Obama insists he doesn’t want our energy needs linked to unstable parts of the world.  Service to do anything about the Occupy beatniks laying siege to a number of parks in Washington, DC?

Why should it be portrayed as a greater tragedy when a “single mother” loses her job rather than a man with a wife that stays at home?  Seems both domestic arrangements are in similar positions without income.

In calling for a single source for the unemployed to seek information on training opportunities, doesn’t that involve the federal government assuming more control over education?

Obama insists it should be illegal for students to drop out of school before they are 18.  Why should this be a matter of federal interference and what will the punishment be for those leaving prior to that age?

If no country is better than any other according to multiculturalist dogma, then why should foreign students be allowed to remain here after graduation?

If women are to earn equal pay for equal work, then make them lug the same weight around the stockroom or warehouse without having to seek masculine assistance to do so.

If lightweight vests are being developed by federal researchers that can stop any bullet, will such protective garments be made available to civilians as well or do we have an obligation to be shot by law enforcement?

Interesting how it was mentioned derisively about a company that at one time only produced yachts.

If it should be impermissible for insurance companies to charge more for women’s health coverage, then why should men have to pay more for motor vehicle policies?

Obama claimed politics is not about clinging to rigid ideologies.  So why is it conservatives that must always surrender their basic ideals and ideas?

Obama claimed that government ought to only do what people are unable to do for themselves.  Thing of it is, given his Frau’s desire to manipulate and meddle in your dietary intake, the First Couple doesn’t think you are really capable of doing anything for yourself.

Obama wants to grant tax credits to businesses hiring veterans.  Why should the military status of a business’s employees be any business of the federal government?

The best way to insure opportunities for veterans, as well as all other Americans, is for the federal government to know the least amount possible regarding the nation’s workforce.

If it doesn’t matter in the military what color or gender you are, as Obama insists, why are certain standards lowered for females seeking advancement and White males held back because of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character.  If color has no bearing in the military, why are we often reminded that Colin Powell was the first Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if that is suppose to immunize him against all criticism and scrutiny?

Would Bob Gates have been kept on as Secretary of Defense had he been a solid conservative Republican rather than an ardent establishmentarian compromiser?

Obama admonished the American people to look at what the nation could accomplish if the people were organized along military lines.  However, the purpose of the military is to defend democracy, not practice it.  In a civilian state, the average person is allowed to question the decrees and decisions of leaders elected, appointed, and bureaucratic.  Such bottom up scrutiny is not allowed in the military and is punished severely.

This analyst tabulated approximately 80 rounds of applause in the 2012 State of the Union Address.

by Frederick Meekins

 

WesternFront America

It seems like a bizarre notion, but does Barack Obama want to lose the election in November?

I think he does!

One is struck by the way Obama has visibly aged in the job. He may well have grown weary being POTUS.

By any rational standard, one would say he wants a second term, but Obama has always operated in a fantasy world where mere words are supposed to translate into reality. And he has repeatedly talked about being a one-term president.

He is, after all, his own invention; the author of two memoirs of a life that had little achievement to point to other than getting elected first to the Illinois legislature and then to the Senate where he lingered a bare two years before running for president.

I raise the question because Obama seems to be deliberately irritating the very people who are supposed to be his “base”; the hard core liberals, the Hollywood crowd, youth, and unions, among others. His partisanship has put Congress into total gridlock.

When members of the Occupy movement showed up in Washington, D.C., one of them threw a smoke bomb onto the White House lawn. Others who have been camped out in a park there are likely to be tossed out if for no other reason than the place is overrun with rats and has become a public health hazard.

The decision to stop the Keystone pipeline is a deliberate offense to the unions that have contributed millions to his campaign. Why? It pleased the environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth. Americans, however, understand the pipeline represented both jobs and oil, two things they deem worth having.

Then there are all the vacations Obama and his family takes. They have one thing in common. They are ostentatiously expensive. Obama or Michelle always seem to be going on vacation or returning from one. The characterization may be unfair, but perception is everything.

Americans are very keen on their military and, of all the government programs Obama could have chosen to trim, he’s had the knives out for the Pentagon since he took office. While a war-weary public was likely pleased when he withdrew troops from Iraq (neither Bush, nor Obama had a choice as the Iraqis made it clear they wanted U.S. troops out), the fact remains that the main news out of Iraq these days are bombings as the Sunni versus Shiite conflict has returned. Afghanistan remains a millstone.

Even in the face of a clear threat, it is unlikely that Obama would respond militarily between now and Election Day. The most likely scenario, however, would be an Israeli decision to strike at Iran before it becomes a full-fledged nuclear threat. It must be said, however, that Obama and other NATO nations have positioned some military assets in the Persian Gulf, but would he pull the trigger? It’s doubtful.

The most obvious problem Obama faces is unemployment. It’s variously set at anywhere from 11% to 20% depending on the part of the nation you’re discussing. It still is far too high everywhere and he gives every impression of being, if not indifferent to it, at least in no hurry to address it. Most certainly none of his programs have reduced it. His alleged “stimulus” was little more than a political slush fund that added billions to the national debt and failed.

Every President is subject to “events” and the likely default of Greece and financial troubles of several European nations are likely to impact the national election as Americans try to sort out what effect it will have here. Obama has already presided over the first downgrade of America’s debt rating and we shall surely be reminded of that in the months ahead.

