About Me

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

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Barack's dirty laundry

Happy Anniversary Mr. President!
 
After one tepid year in the Whitehouse, still we ask: "Who is Barack Obama? Does anyone really know him?"
 
Remember all the fanfare on that uncommonly warm night in Chicago's Grant Park, where Obama addressed a tearful crowd - both white and black - ever anticipitory that nation's racial problems were finally at an end?
 
During that coronation speech, America watched in beguilement as their charismatic President-elect spoke so elequently- believing he could actually transform his stirring message of hope into reality!
 
Gee. Whatever happened to that?
 
Barack Obama has turned out to be an empty suit. An image. A brand. Hyped by the media as though he could walk on water - parting the turbulent seas of America's racial divide; but the chasm has only grown wider.
 
America has fallen callow victim to mass deception: That Obama was a new type of politician. That he should be held not so much as the first black man to be president, but rather the improbable all-American story - one of rising from single-parenthood, and through sheer will, finally makes it all the way to the Whitehouse!
 
And who wouldn't buy that?
 
But now we know: the American electorate has been SOLD a bill of goods - denied knowledge of the true heritage of the man elected America's 44th (and most divisive) President.
 
A man deserted in childhood by his biological father - whose birth records, both in the United States and Kenya, are sealed by government order.
 
His adolescent mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, taught Barry Sotero his fundamental outlook on life:
 
Davis spied on U.S. military installations in Hawaii for the Soviet Union; edited a communist newspaper; authored pornographic novels, and wrote poetry in praise of Joseph Stalin. And Barry Sotero chose to adopt him as a surrogate father.
 
Yes, who really IS Barack Obama?
 
A man who had promised "transparency" in government, but spends millions in legal fees hiding information that would determine his eligibility to be President.
 
He is a former drug user - once accused of offering cocaine to a Chicago limousine driver who'd taken him to a Rush Street nightclub in 1999.
 
A man about whom liberal journalist Tom Brokaw once said...“There’s a lot about him we don’t know.”
 
Do we know anything of Obama's academic records? They remained sealed - from kindergarten through law school.
 
Do we know how Obama could have arrived in New York in June of 1981, lacking enough money to get a hotel room; but yet a month later, he tours Indonesia and Pakistan?
 
What country’s passport did he use? Who's name was it in? Is Barack Obama his true legal name? Or is it Barry Sotero? Could even Sherlock Holmes crack the case of this mystery man, who just happens to be PRESIDENT?
 
Vinai Thummalapally, his roommate at Columbia, describes him as a mediocre student. Robert McCrary, former classmate at Occidental, saw Obama as "cocky, sometimes arrogant...and not open to others."
 
A man whose Law School Admission Test scores and grades were barely acceptable -but was admitted to Harvard via intervention of a "Saudi" businessman," Khalid al-Mansour - aka Don Warden- the black nationalist founder of the renowned Afro-American Association, which included Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, and Maulana Karenga - the founder of "Kwanza."

Barack Obama - a person in whom others always see great “potential,” but never actually does anything with his supposedly prodigious talents.
 
After entering law school, Obama becomes the only Harvard Law Review editor who never publishes in ANY law journal. He is later lauded for the "literary brilliance" of his two, ghost-written memoirs.
 
Obama then graduates as a lawyer, but with no significant accomplishments - no reputation in the legal community. The records at his old law firm are officially listed as "thrown out."
 
What cases did he represent? How did all of his state Senate records disappear?
 
Barack Obama, former U.S. Senator, who never authored a single piece of legislation.
 
A disciple of the Marxist Saul Alinsky.
 
A man with more skeletons in the closet than a house of horrors. A walking-talking encyclopedia of endless innuendo.
 
From his humble beginnings as a $13,000 /year a community organizer, Mr. Obama most certainly has done himself well.
 
A product of the thug-laden Chicago political machine. A man with Marxists, corrupt politicians, and criminals as personal friends. Obama conceals everything- yet claims to hide nothing. One example is his relation with William Ayers - the local terrorist..."just a guy in the neighborhood".
 
Sure.
 
Then there's that cryptic rumor of a mysterious arms-dealer, who becomes a billionaire; then funnels money to Tony Rezko, who subsequently helps Obama obtain an expensive house? Hmmm. Do we know the real story behind that?
 
Where's the National Enquirer when we need them?
 
While running for President, Obama is endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America, Socialist International; Workers International League; and of course, that patriotic, flag-waving organization - ACORN.
 
Obama publicly laments slavery in America - abolished 150 years ago - but praises Islam, which practices bigamy and sexual mutilation of young females.
 
A man who speaks endlessly about helping the less fortunate, but gives no income to charity. A man with the most left-wing voting record in the United States Senate, but then promises to “govern from the middle.”
 
A man who has never even had a paper route, but tells Detroit how to make cars.
 
A Commander-in-grief who doesn’t know how to shoot a rifle, but publicly divulges the nation’s most important intelligence secrets.
 
A man who's added more to the national debt in 120 days than all other Presidents in the past 220 years, yet often speaks of “fiscal responsibility”.
 
A man with such unbridled vanity that he gives the Queen of England his personal gift - an iPod containing recordings of his own speeches.
 
A President who scoffs at being called a socialist; yet nationalizes the auto industry, the major banks, and segments of the insurance industry; and now wants to nationalize the healthcare industry.
 
A President who says that science will guide his administration , but has no formal science education.
 
A President expressing disdain for the U.S. Constitution, because it limits the government’s ability to “ redistribute" wealth.
 
A President who decries the atmospheric "poisoning" by fossil fuels, yet flies around the world in Air Force One with an entourage akin to a rock star. 
 
A President who swore an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies,” yet has nominated a reverse-racist, domestic enemy to the Supreme Court.
 
A President canceling all missile defenses, while rogue nations develop long-range ballistic missiles.
 
A President who thinks “waterboarding” is immoral, but insists partial-birth abortion remain legal.
 
A President who decrees acts of terrorism are now to be deemed “man-made disasters," lest he offend his sacred Muslim brothers.
 
A President who berates American CEO’s for flying in private planes, but whose wife spends hundreds of thousands taxpayer dollars flying to Paris monthly to shop.
 
A President who promised transparency, but requires the screening of all questions.
 
A man who freely admits his energy policies will bankrupt the American coal industry -increasing the average American’s annual utility bills by over $2,000 in the teeth of a severe recession.
 
A man who heroically SAVED more jobs than any other modern sitting US president- but somehow managed to LOSE seven million since taking the oath of Office.
 
The first act of the Obama mystery has unfolded, with America still largely unaware of who he actually is - while the chasm between reality and the Obama fantasy has grown only wider.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The ultimate hate crime

 

What IF?

It's February 2010, and a newly-emboldened democratic Congress - having successfully passed healthcare, cap 'n trade, and card check- now seeks to eradicate ALL possibility of "voter disenfranchisement."

A new bill speeds through both chambers, called the "Americans for Fair Elections Act." Nancy Pelosi calls it "breakthrough legislation." Harry Reid dubs it, "America's best way to assure increased participation in the democratic process."

 

But the proposal is neither; in fact, quite the OPPOSITE: It enables anyone - any John Doe or Mary Smith - to go to ANY library or post office (similar to filing one's income tax) and pick up an absenteee ballot form; fill it out, sign, and mail in. Universal voting by mail.

 

Just before the final measure is voted on in the Senate, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) comes forth with his amendment, allowing that any voter can pick up additional blank ballots and distribute them to other "voters" in their county as they see fit - no limitations on number.

 

Sound improbable? Think again! Democrats everywhere are out to subvert our inviolable electoral process, and are slowly but surely getting away with it!

 

ITEM: April 15, 2008, Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner introduces her proposal permitting every Ohio county the option of asking voters whether they want to conduct elections entirely by mail: Ohio's legislature would give counties the authority to put a vote-by-mail issue on the ballot. Brunner's reasoning? Counties would find voting by mail "more convenient" and "less expensive" than opening polls on Election Day. Brunner also wants more early-voting locations, and early drop-off points for absentee ballots.

 

ITEM: Because of the efforts of Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts State Legislature grants the Senator's dying wish - authorizing  Governor Duval Patrick to immediately name an interim U.S. Senator - bypassing a pre-existing law, requiring a 90-day wait.


ITEM: In Minnesota, "relaxed" voter laws permit people to register & vote on election day at the polling sites. There is no ID requirement. No way of confirming residence within the precinct - or whether they're even CITIZENS. If you've registered before the election, you simply tell them your name and vote - no ID required.

ITEM: The "Association for Community Organizers Now" fight a pending lawsuit in Allegheny County, Pa., denying that workers use registration quotas as conditions for employment - declaring their mission of preventing voter disenfranchisement. However, ACORN was active in but SEVEN states in the 2008 general election - all falling under the definition of "tossup" or "battleground states."

ITEM: In the New Jersey 2008 election, voters are not required to give a tangible reason - such as illness or travel - to vote absentee. Governor Jon Corzine had been instrumental in the passing of a "no-excuses" absentee voter law in December of 2007.

New Jersey has had more than its share of razor-close gubernatorial elections, starting with Tom Kean's (R) 1,700-vote victory over Jim Florio (D) in 1981, plus two narrow wins by Republican Christie Whitman in the 1990s. Hence,
 the democrats have come prepared: they have "seeded" Hispanic and black districts in Camden and Newark with a deluge of absentee ballots. 


New Jersey has received a flood of 180,000 absentee ballot requests - a ten-fold increase from 2008. On some 3,000 forms, the signature variates with the one on file with county clerks. But citing concerns that "voters would be disenfranchised," New Jersey's secretary of state has been petitioned to NOT deny applications on the basis of signature comparison alone.

Yes, those doggone, nettlesome absentee ballots. What shall we do about them?

With all the paper (and the trees) being used up, plus all that expensive ink; and (horrors) having to buy a first class stamp, plus time wasted in getting to a mailbox - surely there's a better way.

Of  course! Why not telephone voting? What could be more un-disenfranchising than that?

Just think of the effort and taxpayer money saved!

Think of all the "newly-enfranchised" elderly, confined in nursing homes. Think of the homeless - now able to vote over the phone at the local rescue mission. And think about all the prisoners locked within the jails and penitentiaries, who can easily phone in their ballots - spreading democracy to every possible voter in America!

Let no one anywhere be denied the vote!

As ridiculous as it all sounds, will it eventually come to that? Where we permit these out-of-control democratic legislatures (and secretaries of state) to make a mockery of the basic tenet of our democracy - one man...ONE vote. But already, we may have reached the point of no return.

If the Minnesota State (democratic) Supreme Court had not decided against EVERY Norm Coleman challenge to the unequal tallying of absentee ballots - giving Al Franken his tainted, 312 vote victory, would we even be worried about government health care, or card check, or cap 'n trade?

The Senate democrats - having only 59 votes - would not have been able to stop these Stalinlist ideas from being filibustered to death.

Or how about if the Massachusetts legislature had not caved in to Ted Kennedy, and allowed the ninety-day waiting period to stand?

In either case, the radical Senate democrats would have remained one frustrating vote short!

Is this not the most basic form of dis-enfranchisement; where a legislature, secretary of state, or a court acts in denial of the will of the majority...or entirely eliminates Republicans from the legislative process? What more dastardly deed can be done to our democratic republic?
 
For the first time, our nation is threatened by tyranny from within:

-the tyranny of a Congress, who is at war with its own constituents

-the tyranny of state legislatures, who vote for relaxed electoral procedures - making a  travesty of what our Founding Fathers intended

-the tyranny of democratic secretaries of states, continuing to push the envelope ever further toward anytime, anywhere, no-ID-required voting

-the tyranny of democratic Supreme Courts, who uphold any challenges whenever Republicans file lawsuits in state courts 

So good luck all you tea partiers, birthers and talk-show calllers. You're singing to the choir. Your protests are falling on deaf ears.

None of this fraud - where we are now held captive by the margin of but one Senate vote - would have happened if these democrats had not been allowed to get away with it!

Long ago, concerned citizens - in conjunction with republican legislators - should have taken measures to stop the trend, and act in likewise manner to prevent it.

But is it now too late? Now that the absentee ballot "genie" has escaped from the bottle, can it be put bacK?
 
Conservative Americans must unite in one voice and say... "No more election fraud."

This has nothing to do with disenfranchisement - it does have everything to do with preserving democracy, and opposing these democratic subversives, who seek to stack the deck against fair elections, and literally steal every contest decided within a margin of error. 

Can there be any worse crime than stifling the true intent of the majority - replacing it with the chicanery of the minority? Liberal voters are now outnumbered by as much as two to one vs. conservatives and moderates.
Yet liberal candidates have won every recount election in the U.S in the last 15 years.

And conservatives have no one to blame but themselves!

When the Massachusetts legislature was overturning the existing senatorial succession law, were there any tea parties held in front of their chamber - where  a resounding "NO CHANGE" message could have been conveyed to legislators?

When Republican incumbent Norm Coleman continued to lose challenge-after-challenge in that long, drawn-out recount, were there any tea parties held near the Minnesota state capitol to protest this travesty?

Or how about ACORN? Despite the fact that there are voter fraud accusations flying around everywhere, have any of these criminal thugs served for any length of time in prison?

