Obama’s War Against Israel
There’s a joke making the rounds in my suburban Chicago neighborhood about the clash between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government: Why did Vice-President Joe Biden get angry when Israel embarrassed him by announcing new construction in Jerusalem’s Ramat Shlomo neighborhood? Because it’s usually Biden’s job to embarrass himself.
The joke has carried on far too long. The tension between the two governments is being stoked by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a deliberate attempt to weaken the coalition of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. If Israel had committed a real foul, the Obama administration could have used a quiet threat of public condemnation to force Israeli concessions, and the Netanyahu government would have little choice but to comply.
Instead, the Obama administration has turned a public relations snafu into a public test of Israeli sovereignty, leaving the Netanyahu government little choice but to resist. The neighborhood where 1600 homes were to be built is not a remote outpost. It is mere meters from the Green Line, in a part of East Jerusalem that is actually west of the Old City. It is likely to remain part of Israel in any future Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.
The timing of the administration’s attack is unfortunate, for two reasons. One is that Iran continues to move towards becoming a nuclear power. Each day the U.S. and Israel spend on the Ramat Shlomo question is a day wasted, a day that ought to have been spent dealing with our common enemy.
The second reason is that thousands of pro-Israel activists will arrive in Washington, D.C., next week for the AIPAC policy conference. The contrived crisis is a provocation, a message to the grassroots representing the pro-Israel majority of Americans that bipartisan support for Israel is over.
Too late, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has tried to undo the damage that her 45-minute tirade against Netanyahu has done. She denied this week that there was any crisis at all. Yet, Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren–a historian who has chronicled the history of American involvement in the Middle East–has said that “Israel’s ties with the United States are in their worst crisis since 1975.” (Oren has since denied making that statement, but there can be little doubt that the sentiment is widely held among the Israeli leadership).
Riots broke out across Jerusalem yesterday, orchestrated by Palestinian leaders, who have linked the argument over settlement construction to Israel’s reconstruction of a synagogue in the Old City that was destroyed by Jordan after 1948. Their goal is to spark a third intifada by appealing to religious passions among Palestinians and throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds. If they succeed, the administration will not only have harmed U.S.-Israel ties, but it will also have sparked a new terrorist war that could threaten American interests.
As the White House escalates its attacks on Israel, the chorus of anti-Israel voices in Washington grows louder. In 2008, only 27 congressmen–almost all Democrats–could be found to vote against Israel’s Gaza offensive, Operation Cast Lead. In 2009, the anti-Israel ranks swelled to 39 in a vote on the Goldstone Report. And this year, 54 congressmen–all Democrats–signed a letter protesting the Israeli “blockade” of Gaza. Obama leads, and they follow.
The White House wants to make pro-Israel Americans decide: either an Israel within the 1949 armistice lines, or no Israel at all. It is a false choice, because the two options yield the same result. A forced retreat to the Green Line–rejected by U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, rejected by every previous U.S. President, and rejected over two decades of Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy–is an invitation to Israel’s enemies to press ever further.
It is time that pro-Israel activists turned the tables. We must make our elected officials decide: either continue with the current policy of appeasement, which finds new ways to separate the U.S. from Israel; or a policy of strength, which focuses on the values and interests the countries share. A world that is not safe for Jews and for Israel is not safe for America, either. That is the grim lesson of history and, under the Obama administration, we seem doomed to repeat it.
Joel B. Pollak is the Republican nominee for U.S. Congress in the 9th district of Illinois.
Obama to Israel: ‘Drop Dead’
It took awhile, 14 months to be exact, but both the ADL and AIPAC have issued very solid statements condemning the President’s new verbal war on Israel, and asking for the Administration to curtail the public berating of its supposed ally, and work with Israel in a more diplomatic fashion on both the peace process and Iran.
f not hostility to Israel’s survival is at work. The infamous New York Daily News headline about Gerald Ford’s response to New York’s fiscal crisis was less fair to him (he never said these words) than the title of this article is to President Obama.It is interesting that David Axelrod, who blasted Israel on network news programs on Sunday, and is a proud standard bearer of the Millard Fillmore label when it comes to the history and politics of the Middle East conflict (for the record, Fillmore headed the Know Nothing Party back in the 1850s), will be honored by the NJDC (National Jewish Democratic Council) at a coming event. Axelrod has pretty much a perfect record of having avoided any connection with any pro-Israel or Jewish communal activity in his long political career, with the notable exception of raising money from Jews for Democratic candidates.
