“NOW HEAR THIS”

For Veterans of the U.S.Navy (Veterans spelled with a capital V for respect) are familiar with those three words.  When “Now hear this” was broadcast throughout the ship over the squawk box you knew some significant announcement was about to take place.  It didn’t have the urgency of the raucous man-your-battle-stations alarm, but it usually was something important like “The number two evaporator is back on line so the showers will be operational again from oh six hundred to oh six thirty tomorrow morning.”  Or it might be the announcement of the name of the movie that would be playing in the mess hall that night.  Whatever it was, it was usually something you wanted to know.

Now hear this.  Andrew Klavin may be seen, actually we should say may be read, on the internet right now.  Best known for his entertaining message filled films and video productions, Klavin is no slouch with a pen either.  His prose production is entitled A Fantasy Election, an Imaginary Man and the tagline is Barack Obama has always been less real than a dream—a media dream.  It’s about an empty man in a real chair.

The Army has a phrase too; it’s “Listen up!” which is usually followed by a command.  So whether you are a soldier of the earth or a man of the sea, listen up and now read this.  It’s not an order but it’s better than most of the movies they play in the mess hall.

OBAMA’S PROMISORIAL PROCLAMATIONS MEET THE REALITY OF IRRATIONAL EXPECTATIONS

The promisorial proclamation

“…I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment — this was the time — when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals.” — Barack Obama

Let’s take each promise in the order in which it was given.

“…this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick…”

Was there no care for the sick before the age of Obama?  Perhaps that’s why Michelle felt no pride in America before her husband was nominated to run for the presidency.  We know Obama was referring to what has come to be known as Obamacare with its promised expansion of coverage to all, so let’s be generous and allow that the jury is still out on this one.  Although the program is a setup for disaster, the disaster hasn’t occurred yet because many of the law’s provisions have not yet become effective.  What we do know is the law was so unpopular that it required a good deal of unethical practices to get it rammed through both houses were controlled by the President’s own Democratic Party.

Medical care has been available to everyone for many years.  Emergency rooms accept the indigent for anything from kids with sore throats to someone with serious injuries.  What’s missing is insurance.  It is true that broader and more personal care is provided through insurance coverage.  Privately purchased insurance is a thing of the past.  Today it comes with employment which leads us to promise number two

“…this was the moment when we began to provide …good jobs to the jobless”

This one hardly needs comment.  Since Obama made the promise of “good jobs” the jobless rate has grown from less than 6% to nearly 10% and remained over 8%, where it still is, for a longer period than at any time since the Great Depression.  The real unemployment rate is over 11% when you count the jobless who have given up even on seeking work.

“…this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow…”

Only God and Obama could ever make a promise like that and God knows there is no reason to promise it.  In fact, the highest ocean tide ever recorded was on the night of October 4–5, 1869 at the head of the Minas Basin in the Bay of Fundy.  It was a promise to do the unnecessary and the impossible.

“…this was the moment when …our planet began to heal…”

I suppose he was referring to environmental friendly programs like the subsidizing of Solyndra to postpone its bankruptcy and the building of the Chevrolet Volt in the hope that someone might buy one.  As far as healing is concerned, none has been observed as yet, particularly not in politics.

“…when we ended a war …”

The troops were not drawn out of Iraq in the time promised.  And we are still fighting the war in Afghanistan.  The causalities are just not being reported as loudly since Obama took office.

“…this was the moment when we …secured our nation and restored our image”

Judgment on this one falls in the realm of opinion, but does anyone really hold the opinion that our image in the world is better than it was 4 years ago?

“this was the time — when we came together to remake this great nation…”

In that statement there lays a germ of truth.  We just hope the disease is reversible.  What came together was not the nation as a whole, but the internal workings within each of two factions into which the country became more deeply divided under this president.

We need some fixin’ that’s for sure, but we don’t need Obama to “remake this great nation” into something else.

RADICAL IN CHIEF, THE AUTHORS CONCLUSION

Stanley Kurtz, author of RADICAL-IN-CHIEF, Barack Obama and the Untold Story of Socialism in America ended his book with a Conclusion.  He begins,

From his teenage years under the mentorship of Frank Marshall Davis, to his socialist days at Occidental College, to his life transforming encounters at New York’s Socialist Scholars Conferences, to his immersion in the stealthily socialist community organizer networks of Chicago, Barack Obama has lived in a thoroughly socialist world.