Where is the tea party outrage about that?

Thomas Jefferson once wrote: "One man with courage is a majority."

Will Americans continue to sit back and watch their republic literally seep away every November through the corruption of the electoral process? Do we just sit back and complain about the loss of our liberty? Or do we have the courage to speak out and bitterly oppose it?

Criminals are inherently evil. They always continue their sprees until they are caught and punished; otherwise, they continue to wreak their havoc on those unfortunates who stand in their way.

The analogy is obvious. If these democratic thugs are not thwarted, they will continue their unconscionable voter fraud that permeates our elections - undermining our democracy for their own selfish ends: the perpetuation of power.
  

These are the true hate crimes against America.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Saving commander Obama

 

(QUOTE) "Battles are won by slaughter and maneuver. The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter." - Winston Churchill

 

QUESTION: Is Commander-In-Sneak Obama setting us up another for another "Black Hawk Down" debacle?

 

Is the American public even aware of the rashly irresponsible orders he has issued to our "fighting" troops in Afghanistan - ordering them NOT to fire back - a prelude to certain decimation?

 

And worse - why is our lamestream media ignoring this outrage?

 

Recently, BBC television depicted a U.S. Marine hunkered down in Afghanistan, complaining that..." he was not allowed to shoot back when under fire;" a situation resulting from Obama’s new rules of engagement (ROE) . 

 

Last July, General Stanley McChrystal explained the new ROEs to BBC news: (quote)..."We are now advising troops to break off from firefights with the Taliban...If you are in a situation where you are under fire from the enemy... if there is any chance of creating civilian casualties, if you can withdraw from that situation without firing, then you MUST do so”...(unquote).

 

Remember the pacifist in "Saving Private Ryan" - insisting his squad let their German prisoner go, then later cowered as he watched the same Nazi kill his fellow Americans?

 

This is EXACTLY what our dearly-beloved anti-President is doing to our brave troops! 

 

Yes, it's all the idea of our honorable Commander, Barack H. Obama, who has never spent a day in uniform - not even as a Boy Scout. 

 

So why even bother with issuing such orders?

 

Why not just take away our soldiers' M4 rifles, and equip 'em with squirt guns? Or maybe they can suddenly appear, and shout "boo!" Better yet, use paintball rifles; that way, they can let those nasty Taliban dudes be aware that indeed, they're "marked men."

 

Meanwhile, month-after-month, the increasing casualties of our brave troops - fighting in this mountainous Afghan hell-hole -indicate no forseeable end in sight to the carnage.

 

Last July, patrolling Bravo Company Marines of the 1st Battalion, 5th Regiment in Nawa (Afghanistan) had surprised 40 Taliban insurgents, caught inside a suspicious-looking, isolated compound.

 

The Taliban immediately opened up with automatic weapons and rocket fire:  

 

The Marines could have instantly wiped out the insurgents by calling in an air strike -patrolling overhead.  Instead, they followed the "Obama Rules of Engagement" - show restraint.  The result? One U.S. Marine dead, one wounded, and the Taliban insurgents escaping unharmed out the back door - undoubtedly laughing at the folly - emboldened and free to kill again.

 

Meanwhile, Obama is back in Dover, Delaware showing his "compassion" for 15 recently-arrived deceased troops; solemnly saluting their caskets - "deeply concerned" for the soldiers' grieving families.

 

But why did Obama drag along the cameras? Could not the entire 4 AM ceremony (travesty) have been done just as well in private? 

 

Obama plays the political game; always thinking ahead; never caring about anything other than his own selfish ends - and how he can achieve them at the expense of others: in this case, 15 dead Marines, and three fallen DEA agents.

 

POINT: There never has been a modern war without civilian casualties. Trying to fight one - that the other side has zero civilian deaths  - is impossible.  And to require that our military obey those rules repeats the same mistake over and over again: US Marines dead...Taliban allowed to flee unharmed.

 

Lacking prior military experience, Obama is unaware that in ANY urban environment, civilians are present in almost all firefights.  And his insipid rule only encourages the Taliban to hide amongst civilians - hence "the chance" of ALWAYS creating civilian casualties.

 

Think about it. Is this not tantamount to allowing the enemy to "fire at will", but requiring our soldiers to cower and take it?

 

And what about the horrid roadside bombs that continue to kill and maim our soldiers?

 

Does Obama not realize that Afghan "farmers" (camouflaged as such) can go about planting these devices at will - feigning as though they were doing road repairs, or even agiculture? What is this president thinking? Certainly not about the welfare of our troops!

 

Does he not seem more concerned with his Moslem "brother" enemy?


Is this not Vietnam revisited, where another fool democratic president callously played politics with the lives of our soldiers, refusing to give them the means to win?

 

This would otherwise be laughable, notwithstanding winning a war; and the life & death struggles of our American combatants. 

 

Does not being President mean the responsibilty of the entire U.S. armed forces, the most powerful on earth? And yet we have what appears to be nothing other than a political and media circus.

 

Other than the Constitution, what qualifies this unfeeling man to be our Commander in Chief?

  

But then again, what did we expect? Our Muslim "President" protecting his Muslim brothers.

 

Not surprisingly, Germany has now been pressured to alter its ROE (Rules of Engagement) for its troops in Afghanistan. While the 3,400 German troops have always been restricted from seeking firefights, they are increasingly getting attacked by the Taliban-  now aware of the new German ROE's, and taking full advantage of it.

And from a more recent BBC news story: (quote)..."the restrictive Rules Of Engagement have become a growing embarrassment for thousands of German soldiers arriving home, who had served in Afghanistan, and have continued to complain bitterly about those rules after returning."

Barack Obama is signing the death warrants of our troops with insanity such as this. 

 
But why?

 

Is Obama deliberately trying to discourage the military through injury, and people not re-enlisting? What recruit would want to serve under a Commmander -in-Chief, not having his best interests at heart, who would side with the enemy rather than his own nation’s troops?

 

Is this yet another Democratic President who uses the military for his own aims, or to "make a statement?"

 

Sadly, our Founding Fathers should have included this one critical requirement in our Constitution:  Article 10, Sec. 2..."Never having served in the armed forces, the newly-elected be not allowed to serve as President."

Ironically, could one have crafted a BETTER set of engagement rules to all but guarantee our troops are eventually killed, and the war could never be won? Shame on the Chiefs of Staff for approving them, let alone ordering our soldiers into harms way under them.

Could such an order be considered  treasonous?  Setting our troops up to maintain a defenseless presence, thereby allowing Obama to appease his Left? Hence, we have 20,000 troops conducting their missions with their hands tied. And Obama further jeopardizing them by deciding to either send - or not send - even more. 

.

Indeed, all we hear is, "Not enough troops! Send more troops.” But if Obama finally does send more troops, what then? They will remain soldiers with no capacity to fight back, unless one can first PROVE whom it actually is before taking aim.  

 

This is a recipe for disaster...a lose/lose situation for our soldiers. If they follow these directives, many more will die. If they do not follow them, many face Court Martial for failure to follow orders.

 

If this doesn't PROVE that Obama is an incompetent commander in chief, what does? Or does he harbor some insidious ulterior motive?

 

Once again..."The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter." Is Obama deliberately ordering our troops into harms way, then to stand down and take it?

 

In all the annals of ancient and modern warfare, has there ever been a general who ordered his soldiers not to fire back? How long would he have remained in command? Would he not be rendered a laughing stock of history, similar to Neville Chamberlain? 

 

One cannot help but arrive at the obvious conclusion: who's side is Obama on? Could this be grounds for an impeachable offense? What if Bush had acted in such reckless fashion?

 

Do the Marines have their weapons pointed at the wrong people?


Our internal enemies seem much more dangerous.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Great Huckabee

 
Jim DeMint for President?
 
Why Not?
 
Sure sounds a lot better than "Mike Huckabee."
 
For one thing, doesn't "Huckabee" sound like some fugitive character from the Andy Griffith show?
 
(begin dialogue)
 
"Hey Opie, where ya goin'?"
"I'm going fishin' with Huckabee."
"Well that's fine son. Have a good time; Oh 'n be sure to tell Aunt Bee when you'll be back; she's gettin' ready to bake some of her mighty fine elderberry turnovers."
"Oh BOY!" Se ya' later Pa."
 
But before we go any further, let's give "Huckabee" his due: As they say in ol' Mayberry, (quote)..."That Mike Huckabee plays a mighty fine ghee-tar on Saturday Night. Sure does!"
 
Indeed; it's everyone's highlight of the weekend: tuning into Fox cable, and watching Mike Huckabee play "wanna-be-a-rock star." Now mute the sound.  See if you can tell the difference from the Ted Mack Original Amateur Hour- only without the applause meter.
 
Even funnier than the amateurs performing on Huckabee's hillbilly horror show is the vain attempt by Fox to portray him as some great soothsayer - as if he were the hallowed conscience of the Republican party.
 
Yes, whenever those nasty, dastardly libs from the Obama administration say/do something outrageous, we immediately run to our remotes...click on Fox, just in time to catch... "and here with us tonight to comment is Mike Huckabee..."
 
Who even pays any attention to this scab? This political pretender. 
 
Who (or what) is this Huckabee anyway? What does he stand for, other than the flat tax? Worse, whenever someone even mentions "the flat tax," do your eyes not roll around, then glaze over? Can you imagine a yard-sign/bumper sticker in 2012, that says..."Vote Huckabee; he's for the flat tax"
 
How lame can you get?
 
Doesn't "the flat tax " sound like something to oppose? Who, besides the even lamer Steve Forbes, even talks about the stupid thing? Yet Huckabee acts as if supporting a flat tax will tide him to glorious victory!
 
Rejoice conservatives! It'll be Republicans winning going away in 2012 -riding into office on the great Huckabee's coat-tails; the country awash with people clamoring for his electrifying, stupendous flat tax!  Hallelujah!
 
CONCLUSION: Mike Huckabee needs to retire from politics and get on with his life's work...reincarnating the once-popular Ted Mack format of the good ol' days, so he can continue to hold America spellbound every Saturday night on Fox, with his homespun talent show.
 
But a presidential candidate? No way.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Spreading the wealth? Or sharing the misery?


Watch any of the classic World War II movies:

 

Sink the Bismarck; Guns of Navarone; Longest Day; Battleground; Battle of the Bulge; Patton; Saving Private Ryan. One cannot help but be dazzled by the villainous Germans, and their ruthless efficiency. 

 

They wore slick uniforms; fought with unbelievable weaponry; they had an intense, precisely-organized Prussian approach to war - compared to the "laid back," improvisational method of the Americans.

 

The Nazis had all the best armaments. The renowned Bismarck...Tiger tanks...the 88mm cannon...the M42 machine gun...ME 262 jet fighters; V-2 rockets. Yet they lost to the Americans, with their flimsy Sherman tanks, and lumbering B-17 bombers.

 

Obviously then, it begs the question: How did the Americans manage to win?  

 

But to those who had lived through that era, they would reply, "We out-produced 'em".

 

Indeed; immediately after Pearl Harbor, the incredible wartime economic shift in the USA took place with amazing rapidity:

 

Ford and GM quickly changed over their assembly lines to producing tens of thousands of jeeps, trucks, and tanks. Arsenals in the Midwest manufactured shells and cartridges by the millions.

 

Boeing, North American, Douglass, Curtiss, Grumman, et al. hired hundreds of thousands of aviation workers; and by mid-1943, were turning out thousands of warplanes every month to be shipped to the ports of departure on our two coasts.

 

No less impressive was the remarkable wartime re-organization of the railroads, instrumental in shipping the weapons of war - plus the oil and gasoline to fuel them - running on precise wartime schedules.

 

But the key to it all was STEEL; and the workers who labored on 12-hour shifts - seven days a week - in the booming mills that produced it.

 

The Germans had their gigantic Krupp works in the Ruhr Valley. We had Pittsburgh, Gary Indiana, and Youngstown.

 

If one had been living in any of three major steel towns during the war, they would recall the smokey, orange-hazed night sky. Crashing noises from the mills. Train whistles blaring at night.

 

15 to 20 minute waits at railroad crossings were commonplace during the 1940's.

 

Now, trains are a rare sight; you might hear one at night. 

 

Nowadays, because of the scrap metal boom, most traces of the old steel mills have literally vanished. The air around Pittsburgh, Gary and Youngstown is pristine, compared to the days of steel prosperity, before the major manufacturers began shutting down.

 

But why - for the most part - the absence of steel making in America? Were we to fight another prolonged war, what then?

 

First came the incompetent Jimmy Carter of the late 1970's, who's lack of foresight started our steel-manufacturing demise.

 

It was he, plus his fool Attorney General, Griffin Bell, who had denied the lawsuits of the fired steelworkers, who were suing the major steel companies on the premise that by closing down their plants, it would bring not only local economic calamity, but also risk our national security (in the event of war).  

 

Then came Reagan...Bush...Clinton. Need we go on? 

 

Promises, promises. All initially promised they'd bring manufacturing and steel jobs back to those distressed rust belt towns; but after their elections, they were probably just too darn busy to get around to it...but they sure meant well.

