Ohhhhhhhh does this sound familiar?
Romney Ropes Off Media to Avoid Making Unscripted Gaffes
And then the GOP tries to knock Obama's use of a teleprompter when this guy can't handle ANY public interaction. Amazing.
Publicado: 05-17-2012 07:45 PM
The Great Barry
By Mark Steyn
NRO May 19, 2012
It used to be a lot simpler. As E. C. Bentley deftly summarized it in 1905:
Geography is about maps But Biography is about chaps.
But that was then, and now Biography is also about maps. For example, have you ever thought it would be way cooler to have been born in colonial Kenya?
Whoa, that sounds like crazy Birther talk; don’t go there! But Breitbart News did, and it turns out that the earliest recorded example of Birtherism is from the president’s own literary agent, way back in 1991, in the official bio of her exciting new author: “Barack Obama, the first African-American president of The Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”
So the lunatic theory that Barack Obama doesn’t meet the minimum eligibility requirements to be president of the United States was first advanced by Barack Obama’s official representative. Where did she get that wacky idea from? “This was nothing more than a fact-checking error by me,” says Obama’s literary agent Miriam Goderich, a “fact” that went so un-“checked” that it stayed up on her agency’s website in the official biography of her by-then-famous client up until 2007: “He was born in Kenya to an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister.”
And then in April 2007, someone belatedly decided to “check” the 16-year-old “fact” and revised the biography, a few weeks into the now non-Kenyan’s campaign for the presidency. Fancy that!
When it comes to conspiracies, I’m an Occam’s Razor man. The more obvious explanation of the variable first line in the eternally shifting sands of Obama’s biography is that, rather than pretending to have been born in Hawaii, he’s spent much of his life pretending to have been born in Kenya. After all, if your first book is an exploration of racial identity and has the working title “Journeys in Black and White,” being born in Hawaii doesn’t really help. It’s entirely irrelevant to the twin pillars of contemporary black grievance — American slavery and European imperialism. To 99.99 percent of people, Hawaii is a luxury-vacation destination and nothing else. Whereas Kenya puts you at the heart of what, in an otherwise notably orderly decolonization process by the British, was a bitter and violent struggle against the white man’s rule. Cool! The composite chicks dig it, and the literary agents.
And where’s the harm in it? Everybody does it — at least in the circles in which Obama hangs. At Harvard Law School, where young Barack was “the first African-American president of The Harvard Law Review,” there’s no end of famous firsts: As The Fordham Law Review reported, “Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.” There is no evidence that Mrs. Warren, now the Democrats’ Senate candidate, is anything other than 100 percent white. She walks like a white, quacks like a white, looks whiter than white. She’s the whitest white since Frosty the Snowman fell in a vat of Wite-Out. But she “self-identified” as Cherokee, so that makes her a “woman of color.” Why, back in 1984 she submitted some of her favorite dishes to the Pow Wow Chow cookbook, a “compilation of recipes passed down through the Five Tribes families.”
The recipes from “Elizabeth Warren — Cherokee” include a crab dish with tomato mayonnaise. Mrs. Warren’s fictional Cherokee ancestors in Oklahoma were renowned for their ability to spear the fast-moving Oklahoma crab. It’s in the state song: “Ooooooklahoma! Where the crabs come sweepin’ down the plain . . . ” But then the white man came and now the Oklahoma crab is extinct, and at the Cherokee clambakes they have to make do with Mrs. Warren’s traditional Five Tribes recipe for Cherokee Lime Pie.
A delegation of college students visited the White House last week, and Vice President Biden told them: “You’re an incredible generation. And that’s not hyperbole either. Your generation and the 9/11 generation before you are the most incredible group of Americans we have ever, ever, ever produced.” Ever ever ever ever! Even in a world where everyone’s incredible, some things ought to be truly incredible. Yet Harvard Law School touted Elizabeth “Dances with Crabs” Warren as their “first woman of color” — and nobody laughed. Because, if you laugh, chances are you’ll be tied up in sensitivity-training hell for the next six weeks. Because in an ever more incredible America being an all-white “woman of color” is entirely credible.
