MARCO RUBIO ENDORSES MITT ROMNEY – WHAT IT MEANS

Rubio’s endorsement is the final blow ending any chance Santorum still had of securing the nomination.  Rubio is highly regarded by members of the Tea Party faction making his endorsement a very significant one.  In fact, Rubio would be the ideal choice for Vice Presidential running mate.

Imagine Rubio on the campaign trail – young, Spanish speaking, popular, experienced in government but not part of the Washington establishment, from the South to balance Romney’s northern Massachusetts handicap.  And Rubio has fire in his delivery that Romney does not.  But would he run if asked?

OBAMA DENOUNCES PUBLIC MANDATE

In case you missed it ….

The Republican Party is preparing a collection of juxtaposed videos for TV commercials to be shown during the national campaign.  Thanks to Al Gore for giving the internet to the people, the Blogosphere is already suspending the Democrat contender from his own petard.

IS CARVILLE ADMITTING OBAMACARE IS AN ALBATROSS FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY?

If the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare “I think this will be the best thing that has ever happened to the Democratic Party,” according to Democratic strategist James Carville.  Puzzled?  Here’s his reasoning,

“You know, what the Democrats are going to say, and it is completely justified, ‘We tried, we did something, go see a 5-4 Supreme Court majority’.”

Carville … predicted health care costs will only increase in the future, in which case Republicans will be to blame for leading the drive to expel a federal program designed to help Americans cover those costs. (CNN)

“Then the Republican Party will own the healthcare system for the foreseeable future. And I really believe that. That is not spin,” Carville said.

Pass a bad law and then root for it to be repealed so you can blame the other party for the mess you created.  Good plan, Mr. Democratic Strategist.

Comments coming from Supreme Court Justices in response to Obama’s Solicitor General have been a riot.  Watching the Court hasn’t been this much fun since the Justices overturned Roosevelt’s NRA (Google it).

THE TRAYON – ZIMMERMAN AFFAIR

Al Sharpton rose to power on a lie.  When the Tawana Brawley case was revealed to be a trumped up incident that never happened, the career of a good prosecutor was already destroyed.  Sharpton has never acknowledged the falsehoods were the basis of that case.  He’s a phony and everyone with any sense of objectivity knows it.

Jessie Jackson is past his prime.  He is living comfortably on the proceeds of racial based corporate intimidation, surfacing occasionally to keep racism alive in support of the industry which has served him so well financially.

Barack Obama is the third well known black man to make a run for President on the Democratic ticket.  Obama is cut of different cloth.  He is for real and he is not out to profit financially from the racism industry.  But he encourages it by what he doesn’t say and occasionally by what he does say.  Sharpton and Jackson speak for Sharpton and Jackson, fair enough.  They are free to take sides but the President is not.

When a black man forced his way into a home in Boston, Obama sided with the black man immediately before he knew the facts.  If you remember that incident cost him a beer and an apology to the cop.  When the case against Black Panther intimidation at the polls was technically already won by default, Obama’s administration dropped the charges.  Obama has never exactly said he supports reparations, but he has never said he opposed them and has argued that some form of acknowledgement of crimes against blacks and American Indians should include deeds and not just words.  And we should not overlook Obama’s own words that he had found his life’s work as he lingered in the pew after listening to a sermon on the subject – It’s the white man’s need that runs a world in need.

When a Muslim who said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats, later shot and killed thirteen people at Fort Hood, Obama rightly called for patience to learn the facts before making any judgment.  When an unarmed black boy is shot and killed by a Hispanic the need for patience to find the facts is no longer important.  The New Black Panthers put a bounty on a Hispanic man’s head as their leader shouts for a lynching with “If the government won’t do their job, we will!” and Obama signals acquiescence by his silence.

The Great Divider keeps his rage under control but time and again his bias comes to light. These are strong words but it’s time they be said.

RULES for RADICALS by SAUL ALINSKY, FIRST IN A SERIES

This Post begins a series on the book Rules for Radicals by Professor Saul Alinsky.  During the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama proudly proclaimed his experience as a community organizer.  The professor is known as the Godfather of community organizing.  Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley College thesis on the life and work of Saul Alinsky.  Chris Matthews stated on his MSNBC Hardball program that Saul Alinsky is one of his heroes.  Who is this man Alinsky and what did he teach?  Let’s go to the book and find out.

Prologue
At the front of the book, even before the Prologue, Alinsky writes a brief tribute to Lucifer the devil.  Alinsky admires the devil, holding him in high regard because he succeeded in winning a kingdom for himself.

The author’s prologue is a litany of misery. In his view, the world is a thoroughly miserable place. The prologue is replete with phrases like these — “the outcome of hopelessness and despair is morbidity” and “there is a feeling of death overhanging the nation”.

Alinsky correctly cites Leftist radicals as completely rejecting the common “goals of a well paid job, suburban home, automobile … and everything else that means success” to others.