 

Of course, over the past few decades, it’s been cheaper to import steel manufactured in foreign countries. 

 

But that doesn’t mean that America's steel industry is doomed. Many mills are actively producing high-quality specialty steels for specific markets requiring it. Demand for seamless pipe for the oil drillers has remained especially strong.

 

On the contrary, in the coming months & years, many economists predict heavy manufacturing is going to make a comeback in America; although nowhere near the heydays of the 40's, 50's and 60's.

 

But it all remains contingent on the availability of cheap energy.

 

Today, moderately strong world steel demand, higher global prices, a weak dollar, high ocean freight rates- all are acting as a disincentive for steel imports, with a concomitant rise in strength of our slowly-recovering domestic steel industry.

 

Hence, once the economy improves, an expected rise in demand portends good times ahead for US steel makers...except for one "X-factor" now ominously looming on the horizon: the bizarre environmentalism of the Obama administration - and the green fanatics looming within both halls of Congress.

 

And what do they have in store for us? Prosperity? Another Great Depression? Who can even explain their motives, other than ruin?

 

In a time of severe recession; a real unemployment rate hovering around 16%, with no end to the job losses in sight, and ever more families seeking food stamps, Barack Obama and the Senate democrats have chosen "climate change" as their priority.

 

Never mind that polls reveal less than 10% of Americans even care about climate change, or the bizarre premise that the earth is warming. They feel otherwise. They don't believe it; nor can find evidence of it in their daily lives.

 

But those same polls reveal that the vast majority are DEEPLY worried about the economy: 

 

They DO see the suffering that's evident around them, as wave-after-wave of job losses keep rippling through the nation, with no end in sight.

 

But Barack Lunatic Obama seems to feel otherwise:

 

Incredibly, this vainglorious man is encouraging the Senate put “Cap-and-Trade” on a fast track to passage, so he can go to Copenhagen this December and crow heroically (to the European socialists) that the United States is now the leader in the green energy revolution- saving the world from the non-existent threat of global warming!

 

But as they say...misery loves company.

 

The European nations have ruined their own socialist economies after adopting the insipid, job-destroying, "green energy revolution" - and are mired in deep recession. So naturally, they're exerting enormous pressure on Obama to do likewise.

 

Hence, he is quite bound and determined to please them. He seeks glory in Copenhagen. He wants to arrive there, triumphantly waving his victorious Climate Change law to the world, proclaiming the damnation of fossil fuels for all time!

 

And if it sparks an inevitable downward slide of the US economy - so be it.

 

But we know Cap 'n Trade has nothing to do with the climate; in reality it will be the fast track to economic ruin.

 

Cap and Trade will tax all energy use in America, spelling disaster for the energy-intensive steel industry, let alone how it will destroy another 30-50% of what remains of our manufacturing base.

 

But liar Obama remains in full campaign mode, running around the country, happily proclaiming his favorite mantra about how his plan (scam) "will generate millions of new green jobs."

 

Sure it will.

 

In reality, it will generate millions of newly-unemployeds, now dependent on their monthly Obama check for survival.

 

Cap and trade will inevitably destroy the coal industry. It will all but level the budding recovery in our steel industry. It will put people who work as drillers and refiners on the unemployment lines.

 

But it will produce a great spike in the economy- in China.

 

As the cost of manufacturing gradually rises over this next decade, we'll witness millions of jobs fleeing offshore in the inexorable search of higher profits. The laws of economics cannot be repealed. Those countries offering the lowest production costs (energy-taxation) always emerge the victors. 

 

Meanwhile, the entire United States gradually becomes a massive, California-like disaster, as the radical environmentalism of the1980's that ruined that state is foisted upon the rest of the country, by none other than the mean-spirited diminutive weasel from San Francisco, Barbara Boxer- proud sponsor of the Senate climate bill.

 

Obama's insistence of switching to higher cost wind/solar generated electricity (and other alternatives) is less than a zero-sum game. Any green jobs created are more than offset by the loss of conventional energy jobs- hurting the US manufacturing sector which requires reasonably-priced energy to compete in the global marketplace.

 

Higher energy prices literally ruin the economies of scale in every facet of our lives.

 

Look for the doubling and trebling of our electric bills; five dollar-a-gallon gasoline; and keeping our houses at a shivering, European-like 59* at night.

 

And what about the inevitable spike in food prices? Or the fact that school after school will be forced to close down - or seek higher tax levies - as their energy costs skyrocket, and teachers are laid off en masse. Has anyone considered that?

 

And for what? Because of preventing too much carbon dioxide - a gas humans exhale  -from "poisoning" the air?

 

Meanwhle, what's the first thing Mr. Obama will do after returning from Copenhagen next December 19, having accepting the world's accolades for pushing through his destructive plan?

 

Of course; he'll go to his oval office; crank up the heat to 80*, roll up his shirtsleeves, put his feet up on the desk; light a cigarette and think..."what a country!" 

 

Meanwhile, millions of the newly unemployed, and millions more miners, blue collar workers, and others worried about their futures, will think..."What a president- aarrgh!"

 

Thanks Mr. Obama; have a Merry Christmas.

 

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

Republicans battered again


Let us give thanks:

 

Yes; be glad to know that our nice friends at the "Association for Community Organizers for Reform Now" have a new defender – the esteemed Alan Grayson.

 

So how did still another democratic leftist manage to get elected to the 111th Congress?

 

Simple.

 

Alan Grayson - the self-acclaimed Congressmen from ACORN - funded 70% of his 2008 election campaign himself. Mr. Grayson also "won" the endorsement of the left-leaning regional media.

 

In the weeks preceding the November 2008 election, the "Orlando Sentinel" printed four different editorials, in an attempt to water down strong support for incumbent Republican Rick Keller, who previously had held the traditionally conservative central Florida 8th district seat.

 

Not surprisingly, Grayson won by the usual ACORN chicanery.

 

He was the beneficiary of nearly 70% of the "early" votes cast; and although losing to Keller in the outlying rural counties (Osceola-Lake-Marion) he won in Orange county, helped by strong support of ethnic Puerto Ricans, SEIU members, Convention Center employees, Disney World, Universal Studios, plus the tourist hotel workers.

 

Although Republicans have tagged Grayson as a "loud-mouthed idiot-embarrassment" to the people of central Florida, that's EXACTLY what Rahm Emanuel - who "imported" this New York thug to run in a heavily-red district - wants them to think.

 

Grayson represents all the democratic party stands for: big government, and the full socialization of the US economy by 2015. And what can stop him? The Republicans under estimate this monster at their own peril!

 

So who is Alan Grayson? Just check out his hard left resume and judge for your self :

 

Originally from the Bronx, NY; educated at Harvard (Karl Marx U); worked for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in DC where he was further indoctrinated to the left, while working at her husband's Washington law firm; moved to Florida to get elected; finally made it on Obama's coat tails; 13th wealthiest member of Congress.

 

WARNING: Grayson's Republican opponent in 2010 will need heavy support to oust this most clever democrat. Yet Republicans are taking his demise for granted, and all because of what? That Grayson is obnoxious?

 

Wake up, Republican fools, Grayson acts obnoxious for a reason! It works! It draws this previously unknown slimeball ATTENTION.

 

In summer of 2008, Grayson drove around Orlando with one of those "Bush lied/People died" bumper stickers - yet still managed to win in November in a Republican district.

 

This August, Grayson held a contrived Town Hall meeting in a tiny Union hall, right AFTER holding a meeting with union members; thus all available seats were occupied, leaving non-union constituents haplessly stranded outside.

 

And just how clever is Mr.Grayson - supposedly some foot-in-the-mouth jerk who somehow made it to Congress?

 

POINT: Before being elected, Attorney Alan Grayson worked extensively on uncovering and combating contractor fraud in Iraq; and rather amazingly, was the ONLY counsel to win a corruption case against a defense contractor during the Bush administration

 

POINT: When asked to put into context ACORN's impact on the American taxpayer, Grayson replied: "The amount of money that ACORN has received in the past 20 years altogether is roughly equal to what the taxpayer paid to Haillburton each DAY during the war in Iraq."

 

POINT: Grayson is a founder of the "Alliance for Aging Research" which is supposedly a non-profit organization getting research grants - mostly stem cell research. This organization also receives funding for various "elderly health issue" related projects. Hence, Grayson stands to benefit handsomely from the Public Option.

 

POINT: Grayson publicly came out AGAINST Henry Waxman's cap 'n trade bill last June; but at the "last minute" dropped his stand against the energy tax after Waxman personally bribed him with a phony, $50 million pork project for Orlando - the National Center for Hurricane Research (yes, we'll soon learn how to prevent those nasty, level 4 hurricanes)

 

POINT: Last spring, ACORN made a personal stop at Mr.Grayson's Orlando district office to "thank" the Congressman for supporting Barack Obama’s budget; which of course, clandestinely funnels taxpayer money into ACORN's coffers.

 

Since the Obama administration is 100% behind Grayson - despite his so-called "gaffes" (all intentional) - this is all the more reason for Republicans to GET SERIOUS about defeating this bully, who threatens conservatives - not just in central Florida -but throughout the entire Republican party itself.

 

Who can remember any Congressmen bearing such arrogance (save for the odious Chuck Schumer), who is more articulate, more self-assured, and has an inherent knack for returning barbs aimed directly at him, with even greater political effect?

 

The Republicans foolishly discount Grayson's masterful, Alinsky-esque rhetoric:

 

Argue NOT the issue. Don't refute with facts or evidence. Just ridicule and call names; typical communist tactics - but with incredible damaging effect!

 

EXAMPLE: Grayson personally erased all Republican "death panel" momentum in public opinion polls vs. government-run health care -standing on the House floor and asking rhetorically: "What is the Republican plan? They want you to die quickly." Grayson has since received a net inflow of $2.5 MILLION dollars for his campaign war chest, rendering him virtually UNBEATABLE for the 2010 election.

 

CONCLUSION: Alan Grayson is God's gift to the Left.

 

He is a consummate liar. He lies about Republican proposals; lies about the Democrat's plan to tax the middle class into poverty. He refuses to address statistics that prove that the Democratic socialist agenda will put many mid-size and small businesses, OUT of business.

 

Grayson is already one of the best at spinning - and outright lying - to the media and his constituents.

 

Grayson is on Barney Frank's banking committee - a sponsor of the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009." It would impose government controls on all employee pay (not just top executives) of companies receiving funds from the U.S. government - altering the compensation agreements already in place.

 

He is one of 83 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus- basically communists masquerading as..."those bringing together the collective wisdom of progressives inside and outside of Congress" (their mission statement).

 

Can you picture Alan Grayson in the Senate, whereupon he would be more than likely to serve for life? Well that's just what the DNC has planned for their newest rising superstar.

 

Ah yes; we'll have Pelosi, Frank, Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer, Durbin, Hoyer, Waxman, Waters, Weiner, Nadler... and NOW Grayson, driving the Marxist agenda into our living rooms; as we yell and scream at the television, faced with the prospect of watching these leftist cretins be perpetually re-elected for the remainder of their political lives.

 

And what are the savants from the Republican National Committee planning for their newest, and possibly most dangerous threat of all?

 

Delusions! Pretensions! Naively assuming that "the conservative people of central Florida will vote this idiot from office."

 

Sure.

 

Every Republican should be scared to death of Grayson. The RNC undoubtedly won't throw enough money into the 2010 race- not when their resources are so limited.

   

Grayson is loaded. He has his own personal wealth. Whichever of his GOP challengers survives the primary will have little name recognition, and not enough money, as the GOP will undoubtedly blunder again in 2010, perpetually wondering...."why are people so stupid to keep re-electing these jerks."

 

But who are the stupid jerks?

 

Rahm Emanuel personally imported a New York City radical to steal yet another Republican seat from a highly conservative central Florida district - even going so far as to brand Grayson a Blue Dog.

 

And with the help of ACORN, it worked.

 

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

Obama's AP invasion

 

All through the summer of 1938, Britain & France believed that Adolf Hitler planned to strike at the Sudetenland - perhaps the whole of Czechoslovakia.

 

The Treaty of Versailles had left 3 million ethnic Germans residing in "Sudeten" - an economically valuable area, situated strategically amongst the Czech, German, and Austrian borders. Thus, Hitler sought to annex the land, where he would then control the area geographically centered in the middle of Europe.  

 

But first, Hitler would need a REASON to invade the Sudetenland.

 

Contrary to common belief, Adolf Hitler had no intention of starting a World War. The German mainstream population would never support it. In fact, many of Hitler's generals, having fought in the horrid trenches of World War I, were decidedly opposed to any type of military aggression unless Germany was first attacked.

 

Thus, Hitler cleverly determined brinksmanship would best serve his purpose: he would frighten the bordering countries into submission- using the German military as a last resort.

 

Now Josef Goebbels; Germany's famed propaganda minister, would step to the fore: He ordered the German press to commence a massive propaganda barrage against Czechoslovakia, preparing the German people for a possible invasion.

 

The German newspapers were filled with accounts of mass arrests of innocent Germans in the Sudetenland; there were the inevitable circumstantial stories by phantom German foreign correspondents.

 

Nonexistent people in nonexistent villages were being slaughtered. The Czech government attempted to refute the massive lies, but later gave up in abject despair.