Entering these murky waters, swimming through it like a crab in Mrs. Warren’s tomato mayo, Barack Obama refined his own identity with a finesse Harvard Law’s first cigar-store Indian lacked. In 1984, when “Elizabeth Warren — Cherokee” was cooking up a storm, the young Obama was still trying to figure out his name: He’d been “Barry” up till then. According to his recently discovered New York girlfriend, back when she dated him he was “BAR-ack,” emphasis on the first syllable, as in barracks, which is how his dad was known back in Kenya. Later in the Eighties, he decided “BAR-ack” was too British, and modified it to “Ba-RACK.” Some years ago, on Fox News, Bob Beckel criticized me for mispronouncing Barack Obama’s name. My mistake. All I did was say it the way they’ve always said it back in Kenya. But Obama himself didn’t finally decide what his name was or how to say it until he was pushing 30. In the shifting sands of identity, he picked his crabs carefully.
“I suppose he’d had the name ready for a long time, even then,” says Nick Carraway in The Great Gatsby. “His parents were shiftless and unsuccessful farm people — his imagination had never really accepted them as his parents at all. The truth was that Jay Gatsby of West Egg, Long Island, sprang from his Platonic conception of himself. . . . So he invented just the sort of Jay Gatsby that a seventeen-year-old boy would be likely to invent, and to this conception he was faithful to the end.”
In a postmodern America, the things that Gatsby attempted to fake — an elite schooling — Obama actually had; the things that Gatsby attempted to obscure — the impoverished roots — merely add to Obama’s luster. Gatsby claimed to have gone to Oxford, but nobody knew him there because he never went; Obama had a million bucks’ worth of elite education at Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard Law, and still nobody knew him (“Fox News contacted some 400 of his classmates and found no one who remembered him”). In that sense, Obama out-Gatsbys Gatsby: His “shiftless and unsuccessful” relatives — the deportation-dodging aunt on public housing in Boston, the DWI undocumented uncle, the $12-a-year brother back in Nairobi — are useful props in his story, the ever more vivid bit-players as the central character swims ever more out of focus, but they don’t seem to know him either. The more autobiographies he writes, the less anybody knows. Like Gatsby presiding over his wild, lavish parties, Obama is aloof and remote: Let everyone else rave deliriously; he just has to be. He is in his way the apotheosis of the Age of American Incredibility. When just being who you are anyway is an incredible accomplishment, Obama managed to run and win on biography almost entirely unmoored from life. But then, like Gatsby, he knew a thing or two about “the unreality of reality.”
— Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist
Publicado: 05-20-2012 09:56 AM
Black churches: Betrayed again by Dems
Larry Elder lists reasons Christians should have bolted party – besides 'gay' marriage
President Obama’s affirmation of gay marriage threatens to undermine the near-monolithic black support Obama enjoyed in 2008. Several members of the black clergy now say they intend to sit out the presidential election. One poll from last November found black opposition to gay marriage at 58 percent, higher than the rest of the country, which is about evenly split.
The real question is this: What took black church leaders so long to reconsider their near blind support for the Democratic Party?
The historical strength of black churches has been that of a moral and spiritual refuge in a once-hostile country of legalized slavery and Jim Crow. This explains why so many civil rights leaders came out of the church. The moral cause was just and clear: Equal rights mean equal rights – for everyone.
But equal rights and equal results are two very different things. The modern civil rights movement lost its way by failing to appreciate the difference. To achieve “equal results,” the Democratic Party, among other things, demands redistribution of wealth, a government response to the “gap” between the rich and poor, higher minimum wages and higher taxes on the so-called rich.
The Democratic Party opposes education vouchers, despite polls showing that black and Hispanic inner-city parents want them. The Democratic Party is the party of race-based preferences and also opposes privatization of Social Security.
The Democratic Party is the party of the welfare state – a neutron bomb dropped on the intact nuclear family. Author/editor/professor Marvin Olasky, in his book “The Tragedy of American Compassion,” traces the growth of welfare. During a mere three-year period in the 1960s, welfare rolls increased nearly 110 percent. President Johnson established “neighborhood centers” whose workers went door-to-door, apprising people of their welfare “rights and benefits.”
Until the so-called “War on Poverty,” the poverty rate declined steadily. At the turn of the century, nearly 70 percent of Americans were poor. But by the time of the “War on Poverty,” the rate stood at approximately 13 or 14 percent. What happened? Welfare created dependency and decreased the incentive of the welfare recipient.
