Obama is Sincerely Wrong

We were bombarded by images of Obama and his tears as he said every time I think of those kids in Newtown “it makes me mad.” Then he turns toward the camera to show him wiping his tears. Whatever you thought of his performance, he made it obvious so we couldn’t miss it. (I wondered how much practice it involved)

But such is the news cycle, it took on a life of it’s own. Surely that one will be enshrined in his library one day. Just in case people say he was emotionless or cold, they can have that starring people in the face.

What happened though in the coverage was a consensus formed quickly. Most people came along to say “well, he may have been sincere.” Of course libtards would say he was very sincere and moved.

That started me thinking. Is that the only point, whether he was sincere or not? So he may have been but he was sincerely wrong, too, if so. It’s as if we are supposed to judge his plans and ideas on whether he was sincere — or sincerely crying. Remember they made fun of Boehner for getting emotional. He just can’t control himself, he’s a wreck. But this was Obama so they were righteous tears. (can’t have too many of those Obama tears) And we are supposed to pay attention to those like punctuation marks.

His ideas on gun control are wrong, his motives for doing them are wrong(at least very highly suspect), his use of power is wrong, and his rationale was wrong. But they all want to focus on whether he was “sincere” or not. Sure he believes in his cause and reasons. But whether he is “sincere” or not about them does not change what they are. So the majority of people in media missed that point. Since when do we want someone creating law out of their emotions?

But that is what libs want (and Jeb Bush too). Make amnesty plans on emotions, do Obamacare on emotions. Then say, well no one can deny he was sincere. So no one can deny you were wrong because they cannot deny your emotions. I can’t help thinking that’s just how the WH planned it. We’re supposed to control our borders based on emotions. We’re supposed to run the economy on emotions, and taxes on tears. Policy, education, defense, environment, resources, justice, and even elections on emotions. But hey, they are “sincere” that’s all that matters.

RightRing | Bullright

Soros hits campaign trail running mouth

Surprise, Soros calls to resist Cruz and Trump. But who is we?

SOROS: We must ‘resist the siren song of the likes of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz’

Business Insider By Colin Campbel

Billionaire hedge fund manager George Soros warned in a Monday op-ed that Republican presidential candidates were following a belief that endangers “open society” with how they frame the fight against the Islamic State terror group.


In Soros’ op-ed piece in the Guardian:

Jihadi terrorist groups such as Islamic State and al-Qaida have discovered the Achilles heel of our western societies: the fear of death. Through horrific attacks and macabre videos, the publicists of Isis magnify this fear, leading otherwise sensible people in hitherto open societies to abandon their reason.

Scientists have discovered that emotion is an essential component of human reasoning. That discovery explains why jihadi terrorism poses such a potent threat to our societies: the fear of death leads us and our leaders to think – and then behave – irrationally.

The irony of Soros lecturing about fear is rich . Fear and the emotional argument substituting for reason is the fuel Obama and the Democrats run on. The emotion that leads their environmental policies, fear that leads their global warming charge. Fear was the foundation of Obamacare and emotion was the chaser. Fear of conservatives and the right is how they campaign and sell their candidates. Emotions long ago replaced reason and scientific method for the Left. Fear of gov’t shutdown. Democrats use fear as a tool.

And faith is very much in style with Democrats. Change you can believe in” was a whole presidential campaign — based on no science, facts or rational reason — wrapped in emotions. Words like fundamental transformation are euphemisms for the “change” they seek. “Debate is over” become tag lines for shutting down dissent. If that doesn’t end it, then apply the RICO statute to prosecute skeptics and deniers. Does that all sound rational, reasonable, and void of emotion? No. Resist the siren of the Soros puppet squad.

Soros is only doing something else the Marxists do so well, projection. Always accuse your opponent of what you yourself are doing. It is very Lenin-esque.

But emotion is how they package their message, campaign, and argument. It is inseparable.
Now a word from a leading Democrat sponsor, from when dissent was cool.

Case study in projection — the emotional change, hope salesman:
The great false hope “the moment… we restored our image as the last best hope on earth”.

Maybe no fear (of the reaper) works for king Georgy, and Barry.
Rational people would disagree.