In the early days of the 2008 campaign, Obama spoke proudly of Black Liberation theologist Jeremiah Wright saying the preacher had a profound influence on his life and “I could no more disown him than my white grandmother.” He spoke openly about his activities as a community organizer, even offered it as a factor in his qualification for the office of President.  That secured the far left vote.

But Obama knew America was not ready to elect a true socialist knowingly.  So later he disowned Rev. Wright and denied the extent of his involvement with ACORN.  From that point on he adopted a policy of stealth and downplayed or denied his socialist past.

From the beginning, Obama has talked about change but doesn’t explain the nature of the change he has in mind.  Kurtz supplies the answer.

Since Obama has not supplied the truth about where this change is headed his past remains an essential source of guidance for the American people.  In sum, the fears of Obama’s harshest critics are justified; the President of the United States is a Socialist.

Image

JUSTAPHOTO and a quote

RANDOM THOTS OCT-5-2012

The Debate  –  from today’s New York Times

Under fire from fellow Democrats, Mr. Obama came out swinging, accusing Mr. Romney of lying to the American people about his plans for the nation. “I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney,” Mr. Obama told 12,000 supporters during a lakeside rally. “But it couldn’t be Mitt Romney, because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year promising $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy. The fellow onstage last night said he didn’t know anything about that.”

Isn’t Obama saying he was thrown off course in the debate because Romney surprised him?  It sounds more like a confession that he can’t handle surprises than it does like an excuse.  He would have done better to say that he, Obama, was not himself last night.

Ben Stein on insurance

“Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured… but not everyone must prove they are a citizen.”

Now add this, “Many of those who refuse, or are unable, to prove they are citizens will receive free insurance paid for by those who are forced to buy insurance because they are citizens.”

Powerline with another paradox

“Suspected terrorists can be killed without legal process by drone strikes but, if captured in the hope that they will provide valuable intelligence, cannot be slapped in the face.”

WOW! IT’S UNANIMOUS!

Headlines from the right run from “Won by two touchdowns” to “It’s Over!”  Comments from the left run from puzzlement to disappointment and to downright anger at their candidate for his poor performance.  There is universal agreement that Romney won this one – big time!

But it is not over.  Obama had a bad night but remember what he told his followers in an earlier campaign, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we will bring a gun.”  Romney skipped the knife and came in to the fight with a gun.  Expect Obama to bring a cannon to the next one.  One just wonders what he has to use for ammunition.

Because we live in an age of idiocy, I feel compelled to explain for the benefit of readers on the left that all this talk of guns and ammo is metaphorical (look it up).  I wouldn’t want to be accused of inciting violence the way Sarah Palin was when she used the word “target” to identify areas where conservatives should focus their efforts.

This election is about more than a choice, it’s a test.  There has rarely been a race where the candidates and the choices voters face are better known.  There is no complacency in this race.  This is not a pass or fail test either.  The margin of victory will be the score.  If Romney wins big there will be hope for major change.  If Romney wins but the margin is small the test will show America has a slimmer chance of returning to what it once was.  If Obama wins, it’s all over.  America will have made a clear choice and it will be all but impossible to reverse it until the country collapses in fiscal distress.  Then a strong man will come in and be accepted by the people in their distress.  That’s how Hitler and Pinochet gained power.  Hitler destroyed his country, Pinochet returned his to prosperity.  They both killed a few people in the process.

JUSTAPHOTO – CHURCHILL FACES DOWN OBAMA

 

A SNIPPET ABOUT THE CHEVROLET VOLT

voltshock.jpg

The snippet is from a serious blogger with a sense of humor, or at least a good sense of the ridiculous or he wouldn’t call himself Senator Blutarsky.  The moniker is fitting if you consider the Volt is somewhat of an Animal House product.  Here is the Senator’s bottom line.

THE BOTTOM LINE: even with generous assumptions, the first generation of the Chevrolet Volt will consume about $1 billion in federal tax credits, and STILL result in an economic loss to GM shareholders in excess of $600 million over its lifetime. Without the subsidies, the cumulative loss would triple to $1.8 billion.