The Heritage Foundation compared families on welfare versus families eligible for welfare but that, for one reason or another, refused to take it. The results were startling. Heritage reported: “Young women raised in families dependent on welfare are two to three times more likely to drop out and fail to graduate from high school than are young women of similar race and socioeconomic background not raised on welfare. Similarly, single mothers raised as children in families receiving welfare remain on AFDC longer as adult parents than do single mothers not raised in welfare families, even when all other social and economic variables are held constant.”
The Democratic Party is the party of Roe v. Wade, even though blacks are more pro-life than whites. Former President Jimmy Carter, a religious man who called himself “twice born,” thought the Democratic Party made a tactical and moral error by embracing abortion-on-demand as a federal right guaranteed by the Constitution: “I never have believed that Jesus Christ would approve of abortions, and that was one of the problems I had when I was president, having to uphold Roe v. Wade. … But except for the times when a mother’s life is in danger or when a pregnancy is caused by rape or incest, I would certainly not and never have approved any abortions. … My **noallow** on abortion … is to minimize the need or requirement for abortion and limit it only to women whose (lives) are in danger or who are pregnant as a result of rape or incest. I think if the Democratic Party would adopt that policy, that would be acceptable to a lot of people who are now estranged from our party because of the abortion issue.”
The Democratic Party is the party of tax-the-rich. Never mind that Democratic Party icon President John Kennedy sounded downright trickle-downish when he said: “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low – and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now. The experience of a number of European countries has borne this out. This country’s own experience with tax reductions in 1954 has borne this out, and the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget – and tax reduction can pave the way to full employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budgetary deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous expanding economy which will bring a budgetary surplus.”
The Democratic Party is the party of minimum wage. Nobel Laureate economist Milton Friedman said, “We regard the minimum wage as one of the most, if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books.”
For all these reasons, having nothing to do with gay marriage, black churches should have broken with the Democratic Party long ago.
Better late than never.
Publicado: 05-20-2012 11:41 AM
A Rough Sunday for Team Obama
By Guy Benson 5/21/2012
The Sunday morning network chat shows typically distill and explore the major political themes of the week, with Republicans and Democrats grappling for narrative control. This week's programs were no exception, and suffice it to say that the Obama campaign didn't have a very productive weekend. Three of its surrogates strayed off message, handing the GOP a series of golden talking points:
(1) Former top economic adviser Austin Goolsbee admitted what we've known for some time: President Obama is the "undisputed Debt King." Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace laid down the facts, and Goolsbee could do nothing but stare the truth in its face:
Wallace: "The fact is, Mr. Goolsbee, that under this president, the debt has increased by five trillion dollars, or almost 50 percent."
Goolsbee: "Look, I don't dispute that the deficit has increased."
In an emailed statement to the media, the Romney campaign chuckled that "its nice to see that the president's campaign isn't disputing the facts, for once." It's a backhanded compliment, of course, but I'm not sure how much credit Goolsbee really deserves. Acknowledging empirical math shouldn't be a laudatory act; it should be common practice. Barack Obama has presided over an unprecedented (some might say "unpatriotic") bloating of the national debt and has institutionalized trillion-dollar-plus deficits, rupturing his early pledge to halve the annual deficit by now. This reckless record of spending -- accompanied with unforgivable inaction on long term debt solutions -- is one of Mitt Romney's top indictments of the president. Goolsbee's frank admission thus affirms a primary Republican election year message.
As religion becomes an ever-more significant issue on the campaign trail, Mitt Romney's Mormonism will be off-limits as a subject for the opposition, Obama campaign advisor David Axelrod said on Sunday. "We've said that's not fair game," he said on CNN's State of the Union. When asked whether the campaign "repudiate[s] the idea that Mormonism should be on the table" this election season, Axelrod insisted: "absolutely." He added, however, that Romney should to come out stronger against attacks on Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Some Obama allies haven't gotten this message -- two elected Democrats have made inflammatory statements about polygamy in recent weeks. And as for Axelrod's gripe about Romney's reaction to the Wright reports, I'm not sure what else he could have done to satisfy Axe's repudiation thirst. He came out and thoroughly rejected the hypothetical Wright attacks within hours, to the chagrin of some conservatives. I guess he has to keep the gravy train chugging along somehow, right?
(3) Finally, Democratic Newark Mayor Cory Booker -- last seen participating in an Abbott and Costello routine with Chris Christie -- appeared on Meet the Press and totally cut the legs out from under Team Obama's Bain Capital demagoguery:
"If you look at the totality of Bain Capital's record, they've done a lot to support businesses to grow businesses, and this [Obama strategy] to me...I'm very uncomfortable with it."
