugh vs. Michael Steele-- political stupidity on steroids!

The stock market is in a slow crash; millions of Americans are losing their livelihood; Obama is talking about huge taxes on everything and everybody; the foreclosure crisis; the major banks are in need of bigger bailouts; GM is about to go out of existence;  threats from al Quida; the Taliban; Afghanistan; Pakistan; Iran; the worldwide economic crisis...etc.

But the top news story? The statement that "Rush Limbaugh hopes Obama fails!"

Why do the Republicans continue to be so muted? Blessed are the meek? Turn thine other cheek? That may be a ticket to heaven, but Jesus (fortunately) never had to face a Rahm Emanuel in the temple --or the cunning of a David Axelrod amongst the Pharisees, or a defiant type like a James Carville during His sermon on the mount.

Or a thuggish group like ACORN.

If the Republicans don't soon get on the same page, they might as well wave the white flag because very soon, our good friends from ACORN will be receiving at least 4 billion  in "neighborhood outreach" funds --and they will again be registering hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voters nationwide. And if left unchecked, ACORN will further cement the democratic majorities in both houses of Congress after the midterm elections of 2010.

The Republicans have been accused of not having an economic recovery plan of their own (yet another, very clever political feint from the democrats). Well here's a REAL plan--a critical step that the Republicans must utilize against ACORN before it's too late.

It's called "write your Senator"-- an old fashioned, last-ditch attempt to alert the nation about these subversive, marxist thugs, who were indispensable in getting Barack Obama elected to the presidency in 2008.

Immediate action is necessary! Nothing else is more important to the survival of the Republican party than counter-acting ACORN!

If the American people continue to remain ignorant about this ACORN threat, we could be experiencing the tyranny of one party rule for possibly the next fifty years--or more.

So here's the first step: writing  a letter to your Republican senator. If you do not have one in your state, pick one whom you feel is a patriotic upholder of our democracy, and not just some hollow politician seeking a lifetime government job.

Suggestions include Jim Bunning of Kentucky; or James Inhofe of Oklahoma. Here are some others:
-Tom Coburn (Oklahoma)
-Bob Corker (Tennessee)
-Jim De Mint (South Carolina)
-Richard Shelby (Alabama)
-John Cornyn (Texas)

But  pick one whom you feel will be concerned enough and address a letter to him.

See instructions below for further details:

1) get out your typewriter, computer, word-processor, pen-paper; whatever
2) look up the address of your nearest Republican (or favorite) senator: try "Ask.com"
3) copy the text of the letter below; edit freely to your own vocalization
4) purchase and affix first class stamp
5) address the letter as "confidential"--and mail to Washington, DC
6) hope for a sincere response to your request
7) don't forget: words "move" people --especially in the form of a personal letter
8) pray that it's already not too late to stop ACORN's money-fortified challenge in 2010

The text of the letter is as follows:

(date)
Office of  Senator (name) 
Washington, D.C.                                                                                                     

Dear Senator (name)
 
I am writing this unexpected and urgent letter to you from the standpoint of an extremely concerned American citizen.
 
Every since I was in elementary school, I was fascinated to read about our American history. I was fascinated by the Colonial Revolutionaries in Boston; the brave Minutemen; the bravery of the soldiers who spent the winter at Valley Forge; the bravery and ingenuity of George Washington at Trenton; and the resolute bravery of the Continental
"rag-tag" Army over the Red Coats at the key battles of Monmouth and Cowpens.
 
As a youth, I was always so proud of my American heritage.
 
Throughout our entire history, we are a nation who have survived through the most desperate of times and circumstances, because of our tradition of American bravado. Whether it was the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Spanish American War, or the two World Wars, the bravado of the Americans always seemed to win the day.
 
Yes; the thing that always shone throughout American history was our confidence.
 
Even in Vietnam, the pride and bravado of our soldiers won every battle. And twenty years later, we won the 4-day lightning war against Saddam Hussein, due to the bravado and swagger of America's traditional ability to sweep any challenge aside, because: "We're Americans... we are a nation of winners...we are the home the brave".
 
But now, a virulent cancer has suddenly seeped into our consciousness. We're no longer a confident nation. Something's happening --we are losing our bravado. We no longer speak our minds in public. Many now only feel confident enough to whisper meekly--a fear borne of some tasteless, odorless, but decidedly deadly repression-- which, as you surely must perceive for yourself, is destroying the very fabric of our nation.
 
Yes Senator,  it's repression that has seeped into the consciousness of our nation. We're no longer the UNITED states of America- repression is transforming us into a divided, bitterly partisan nation-- swamped by wave after wave of political correctness.  We are afraid to speak out. Our media will not report the truth.
 