Richard Baehr is chief political correspondent of American Thinker.
A Jewish Democrat Wakes Up
Disappointing Leon
Candice Paul
A VOTE FOR MARCO RUBIO
Finally, a politician WE can fully support.
Marco Rubio is a friend of Israel and every Jewish American in the State of Florida should be watching him. He understands that we can not turn our backs on Israel, an ally to the United States. We CAN NOT TURN OUR BACKS ON ISRAEL and think that if we do the United States will be a safer place to live. As long as there is a possibility that Iran will have Nuclear weapons …WE MUST STOP THE MADNESS and support Israel in doing so. Marco Rubio is young and has the heart of a lion. He understands that we cannot bend to the pressure of the world and turn our backs on our allies. Israel needs to be protected from the Government that is in place in this country and we must begin with A VOTE FOR THE US SENATE. Marco Rubio is a friend of Israel..we need him on Capitol Hill fighting for what is right both abroad and here at home. Vote for Marco Rubio. www.marcorubio.com
A Disgrace to Science
By Tom Bethell from the February 2010 issue
I planned to write something about nuclear power—about how the U.S., after a 30-year delay, had better hurry up and restart nuclear power. Then came Climategate. It involved the release—it has been called a theft but more likely it was a deliberate leak—of e-mails from a “university” in Britain that has been promoting climate change fears in the guise of collecting climate data.
With that, a new public understanding of the realities of science today may begin to dawn. The new reality is this. For about a generation, the Western world has been coping with a politicized attack on science by the very people who should have been guarding its integrity.
The obstruction of further developments in nuclear power was only the beginning. In 1979, an accident at Three Mile Island, in which no one was hurt, brought the nuclear power enterprise in the U.S. to a halt. Fears were deliberately inflated. China was not intimidated, however, and today it is adding nuclear power on a large scale; 25 new reactors are under construction. Plainly, if this continues much longer, China will develop an unstoppable economic lead over the U.S. And it will be our fault.
China’s former catastrophe (Communist rule) now works to its advantage. In 1949, the nation’s intelligentsia seized power—for that is what Communism entails. They became socialist planners for 40 years and impoverished the country with famine and ruin. Since the late 1960s, our homegrown intelligentsia have felt deprived because they never had the same opportunity. They never could seize the power they believe is rightfully theirs. The amazing result? China is now immunized against the socialist disease, whereas the U.S. has still not been fully exposed. We remain susceptible, and keep on experiencing its maladies.
Europe has already succumbed, and the near-socialist structure of its economies is not sustainable for much longer. It will have to be reformed or ended. Possibly Islam will finish the job. I would give Europe’s present political structure another 10 years. In Britain, the conservatives under the feckless David Cameron promise no improvement.
Here, the betrayers of science have found that public opinion is easily manipulated, especially with press cooperation. The principles that, starting in the 17th century, turned science into one of the great human enterprises can be subverted. Most Americans—most people in the world—know so little about these things that the methods of science can be twisted with hardly anyone noticing.
Today, many scientists and opinion leaders think that if an elite consensus in favor of certain “policies” can be generated, the underlying science must be right. The corrupt system of “peer review” will reliably exclude dissenters, and if the naysayers continue making themselves heard they will be called denialists, tools of right-wing talk radio, etc.
This is where climate science has been heading. It is also where other major fields of science stand today—at the mercy of a contrived consensus. “Climate change” has attracted major attention not because its methods of subversion are much different from now-standard practice, but because literally trillions of dollars are at stake.
Those who promoted the bogus certainties of global warming not only sought to upend a whole way of life but came close to doing so. They have been aided by hundreds of well-known politicians, writers, reporters, and politicized scientists. Among politicians, Al Gore is only the best known. In the last category, James Hansen and Michael Mann are among the major U.S. culprits.
Christopher Booker, who has long covered these issues for the Sunday Telegraph and is one of the few British journalists to have done so, calls climate fraud “the greatest scientific scandal of our age.” He notes that the Royal Society, a once great institution founded in 1662, has become “a shameless propagandist for the warmist cause.”