In condemning The One's Bain strategy as "nauseating," Booker also made the point that public pension funds invest with companies like Bain to help **noallow** strong retirement funds, dealing another blow to the silly notion that only Romney and his top deputies benefited from robust investment returns. Recapping: Conceding Republican's valid criticisms on deficits and debt, taking Mormonism off the table, and praising Bain Capital's strong investment record. What does that leave for Democrats to run on? Perhaps the Washington Post should start digging into how Romney treated his pet goldfish in middle school.
UPDATE - Booker is back-tracking on his Bain defense, almost certainly at the behest of Team O:
People are describing that has a "hostage video." Yeah, pretty close. The RNC is circulating a "Stand with Cory" petition, just to rub it in. Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal asks the trenchant question in all of this: If Bain just devoured and destroyed companies, why are people still lining up to do business with them decades later? Answer: Because the point of their business model is to save and grow businesses -- and they're damn good at it.
Publicado: 05-21-2012 01:11 PM
Stupidity Laws Could Have Stopped Obama
By John Ransom
Democrats have been crying for the last few weeks because the official bank of the Obama administration, JPMorgan Chase, lost $2 billion dollars in a hedging strategy that will likely get a few more folks fired from the firm.
Democrats have used their deepest Vox Populi to decry loose bank regulations that allowed this outrage to happen.
Their argument would be especially good if the bank regulations they are criticizing weren’t the result of large Democrat majorities and signed into law by President Occupy Wall Street himself just as the Democrat majorities unwound.
As Reuters notes “The 2010 Dodd-Frank financial oversight law was enacted in response to the financial crisis includes the Volcker rule, which bans banks from making speculative bets with company money. But it includes an exemption for trades done to hedge risk.” Nice loophole there guys; must have raised a ton on money for Democrat campaigns on that exemption.
House Republicans meanwhile are taking a more pragmatic and ultimately correct **noallow** that these losses are best left to shareholders and board of directors to figure out.
"There's no law against stupidity. No law against stup...id trades," said House Speak John Boehner.
Because here’s where Democrat logic really falls apart: If there were laws against stu..pid investments, we could have used it the last three years to protect the taxpayers from Obama.
How come Dodd-Frank is silent on the stupidity of a president whose past investment management expertise consists mostly of ordering t-shirts for the marches he conducted in Chicago neighborhoods?
If you want to talk about really solving too-big-to-fail, or systemic risk in financial markets, you can start at the White House.
Obama’s been the Typhoid Mary of the investment business since Democrats gave him an unlimited check book.
It’s just possible that because of Obama the solar industry won’t recover from his government-imposed investment strategy for a decade. Solar investments- like the Guggenheim Solar ETF- which once traded above $250 before Obama was elected, trade very close to an all-time low at $17.74 during this historic, green Renaissance that Obama has ushered in.
Looking only at the high-risk/no reward green company investments Obama’s made, he’s lost about $6.5 billion so far out the $34 billion in Department of Energy loans, according to CBSNews via Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey.
Most of these loans were less than 24 months old. It could be even worse for the administration if the $2.1 billion loan that they approved had been accepted by Solar Trust of America before they went into bankruptcy in April.
Imagine almost $9 billion in loses- close to one dollar out of every three dollars that was committed gone bad- just in that one program…and counting.
Or how about the TARP bailout that the government’s own Inspector General estimates will cost taxpayers $60 billion in losses? Or the $24 billion loss on the automaker and auto union bailouts?
Oh; and here’s my personal favorite: “More specifically, the total cost of federal regulations has increased to $1.75 trillion,” writes the federal government’s own Small Business Administration.
And as we predicted, even more Democrats are abandoning the president now that the administration’s investments chickens have come home to roost and laid eggs by the hundreds of billions.
Appearing on Meet the Press, an Obama surrogate- yes, a surrogate who is supposed to speak on the president’s behalf- indicted Obama’s attack on Mitt Romney’s investment record at Bain Capital.
Obama contrasted his job of Investor-in-Chief and Great Constitutional Law Giver with the job of private investor that Romney had: “And so if your main argument for how to grow the economy is, I knew how to make a lot of money for investors,” said Obama “then you’re missing what this job is about. It doesn’t mean you weren’t good at private equity, but that’s not what my job is as president.”
Exactly Mr. President: You’re missing what your job is about.