Young radicals are unhappy because they see only the faults in the world, and no purpose in life. They are in a constant search for themselves. The middle class and affluent are mired in the likes of divorce and disillusionment. The whole world is such a discouraging place that anyone who is happy in it must be blind.

Alinsky seldom speaks about changing America. He talks mostly about changing the World.  His vision of ubiquitous despondency transcends domestic locus.

Revolution with some violence is likely to be required in order to wrest the power of government from those now in control. But revolution must come at the end of the process, not at the beginning. A successful transition of government must be directed like a three act play –  first set the stage, then develop the plot, and finally conclude with the main event. The function and duty of a community organizer is to direct this process.

Act I is join the crowd, gain respect, acceptance and legitimacy.
Act II development, spread discontent, build support for Act III
Act III is the revolution itself, which of necessity will be violent.

Alinsky encourages radicals to fight but discourages those who are impatient and want to go directly to Act III.  Starting at the conclusion is ineffective and it will never bring success.

Commentary on the Prologue
There can be no doubt about the fact that we are dealing with a very morose individual.  Midway through the Prologue it would seem to be a great waste of time to read any further.  Just then he puts forth the analogy of the Three Act Play and suddenly begins to make sense.

Act I.  Join the crowd, gain respect, acceptance and legitimacy.  Of course!  We live in a democracy with a prosperous and sizable middle class.  Such a large segment of people are not going to surrender the fruits of their labor voluntarily.  The goal of complete transformation with redistribution of wealth must begin with stealth.

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”  A statement generally accredited to Norman Thomas, six time candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket.

Obama completed Act I with his election.

Act II is development, spread discontent, build support for Act III.  Contented people do not cry for change.  Therefore discontent must be sown and spread across as wide a spectrum of the population as possible.  We see this today in class warfare by which Obama pits American against American.  The rich, the banks, the oil companies are all made out to be enemies of the people, every one, without exception.  Even riling up the Catholic Church has its advantages providing it does not cost Obama the election.  To solve that, the whole contraception issue is laid on the opposition.

Act II is where we are now.  Understanding what Act II is all about answers a lot of questions.  For one, harmony is not an objective, quite the opposite.  Later in the book, Alinsky tells the community organizer that the establishment will label him an agitator and they will be correct.  That is the job of a community organizer.  Act II is about fomenting unrest and building passion for change.  It is not possible to completely transform a democratic government when most of the people are content and united.

Act III is the revolution itself and Alinksy says violence is inevitable because both power and possessions will need to be wrested from those who have them and they will fight violently to keep it.  There is now general agreement among Socialist leaders today on Acts I and II but they are split on Act III.  Francis Scott Piven argues for the violent revolution option and the sooner the better.  The other school argues that attempts to overthrow the standing government by militant violence are destined to fail.  But with stealth and patience working within the democratic process America can be led to succumb into a socialist state at the ballot box.

Alinsky is basically in the non-militant camp but with the caveat that some violence will be unavoidable at the very end to complete the transformation.

THE CALL FOR VIGILANTE JUSTICE IN FLORIDA

In the aftermath of the World Trade Center attack that was carried out by 19 Muslims, President George W. Bush took quick pre-emptive steps to prevent backlash from arising against Muslims in America.  In the aftermath of the killing of an unarmed Black youth, President Barack H. Obama has done little, some would say nothing to quell the backlash that is rising in the Black community against non-blacks in America.  What if the shooter had been plain vanilla white instead of someone from a Hispanic/Black family?

The New Black Panther Society has issued a $10,000 “reward for the capture” of George Zimmerman, the shooter.  Zimmerman is not on the loose and hiding.  So in this case capture means kidnap: every Panther member knows that.  When Panther leader Mikhail Muhammad announced the reward he called for 5,000 Black men to mobilize and bring Zimmerman in.  “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” Muhammad said, “If the government won’t do the job, we’ll do it,” followed by chants of “freedom or death” and “justice for Trayvon.”

It’s vigilante justice calling for a trial-less lynching.  In times like these a black President should take every possible measure to show he is race neutral.  When racism rears its ugly head, no one is in a better position to quell it than a black President who is willing, able and anxious to restore harmony.  Unfortunately, we don’t have one.

KEYSTONE and OBAMA – THE VIEW FROM CANADA

Canada has the worlds third largest petroleum reserves.  There is no cheaper way to import crude oil into the United States than by pipeline to Canada.  There is no nation with whom we are on better terms than we are with Canada.  If we maximized governmental support for exploration, production and transportation of U.S., Canadian and South American reserves, after a few years we would not need to buy one barrel of crude oil from mid-east suppliers.  In fact they would become reliant upon us for their energy needs because we have the refineries.

One Canadian broadcaster minces no words as he tells the audience his views from across the border. You can hear his strong words here.

 

IS THERE NO SHAME?

