It’s about that time with Obama on Iran deal

What time is it? It must be Obama slime time. Time to get the slime machine in mach speed, like the centrifuges in Iran.

He’s using every nasty slur and label he can to attack anyone, including Jews, who don’t support his Iran “peace in our time” nuclear deal. What’s behind door number one, nuclear bomb. What’s behind door number two, the Ayatolah and a nuclear bomb. Never mind what’s behind the third because you’ll never get passed the first two.

Jewish Magazine Accuses White House of Using ‘Jew-Baiting’ and ‘Bigotry’ to Smear Iran Deal Critics

Aug. 9, 2015 10:08am Sharona Schwartz | The Blaze

The Jewish online magazine Tablet has accused the White House of engaging in “Jew-baiting” and “racial and ethnic prejudice” to slander critics of the Iran deal, including New York Sen. Chuck Schumer.

The magazine’s editors compared the behavior of the White House to “the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally.”

Schumer, a Jewish Democrat, announced on Thursday that he was breaking with President Barack Obama and would vote to oppose the Iran nuclear agreement.

In the editorial, titled “Crossing a Line to Sell a Deal,” the editors of Tablet on Friday asserted that the “White House and its allies shouldn’t need to smear American Jews — and a sitting senator — as dual loyalists to make their case.”

While the editors noted that they “support the president” and “sympathize” with his efforts to combat Iran’s nuclear weapons pursuit, they wrote, “What we increasingly can’t stomach — and feel obliged to speak out about right now — is the use of Jew-baiting and other blatant and retrograde forms of racial and ethnic prejudice as tools to sell a political deal, or to smear those who oppose it.”

“Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple. Accusing Senators and Congressmen whose misgivings about the Iran deal are shared by a majority of the U.S. electorate of being agents of a foreign power, or of selling their votes to shadowy lobbyists, or of acting contrary to the best interests of the United States, is the kind of naked appeal to bigotry and prejudice that would be familiar in the politics of the pre-Civil Rights Era South,” the editors wrote.

“This use of anti-Jewish incitement as a political tool is a sickening new development in American political discourse, and we have heard too much of it lately — some coming, ominously, from our own White House and its representatives,” Tablet wrote. “Let’s not mince words: Murmuring about ‘money’ and ‘lobbying’ and ‘foreign interests’ who seek to drag America into war is a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card.”

“It’s the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally, not from the President of the United States — and it’s gotten so blatant that even many of us who are generally sympathetic to the administration, and even this deal, have been shaken by it,” the editors wrote.

“Whatever one feels about the merits of the Iran deal, sales techniques that call into question the patriotism of American Jews are examples of bigotry — no matter who does it,” the editors added.

Read more The Blaze

Time for Obama to unleash another divisive attack campaign on his opponents — even if they be Democrats.  The White House has threatened that anyone vying for leadership would be held to account for past positions. Dems have already announced they will oppose Schumer for leader based on this position. Of Course if Schumer was not such a racist, bigot, backed by Jew billionaire lobby, anti-peace extremist, dual loyalist, war monger, and ally to the radicalized “death to America” Islamists in Iran. Any questions?

I’m addicted to power

Hello, my name is Barack Obama (I think) and I’m addicted to power.

I came to this meeting to admit my addiction is uncontrollable and I need help. Actually, some tell me that the ones who really need help are those under my power and authority. Well, I have no reason to believe that or any reason to relinquish any power I have over them. See I can’t help it. It is really not my narcissistic personality that is at fault.

It must be the people’s fault. First they elected me, then as I exercised more and more executive power, they continually asked me for more. Why even the Congress applauded my plans to make them irrelevant if I did not get my way. They cheered and people told me they want to see more executive abuse. I tried to inform them that it really wasn’t my style, but they convinced me to take every opportunity I’m given to usurp more power, control, and abuse my authority.

So I am not to blame. It was my genuine desire to take my foot off the throats of the people, and off the neck of America. But it is so enjoyable that I must have more and more. Since that is the wish of the people as well, I admit it is an offer I cannot refuse.

I know they want me to be the permanent King of Amerika, too. I cannot let them down. I just want everyone to know this was not my idea, they made me do it.

Since Power Anonymous is such a small exclusive club, I will continue to come here to keep you abreast of my feelings. It’s what others call accountability. Well, some stragglers see my hunger for power as a problem, for some reason, but I don’t know why? So I am assuaging them by continuing to come to these “therapy sessions”.

Thank you.

Obama honors sacrifices at Selma

Obama gave a speech at the 50th anniversary of Selma’s “Bloody Sunday” march. He quoted the phrase “We shall overcome”. Some of us wish we would overcome, him.

But what about the 57 million fetuses and babies struck down in abortion since 1973?
What about their sacrifices in America, paying with their lives, blood and treasure?

  • Deprived of Life liberty and pursuit of happiness
  • Deprived of due process.
  • Deprived of their inevitable right to vote.
  • Deprived of their rights of speech, religion, and assembly.
  • Deprived of the opportunity to make change, to the culture and perception.

Obama’s Selma speech was hailed as historic and a mile-marker of time, to recognize a cause: from racism to voter rights. Yet just days before, Benjamin Netanyahu gave an important joint session speech while Obama, Biden and many of their fellow travelers could not even attend. However, Obama rushed out to say that there was nothing new in it.

So his speech at Selma was nothing new that we didn’t already know. And political.

Obama will boldly take executive action for amnesty for illegals and he unilaterally, unconstitutionally rewrites law under the guise of helping victims. But he would never take any simple action to save the unborn. In fact, he offers Planned Parenthood more money. He is the biggest friend and ally of the nation’s largest abortion provider. He swears on the altar of a decision of Roe v Wade. Now 17.3 million black babies aborted since 1973.

On this great anniversary of Selma, and Dr King, he allies himself with the downtrodden and victims, preaching social change and rights. The purpose of government is to secure our inalienable rights — not the other way around.

A couple of the quotes from his speech were: (3 excerpts from the transcript)

-“We secure our rights and responsibilities through a system of self-government, of and by and for the people.”