The other event will be the Supreme Court hearing of the case against Obamacare in March. They may not issue a decision right away or they might issue one just before November 6th.

There are two lines of thought about the forthcoming national election. Past Presidents were relieved to leave office despite its power and prestige. (1) Obama may not like being President and (2) he has concluded that he will be defeated. He gives the impression of not caring about public opinion anymore.

The only people publicly defending him seem to have Attention Deficit Disorder. Either they haven’t paid attention to what a disaster his term has been thus far or they just don’t think it’s his fault.

I think he will go through the motions, but I also think a majority of voters no longer believe a word he says anymore.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

 

WesternFront America

To those of us in the Carolinas, it has become clear that the Republican Party is counting on the “ABO” Vote in November. The ABO vote is: “Anybody But Obama” meaning, of course, that the GOP expects republicans will vote for anyone they nominate in order to defeat Obama.

Frankly, it’s the only explanation that makes any sense. Even the candidates, themselves, tell us that any one of the GOP candidates would make a better president than Obama. (Like that was really difficult to discern!)

I spoke to a politically astute friend recently who told me he is very afraid that Romney will win the nomination and lose the election to Obama. (I share that opinion.) But, my friend went on to say, I will vote for whoever is on the ticket against Obama.

See, the problem with an Obama vs Romney ballot is – one of them will win!

Maybe it is just yours truly, but I am more than a little tired of the milquetoast candidates the GOP continues to put forward for President. I mean, look at Dole and McCain. And, frankly, I was not impressed with George W. Bush’s compassionate conservatism, which was nothing more that another way to say “moderate” or “RINO” (Republican In Name Only).

I’m past ready for a candidate with fire in his or her belly. In my less than humble opinion, the GOP needs a candidate who will get into the gutter where the democrats seem always to take their campaigns. We need a candidate who will trade blow for blow with the Democratic Party candidate — a candidate who will go for the jugular, grasp the throat of the opposition and hang on ‘til the election is won.

Politics is a dirty game. If a candidate is not willing to get dirty to win, then how in the world am I to trust that when he is up against the world’s meanest, toughest, “low-downest” scoundrels, he will be able to trade blow for blow – and – do whatever it takes to destroy America’s enemies.

Nice guys are, well, NICE. I’m tired of nice! It is past time to get mean and throw our weight around.

Look. We have enemies who are in our face proclaiming loudly, and with vigor, that they intend to destroy us, to kill every American they can — at the very first opportunity. Uh-uh. Nope. This is not the time for a nice guy in the White House.

Our current President seems to think that his flowery oratory will placate our enemies and we can have a global group hug, sing a few verses of Cum Ba Ya, and it will be all better. I’ve seen this movie — and it does not end well for the nice guy.

No. We desperately need a leader tough enough that when he speaks, the world stops what it’s doing to listen. We’ve had enough of a President who runs off at the mouth like a broken facet. Nobody’s listening anymore – if they ever were.

We also need a leader who leads from the front. Leading from the rear doesn’t happen. Leading from the rear is NOT leading – period. It should be clear by now that when America does not lead — the world goes to hell in a hand basket.

I am frustrated, and more than a little angry, that the GOP is holding to their practice of nominating the “next in line.” I am tired of limp wrists in the White House. I am tired of my President bowing and scraping to every tin horn tyrant he comes across, asking “permission” of the UN, and sucking up to our sworn enemies. It is embarrassing and deeply humiliating.

Sadly, when I see Romney – I see Al Gore with a GOP bumper sticker on his butt. I get the same uneasy feeling I got when Al Gore was running for President. It’s that feeling that something isn’t right, that something is out of place here. Plainly – it’s the feeing that I am looking at a hypocrite. I feel that I am being sold a bill of goods and that he is reading from a well-prepared script, which he has memorized down to the last dot and tittle.

I once interrupted a very young salesman at my door when he was about 30 seconds into his canned spiel. I asked him a question, which he could not answer. He apologized, and asked my forgiveness as he began his spiel all over again — from the very beginning — because that was the way he had memorized it. Back in the day we called that a “canned pitch.” THAT is the feeling I get when I listen to Romney in a debate or delivering a speech. There is no THERE there.

Barring an act of God, Romney will be the GOP nominee. I have to ask: If Romney wins the election and defeats Obama, short of being rid of Obama, what will America have gained? To me, it is comparable to the cancer patient placing his entire faith in a new miracle cure for cancer only to learn, after weeks of treatment, that it does not work, either.

I do not agree that beating Obama will be a walk in the park, as some of my fellow conservatives have postulated. I continue to have great respect for their opinions – BUT — I am convinced the “ABO” vote will be absolutely necessary in November to evict America’s would-be King, Mr. Barack Hussein Obama.

J. D. Longstreet
***********************************
VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012
***********************************
Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

The Founding Fathers, authors of the Constitution, were obsessed with any form of government that could become too powerful, too willing to use force to oppress citizens. They had cause. They had fought a long war against the greatest power of their age, ruled by a king with nearly absolute power. They fashioned an instrument designed to ensure that the President could not rule by edict and defused power among three branches of government.

We have a President currently running for reelection against Congress, Wall Street, Republicans, and the right of citizens to be free of an overly intrusive government.

Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution says: All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in the Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

All appointments of the President must be approved by the Senate while it is in session and the Senate, even over the Christmas and New Year’s vacation has remained in session, if only in a pro forma, technical manner. Every three days it has been convened to assert its powers.

