Archive for the ‘Sabotage’ Category

Incompetent or Malevolent?

Sunday, September 16th, 2012

Too wrong to be accidental

As the leftists in the mainstream media continue excuse Barack Obama, I believe the American people are beginning to catch on.  At every turn, President Obama’s policies are failures, viewed from the standpoint of ordinary Americans who value the future of their country.  The problem is that Obama undoubtedly views these as successes, since he is in no way ordinary in his view of America.  Remember, he thinks America is an exceptional nation “in the same way the Greeks believe Greece is an exceptional nation.”  The truth is that Barack Obama views the United States as an exceptionally evil nation that must be crushed, and cut down to size.  He exhibits certain loyalties to other cultures and philosophies that are fundamentally at odds with the uniquely American culture that had given rise to our national prominence and prosperity.  Since his inauguration, virtually every policy he has advanced has furthered his aim of deconstructing America. This growing crisis isn’t a result of simple negligence, but instead the culmination of a drive to make America nearly irrelevant around the globe.  He has overseen a bankrupting of the nation that will effectively force the United States to withdraw from the world, leaving us unable to afford to defend even our own borders.  Some believe he is merely inept, or “in over his head,” but that doesn’t fit the facts.  Obama is achieving the “dreams from his father” to the detriment of every American, as well as the civilized world.

Before you dismiss this out of hand, you ought to consider the laundry list of policies he has undertaken that are by the fact of their aim, obnoxious to American ideals and values.  Providing missile defense secrets to the Russians cannot be in the interests of the people of the United States, yet this he has done without the first explanation of his rationale.  Fortunately, we know his thinking because it shows in every policy he has implemented:  The United States must not be permitted a technological edge against potential enemies.  In his view, it allows the US to have much more influence around the globe than it “deserves.” You dastardly Americans have had your way in the world for far too long, and he’s out to correct that “imbalance.”

He has driven out regimes that were at least malleable in the face of cash throughout the Middle East.  It is true that some of these leaders were monstrous, Gaddafi for instance, but our relationship with Hosni Mubarak was hardly the worst convenient arrangement we’d ever entered in that part of the world.  As he pushed the “Arab Spring” forward, one had to question the wisdom of all of this as we saw radicals making huge advances in many of these formerly cooperative countries.  Turkey is now ruled by a growing Islamic radicalism, and Tunisia is a wreck born of this movement.  Iraq is coming apart at the seams again, and throughout the Gulf states, Islamic radicalism is leaping forward.  One might make a serious error in relation to one country or another, but what Obama has wrought is a region-wide disaster.  What do you suppose will happen when the radicals chase us out of every oil-producing state?  How long do you suppose we will keep the taps flowing?  What will become of us then?  Will you ride a solar bicycle to work?  Will you enjoy twenty dollar gasoline?  Obama’s “green energy” plans are a farce, and always have been, and he knew that too, which is why he invested so much of our money in various boondoggles that were really simple kick-backs to political donors.

He is in the process of making our nation defenseless.  Defense of our nation requires much more than a few bombers, tanks, and the personnel to operate them.  One of the greatest threats to our nation is the fiscal and monetary policy of the US Government.  Our government consumes too much, and the overwhelming bulk of spending is for the entitlement sector.  It is already squeezing out defense expenditures, which is one of the few perfectly legitimate functions of our constitutional form of government.  This was known long before it began to become a reality, and it’s been an object of Obama’s runaway spending all along.  What sort of responsible President would use the troops’ paychecks as a bargaining chip in a budget battle, threatening to cut them off if he didn’t have his way?

Obama has created a growing rift in American society.  This rift has racial elements, but it has created divisions between generations.  He is setting the stage for an environment in which the young will be at war with the old over diminishing federal resources.  His economic policies have created an entire generation of discontent, but because they’ve been largely indoctrinated rather than educated, too few are able to see that the man who poses as their savior is instead acting as the agent of their enslavement and impoverishment.  What else can be the meaning of Occupy Wall Street, a movement planned and coordinated, as well as funded by his radical friends?  To watch some of these poor dumb souls run about mouthing the articles of faith from communism, but unable to even recognize their advocacy as such is a study in irony only to be fully appreciated by the perfectly mad.