-“That’s what America is. Not stock photos or airbrushed history or feeble attempts to define some of us as more American as others. We respect the past, but we don’t pine for it.”

-“Because Selma shows us that America is not the project of any one person.

Because the single most powerful word in our democracy is the word “We.” We The People. We Shall Overcome. Yes We Can. It is owned by no one. It belongs to everyone. Oh, what a glorious task we are given, to continually try to improve this great nation of ours.”

“We” is a powerful word, no doubt about it. But he co-opted that into a cheap campaign slogan of “yes we can” to propel his own political agenda. And he still extorts the people for his own political ends. He offers no consolation or concessions to those that disagree with his agenda. Then he closed by saying: (emphasis mine)

“We honor those who walked so we could run. We must run so our children soar. And we will not grow weary. For we believe in the power of an awesome God, and we believe in this country’s sacred promise.

May He bless those warriors of justice no longer with us, and bless the United States of America.”

We honor their sacrifices, do we? Does he honor the combined sacrificed blood of 57 million abortions? Well, only if honor means swimming in the blood of 57 million aborted babies, who were denied their right to life and due process, who weren’t even granted second-class human being status, but aborted. No amnesty or Executive action for them.

But this guy can rally people lecturing them to use their God-given rights, extorting the Selma anniversary for political purposes. Yet he just condemned Netanyahu for giving a national security speech for percieved “political” reasons calling it a distraction. Democrats poo-pooed it as political theatrics. The urgency of an emergent nuclear holocaust means as much to him as the human genocide of abortion right here in the USA. In fact, he defends the latter as a right. So how far will he go to appease Iran’s nuclear aspirations?

We shall overcome“… Oh Lord, I pray it be so!

Don’t need no stinkin’ illegal database

Another dagger to America. From the guy who brought us Obamacare, and the illegal executive order amnesty. He’s on a mission.

Obama’s Police Task Force Recommends Scrapping FBI’s ‘Immigration Violator’ Database

Chuck Ross 03/02/2015 | Daily Caller

A task force appointed by President Barack Obama to reform policing in the U.S. is recommending that the Department of Justice scrap an FBI database that gathers and maintains information on certain “immigration violators.”

The recommendation, handed down by the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing in an interim report on Monday, pertains to FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database.

NCIC is used by local law enforcement officers during traffic stops and other encounters with the public. The database, developed in 1967, allows officers to find out if the individuals are wanted for crimes in other jurisdictions.

An immigrant violator database was added to NCIC in 2002. That particular database tells officers if a person has an outstanding removal order, whether the person failed to complete a special post-9/11 registration requirement or whether the individual was previously deported with a felony conviction.

More continue reading

 

What police force in their right mind would want to scrap the database? So the answer to problems of enforcement is to drop the datasbase. Right,  I could see him doing that with guns or that database.  Never.  Rather than sanctuary cities, which are a huge problem, turn America into a sanctuary nation — don’t ask don’t tell. Purge the records and limit the police’s ability to enforce the law.

I’m sure the Jihadis the world over along with thousands of illegal criminals will be thrilled.  Bring them “out of the shadows” and force law abiding citizens into the shadows. Obama’s M/O seems to be set up a task force committee to his design, then issue its recommendations to him for action. So far it is working.

Semantics Summit

Instead of a Summit on Extremism it is really a semantics summit.

“Political grievances that are exploited by terrorists.” Is he admitting he is a terrorist? Seriously, he’s done more to exploit grievances and divide people than anyone.

If I hear one more hand-picked letter example from Obama of a Muslim child saying they are good people, my head will explode. Where are all the letters from Christians saying this intolerance and genocide against Christians and Jews has to stop? None. Oh, he’s getting no letters from concerned Christians. More validation of his defense of Islam tour.

Obama boiled it down to a semantics soup. No matter what you see on the menu, you are getting semantics soup. (no offense to the Soup Nazi)

As Eric Holder instructed us, what does it matter if they use the words “Islamic terrorism” or not? Ask Obama, It matters a whole lot to him. If it really didn’t matter he wouldn’t have problems using it occasionally, so at least people know what he is talking about.

Related
Obama’s religious blindness aids Islamic State: Column by James S. Robbins

Rice plays the Gong Show, loses

Susan Rice delivered a strategy speech to Brookings Institution. In it she said:

But, too often, what’s missing here in Washington is a sense of perspective. Yes, there’s a lot going on. Still, while the dangers we face may be more numerous and varied, they are not of the existential nature we confronted during World War II or the Cold War.

We can’t afford to be buffeted by alarmism and an instantaneous news cycle. We must continue to do the hard work of leading a complex and rapidly evolving world, of seizing opportunities, and of winning the future for our children.

Perspective? Well it is not D-Day, yet anyway. No, this is the Titanic. Captain O and his advisers are telling the band “keep on playing, just a little louder”.

On Iran she said: “We must give diplomacy a chance to finish the job.”

How many chances has diplomacy had? Obama himself has extended it what 3 times? Again, a parallel to the Titanic. Give those life preservers a chance if you really must. But relax and stop the alarmism.

BBC

In a letter outlining the strategy, Mr Obama said the US would “always defend our interests and uphold our commitments to allies and partners”.

“But we have to make hard choices among many competing priorities and we must always resist the overreach that comes when we make decisions based upon fear.”

I rest my Titanic analogy case. ‘Let’s not act too rashly, more music please, louder. Have some faith in the concept. Louder.‘ Our national defense and security is overreach?

After all her statements, there are people fighting to Gong her. She certainly has a record in divisive denial, like Benghazi.

Strong and sustained American leadership remains essential, as ever. Think for a minute where the world would be today without decisive U.S. leadership.

Yea, just think.

We will always act to defend our country and its people, but we aim to avoid sending many thousands of ground forces into combat in hostile lands.

So Obama wants Congress to draft and pass a new authorization for Obama on Iraq, which should state no ground troops. Does that sound ridiculous for a necessary authorization?