Government funding has been the major subversive force. If you read Science, as I do, you see that the issue the magazine cares about above all others, and editorializes about week after week, is funding. Government funding. The constant concern about money means that Science and other journals feel obliged to keep up a drumbeat of articles that sustain the mood of crisis surrounding a given issue. Climate change is the leading illustration today, but there are others.
One example—a comparatively innocent one as these things go—is the flu-scare industry. It comes around like clockwork. SARS (’03) was replaced by avian flu (’05), then by swine flu (’09). Don’t panic but do worry (is the message), because it’s pandemic time. The key point is that death from infectious disease is way down compared to what it was in earlier centuries, and yet these agencies exist and need to keep puffing up their budgets.
So a scientific-seeming scare emerges from the World Health Organization and is magnified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The media, hungry for viewers, lavish uncritical attention. More cautious newsroom voices, should they exist, will be frightened off: “Be responsible! You could cause the deaths of millions of people!” Budgets for WHO and CDC are duly fattened. Infectious disease boss Anthony Fauci appears on TV on schedule. He tells us to stay calm, take our shots, and be alert for news bulletins. Laurie Garrett publishes another scary tome and Michael Fumento remains the lone dissenter. Within two or three years it’s time for another cycle.
The scientists who promote these self-serving scares are employed by government agencies or by universities. The latter are under constant pressure to attract grants, whether from the NIH, NASA, the National Science Foundation, or other government agencies. For more than 20 years the leading manipulator of climate science has been an ideologue named James Hansen, with NASA’s Goddard Institute since 1981. He played a major role in promoting the global warming deception, and has done so with impunity despite almost 30 years’ employment by a government agency.
Recently, Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University has been the leading promoter of bogus global temperature claims. He manufactured the misleading “hockey stick” temperature graph that eliminated the Medieval Warm Period by cherry-picking tree-ring data. He accuses dissenters of being funded by oil companies and has garnered $6 million in government grants for Penn State. As a climate dissenter rather than a distorter, he would have been vilified, not remunerated. He’s an enemy of science.
COULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHY oil company money corrupts and government money does not? The government has now spent about $25 billion of our money in promoting climate scares. Oil companies have been reduced, pathetically, to telling us how “green” they are. By the way, climate change used to be called global warming. But the globe has not warmed over the past decade, even by the warmists’ inflated numbers. So they relabeled it, and climate “change” will be confirmed by whatever happens.
Warmist fanatics meanwhile preserve radio silence about nuclear power, which emits no CO2. They actually imagine that coal and oil can be replaced by renewables. Scientific American (like New Scientist, a journal that can no longer be trusted) published a cover story (Nov. 2009) that was so absurd that a friend of mine who publishes an energy newsletter treated it as a hoax. The two authors had a plan to show “how 100 percent of the world’s energy, for all purposes, could be supplied by wind, water and solar resources, by as early as 2030.” No kidding. (Or were they kidding?)
The prolonged deception about warming, and the silence about nuclear power, shows that the warmists’ real interest is in a revolutionary change in the American way of life, not the reduction of emissions. If Obama uses the EPA’s endangerment finding (claiming that CO2 is a pollutant) to curtail CO2 emissions unilaterally, as warmists have told him to, the administration will bring itself to a one-term conclusion in an era of brownouts and blackouts.
My friend Fred Singer, who was at Copenhagen and has been a leading climate dissident, thinks that Climategate may completely undermine popular trust in science. But right now, maybe that is what is needed.
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt in the American Thinker ———————-
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
In the modern era, we’ve seen several failed presidencies–led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait– they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out. Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China.
George Bush Jr didn’t fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies. Yet George Bush Sr is still perceived as a man of uncommon decency, loyal to the enduring American character of rugged self-determination, free markets, and generosity. George W will eventually be treated more kindly by historians as one whose potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles, in some ways repeating the mistakes of his father, while ignoring many lessons in executive leadership he should have learned at Harvard Business School. Of course George W could never quite overcome being dogged from the outset by half of the nation convinced he was electorally illegitimate — thus aiding the resurgence of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.
But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.
But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What’s going on?
No narrative. Obama doesn’t have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn’t connect with us. He doesn’t have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don’t align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, Reagan.
But not this president. It’s not so much that he’s a phony, knows nothing about economics, is historically illiterate, and woefully small minded for the size of the task– all contributory of course. It’s that he’s not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn’t command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don’t add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don’t make sense and don’t correspond with our experience.