There comes a point when the bigger and bolder the lie the harder it is to disbelieve.  There was a movie made with a scene that illustrates the point very well.  It may have been How to Cheat On your Wife with Bobby Morse, I’m not sure.  The scene starts with a man and woman enjoying each other’s company naked in bed.  The man’s wife comes home unexpectedly with grocery bags in hand and catches the pair before they can get out of bed.

The wife launches into a series of furious tirades.  Without returning a glance or uttering a word the cheating pair fly out of the sack, dress, and make up the bed.  All the time this is happening, the wife is right there screaming bloody murder at the two of them.  Shortly the bed is made, the woman is gone and the husband is relaxing in his usual chair reading the evening paper as his wife continues her angry rant.  He lowers the paper and asks “What’s the matter dear?”  His wife comes down an octave and yells something about “That #%&*  woman…” “What woman?” he asks.  “There’s no other woman here.”

The episode ends with the wife taking a puzzled look into the bedroom which appears completely undisturbed, heaving a sigh and calmly asking “What would you like for dinner dear?”  The point is if you are bold enough to tell a lie that is big enough with a face that is blank enough to a person who is gullible enough and wants to believe you enough, and then if you are dishonest enough to try it, you just may get away with it with many people.

Anyone who knows Barack Obama is President of the United States knows he has been adamantly opposed to completion of the Keystone Pipeline.  He still is.  He gave a speech in Cushing, Oklahoma declaring he is giving a fast tract to the project but the truth is he is blocking it.  Obama has approved a portion of the line over which his approval is not needed and continues to deny approval for the portion where his approval is needed.

There are sufficient oil reserves on U.S. territory to meet 100% of our domestic demand for 200 years.  Obama says repeatedly that we have just 2% of the world’s reserves and use 20% of the supply.

The Obama administration has not laid down one inch of pipeline.  Obama says he has lain so much pipeline that it would reach around the world.

Obama says domestic oil production has risen during his tenure.  That’s true.  It has risen in spite of his efforts to stop it.  Production from land subject to Federal leases has declined.  The only increase has been on private lands over which Obama has no control.

Obama specifically chose Solyndra to be the poster boy for his administration’s government green energy program.  He flew to California to give a long speech at a Solyndra plant holding the company up as one of the finest examples of what his administration is doing to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.  Now he says “this was not our program” then blames the Chinese for its failure.

Let’s hope the lies are told often enough that voters will see through them enough to throw the bum out of office.  We have had enough!

GE MAKES THE SWITCH – FROM OBAMA TO ROMNEY

General Electric president Jeffry Immelt has privately switched his support from Barack Obama to Mitt Romney.  According to Charles Gasperino writing for the New York Post, Immelt, a Republican, thought he could moderate Obama’s anti-business views but has become very disenchanted with the President. A GE spokesman said the idea is ludicrous.  Evidence would say otherwise.

In Immelt’s annual letter to stockholders he wrote:

“We live in a tough era in which the public discourse, in general, is negative . . . American companies, particularly big companies, are vilified,” when “we need to work together to find a better way.”

GE executives contributed more than 300% more to Obama than to McCain in the 2008 campaign.  This time around those GE executives have contributed twice as much to Romney than they have to Obama.

There are things about manufacturing that the guy on the production line knows better than the president of the company.  There are things a well informed voter knows about a presidential candidate that a man who shakes hands with him does not.  If Jeffrey Immelt is disappointed it’s because he was too busy managing GE to see what was obvious from the start to Joe the Plumber.

If Gasperino is correct, it bodes well for the 2012 election.  For if GE, of all companies, has had a change of heart, certainly others have as well.

SHOWDOWN by DAVID CORN

OBAMA'S EXECUTIVE JET

David Corn is the Washington Bureau Chief for the publication Mother Jones and author of the book The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception.  David Corn is no friend of the Right.  His latest book is Showdown: The Inside Story of How Obama Fought Back Against Boehner, Cantor, and the Tea Party  is to be released tomorrow.

The book covers a short but very interesting period in the presidency of Barack Obama, from the 2010 election until the beginning of this year.  The headline item is that Obama blamed Fox News for the 2010 results because, he says, Fox branded him as a Muslim 24/7 day and night.  If he believes that, and there is no reason to think that he doesn’t, the man is clueless.

Obama castigated corporate leaders ““I saved these guys when the economy was falling off a cliff,” Obama said, according to Corn. “Now I get nothing but their venom.”  Obama has said he doesn’t watch cable news programs like Fox.  Apparently he doesn’t watch CSPAN either.  And if he thinks the venom is coming from the corporate executives, he must not be listening to his own speeches either.

David Corn writes that the day after the 2010 elections, Obama told his confidants that he would,

“get a tax deal done, extend unemployment benefits, ratify the new START treaty, repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and pass the DREAM Act and a children’s nutrition bill in the following two months. David Axelrod told Corn he remembered, “We all looked at each other quizzically, ‘What does he see that we don’t?’”

What Obama did not explain is that what he could not get through the Congress he would accomplish with regulatory change or an Executive Order.