We are committed to fighting terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, even as we rally the world to meet the threats of tomorrow

“We are committed” even as we cannot deny Iran nuclear capability. But follow what we say, not what we do. “Louder music, please!”

The price is wrong

I think Obama invented a new game show formula. I’ll call it “the price is wrong”.

Even if Obama got some kind of arrangement with Cuba, at what real cost would it be? We already gave up the store without any significant gain.

His belated action against ISIS, but he can’t even call it Islamic terrorism. The Iran nuke deal. Their climate change deal with China. A Mid East peace deal with Israel. And that is if he actually gets those so-called deals. Iran is getting how much taxpayer money for what? We already made concessions, and enshrined enrichment. So even if he ends up with something he claims is a “deal”, at what enormous price and concessions did it all come? Plus they are generally lousy deals at that.

That leads me to the name of Obama’s new game. Contestants name a price the other guy must pay. There is no loser, except if you consider the price (consequences) of it all.

Obama calls this diplomacy but it’s the same way he does politics by buying votes. He’s trying to do the same with foreign policy, everything is about what he can (we) do for them… “Name your price”. One where they can’t lose, but at what cost? The only reason is to claim success no matter what. Well, he is the President of smoke and mirrors anyway.

But the price was always wrong.

A few words about the SOTU

You may think you know what Obama will say in his SOTU speech, but I know what he will say. (…so says my satirical pen)

  • Valerie Jarrett could not speak tonight, so I will.
  • The only war we will engage in is class warfare. And that war will never end.
  • I’m officially changing the name “Uncle Sam” to Uncle Obama.
  • Peace through appeasement.
  • Now, for my next trick I will pull out my veto pen.
  • Stealing people’s money and spending it is now called investment.
  • Elections have reactions not consequences.
  • You didn’t build that, but I did.
  • If memory serves me,  and it should….

Just a few of the highlights. The WH has been asking its minions to sign up “are you in?” to say they will watch, so expect much more. Word is some straw men will be attending, too.

The steady drip, drip, drip

It’s Ferguson, it’s NYC, no it’s everywhere. In fact, it isn’t black, native American, or other, it’s everyone. And it’s law enforcement across the board.

So that is Obama’s latest on the police acting stupidly, in Obama’s narrative. Only there is no summit in sight on the problem.

Remember last year under the sequester when Obama wanted America to feel the pain of budget restrictions? He threatened us with cuts to fire and police departments. He used those threats as fodder against any opposition to his unilateral agenda.

Now he critiques the cops for their treatment of people. And he broadens it to their treatment of, well, everyone.

His latest statements come on the heels of the NYC grand jury decision not to prosecute police for “murder” or death of Garner, in their arrest of him for selling cigarettes. A case where, once again, Al Sharpton is front and center in the case and reaction to the decision. It’s amazing he can still have time to have a show on MSNBC. But this is probably considered being “on assignment.”

Obama on NY grand jury decision: ‘This is an American problem’

December 03, 2014 | The Hill

President Obama vowed Wednesday that he would not “let up” in his push to address law enforcement issues after a grand jury in New York opted not to bring criminal charges in the case of Eric Garner, a black man killed when a white police officer placed him in a chokehold.

“It is incumbent upon all of us as Americans, regardless of race, region, faith, that we recognize this is an American problem and not just a black problem or a brown problem or a Native American problem; this is an American problem.

“When anybody in this country is not being treated equally under the law, that’s a problem. And it’s my job as president to help solve it,” he said.

Obama said the Garner case speaks “to the larger issues we’ve been talking about now for the last week, the last month, the last year and sadly for decades.”

“Unfortunately, we are seeing too many incidences where people just do not have confidence that folks are being treated fairly,” Obama said.

The president said he had spoken to Attorney General Eric Holder on the phone, and that the Justice Department would have additional information about the federal response to the grand jury finding.

Okay, people are not being treated fairly, and people across the country do not have confidence in the system. That might have some merit in the broader context.

Either people are not being treated fairly, or there is some wide perception in the public that they are not. But when we the people took issue with the border, we were told everything was fine and that we just had a perception problem.

Now based on a few individual instances, he tells us people are not being treated fairly. And that he supposedly stands on the side of the mistreated people. In other words, like an Al Sharpton in the Oval Office. He rolls all this out as if it were just a matter of fact that everyone knows. (contrary to his reaction to what most people think of the border)

Furthermore, if he wants to talk fairness, how about the way he treated this last flood of illegals over the border? Now he wants to lecture us about fairness? Or how about the way the IRS treated conservatives for years? Remember his get to the bottom of this…before his “not a smidgen of corruption” line. But he is a one-man crusader for fairness.

The real dirty truth about Obama is it very much matters who you are, what color you are, what demographic you are, what political party you belong to, or how much money you have, or what job you have, or who your employer is in the way you are treated. This is just how he and his Democrat colleagues see things. Now he once again comes out pushing his old canard about equality, fairness, and victimhood. And if you trust either he or Holder as the guardians for fairness, then you really need your head examined.

Just what we need, Obama vowing a campaign for fairness. He didn’t even demonstrate fairness in his presidential campaigns. And he didn’t push his Obamacare fairly.

Now, he is Obama, Captain fairness. Captain Hypocrite is more accurate. Any time Obama lectures about fairness, look out. These days lies travel faster than the speed of airwaves, especially from the bully pulpit.

RightRing | Bullright

Same theme rings a note

It’s time for another custom comparison. I do it for perspective, to avoid being myopic on one issue, and to keep the larger picture in mind. That includes the greater principles involved — or problem as the case may be.

In this one it is Obamacare, the VA scandal, and the IRS scandal.

So here we are with Obamacare, or Affordable Care Act as they like to call it. We now see even more evidence of what went into cooking up this abuse of power. Yes, abuse of power is the central theme to all this. “We’re from the government…”

They passed Obamacare using every trick they could think of, and used every scheme they could devise in writing it. They assumed people had to be lied to. So they lied in creating it, then they lied in promoting, ie selling it. They used all the contorted methodology they could to ram it through a Party line vote. They had backroom deals and closed door meetings in creating it. They used government abuse to get it passed. They took money from another government program in trouble to fund it.