On the international stage, the man who promised to make the world love or at least accept America has accomplished the precise opposite.  Contempt for America has grown in all quarters, both because we have become weaker, and because we have abandoned many of our allies.  The snubs of the Brits and the Israelis are among the most telling, because these had been two of our best friends in recent years.  No longer.  The Israelis government must wonder each day if it is to strike Iran in a pre-emptive attack on nuclear facilities whether Obama will use the occasion as an excuse to create an alliance with Iran.  How many times, and in how many ways has he foolishly insulted our British friends, disclaiming anything “special” about our relationship with an ally who we together stood through two World Wars, and many lesser engagements?  To discover that we now have a cool relationship with our historical allies should be an embarrassment to Obama, but it’s not, because while those alliances have made us stronger over time, that is the antithesis of his goal.

Viewed carefully, one can detect even in his domestic policies a certain contempt for the American people.  Obama-care was enacted over the wild objections of the American people, and his policies on illegal immigration, including his de facto amnesty policies are obnoxious to every American who came here by standing in line and observing the legal process.  Examine how he is now using executive orders and policy changes in various federal departments in order to increase the number of gun confiscations.  Look at how his surrogates now agitate against free speech.  Remember when liberals told us that virtually anything goes in the name of free speech?  Look at how they have run away from that as they have shifted the limiting of speech into the service of their political agenda.

He abhors Christianity, at least insofar as it isn’t the product of broken minds like Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s.  Black liberation theology is more of a political philosophy than a religious one.  Meanwhile, Catholics and other Christians who may have serious ethical issues with funding of abortion and contraception through taxpayer dollars are now shocked to see that such policies will be imposed now through regulations on health insurance.  It’s funny that while he has undertaken to make the world safe[r] for Shariah, he has done everything possible to punish Christians of various denominations.

I could go on for many pages, but the fact is that it really isn’t necessary.  My readers will have known by now that this President isn’t making any “mistakes” in his eyes, or in the intentions of the left.  Everything he is doing or has done pursues as its ultimate object the diminution of the United States of America.  Nobody could get this many things wrong by accident.  Sheer chance alone would demand that something come out right once in a while that would be good for the American people, if all this were accidental.  It’s not.  What we are witnessing is the result of a coordinated effort to reduce the United States to irrelevancy, or even vulnerability. It’s being done with a malice aforethought in what can only be termed the premeditated murder of the greatest nation in the history of the world.  It’s time we deny to him the alibi of incompetence for once and for all.  His presidency has been too heinous and too malevolent to have been the result of negligence alone.

Convention Fight Update: It Isn’t Over

Tuesday, August 28th, 2012

Ladies and gentlemen, the GOP establishment is trying to pull a fast one, and they’re using media to confound and confuse the issue. Given my stance on the state of the Republican Party, you might wonder why I care what they’re doing in Tampa.  Let me make this as clear as I am able, because you, who work precincts, and who carry the water for the Republican Party at the grass-roots level deserve and need to know the truth:  They think you are suckers.  I am not trying to make you any angrier than you may already be with the GOP establishment, but I want you to understand the chronology of what has been done. Let’s cover it briefly:

Friday, the 24th of August, Ben Ginsberg, acting on behalf of the Romney campaign gets rules placed that would severely limit the influence of the state parties in selecting delegates, or having much say-so at all in future elections.  This rule 15(and now 16) would have made it nigh on impossible for you in the grass-roots of the party to have your rightful influence on the national convention.

Over the weekend, Morton Blackwell sent out a response to this, outlining the problems.  This was a rather complete appraisal of the probable impact of such rules.  Blackwell is a hero in my estimation, sounding an alarm that began to gather steam by Sunday, and was trumpeted by no less than Mark Levin and Sarah Palin on Monday evening.

The GOP establishment never runs out of tricks to play against us, even as they frequently seem confounded by the Democrats.  On Monday evening, they pushed out a story via the Houston Chronicle that proclaimed the matter resolved, and that any crisis and floor fight had been averted.  Worst of all, it was false, because it ignored and omitted the matter of Rule 12, that will permit the party bosses to shove Rule changes down our throats by a 3/4 vote.  That sounds okay, right?  The problem is that it’s really not as great a defense as some have been led to believe.

This phony “compromise” prompted this morning’s letter from Mr. Blackwell, who explains the truth of the matter.  Wrote Blackwell:

“Proponents of the “compromise” ignore the enormously destructive problem of the proposed Rule 12.  Rule 12 would enable 75% of the Republican National Committee later to eliminate their “compromise” and to destroy or make drastic changes in dozens of other rules which have served our party well over the years.