Just because you can squander trillions of dollars, doesn’t mean you’ve done a good job as president.
Your job as president quite OBVIOUSLY is not to invest money is it? If we needed a reminder of it before you were president, we’ve certainly gotten one now that you’ve blown $9 trillion with no economic growth or jobs to show for it.
Because even if your job was to invest taxpayer dollars, face it: you suck at it.
And Romney did quite a good job at investment in both public and private life.
Moreover, it’s really stu..pid for your campaign to pick investment expertise as something to contrast with Romney.
"I have to say from a very personal level I'm not about to sit here and indict private equity,” the industry where Romney worked, said Mayor Cory Booker (D-Newark, NJ) who speaks on behalf of Obama. “To me, it's just, we're getting to a ridiculous point in America. Especially, I know, I live in a state where pension funds, unions and other people are investing in companies like Bain Capital. If you look at the totality of Bain Capital's record, they've done a lot to support businesses, to grow businesses, and this to me, I'm very uncomfortable with" Obama’s attack against Bain and Romney.
And he’ll go on being uncomfortable until someone passes a law preventing Obama from “investing” in stu...pid campaign messages.
Publicado: 05-22-2012 12:26 PM
Under Obama: 30 Worst Months of Employment in the Past 25 Years.
The federal government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes monthly tallies for the employment-population ratio. That stat shows something rather straightforward: Among those who are living in America and are free to pursue employment, what percentage are employed? (The bureau excludes those who are under 16 years old, are active-duty military, or are — in the bureau’s own words — “inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged),” from its tallies.)
Over the past quarter of a century (a total of 300 months), dating back to May 1987 and the Reagan administration, here are the 30 worst months (that is, the bottom 10 percent) for the employment-population ratio, along with the president who happened to be in office at that particular time.
Publicado: 05-23-2012 02:46 PM
Despite a growing backlash from his fellow Democrats, President Obama has doubled down on his attacks on Mitt Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital. But the strategy could backfire in ways Obama did not anticipate. After all, if Romney’s record in private equity is fair game, then so is Obama’s record in public equity — and that record is not pretty.
Since taking office, Obama has invested billions of taxpayer dollars in private businesses, including as part of his stimulus spending bill. Many of those investments have turned out to be unmitigated disasters — leaving in their wake bankruptcies, layoffs, criminal investigations and taxpayers on the hook for billions. Consider just a few examples of Obama’s public equity failures:
● Raser Technologies. In 2010, the Obama administration gave Raser a $33 million taxpayer-funded grant to build a power plant in Beaver Creek, Utah. According to the Wall Street Journal, after burning through our tax dollars, the company filed for bankruptcy protection in 2012. The plant now has fewer than 10 employees, and Raser owes $1.5 million in back taxes.
● ECOtality. The Obama administration gave ECOtality $126.2 million in taxpayer money in 2009 for, among other things, the installation of 14,000 electric car chargers in five states. Obama even hosted the company’s president, Don Karner, in the first lady’s box during the 2010 State of the Union address as an example of a stimulus success story. According to ECOtality’s own SEC filings, the company has since incurred more than $45 million in losses and has told the federal government, “We may not achieve or sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis in the future.”
Worse, according to CBS News the company is “under investigation for insider trading,” and Karner has been subpoenaed “for any and all documentation surrounding the public announcement of the first Department of Energy grant to the company.”
● Nevada Geothermal Power (NGP). The Obama administration gave NGP a $98.5 million taxpayer loan guarantee in 2010. The New York Times reported last October that the company is in “financial turmoil” and that “[a]fter a series of technical missteps that are draining Nevada Geothermal’s cash reserves, its own auditor concluded in a filing released last week that there was ‘significant doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern.’ ”
● First Solar. The Obama administration provided First Solar with more than $3 billion in loan guarantees for power plants in Arizona and California. According to a Bloomberg Businessweek report last week, the company “fell to a record low in Nasdaq Stock Market trading May 4 after reporting $401 million in restructuring costs tied to firing 30 percent of its workforce.”
● Abound Solar, Inc. The Obama administration gave Abound Solar a $400 million loan guarantee to build photovoltaic panel factories. According to Forbes, in February the company halted production and laid off 180 employees.