Then there were all the promises or, as I call them, lies they used to make us feel good about it. Something with that many lies to sell it must be pretty bad on the face. They embedded all these taxes and then said but they aren’t taxes. Then the Supremes did call it a tax and upheld it on those grounds. Why there are even sub-scandals like the Louisiana Purchase, “Cornhusker Kickback” for Nebraska, and now the money Gruber was paid while designing and promoting it. Mary Landrieu’s 300 million dollar Louisiana Purchase turned into a 4.3 billion dollar windfall. Then the controversy over state exchanges.

Where is the VA in this? The VA and government employees systematically schemed to limit and cheat healthcare for military vets. You have the schemes, and then you have the abuse and trail. Though it is criminal what they actually were doing but now they treat it as though it were a disciplinary infraction of policy, rather than policy. What they did was akin to a pyramid scheme. If some people complained, point to the great benefits of the system and claim it just needs more funding to correct it.

Behind it all, they were lying to people and keeping separate secret lists. Then even getting bonuses based on false premises. The sacred obligations we have toward veterans, and the trust therein, was broken. Though little can undo the damage done, but they make gestures to correct the systemic abuse within the system. But now it gets even worse in the fallout. They suspend or fire some people while what was done is criminal, especially to veterans. (even media termed it a scandal) But employees have protections, you know.

The IRS was intentionally targeting swaths of people, but we weren’t supposed to know that. Discrimination anyone? They claimed they were treating everyone the same. (with suspicion?) They claimed it was a few rogue employees apparently freelancing. So they lied. They feigned outrage when faced with the problem. Then we find it went further, deeper into the caverns of bureaucratic planning than they want us to think. Oops, can’t even feign outrage over that, so deflect and dismiss it.

Then we see the trail of scheming to cover up, right through testifying. They issue blanket statements to substitute for actions. They used their political disagreement with a Supreme decision as grounds for their selective political targeting. Finally, IRS is the enforcement arm for ObamaCare.

In all these scandals, they also blamed Republicans: for resisting Obamacare and misnaming it; for playing politics with the VA though problems were systemic; for even calling the IRS thing a “scandal” and an abuse of power. Some Dems applauded and encouraged the behavior.

In Obamacare they lied to create it and push it through. In the VA, they said they were improving the process. In IRS, they lied that it was a problem or abuse. There is a vacuum of accountability for any of it. Not even admission. Real lives are affected and damaged by all. They even called the IRS scandal a partisan witch-hunt, talk about irony to the tenth power.

Then they lie from the podium about the problems and scandals claiming Obama et al were completely unaware of the problems. It’s a little hard to say you were fixing or correcting the problems when you claim you were not aware of them.

Can you say abuse and misuse of power? Its a running theme throughout the administration. Even while we are looking at one area of government abuse, they and Obama are steaming toward another abuse of power. It’s so bad they will create a scandal to cover a scandal.

Of course there is the coverup: hard drives crash, emails are somehow lost, records are lost or destroyed. But they are upset at what conservatives call things — scandals, Obamacare, corruption. They are still selling Obamacare on the ‘wet noodle principle’, throw it at the wall if it will stick. The Constitution is being shredded and they are worried about what it is labeled. There was knowledge, intent and misuse of government power. And yes, they were all sponsored by “change you can believe in”…”yes we can.”

So, it’s Republicans fault for not liking it, and people are too stupid to understand.

RightRing | Bullright

Hey, big spenders…

Teachers Unions Spent Big, Lost Big

Record-breaking spending wasted on lost Senate seats, govr’s mansions
BY: Bill McMorris – November 7, 2014 | WFB

The nation’s largest teachers unions blew about $60 million of their members’ money on the disastrous 2014 midterms elections.

The record-breaking campaigns waged by the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, which represent more than 4 million educators nationwide, did little to stem the Republican wave.

The NEA was the second-largest Super PAC donor of the 2014 cycle, spending more than $22 million to aid Democratic candidates for federal office. The federal spending was on top of an estimated $28 million push at the state and local level. The NEA declined an interview request to discuss the election results and its political strategy moving forward.

The AFT had said it planned on spending $20 million during the 2014 cycle, a ten-fold increase from the $2 million it spent on 2010, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The AFT did not return request for comment. AFT President Randi Weingarten said that Democratic candidates suffered from President Obama’s unpopularity among the electorate.

More at: http://freebeacon.com/issues/teachers-unions-spent-big-lost-big/

If they just had a little mo’ money! Haha Now they know where their union money is going. They were determined to spend to defeat their opponents, which are us the American taxpayers. And this was just a midterm. Note the 2010 spending by comparison.

So their objective was to spend as much as they could to overcome Obama’s unpopularity. And they lost. Maybe his unpopularity cannot be compensated for? They were campaigning against Obama, I like that.

Here’s to you teach’s, and Randi Weingarten.

Maybe they need to spend a little time with the common folk. (not the common core)

Saul move on over, reformation is coming

In 2008, the conversation was about a post-racial America. Now all anyone can hope for is a post-racial Obama. But that ain’t going to happen. We know that.

Roger Simon, co-founder of PJ media, wrote a piece on just that with just that conclusion. Racism has become the Holy Grail to Democrats — with their fictitious war on women coming in a close second. As he says, next up it is Hispanics.

Liberal Racism: Hispanics Are Next

Roughly ninety-five percent of racism in America today now either emanates from liberals or is generated by them. The Democratic Party relies on racism because, without the perception of serious ongoing racism in our culture, the identity politics on which the party depends would disintegrate. As presently constituted, they wouldn’t win another national or statewide election. This makes the Democratic Party by necessity a virtual racism-manufacturing machine.

The Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons are not anomalies. They are the motor that drives the car. Barack Obama could in no way be a post-racial president as promised, even if he wanted to be (doubtful). He wouldn’t have had a party anymore.

The idea that the chief executive of our country would want to give special privileges to Latinos above and beyond the wishes of their future fellow citizens is not only morally repugnant, it is highly socially damaging. It drives us apart — and apparently deliberately.