Even so, President Obama has announced several “recess” appointments, all clearly a challenge to the Senate and all clearly a tyrannical power grab. He appointed Richard Cordray as the first director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a new function that puts government between the lender and the citizen. In theory, all loans in the future will be subject to government approval. This is Communism, not Capitalism.

In addition, he appointed three members to the National Labor Relations Board, intended to arbitrate disputes between unions and corporations. None of them have appeared before a Senate committee for vetting. It was this board that demanded Boeing shut down its new factory in South Carolina, one of many “right to work” states that empower workers with the right to determine whether they want to join a union or not.

Neither Obama, nor any president who preceded him can make appointments without the “advice and consent” of the Senate. (Article II, Section 2). As recently as the first week of the year, referring to the Senate, Obama asserted that “I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them.” He has no such obligation. Those are the words of an incipient tyrant.

These actions put me in mind of Niccolo Machiavelli, famed as the author of “The Prince”, a book of advice to Lorenzo de Medici who was the ruler of the former republic of Florence, one of many city states in Italy. Born in 1469 and died in 1527, Machiavelli living during the early years of the Renaissance, a period that saw the flowering of literature, science, art, religion and politics. Historians consider it a bridge between the Middle Ages and the modern era.

The renaissance was a period of social and political upheaval, one in which the various princes ruled so long as they could protect their principalities against wars by others seeking to expand their powers. “The Prince” is largely seen as advice on how a prince may have to resort to the methodical use of brute force and deceit to hold onto power, but it was more than that. It was a guide to ruling people with a minimum of oppression.

“It should be borne in mind,” Machiavelli wrote, “that there is nothing more difficult to handle, more doubtful of success, and more dangerous to carry through than initiating changes in a state’s constitution.” Obama is engaged in an attack on the U.S. Constitution.

Of princely power, Machiavelli wrote, “The people are everywhere anxious not be dominated or oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles are out to dominate and oppress the people. These opposed ambitions bring about one of three results; a principality, a free city, or anarchy.” The Constitution ensures a free nation with limited federal powers and is a guard against anarchy.

Evidence of Obama’s narcissism and drive for complete power is ample. He is on record as saying the Constitution is composed of “negative” limits on power. Others regard the Constitution as the ultimate protection against the unlawful use of power. This is particularly evident in the Bill of Rights which was appended to the Constitution because several of the first States would not ratify without it.

In his advice to Lorenzo de Medici, Machiavelli raised the question of “whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse. Within the context of the time, he said, “it is far better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both.” In the run up to Christmas, Americans bought guns in record numbers which suggests there is considerable fear of Obama and the results of his policies over the past three years.

We have witnessed and been victimized by a Democrat-controlled Congress that forced Obamacare on an unwilling public. We have seen the rise of Islamic fanaticism as the result of his failed policies toward Iran and the Middle East. We have had record breaking debt imposed on us by his failed “stimulus” policies. We have seen continued efforts to reduce our military power and to thwart access to our ample energy resources of oil, natural gas, and coal.

It is a long list of usurpations of power that endanger the nation domestically and internationally. Whether it was done out of stupidity or a deliberate effort to harm the nation can be debated, but the most outstanding attribute of Obama has been his continual lying and Machiavelli notes that “the deceiver will always find someone ready to be deceived.”

In this effort, Obama has been greatly aided by the mainstream media with a few notable exceptions. The trust that once reposed in the nation’s print and broadcast media has been eroded and will be hard to regain. The trust given Obama is long gone by all but a few ignorant and lazy citizens content to have their lives ruled by an over-reaching executive branch of government.

The election process will rid us of Obama and likely many of those Democrat legislators who have supported his policies. The House is controlled by the Republicans and the Senate is likely to follow.

Meanwhile, we must guard against the present occupant of the White House. Americans waged a war against oppression in the past and will, if necessary, do so again.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

 

WesternFront America

We have said many times that Obama envisages Congress as an inconvenient impediment to his agenda to create a strong socialist central government in the United States of America.  If there was ever a single iota of doubt in the minds of Americans that Obama is seeking to assume all US government power unto himself, then his recent actions in naming a head for the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three new members to the National Labor Relations Board and totally by-passing Congress to make those appointments – while the Senate was still in session – should remove all doubt.

What we have here, dear reader, is a full-out raw power grab by the Executive Branch of the US government.  This move by Obama is an abuse of power. It is arguably unconstitutional — and should be grounds for impeachment.

If the US Congress does not take immediate steps to stop the power hungry mob in the White House then the US will, very soon, find itself the newest tin-pot dictatorship with a petty tyrant in total control of the government.

(A reminder:  Only days ago the media was asking why Americans were buying so many guns. You have just seen the answer to that question.)

Look:  We have a would-be emperor on our hands right here in America, the world’s last hope for democracy.

Obama’s disrespect for the US Constitution is breathtaking.  Not only does he disrespect it – he defies it!

As we continue to see Obama’s tentacles spread through the government with his new agencies, Czars, and a myriad of additional rules and regulations handed down by his henchmen – is it too far a stretch to predict that by next fall the Obama Administration will declare a national emergency and suspend the election set for next November?  No, I am not kidding — and I fear it is NOT an exaggeration.