● Beacon Power. The Obama administration gave Beacon — a green-energy storage company — a $43 million loan guarantee. According to CBS News, at the time of the loan, “Standard and Poor’s had confidentially given the project a dismal outlook of ‘CCC-plus.’ ” In the fall of 2011, Beacon received a delisting notice from Nasdaq and filed for bankruptcy.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. A company called SunPower got a $1.2 billion loan guarantee from the Obama administration, and as of January, the company owed more than it was worth. Brightsource got a $1.6 billion loan guarantee and posted a string of net losses totaling $177 million. And, of course, let’s not forget Solyndra — the solar panel manufacturer that received $535 million in taxpayer-funded loan guarantees and went bankrupt, leaving taxpayers on the hook.
Amazingly, Obama has declared that all the projects received funding “based solely on their merits.” But as Hoover Institution scholar Peter Schweizer reported in his book, “Throw Them All Out,” fully 71 percent of the Obama Energy Department’s grants and loans went to “individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party.” Collectively, these Obama cronies raised $457,834 for his campaign, and they were in turn approved for grants or loans of nearly $11.35 billion. Obama said this week it’s not the president’s job “to make a lot of money for investors.” Well, he sure seems to have made a lot of (taxpayer) money for investors in his political machine.
All that cronyism and corruption is catching up with the administration. According to Politico, “The Energy Department’s inspector general has launched more than 100 criminal investigations” related to the department’s green-energy programs.
Now the man who made Solyndra a household name says Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital “is what this campaign is going to be about.” Good luck with that, Mr. President. If Obama wants to attack Romney’s alleged private equity failures as chief executive of Bain, he’d better be ready to defend his own massive public equity failures as chief executive of the United States.
Publicado: 05-25-2012 02:35 PM
A Whig Manifesto ^ | May 26, 2012 | Chuck Morse
Examining the life and faith of Karl Marx, the patron saint of the left, offers insights into the mind and the actions of the left today. Rev. Richard Wurmbrand, the author of Marx & Satan makes a convincing case regarding the satanic beliefs and practices of Marx and his coterie of radicals. The amoral philosophy of Marx, the dialectic, the convoluted and inverse **noallow** of communication, the worship of earthly power, these are all telltale signs of satanic worship and are the hallmark of the left approach to life and politics today. Certainly Marx’ spawn, Nazism and Communism, unleashed more evil into the firmament than have any other cults in history. As Jesus said on the Mount: “A good tree cannot bear evil fruit, an evil tree cannot bear good fruit…know them by their fruits.”
Marxist ideas have been submerged into an unwitting culture, a culture that is not consciously engaging in satanic worship. Yet the satanic influence of Marx continues to permeate society today whether or not one is literally a devil worshipper. Wurmbrand speculated that Marx was a follower of British occult figure Joanna Southcott, one of the many 19th Century expositors of the “new age.” This author considers the 18th Century Jewish Satanist and occultist Jacob Frank to have more in common with Marx’ approach to life and politics.
Jacob Frank (1726-1791) claimed to be the Messiah and formed a secretive heretical sect that broke away from Judaism. Frank was a follower of Shabtai Zvai, another Jewish false messiah from the previous century. The Frankists, followers of Jacob Frank, formed secret societies after a rabbinic excommunication of him and his followers from Judaism at the 1722 Assembly of Lemberg. The satanic nature of the Frankist movement was indicated by their belief in the virtue of reversing all norms of morality and glorifying that which is considered immoral. Sigmund Freud, who popularized the concept of polymorphous perversity, was probably influenced by the Frankists.
Marx viewed himself as a messiah. Like Jacob Frank, who claimed along with his followers to have converted to Catholicism, and like Frank’s predecessor in heresy Shabtai Zvai and his followers, who claimed to have converted to Islam in 1666, Marx advocated subversion and the necessity of shape-shifting ones image and tactics to suit conditions.
The necessity and justification to lie was codified in leftist thinking by Russian revolutionary Sergei Nechayev and his influential tract Catechism of a Revolutionist. This author has noticed that some left-wing guests on his radio talk show over the years become conservative once they get wind of the conservative orientation of the host. By this means, by deception, the left-wing guest avoids an argument that might require an explanation and defense of leftist positions and beliefs.
Like Frank and his followers, Marx and his coterie believed in God as a common misconception about Marx is that he was an atheist. Marx and his colleagues sought to overthrow God. This view was summed up by Michael Bakunin, a close collaborator of Marx and a fellow founder of the First International:
The Evil One is the satanic revolt against divine authority, revolt in which we see the fecund germ of all human emancipations, the revolution. Socialists recognize each other by the words “In the name of the one to whom a great wrong has been done.”