My only question is: isn’t all this getting a bit old, even for Libs? So this is where we are.

Their tactics and arguments have become stale — to be kind — and that is what voters are now seeing. Senator Uterus has learned that lesson. Senator Mark Pryor said Obama was a drag on his campaign. Grimes couldn’t endorse Obama. How long can you push phony arguments until they get old, even laughable? (ridicule can be a positive thing)

Alinsky’s RULE #7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

Liberals can be counted on to do what they always do, when they decide to move on they do so in lockstep. The new thing will be the rage, sucking up all the energy in the room, which backwashes old ideas that are no longer effective. “Don’t become old news.”

RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

Of course, the new ideas will be just as specious as the old but that doesn’t matter because they are new. Leftists will tweak them along the way, the same way Obama revises his statements or the way they tweaked Obamacare. When everything is part of an evolving argument, a lot tends to get lost in the shuffle.

Remember the rules for radicals is geared to opposing typical activists or activism, and overwhelming them. If anything, the rules are about breaking rules, and it is always about what works — the ends justify the means. Hispanics beware.

RightRing | Bullright

Dems try to cheat the electorate

What else is new?

Dick Morris: Democrats Using ‘False Flag’ Plan to Steal Senate

Tuesday, 14 Oct 2014 | Newsmax

By Dick Morris

Failing to persuade voters to support their discredited agenda, Democrats are now determined to use a false flag strategy to advance their plan to steal a Senate majority this November.

Masquerading as independents in four key Senate races, Democratic candidates are embracing a wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing tactic to fool voters into believing that they are not the party hack/Obama rubber stamps they truly are.

By pretending that they are Independents, they can take power and help Obama implement his plan to create a single ruling party government in the U.S.

Read more at Newsmax

Oh yea, they are the IN–dependents.

Hope on the ropes
Josh Earnest said:

“Ultimately, those Democratic candidates will have to develop their own strategies in their states for figuring out how exactly to do that,” he continued. “And there are people running in red states that have a strong track record. … So it should be their decision. It’s ultimately their campaign; it’s their name that’s on the ballot.”

“Democrats who are running in red states, blue states and in so-called purple states are going to need the strong support of those voters who supported the president in his re-election campaign, that they’re going to need the support of young voters and Hispanic voters and Asian voters, African-American voters, of course. And so helping voters in all these states understand the stakes in the midterm elections is one way the president can help Democratic candidates on the ballot.”

He forgot to mention women. All voters are to Dems is their collective commodities.

Obama stuck out his nose:

“And so some of the candidates there — it is difficult for them to have me in the state because the Republicans will use that to try to fan Republican turnout,” Obama said.

“These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me, and I tell them, I said, ‘You know what, you do what you need to do to win. I will be responsible for making sure our voters turn out.’ ”

He owns the voters. It’s all about Obama.

It wreaks like a narcissist trying to be relevant. At the time they distance themselves, arguably, from Obama he says not to worry they always vote with me and will remain with me. But ‘say or do what you must to win an election.’ In other words, lie. Tell them whatever you need to tell them. But we know they are merely Obama stooges anyway.

Calling themselves independent at all is insulting. Independent of the record, maybe. Just what we all really love about politics, saying anything to get elected and doing the opposite.

Is that a great voter turn-on or what?

RightRing | Bullright

Providence votes in disagreement

This takes a little explaining but I’ll try. The last few weeks reinforce my opinion that there just might be some method in all this madness. It’s a working theory.

Let me start by acknowledging all those loud voices against foreign involvements of any kind. Oh, it makes for some good soundbites. Generally, a lot of people agree with that evidenced by Ron Paul’s popularity. There are good points. There are also limits and extremes, though this is not about the validity of that theory.

Into that backdrop and sentiment came Obama into office. He attempted to project his success in that philosophy, as well as his overall ideology. Then came his second campaign and, besides all other problems, he made anti-war the central issue. “Osama bin Laden is Dead and GM is alive.” Biden said that was the bumper sticker for the campaign, despite reality. Obama’s inaction toward foreign wars was supposed to be his greatest achievement. And they eventually caught bin Laden, even if it was only a matter of time. He rode the victory lap long and hard on that right into the campaign.

Then came Benghazi. After years complaining that Bush took his eye off the ball, a terrorist attack happens. No sooner did it happen than he was figuratively and literally in full campaign mode when they began lying and standing truth on its head. They had already been spinning the Libya adventure, declaring it a validation of Obama’s approach and trying their organizing touch with their Muslim Brotherhood connections.

That was just the backdrop for what happened. As hard as team Obama tried to project his utopian vision, events took place to defy it. Well, they still argued that not only were they correct but things were going swimmingly smooth.(or they pointed to Bush) Regardless of the talk, one Mid-East uprising after another went awry under his studious leadership, if you followed their narrative about it all. They tried to reassure everyone things were working as planned. Biden had claimed Iraq would be their big success story.

But they were so busy running from and trying to rewrite Benghazi to notice what was happening — or to see the overall message. The people caught on but they didn’t. And they dug in even further, calling Benghazi a manufactured and made-up scandal just like they called Fast and Furious. It was standard protocol to deny any truth about it.

Here is the point. It was somewhere between the middle of his fist term and Benghazi. He painted a portrait that seemed nothing like reality, and the sales pitch for it became harder and harder. There never was an attempt to work with others — as Obama claimed he had always done. No, those lies aren’t the real point either. But what happened every time was as if divine providence proved him wrong.

As he was writing off Iraq as ‘his’ success story, it was falling apart. As he was betting on the Arab Spring, it got sprung by his Mo-Bros and radicals. Just like he’d declared success in Libya it fell apart. As he swore off action with a red line in Syria, with a warning not to use chemical weapons, what happened? Hello chemicals. He then declared it a success after Putin cut him off at the pass, and detoured it. Success was now an agreement, he claimed. He was applying the same negotiation strategy with Iran, and again prematurely calling it progress and success.