Americans are in serious trouble and I don’t mean with out national economy.  We are in critical danger of losing our freedom and liberty as a country.  I would not be surprised, any day, to see the news channels suddenly break in with a bulletin that Obama has dissolved the Congress and placed the country under martial law until a date uncertain, far in the future, when our economy has been, er, stabilized.

Farfetched?  Really?  I mean – REALLY?  We have a branch of our government out of control, people.

This in-your-face move by Obama demands action by Congress to stop his abuse of power in its tracks.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, said:  “Although the Senate is not in recess, President Obama, in an unprecedented move, has arrogantly circumvented the American people,” (SOURCE)

Senator McConnell is absolutely right.

John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio and Speaker of the US House of Representatives, said Obama’s action was: “an extraordinary and entirely unprecedented power grab by President Obama that defies centuries of practice and the legal advice of his own Justice Department”

“The precedent that would be set by this cavalier action would have a devastating effect on the checks and balances that are enshrined in our Constitution,” (SOURCE)

The fact is – Obama has spat upon those constitutional checks and balances referenced by Speaker Boehner.  The longer Obama stays in office the more America resembles a banana republic, with a tin pot dictator holding the reins of power.  Move over Hugo Chavez!

Of course Obama’s defiance of Congress is an integral part of his political campaign for reelection.  But this time he has gone to cussed far. There can be no question now that Obama is a threat to the freedom of the American people.  His seeming thirst for power begs the question:  Is Obama the American Putin??

Here we have a man in the Presidency who is, I believe, constitutionally unqualified to be President by reason of the circumstances surrounding his birth.  His father was a citizen of Kenya and not an American citizen. The Constitution declares a candidate for US President must be a natural born citizen of the United States, which means — BOTH mother and father must be American citizens.

We Americans know less about Obama than any other President in US history.  Is his name Barack Hussein Obama or Barry Soetoro?  Was he born in America – or Kenya?  Whose Social Security number does he really have? A number of other people have, or have had, the same number. The record of his education is blurry at best.  He is reported to have been a college instructor on the US Constitution, yet he seems to totally ignore it when it gets in the way of his insatiable thirst for power over the American people.

Let’s face it. Obama is a truly scary figure in American politics today. I am convinced he has a dark agenda for America and that agenda is a threat to the freedom of the people of America.

J. D. Longstreet

***********************************
VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012
***********************************
Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

Election years tend to create a level of frenzy concerning the selection of the nominees and the outcome. The media feed this in order to keep readers reading and viewers viewing. The history of American elections has always been one of vituperation between the parties, so there is nothing new about this. Indeed, since so much depends on it, the political free-for-all is a healthy exercise.

It can, however, make for a difficult environment in which to go about one’s life; the air filled with charge and counter-charge, polls going up and down, and a general sense that something is very wrong with the way the government functions.

On the bright side, a gridlocked Congress may bring a measure of relief to everyone. Writing about gridlock in January 2011, Marcus E. Ethridge, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin, noted that “By fostering gridlock, the U.S. Constitution increases the likelihood that policies will reflect broad, unorganized interests instead of the interests of narrow, organized groups.” In 2011, we saw what happens when advocates of “renewable energy”, wind and solar power, or electric cars, get priority over the needs of most Americans for reliable energy and transportation.

At the heart of the 2012 election will be the recognition that the economy is still not recovering, that government is seeking to extend and expand its control over our lives, and, even among former supporters of Barack Obama, that he has been a failure of historic proportions.

A Friday Rasmussen Reports said that “Voters right now give the edge to Republicans when asked which political party is likely to win the White House and control both the House of Representatives and the Senate in next November’s election”, adding that “a lot of voters are undecided.” Those voters may actually wait until entering the polls to cast their vote.

Another bad piece of news for President Obama is a new comparative analysis of current voter registration data in key electoral states of Nevada and North Carolina. According to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, there has been “a drastic drop from 2008 levels when a record-high proportion of young Americans turned out overwhelmingly to cast their votes to elect Barack Obama as President.” This is significant because more than two-thirds of young voters supported the Obama/Biden ticket in 2008.

The President had a low moment following the passage of Obamacare that transformed itself into the Tea Party movement and an even worse one in 2010 when it propelled a large number of Republicans into the House of Representatives, causing its control to change hands. He has had, in fact, only one truly high moment and that occurred when he announced the killing of Osama bin Laden in May 2011. At the time, he typically took complete credit. In a speech at Fort Bragg to returning troops from Iraq, the word “victory” was never spoken.

Americans are not unmindful that the downgrade of the rating of the nation’s sovereign debt, the first in the nation’s history, was announced on Obama’s watch. The rate of “official” unemployment has receded to 8.6% but most Americans are well aware that it is far closer to 11% or more. America continues to experience that longest period of long-term unemployment since the 1930s.

For these and a myriad of other reasons, there is little reason to conclude that President Obama has any chance whatever of being reelected. The widespread contempt for Congress is also a hopeful sign for change. These are reasons to remain calm amidst the din of electioneering in the months ahead.

There is, however, all manner of troubles brewing in the world. Europe will have to find a solution to what will happen if its southern tier of nations elects to default on their sovereign debt. Cracks in the European Union are evident. If it falls apart, it will be very messy, but Europe existed before the EU and would if it disbands.

The Middle East is in the midst of a huge struggle between its fanatical Muslim faction and a population unhappy enough with former dictators to have forced out several in 2011 with the prospect that Syria’s Bashar Assad will fall in 2012.