We are the red vs. the blue-- a nascent, undeclared, non-violent civil war, where the people in power now are throwing our traditions, our Constitution, and our American heritage right out the window in favor of repression. 
 
This so-called stimulus bill was the last resort. It prompted me to write this letter to you. I feel you are one of the few persons left in the Senate that I know of who would actually act on my request.

Senator (name), you must somehow stop, or find a way to nullify the money ACORN will receive from this Recovery and Reinvestment act. YOU must somehow alert the public; you must somehow chair a committee to investigate these monsters, then find a reporter (or national outlet) who's brave enough to rise above the repression, and expose this grave danger to our freedom as a nation.
 
In all my years, I cannot believe-- nor have I ever perceived -- that a radical leftist group like ACORN could do so much structural damage to our country in such a short time.
 
In the democratic presidential primaries of '08, it was ACORN who turned the tide and was the key to rigging the Democratic presidential primary election. Yes- I used the word "rigged."
 
Recall the improbability of Barack Obama's upset in the Iowa primary: Hillary Clinton was far ahead in every poll. But the day of the Iowa caucus, there were reports statewide of boisterous groups arriving from nearby Illinois, who had descended upon the caucus locations at noon, got out of their buses, and went into their well-rehearsed brownshirt exercises.
 
ACORN partisans locked doors, refusing to allow anyone in, unless they were going to vote their allegiance to Obama. Phone lines rang continuously from early afternoon until well after the caucuses concluded, with reports from people from all over Iowa who swore that they were victimized and who observed irregularities:
 
There were caucus chairpersons in place at many locations who were obviously biased for Obama. They refused to accept preference cards from Clinton supporters who were at the caucus sites (on the grounds that the cards were not filled out fast enough). And these same chairpersons (ACORN operatives) brazenly intimidated many Clinton supporters into leaving early prior to electing delegates.
 
There were ACORN (Obama) people waving signs wildly, shouting down Hillary supporters, pushing people into corners, and even bullying people in wheel chairs-- intimidating them all into caucusing for Obama. Hillary voters were badgered in the parking lots, and at caucus hall entrances. It was get-in-your-face politics at its most horrific level.
 
The actual details of the thuggery were not brought to light in many of the local papers or TV stations around Iowa. And certainly no national media outlet dared pick up the story. It was beyond shameful. It was media censorship-- political correctness running wildly out of control--reminiscent of tactics that Robert Mugabe might employ in Zimbabwe.
 
Eventually, the Clinton campaign became befuddled. They were getting creamed in EVERY primary state that had held a caucus; yet they were competitive in the states using traditional balloting.

Naturally, the press covered by saying..."Obama had the superior ground organization in the caucus states". Of course he did! The Acorn thugs had perfected their Iowa technique, and just executed this election-day thuggery in all the other caucus states.

And once again, it was the deafening silence of the media who allowed it all to take place.
 
But ACORN remains a "whisper topic," because it brings shudders to any patriotic American, who do not realize the ongoing threat they pose to our democracy-- fraudulent voter registrations-- one man; many votes!
 
Examine the so -called "deadlocked" Norm Coleman--Al Franken senatorial recount in Minnesota. ACORN has had its shadow over the entire, corrupted process.
 
Mr. Coleman won statewide in the general election by a statistical margin of only 0.0002%. Out of three million votes cast, Coleman prevailed by 725 votes. "Close" doesn't even come near describing this election.
 
But 'magically', in the recount, Mr. Franken won almost all challenges presented to the Minnesota State Canvassing Board, and prevailed in some counties by margins as much as 3 to 1, 4 to1, or even higher. But how do you go from Coleman's .0002% mathematical statewide victory, to Franken's statistically impossible 70% (or better) per-county margin of victory in the recount?  Just call ACORN-- the Votebusters.
 
What made the recount ridiculous is that in EACH of the counties that produced challenged ballots, it always inured to Franken's advantage, and eroded Coleman's election night lead. The reason? Mark Ritchie, Minnesota Secretary of State (a staunch ACORN operative) was in charge of the recount.
 
Highly implausible, post-election "corrections" in just three precincts -- Two Harbors, Mountain Iron, and Partridge Township -- cost Coleman 446 votes, and netted Franken 504 new votes. The Minneapolis Star Tribune attributed the 446-vote "correction" in Franken's favor to "exhausted county officials."
 
Senator (name), I'm sure you'll agree, that it's manifestly absurd that the 504 total new votes for Franken from just 3 precincts, somehow turned out to be greater than adding together all the vote changes in the ENTIRE state for the ALL THE OTHER Minnesota presidential, congressional, and statehouse races combined- which were a net sum of only 482 votes.
 