Now do you notice what happened every time, almost as if planned? The truth showed its head every time. So the message was always there, we could see it. I believe, and it is only my opinion, that the truth was saying “you cannot hide me, and I am not going away.” Despite what Obama did, it seemed truth would not be hidden from view. As stubbornly arrogant as Obama is, the truth appears as stubborn.

They start with deception: but the JV, regional ISIS begs to differ. No threats in this country, then people are caught at the border with ISIS ties ( plus those who got by). Napolitano said we had a border perception problem. Yea, a 20/20 problem. You can’t hide 60,000 illegals storming the border. Why make the statements? No shutdown of government, voila shutdown. Obamacare will save money, facts be damned. Clapper said we aren’t wittingly collecting Americans’ information. Obama said there was “ not even a smidgen of corruption” in the IRS scandal. Hello.

Obama rolled out his signature Obamacare putting so much emphasis on their success beforehand that it could not live up to it on any level. Even worse, the process to roll it out was so flawed it was laughable. Do you see a little humor in that? I know it wasn’t funny but it was like Providence was playing its hand again. The irony of truth, in spite of what they said and did. With all the ObamaCare hype, you’d think at least the problem-plagued program could roll out without creating even more disaster than it already was.

Even with help from mainstream media, they could not completely hide the truth. Benghazi blew up in their face, after they thought they had killed it. Then came the IRS scandal. Each time they defiantly ignored it. Then the sequester testified.

Obama portrays himself as patient and wise. Events don’t validate it. Almost the harder they try to project their narrative, someone is saying “not so fast…you can’t get away with all those lies.” You probably know what I think. But it would be hard to suggest Obama is going along completely undeterred. Oh, nothing has stopped him so far. No lightning bolts prevented his machinations. At the same time, the truth was not allowed to be buried. Lord knows they tried. Obama makes some pronouncement and within a day or two facts say the opposite. I have to see a little method to this madness. I almost look forward to the next pronouncement so truth can vote its conscience.

“Something in the depths of our souls…tells us that the world may be more than a mere combination of events.”-Louis Pasteur

RightRing | Bullright

Race-baiter in chief seeks advisor

And the real good news for the Spite House is: one happens to be available.

Politico: Al Sharpton Becomes Obama’s Race Ambassador

Friday, 22 Aug 2014 03:47 PM

By Sandy Fitzgerald | Newsmax

The Rev. Al Sharpton has come a long way from his bullhorn-shouting presence at some of the nation’s most racially charged events, and has become President Barack Obama’s go-to man for a White House seeking to make a connection when tensions are flaring between the races, a Politico Magazine article claims.

Sharpton’s latest appearance happened this month in Ferguson, Mo. He arrived 72 hours after a white police officer shot and killed 18-year-old black man Michael Brown. Brown’s grandfather requested he come in to help after Sharpton advocated for the family of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, reports Politico Magazine.

But these days, Sharpton is taking a different route, and instead of agitating protests, he’s serving as a contact for the White House, a role he once again played in the Ferguson melee.

“There’s a trust factor with The Rev from the Oval Office on down,” a White House aide told Politico. “He gets it, and he’s got credibility in the community that nobody else has got. There’s really no one else out there who does what he does.”

After Sharpton met with Brown’s family and members of the local community, he connected with White House adviser Valerie Jarrett, who told him the president was “horrified” by the images he was seeing from Ferguson and wanted to know what the Brown family expected from the White House.

While the old Sharpton was avoided, the new Sharpton visits and texts or emails the White House and Obama officials frequently, especially with Attorney General Eric Holder, the first black man to hold that job. Holder, who traveled to Ferguson this week for a probe into the shootings, and Sharpton both say the Ferguson crisis is important to Obama’s legacy.

The shift has been a lifelong goal for Sharpton, says the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who in the past was often a rival of Sharpton.

Sharpton said he has matured over the years, but his critics don’t accept that.

“I’ve grown to appreciate different roles and different people, and I weigh words a little more [carefully] now. I’ve learned how to measure what I say,” he said. “Al Sharpton in 1986 was trying to be heard. I was a local guy and was like, ‘Y’all are ignoring us’…. That’s not the case now.”

Read more:  http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/al-sharpton-race-missouri-police/2014/08/22/id/590375/

 

Let’s call him the czar of racism.  Activist, organizer, race agitator, promoter, TV host, and White House adviser.  Race-baiter General.

The excuse that is being made is that the Brown family called the bad-reverend to help. But don’t you think countless people or families in Chicago reach out to Sharpton? But the provocateur did not turn down the Browns. He “learned how to measure what he says”…. now that is funny.

Obama and his legion of sock puppets

A sock puppet, in the context of online communications, is a fake identity created to promote someone or something through blogs, wikis, forums or social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter.

sock puppet photo: sock puppet sock_puppet.jpgSock puppets are often created to improve the status of some company or other entity or to promote a particular viewpoint that is expected to be helpful to that entity. Fake identities are created to circumvent site bans, increase product sales, improve or tarnish reputations, spread disinformation and stifle dissent, among other possibilities.

Sometimes people create their own sock puppets; sometimes they hire others to do so. Someone hired to create a sock puppet is referred to as a meat puppet, an Internet shill or a cyber shill. The use of a sock puppet to artificially stimulate demand for a product or service is known as sock puppet marketing.

Okay, now that we all know the general term and definition of sock puppets, we can move on. So what Obama does is call out his minions and re-broadcast his message through a legion of useful idiots, aka sock puppets. Sure they may be real people, but there is nothing real or original about what they say. There was nothing original about Obama either.

Want a great example of this just tour the twitter universe at a given time. After the chief loon utters one of his verbal commands, you see them scurrying to place his words into the dialogue wherever, and I mean wherever, they can. Don’t believe me? Just go to any popular representative or Senator’s page — mostly those on the Republican side — and see for yourself. All the talking points boiled down to useful twitter-verse lingo. It doesn’t matter what they reply to, the same talking points. Mostly off topic, makes no difference. They just spout toxic verbiage whereever they feel like taking a dump.