Iran remains the wild card and its nuclear dreams will likely end with a well-timed and well-executed attack by Israel. Israel saved the world from a nuclear Iraq in 1981 and a nuclear Syria in 2007. An attack on Iranian nuclear and military facilities could trigger an internal movement to overthrow the mullahs.

There are other wild cards in the Middle East. The Palestinians show no indication of giving up their dream of destroying Israel. That will not happen. Without Iranian support, both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza will be set adrift. Muslim atrocities in nations such as Nigeria where Christian churches were bombed on Christmas Day will contribute to a growing movement against Islamic terrorism. It will not happen overnight, but it will happen.

Even the Russians show signs of tiring of their post-Soviet ruling class led by Vladimir Putin.

America faces a long period of restructuring the socialist programs that began in the 1930s and reached their peak in the 1960s. Should the GOP gain control of Congress and Obama is defeated, real change will occur.

Two other factors signal better times ahead. They are the failure of the global warming hoax and the disdain the “Occupy” movement engendered.

In 2012 Americans will take steps to end the scandals and deprecations of the Obama administration.

We shall ignore the anticipated shouts of racism.

We shall see the Supreme Court disembowel Obamacare or set in motion its repeal by a GOP controlled Congress.

We will select a President and a Congress to put things right.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

 

WesternFront America

In his extraordinary book, “Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century”, the historian, Dr. Paul Kengor, stated in his introduction that “We now know that American Communists and their masters in Moscow were acutely aware that they could never gain the popular support they needed to enlist the support of a much wider coalition that could help them push their private agenda.”

Most threatening, however, was Dr. Kengor’s discovery that “it was nothing short of stunning to research this book during the presidential bid of Barack Obama and hear so many of the names in my research surface repeatedly in the background of the man who became president of the United States of America. The way in which so many names and themes from the Cold War past aligned and made their way into Obama’s orbit was chilling.”

Obama’s December 8th speech in Osawatomie, Kansas revealed to anyone paying any attention that the President is a Communist. Speaking of the nation’s economic system that has created the greatest wealth for the most people anywhere, Capitalism, Obama said, “It doesn’t work. It has never worked.”

No one would argue that capitalism is “fair”, nor would they argue that life is “fair.” These are things that never were and never will be, but Obama’s reelection campaign theme will be that Americans are suffering because of Capitalism, because of a lack of fairness.

In a December 8 Washington Times commentary, Jeffrey T. Kuhner wrote, “There is only one problem with the White House’s narrative: It’s completely false. Mr. Obama is not a defender of the middle class but has been its mortal enemy. His policies have impoverished working-and-middle-class Americans.”

Other than the utterly brain-dead liberals for whom facts are meaningless, most Americans understand, as Kuhner pointed out, “His massive stimulus failed to restore economic recovery…his trillion-dollar deficits and skyrocketing debt have mortgaged the future of our children…Obamacare suffocates businesses, stifles job creation, and adds another unsustainable entitlement. It is creeping socialized medicine, which is wrecking the world’s finest health care system.”

Rush Limbaugh denounced the speech as “alien to American ideals and principles…your vision for this country is not rooted in any—not one—American tradition.”

Obama’s history, what is known of it given his extensive efforts to hide the facts that are usually available about a candidate or president, is testimony to the fact that he is a Communist and the only reason this remains clouded to many Americans has been the shameful failure of the Fourth Estate, the liberal mainstream media, to expose it.

He remains in office due to the failure of both the media and the Republican Party to cite the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition against anyone holding the office who is not a “native-born” American. Obama’s father was a Kenyan, a subject of Great Britain. He should not have been on the Democratic Party ballot and he should not be in the Oval Office as this is written.

Many of the known facts about Obama were published in Dr. Jerome Corsi’s 2008 book, “The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality.” Thirty-five pages of footnotes citing the documentation of the facts cited were there for anyone to read. Obama was born into a family of Leftists. As a youngster he was mentored by Frank Marshal Davis, a member of the Communist Party USA.

Of his early college years, Obama said in his memoir that at Occidental, “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.”

Obama’s political career began with a fund-raiser in the living room of two dedicated, self-identified Communists, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. As Dr. Corsi pointed out, “The problem is that Obama sought out his relationships with the Alinski organization, the Ayers-Dohrn radicals, the scandal-ridden (Antoin ‘Tony’) Rezko, Reverand (Jeremiah) Wright and black-liberation theology, and Farrakhan and the Black Muslims. At the time he wanted these ties.” In the course of his 2008 campaign he rejected all efforts to tie him to these individuals.

The appointment of the many “czars” to oversee and guide the actions of government departments and agencies became the subject, first of ridicule, followed by the realization he was infiltrating the government with known radicals of different stripes. The one that quickly gained attention was Van Jones, an avowed Communist. When that became known, Jones resigned.

The Osawatomie speech was classic Obama. In the past he has sought to align himself with former presidents and this time around it was Theodore Roosevelt, a progressive. As Americans have sought to peel away the many layers of deceit surrounding Obama, the single abiding factor in his life is Communism. The views he expressed were a combination of class warfare and an attack on Capitalism.

In 2008 Americans, reeling from the financial crisis that all too conveniently began in the final months of the Bush43 presidency, were duped into believing that a man with nothing more than a message of “hope and change” was a messiah that would lead the nation out of its problems.

