A new poll shows Americans are unenthusiastic about Obama campaign priorities.
Unenthusiastic? They should be more than “unenthusiastic”. Obama’s goals should he win a second term should have middle class Americans hyperventilating in terror.
Ron Radosh, PJ Media: The Book to Defeat Obama: Stanley Kurtz’s Spreading the Wealth:
What Stanley Kurtz has accomplished in his new book Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities, to be published on August 2, is nothing less than the complete exposure of President Barack Obama’s secret plans for his second term in office — plans that in reality amount to an assault on the values, well-being ,and quality of life of the very middle-class voters he claims to represent.
The unfortunate title — not an attention-grabber in bookstores —does not covey the breadth of his research, the scholarly yet readable and comprehensive analysis of where the president is coming from, and the nature of the social policy Obama will put into practice if he wins a second term. They amount to an entire gamut of initiatives, some well underway, to redistribute wealth not from the fabled 1% — who really do not have enough to save us from fiscal Armageddon even if the government took 80% of their profits — but from the average, middle-class, hardworking citizens who sought better lives and realized the American dream by moving to the suburbs, where the air is cleaner, the schools are decent, and life is peaceful and integrated.
These citizens are the very swing voters Obama is now courting; his many TV commercials about helping the middle class target them. What Kurtz reveals in chilling detail is that the group of radicals surrounding the president — names most of us (including me) are not familiar with — are nevertheless as dangerous and extreme in their goals as Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. While those three are persona non grata in the White House, these unknown radicals are just as important, and they are planning social policy with Obama’s approval.
If Obama were honest, Kurtz says, he would say the following to the American people:
My fellow Americans, to be honest, I have some serious reservations about the way this country is structured. In America we have this strong bias toward individual action. … But individual actions, individual dreams are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations. Locally those collective actions… have got to be pushed at the regional level in such a way as to unite small towns and suburbs with nearby cities.The whole federalist system, as the founders created it, is too geared toward John Wayne-style individualism. You pick up and move to a suburb in search of your American dream. But this leaves less well-off folks behind, so classic federalism extracts a price this country can no longer afford to pay. The only way to make certain this nation’s wealth gets more equally divided among all Americans is to run our country more centrally. That way no one can pick up and take his tax money to another town, suburb, or state without sharing it with someone less fortunate. That’s why I plan to do everything in my power to advance federal and regional control of America’s tax money and especially of America’s system of education, so as to eliminate the local differences upon which our long but troubled tradition of John Wayne-style individualism rests.
Obama, Kurtz shows, is running an active Alinskyite program in the present, not simply in the 1980s. It is a radicalism of a hidden, regionalist agenda, carefully kept below the radar, something that its exponents actually brag about. The programs waiting to be implemented actually are “nothing less,” Kurtz writes, “than a direct attack on large sections of his own middle-class supporters.”
Read the whole disturbing thing. Kurtz is definitely on to something…
Flash back to March 30, 2012, March 30, 2008, December 1995: The Collectivist Makes His Case: “You’re On Your Own” Economics Doesn’t Work:
Via RCP, here’s Obama speaking at a fund-raiser at one of his favorite types of venues; a college in Vermont:
“You know, each of us is only here because somebody somewhere felt responsibility, yes to their families, but also to their fellow citizens. Also to our country’s future. That’s the American story. The American story is not just about what we do on our own. Yes, we’re rugged individualists, we expect personally responsibility and everybody out there has got to work hard and carry their weight,” President Obama said at a fundraiser with college students at the University of Vermont.
“We also have always understood that we wouldn’t win the race for new jobs and businesses, and middle class security if we were just applying some ‘you’re on your own economics,’” Obama said.
“It’s been tried in our history and it hasn’t worked,” Obama said. “It didn’t work when we tried it in the decade before the Great Depression. It didn’t work when we tried it in the last decade. We just tried this. What they’re peddling has been tried — it did not work!”
Back in 2008, I directed attention to this December 1995 Chicago Reader interview of then candidate for IL State Senate, Barack Obama. I found his attack on individualism to be quite alarming. Sadly, when you read his words from 1995 and compare them to what he is saying, today, you find that his collectivist philosophy has remained remarkably consistent over the years.
“In America,” Obama says, “we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.”
Out of appreciation for the fact the most Americans have this “bias” for rugged individualism, Obama still pays lip service to it, today, to even left-wing college crowds. But the song remains the same - individual actions are not sufficient.
Expose Obama: Video: Obama:People Shouldn’t Be Able ‘To Own Guns’:
Something to keep in mind the next time you hear Obama says he believes in the right to bear arms. He doesn’t. In a second Obama term the “under the radar” efforts to curb gun rights will likely intensify.