 

Hitler had now been given his pretext for invasion:

 

 "The misery of the Sudeten Germans is without end," he declared. Hitler had promised that Germany would "take care of her own" and put an end to the continued oppression of 3 million Germans. "I hope that the foreign statesman will be convinced that these are not mere words," the Feuhrer added ominously.

 

Although his rhetorical tone was gravely threatening, Hitler cleverly gave NO EXAMPLES of Czech atrocities, letting one's imagination do his evil bidding.

 

Of course, we are aware of what happened next:

 

A frightened Neville Chamberlain (British Prime minister) sent off a terse telegram to Hitler..."Having regard to the increasingly critical situation, I propose to visit you immediately, in order to make an attempt to find a peaceful solution."

 

On September 29th, 1938 the Munich Conference was held. It was the sellout of Czechoslavakia to Adolf Hitler. Neville Chamberlain would go down as History's all time dupe, as he arrived back in England, blithely declaring... "Peace in our time!"

 

Hitler's victory was complete: the Sudetenland was his.

 

In March 1939, the Munich pact was nullified. The Germans invaded Czechoslovakia, and subsequently - believing the English and French had no will to fight - Hitler then invaded Poland on Sept.1, triggering the start of what would evolve into World War II.

 

But in the final analysis, historians have omitted the true origin of the war. It was not the infamous Munich Pact; it was not the Treaty of Versailles; and as previously mentioned, it was not Hitler's purposeful intention to initiate a world conflagration.

 

Without the righteous indignation of the German people - falsely led to believe that their Sudeten Aryan brothers were being beaten and murdered - Hitler knew his territorial ambitions would remain thwarted.

 

Indeed; what had started the whole conflict was the Nazi press; stirring up the German people with phony reasons to be angry; masterfully authored by propagandist-in-chief, Josef Goebbels.

 

But it would not be the first time that an evil despot had employed propaganda, and misled his people toward his own evil purposes - nor would it be the last. 

 

Which of course leads us to the present, and yet another intolerant despot, who would use the press to manipulate his own people, treating them condescendingly, as though no other belief - save his own- could exist.

 

EXAMPLE: Let's use Barack Obama's unofficial propaganda arm, the brown-nosers at the Associated Press, to depict the sophisticated - yet barely perceptive - line of baloney Obama uses to manipulate "the masses" about the "threat" of global warming.

 

NOTE: as we review the press release, we shall also stop to analyze:

 

(begin press release)

 

AP: President Barack Obama, in a speech Friday in Boston, said he believes "a consensus" is emerging in Congress on the climate issue. But he also accused some opponents of making "cynical claims that contradict the overwhelming scientific evidence" that the earth is becoming warmer in an attempt to derail legislation.'

 

Stop right there, being noteworthy of the two phrases, "the overwhelming scientific evidence"...and..."he accused some opponents of making cynical claims."

 

We, as Americans should be fearful of this demagogic liar: Is there overwhelming scientific evidence the climate has changed? Have you looked outside your window lately? Seen anything unusual?

 

Does Obama offer any examples of  this "overwhelming evidence"?

 

And what about Obama's accusations against opponents "making cynical claims"? Does that sound like proper rhetoric for an American president? Or is this not an exact PARALLEL to what Hitler did, in his takeover of the Sudetenland, without a shot being fired?

 

The similar methodologies of the two cannot be overlooked! Remove the goose-stepping militarism and Obama & Hitler seem virtual Siamese twins.

 

Just as Hitler gave no specific examples of Czech atrocities against dislocated Germans, Barack Obama offers no specific evidence of global warming. Just as Hitler let the tone of his rhetoric intimidate the British, Obama does exactly that, in his warning that any opposition is just "cynical claims to the contrary."

 

In retrospect, Hitler initiated a military conflict against his FOREIGN enemies. Barack Obama is fighting his own callous war against all DOMESTIC opposition - the comparison being that both dictators are (were) quite cunning in using the press as purveyors of their evil propaganda.

 

Face the stark reality America: Dictator Obama has now let it be known; he will tolerate no dissenters! Seig hiel!

 

But you're still not convinced? Let's proceed onward, using that same speech, as we pick up the second paragraph of the AP release:

 

(Quote)..."There are those who will suggest that moving toward clean energy will destroy our economy, when it's the system we currently have that endangers our prosperity, and prevents us from creating millions of new jobs," Obama told his audience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

 

Again stop right there: Listen to this lunatic!

 

He not only seeks to intimidate all dissenting opinion, he is tacitly declaring war on our entire, conventional energy-based economy! Note how he cleverly adds the phrase..."prevents us from creating millions of new jobs."

 

Just as Hitler blamed the Jewish in the1930's for Germany's depression, Obama  scapegoats those who wish to maintain our economic (and energy) status quo; so WHERE is the difference?

 

Note how cleverly Obama ties it all into one brief speech:

 

He sets the premise that global warming is "scientific fact," then goes on to lend credence to the falsehood that if we don't immediately abandon fossil fuels, we imperil the great "green economy" that manipulator Obama declares is at hand.

 

Rejoice everyone! The great green energy revolution - and the jobs bonanza along with it - is on the way; and all we need do is begin building windmills, abandon coal and gasoline, and let those good times ROLL!

 

Is anyone stupid enough to believe this? Has there even been a more haughty, condescending radical in the Whitehouse? And worse, anyone who disagrees is to be marginalized as a cynic?

 

But you say you still don't believe that Obama is dangerous? Or that it's patently absurd that some dare compare him to Hitler? Well try on these brownshirts for size, and see if you're not convinced.

 

Herein folows an excerpt from Obama's campaign speech, on July 2, 2008, in Colorado Springs:

 

(QUOTE)..."We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

 

Note: For those ignorant of World History, kindly google "brownshirts" and witness the stunning similarity in the objectives of Barack Obama vs. how Hitler rose to power in the mid 1930's.

 

But even the so-called "true reporters" of the news (Fox, and the big name conservative talkers) are remiss in calling a "spade a spade."  They also want not to be accused of "unfair comparisons" i.e. that Barack Obama in any way resembles Hitler


But as the axiom goes..."LET TRUTH BE TOLD."

 

Barack Obama is the most intolerant president in U.S. history: he seeks to marginalize any who disagree, letting propangandist Rahm Emanuel go on Sunday morning political shows, to paint Fox as "not being a news organization."

 

Adolf Hitler did the same thing - but quicker...he would "liquidate" any who opposed him.

 

Barack Obama has stifled truth, intimidated his opponents, and sued his way to the Whitehouse; Hitler won an election in 1933, by the same basic path, with the focus being on INTIMIDATION.  

 

Barack Obama is the most secretive president in U.S. history: like Hitler once did, he works exclusively behind closed doors - clandestinely plotting his socialist takeover of America.

 

But the salient point is this: Hitler was a power-mad lunatic, who manipulated the press, used his militaristic National Socialism Party to take over Germany, but was then thwarted in his futile attempt to conquer the world.

 

Now - similar to an algebra problem- take out the above "militaristic" part, and "substitute" for Hitler. Does not the name of Barack Obama fit the equation rather nicely?

 

Obama may not be out to conquer the world, but complete government control of the U.S. economy isn't a bad place to start.

 

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

Will Schumer invoke Ted Kennedy's ghost to haunt the GOP?


QUESTION: Is there a more arrogant, repugnant slimeball on planet Earth, other than Chuck Schumer? 
 
Can there be something in the water in New York?  What else could possess the people of the "Empire" state to support this loathsome, lying weasel? The very sight or sound of this worm is enough to make one retch in visceral pain.
 
ITEM: On February 10th, 2009, Schumer took the Senate floor to rally support for the Obama Stimulus bill... (quote) “The American people really don’t care about those “little tiny, yes, porky amendments.” Worse, Mr. Schumer had punctuated his derision by pinching his thumb and index finger together.
 
He then scoffed: "Only the chattering classes worry about such trivial matters..."
 
Only the "chattering classes"? The astounding arrogance of this vile man is exceeded only by his soaring ego!
 
Every time this cretin speaks, does it not evoke intense, violent emotional retaliation - similar to discovering a fly in one's bedroom? 
 
And what about Schumer's sanctimonious smirk of superiority - that maddening self-assurance? Reason enough to provoke virtually anyone into instant rage, like the urge to stomp on a cockroach scurrying about in the kitchen.
 
Yet, despite the fact that cockroach Chuckie is way-way more influential (and ten times MORE dangerous) than Harry Reid, what are the Republicans planning on doing about him in the upcoming 2010 election?
 
Virtually, NOTHING!
 
Hence, Schumer will be granted even six more years to levy his sneaky, diabolical, Machiavellian attacks against the Republican party -unraveling the very fabric of traditional America - while undermining the Constitution; and bearing the mantle of the late Ted Kennedy.
 
ITEM: Late last May, Schumer, the New York Democrat, cleverly issued a statement that ended up fracturing all oppostion to Barack Obama's radical nominee to the Supreme Court: (quote)... if Republicans oppose Sonia Sotomayor, they'll do so at their "own peril..."
 
..."I think the confirmation process will be more of a test of the Republican Party than it is of Judge Sotomayor," Schumer told reporters..."It's a test for the Republican Party because she is a mainstream justice...Why would they oppose her? There's no really good reason."
 
Schumer's opening salvo in the Sotomayor confirmirmation war couldn't have been better placed; it immediately intimidated the Republicans (on the Senate Judicial Committeee) into thinking..."Gee, if we oppose this brutal leftist witch, perhaps we'll lose the Hispanic vote forever."
 
The fool Republicans had swallowed the bait wholesale!
 
Schumer succeeded in outpsyching the opposition - even provoking a rift. Suddenly, there was no talk of the evidence against Sotomayor; that she had made statements of reverse racism, or that she would most assuredly legislate from the bench.
 
The result? Sotomayer's tragic confirmation breezed through the Senate, as though she was the next Sandra Day O'Connor! This, despite the fact that she had stammered and lied her way through the interrogation process, as lily Republicans tossed softball after softball, as if addressing the Queen of England.
 
And can there be any doubt about how Ms. Sotomayor will perform in her remaining LIFETIME on the Bench?
 
Over the next 30-40 years, our center-right nation will lay in ruin, as the Constitution is rewritten; especially if States invoke their 10th Amendment right to refuse nationalized healthcare, and leftist Sotomayor then bullies the Supreme Court into upholding its legality.
 
Ironically, the fool Republicans would never get the Hispanic vote anyway, whether they had confirmed Ms. Sotomayor or not!
 
Chalk up yet another damaging defeat for the nation, courtesy of the reptilian Chuck Schumer.
 
ITEM: Speaking of the Hispanic vote, guess who is emerging as the primary force behind immigration reform? Now that Ted Kennedy is "departed" from his chairmanship of the Immigration Subcommittee in the Senate, Schumer now enthusiastically senses yet another chance to radically alter the character of our nation irreversibly:
 
(Quote)...“When the President asks me whether we can pass comprehensive immigration reform this Congress, I will smile and say, ‘Mr. President, yes we can.’ said Mr. Schumer…If I did not believe we could accomplish reform THIS YEAR, I would have never accepted the Immigration Subcommittee post. Legislative backwaters are not places in which I thrive.”
 
So how're we doing, all you brilliant Republicans, now that you've tacitly chosen Chuck Schumer as your defacto Senate leader?
 
Isn't it just great that you're ALL getting along? Perhaps Rodney King will award you the Congressional Peace Prize! Is there anyone, save for Michele Bachmann, who's willing to actively fight on Capitol Hill to save conservative America?
 
Not surprisingly, Nancy Pelosi plans on spending FIVE MILLION dollars in 2010, to defeat Ms. Bachmann in Minnesota. But what are the Republicans planning to do about Schumer?
 
No wonder the man goes brazenly about his goal of destroying conservative America, as Ted Kennedy once did. 
 
Both had neither conscience, nor fear of losing their political power - a deadly combination, leading to legislative demagoguery, and utter disregard for all Senate Republicans, who have meekly stood by for a generation now with no end in sight.   
 
Just since February, Schumer has hit a triple...well on his way to home run:
 
1) instrumental in passing Obama's budget-busting, anti-stimulus bill,
2) getting the radical Puerto Rican activist Sotomayor elevated to the Supreme Court
3) planning to get his "immigration reform" bill passed through Congress by year's end
 
And like a liberal energizer bunny, Schumer keeps go-go-going for his (and the late Kennedy's) piece de' resistance': the socialization of America's healthcare system, as he pushes Reid into a hated Public Option plan, now included in the final Senate bill.
 
Speaking on "Meet the Press", Senator Slimeball put on his best lying face - babbling away about need for the Public Option "to create a level playing field."
 
But Schumer knows all about level playing fields:
 
The so-called Public Option - with the states' ability to "opt-out" - will be nothing other than a political neutron bomb, eventually going off and destroying every private insurance company across the country, as they are faced with untenable federal regulations, and one-by-one, go bankrupt - leaving the government as the sole determiner to who ultimately lives or dies, once they become single-payer to our nation's health care providers.
 
Is it any wonder that this was Ted Kennedy's ULTIMATE wet dream? Or Schumer's home run? The federal government, now in possession of 20 percent of the nation's GDP, and literally controlling our lives from cradle to the grave?
 
