http://frontpagemag.com/2012/davidhornik/morsi%e2%80%99s-egypt-eyes-nukes/ There are certain obvious parallels between the 1979 rise of the ayatollahs’ regime in Iran and the 2012 rise of the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt. In both cases, the political takeover was enabled by a Democratic U.S. president who had some degree of sympathy for it. In both cases, a moderate U.S. ally—Reza […]
https://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/articles/316747/obama-s-truth
More than any Democratic president since Franklin Roosevelt, Barack Obama in his writings and speeches has worked out an impressive interpretation of American history that culminates in modern liberalism. It also culminates, not incidentally, in him. As a writer, Obama’s strength is telling tales, and his story of America mixes together social, intellectual, and political history. It begins and keeps contending with the Founding– with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. He tries to tell a new story about the country that acknowledges, and then contextualizes, traditional views in ways that are meant to be reassuring but that point to very untraditional conclusions.
In The Audacity of Hope, his second book, in a chapter titled “Values,” he quotes the Declaration’s famous sentence on self-evident truths and then comments:
Those simple words are our starting point as Americans; they describe not only the foundations of our government but the substance of our common creed. Not every American may be able to recite them; few, if asked, could trace the genesis of the Declaration of Independence to its roots in eighteenth-century liberal and republican thought. But the essential idea behind the Declaration — that we are born into this world free, all of us; that each of us arrives with a bundle of rights that can’t be taken away by any person or any state without just cause; that through our own agency we can, and must, make of our lives what we will — is one that every American understands.
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/09/what_obama_thinks_of_americans.html
We know how Barack Obama feels about Mitt Romney. He holds him in contempt — and, speaking through his proxies, has all but called him a felon, tax cheat, and murderer.
Who cares? Trash talk is Obama’s political lingua franca. He relishes delivering these insults face-to-face while shielded by the respect his victims have for the office of the presidency — a reverence he does not share.
What should be important is how he feels about us: the American people. And how should this impact the so-called likeability gap between him and Romney as election day approaches?
In 2008, Americans questioned Barack Obama’s feelings towards Americans. His famous gaffe was the tipoff:
You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them[.]
So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Yawn — everyone knows about that broad-based insult. And everyone certainly knew that Obama’s “moral compass,” Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Jr., had scathing views of America and toward Americans. One was explained away as a “gaffe” and the other explained away by claims that Obama was never in the pews when a stream of anti-America invective poured forth from Wright — an excuse belied by Obama’s own words in a newspaper interview and by keen investigative work by Stanley Kurtz in his book Radical-in-Chief (pages 320-3).
But Obama’s condescension towards broad swaths of Americans was presaged years before, and it has deepened and widened over the years. In 1990, he said that “suburbs bore me.” By implication, suburbanites bore him but do have their uses — donations and votes, for example.
But Barack Obama has never been able to keep his feelings towards Americans hidden for long. Americans don’t see the contempt too often, though, because Obama’s speechwriters are more circumspect than he is on the stump.
The truth comes out Washington-style: as “gaffes.”
There is a stream of insults that has flown forth over the past few years — and have been all but smothered by the media. That is an anomaly, of course — because if there has ever been a “man bites dog” story that should compel media coverage, it would be a politician — let alone a president — who, instead of delivering paeans to the people, rebukes them repeatedly.
What have these insults been? What do they reveal? And, more importantly, why should we vote for a man who holds such a low opinion of Americans? And why do Americans like a man who clearly does not like many of us?
The Dirty Laundry List
“I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” Obama must have realized how this might be interpreted, so he added some nice-sounding verbiage, but the deed was done. Bill Clinton had proclaimed in his second inaugural address that “America stands alone as the world’s indispensable nation” (italics mine). Barack Obama does not agree — and moreover, he says we are not a model for the world and in fact have reasons to atone to it. And Obama has assumed for us the role of atoner in chief.
Very early in his presidency (in 2009), Obama did apologize at least five times, and perhaps as many as ten times, within the first six months of his presidency. We are not worthy of respect.
Furthermore, Americans don’t think clearly. When the red tide of the 2010 midterms became visible, Obama refused to accept responsibility that Democratic policy was at fault. On the contrary, the people were.
President Barack Obama said Americans’ “fear and frustration” is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.
“Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country’s scared.”
This was echoed recently by Michelle Obama, who depicted undecided voters as “confused” and “knuckleheads.”
People who watch Fox News (the most widely watched cable news outlet — and one Obama has appeared on, opposite Bill O’Reilly, over the years) are a “little stubborn” and don’t understand Obama’s policies. For good measure, he told Republicans in 2009 (pre-Sandra Fluke) that you “just can’t listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done” — as if Republicans just are mindless robots marching to Limbaugh’s tune.
Why should that matter, since Americans are poor listeners anyway?
President Obama recently said that the biggest mistake of his first term was not being a good enough story-teller, explaining that he needs to be better communicate to the American people as to why his policies mattered. (His verbal tic “let me be clear” when he prefaces a point reflects the view that Americans need to pay better attention.) Paul Ryan had some fun with this criticism during the Republican National Convention.