Satan [is] the eternal rebel, the first free thinker and the emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge.
The skill of the leftist political communicator today is to say absolutely nothing in long and elaborately adorned sentences that sound important and profound. The ultimate sign of a skilled left-wing dialectician is noted by the ability to state two diametrically opposite principles in the same speech and even the same sentence. These two talents are verbal examples of the satanic method which is one of deceit and or extolling an overthrow of conventional norms. President Barack Obama is an example of a highly skilled left-wing dissembler and dialectician.
Publicado: 05-26-2012 01:19 PM
SMARTEST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY PROVED TO BE QUITE IGNORANT
Smartest president in history infuriates our allies with talk of "Polish death camps"
In the course of honoring Polish resistance hero Jan Karski, (was born and died as Catholic) President Obama managed to touch off an international crisis by saying, Jews were being murdered on a massive scale and smuggled him into the Warsaw Ghetto and a Polish death camp to see for himself. Jan took that information to President Franklin Roosevelt, giving one of the first accounts of the Holocaust and imploring to the world to take action.”
It’s rather difficult to imagine Karski barging into FDR’s office and announcing his discovery of “Polish death camps.”
The Poles were understandably furious, with Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski saying via Twitter, “The White House will apologize for this outrageous error.” That’s pretty much the textbook example of demanding an apology in no uncertain terms. Sikorski added, “It’s a pity that such a dignified ceremony was overshadowed by ignorance and incompetence.”
No apology was forthcoming, but National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor did offer a clarification, explaining that “the President was referring to Nazi death camps operated in Poland. The President has demonstrated in word and deed his rock-solid commitment to our close alliance with Poland.”
You see, it’s all the Poles’ fault for misunderstanding The Smartest President In History. Obama couldn’t possibly be too lazy to develop a serious understanding of Jan Karski or his people. It’s not as if he just robotically reads whatever appears on his teleprompter while daydreaming about his next fundraiser.
Would it really have been so hard for Obama to personally rush out a sincere apology for his blunder? What sort of overweening ego is necessary for a man to consider any other course of action at such a moment? Given the intensity of the Polish reaction, they’re likely to view Obama’s reluctance to take personal responsibility for his statement as salt in their wounds.
For those who think the Poles are over-reacting, imagine Imperial Japan had captured Hawaii during World War II, and some future foreign leader prattled about the “American death camps” established by the occupiers. To complete the analogy, imagine that America spent five decades after the defeat of the Axis trapped behind the Iron Curtain. Pretend the ruins of fascism and communism were scattered around your hometown.
For good measure, imagine the foreign leader in question had chosen to shoot a round of golf during the funeral of our President, following his tragic death in an airplane crash, and stripped us of the missile defenses we were promised, famously assuring the Russians that he would be even more “flexible” once he was safely re-elected.
Oh, and suppose that foreign leader had openly declared war on the religion a good 90 percent of us held, compelling the Church to file dozens of lawsuits to defend its religious liberty.
We’d be a little testy under those circumstances, don’t you think? Poland deserves much more respect than Barack Obama has been willing to offer.
Publicado: 05-30-2012 06:37 PM
http://townhall.com ^ | May, 30 2012 | Katie Pavlich
Allen west knows how to fight the enemy.
THE PERFECT ROMMEY'S CABINET AND TOP ADVISERS
Allen West V.P.
Rick Santorum - Sec'y of HHS
Sarah Palin - Sec'y of Energy + Sec'y of Interior (merge these)
Newt Gingrich - Sec'y of Education
Michelle Bachmann - Attorney General
Herman Cain - Sec'y of Commerce, HUD, and Head of GSA (merge)
John Bolton - Sec'y of State
John Petraeus - Sec'y of Defense
Tim Pawlenty: Sec’y of Transportation
Ron Paul - Head of Federal Reserve (let the audit begin)
Donald Trump - Head Council of Economic Advisers
Paul Ryan - Head of Office of Management and
Budget Joe Arpaio - Head of FBI, and Homeland Security (merge these)
Di.ck Cheney - Head of CIA
White House spokesman: Mike Huckabee
1st Supreme Court nominee: Mark Levin
2nd Supreme Court nominee: Ann Coulter
05-31-2012 01:59 PM - editado 05-31-2012 02:09 PM