Obama was and is the first Communist President of the United States of America. We have a President who rails against “millionaires and billionaires”, corporations, Wall Street, and all other aspects of our Capitalist economy.

We have a President and a Democratic Party that have tipped their hat to the Occupy Wall Street radicals.

We have a President and a Democratic Party totally aligned with the unions in America, some of which put the auto industry in jeopardy, others in the public sector that have plundered state treasuries with sweetheart deals for pensions and health plans, and who we have seen thuggishly oppose the restructuring of collective bargaining. It is why a close ally of Obama, Andy Stern, the former president of the Service Employees International Union (SIEU), praised the Chinese Communist economic model in a December 1 Wall Street Journal article.

And we now have a President who says Capitalism “doesn’t work” and “It has never worked.” That is utterly absurd, but it reveals his ideology and his goal of fomenting a Communist revolution in America by bankrupting the nation to achieve it.

Obama is a horrid aberration, the result of a combination of the Democratic Party, the liberal media, and the education community to dumb down Americans and make them ready for the Communist America that Obama advocates.

Communism did not die with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is alive and well in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam and in Venezuela. The soft form, Socialism, has brought a number of European nations to ruin and threatens the U.S.

In 2010 Americans returned power in the House of Representatives to the Republican Party. We must finish the job in the Senate and in the White House in 2012. If we do not, the America we love will perish.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

“Politics” is rotten … period.

The form of government the American people chose at their founding was unique.  It still is.  Many have sprung up around the globe in imitation of the American constitutional “representative” republic.  None have yet hit the mark — though they have come close.

Ours is an imperfect form of government. It is a government “of,” “by,” and “for” the people. The key word, of course, is “people.” And therein lies the problem.

The American government was flawed from its beginning.  It is a result of the human touch.  It could not and cannot be helped.  But it has worked miraculously well, for over two centuries.

From time to time, America has touched on destruction, even self-destruction. But, so far, we have managed to pull back, at the last moment, and survive to become a colossus astride the world.

There have been costs. There will be more.

Some say America is hard on the world.  Maybe.  But America is hardest on itself.  The internal war between Americans to determine what we will become still rages. For, you see, America is never static. America is always “becoming.”

The continuous swirling vortex that is America wounds and wounds deeply.  Our leaders come and go.  They ascend to the pinnacle of power with grandiose ideas only to be swept to the kneeling benches below by the American people, fickle, as they are, who choose not to accept those ideas or that leader’s choice for the direction of travel he intends to take America. We have seen it time and time again.

America’s current leader, Barack Obama, is experiencing the backhand of the people of America. His policies, his directions, his political philosophies have been rejected by “the people.”  He is in a desperate fight to salvage something for posterity.

Obama’s mistake was to drag America, kicking and screaming, in a direction it did not want to go. As a result he will earn an asterisk by his name in the history books as America’s first black President — and very little else.

America finds itself at another crossroads.  We have one chance to take the right direction.  The cost of choosing wrongly is the destruction of our great nation.

The process of choosing a leader for the future of America is well underway.  It is a spectacle seen nowhere on earth save for America.  We push forward a number of men and women we think we would like to see lead America  — then we begin the process of striping the flesh off their bones.  There is no mercy.

Candidates who survive the process are not necessarily good leaders just very good at perseverance and dodging those proverbial slings and arrows.

America is rich in citizens who would be leaders about whom future generations would sing songs.  But they will not step from the safety of the sidelines and join the fray.  But then, who can blame them. Of course, that means America tends to be led by the second best, or the least best, or the lesser of two evils, all soaked in mediocrity.   It is a rare occurrence, indeed, when America actually gets a better President than it voted for.

The fact is – there is no outstanding leader among the candidates for President from either side of America’s political spectrum in this election cycle.  At the very moment America is in desperate need of a lion at the helm — we have only mice from which to choose.

America can do better than this. The nation deserves better than this. But THIS is where we are.

From today’s perspective, the American future is bleak with decay as far as the eye can see. Why? — Because we are no longer a single people. We have become far too diverse a population. Until we decide, again, who we are and coalesce around that certain, singular, American character, we will remain, for all intents and purposes, ungovernable.

Diversity and inclusion have murdered the singular American character and culture. We are adrift, unclaimed, and unclaimable. Electing another mouse to lead us will do nothing more than seal our destiny as just another consignment to the dustbin of history.

J. D. Longstreet

VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012

Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

Obama’s past is so vague and so little is known about the man before he won a seat in the Senate that it is extremely difficult to refer to times and places in his past. But I do seem to recall that he was said to have been a constitutional expert and even TAUGHT the US Constitution at some college or other. If so, it is more than a little interesting.

See. Here’s the thing: IF Obama taught the US Constitution then he knows that America opted for a bicameral constitutional, representative, government with a president as the chief executive. Nowhere in the US Constitution is a King of the United States proved for. NOWHERE.

Apparently someone else taught Obama’s class they day they covered presidents vs kings in America. Obviously, he was absent. Else he would have known that America has no king.

After hearing King Oba … uh … President Obama making proclamations on the campaign trail as to what he intends to do without the approval of the people’s legislature, methinks the King, er, the President is in dire need of psychiatric help. He gives every indication that he is delusional.