Go to the Senator’s own words if you want to read the nitty-gritty above the Bottom Line.  Be forewarned, he uses a lot of numbers.  Why not simply divide $1 billion by the number of people who pay taxes to see how much of your money has been invested in the Government Volt.

Let it go at that, watch tonight’s debate and don’t neglect to vote.

WHY ARE OBAMA’S VOTER POLLS SO STRONG WHEN HIS RECORD IS SO BAD? Part II

In our first post exploring the dichotomy between Obama’s poor record and strong support we explained that with true believers his record doesn’t count.  He’s a Democrat and he is black, and that is good enough.  But there is another and more disturbing reason for the apparent dichotomy.  We are approaching Tocqueville time in America.

The answer may lie in the very nature of democracy itself.  If that’s the case, we can’t say we weren’t warned.  Aristotle said democracy would lead to great corruption.  Plato warned that the demos (the masses) lacked sufficient understanding to differentiate the charmers from the honest and capable candidates and they would choose the charmers.  Given the nature of man and the fact that in any society the masses will outnumber the elites, both philosophers held that democracy would lead to the demos voting largesse unto themselves from the nation’s accumulated wealth to the ultimate detriment of the entire society.

Aristotle and Plato did not have the benefit of history to confirm their opinions because democracy was a new concept in their day.  But Alexis de Tocqueville, a noted French writer and historian who came more than 2,000 years later did look back on the rise and fall of great empires some of which were limited democracies.

Tocqueville was born to French aristocracy and lived during the period of the French Revolution.  He was a keen observer of the American Experiment that combined free markets, rights to private property and a level of democracy theretofore unknown.  The young Frenchman noted at the time that the “experiment” was a great success.  However, as our long running sidebar suggests, he also warned that over time the public will vote themselves more and more benefits until the government’s treasury is depleted and the system collapses in fiscal insolvency.  Usually to be followed by some form of despotic governance.

Obama is a charmer, Romney is not.  Obama promises ever greater largesse to the people, Romney does not.  The combination of true believers and largesse voters forms a base of unwavering support.  The stable of true believers is relatively static; but the percentage of largesse voters grows over time.  The time Tocqueville gave for the American democracy to run its course was about 200 years; we are well beyond that.  The 2012 election will answer the question, have we reached Tocqueville time in America ?

RADICAL-IN-CHIEF – Chapter 10 – The Obama Administration

This post continues the series of chapter by chapter summations of the book Radical-In-Chief by Stanley Kurtz.

Chapter 10
The Obama Administration
The modern socialist movement in America has abandoned its open and militant ways of that were so evident in the sixties.  That approach might work to bring the sought after revolution and change in an impoverished nation but not in a democratic, free and prosperous country like the United States.  Socialist scholars like Saul Alinsky and Michael Harrington convinced other movement leaders a long time ago that the only workable strategy for transforming the United States into a Marxist socialist government is a combination of stealth and incremental advance.  That’s the course followed by Obama and his administration today.

Stealth was evident in the way the health care plan was handled.  The stakes were high because single payer health care would bring 16 % of the national economy under government control.  That was Obama’s real objective.  Every measure was taken to avoid scrutiny which is why there was such a rush to get the bill passed as rapidly as possible.  The “public option” originally proposed was designed to lead to single payer, government only, healthcare over time…  Obama denied the single payer objective claiming the public would always have a choice; the government would simply be offering an additional option in fair competition with private insurance companies.  It should be obvious to anyone that private industry must remain profitable to survive and cannot compete with government that, supported by taxpayers, can operate indefinitely at a loss.

Barack Obama ran his presidential election campaign on promises of a post-partisanship and an open style administration.  Once in office, it turned out to be quite the opposite.  He stirred controversy, for instance, by attacking the Fox News network, calling them illegitimate and attempting to bar them from press conferences to which the other networks were invited.  He attacked the Supreme Court while speaking as President of the United States before the entire Congress and to the entire nation by television.  These are not steps toward healing; they are overt acts of division.

Naive voters may think the increased partisan hostility is a failing.  But, to a trained community organizer it is an objective.  The generation of animosity and division is the ground work laid for the conditions that prepare people to accept, even demand change.

To a community organizer, polarization is a strategy.  Creating division is the first step in the path to transfer of power.