“In practice, Rule 12 would enable an RNC chairman to enact almost any rules change he or she desired, because an RNC chairman already has so much power and influence that he or she can almost always can get 75% or more of the RNC members to vote for or against anything.  A chairman already has the enormous “power of the purse,” and should not have also the power to change party rules at will.

“There is already quite enough power flow from the top down in our party.  Instead of approving more power grabs, we should be looking for ways for more power to flow from the bottom up.  That’s how to attract more participants into our party.

“The media’s picked up on this series of last-minute manipulations by D.C insiders and consultants, and I’m sure you’ve been bombarded with contacts from both sides.

“The truth is, this isn’t a compromise.  It’s far from it.”(emphasis added)

Complicating this matter has been the fact that many people ran with the “compromise” business without fully grasping what had been omitted from the Chronicle’s story of Monday evening.  Mark Levin posted on Facebook that the problem had been resolved, but the truth is that it hasn’t.  He likely read the Chronicle story or other stories derived from it, and concluded the crisis had been resolved.  He is to be forgiven this error, because this whole thing is being done precisely to create confusion about the state of the fight.   As those of us who followed the matter into the wee hours of the morning know, this was never the case, and as Mr. Blackwell makes plain in his latest note, the matter is far from resolved even at this hour.

Ladies and gentlemen, make of it what you will, but the facts are plain: The GOP establishment is out to rule the party from the top, and despite pretending otherwise, Mitt Romney’s campaign has had a strong hand in this.  Worse, the deceptive notion that Ron Paul supporters are behind this kerfuffle is designed to get you to shrug and walk away without a fight.  I don’t doubt but that there are a number of Paul supporters involved, but there are many who simply wish to safeguard the future of the party, and that’s where you should come in, if you still care about the future of the party.

This isn’t over. It’s not over until the rules are adopted, and I urge all conservatives to get in touch with their states’ delegations and put an end to this madness.  This is YOUR PARTY!

As Erick Erickson reports on RedState, this isn’t over.  Time to let them hear you, conservatives!

Michelle Malkin has a complete list of State Party contact numbers, as well as this list in PDF form.

Ron Paul Won’t Touch Romney in Debate – Now We Know Why

Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012

Like Father Like Son?

It’s all coming down to this:  Ron Paul is staying in this race in order to assist Romney, because he wants his son to be on the Presidential ticket with Mitt Romney.  As he travels around stumping on the basis of his limited government position, all he’s really angling for his to get his son on the ticket with the most liberal candidate in this race.   I wonder if the people who are supporting Ron Paul know this, because if not, they’re in for a big surprise.  I’ve never seen such a thing.  Talk about opposites:  Ron Paul wants Mitt Romney because he’s considering his son for the VP slot, but the problem is that the only way he can do that is to defeat Rick Santorum, and in tonight’s debate on CNN, the elder Paul had every chance to criticize Romney, but he didn’t, and instead spent his time hammering Santorum.  This is not a coincidence, as the article linked about makes plain.

I like many of the things Ron Paul stands for in the domestic arena, but the problem is that I now know he’s a shill candidate, and it’s been increasingly clear for some time.  This is a sell-out of the first order because irrespective of whether the younger Paul is on the ticket, the problem remains:  Romney can’t win, but even if he did, Rand Paul will be nearly powerless to effect policy changes, and virtually none of Ron Paul’s positions will be adopted.  If Ron Paul’s supporters are willing to stand for that, frankly, I don’t know what to make of them any longer.  Romney’s presidency would be the antithesis of everything Ron Paul has advocated.

At the conclusion of the debate on CNN, Anderson Cooper came on as the stage emptied of the candidates, and I watched with interest as Mitt Romney got up and directly went to shake Ron Paul’s hand and exchange a few words with him.  He should have kissed his backside instead, as Paul never failed to attack Rick Santorum throughout.

Now that I better understand Ron Paul’s actual agenda, it’s easier to walk away from him. He may be willing to settle for a campaign that ends with getting his Senator son on the Mitt Romney ticket, but I certainly am not.  This is why people become so frustrated with politics:  Politicians sell them out while soliciting their donations, and broker behind-the-scenes deals for the sake of personal expedience.  Unreal.