Was the animated version of Obama’s story about his agenda “The Life of Julia” dumbed down enough for hapless Americans? The Julia fiasco was mocked not just for its approach (the moral of the story is that all one has to look forward to is a life of dependency), but also for apparently leaving some important facts on the cutting room floor, resulting in a collection of “bogus” assumptions. Is this the type of story we are told to absorb?
Many of the stories that Obama does tell us, from his own life story (filled with fabrications) to the auto bailout “success” fairy tale to the broken promises regarding ObamaCare and the incessant peddling of tall tales known as Mediscare, lean a bit more toward fiction than fact. Should we trust a man who shamelessly abuses the facts of his own mother’s death for political purposes? As Victor Davis Hanson writes, “[i]f a writer will fudge on the very details of his own dying mother’s seeking to obtain healthcare, then he will fudge on almost anything.”
How true.
Policeman “acted stupidly” when they did their duty and investigated whether a friend of Barack Obama’s (Henry Louis Gates, Jr.) was committing a crime. Since Gates is black, Obama commented that there is a “long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” So policeman not only act stupidly, but also are motivated by racism.
Barack Obama see a more pervasive sense of racism stalking the land than was evident when he gave his famous 2004 “There is no white America, no black America” speech at the Democratic National Convention. He commented recently that elections are tight when you have a name like “Barack Obama.” This is not the first time he has cast aspersions on Americans. Back in 2008, he said Americans might be reluctant to vote for him because, referring to himself, “he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.” His grandmother was fearful of black youths because she was a “typical white person,” and he quoted approvingly in his book The Audacity of Hope that “white men’s greed runs a world in need.”
Republicans are “bomb-throwers” and “hostage takers” who sip Slurpees while driving the economy into a ditch. If they want to help, though, they have to sit in the back of the bus. From there, at least they won’t be able to excavate moats and fill them with alligators to kill Hispanics slipping across the border from Mexico. Republicans are members of the Flat Earth Society, though, so how worthwhile would their input be anyway? Might as well stick with the Slurpees — if Mayor Bloomberg permits.
Guess that whole “there is not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America” thing was “just words” back in 2004.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/why-is-obama-so-quiet-about-the-chicago-teachers-strike?f=puball Why has President Obama been so hushed about this week’s Chicago teachers’ strike? Clearly he has been distracted, what with the unspeakable tragedy of the murder of four Americans in Libya – Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, technology officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods – and the ensuing deadly […]
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/government-of-by-and-for-the-epa?f=puball Seven score and nine years ago, President Lincoln resolved to take increased devotion to ensuring that government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the Earth. Yet, today, our lives are determined not so much by We the People, as by a distant central government, particularly increasingly […]
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/if-this-uk-independent-story-is-true-then-hillary-clinton-should-resign-tonight
The magnitude of this, if it’s actually true, is impossible to fully describe.
Charlie Foxtrot is not a sufficient term.
The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal.
American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.
The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the “safe house” in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed “safe”.
Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.
According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.
According to this piece, Stevens wasn’t killed in a car as the original reports coming out of Benghazi indicated…
According to security sources the consulate had been given a “health check” in preparation for any violence connected to the 9/11 anniversary. In the event, the perimeter was breached within 15 minutes of an angry crowd starting to attack it at around 10pm on Tuesday night. There was, according to witnesses, little defence put up by the 30 or more local guards meant to protect the staff. Ali Fetori, a 59-year-old accountant who lives near by, said: “The security people just all ran away and the people in charge were the young men with guns and bombs.”
Wissam Buhmeid, the commander of the Tripoli government-sanctioned Libya’s Shield Brigade, effectively a police force for Benghazi, maintained that it was anger over the Mohamed video which made the guards abandon their post. “There were definitely people from the security forces who let the attack happen because they were themselves offended by the film; they would absolutely put their loyalty to the Prophet over the consulate. The deaths are all nothing compared to insulting the Prophet.”
Mr Stevens, it is believed, was left in the building by the rest of the staff after they failed to find him in dense smoke caused by a blaze which had engulfed the building. He was discovered lying unconscious by local people and taken to a hospital, the Benghazi Medical Centre, where, according to a doctor, Ziad Abu Ziad, he died from smoke inhalation.
An eight-strong American rescue team was sent from Tripoli and taken by troops under Captain Fathi al- Obeidi, of the February 17 Brigade, to the secret safe house to extract around 40 US staff. The building then came under fire from heavy weapons. “I don’t know how they found the place to carry out the attack. It was planned, the accuracy with which the mortars hit us was too good for any ordinary revolutionaries,” said Captain Obeidi. “It began to rain down on us, about six mortars fell directly on the path to the villa.”
Libyan reinforcements eventually arrived, and the attack ended. News had arrived of Mr Stevens, and his body was picked up from the hospital and taken back to Tripoli with the other dead and the survivors.
Not sure whether that part is accurate or not, since it doesn’t explain how the other three Americans were killed.