The American Spectator: DOJ Weasel Keeps Weaseling Sharia Law comes to America under the guise of “civil rights”:
Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the United States, is one of the most destructive forces against the rule of law in our nation, including being the man responsible for the DoJ dropping charges against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation in Philadelphia during the last presidential election. (If you want to understand more about just how bad this man is, read “Injustice” by Christian Adams.)
Perez appeared before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Constitution (glad to know we have one of those!) which is a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) chairs that committee, and the congressman posted a clip of the questioning to his YouTube page with the following introduction:
In a Constitution Subcommittee hearing yesterday, Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-02) questioned Assistant Attorney General, Thomas Perez, over the Administration’s commitment to 1st Amendment rights. Franks’ questions were prompted by a Daily Caller article from late last year in which Perez was quoted as warmly embracing the proposals of Islamist advocates in a meeting at George Washington University, among them a request for “a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.”
Perez’s refusal to answer Franks’ question suggests a further dangerous inroad by Islamists into the policy-making of this administration (by which I do not mean that Perez is a Muslim, but rather that he is sympathetic to any force, such as Islam, which runs counter to the rule of law in this country.)
Jack Cashill is enjoying a little too much schadenfreude, here, if you ask me: Maraniss Gets Testy as New Obama Bio Tanks
David Maraniss, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Barack Obama: The Story, is getting testy. And it is not hard to understand why. The Washington Post diva spent the last four years on his career book, released it in the heart of a heated re-election season, got the kind of exposure a Kardashian would envy, and now finds the book heading for the remainder racks weeks after its release. Oy vey!
As of this writing, the book ranks 1,696 on Amazon’s bestseller list. By contrast, Edward Klein’s unfriendly Obama tome, The Amateur, has outsold just every book this summer not centered on female bondage, spent weeks on top of New York Times top-ten list, and now ranks 55 on Amazon despite being out a month longer than The Story.
Rather than assess why his book tanked — it is too honest for the left and too dishonest for the right — Maraniss has turned his wrath on the people he seems to hold responsible for the book’s failure — namely, “obsessed conspiratorialists” like me. His pique has found its outlet in a mean-spirited Washington Post op-ed, a minor classic of journalistic myopia. Allow me to address its concerns.
Cashill says that Maraniss comes across as “testy” in his new Post column because his book about Obama has not done well, and that his massive advance “will never be recouped by the publisher.” This may be the case. But he may also be testy because he realizes he missed the importance of the Frank Marshall Davis story, and that the Obama critics were right all along.
Paul Kengor points out that writers and historians always focus on the mentor, in order to explain the background, history and future policies of a major political figure like a presidential candidate—except when it came to Obama. Why?
Although Maraniss should be commended for exposing Obama as a major drug abuser, something Obama concealed from voters in 2008, the superficial treatment of Frank Marshall Davis is a major blot on Maraniss’s record. He will never be able to recover from it.
My stories about Davis have become a broken record, but it is necessary to play this record again and again because “journalists” such as Maraniss persist in their dishonest campaign to ignore his influence on the current occupant of the Oval Office. His Post article is only the latest example of his deceptive writing on this matter.
Why does he do it?
The short answer is that he thinks he can get away with it. He thinks his writing, based on the reputation of someone who writes long books about important people, can drown out all of the others who seek the truth and raise inconvenient and uncomfortable questions.
But why ignore such a critical and central fact about Obama? The answer in this case has to be that the truth is so powerful and so damaging to Obama that it has to be ignored. The lid has to be kept on this story, to the best of the ability of Maraniss and his ilk to do so. That is why the cover-up continues.
Admitting Obama was a doper is one thing; writing about his Communist mentor is something far more serious that opens a Pandora’s box.
But is the story more than that of an agent of a Moscow-funded political party having access to our President for eight years of his young life? This is where the story of Frank Marshall Davis takes a very bizarre sexual turn.
John Nolte, Big Journalism: New Anti-Romney Meme: Complimenting Israel’s Prosperity Is Racist:
First we saw it with Romney’s comments about the Olympics, now we’re seeing it with Romney’s comments comparing the state of Israel’s economy with that of the Palestinian-controlled territories: Speaking the truth is now politically incorrect and undiplomatic.
Romney’s quote via the Associated Press:
“As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality[.]”
And yet, this is the AP’s headline: Romney outrages Palestinians by saying Jewish culture helps make Israel more successful
As if on cue and standing by, the Palestinians screamed RACISM:
Not to put too fine a point on it, unlike SCOAMF, Romney is making all the right enemies:Hamas Official Calls Romney A “Racist” And An “Extremist” After Speech In Israel…
Brandon Darby, previously an FBI informant, is speaking out on the DOJ’s hesitancy to help human trafficking victims, particularly minors. Read more of his shocking account.***
Anti-communist leader Lech Walesa told Mitt Romney today that he must be successful in the November elections not just for America but for the rest of the world too. The former Solidarity leader understands how the economic decisions by US leaders influence global markets.