If Schumer is not silenced in 2010, how much more damage will this radical leftist bring upon our nation?
 
Just in 2009 alone, the man has been instrumental in rocketing the national debt, radicalizing the Supreme Court, and pushing for a plan that will literally topple our world-renowned model for healthcare, and indeed, place it on a "level playing field" - the equal to Cuba, or Canada, or England's socialized nightmare.
 
And if Schumer devises a way to get his immigration reform bill through a democratic-majority Congress, what then? In just another generation will anyone even recognize what we now call the United States?
 
How many "parallel societies" can be tolerated before traditional America is lost forever?  How many more radical Justices are confirmed, before the Supreme Court- like the czars-  becomes yet another arm of the Congressional Leftists?
 
How many more measures will Schumer put before the Congress, such as gun control and the Fairness Doctrine; laws which will usurp both  the First and Second amendments - stripping way our ability to speak out or defend ourselves against the tyranny of these power-mad radicals.
 
Since the mid 1960's, the very course of our nation has been pushed hard left; first by Ted Kennedy, and now by Chuck Schumer - liberals who cannot be dealt with any other way than by the same methods they use themselves - political hardball.
 
Chuck Schumer is but 58. The Republicans cannot sit by any longer. They must break out the big guns.
 
Like democrats Hillary Clinton in 2000, and Robert Kennedy in 1964, the GOP either imports a heavyweight to run for the Senate in New York, or watches Schumer go on for the rest of his life to establish one-party democratic rule - perhaps for the entire 21st century.
 
Barack Obama will be gone by 2012; or at the very latest by 2015. But if cockroach Schumer is not stamped out, could he, like Robert Byrd, serve long enough to sing conservative America's final swan song?
 
Yes Republicans - it's actually that serious: Michelle Bachmann can do only so much in the House.
 
But there's that other great lady of the Grand Ol' Party; the one, who if convinced by enough conservatives that "it's up to her," would gladly cast aside her futile aspirations for the Whitehouse, if she could better function where she could slay even more Leftist dragons - like Chuck Schumer - in the United States Senate!
 
Can you picture the headlines a year from now? "Extra! New York Senator-elect Sarah Palin defeats incumbent!  
 
No Republicans; it's not a pipedream. Palin has already immersed herself in New York politics, having declared herself in favor of Doug Hoffman, conservative candidate from the upstate 23rd congressional district.
 
A Palin-Schumer contest would be the biggest attraction in Senate politics in over 150 years, going back to the Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858.
 
And the outcome would be no less important. 
 
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can we survive the "new normal" economics of Obammunism?

 
How many of us can remember the good ol' days?
 
That's right you whipper-snappers; once upon a time, those black and white TV programs (like "Leave it to Beaver") had an actual basis in reality:
 
The average American family had but ONE breadwinner, and a real stay-at-home mom; yet the entire family enjoyed what is characterized - by todays standards- as an "upper midddle class" lifestyle.
 
But how, you say, was that possible? Only ONE person in the family bringing home the bacon?
 
It's called conservative economic policy. Free enterprise. Capitalism. Stuff unheard of today in the current economic jargon, now that "liberalism" and the "new normal" have taken hold.
 
America’s unprecedented affluence in the postwar years was characterized by an enormous industrial engine, nearly doubling America's GDP during the 1950s - and then AGAIN during the 1960's - a startling rate of economic growth, not seen before or since by any other nation on earth.
 
Back in the day, in a commentary about the 1960's, Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith marveled that...(quote) “the ordinary individual has access to amenities — foods, entertainment, personal transportation, plumbing — in which not even the rich rejoiced a century ago.”
 
Galbreath had good reason to be jubilant:
 
In the 1950's, U.S. disposable personal income, in constant dollars, grew by an amazing 33%. In the 1960s it grew by more than 50% - an astounding achievement, leaving today's economists slack-jawed.
 
Galbreath continued....(quote) “With wealth never before imagined, Americans could dream dreams never before possible. In the early years of the 1960s, national optimism reached epidemic levels...Soaring revenues convinced many in Washington that ‘the wealthiest country on the face of the earth could accomplish whatever it set its mind to' …It was an optimistic age, and belief was too easily suspended..."
 
But then Galbreath made what was his most telling analysis: (quote)..."In effect, the rise of economic liberalism was made possible by the unparalled 1960's boom."

Galbreath, most presciently, had pinpointed the source of America's current, precipitous decline: economic liberalism - a.k.a. wealth redistribution, an idea borne of the LATE 1960's.
 
So strong was the US economy of the early 60's that unemployment touched under 4% in 1964.
 
Large Fortune 500 companies were in hot competition for workers. The now-extinct "help wanted" signs were omni-present. Newspaper classified sections were bursting with page- after-page of advertisements for new jobs.
 
Ask anyone who lived during the 60's; the first word that comes to mind is PROSPERITY.
 
When John Kennedy was sworn in, he had been raised from a family of businessmen. Hence, like any proficient chief executive, President Kennedy did the first thing necessary to increase revenues, and thereby raise profit margins - something unheard of today - he CUT TAXES.
 
The Kennedy tax cuts focused first on business in 1962, two years before the 1964
overall rate reductions. Depreciation reform, and an investment tax credit were Kennedy's two key factors that lowered the cost of production, and got the economy booming.
 
In fiscal 1961, the federal deficit was merely 0.6% of gross domestic product. As of 2009, it now stands at an astounding 14 percent, with no end to the rise in sight.  
 
Said Mr Kennedy: (quote) ..."An economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget - just as it will never produce enough jobs or profits."
 
Between 1961 and 1968, the US economy expanded by more than 42 percent, with federal revenues rising by one-third; all taking place during a time when tax rates had been reduced. 
 
Again, we offer another Galbreath historical insight: (quote) ..."But by mid-1966, the liberal storm was brewing…It came suddenly, leaving a deeply altered landscape in its wake.”
 
Truer words have never been spoken (or written):
 
"The storm came suddenly...leaving a deeply-altered landscape in its wake..."
 
It was Galbreath's poetic way of stating bluntly how the democratic Left - led by Massachusetts liberals like Ted Kennedy, and Tip O'Neal - have all but destroyed America's economic primacy during the last four decades, leaving in its wake the horrendous welfare and entitlement mentality that reigns today. 
 
Which brings us to 2009, and what the economic mouthpieces of the Obama administration are calling, "the New Normal."
 
But is that what we're supposed to accept? Are we that gullible?
 
Double digit unemployment, falling economic production, increasing pessimism, big declines in disposable income; these should be categorized as "normal"?
 
Does this not sound more like what took place in Cuba during the 1960's, after Fidel Castro had risen to power in the late 50's?
 
Hypothetically, were we to ask any of the great, now-deceased dictators of the 20th century what their key was to the seizure and holding of political power, would they not ALL unanimously agree..."get a good propaganda minister, one who'll always put forth the party line, lest the masses be aware of the actual truth..."
 
Indeed; this lesson has been well-learned by the Obama administration; any news organization who dare not espouse the president's socialist party line has come under unrelenting attack - with the Fox network lying directly in the line of fire.
 
Hence, Obama's propaganda ministers, cloaked in innocuous, official-sounding titles, are given credence by the mainstream media, and thus keep "the masses" from revolting freely, as they would do otherwise if America still truly maintained its freedom of the press.
 
What if unemployment had exceeded 10% during the Bush years? What if the percentage of national debt to GDP had hit 14%? Would the media be spinning that as the "New Normal" as they do today?
 
So now, the fool American public is getting just what they deserve, a calamitous, W-shaped recesssion, replete with high unemployment, falling disposable incomes, and a misery index that makes previous downturns look tame by comparison.
 
Meanwhile, the insiders back in the Obama Whitehouse are enjoying the last laugh, having devised a most clever policy of "managing voter expectations."
 
EXAMPLE: Chief Economic Advisor (ahem-ahem) Christina Roemer (quote)..."With predicted growth right around two and a half percent for most of next year, movements in the unemployment rate - either up or down - are likely to be small. As a result, unemployment is likely to remain at its severely ELEVATED level."
 
TRANSLATION: "Alright you peons...get used to the economic incompetence of my revered, Marxist leader, Barack Obama, as he continues to chip away at the economy, until he has ALL of the private sector on its knees!"
 
In all the history of the presidency, has there ever been a more media-savvy, slippery, slimy chief executive than Barack Lunatic Obama? Where does this man get his nerve? How does he sleep at night? Is he on a mission to destroy our economy?
 
Standing at the site of a Springfield, Virginia highway project (funded by his economic stimulus plan) Obama recently said, "I am committed to exploring all avenues to create jobs."
 
(Quote)..."We’re going to continue to explore each and every avenue that I can think of that will lead to job creation and economic growth,” said Obama, while standing with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and four construction workers wearing hard hats.
 
Yes indeed, Mr. Obama continues to explore each and EVERY avenue!
 
Is that why he signed a stimulus bill (anti-stimulus) that spends over a TRILLION dollars (with interest) yet provided only $30 billion towards rebuilding of our infrastructure, and but a measly 500 million toward aiding small business?
 
Or how about the cap and trade law, a measure that Obama brazenly defined as a "jobs bill," that he wants passed by end of the year.
 
Cap 'n Trade has been defined by experts as a disguised national energy tax on oil, gasoline and coal, which will spike the cost of industrial production, and drive an estimated 2 million jobs offshore to China and India.
 
Hmmm; that's a strange avenue to explore for jobs. Maybe if only 1.5 million jobs go offshore, Mr. Obama can blithely proclaim... " I saved half a million!"
 
And of course, there's that great economic growth engine of government-run healthcare, which will discourage underpaid doctors &  nurses to abandon their professions in droves, and render thousands of ex-health insurance workers to the unemployment lines; not to mention pharmaceutical researchers, scientists, medical device manufactures, private clinic operators - plus all their employees, janitors, delivery people, accountants, and clerical workers.
 
Yes, this is the "new normal."
 
Obama, running around the country in permanent campaign mode, crowing away about how we need to reform this, we need to regulate that, we MUST act NOW, and why, were it not for his policies, things would be even worse.
 
But can it get any worse?
 
If Obama succeeds in passing his radical agenda, the real unemployment rate in the U.S. could hit 20 percent by 2011 - actual depression territory.
 
Yet, aside from Fox news, the main stream media will go to no end to spin the debacle as a "healthy downturn;" and the national deficit will continue to rocket, as Congress passes one unemployment extension after another, another increase in food stamp allotments, and Obama suggests selling yet another 500 billion in debt to the Chinese for another stimulus.
 
How soon before America realizes we have an ivy-league-educated lunatic in the Whitehouse? A socialist anti-President, deliberately out to bring down the private sector, stripping the wealth of middle class, and thus take away the ability of conservative America to oppose him.
 
Barack Obama has extensively studied Franklin Roosevelt's socialist New Deal; and he also knows thoroughly the benefits to the US economy that were the result of John F. Kennedy's capitalist New Frontier.
 
But Obama has chosen neither; He is leading America down an unknown path, something not yet defined by any historical precedent; something beyond socialism, even Marxism.
 
Let's call it Obammunism, where the people inevitably become enslaved by the government, yet are so easily-led by the propagandists that they welcome the misery, and prepare for even worse times ahead, because they've been brainwashed into thinking..."Hey, everything's fine; it's just the new normal."
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Medicare E- the harbinger of tyranny

 
During our lifetimes, we've all heard or read this a thousand times:
 
"As always, consult with a healthcare professional before starting any diet, exercise or supplementation program, or before taking any medication - or if you have, or suspect you might have, a health problem."
 
But come another five years or so, forget it! If you plan on starting an exercise program, a diet, a new physical regimen, or need just a simple medical exam for a new job - what then? 
 
Yup, you won't even be able to do it; not with government-run healthcare! Get to the back of the line, buddy! That'll be at least a six-to-eight month wait...if you even get to see a doctor at all.
 
Healthcare pandemonium anyone? It's coming to a med center near you.
 
Has anyone REALLY pondered the incredible, horribly-disruptive effects of socialized medicine? And yes...it will affect YOU very negatively- no matter your age - sooner or later.
 
If you're young, what if your dear Grandma is in need of kidney transplant? If you're middle-aged, what if your dear Dad needs a triple-bypass, or he'll die. And what if you're just entering retirement age, and you're diagnosed with bladder, or ovarian/testicular cancer?
 
See ya later; it was great knowin' ya.
 
Yes; our wonderful federal government - those same people who'll send armed men to your door if you don't pay your taxes; those same people who will deny you supplemental social security if you become truly disabled before age 62; those same people who could care less if your house is washed away in a hurricane - will be the ones literally in control of your destiny, and how long you'll actually LIVE on this earth!
 
Even those presently on life-saving medication should be trembling.
 
Imagine going to your pharmacy in a few years, only to find out that your prescription is discontinued! But why? The pharmaceutical company could no longer charge enough to stay profitable; or your long-faithful insurance provider had bit the dust - all because the government now controls everyone's lives because of the PUBLIC OPTION.
 
But you say the Tea Parties and Townhalls have taken care of all this?
 