And the biggest travesty of all was that many absentee ballots, possibly as many as 3000, mostly from troops serving overseas, were not counted-- thanks to Mr.Ritchie-- and ACORN. And these are the votes that tend to go Republican by the greatest percentage.
 
By whatever means, subverting the electoral process illustrates that any close election in the country now constitutes an open invitation for ACORN to try to steal the victory.
 
But that's ACORN's specialty. They are the agents of change-- they change elections, they force people to "change" their minds, they even changed the way banks made loans in the 1990's to precipitate the foreclosure crisis.
 
And so far ACORN has already changed the course of presidential political history, resulting in the repressive threat we have now from this well-funded "volunteer" organization.
 
Our future elections are in jeopardy. ACORN could keep the balance of power in the hands of those who would use their offices against the best interests of America. These are the people who would not uphold or serve to protect the Constitution; people who would grab power "by any means necessary"; and once obtaining it, would not surrender it easily (or fairly).
 
Senator (name)--you must now be the canary in the coal mine. If the public funding of ACORN is not challenged, the dominoes of our democracy will fall, one-by-one. You must warn America what is happening now and what we are about to lose--our Constitution-- because of corruption within our sacred electoral process.
 
There is no quicker way to destroy a democracy than disenfranchisement. If people can't vote, or feel that their vote didn't count, or sense that their candidate lost because of fraud, then what? Groups could be demonstrating. Order could break down. Civil disobedience could follow.
 
Our media has failed us. Most Americans are too busy earning a living, and can no longer depend on their news for accuracy, or have the time for a newspaper-- something Thomas Jefferson often warned about: "WHERE THE PRESS IS FREE, AND EVERY MAN IS ABLE TO READ, ALL IS SAFE".
 
Senator (name), I"m imploring you to use your office to call attention to this grave threat...this so-called volunteer organization of ACORN (Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now).

You must warn. You must be our modern day Jefferson. Call a committee hearing; remind America, "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance". Or call a press conference. Insist all the networks be there. Persist that it's a matter of grave national importance.
 
If left unchecked, there will be no one to stand for protecting the voter's rights.

Now that all of our elections can be stolen without challenge, future world history might read: "The organization ACORN were the Founding Fathers of a new socialist revolution that eventually engulfed a once-proud and strong American nation."

 

Most sincerely;
(your name)
 

Final post script to all conservative Americans:

If you care at all about your country--if you care at all about your individual freedom-- then do not procrastinate. Do not take this matter lightly.

ACORN plays for keeps. They are upholders of those who are deadly serious about destroying our democracy; a political activist group comprised of something most Americans could never imagine in their worst nightmare--a violent, communist, subversive group, operating with public funds-- right within the midst of every population center in the United States.

And they are here and now.

So go to your computer, your library, or your desk immediately, and write this letter promptly, to save our America.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

Is Obama exploiting fear to facilitate his socialist power grab?


Dateline: November 17, 2008-- it was hailed as a legendary market call from an investing legend. It was the mother of all buy signals. It was a bold call, albeit one grounded in well-established investment theory.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor who made his fortune buying stocks on downturns, had advised America to buy stocks; but this time it turned out to be a calamity.

And now Mr. Buffett, Barack Obama's formerly highly-touted economic guru, recently emerged from out of his hiding place and pronounced in his news letter..." the U.S. economy will remain in a shambles through 2009".
 
Oh, but not to worry; Mr. Buffet forecasts..."better days ahead for the country".
 
Sure-- better days ahead-- trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. Bleak outlooks for all the nation's large banks; and Barack Obama's repeated claims that our nation is in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression-- all are jawboning the stock market southward.

The result? The Dow hit a low this week not seen since the glory days of 1997, below the 7000 level. And the economic tea leaves and news coming out of financial companies is still so alarming that investors feel no other alternative than to head for the exits.

But how concerned is the White House about the impact of the recent $11 trillion in wealth that has vanished from the stock market?

Apparently, not much

"I think it is unwise to believe everything we do is designed to cause an immediate market reaction, or that the score should only be kept by that,'' said Robert (Mr. Smirk- rhymes with jerk) Gibbs.

The smirky-jerky White House press secretary, continued... "If you look at the news of the week, the market probably processes in a lot of information, whether its price increases, or a lot of news throughout the globe about a deteriorating economy". Gibbs then suggested, "it's more likely a reflection of the nation's challenges, not merely a reaction to what the White House is doing."

Translation: anti-president Obama is not responsible for this downturn--it's what "we inherited" from the failed policies of the Bush administration, and a greedy Wall Street taking advantage of Main Street.

