How I woke up to the untruths of Barack Obama

By Christopher Booker

The President’s State of the Union address was as weaselly as any politician’s could be.

When I happened to wake up in the middle of the night last Wednesday and caught the BBC World Service’s live relay of President Obama’s [...]]]>

How I woke up to the untruths of Barack Obama

By Christopher Booker

The President’s State of the Union address was as weaselly as any politician’s could be.

When I happened to wake up in the middle of the night last Wednesday and caught the BBC World Service’s live relay of President Obama’s State of the Union address to Congress, two passages had me rubbing my eyes in disbelief.

The first came when, to applause, the President spoke about the banking crash which coincided with his barnstorming 2008 election campaign. “The house of cards collapsed,” he recalled. “We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn’t afford or understand them.” He excoriated the banks which had “made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money”, while “regulators looked the other way and didn’t have the authority to stop the bad behaviour”. This, said Obama, “was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work.”

I recalled a piece I wrote in this column on January 29, 2009, just after Obama took office. It was headlined: “This is the sub-prime house that Barack Obama built”. As a rising young Chicago politician in 1995, no one campaigned more actively than Mr Obama for an amendment to the US Community Reinvestment Act, legally requiring banks to lend huge sums to millions of poor, mainly black Americans, guaranteed by the two giant mortgage associations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

It was this Act, above all, which let the US housing bubble blow up, far beyond the point where it was obvious that hundreds of thousands of homeowners would be likely to default. Yet, in 2005, no one more actively opposed moves to halt these reckless guarantees than Senator Obama, who received more donations from Fannie Mae than any other US politician (although Senator Hillary Clinton ran him close).

A later passage in Obama’s speech, when he hailed the way his country’s energy future has been transformed by the miracle of shale gas, met with a storm of applause. Not only would this give the US energy security for decades, creating 600,000 jobs, but it could now go all out to exploit its gas and oil reserves (more applause). Yet this was the man who in 2008 couldn’t stop talking about the threat of global warming, and was elected on a pledge to make the US only the second country in the world, after Britain, to commit to cutting its CO2 emissions from fossil fuels by 80 per cent within 40 years.

Even more telling than his audience’s response to this, however, was what happened when Obama referred briefly to the need to develop “clean energy on enough public land to power three million homes”. But no mention now of vast numbers of wind turbines – those props beside which he constantly chose to be filmed back in 2008. No harking back to his boast that “renewable energy” would create “four million jobs”. And even to this sole fleeting reminder of what, four years ago, was his flagship policy the response of Congress was a deafening silence.

Read Article

Barack Obama is still driving America towards decline

Two words hardly mentioned in Barack Obama’s 65-minute State of the Union address to Congress: freedom and liberty. President Obama’s fourth and possibly last State of the Union speech was long on big government proposals, but short on the principles that have made America the [...]]]>

Barack Obama is still driving America towards decline

Two words hardly mentioned in Barack Obama’s 65-minute State of the Union address to Congress: freedom and liberty. President Obama’s fourth and possibly last State of the Union speech was long on big government proposals, but short on the principles that have made America the world’s greatest power. His lecturing tone exuded arrogance, and he failed to present a coherent vision for getting the United States back on its feet after three years of economic decline. It was heavy on class-war rhetoric, punitive taxation, and frequent references to the Left-wing mantra of “fairness”, hardly likely to instil confidence in a battered business community that is the lifeblood of the American economy.

Above all, he remains in denial over the levels of federal debt that threaten the country’s long-term prosperity. This was not a speech that was serious about the biggest budget deficits since World War Two. There was no sense at all that America is a superpower on a precipice, sinking in a sea of debt that threatens to undermine America’s power to project global leadership for generations to come. In fact, his interventionist proposals will only make matters worse.

From new federally funded infrastructure projects to increasing regulations on financial institutions, President Obama remains wedded to big government – an approach rejected by a clear majority of Americans, who view it as a millstone around their necks. As Gallup’s polling has found, nearly two thirds of Americans see big government as “the biggest threat” to their country.