In the meantime, while we’ve been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he’s dissed just about every one of us–financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012: “For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn’t give me enough time; if only I’d had a second term, I could have offended you too.”
Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state–staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there’s always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that.
Yes, small presidents do fail, Barack Obama among them. The coyotes howl but the wagon train keeps rolling along.
Support Vijay Kumar for Congress
We must recognize that we are engaged in a worldwide war against terrorists who use unconventional tactics. We have achieved all we can militarily and must recognize that there is no central front in this conflict. That is, we cannot win the war in any particular place or location. This war must be waged on an ideological level as well as on a military level. Setting a timetable for withdrawal is setting a timetable for failure. The timetable for withdrawal is when we have achieved complete victory over forces determined to establish an Islamist front in the Middle East.
America is not alone in this struggle. We can accomplish our goals by engaging our allies. Inclusion and diplomacy should be our catchwords. We must strengthen our alliances and develop a strategy of cultural defense for Western Europe, Great Britain, India, and other nations that have been victims of Islamic terrorism. We must not substitute short-term solutions for long-term goals. Our objective is to empower moderates by attacking the underlying philosophy that breeds terrorism. Also, we must realize that independence from Middle Eastern energy sources is integral to winning the war on terrorism.
War on Terror has failed simply because there is no such a thing as War on Terror. War on Terror is War on Shadows. Terrorism is a technique. an Insutrument to reach certain ends. I maintain that this War can be won within five years, for less than one billion dollars, and without further loss of any American Life. Provided we name our enemy. ……Terrorists are not alquid….it is unversal Jhad.
Obama, The Emperor, Has No Clothes: We’ve Reached The Tipping Point And His Programs Must Be Stopped
By HERB DENENBERG, The Bulletin
If we had a Winston Churchill in the White House, America would still be in mortal danger and we would have a long, tough fight for survival ahead. We face a threat of Islamic terrorism as dangerous as any of the many threats of our history including that of Nazi Germany, Soviet Communism, Italian Fascism, and Japanese Imperialism. We face economic problems and international competition that call into question our ability to maintain the productive economy necessary to support the military machine needed for survival. We have a failed educational system that will not provide the scientific innovation and educated personnel and other advances necessary to maintain economic viability in the 21st Century. We have a biased, dishonest, and fraudulent mainstream media that misleads and deceives rather than informing and educating the public on the issues of our times.
But we don’t have this best-case scenario in the White House — we have the worst-case scenario. Yes, it’s about time America wakes up to the fact that we have a radical, leftist, socialist politician who still carries the trademark of the corrupt Cook County Chicago political machine from which he came and who has populated the White House with wild radicals and thugs willing to use intimidation and anything else if needed to achieve their goals. The Chicago machine adopts the Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals that says the end justifies the mean, i.e., anything goes. On top of that our president is incompetent. At this time of the greatest danger to America, we have another even greater danger: a president not up to the job and not fit for the job.
Someone has to ask the president, “Have you no decency? Have you no character? Have you no honesty? Do your words and your promises mean nothing? Are you willing to justify any means to achieve your ends?” Yes, we are well past the tipping point, and it is time for the obvious conclusion, “The emperor has no clothes.” If we don’t recognize Mr. Obama for what he is by now, we must be clueless and hopeless.
President Barack Hussein Obama has clearly demonstrated he is exactly what many expected and even much worse. For example, right from the beginning, early in the last presidential campaign, I said Mr. Obama was a world-class fraud, phony, faker, fibber, and four-flusher and a radical, liberal, leftist socialist, America-hater to boot. Now, I realize that description may sound strong, but it wasn’t strong enough. Mr. Obama is much worse than that.
Every politician may break campaign promises. But even the most corrupt ones have limits. Mr. Obama has no limits. At the very core of his campaign, he claimed to be the great post-partisan, non-partisan unifier to bring us all together and listen to every side of every issue. He told us a gazillion times there are no Red States and Blue States but only the United States. He claimed a new politics, with openness and transparency in all matters. He was the great courier of hope and change. But that was just campaign rhetoric and even post-election rhetoric. He has demonstrated he is the exact opposite of his basic claims. He is highly partisan, content to shutout, shut up, and ignore Republican ideas and Republican voices. He rejects transparency, and is as secretive and opaque as possible. Other politicians have broken campaign promises, but never on a scale such as this involving the promises most central to their campaigns, and never before so openly and brazenly with so little regard for the citizens who were sold this fraudulent bill of campaign goods.