But traders and investors alike beg to differ:
 
Stocks are a bet on future performance and earnings. And right now, people have low to no confidence in the fiscal and monetary gyrations the Obama administration is going through. The stock market has incrementally shed value since Mr Obama was nominated, then elected, and then inaugurated--- each event caused another prolonged dip in stock prices.

And now with every doom and gloom statement Mr. Obama  makes (to innoculate him against failure of his program), stocks churn again.  Stock values always decline during periods of uncertainties; and what could be more uncertain than Obama's recent "to-and- fro" pronouncements, which virtually guaranteed the disastrous drops.
 
Every other word out of Obama's mouth is "crisis" or "calamity" or "catastrophe"; and investors and traders alike respond accordingly. A huge psychological component to the underlying market always exists; yet Obama obsessively continues to play his calamitous game of boogie man vs. Wall Street.

But could there be some ulterior motive...a more cunning reason? Is Obama exploiting fear and insecurity to facilitate his socialist power grab?
 
Obama claimed he would be a transformational leader; but the only thing transformational about his anti-presidency is that it will transform the dollar into a worthless currency, and the country into a third-world socialist nanny state.
 
And just WHEN will the media stop their cover-up for their candidate, who became our selected (not elected) 44th president? When does Obama actually become accountable for his policies' impact on the economy?
 
Obama seems to reflect a compulsion to keep driving the Dow down.

Yes indeed, he'll show those "greedy fat-cats" (a.k.a. the American public) who dared to invest in the stock market!  And as he's talking down the Dow, he's dragging down capitalism and the free market economy. It’s all part of his government dependency plan.
 
And going back to ever since his socialist comrades in Congress-- Pelosi & Reid-- took over on March 3, 2007, when the DJ Index closed at 12474, it now trades below the crucial support level of 7000. Support levels are used by Wall Street technicians to predict emotional buy-sell trigger points in market indexes.

So look out below--there may be further downside --a lot further. Just in the first month that Mr. Obama has been in office, the DJI has lost 1000 points.

And the stock market could continue to get pounded with Obama's insane, inane, financial agenda: spending $787 billion (before interest) on the economic debt expansion package (disguised as a stimulus); and then another $400 billion in supplemental spending-- and introducing a $3.5 trillion budget that next year alone will result in the highest annual budget deficit in U.S. history, which will consume an unheard-of 12.3% of the nation's gross domestic product.
 
But that just for starters! Obama forecasts trillions in deficit spending in his first term; then the next week, he's gung-ho for a plan halving the upwardly-spiraling deficit.

So if you were a big money investor, what would you think?

Obama's insanity-calamity deficit-spending profligacy has Wall Streeters heading for the hills; And with Obama on his current socialist, wealth-transfer, tax-hike frenzy, it will only worsen to the point where 1930-32 could become the new market model for Obama's wealth-destroying policies.

Right now, the market climate on Wall Street resembles an old time Japanese horror flick: Wall Street investors fleeing in panic from the Barack Obama wealth destruction monster--breathing his fire of higher taxes and socialism at every American financial institution.

And Wall Street sees the writing on the wall-- their worst, post election fears are coming true--- sensing that Obama is going to keep on spending and spending, with his objective to make the USA into a complete welfare state.
 
But if only Obama would pay attention to history, and truly get behind a sound policy that would stop the bloodletting.

Obama obviously knows that he could stimulate investment by lowering taxes on the "job creators"...the small businesses. But that would mean surrendering---giving up wealth (power) to the private sector-- and undermining his aim to railroad power from Wall Street to Washington.

Currently, investors are longing for the Reagan years, when lower income taxes decreased the cost of capital, and thus lowered the "hurdle rates" for various investments and projects. And the Dow took off in October, 82 and rose magnificently until March of 2000, with the internet bubble bust.

Right now Obama could provide an overnight turnaround if he cut corporate taxes, which would to help bring jobs home from overseas, and also would reduce the cost of capital for more investment.

And if Obama reduced capital gains and dividend taxes from 15% to 7.5%, it also would lower the cost of capital and create more investment. Remember that the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th longest economic growth cycles have occurred after the top tax brackets had been lowered.
 
But Comrade-in chief Obama has other ideas; just look at what happens when he speaks:

On inauguration day you could follow the dive of the Dow as he delivered his address. Whenever Geithner and Bernanke spoke recently, the market dived. After the anti- stimulus bill was passed by Congress, the market dove.

Words are important to the markets; and so far Mr. Obama's words have given the market nothing but negative reassurances.
 
The market trades basically on solid expectations. But the one thing the Street cannot tolerate is uncertainty. And the market is spiraling down in a cyclone of economic bad omens. And worse, the specter of the Obama tax hikes has basically pulled the plug for any type of bounce for the Dow-Jones in the near future.