But the point is that Stevens only had, at most, two Americans for security at a consulate in one of the most Al Qaeda-friendly cities in the world, right after we announced we’d killed Al Qaeda’s Number 2 man who it just so happens was from there. And on September 11, we depended on Libyans to provide us with security.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/spreading-the-wealth-how-obama-is-robbing-the-suburbs-to-pay-for-the-cities-interview-with-stanley-kurtz
Recently there has been a spate of videos and movies and columns detailing the radical past and associations of President Barack Hussein Obama. Long before many of these emerged, Stanley Kurtz’s book “Radical In Chief-Barack Obama and The Untold Story of American Socialism” meticulously detailed the trajectory that propelled a young and radical student to the White House to implement his goal of a socialist welfare state in America.
In his new book “Spreading the Wealth- How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities” Kurtz cogently argues, again with meticulous research and detail, that “regionalism” a redistributive agenda which would meld suburbs including their schools, utilities and essential services and taxes into cities, is already in place ready for implementation in a second Obama administration.
This is not a new idea and has its roots in the community organizers who trained our President with the argument that rich and essentially white people fled to the suburbs leaving the inner cities to struggle with blight, crime ,poverty, homelessness and poor and failing schools.
To correct this, it was argued, required a major redistribution and “equalization’ of wealth.
The suburbs, leafy retreats from asphalt and congestion, have been depicted in movies and books as stultifying, middle class, prejudiced, boring and ” bourgeois.” For community organizers they represented what Kurtz calls “a defect in American structure.”
We are familiar with Bill Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and Frank Marshall Davis, all of whom contributed to the President’s education and radicalization, but what is “Building One America?” Who is Myron Orfield? Who is Mike Kruglik?
They both come from the Gamaliel Foundation which Obama helped to found…..Kruglik as leader and Orfield as “strategic partner. ” The Gamaliel Foundation established in 1968 ostensibly as a fair housing group was, in fact, a radical group promoting the thesis that America is a racist society where ruling classes keep themselves in power by racism and greed and promotion of the suburban myth.
Myron Orfield, is described, by a like minded radical as “the most revolutionary politician in urban America”…..who..”split the suburbs” in the St. Paul-Minneapolis area to put regional tax base sharing in place.” To buttress his case he used spurious maps to prove ” financial disparities” between cities and suburbs, for which the only cure is tax base sharing by cities and suburbs.
Mike Kruglik was Obama’s boss during his community organizing time. He and Orfield head “Building One America” whose goal is to impede suburban survival and spread with regulations, taxes and fees…all cloaked as “environmental concerns “such as Obama’s Sustainable Communities Initiative.
In July of 2011, Kruglik and Orfield met with Obama at the White House, in a forum called “First Suburbs, Inclusion, Sustainability and Economic Growth followed by a private meeting in the Oval Office between Kruglik and the President. Obama’s friendships with radicals of his youth have clearly been “sustainable.”
Kurtz also discloses ominous efforts to “equalize’ education as part of the anti-suburbs initiative. Leftist Linda Darling Hammond, an Ayers acolyte and friend who proposed teaching “social justice ” was passed over as Secretary of Education, but she is a key player in the administration’s efforts to equalize school standards and tests between suburbs and cities by imposing a government standard on schools. Darling Hammond does not rest with attacking “sexuality, race, and gender privilege”….she also derides ‘white, middle class, suburban America.”
These are just a few of the people and programs that Stanley Kurtz writes about in this alarming, informing and essential book. More than any movie, column or documentary, Kurtz goes where no one else has gone in detailing the dangerous leftist agenda of a second term Obama presidency with programs and key players that are already in place. Read it.
Stanley Kurtz has graciously agreed to an interview.
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/09/17/intruding-realities Under the Unleader, America is creating power vacuums that liberal vanity won’t fill. Reality has a way of intruding, interfering with political hopes and ambitions. The realities of the past week in Egypt and Libya are so clear that they have propelled at least a few European liberals to what they surely regard as […]
http://www.prudenpolitics.com/newsletter?utm_source=P&P%20Auto%201&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4514
“President Obama and his men (and particularly his women) are having a tough time standing upright in the fierce wind blowing from the east. The troops are leaderless and the leader is rudderless. Their strategy, unique in American history, is making a wish for the barbarians to be nice. The news from Libya gets darker, and the worst of the bad news for the president is that if everybody at the White House is “on message” it’s because everyone gets to make up his (or her) own message for nobody to believe.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who obviously needs a good night’s sleep, got in a war of adjectives with some of the caliphs of the Arabian knights. She fired the first volley of adjectives at the infamous video about the Prophet Mohammed, which the White House, against all available evidence, insists is the sole cause of the deadly riots. The video is “disgusting and reprehensible,” she said, “and it appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and provoke rage.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/14/geert-wilders-5-questions-with-decker/#ixzz26elMjyNY Geert Wilders has been a member of the Dutch Parliament for 14 years and is the founder and head of Holland’s Party for Freedom (PVV). He is known across Europe for his staunch defense of individual liberties in the face of increasingly strict speech codes and other politically correct legislation. His party is fighting […]