Deaths From Global Warming Hoax Soar

Tuesday, February 14th, 2012

Political Hoax Engulfs Globe

The Canada Free Press has published an article that aptly makes the case that the Global Warming Hoax is now responsible for a growing number of winter deaths among Europeans and others who have succumbed to the cold due to the expense of heating their homes, particularly amongst the elderly.  This makes perfect sense, as the elderly on fixed incomes struggle to pay for their medicines, heat their homes, and buy groceries.  The UK and others in Europe have been closing down coal-fired power plants, driving up the cost of electricity, and generally diminishing the standard of living. We will soon experience this same phenomenon here in the US, even in summer, as Texas will lose three coal-fired plants this year, to be shut down in accordance with EPA mandates.  Instead of freezing to death, our elderly will bake in their homes come high summer, and you can bet the death toll will rise here too.

This is all the result of a logically and scientifically bankrupt notion of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” that is being pounded into the heads of your children at your local public schools, despite the fact that much of these theories have now been debunked, and the science upon which these government actions have been taken demonstrated as biased and fraudulent.  Much of this is based on the mistaken theory that Carbon Dioxide(CO2) drives temperatures, when it now turns out that the opposite may in fact be the case.  Rather than exhaling and adding to Global Warming, it seems, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is highly dependent upon the temperature of the oceans, since they sequester a large amount of the world’s CO2.  As temperatures rise from any cause, the oceans’ carrying capacity for CO2 rises.

The question remains: While we experienced some minor warming over the last two centuries, the cause of that warming remained unclear.  We actually experienced a “little ice age” that tapered off through that period, leading to another question:  What is the actual “normal” mean surface temperature on planet Earth?  That turns out to be a rather more difficult question to answer, particularly because there are overlapping cycles that may even have a cosmic source, such as our solar system’s relation to the spiral arms of the Milky Way.  What this implies is that our climate may indeed be dominated by factors well outside of human control or influence, and that our contribution to any alleged “climate change” is incidental to the natural processes at work.

Naturally, the biggest single driver of climate on Earth is our own Sun.  It too goes through cycles of activity and relative inactivity in terms of sun spots, solar flares, and other phenomena that directly affect the way our world is heated, just ninety-three million miles away.  Meanwhile, right here at home, the masterminds who wish to command us have been looking for excuses to control our activities, and in the 1970s, they happened upon the climate as a good excuse.  First, they said we would go through an ice age, when during the latter half of that decade, parts of the country experienced record snowfall, blizzards, and cold spells.  When the cycle began to reverse in the 1980s, they quickly went off in search of a new bogeyman, and of course they found one:  Human activity, they alleged, was causing the Earth to warm.

According to their most ludicrous predictions, Florida should by now be under water, along with all of Louisiana, and other coastal regions globally.  The polar ice caps should be all but non-existent, and yet the polar ice has returned with a vengeance, leading some to wonder what was all the fuss all along.  The human policy tinkerers are never discouraged, because they keep ginning up new science to support their claim of the week, and of course the ruling by the EPA that they can now regulate CO2 means they will.  This has spawned shut-downs of coal-fired plants, and driven up energy prices globally.  This is the result of an Obama administration unrestrained by the doubt now cast on the questionable science, forging ahead with its regulatory scheme because in truth, none of this is about the environment. No, it’s about you.

What better way to claim the authority to regulate all human activity than to claim dominion over the question of Carbon Dioxide, and the various energy sources that produce it?  All life requires energy, and modern civilizations require gobs of it, but by shutting down energy production, not only do they restrain and restrict your individual endeavors, but also the enterprises that allow you to sustain yourself.  Businesses require energy, and to make it more expensive is to reduce the productive capacity of the entire private sector.  More, since government is the single largest energy consumer by far, its weight adds to the cost.  There’s no desire or even real concern for the environment among policy makers pushing this garbage.  They’ve always viewed it as the method by which to regulate our lives.

Meanwhile, real people are losing their lives around the globe to this miserable policy, predominately in Europe and North America. It’s a terrible shame, but then we’re talking about politicians who have little of that, and as they posture as saviors of the planet, as the death toll from their schemes increases significantly, at some point we ought to ask the question: “For whom are we saving it?”  After all, they are discouraging human reproduction by every available means, and the elderly are being baked, euthanized, frozen, starved.  If we’re not reproducing, and we’re shortening our life expectancies, the population will at some point begin to shrink.  They’ve been after that goal since Paul Ehrlich wrote The Population Bomb, and yet not a single one of their dire predictions has ever come true, so instead, they’re now imposing them.