Wall Street is about creating wealth. But Obama is about destroying wealth. Oppressive tax policies on the wealthy destroy initiative; and destroy the most essential element of future economic expansion--CAPITAL. People seem to be thrown for a loop when that word 'capital' is tossed out there. That includes Barack Obama.

But the maddening question is: Why doesn’t the Chosen One choose to calm the waters? If Obama would only make a simple announcement: "We do not plan on raising taxes for the foreseeable future, because in a downturn, this is a bad idea".

But instead, we get: "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes; not any of your taxes.
 
Translation: if you make over $250K, your lifestyle is going to mimic the stock market--it's about to take a sudden plunge-- and it will take the economy down with it.
 
And all during the prolonged plunge, Obama stubbornly has taken a phlegmatic approach to the massive losses in the market; while all the while, panicked investors and big money speculators--fearing another 1929-- are driven to panic selling.

But Obama doesn't see the losses as suffering for people, but rather an opportunity, because he suffers himself from that incurable disease-- economic socialist liberalism-- a disease which is always terminal, and has no cure.

Economic liberalism's symptoms are many, but the cause is simple-- those who suffer from it have never worked a hard day in their lives. They have no idea of what it takes to earn a buck in the real world; they never have had a real job in the private sector.

Thus according to comrade Obama; anyone who has more money "than they deserve," must surrender the excess to those who have less. A philosophy which is an anathema to Wall Street.

After 1929, the market didn't recover for 25 years, until1954. And for all we know it could go down much more from here, reminiscent of the good ole days of 1930-36.
 
So after 200 years of presidents who have praised the economic strengths of Americans, Obama is celebrating our weakness. His negative words have done almost as much damage to the stock market as all the financial challenges combined.

And Obama knows well the one TRUE economic index to be concerned with: the power a fascist can seize is directly proportional to the severity of the crisis.

Obama has learned well his socio-marxist-fascist strategy: It is much easier to frighten people than to urge them to do the right thing.
 
Barack Obama, former South Chicago community organizer; he was not trained to give people hope and encourage them to strive to be better; his training was to convince people that they were truly downtrodden and oppressed, and that only the government could save them.
 
So Obama welcomes a terrible economy-- it enables him to call it a crisis, and enact desperation measures that steal individual freedom from Americans. Obama wants everyone to need government. And bigger government bestows more power to Washington.
 
Fear and intimidation is a standard policy, Just look at Cuba (or any socialist nation) and you can see that Obama is ruling in the same manner as any socialist dictator would. Thus our anti-president needs a declining economy. It makes it easier to install full-fledged fascistic socialism.
 
Barack Obama- the Marxist man with a populist, preacher-like Mussolini slant.

So what's the best advice to Wall Street and investors alike? Buy "puts" on the option markets; go "short"; brace for further declines.

Until Obama learns the difference between being a leader and being a manipulator, the markets will descend. Until Obama learns how to solve problems, not exploit them, the market will go down.

But if Barack's callous calculations somehow don't work out-- if it's only one term for our fearless, socialist leader-- he'll find out that all along, tax cuts and prosperity (not fear and uncertainty) should have been the way to go.

And "Yes we can", will quickly turn into a..."I wish we did."


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com


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

Will the leeches prevail again in this next election?


Real men confront their foes; agree? OK then, to all you republicans out there contemplating your fate in the next election, here's a question that all of you can utilize to confront and confound those very clever (and sneaky) democratic foes in ANY political situation-- and get them thinking about themselves and what they're doing to America.
 
Ask them: "Would you rather be a MAN-- or a LEECH"?

Yes; believe it or not, that's actually the question that will win the next election; and it'll make a boffo bumper sticker, or a snappy, catch-all campaign slogan.
 
How, you say?

Easy...it automatically puts these liberal slime-purveyors on the defensive, and it hits the political nail right on the head.
 
The democratic party has morphed into a party of leeches; they are the party that stands for rewarding the sloths (subsidizing non achievers) by sucking the lifeblood out of the producers-- the working man and the wealthy people who create jobs-- all for the sake of staying eternally in power in Washington.
 
Example: how the leech strategy works in virtually any political setting:
 
Scene: two men riding to work on public transportation, debating politics
 
Republican: "You voted for Obama? So would you rather be a man or a leech"?
Liberal: "What"?
Republican: "I said , would you rather be a man or a leach"?
Liberal: "I still don't get it".
Republican: "Well get this: The democrats are the party of the active leeches...doing all they can to suck the tax payers and working people dry, and transferring the money to buy the votes of those who are quite content to live off the lifeblood of the working people--the passive leeches".
Liberal: "Hmmm. I don't know what to say...uh...I never thought of it that way...hmmph".
 