However, since the subject of his attack was serious in nature on Islamic terrorism and ISIS et al, then it is worth exploring deeper . Of course the element of fear terrorists employ is very real. Yes, it is their goal. But no, having some element of fear, for the entire situation, does not mean one has succumbed to the agenda of the terrorists. Remember their political ideology, terrorism agenda, is multi-pronged. Fear is the ingredient that drives their desired reactions. But if it does not get their desired results then the objective failed. The whole point of terrorism is to force political their objectives. It is how the fear is channeled that is critical. Though fear is deemed good when channeled to Democrats.

Having no fear is the definition of fearless. Being free of fear in the face of terrorism is not enough. More importantly, one has to have the correct reaction to the terrorism. Giving them what they want is not a successful option for opposing or defeating terrorism. Ceding the terrorists’ ground is not winning. And in most cases, a respectful amount of fear is a good thing. Being fearless is strategically dangerous.

I’m sick of these tired arguments of “that is what terrorists want.” I.e. terrorists want Americans’ boots on the ground over there fighting them. Do they really? I highly doubt that. The other important thing we must understand is propaganda. Why should we carry their propaganda for them. Why shouldn’t we oppose it? We’ve fallen victim to their propaganda. Closing Gitmo is a recruiting tool, so we must shut it down. Really? Ridiculous. Islamic terrorists want and expect us to be politically correct, too. So why are we giving them the p/c they want? Then I always trust Soros on all things ISIS.(not)

But why give them what they want by adopting their propaganda into our dialogue? What they want is to influence debate and opinion here. I’m sure you could find some of the same arguments in their propaganda magazines as you hear right out of Democrats’ mouths, like “it’s a war on Islam”. The truth is they’ve declared war on us in the name of Islam.

But fear is a resource when Democrats use it as a tool — even while criticizing ‘fear’– and a powerful motivator. The Marxist Left have proved they care nothing about right or wrong, but only how people feel about it. Perception is reality, fear is a means. Skeptics beware.

RightRing | Bullright

Faux step-dad being investigated

Michael Brown’s stepdad investigated for comments

AP  By JIM SALTER — 12/2/14  | Yahoo News

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Police are investigating Michael Brown’s stepfather for angry comments on the streets of Ferguson after a grand jury decided not to indict the police officer who fatally shot his stepson, a spokesman said Tuesday.

Officials want to talk to Louis Head about his comments as part of a broader investigation into the arson, vandalism and looting that followed the Nov. 24 grand jury announcement, St. Louis County Police spokesman Brian Schellman said. Twelve commercial buildings were destroyed by fire. …/

Video widely circulated after last week’s grand jury announcement shows Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, on top of a car and breaking down as the decision blares over a stereo. Head, her husband, comforts her then yells angry comments, including “Burn this bitch down!”

Family attorney Benjamin Crump has called the reaction “raw emotion,” but “completely inappropriate.” He did not immediately return messages seeking comment Tuesday.

Head has not yet been interviewed by police, and there is no timetable for when the investigation will be complete, Schellman said. He declined to discuss what specific charges Head could face. A message left with a spokesman for St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch was not immediately returned. …/

Ferguson Police spokesman Jeff Small said that department is not conducting a separate investigation of Head. …/

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that teachers joined the students and the Ferguson-Florissant School District provided buses to pick them up and return them to classes by mid-afternoon. It was their first day back in class after Thanksgiving break was extended a day due to bad weather Monday, when similar walkouts were staged across the country.

More: http://news.yahoo.com/michael-browns-stepdad-investigated-comments-204459408.html

Well, that took some time. They keep reporting him as the Step-dad. Crump made media appearances calling it an emotional statement. Oh, it was filled with emotion all right.

Because he was emotional does not negate his words or what he said. He repeated it enough times. You’d have to prove temporary insanity to say he didn’t know what he was saying. Most likely a planned response, IMHO.

I wonder if someone screaming fire in a theater can be excused because he was emotional? It was probably that emotion which lent even more credibility to his statements. We had a president elected largely on emotions. But when someone incites a riot, emotion is somehow supposed to be an excuse? Go figure.

PS: district school buses shuttle students and teachers from protest?

RightRing | Bullright