I am talking about the stupid subject of sock puppets only because of their narrative. They are obnoxious. They don’t have to know or understand what they are saying, and chances are they don’t want to. Remember how “Mic Check” was used in OWS dialogue. (if one can call that dialogue) They just offer a mouthpiece to project Obama’s sound-bite agenda. It’s simple. He’s the ventriloquist, they are the puppets. But they can also email and call reps, per orders, or whatever happens to be on Obama’s menu.

There is little difference from one to another. Reply to any of them and they block you and call you a troll. They have their too-cute-by-half hashtags and contacts on Twitter. They are there so you cannot ignore them. Of course, it’s right up Obama’s alley with all those fictional followers he and the First Twit have. These are just self activating bots.

RightRing | Bullright

The ultimate clueless corporatist and company

It’s a bird, it’s a plane. No, it’s an Obama.

Over at the Daily Caller I read an article about Obama the corporatist, which is a pretty good description. And another makes the case that he is “clueless”. Both show his politics are driven by special interests. Well, no news there is there?

The first article makes the case for Obama the corporatist.

Like many others, I’ve been on the lookout for examples of corporatism — the tendency to replace the formal individuated equality of the market, universal rights and democracy with rule by society’s various big interest groups, exercising special privileges by virtue of their particular social role and cutting deals with each other (usually to protect themselves).

I bet these evangelicals never saw themselves as entwined in that paradigm. But they are. Yet they can spot it in other groups, not themselves.

But it deserves closer examination. Sure Obama has run his politics and campaign on special interest fuel. That is also what gave us this divisive landscape. Does he care about the toxic landscape? Not on your life or anyone else’s. In fact, he doesn’t value life at all, but that is not the point here. There really is no logic or common sense behind it. Those people in special interests are only as good as that next handout, favor, or promise as the case me be — and dependent on it. Now that is the point.

Take young people, for example. Obama and the DNC claim they won them over in droves. Done mainly by talk and promises. One was a step closer to socialized medicine. They didn’t know much about socialized medicine, and many do not remember the Hillarycare ordeal. So he went after this new generation to buy them with all these nice sounding schemes. Instead of lowering the costs of tuition, he promises more money for it driving the costs up even further. What do they care, if he promises more money? Would he cut up the ‘halls of ivy’ institutional gold card? No, that would go against their special interest politics.

The “Clueless” article mentioned a quote from Obama himself.

“Sometimes, people don’t always act rationally, and they don’t always act based on their medium term, long-term interest,” he said about the Arabs and Jews, as if they are Illinois state legislators arguing about how to spend tax revenues.

It’s hard to imagine Obama criticizing anyone for not thinking of “long-term interests”. Pot meet kettle. And his circle of sycophants don’t seem to care about that either.

Now imagine the youth who were all crazy and “fired up” for Obama in a few short years. Right now they are fortunately in a demographic Obama and the DNC care about. So will they still fit in a few years, into one of DNC’s beloved special interests?

In a few years they’ll be out of school and applying for some job in the private sector, to make back those tens of thousands of debt dollars. They’ll be fighting the stale economy, wondering where are the jobs? They’ll be faced with rising taxes, and soaring costs of food and energy. But they will be on their own, literally. because they don’t fit into a group qualifying for special status or subsidies. They might even be in a non-preferred group.

So that personal interest Obama (DNC) took in them will be a distant memory. Just like those miners in Virginia and Pennsylvania, the courtship is over. Sure you may want to continue supporting them in any case, but why? Unless you still fit into one of their preferred status groups, you are as relevant a mosquito to them. So that is their future, but no one is looking that far ahead.

Notice what the union miners have suddenly realized about Obama, that he sold them out. It doesn’t feel so well to be used and abused. Hell, they don’t treat illegal aliens that bad.

UMWA protestors arrested

So what happens when you become one of the non-preferred groups and persona non grata, even after you supported Dems? Protest all you want… there’s nobody at home.

Are you taking notes students? Where will you be in a few short years? Then there is the real irony in the miners’ situation: the only ones who care and listen are the conservatives and Republicans. Is that not strange? But they still don’t get it as they support a handmaid of Tom Steyer, the guru of greenbacks on the Left.

Now just reverse the clock back ten years and you would remember all the outrage over Dick Cheney meeting with oil people. You would have thought the world was coming to an end. Contrast that with the endless number of meetings the Occupier has had himself with union leaders and thugs of all kinds, even weekly. In fact, they want more of it.

RightRing | Bullright

Talk about building it… and they come

The old saying is “build it, they will come”. The government has revised that to ‘talk about building it, and they’ll come.”

From the government’s page on unaccompanied children policy:

“Their youth, their separation from a protective environment or person, and the hazardous journey they embark make UAC especially vulnerable to becoming victims of human trafficking, exploitation, and abuse. UAC have multiple, inter-related reasons for undertaking the difficult journey of traveling to the United States. UAC leave their home countries to rejoin family already in the United States, to escape abusive family relationships in their home country, or to find work to support their families in the home country.”

Talk about extreme irony. The vulnerability of these people to be exploited and abused by our system is obvious – from the White House on down through the political ranks. That is exactly their purpose here to exploit illegals for all they can, politically. And the message is out to come and you will receive their protection.

Of course protection from what is not clear. In their homeland violence is down, and yet they are coming. Word is out they can seek and receive relief in this country with little chance of being returned.

The message is out that the US is about to rewrite its immigration law and policies to include them, should they get here, in de facto amnesty. Regardless what the nuances of the law are, the message is out. And they are coming.

There were 14,000 of these referral applicants in 2012, this year they expect over 60,000. And that is only an estimate. So there is a systematic agenda on both sides here. But clearly the illegals are jumping through the hoops.

It has been described by church organizations as a “sobering crisis of minors and others from Central America crossing into US”

Rather than sobering crisis, I’d call it a “slobbering crisis” of historic proportions.

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi: administration busted again

Explosive New Report About Benghazi: They Heard the Terrorists on the Phones While it Happened…

By Caroline Schaeffer | IJReview

A damaging new report from the Air Force pilot who transported embassy officials from Libya discloses that the terrorists who attacked the Benghazi compound and murdered four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, two Navy SEALs, and one information officer, stole State Department cell phones to call their higher-ups and declare their operation a success.