The leech question is ideal; it can be a party slogan...it's controversial...it's hammering...it comes right at the point--it calls out the democrats for what they're actually worth to our country--nothing.

The demon-crats have become so arrogant, and have swung so far to the left, they are out to rig our Constitution and all future elections to keep things going their way; they will never surrender their hard-won power they have in Washington--and they'll go to any length to keep it!

Henceforth, the necessity of the leech strategy,  and why it will work to the complete advantage of the republicans starting as soon in these upcoming midterm elections in 2010.
 
So republicans must counter-attack with the battle cry of the leeches. Think about it, pegging he democrats as the party of leeches: it's confounding; it's resounding. It would catch fire in the media; and it would have the talk shows buzzing.

It would be an epoch, much-discussed publicity stunt, combined with a moral warning to all America...the level to which the democrats will sink to keep Washington on a path that'll eventually ruin America-- causing the demise of free enterprise --and taking the economy down with it.

Even little children would understand the philosophy of the leech, and would grow up to become future Republicans instead of these vile, dumbed-down liberal democrats.

And what's even more important, the slogan (question) is blunt and to the point, and IT'S INDEFENSIBLE; it's provocative. It would invite the attention of every liberal pundit...shocking them with its confrontational innuendos.

After all, everyone knows what leeches do; and they are universally despised; and leech is a moniker the democrats have rightly earned with their indescribably unpatriotic railroading of America's future, with their brazen attempt to spend America into a second great depression, as only a bunch of treasonous leeches would do.
 
The leech strategy is one surefire way to stop the haughty Obama; it would give him a bloody, well-deserved political nose, because the accusation is inherently embarrassing, and would tongue-tie the articular, beguiling Obama because it's all so TRUE and thought-provoking.

So we might as well confront our anti-president with what he's actually doing to our country--creating a society  based on a leech mentality, and confirming a peculiar, newfound elevated status for the welfare class-- the passive leeches.

Ask any red -blooded American, "Would you rather get an occasional check from Obama...or have a real job in the private sector, and have the self-esteem of a true wage earner, instead of a leech?" The answer in most case would be obvious.

But nowadays, one might not be so sure, because our socialist, class warfare-promoting, anti-president-- whose about to turn America's once proud culture of self reliance on its virtual head-- is bent on creating a permanent underclass of government dependent leeches who will vote for him again in 2012.

As president John F. Kennedy never would say..."Axe not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you".

Yes, thanks to Mr. Obama, we'll have  a permanent underclass of leeches, who, rather than looking for work, now will look forward to their next appointment with their case worker, to see if they can leech ever more so called "entitlements" from the government: more welfare; more food stamps; more section 8 housing; more WIC; more SSI; more unemployment benefits; more free health care- the Constitution of the leeches, which upholds the gimmee principles of anti-democracy.

"Gimmee more this...gimme more that, and let those evil rich people pay, because they're the ones who cheated us  disadvantaged people in the first place-- so they deserve to pay the high taxes-- they can afford it; and we'll gladly accept it"

Meanwhile the people who work are to be bled dry to the bone by the spend-ocrats, who smell blood in the water, and are passing one legislative measure after another to let the taxpayer bloodbath run amok until they can pay no more -- and the economy collapses under its own weight of 100 million leeches.

And as we speak, the leeches in Congress are busy conspiring new ways to suck the lifeblood out of nation's treasury, trying to come up with ever more vote-buying schemes to keep all their leeches from becoming discontented.

So take heart; if Obama can win on change and hope, the republicans can win on man vs. leech .

Despite the mountainous task ahead, it has the potential for driving all the future undecideds in the "right" direction . It's certainly a better approach than... "we are the party of conservatives... we are the party of fiscal responsiblity...we are the party for tax cuts.

And while there' s nothing wrong with the above, these anachronisms have little relevance in the lives of the independent voters, who went for Obama's snow-job of change and hope in the first place.

Obama accurately figured these were simple minded, dumbed-down voters; so he capitalized on it.

So the republicans can accomplish the same thing, because although these future undecideds may never have the mentality to understand why tax cuts spur an economy, everyone understands the reviled politics of the party practicing leech economics, and nobody wants to be identified as such.

So print up them there bumper stickers ya'll... punch out those campaign buttons; and get out those yard signs. "Would you rather be a man or a leech" has the unlimited potential of  a campaign slogan that could go down in history-- if it wins the vote.

Hence victory is in the offing, if enough people are willing to give it a shot.

The man vs. leech strategy would be a sensation on the internet, the same way Obama won in 2008, and a pathway for republican victory in 2010 and 2012 . It would unite voters on the web, and shore up the base .