We are, of course, referring to Mr. Obama’s abuse of the Presidential Executive Order authority. Even now, Mr. Obama is preparing to issue a host of presidential executive orders. He is making no secret that he intends to rule by executive order and regulations issued by HIS czars and the heads of the various government agencies under his command. In fact, he openly boasts about it before crowds, which have been especially screened by the Democratic Party, and the DNC, before they are allowed to bask in Mr. Obama’s dimly lit glory.

In the event that Mr. Obama DID, in fact, miss the class on presidents vs kings, then we shall endeavor to enlighten him and all others stricken with the same malady – lack of constitutional knowledge.

Article I, Section 1 of the United States Constitution is concise in its language, “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

Got it? No king mentioned there, right?   The last thing the founders of the United States wanted was the establishment of a strong central government and a strong political leader at the center of that government. They had just fought a long grueling war to gain their freedom from a King and they no longer wanted kings, potentates, or czars. What they DID want was a loose association of States in which the power emanated from the States and not from the central government. (Bet THAT wasn’t taught in Professor Obama’s class!)

It is important to remember that before the constitution there were the Articles of Confederation. “The President” was the President of the United States in Congress Assembled. The powers of the office were extremely limited and the President served for only one year. The Constitution, in contrast to the Articles of Confederation, established a strong four-year Presidency, but still only provided extremely limited powers to the office.

“Today, the executive branch of the government is immensely powerful, much more powerful than the founding fathers had envisioned or wanted. Congressional legislative powers have been usurped. There is no greater example of that usurpation than in the form of the Presidential Executive Order. The process totally bypasses Congressional legislative authority and places in the hands of the President almost unilateral power. The Executive Order governs everything from the Flag Code of the United States to the ability to single-handedly declare Martial Law. Presidents have used the Executive Order in times of emergencies to override the Constitution of the United States and the Congress.” (SOURCE)

“President Abraham Lincoln suspended many fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. He closed down newspapers opposed to his wartime policies and imprisoned what many historians now call political prisoners. He suspended the right of trial and the right to be confronted by accusers. Lincoln’s justification for such drastic actions was the preservation of the Union above all things. After the war and Lincoln’s death, Constitutional law was restored.” (SOURCE)

Here are just a few Executive Orders that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen:

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education, and welfare functions.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, and designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Ordersinto effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

· EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

If it sounds like George Orwell’s “1984” well, yeah, that’s exactly what it would be – if the executive orders above were enacted. To become US Law they do not need to be run by Congress. No. All that is necessary is that they be PUBLISHED in the FEDERAL REGISTER. THAT’S ALL!
There is one more executive order I want to make you aware of – and this one ought to scare every American out of their wits. For with this one E.O. we will lose our freedom — completely. Here it is:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen-year period.

Just like that, we are no longer a free people.

Conservative activist Howard J. Ruff said: “Since the enactment of Executive Order 11490, the only thing standing between us and dictatorship is the good character of the President, and the lack of a crisis severe enough that the public would stand still for it.”

“Executive Orders are, indeed, controversial because they allow the President to make major decisions, even law, without the consent of Congress. This, of course, runs against the general logic of the Constitution — that no one should have power to act unilaterally.” (SOURCE)

“If Congress does not like what the executive branch is doing, it has two main options. First, it may rewrite or amend a previous law, or spell it out in greater detail how the Executive Branch must act. Of course, the President has the right to veto the bill if he disagrees with it, so, in practice; a 2/3 majority is often required to override an Executive Order.

In addition to congressional recourse, Executive Orders can be challenged in court, usually on the grounds that the Order deviates from “congressional intent” or exceeds the President’s constitutional powers.” (SOURCE)

As we have now seen, Mr. Obama COULD, indeed, make himself dictator with the stroke of a pen. Granted, it would be a very brief dictatorship, but we now know just how easily it can be done.

This is WRONG and needs to be corrected by a constitutional amendment as quickly as the US has a Congress with the level of testosterone necessary for brave action in the name of FREEDOM.

Obama is openly threatening to push his socialist agenda into US Law by using his authority to proclaim law with the power of the executive order.

Does America want a dictator, or a President answerable to the people? Vote for one or the other at the ballot box in November of 2012.

J. D. Longstreet

VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012

Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

On the 6/26/11 edition of Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace inquired if Representative Michelle Bachman was a flake. As justification for this line of interrogation, Wallace pointed out an instance where Bachman insinuated that certain members of Congress were anti-American.

So apparently in the eyes of those considering Bachman a flake, it is now allegedly a sign of instability to expose those facts that a number of elites would rather gloss over in the hopes that the American people won’t find out about such personalities and instances.

For example, Cynthia McKinney cannot be described in any other way than anti-American. Not only did this Georgia representative appear on Libyan state television. She also praised the Qaddaffi regime.

People of good conscience can disagree as to the propriety and prudence of U.S. and NATO intervention in this north African uprising. However, what cannot be denied is that old Muammar is one of the great scumbags of the 20th and 21st centuries.

For though Al Qaeda and Qaddaffi’s regime have come to blows in this rebellion, it must be remembered that Qaddaffi was, for a lack of a better term, a superstar of world terrorism decades before any of us ever heard of Bin Laden.

If McKinney wants to position herself as a feminist, she must be asked why would she even give this regime the time of day, much less speak favorably of it. It was reported during one point of the conflict that Libyan forces were using rape as a weapon of terror and intimidation.

It could be argued that, despite her ability to grab an occasional headline such as when she tussled with Capitol Hill police when she insisted regulations regarding members of Congress showing identification didn’t apply to her, McKinney’s subversive tendencies do not necessarily epitomize the foremost personalities of America’s national legislative body.