At some point, as Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security scours lines in airports and other venues for those who would carry out “man-caused disasters,” at some point she might be inclined to turn the focus on government. Slowly now, at first, but in escalating fashion, the ultimate results of these policies will be a disaster in human terms.  We must regain control over this runaway government, and we must begin to tear it down.  It’s maniacal policies are now poised to kill us faster than any “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” ever could.

 

Ron Paul Sold His Soul to Mitt Romney?

Friday, February 3rd, 2012

Working Together?

I don’t know if this is true, but some of the facts are well-known, and if it’s true in any measure, the people who are supporting Ron Paul will be asked to shuffle across the convention floor to support Mitt Romney, not in exchange for the Vice Presidency, and not even for a cabinet posting, but for a speech for Paul and his Senator son in prime-time during the Republican National convention.  Ron Paul supporters should know that this is the extent of the goal of this entire campaign, and that Mitt Romney has designs on their support.  This is the reason that throughout these debates, and throughout the campaigns, Ron Paul hasn’t run one negative ad against Romney, and hasn’t even ruffled Mitt’s feathers in any of the debates.  He has a strategic alliance, and he’s willing to carry out this charade in order to get a speaking platform for he and his son.

This leads me to several questions I have long suspected I would have to ask of the folks who have with such vigor and diligence supported Ron Paul, through thick and thin, and against the taunts of most of the other campaigns or candidates.  Is that what you Paul supporters have been angling to achieve?  Will you put down your Paul signs and pick up Romney placards instead?  Is this the ultimate meaning of your money bombs, your poll-slamming, and all the other activities in which you have participated in support of Ron Paul’s agenda?  How much influence do you now think Paul will wield in a Mitt Romney administration?  Do you think Romney will legalize drugs?  What about the military and foreign aid budgets?  What of the commitment to the Constitution?  What becomes of eliminating the Federal Reserve?  What will you do when you discover that not only has your candidate undercut you, but that all he managed for your trouble were twenty-four dollars worth of costume conservatism?

I know the diehards will be unable to believe this, much as we who support Sarah Palin couldn’t grasp for some time her announcement of the 5th of October.  Knowing at least a little of what they will ultimately feel, I am angry for them, not because of the alliance, but that it’s been so well-hidden from them in plain sight.  I agree with much of Ron Paul’s spending cut agenda, and I agree with his stance on the Federal Reserve, but if all this has been in pursuit of a speaking platform, I must ask them if this entire exercise will have been worth it for a few minutes of prime-time exposure of your issues.  To my friends in the Ron Paul legions, and you are my friends in many important ways despite our disagreements, because I know you love liberty, I must confront you with this not in order to say “I told you so,” but instead to commiserate with you. You may remember that some time ago, I decided myself that if Paul could only make himself a little more palatable on foreign policy, I could potentially support him.  I told voters in Virginia that to vote for Paul as their only alternative to Mitt Romney was a vote in the name of restoring the party.  Now, you see, I advised those Virginians to what appears to have been no more than a ploy.

In truth, this sickens me, and I am tired of the manipulations this entire primary season has revealed.  As time goes on, it may yet get worse, and if it does, I’m going to say so without apologies.  Some things are simply “a bridge too far,” and the idea that a politician would use their influence with supporters in such a way is frankly unforgivable in any context.  I realize that there will be attempts to gain some promises from a potential future Romney administration, but for the love of all things good in the world, that seems a tiny prize to exact for all the laborious efforts Paul’s supporters have poured into this.

Some of you will remember when I said of Paul that I love his domestic spending agenda, and his general temperament toward government growth, but you and I know that Mitt Romney will not follow that plan, as he already offers glimpses of “strengthening the safety net.”  My friends, I would not blame a one of you if you took one look at this and simply walked away.  Really.  I feel for you.  I do.  This abandonment of principle in the name of  such pathetic rewards makes me steam.  Surely for withholding his fire against Romney in the early primary states, he should have gotten more than this dry bone to toss to his supporters. If it is true, I expect the backlash may be ferocious, and it would be deserved, but there’s one person I really wouldn’t want to be, and his name is Ron Paul.  Maybe they’ll take some of their inevitable anger out on the GOP establishment that deserves no small measure of the blame.