And who would be able to resist such a provocative slogan? It's appealing; its beguiling: the democrats on capitol Hill-- all pegged haplessly as leeches.

Finally, the republicans would get the last laugh! And what do they have to lose?

The leech strategy gives the republicans the upper hand. It gives them a non-pareil offensive weapon that they haven't had since the days of Reagan--a rallying point!

Elections are versatile animals: they can succeed because of a magnetic candidate, or they can be won because of a magnetic slogan.

And for all you arch-conservative Republicans out there-- still clinging to the legacy of Reagan, who see this whole thing as totally frivolous -- have you got any better idea?

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com
Tags: leaches  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gobal warmongering? Climate changers? Islamic aggressors? When the U.N. attacks!


Almost 65 years ago, in September of 1944, U.S., British, Soviet, and Chinese representatives met at Dumbarton Oaks in Washington to draft the charter of a postwar international peacekeeping organization based on the principle of collective security. It provided for a General Assembly of all member states, and a Security Council .

Voting procedures were finalized at the Yalta Conference in early 1945; and finally, representatives of 50 nations met in San Francisco in June 1945 to complete the final Charter of the United Nations.

And after this promising post-World War II beginning for the U.N., things have gone south ever since.
 
Today the United Nations has morphed from the world's peacemaker, to universal rabble rouser, sticking their collective noses into everything but making peace.
 
Exhibit A-- Islamic countries recently won United Nation's backing for an anti-blasphemy measure, which Canada (and other Western critics) said, "risks being used to limit freedom of speech".

This measure, "The Defamation of Religions," passed 85-50, with 42 abstentions in a key UN General Assembly committee, and will enter into the international record after an expected rubber stamp by the U.N. plenary council later this year.
 
It's an obvious (and ominous) victory for Muslim religious fascists -- they can now exploit a human rights approach towards silencing any dissent of which they disapprove.
 
And already the resolution has stirred controversy within Europe: U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, recently condemned as “offensively anti-Islamic,” a Dutch lawmaker’s film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence.

The film, which was launched by Islam critic Geert Wilders over the Internet, caused enough resentment that the Sec. General appealed for calm to those “understandably" offended by it....“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is NOT at stake here.”
 
An ominous statement indeed, and a possible violation of our First Amendment right to free speech in the United States.
 
Actually, what's being proposed is not just some campaign for religious freedom of expression, but rather a sinister collective movement-- the parallel government of the entire world.

But while the draft's sponsors say it (and earlier similar measures) are aimed at preventing violence against worshippers regardless of religion, religious tolerance advocates warn the resolutions are being accumulated for a hidden ulterior motive... providing international cover for domestic anti-blasphemy laws.

While the current resolution is non-binding, the anti-blasphemy decree would impose its terms on signatory states.

So here's the good ole, peace-keeping, peace-loving UN, busy at work in a back door ploy of upholding the tenets of radical Islamic fundamentalism, which purports: "An Islamic believer must be serious in every field...There are no jokes in Islam...There is no humor in Islam... There is no fun in Islam".                 

And the trend in America (should we become a signatory) is more ominous; more religious segregation; more Muslim demands within the public schools: the permission to wear headscarves; the demand for prayer rugs; special cafeteria provisions; separate gymnasium classes; and ultimately, classroom Sharia law, begetting a parallel society within a supposedly melting pot country-- our Unites States.
 
Yes, give 'em an inch and they take a society hostage by their own form of cultural jihad--subversion of America's schools and colleges-- religious aggression under the guise of cultural awareness.
 
And where does it stop within our domestic borders? Separate schools? Separate laws? Separate cultures? Parallel societies?

As those old timers in Flatbush used to say at Ebbets Field in Brooklyn... "throw da bums out!" Should we expel the U.N., before they exploit America to the point of no return?
 
How much more do we yield to these deceitful aggressors before they have their own Muslim governing bodies within America? This is where we're headed if this liberal, fascist aggression isn't stopped dead in its cultural tracks.

But fostering controversy instead of peace has been the UN's stock in trade for the last two decades.

So now, we move to exhibit B-- U.N. radical environmentalism-- the attempt by the organization to become the power center of the world's political universe.

And demonstrative of the UN's covert strategy has been their insatiable, chicken little attempt to convince the world that the climatalogical sky is falling: the global warmongering drumbeat of climate change.
 
Armed with "expert" climate models, the UN's IPCC maintains that, "Global warming will continue and even intensify in the 21st century."

Vladimir Katsov, the head of a geophysics laboratory in Russia (and member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), agreed with the IPCC's estimate that the temperature would rise by 1.8 to 4*Centigrade by the end of the century.