For proof of Mr. Obama’s breaking all of his core promises, look at what is going on with ObamaCare. Everyone probably remembers his promise, repeated at least eight times, that negotiations on the health-care bill would be televised on C-SPAN and would be streaming on the Internet. Among his statements: “We’re going to do all these negotiations on C-SPAN…We will work on the process publicly … These negotiations will be on C-SPAN.” He constantly explained that putting all negotiations (yes, he said, “all”) on C-SPAN would assure that everyone could see for themselves whether their Congressmen were putting forth arguments on behalf of insurance companies, drug companies, and other special interest groups or making arguments on behalf of most of their constituents. You can hear him make this promise by going to the Internet, where at least eight videos of Mr. Obama making that promise are collected (www.thenakedemperornews.com).
The other examples of Mr. Obama’s breaking his promise of transparency and openness in every way can be cited that are just as extreme as the C-SPAN promise. The negotiations to reconcile the Senate and House version of ObamaCare are being carried out behind closed doors in secrecy. Republicans are not even represented.
And his core promise of bipartisanship has also been demonstrated to be a total fraud, which is what Mr. Obama is. He called for bipartisanship and a new politics all during the campaign and continues to do so (apparently in an attempt to silence Dick Cheney and other leading critics of his policies that are making America vulnerable to terrorism). But Mr. Obama’s words and rhetoric have no connection with his actions and programs. Republicans have had no part in drafting the legislation and their ideas and amendments have been ignored. There has been no real attempt to adopt the many sound suggestions and legislative proposals made by Republicans, such as permitting the purchase of health insurance across state lines and doing something to curb malpractice lawsuit abuse. Mr. Obama and the Democratic Congress have been strictly partisan, and haven’t even been willing to adopt a token idea from across the aisle. They do not want one note of dissent and not one baby compromise. They have made it clear that ObamaCare will be jammed down the throat of the American people regardless of their views and regardless of democratic values and traditions. Even a question about the constitutionality of Obamacare was fobbed off by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, as if the reporter asking the question must be deranged for even raising the issue. In fact, there are serious questions about aspects of the ObamaCare proposals.
What is even more outrageous than breaking the most fundamental Obama promises is the attempt to pretend they are not being broken. Obama’s White House actually refuses to explain why these promises are being broken. In fact, they won’t even respond to questions about the C-SPAN promise. When Mr. Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, was asked about it, he simply ignored the question and did so the next day when the same question was asked. When Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was asked about it, she went into a speech claiming this was the most open and transparent legislative process in memory. Her reply was Orwellian, being the exact opposite of the truth. The Obama team apparently thinks the Americans are totally idiots willing to believe brazen, blatant, bold-faced lies.
This isn’t hope and change. This isn’t politics as usual. This is worse than politics as usual. This is the corrupt Chicago-style machine politics of thugs and intimidators. Recall that Mr. Obama came out of the corrupt Chicago machine and even refused to work with those trying to bring about its reformation. And now we see he has brought the corruption and thuggery of that style of politics to the White House. We not only have that style of politics in control in the White House, but even worse, its agenda is the radical, liberal, leftist, socialist program that runs contrary to American values and the very principles of our Founding Fathers. As we know, right before his election, Mr. Obama said he was going to fundamentally transform America. And that’s what he is doing, but transforming it by destroying its constitutional structure.
He is involved in an unprecedented expansion of government, explosion of spending, national debts and deficits, taxation, and regulation of every aspect of American life. His debt is unsustainable, and his expansion of government is so great that it is going to squeeze out and kill the private sector. That government expansion will also kill American entrepreneurship upon which America’s productivity has always depended. At the same time, it is contracting our liberties. A gargantuan government controls almost everything and that means the private market and the private citizen control almost nothing. His signature legislation on health-care is an attempt to control America and Americans. The Obama agenda is nothing more than the “road to serfdom.”