You actually thought your local Congressperson (or U.S. Senator) had gotten sufficient warning that you - the almighty constituent - was virulently opposed to any government involvement with your health care?
 
Get real, you fool. 
 
Do you think these despicable, amoral, scamming, scheming, plotting, pond-scum, bottom-feeders hiding in Washington were actually going to listen to you, or the people, whom they supposedly represent?
 
Wake up America! Your Congress-person is your sworn enemy! They have no compunction about lying to you with a straight face; that's how they got elected in the first place!
 
These are the most dangerous people on earth!
 
People who have great power, but who lack even a conscience!
 
Hence, they will always do what's best for themselves, which means consolidating power by expanding the government; which means passing a government-run healthcare system BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
 
They WILL pass a bill containing the Public Option, which will take away our freedoms...forever. They will pass climate change; they will pass immigration amnesty.
 
And Barack Obama will smile and crow like a hyena - telling all the nation about "these great accomplishments for the changing of America for the better."
 
But you say this is all an exaggeration?
 
Do you think they would never do this for fear of being voted out? Hah!
 
That's exactly what they want you to think! Complacency is the key to their plot.They know people have short memories.
 
But worst of all, they think we're STUPID.
 
Right now as we speak, Mike Ross (D- Ark.), leader of the 52 House Blue Dogs, and Mary Landrieu (D-La.) supposedly the "most moderate" democratic Senator, are plotting our demise; they've figured out a way of "selling the public option" to the people in their respective states - where a vast majority have spoken out against it in the August townhalls.
 
That's right fellow Americans; these two sell-outs, confident in the stupidity of the Louisiana and Arkansas voters, feel they can be re-elected by simply calling the Public Option something else: Medicare E, or a "trigger."
 
Here's how it goes:
 
Ross and Landrieu know two things:
 
1) they both know all of their cohorts in each chamber of Congress are FIXATED on how they plan to vote; because it will either encourage/discourage the other Congressional moderates to vote "yea" or "nay"
 
2) they also know that if they do not vote FOR the Public Option (whatever they end up calling it) Rahm Emanuel and the DNC have threatened to cut them off from all party support, and they could be defeated lacking the huge money that the Democratic Party will offer for their 2010 campaigns.
 
The bottom line? Landrieu and Ross will choose the campaign money - supremely confident in the stupidity of their voters back home.They will vote AGAINST them, fearing not any consequences.
 
Both know they can't come out "in favor of the public option." But by re-branding it with the innocent sounding, "Medicare E" or "trigger", all the other House and Senate moderates will vote lock-step, to "save" the presidency of Barack Obama.
 
After Ross votes "yes" on HR 3200 (Nancy Pelosi's masterpiece, which contains a ROBUST Public Option), he will go home to his angry constituents during Thanksgiving, telling them..."Not to worry...government-run healthcare means nothing more than Medicare for Everybody!"
 
Hence, by calling it by it's new, more-friendly moniker - Medicare E, which sounds SO innocuous; so warm; unlike the intimidating, morose "Public Option"- Mr. Ross is supremely confident that he'll turn the anger into sweet compliance.
 
This is condescension in its highest form!
 
And after Ms. Landrieu votes for the Public Option in the final form of the Senate bill, she will also go home this Christmas, and lie with a straight face:
 
..."I have done the people of  Louisiana a great service...you all will now be covered for your health care, and the government won't have anything to do with it, UNLESS these insurance companies continue to be greedy, and refuse to provide affordable coverage for everyone, which they are now mandated to do..."
 
But will the people be able to see through the deceit of these two, smooth-talking liars? Will they for once, NOT be stupid enough to fall for the possibility that they actually could be better off with Medicare E, or the trigger option? 
 
With the government mandating insurers to accept everyone - including pre-existing conditions - private insures will NEVER again be profitable, as they quickly go under - now forced to pay big claims after sick people, upon signing up, require immediate care.
 
Ergo - the Trigger goes off quickly- the Public Option takes hold, and the federal government now controls everyone's ability to decide on their health provider.
 
And when liar Mike Ross is back home in Arkansas, misleading the voters about "Medicare E," saying that..."Hey, what's wrong with having Medicare for everyone? That's why I voted FOR it!"
 
Well here's what's wrong with it: Medicare has trouble enough working for just the elderly. Now imagine everyone, the entire demographic - all 310 million Americans - now eligible, and in need of Medicare; now what?
 
Medicare for everybody will not be free. It will rocket the national debt to 30 trillion by 2025; and the United States will be insolvent.
 
Medicare for everybody means endless lines; endless bureaucracy; rationing of care; and of course, the death panels - a faceless bureaucrat in Washington, deciding who lives; or who's quality of life is forever destroyed, because they were denied a back operation, or knee replacement, and now must hobble in permanent pain.
 
But don't forget, Medicare for Everyone - with the inevitable shortages - means the government will be more than wiling to book you an IMMEDIATE appointment with Dr. Kevorkian, in the surest, fastest way to solve any medical infirmity - self-extinction.
 
Medicare for everybody means just that - everybody!
 
Once passed, every illegal alien from Mexico, Guatemala, and all points South, will be flocking to the US, along with their grandmothers, in hope of qualifying for govt. subsidized free healthcare
 
But despite these nightmares, Landrieu and Ross are not concerned; they plan on being re-elected - the odds are 95% in their favor. Rahm Emanuel has already convinced them about that. 
 
And why should ANY Congressperson worry?
 
The Public Option, Trigger, Medicare E, are for the stupid common people - not aristocrats like them; so voting yes on something that so goes against the people (and their country) just comes naturaly to these miscreants.
 
But that's precisely why we have to wake up, and snap to it!
 
If we want to save our country, our liberty, our freedom, our ability to decide who shall be our doctor, and preserve the quality of life in America that we have so long taken for granted, we have act NOW.
 
Call your local precinct captain; find out who is in charge. Or take action yourself. Go door-to-door. Organize a tea party to be held in front of your local congressperson's office, or even in the front yard of their homes.
 
Desperate times require desperate measures!
 
It's imperative we find some way to stop these congressional maniacs, before 550 fanatical people ruin life for all of us 300 million Americans - permanently.
 
If we sit back and do nothing, other than watching Fox news, or calling talk show hosts to grumble about "how were losing our country,"  we're playing right into their malevolent hands; that's exactly what they're counting on us to do.
 
So do we get mean and nasty with these Bolshevik desperados- our Congress?
 
Do we have the nerve to charter a bus, and go out to their residences, and yell loudly, and wave signs, and hold a tea party on their front yards? ACORN seems to have done this repeatedly with the desired effect; its called instilling FEAR.
 
Is this time any different than 1775, when an overseas enemy attempted to force its policies on vast group of unwilling subjects? Only this time, the enemy resides in Washington, DC.
 
This is an even more dangerous foe than any foreign power America has defeated before.
 
A sneaky, clandestine domestic enemy, with the ultimate power to destroy our lives and ruin our pursuit of happiness - without nary a shot being fired.
 
And to add insult to injury, this is an enemy who regards the opposition as STUPID; too dumb to even know when they're being led off the cliff of freedom, to the depths and despair of tyranny.
 
We must prove them wrong...with the speed and conviction that it must be done quickly. 
 
By time of the  2010 elections, it will be too late. 
 
www.keenobserver. blogtownhall.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Global Warming? Liberals don't believe it either!


Two things you cannot deny:

1) liberals are immensely astute about obtaining positions of power.

2) liberals extend their political power by clever inversion of language- lying openly by stating everything as polar opposite of what they actually attempt to accomplish, or believe themselves. 

 

For example, when liberals say they want a Public Option "to increase competiton among private insurers," what are they REALLY saying? It means they want the government to be able to drive them all bankrupt!

 

Which begs the question: "What if liberals actually knew climate change/global warming was baloney, but are using it to make "useful idiots" out of the Right? 

 

That's correct: to all you so-called brilliant conservatives...you've been had. You're a bunch of gullible dolts. Stop playing into these liberals' slimy, power-hungry hands! 

We know damn well there is NO climate change, nor global warming; but so do the liberals! They're using both terms irresponsibly (and interchangeably) to covertly extend their POLITICAL POWER, painting the conservatives as the ones preventing progress. 

 

If libs are smart enough to garner political majorities, are they not able to realize that man-made global warming IS sheer scientific folly, yet cleverly use it for the obfuscation of their real agenda - wealth transfer, via the consolidation of everyone into "one world" government?

 

Let's begin with Carol Browner, Obama's proud choice for Climate Czar, who's been "unearthed" as a member of the radical organization known as "Socialist International"(SI); not exactly your local rotary club, but a hardball group of leftists, with their avowed goal: forcing a radical environmental agenda upon the ENTIRE world.

Socialist International purports all the shop-worn liberal mantras: peak oil; CO2 is a pollutant; we're on the verge of irreversible climate devastation; the U.S. is poisoning the atmosphere. And all this can only be "counteracted" by cap-n-trade.

S.I. calls for the, "redesign of the international rules on intellectual property," i.e. more twisted liberal lingo for compelling all U.S. inventors to surrender their advancements, in order to "share" technologies with less-developed countries.

 

Socialist International holds that America - being the world's largest energy user- must shrink its economic output (energy usage) in conjunction with the lesser countries increasing theirs, and strive for "world equality." 

 

Does anyone smell a rat?  Is America being set up for a massive economic fall?

 

Socialist International defines everything being as "one-world" - a cleverly disguised re-distribution scheme to be done incognito via the UN.

And the culmination of their radicalism will take place at the "Copenhagen Conference," scheduled for December 7-18, 2009, where Marxist-in-Chief Obama plans on signing a 180-page "climate treaty" that could haunt America forever. 

 

An in-depth look at Socialist International reveals the organization has been pushing hard for "global governance," meaning that "dangerous" climate change is caused by America emitting far too much Co2, in comparison to smaller nations, which emit little greenhouse gas - therefore, they must be rewarded for their good climatic behavior.  

 

Hence, America owes a "climate debt" to the world: and the Copenhagen Conference will be SI's ultimate payback for their concerted efforts, as the other socialist countries of the world gather to divvy up the spoils, and make America pay for its horrendous, environmental sins of the past. 


Can you see the huge shakedown coming? We're about to be compelled to share our technology, our GDP, and our national sovereignty, in return for what?

 

NOTHING!

 

This so-called "treaty" requires America to surrender its economy to the third world; and Barack Obama is 100% in favor of doing just that!
 
He will go along with the "Conference of the Parties to the Convention" (COP), blithely professing that, "we must do this...before it's too late."

 

First it was the economic/stimulus "crisis", then the budget "crisis ; then the health-care crisis; and now it's the climate crisis. Each crisis designed to further sink our country into debt, and take our individual choices away.

 

This perfidious COP treaty sets up a global governing body, with the power to demand massive transfers of wealth FROM the "developed" world (US and Europe), TO the rest of the world (third world).

 

Such a deal! Obama signs this 180-page global travesty, and the American economy plummets accordingly.

 

(Page 127): Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources and transfer technology to developing country Parties, to make full and effective repayment of climate debt, including adaptation debt, taking responsibility for their historical cumulative emissions, and current high per capita emissions.

 

(Page 128): The financial mechanism shall be fully accountable to the COP, which shall decide on its policies, program priorities and eligibility criteria, and allocation of resources for adaptation, mitigation, technology and capacity-building, and any other function that may be determined by the COP 

 

(Page 169): Define non-compliance parameters, penalties and fines as appropriate, and implement parameters and procedures defined by the COP to retrieve funds derived from fines and penalties (enforcement)

 

(Page 171): Impose financial penalties, at a minimum of ten times the market price of carbon, for any emissions in excess of the level implied by the emissions reduction commitment.

 

This barbaric treaty arrangement - coupled with cap 'n trade legislation- is akin to economic rape; a phony excuse to tax energy users and providers, and send the money to the UN - then to be distributed to third world dictators abroad.

 

The goal? Increasing the political power of the Obama administration to all continents.

 

Barack Obama- president of the world!

 

So is it all falling into place now? Obama gets his stupid Nobel Prize, in return for promising to sign the Copenhagen Climate Change treaty - a classic international quid -pro-quo. 

 

Socialist International, Carol Browner, Obama, the UN, and all the other enviro-marxists, actually hide within a "smokescreen", under the guise of saving the environment; a Machiavellian masquerade to take their power to all corners of the earth. 

 

And the key? The hoodwinking of the conservative Right, who have foolishly convinced themselves that liberals ARE fools, believing that man can change the climate. 

 

But herein lies the brilliance--who are the ones ACTUALLY being fooled? 

 

It's almost like a plot from the old "Batman" TV series from the mid 60's:

 

"We Leftists - in our fictional determination to save the world- feign stupidity about global warming, thereby outsmarting the Right, who think WE are the idiots." HAH!

 

"So go ahead and oppose us, gullible conservatives; we liberals have outfoxed all of you. We have the media on OUR side; we have the school children on OUR side; we have conned the moral majority - the ignorant American electorate - over to OUR side..."

 

"And we'll eventually get our way. Domination of the earth!"

 

So are the wonderful objectives of these so-called, "dumb liberals" sounding clearer now, or do we need further explanation?