As one of America’s most prominent families and one of the Senate’s longest serving members, Ted Kennedy was such a part of that institution that he was referred to as the lion of the world’s greatest deliberative body because of his forcefulness in speaking out on behalf of Democratic causes. Though one can be a Democrat and a loyal American (despite this combination becoming increasingly elusive), it could be questioned exactly where Ted Kennedy’s ultimate political loyalties were to be found.

For example, one cannot necessarily cast suspicion by default upon the Massachusetts Senator simply for opposing many of the policies of President Ronald Reagan. After all, a hallmark of a free society is the opportunity to express one’s disagreement with ruling authorities without fear of reprisal.

It is a shame, though, that the youngest Kennedy brother felt the propriety of befriending a regime that epitomized the denial of basic human liberty, namely the Soviet Union.

Those still not convinced of this line of argumentation might observe that, unlike Michelle Bachman, none of these figures are currently in contention for the presidential nomination of their respective party. After all, Ted Kennedy quite literally drove his off a bridge when he fled the scene of an accident in Chappaquiddick, leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to drown. As airheaded as the press might portray her to be, it is doubtful anything that absentminded is to be found in Mrs. Bachman’s track record.

To many that would oppose someone like Michelle Bachman winning the Republican nomination and possibly even the presidency of the United States, Barack Obama represents the pinnacle of what this country has to offer in terms of political leadership. However, if one is able to get over the giddiness that the President is half Black to examine him for what he really is as a human being, one cannot avoid the conclusion that Obama is actually flakier than Michelle Bachman.

A number of her detractors will insist that Michelle Bachman does not have enough experience to be President of the United States. What was it other than emerging from his mother’s birth canal as a baby of mixed pigmentation did Barack Obama do to deserve to have the reigns of the highest elected office in the land handed over to him?

Both Bachman and Obama went on professionally to become attorneys. However, Bachman used her skills to administer her family’s farm and business, adding to the productivity of the United States. Barack Obama used these kinds of skills to become a community organizer in the Alinskyite tradition, meaning he led the downtrodden not into lives of self-sufficiency but rather into dependency on the public welfare roles all for the purposes of overburdening the system in the hopes that it would totter ever closer to the brink of violent revolutionary upheaval as detailed by the Cloward & Piven Hypothesis

Both Bachman and Obama served terms in their respective state legislatures. It was in such an environment that Obama would develop the decisive leadership style he is known for by voting “present” on a variety of issues so he would not be required to take a position one way or the other. One might not that this could be construed as a violation of the injunction in the Gospels of letting your yes be yes and your nay be nay.

The wisdom of the ages holds that you are known by the company that you keep. You can determine a pretty good measure of a man by examining those he surrounds himself with especially in terms of those that he considers advisors.

For example, former White House Director Of Communications Anita Dunn publicly admitted that Chairman Mao was her favorite political philosopher. What all is admirable about one of history’s greatest mass murders?

The affinity of this administration for the most homicidal brands of Communism did not end with that one incident. A Mao ornament was hung from the White House Christmas tree.

Some will laugh this all off. However, would these same fans of Obama be as of a good humor of a presidential underling lauded the political insights of Adolf Hitler or if an Adolf Hitler ornament was spotted dangling from a White House Christmas tree? If anything, wouldn’t a Mao ornament be even more vile since his numbers surpassed the nightmarish atrocities of the Nazi regime, or, since his victims were Chinese rather than predominantly Jewish, these actions weren’t somehow quite as bad?

Granted, somewhere along life’s path we all list among our acquaintances a number of eccentrics and scoundrels. I no doubt fill that role for a number of people. However, for Obama, those closest to him make Dick Tracey’s Rogue’s Gallery look like the Smurf picnic roster in terms of their overall contempt for human liberty.

For example, regulatory advisor Cass Sustein believes those promoting what the government categorizes broadly as “conspiracy theories” should have their freedom of speech curtailed. Sustein also believes that it is the role of the government to implement policies that nudge citizens into certain behaviors. For example, if the government does not want people to rely so much on personal automobiles, increased gasoline taxes might be levied or roads constructed designed in such a way to increase traffic congestion.

Science advisor John Holdren believes sterilants should be put into the public drinking water in order to decrease fertility rates. However, Holdren is not the only Obama minion wanting to do away with what Ebenezer Scrooge dismissed as the “excess population” before this famed miser’s Yuletide change of heart. Obama Healthcare Advisor Ezekiel Emanuel thinks that those below or above a certain age range should be denied medical treatment. Basically put a bullet in granny’s head.

Obama’s Secretary of Energy believes you should be permitted to color your roof any color you want so long as it is white. And speaking of colors, Obama’s FCC appointment Mark Lloyd believes White folks should be denied FCC licenses. Obama’s State Department Legal Advisor Harold Koh believes that Sharia law should be consulted as a source for American jurisprudence.

It could be argued that flake is a designation in the eye of the beholder. Come election day, voters will have to decide what perspective they want steering the national helm.

Do they want someone thinking that at worst you are a worthless lump to be disposed of by the government as bureaucrats or at best a witless clod needing government control in every facet of your existence. Or do they prefer someone that believes that you are better at optimizing these kinds of decisions in your own life on your own.

Frederick Meekins

 

WesternFront America