If that’s not bad enough, this corrupt Chicago-style politician has demonstrated he is incompetent, as this column has documented. (See, for example, “Time for a Change? Obama’s Mistakes Say So,” Jan. 10.) In addition, he seems detached from our major threat of Islamic terrorism. As Charles Krauthammer has pointed out, his initial responses to the Christmas terrorism in Detroit sounded more like a police report than a leader responding to an existential threat to American survival. Mr. Obama spoke of a “suspect” who was an “isolated extremist” who “allegedly” committed certain acts. It took him three days to come up with that initial, pathetically lame response. Only on his fifth attempt did Mr. Obama finally recognize we are at war. But, his earlier responses probably reflected his true views and feeling, and his fifth attempt was probably an act, scripted by his advisors who realized his early statements were turning the public off.
Mr. Obama and the radicals and thugs now entrenched in the White House are bad enough, and are a certain formula for the destruction of America. But making a bad situation worse is the mainstream media, which acts more as an advocate for Mr. Obama and his programs and less like a fair and balanced source of information the public needs to have. Further compounding this lethal formula is a Democratic Party, led by the Obama/Reid/Pelosi triumvirate that is a virtual rubber stamp of any program. And that party has adopted the Obama philosophy based on Rules for Radicals that says the ends justifies the means. In other words, anything goes. That’s why they are content to ignore the public’s views and the traditions and precedents of Congress, and jam through legislation that is not analyzed, debated, or even read. They are immoral, unprincipled zealots that put their agenda above that of the American people, American values, and the American Constitution.
So, it should be past the tipping point. We should be at the point when most Americans can say, “The Emperor has no clothes.” If Americans don’t stop this headlong rush to destroy America, there will soon be no America left to save. Now is the time. The citizens of this greatest nation on earth have to rise up, protest the Obama agenda, and stop it before it succeeds in transforming America into something our Founding Fathers of yesterday and our citizens of today would not even recognize.
We’ve had more than enough of Mr. Obama’s plans. And we have to start acting like we mean it. Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country… and to stop Mr. Obama’s plans to destroy America, as we know it.
http://thebulletin.us/articles/2010/01/16/commentary/op-eds/doc4b515392bea7a605381517.txt
Understanding the Democrats’ Scheme By John F. Gaski
Poor Bill O’Reilly and Brit Hume. There they were on the O’Reilly show a few weeks ago, puzzling over why Barack Obama and the Democrats are doing so many things that are damaging to our country. Bill and Brit agreed that they couldn’t possibly be harming the nation intentionally, because negative voter reaction would redound to them politically and electorally. Can’t the Democrats see this? Did they suddenly get stupid politically? This is so unlike them. How to explain this anomaly?
Poor Bill and Brit, and many others, indeed. It is time to think the unthinkable and speak the ineffable. Apart from the troubling question of intent, or whether Obama-Pelosi-Reid just have a novel view of the public interest, the national Democrats are unnaturally and mysteriously sanguine despite growing backlash by the American people. Why? One reason: The Dems don’t believe they will ever have to face a real election again. Is their plan not becoming obvious? It is very straightforward:
(1) Grant amnesty to the illegal aliens (the correct term for lawbreaking invaders, regardless of their natural and rational motives) which will create up to 30 million reliably Democrat voters — especially after being registered at least once each by ACORN. That is cushion enough to carry any national election. Why else could Dems be so fixated on this agenda item?
(2) Speaking of which, between ACORN and the SEIU, the Democrats will be stealing all the elections they really need anyway, starting next November. (The New Jersey and Virginia governorships aren’t quite as big a prize as control of the U.S. Congress, are they? And one wonders what the real margin of Republican victory in New Jersey was, absent ACORN’s intervention.)
Many laymen still don’t understand how the ACORN scam works. To them, ACORN’s excuse that they are merely committing voter registration fraud, not vote fraud, seems plausible. Here’s the deal: Register 100,000 phony voters such as Mickey Mouse and the Seven Dwarves, thus expanding the nominal voter rolls, and the Democrat vote counters then have the latitude to create 100,000 extra votes out of thin air on election night. This is what “community organizer” really means, and Barack Obama is forever stained by his ACORN background. Not that it matters to him.
America should brace for the biggest vote fraud and election theft caper of all time on election night 2010 — and in the months following. We now know as well that the Dems are guaranteed to win any statewide recount where there is a Democrat Secretary of State. And who, we must ask, is there to enforce the election laws now?