Katsov said..."Warming is likely to influence the intensity of precipitation, floods and droughts, affecting crops and probably triggering migration...and future conflict for ever scarcer water and fertile soil resources.

In a report published in Paris, the UN climate panel - a group of 2,500 scientists from 130 countries tasked with assessing climatic changes-- pronounced its latest chicken little post over the internet: "Humanity might face a rise in global sea levels of 5 to 7 inches in the coming years, saying this climate change was, "very likely, man-made".

IPCC scientist Chris Field of Stanford University also weighed in: "Without decisive action, global warming in the 21st century is likely to accelerate at a much faster pace and cause more environmental damage than predicted".

Chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri added that...
"Concerns about climate change and public awareness on the subject are at an all time high."

Established by the United Nations in 1988, the IPCC brings together hundreds of so-called "experts" from around the world, to assess the science and policy implications of climate change. And In 2007 the IPCC, and the beloved Al Gore, were simultaneously awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
 
Ah yes--who else-- Al Gore!

But besides Gore, who are all rest of these pretenders who claim that a 3 to 4 degree increase will burn our good earth to a cinder in this 21st century? They are nothing more than an assemblage of self-appointed "experts", at odds with thousands of true scientists and physicists who know climate change is a hoax, but are silenced by the one thing that perpetuates this entire sham --the liberal media.

It's the media, who will plaster any report all over the front pages, whenever the IPCC chooses to come out with yet another of its many gloom-n-doom scenarios; portending that the climate apocalypse will soon be at a threshhold level.
 
So according to this IPCC cast of characters; what are we do about it?

Should we be filling up sandbags to stop the rising oceans from invading our doorsteps...or preparing to live underground to escape the inevitable temperature holocaust? Or how about mandatory flood insurance for every household along the seacoasts?

Yes-- were in the good hands of the IPCC-- here  to save us from the impending disaster. And like the robot from "Lost in Space", it's, "Warning -warning -warning...doomsday ahead! We are the IPCC; and don't you forget it".

But curiously, the heralded members of the IPCC panel conducts no scientific research of their own.
 
But with Al Gore behind it all, you know there's an ulterior motive hidden in there somewhere. And why would the UN persist in these baseless, phony warnings if there wasn't some master plan behind it all?
 
And that motive, of course, is cap and trade-- the scam of the century-- based on the dumbed-down scientific ignorance of the American population, demonizing the very life gas all humans exhale, and plants inhale for their photosynthetic processing of chlorophyll-- carbon dioxide!

Yes-- demon carbon dioxide-- supposedly the cause for the nonexistent global warming, that is scientifically at odds with nearly all other mainstream scientists.
 
So what’s the endgame?

It's the hot air from our good buddy Al Gore, who's been concealing his true interest in stubbornly promulgating the scam--Generation Investment Management.

Question: If his motivation in pushing Global Warming is so altruistic, was it really necessary for the already wealthy Gore to establish this multi-million dollar corporation in England?
 
Generation Investment Management's U.S. branch is headed by a former Gore staffer and fund-raiser, Peter S. Knight, who once was the target of a probe by the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice.
  
Gore helped found Generation Investment Management through which he (and others) pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe.

Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income and will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he "buys" his "carbon offsets" from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy "carbon offsets" through Generation Investment Management - he buys stock in the company.
  
Fascinating -the great Gore green delusion.

Gore's carbon credits scam, and the IPCC warnings, are based not upon climatalogical factors, but on economic ones-- a third world wealth transfer done incognito through the U.N.
 
And once the Obama administration mandates that the U.S. government establishes an overall emissions cap, and assigns specific emissions allocations, it will not tell industries and companies what to do or how to meet their allocations.

Each company is free to make their own choices. They can reduce their own emissions-- or pay someone else to lower them--drastically raising the utility bills of every American household, and the slow and inevitable draining of the wealth of the middle class.

And beneath the surface, this climate-change guilt trip will ultimately result in nothing more than an excuse to tax energy users and providers, with the U.N. as the ultimate beneficiary.

Cap and trade will assure that America will shrink its economy, on the absurd premise that fossil fuel energy usage emits far too much CO2, and companies will end up purchasing these cap and trade credits from smaller drone nations, which emit miniscule amounts of CO2, because they have no industry-- they produce nothing.

And all these carbon credit payments may ultimately end up being distributed to third world dictators abroad.

The goal? Increasing the worldwide political power of the UN, and projecting the influence of the Obama administration to all the world's continents...thereby assuring Barack Obama eventually arises as the defacto president of the entire world, with buddy Al Gore standing at his side, as one of the world's wealthiest men.
 
And ironically, if one were to attach the word "American" after the initials "U N", it would read-- UN-American.


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