Because they were using State Department phones, U.S. spy agencies overheard their conversations in real time, he says, and knew they were talking to terrorist leaders about a planned mission.

This new information, reports Fox News, will damage the State Department and White House claim that initial intelligence suggested that the attack was over an anti-Islam video, instead of a coordinated attack. Administration officials including National Security Adviser Susan Rice maintained this “anti-Islam video” claim for weeks after the attacks.

Fox News host Bret Baier interviewed retired Air Force Major Eric Stahl, who commanded and piloted the C-17 which transported the bodies of the four victims of the Benghazi attack, as well as survivors.

In the interview, Stahl says that members of the CIA were confused by the Administration’s claims, because “they knew during the attack…who was doing the attacking.” And this claim was backed up by another official.

The second source, who requested anonymity to discuss classified data, told Fox News he had personally read the intelligence reports at the time that contained references to calls by terrorists – using State Department cell phones captured at the consulate during the battle – to their terrorist leaders. The second source also confirmed that the security teams on the ground received this intelligence in real time.

Furthermore, Stahl wonders why his quick-ready team wasn’t called up sooner, if the State Department knew of the terrorist attack as it was happening.

Hillary Clinton may wonder what difference it makes whether it was a planned terrorist attack or a spontaneous riot which caused the murder of four Americans.

MORE>
 

As Hillary slithers out on the campaign trail, it’s obvious we haven’t heard the last of this. Neither has she. Once again, it counters their entire flimsy narrative. Her supporters will be screaming “but people don’t care about that”.

She didn’t like to do media appearances, so they sent Susan Rice. Now she’s on book tour doing media everywhere. She also does 200k speeches. So maybe they didn’t pay her the right price. They criticized Mitt Romney for his statements on the attack. Everyone piled on to criticize Romney at the time, when he said:

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Oh, they swung on a pivot attacking him and his “campaign” for that. But Obama and Hillary were in office and aware of what was going on. Plausible denial is just not plausible. Yet it was open season to criticize Romney at the time.

Flash forward, they are all criticizing the soldiers for telling the truth about Bergdahl. It’s always amazing when they find their voice on issues. They were not happy about pictures leaked out on the border scandal either. Before that, not a word about it. They weren’t happy about the news of VA, but before that nothing. Just as Hillary has a selective voice.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s pass being revoked by card-carrying Leftists

…its sort of looking that way.

NPR Admits Opposition To Obama May Not Be Due To Racism But Because He’s Terrible

By Brian Anderson on May 13, 2014

We’ve been told over and over that opposing President Obama’s socialist anti-American agenda is due to deep-seated racism and not any conservative values one might hold. Now, the National Public Radio (NPR), of all media outlets, has posted a piece on their blog saying that there might be something more to disliking Obama than just racism. I know, I’m shocked too.

This refreshing revelation from a decidedly left-leaning news source starts out with a great premise:

There’s no question we’re living in a time of divisive politics, when roughly half the country is likely to hate the president, no matter whom he or she might be.

And back it up with a good quote:

“If any white Democrat had pushed through a billion-dollar stimulus plan and a takeover of the health care industry, he would have been equally detested by conservatives and Republicans,” says Whit Ayres, a GOP pollster and consultant.

Continuing with this line of thought, the writer puts in a little historical context. Obama doesn’t have a trademark on being hated:

But modern presidents have all triggered strong negative reactions. John F. Kennedy met with rhetoric from the John Birch Society that in some ways mirrors Tea Party responses to Obama. Militia movements expanded and grew during the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, while George W. Bush’s presidency inspired hatred on the left and a novel fantasizing about his assassination.

“Bill Clinton was vilified and hated more, with more passion,” says David Carney, a Republican consultant. “It was much more personal and negative than anything about Obama.”

This is actually true. Clinton was impeached and Obama has not been even though he deserves it more.

More:  Downtrend.com

Now maybe they are finally catching on, after 5 and a half years. That’s something I questioned about Obama for years. First, why was he so passionate about running when he knew the consequences of being president? He wasted no time either, starting in ’06 right after getting elected Senator.

And why he expected he would be different from any of those, Democrats or Republicans? Right off the bat were his ties with Wright and a slew of other radicals, achem terrorists. That’s always an icebreaker with any crowd. Yea, the speech where he said “we are not a red America, we are not a blue America” to plead his case. Yea, a speech changes all that “history”– is that a derogatory word now? Then again in his “race speech” saying “words, just words?” Those were just words, to Obama anyway.

But no other president has been afforded the privilege of a built-in excuse he (or those around him) flaunted by playing the race card to explain any opposition to him. I predict no future president will have that same opportunity, given how Obama overused and abused it. He kept it in front of him as a shield ready to hoist against any critics. That is a shallow character who does that.

The main point was always: “Obama, have you noticed how just the last few presidents were treated?”

It wouldn’t even be as much of a contradiction or hypocrisy if Obama was not leading the charge in attacking the last president. He assumed the role in the Senate in ’05 . Then he ran against an outgoing president, not McCain, when Bush wasn’t even on the ballot. How none of this ever occurred to the minds of the Left is baffling. If he were anyone else, he would not have gotten that far. He would have been voted out of American Idol based on performance. And this guy who was granted such wide berth hasn’t even appreciated all that effort, including from the media. The media did not lock horns, it lock-stepped right down Obama’s path. Show me the precedent for that.

His disconnect with most of America is because of his own radical ideology and actions. What others think never was Obama’s real problem. No, he believed he was guaranteed the prize for being “present”, like his record in Illinois, despite any facts. Let’s not even mention the records, and zero experience at anything even in the Senate. Pitiful that only now some in the left media admit the “racism” charade. Now if they could find a way to justify what they’ve done for the last five years.

It may be just a start, as they didn’t throw “racism” completely out the window. Well, who wants to throw a perfectly good race card away? But the possibility of the race card as the sole explanation for opposition might be on life support.

RightRing | Bullright