The Washington Post reported:
“I wish you to be successful because this success is needed to the United States, of course, but to Europe and the rest of the world, too. Governor Romney, get your success, be successful!” Walesa said through a translator following their joint meeting in Gdansk.
For all you naive and foolish Americans that voted for a black radical leftist thinking that it would move us toward a colorblind society … here’s yet more proof it was a big mistake:
Under our supposedly postracial president, everything is all about race — including school discipline, which Obama has decreed will be meted out according to skin color:
President Barack Obama is backing a controversial campaign by progressives to regulate schools disciplinary actions so that members of major racial and ethnic groups are penalized at equal rates, regardless of individual behavior.
Charles Krauthammer: Busted: Mr. Pfeiffer and the White House blog:\
Shortly after 9/11, President George W. Bush received from Prime Minister Tony Blair a bust of Winston Churchill as an expression of British-American solidarity. Bush gave it pride of place in the Oval Office.In my Friday column about Mitt Romney’s trip abroad and U.S. foreign policy [“Why he’s going where he’s going,” op-ed], I wrote that Barack Obama “started his Presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office.”
Within hours, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer had created something of a bonfire. Citing my statement, he posted a furious blog on the White House Web site, saying, “normally, we wouldn’t address a rumor that’s so patently false, but just this morning the Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer repeated this ridiculous claim in his column . . . This is 100% false. The bust [is] still in the White House. In the Residence. Outside the Treaty Room.”
Except that it isn’t. As the British Embassy said in a statement issued just a few hours later, “the bust now resides in the British ambassador’s residence in Washington D.C.”
As the British Embassy explained in 2009, the bust “was lent for the first term of office of President Bush. When the President was elected for his second and final term, the loan was extended until January 2009. The new President has decided not to continue this loan and the bust has now been returned.”
At which point, one would expect Pfeiffer to say: Sorry, I made a mistake. End of story.
Don’t hold your breath, Charles.
James Delingpole, The Telegraph: Global Warming? Yeah, right:
What Watts has conclusively demonstrated is that most of the weather stations in the US are so poorly sited that their temperature data is unreliable. Around 90 per cent have had their temperature readings skewed by the Urban Heat Island effect. While he has suspected this for some time what he has been unable to do until his latest, landmark paper (co-authored with Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville) is to put precise figures on the degree of distortion involved.
For the full story go to Watts Up With That NOW!
There is, of course, one very, very sad aspect to this story – and truly it pains me to mention it but journalistic duty compels me to do so – and that’s the dampening effect it may have on the grandstanding of a hapless fellow by the name of Professor Richard Muller.
Poor Professor Muller has been telling anyone who’ll listen – his amen corner in greeny-lefty MSM, mainly – that as a former “skeptic” he has now been forced by weight of evidence to conclude that global warming is definitely man-made and there has been lots of it (a whole 1.5 degrees C – Wow! that’s like almost as much as you’d get if you drove from London to Manchester!!!) since 1750. Tragically – as Watts has very reluctantly and by-no-means-experiencing-any-kind-of-Schadenfreude had to point out is that the data used by Muller to draw these conclusions was unreliable to the point of utter uselessness.
When President Barack Obama blocked the Keystone Pipeline, Republicans said the move would encourage Canada to pursue oil deals with China instead of the United States and cede a massive chunk of North American oil assets to the communist nation.
Now, with China’s state-run oil company CNOOC poised to cut a $15.1 billion deal–the largest ever foreign acquisition for a Chinese company–with Canadian oil company Nexen, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are in full backpedal mode.
In a draft letter to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), Sen. Schumer writes:
I respectfully urge you, in your capacity as chairman of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), to withhold approval of this transaction to ensure U.S. companies reciprocal treatment.
Similarly, Rep. Pelosi is now sounding alarms of concern. In a statement, Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hamill said:
This deal prompts great concern about the Chinese government’s continued attempts to use its state-owned enterprises to acquire global energy resources.
Saying “I told you so” offers little solace to concerned Republican lawmakers.
A federal court in Washington, DC, held today that political appointees appointed by President Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the New Black Panther Party.
The ruling came as part of a motion by the conservative legal watch dog group Judicial Watch, who had sued the DOJ in federal court to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents pertaining to the the New Black Panthers case. Judicial Watch had secured many previously unavailable documents through their suit against DOJ and were now suing for attorneys’ fees.
Obama’s DOJ had claimed Judicial Watch was not entitled to attorney’s fees since “none of the records produced in this litigation evidenced any political interference whatsoever in” how the DOJ handled the New Black Panther Party case. But United States District Court Judge Reggie Walton disagreed.