What of Florida 2000? It is easy to correct the prevailing misconception. One can usually tell what offenses against the commonweal the liberal Democrats are committing by what accusations they make against others (into which they project their own tendencies). In November 2000, Democrats did everything they could to try to steal a national election for the second time in forty years, right before a nation’s very eyes, with local partisan functionaries inventing Gore votes out of those dimpled chads. Still, the Democrats have claimed since Y2000 that George W. Bush stole that year’s election, even though every Florida recount, including those sponsored by the media, demonstrated that Bush 43 really won under the law. Republicans have been so ineffective in publicizing these true results in answer to the Democrat mantra that the propaganda has largely taken hold in the public consciousness.
(3) As if they need it, the Dems will be secretly encouraging (maybe even hiring) third-party candidates wherever they need them, because they know that is the way to split the opposition vote. It almost always happens that way to the Democrats’ benefit. If people such as Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck don’t realize this soon, instead of talking up the third-party route, they will only help to ensure a permanent Democrat stranglehold on Congress and the presidency — although any one of this litany of methods would probably be sufficient for that. So the Dems are actually conservative in the sense of wanting some built-in redundancy!
(4) What do we suppose the extra trillion dollars of “stimulus” money to be spent from 2010 to 2012 is really for? Just a coincidence, or a ready-made election slush fund? How much has already been committed to ACORN and SEIU?
(5) Then there is the “universal voter registration” plan that the Wall Street Journal’s John Fund has spotlighted, granting automatic voting privilege to anyone who has ever registered for practically anything, anywhere, anytime. The Democrats and their henchmen could work with that, couldn’t they? Or why are they so eager to enact it? Their entire history has been to oppose laws that prevent vote fraud, after all. (What could be their motive for that particular laxity?)
These five strategies should be enough to ensure permanent Democrat control of our federal government — a virtual dictatorship. For them, it is a royal flush. But another part of the scheme may be the most pernicious of all. The worst is yet to come.
(6) When you become dependent on the decision of a Democrat bureaucrat for crucial medical treatment — after the health care takeover — how much power does that give the Democrats over you? Elderly voters tend to vote more conservative than younger voters, so letting the elderly dies because care is “too expensive” can reshape the political profile of the electorate. But can we reasonably foresee that party registration or political contributions might enter the bureaucrat’s calculus? Might it occur to the intense partisans of the Obama administration to grant lifesaving treatment to those they regard as “their people,” but not to others? What a neat way to eliminate the opposition! Party registration is already public information. And if they can overturn the secret ballot for union elections via “card check,” how long before they try to impose the same more generally, so they will always know how you have voted? Do not trust the judiciary to save us, either, after President Obama packs the courts with more ultra-leftists.
Chilling, isn’t it? But not extreme: Obama himself has notoriously displayed his disregard for human life by the stated willingness to sacrifice “grandma” to a pain pill and his coarse support for unrestricted abortion — even opposition to the Infant Born Alive Act, which he has tried to subvert.
When the Democrats achieve literal death-grip power over the lives of all our citizens, that’s when they also achieve their long-cherished dream of absolute power in a virtual one-party state. Now is it becoming transparent (so to speak) what the real scheme behind their mania for “health-care reform” is? Now does it all make sense? This is not your father’s Democrat party.
This issue is not about health care, ultimately. It is about raw political power and the long-promised radical takeover of the United States. For anyone who hasn’t thought of all this before, I guarantee that Obama and his party’s other leaders have.
Dictatorship in a one-party state indeed seems to loom for us. As one prominent commentator has pointed out, the normal order of the human condition is tyranny, subjugation, and dictatorship, with only a couple of respite periods throughout history, including our time in the West over the past two centuries or so. It just took that long for the totalitarian types to gain near-total power in our country, which they are now consolidating over the coming year. What are the betting odds that they will ever let it go voluntarily?
No wonder the national Democrats aren’t concerned about having to face the electorate again. Pity the naïve, hapless Republicans who actually imagine they have a fair chance later this year and in ‘12!
The long-time president of my university, Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, used to say, “At our school, we ask all the questions, even the tough ones.” How’d I do, Father?
The most troubling aspect of my analysis is that it represents the logical extension of irrefutable, objective facts. At least five of the six premises are no more and no less than observable Democrat behavior, and the other is a mild extrapolation at most. This is not good.
It’s over, America. We are now living under a proto-dictatorship in the United States. In less than a year, the full reification of it will be apparent to all. Have a nice day. R.I.P., U.S.A.