 

The Obama administration will tax the coal companies, power plants, steel companies, and all of heavy industry according to their usage of fossil fuels; they will be required to buy carbon credits, and trade with nations that produce no energy or emissions .

 

This is all part of an even more hidden agenda-- an undeclared war on capitalism; 

 

It will be the U.S. who will be funding all these payments to 3rd world countries - wealth redistribution on a GLOBAL scale. And the American People will have no SAY in the matter; none at all. 

 

We’re witnessing a worldwide Marxist coup...right under our patriotic noses. 
 

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

Will the media inadvertently foment another Civil War?

Hey; here's a BIG surprise:

 

The majority of Americans NOW favor the Public Option - along with government healthcare reform- by a 57% to 39% margin (ABC-Washington Post poll).

 

This is marvelous! A stunning turnaround! 

 

Why only yesterday, a Rasmussen poll of American households reported that 54% were opposed to the Public option, and only 29% percent SUPPORTED it.

 

Oh, that fickle American public! They just can't seem to make up their minds...or can they?

 

Sadly, we have entered a new "era"; a time where once-revered major American newspapers are now little more than discredited, leftist garbage-wrappers for the Obama administration. 

 

Who needs hefty bags? 

 

In this "brave" new era, we are witness to a first-time phenomenon in our history...the beginning of the end of free speech. And it comes with no formal announcement; no official decree; no Congressional mandate; no presidential order - but undeniably, it's there.

 

And it's everywhere.

 

People no longer "speak their mind" in public; they are now prone to whispering - muzzled  by a horrid, pandemic wave of political correctness that tacitly decrees..."Thou shalt not criticize an African-American president, or ye will be silenced."

 

This new silence of the lambs has affected everyone - especially those sheepish  EX-major news networks: ABC, CBS, NBC, plus Newsweek, and of course, the New York Times, who all meekly espouse the Obama party line, "we are ALL socialists now."

 

But the vast preponderance of the electorate knows otherwise - aware of when they're being hoodwinked. Despite reports to the contrary from these liberal mouthpieces, America is a center-right country, and We the People refuse to be told otherwise!

 

Yet the liberal mainstream media continually reports that Americans favor socialization of medicine, are concerned about "climate change," and that Barack Obama continues to enjoy the support of 60% of the voters.

 

But by lying, they have chosen their fate; they have violated their First Amendment obligation. They now report but half the story...."let no conservative opinion be put forth, lest the truth be known!"

 

In a free-market democracy, the people ultimately make the decision as to how their press should act. And no greater evidence exists than in the precipitous decline in daily circulation of EVERY liberal American newspaper, slanting its news left.

 

Have these big-city editors gone mad? Do they not realize their suicidal stance? Are they not aware of the great silent majority, who has now begun to speak out?

 

What future lies in being a shill for the Obama administration? How many papers can they sell OUTSIDE the Beltway?

 

If they continue onward with this insane policy of leftist lies- supporting a man who is the most hated, divisive president to ever cast a shadow in the Oval Office - will they, like the passenger pigeon, enter into extinction?

 

Even a dumb bird has more sense.

 

According to the major newspapers, Barack Obama can walk on water; and supposedly, has the unbridled support of the voters, in his belief that the government should ultimately be responsible for healing the sick.

 

But the American public knows Obama is the devil-incarnate: after all, how could a man who fought singlehandedly to allow a post-partial aborted baby to die ignominiously in a linen closet, care one whit about the rest of America receiving proper healthcare?

 

Even a child - a young 10-year old boy at an Obama townhall - sensed the overriding antipathy boiling beneath the surface, asking the President..."Why do people hate you...?"

 

But that child's question is germane to the problem we face today...why America is at its most divided point since the1850's- the decade before the Civil War.

 

Yes; that child was watching a man, our president, with a dazzling smile, a charismatic demeanor, the physique of an athlete, the oratory of a great statesman- yet the boy could sense that there was something not quite right; something that did not add up.

 

Indeed, how could anyone hate a man like this? Especially the President!

 

But that's where our liberal, hard-left media comes in.

 

It's become their appointed task to throw cold water on the seething anger that the vast majority of the American electorate now has for their government, and the man who is leading our Congress down a path where few (other than Obama) wish to go.

 

Does Barack Obama REALLY have the support of 60% of Americans? Does the vast majority of electorate even care about climate change, or the fact that illegal aliens lack private health insurance, or that they have not received amnesty?

 

No; but they do care about an ACTUAL unemployment rate of 16%, and that America is on a perilous path to national insolvency. Those are the real things that have them concerned; not some public option, or cap 'n trade law that Obama wants to ram down their throats.

 

It seems Obama is FOR everything that will hurt America's standard of living, and imperils the very survival of our free republic, as he attempts to install full socialism into this country before the end of his first term - and he can't seem to act fast enough!

 

So maybe when that little boy gets older, he'll understand. In America, appearances can't hide what's beneath the surface: the content of one's character.

 

The fact that people so despise Barack Obama has nothing to do with his skin color; nothing to do with his heritage; nothing to do of where he was born - but everything to do with his innermost being.

 

The man is without conscience, and cares not about the health of the average American, nor the wonderful country who enabled him to ascend to the pinnacle of its highest office.

 

Yet our lamestream media continues to portray things otherwise; that everything Obama wants is what the rest of America so desires.

 

Unless we return to what Obama promised as a candidate - versus the agenda he professes now - this radical president, and the hard-left media, are destined to last but one brief term.  

 

That's a change we MUST believe in...lest the nation be torn asunder.

 

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

Will the Republicans blow the big one in Jersey?


Shall we diagnose what's wrong with the Republican party?
We need look no further than the governors' race in New Joisey (Jersey), where honest Jon Corzine seeks a second term.

 

Currently in the "Garden State," life approaches Nirvana:

 

-the state is rapidly losing population, with the highest unemployment in the region; along with the highest overall tax burden in America,

 

-the state property tax is the highest in the nation; yet New Jersey is rapidly cutting services

 

- governor Corzine has increased the salaries of state employees by an amount of $183 million dollars. 

 

- the state worker's pension fund has been increased - part-time workers are even eligible.

 

- job creation is a disaster; 9 of every ten new jobs are in government, rather than the private sector

 

-New Jersey was recently voted WORST of the 50 states in terms of the business climate.

 

-Currently, New Jersey faces a seven billion dollar budget shortfall

 

Other than that, Corzine has done a great job during his first term.

 

In the 'socialist state' of New Jersey, you'll pay a rate of taxation that is equivalent to the socialist counties of Europe, but minus the universal free health care, free college tuition, annual government-subsidized vacations, and 35-hour work weeks.

 

Corzine's private socialism exists ONLY for public workers and the unemployed - they continue to get raises, while the rest of the actual working people of New Jersey are footing the bill.

 

But is this not typical of anytime a democrat takes power? Taxes, more taxes, more "user fees" and more public-sector expansion.

 

ITEM: New Jersey is installing hundreds of new toll booths along the state's major highways - part of Corzine's program to "eliminate waste and corruption."

 

So just how corrupt is beautiful New Jersey, where the state government - along with the rampant fraud - continues to expand?

 

In 2005, Jon Corzine - one of the richest men in American politics - spent a cool $45 MILLION (most of it his own money) to get elected to a governor's job that pays a whopping $175,000 per year.

 

Corzine, a 58-year-old former Goldman Sachs CEO - has an estimated net worth ranging as high as $262 million.

 

Opposing him is "Mr. Clean," Republican Chris Christy - a "take no prisoners" U.S. Attorney (appointed by Bush in 2001) - who has indicted over 130 Republicans and Democrats (all sent to jail), and is campaigning on his reputation (quote)..."I'm going to bring that same attitude to the governor's office."

 

Christie took down such well-known Democrats as former Newark mayor, Sharpe James; real-estate magnate Charles Kushner; and in 2006, Christie issued a highly controversial subpoena for the financial records of N.J. democratic Senator Robert Menendez, shortly before Menendez’s tough 2006 re-election battle.

 

In 1999, Christie flew down to Austin (with eight top New Jersey Republicans) to meet George Bush for a private lunch at the Governor’s Mansion with Karl Rove - a fact that has haunted Christie in his campaign for governor ever since.

 

Last June, the relatively unknown Christie polled nearly 18 points higher than the tax 'n spend liberal, Corzine. By September 1, Christie's lead remained a solid ten points. But by September 30, the lead had shrunk to 4 points- close to the margin of error.

 

And now - incredibly - Jon Corzine looks like the sure winner. But why?

 

Did Christie committ some collosal gaffe? Some egregious political mistake? 

 

Indeed, no matter the odds (or how important the election) the Republicans always seem to blow big races. And why? Because Republicans insist on "playing by the rules"...the fools!

 

But in politics, the number 1 rule is: "THERE ARE NO RULES".

 

You don't bring a bean shooter to a gun fight.

 

All throughout the campaign, Chris Chrisitie has talked about the fact that he will "clean up curruption" and touts his worship of home-bred rock star, Bruce Springsteen. But come November, Mr. Christie is about to find out the hard way - was honesty the best policy?

 

Not when your opponent happens to be the biggest liar in the state of New Jersey:

 

Despite being the most reputable gubernatorial candidate in the country, you'd think Chris Christie was the second coming of Boss Tweed - only with a penchant for being stout.

 

So far, Corzine has spent an incredible 17 million dollars on negative campaigning; and EVERY ad that he puts out about Christie is laden with lies- except for the one's where the Corzine campaign lampoons Christie for his "distended appearance."

 

Christie is both underfunded, and overweight.

 

And Corzine knows well the strategy: BURY an opponent, ANY opponent, in an avalanche of negative, distorting ads - it works every time.

 

People In New Jersey are like hapless, beaten dogs, cynical to the point where they believe just about anything they hear about anyone...as long as it's stated in the negative.

 

EXAMPLE: In one Corzine campaign commercial we learn that...(quote)  “Republican Chris Christie is silent on global warming and will cut environmental protection...Jon Corzine’s creating jobs and making New Jersey a leader in green, renewable energy.... So who stands with you?” (unquote).

 

Ironically, this near-farcical TV spot has proven highly-effective, DESPITE Corzine's record as the biggest job-killer in New Jersey since the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic.

 

Another Corzine ad argues that Christie got preferential treatment in not getting a ticket for a 2002 traffic accident. Christie went down a one-way street and collided with a motorcyclist.

 

(Quote)...Christie threw his "weight" around as U.S. Attorney and got off easy,” says the ad’s voice-over.The ad then goes back to a $46,000 Christie loan to former First Assistant U.S. Attorney Michele Brown:  (quote)...“If you didn’t pay your taxes, ignored ethics laws- would you get away with it?...Chris Christie....one set of rules for himself. Another for everyone else.”

 

In one of the great low points in election history, Corzine has instructed his public union bosses into spreading outright lies - a concerted effort to frighten away police and firemen from supporting Chris Christie -  telling the rank and file that Christie would somehow eliminate or diminish their pension benefits. 

 

Can you get any lower? Of course!

 

Predictably, Mr. Corzine bribed the NY Times to endorse

his bid for re-election as governor of New Jersey.

 

In a recent Saturday editorial, the Times called Corzine...(quote) "a decent man with a laudable set of goals for his state."

 

Corzine...a decent man? With a "laudable" set of goals? Even the Times editorial staff had to hold their noses before printing that.

 

But Corzine was only doing what thousands of Democrat incumbents have done before him, and will continue to do again until it no longer works - go by the time-proven DNC formula of dirty tricks:

 

1) instruct your campaign staff to dig up all possible dirt on the opposition; omitting nothing - even an opponent's physique/stature is fair game


2) pound away unmercifully in the last month of the campaign with horrid lies - no matter how blatant

3) bribe the editorail staff of the biggest local/regional newspaper for their "endorsement," preferably right before the vote

4) watch the Republicans do NOTHING (as always)

 

Never mind the critical importance of this New Jersey governor's race; the Republicans seem not to be worried. 

 

Never mind that it's a referendum on Barack Obama; and should Corzine lose, the moderate democrats in Congress will abandon the radical left's agenda of health care; card check; illegal immigrant amnesty, and climate change, as all of  America breathes a collective sigh of relief.

 

Yes; never mind that all of America is watching the Republicans, as they idly stand by like deaf mutes -leaving Chris Christie to flap in the wind - while Jon Corzine BUYS his second term -further demoralizing honest voters, knowing yet another crook has been triumphant.

 

The RNC (and the Republicans) are watching New Jersey's worst governor of all time literally LIE his way to victory, as they offer Christie little financial help, nor provide any effective on-air rebuttals versus Corzine's slanderous accusations.

 

Today's elections matter not about reputations; it's whoever can buy the most airtime, and shock the voters to the polls:

 

Yes Mr. Christie; you would have made a great governor... but you forgot ONE thing - the Democrats would paint you with the "Bush brush," and blame New Jersey's problems on Republicans; yet the voters are swallowing it, because they continue to hear it, over and over again.

 

You also forgot that the RNC he would be no help, other than HOPING you'll win.

 

New Jersey's property taxes are the highest in the nation; what else do you need to say?

 

All you need do is buy a million bucks of TV air time, and hammer away at Corzine's Achilles heel - the fact that New Jersey's public unions are taking the state down, just like the UAW took down the car industry - and the state of Michigan along with it

 

Or you could go the cheap route and run this 15 second radio spot...."John Corzine is a desperate man... drowning in his own cesspool of corruption. Yes, Corzine deserves 4 more years --in prison."

 

So why not go after Corzine, and the fact that he's for big government; big spending; big unions; and for supporting those welfare leeches who are draining the state dry.

 

Vote Chris Christie; and let integrity beget prosperity.

 

Hey that has nice ring to it!

 

Michael Steele, and the Republican National Committee - are you listening?
 
 

 

 

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

The Best Place on Earth

 
February 23, 1945: in the middle of a hell-on-earth struggle for a desolate, 3-mile square Pacific island, a war photographer would snap an immortal picture - that of six U.S. Marines hoisting up the American flag.
 
Everyone born an American since has seen this photo:
 
The picture was such a sensation it immediately made the front pages of every American newspaper back home. Life magazine put it on its front cover. The photographer, Joe Rosenthal of the Associated Press, became famous overnight.
 
The identity of the six Marines in the picture, 3 of whom survived the carnage on Iwo Jima, all would become household names - similar to the astronauts who landed on the moon a generation later.
 
But what was it - a picture a six men and a flag - that had so aroused the American people back home? It was the overriding symbolism that the flag stood for- no one could defeat the United States, because ours was a land of the free - a country worth fighting for.
 
Back during the days of World War II, our nation's very survival was actually in doubt for a time. Again, the operative word here is FREE. And back in those days, the American flag was symbolic of everything the nation stood for - the preservation of freedom!
 
But now, several generations hence, there is trouble in America:
 
Once again our survival as a free republic is in doubt. Everywhere, our freedoms are being attacked by an even more dangerous enemy than any Axis dictator; America is at war with the liberals - vicious people who despise their own country for the very reason the rest of us all love it- because of its freedom.
 
Which of course, leads us to to ask...why do liberals have such vitriolic hate for the American flag? Yes; put an American flag in front of a liberal, and it's like waving a fire engine-red blanket before an angry bull. They see red! They foam at the mouth; they want it gone! "Get it outta my sight!"
 
Such irony!
 
That flag - the  very thing these liberals despise - is what actually gives these sickos their RIGHT to oppose it! Or speak out against it. But that's where it ends. They have no right to keep the rest of us Americans from saluting it, or displaying it, or pledging our allegiance to it, which they are so determined to do nowadays.
 
But what do they care?
 
Never mind the tens of thousands that died on Iwo Jima; or on Omaha beach; or in the horrid cold of winter 1945, during the Battle of the Bulge. Our brave soldiers once gave their lives for these anti-Americans; the same people now imperiling our freedom to display and salute our beautiful American flag.
 
But why are they so embittered toward the country that guarantees them the right to do this? What makes them so different? What is it about America they so abhor?
 
We all drink from the same water supplies. We all breath the same air. Are liberals born that way? Could liberalism be like autism, where science has yet to determine the actual cause?
 
Michael Savage -The widely-known radio talk show host - has written a book..."Liberalism is a Mental Disorder."
 
One can only conclude that the man has researched his subject well.
 
What could possibly cause a person to hate the American flag?
 
Sure, we understand that it stands for the history of a country that supposedly has been imperialistic, jingoistic, militaristic, and even downright racial in its 235-year past - but so what? Who's perfect?
 
Could have the U.S. have done things any different?
 
Slaves were imported into this country 150 years BEFORE the signing of the Declaration of Independence. In every war which the U.S. has fought, and won 'em all (except for one), have we ever kept territory, or demanded war reparations, or sent those we vanquished into bondage?
 
Or how about World War II? In the post war, did we not entirely rebuild Europe, and make sure the Japanese people had order and stability in their destroyed country, giving them the opportunity to rebuild to the prosperous free society they enjoy today?
 
But the salient point is this: THEY were the ones who started it; and we finished it; but did we rub their noses in it?
 
As far as slavery goes, is any one familiar with that five year period of horrid carnage that is called THE CIVIL WAR?
 
And there's the old liberal standby..."But look what Cheney & Bush did in Iraq!"
 
Yes, look what they did.Those people are now free from the terror of Saddam Hussein, and can actually go about on the street and rail about their new, FREELY-ELECTED government, without some secret policeman to drag them away to be tortured- then beheaded.
 
And not a DROP of Iraqi oil did we expropriate! Not a drop. So there goes that liberal argument that..."we went in there for their oil."
 
And while you're at it, if you liberals despise this county so much - instead of trying to force your anti-Americanism upon the rest of us, and stop us from displaying the flag, or saying a prayer at work or school, or just being patroitic for no other reason than, well, being patriotic -go away; stay out of it; move along.
 
Canada and Mexico are but a hop-skip 'n a jump. South America is nice and warm this time of year.
 
You'll then find out why EVERYONE in the world wants to be an American and come here; but no American - other than a fleeing criminal- is trying to escape the United States.
 
Gee, do you think it could be that freedom thing about America that everyone around the world seems to love - except the liberals. 
 
The vast majority of Americans greatly APPRECIATE their country, and the lifestyle that goes with it. They know there's literally no other land like it - no better place to live. So to all you hateful liberals; stop trying to change it.

We've fought enough wars already to protect the Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms we cherish; but if we have to, we also will battle you odious liberals to the very end, to affirm our belief that America - despite her imperfections - has always been, and will always be...the best place on earth.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Our dearly-beloved Congressional Communist Caucus


Ah yes, let us gather 'round the campfire and marvel at all the good works of the Congressional Black Caucus - those burning embers of American patriotism!

 

Let their great story be told!

 

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) - founded in 1969 by John Conyers - has a total of 42 listed members and officers, and believe it or not - they are uniformly African American!

 

But this begs the obvious question - why not a Caucasian Caucus? 

 

C'mon America; we got some catchin' up to do here!  After all, is this not the era of Multiculturalism? 

 

What about all the other ethnic groups we've left out?

 

Bring on the Brazilian Caucus!  Let's hear it for the Czechoslovakian Caucus! Hail the Muslim Caucus! And horrors were we to omit the Portuguese caucus! And lest we forget, let's extend an accolade out to the Bosnian Caucus, and all their members in good standing. 

 

Let freedom ring! America... the great melting pot of caucuses!

 

And what about the Black Panthers? Indeed - its high time we broke the color barrier! If you're say, an uppity native-American group, how about starting the Red Panthers? No problemo qualifying for fed funding in this new world of egalitarianism! 

 

But how did we get HERE, from there? 

 

Does ANYONE know how we ended up in this country with a "Congressional Black Caucus"...and no one batted an eye? Are they Separatists? Socialists? Communists? All the above? What's their purpose? What if we had a National Irish Caucus?

 

This needs to be examined. Who's "side" are they on? We wonder.

 

Aren't we  ALL Americans? Does not the Congressional Black Caucus imply racial division? Is it their covert goal? Should we examine more closely their TRUE agenda?

 

How about starting with that great patriotic, flag waving, African American - Barbara Lee, the incumbent member of the U.S. House of Representatives, from California's 9th Congressional district.

 

Not surprisingly, Ms. Lee's district is "not competitive." It includes (gasp) Berkeley!

Ron Dellums - who was Barbara Lee's predecessor in the 9th District (and a Blauck Caucus member) - went on to become mayor of Berkeley.

 

Berkeley was the foundation city in "The Movement." It started out with the supposed Free Speech Movement. The Movement was funded with Communist money, as recounted by the late Abbie Hoffman - one of the original "Chicago Seven."

 

Later on, Abbie Hoffman did the planning and filming of Woodstock, only to be marginalized - so the movie seem not orchestrated by the Communist Left (which it actually was).

 

Berkeley - long a hotbed of Leftist dissent - was home to Harry Bridges, the Communist Australian and longshoreman, who was later revealed as a secret member of the Central Committee of the American Communist Party.

 

Bridges was instrumental in the move from Chicago to Hawaii (in 1948) of Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis - later a mentor to teenager Barry Sotero (Barack Obama).

 

Bridges also hired and coached a young Latino Communist Party member named Burt Corona - a mentor to to a young radical named Tony Vilar (Antonio Vilaraigosa), now Mayor of Los Angeles - former member of President Obama's Economic Transition Team.

 

So who was it that said: "Communists of a feather flock together"...er, something like that?

 

Getting back to the eminent Barbara Lee; she has a rather curious profile:

 

Lee assumed her Congressional office April 7, 1998, and has comprised a sterling resume of stellar achievements: a true ALL- American!  

 

- Democratic Member of Congress, co-chair of the radical Progressive Caucus

- Former agent of Black Panther leader, and convicted killer, Huey Newton

- Collaborated with the Marxist dictatorship of Grenada to deceive the U.S. Congress

Voted against using military force against terrorists following the 9/11 attacks

- Has consistently voted against U.S.-led military action, regardless of circumstances

 

Not one for handouts, Ms. Lee has worked hard all her life to get where she is today:

 

While attending Mills College in Oakland California during the early 1970s, Lee worked as a "volunteer" for the local chapter of the Black Panther Party's "Community Learning Center", which later became your local friendly neighborhood ACORN franchise.

 

According to Ms. Lee, she descibes her start in politics..."I began my career in the California state legislature as a member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism;" a spin-off from the American Communist Party.

 

Barbara Lee also worked on the 1973 Oakland mayoral campaign of Black Panther co-founder Bobby Seale, serving as a confidential aide to the Panthers' 'Minister of Defense,' Huey Newton.

 

In the 1980s, Lee joined Democratic congressman Ron Dellums' staff, who headed the House Sub-Committee on Military Installations.

 

Aided by Lee, Dellums used his authority to mislead the Congress and State Dept. regarding Grenada, where many Soviet bloc advisers - in conjunction with Cuban military personnel -were busy constructing an airport capable of accommodating large Soviet-made bombers.

 

As the ranking Democrat member of the House Armed Services Committee, Dellums traveled to Grenada to conduct a "fact-finding" tour; upon his return, he "embellished" the true story of the threat of the Grenadian Communist dictatorship - actually committing TREASON, for which he was never punished! 

 

Mr. Dellums reported that Grenada's 12000 ft. runway was intended solely for "tourist traffic," and that President Reagan's "suspicions to the contrary" were “absurd, patronizing, and totally unwarranted." Dellums' phony assurances had the intention of deceiving the Reagan administration, and allow final completion of the airport.

 

Among the cache of documents retrieved after the liberation of Grenada, are the minutes of a Politburo meeting, where remarks by Soviet Dictator, Maurice Bishop, finger Barbara Lee (then a Dellums aid) as complicit in the treason.

 

In Grenada, Lee offered Maurice Bishop the opportunity to view a highly classified report - six months after it had been completed and turned into the State department - giving him the green light to begin basing Soviet bombers, within easy striking distance of the U.S. 

 

Dellums acted as an agent of the enemy in abetting a pro-Soviet dictator's hostile designs against the United States. His emissary in this act of betrayal was of course, the current leader of the Congressional Black Caucus - Barbara Lee.

 

At the time, the pro-liberal State department chose to "finesse" the issue of Barbara Lee's behavior, and also avoided addressing the even more disturbing case of Mr. Dellums' sellout - choosing instead to sweep it under the rug.

 

And of course, not a word of this ever appeared in any U.S. newspaper, or otherwise slimy Ron Dellums, and the lovely Barbara Lee, could have been summarily tried for treason!

 

When Dellums retired in 1998, Barbara Lee "won" his vacated congressional seat - holding it ever since.

 

In June 2002, Lee joined 30 fellow members of The Congressional Black Caucus (including such notables as John Conyers, Jesse Jackson, Jr., Cynthia McKinney, and Maxine Waters) in filing a federal lawsuit to block President George W. Bush from withdrawing the U.S. from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the old Soviet Union.

 

The lawsuit named Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld as defendants.

 

Author David Horowitz has called Lee (quote)... "an anti-American communist who supports America's enemies, actively collaborating with them in their war against America."

 

So how does Lee continue to get away with it? She stays "well-connected." One of Nancy Pelosi's closest friends is guess who? Rep. Barbara Lee, who's mysteriously become a vocal apologist for our good dictator buddies, Raul & Fidel, who market cigars from Red Cuba.

 

Now - as head of the Black Caucus - Lee recently led CBC delegation to Cuba to meet with the Castros, and was literally effusive in her report about the slum island/nation after arriving back home.

 

But mysteriously, although Lee appears to despise her home country, for some strange reason, she chooses to live here and suffer under the horrid throes of American capitalism, and remains completely enamored of Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, Robert Mugabe; and of course, the Castro brothers - her dream team.

 

So - given all that - how should we truly regard the Black Caucus? Could they be considered our "enemy within?"

 

The problem lies not with the color of its members’ skin. This is AMERICA. WE are a UNITED people! Our focus is on CHARACTER; not on color!

 

But the reality is undeniable: long ago, the Congressional Black Caucus was hijacked (and exploited) by the Democratic Socialists of America, the Communist Party USA, and Socialist Party USA.

 

The Congressional Black Caucus - like slavery - should be abolished... and it can't happen too soon.

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