This should have been a serious speech addressing the economic problems facing the United States. Instead it was a laundry list of half-baked proposals designed to appease the Left. The president should have been talking about reining in spending, lowering taxes, and fostering greater economic freedom, but he opted for policies that will speed America’s decline, not reverse it.

Read Article

WARVANGELICALS

By Coach Dave Daubenmire

I want you to know right up front that I am not a pacifist.

I believe in a strong military, and that national defense is one of the Constitutional responsibilities of our government. When a “terrorist” blows up a group of people He should be swiftly [...]]]>

WARVANGELICALS

By Coach Dave Daubenmire

I want you to know right up front that I am not a pacifist.

I believe in a strong military, and that national defense is one of the Constitutional responsibilities of our government. When a “terrorist” blows up a group of people He should be swiftly put to death.

I believe in a strong national defense and that our obligation is to America first.

But I do not believe in continuous wars, especially the politically-correct ones.

You know what I am talking about.

The types of wars we fight today are, for the most part, offensive, even though our leaders try to convince us that they are necessary for our defense.

Most are not. At least not in my life time. America has been at war somewhere in the world for the entirety of my 59 years on this earth. WWI was known as “the war to end all wars,” which of course it didn’t. It was just a slogan. Americans like slogans. Slogans often masquerade the real issue and make us feel better about jumping on the bandwagon..

The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and the war on ignorance are all nothing more than sloganeering. It is high time the American people came to the realization that each one of those wars was never engaged with victory as the goal. It was the fighting of the war, the funding of the war, and the perpetuation of the war that they were interested in.

Billions of dollars have been thrown down a rat-holes fighting wars that they knew could not be won. And many became rich. The same applies to military wars.

Today we continue to fight in Afghanistan even though America is insolvent.

No one can tell you why we are there. I think it somehow connects to 19 Saudis flying planes into the Twin Towers back in 2001 and “The War on Terror”, but that is just a guess.

Somewhere along the line somebody figured out that there were a lot of dollars to be made in war. Bullets and bombs were needed for war and a sinister group of warmongers figured out a way to make millions by performing their “civic duty” by supplying the ammo…often to both sides.

Christian/conservative Republicans are the greatest promoters of this perpetual-state-of-war. They serve the Prince of Peace by cheering, and voting, for war.

Someone coined the term “Warvangelicals.” They are determined to evangelize the world through the barrel of a rifle. Jesus warned us to be careful…those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.

If you listen closely you will hear the rattle of death reverberating through the American economy. Misuse of the “sword” is bringing death to America.

Wars will not destroy America, but paying for them will. Will the Republican Party even permit you to be a member if you happen to be against the wars?

I am for a strong military, but am against an ever-increasing Department of Defense budget. Did you know that America has military facilities in over 138 different countries including 218 in Germany, 115 in Japan, and 86 in South Korea? “War-mongers”, not liberators,is what the Eastern World calls us.

We have nearly 1.5 million Americans currently serving in the Armed Forces. Nearly 20% of them are deployed overseas. This “Policeman of the World” approach is enriching the Industrial/Military complex, but busting the banks of the American people. Over 400,000 Americans are enriching the economies of other nations through their deployment.

The world has changed, but America is stuck in the “Cold-War” mindset. Why is it the job of Americans to pay for the defense of Germany…or Japan…or South Korea? The American economic coffers are being bled dry. “Those who live by the sword…”

How did war become a Christian/Conservative value?

Christians are soooo confused. Willfully ignorant might be a more appropriate description. Flag-waving Christians are the most ardent supporters of military intervention. Sadly, they know nothing of the theory of just war.

The Principles of Just Wars are:

1. Just cause/right intention: A just war must be fought only for purposes of self-defense against armed attack or to right a serious wrong.
2. Proper authority: A war is just only if waged by a legitimate authority.
3. Last resort: A just war must be the last resort; all peaceful options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.
4. Probability of success: There must be a reasonable chance of success; deaths and injury that result from a hopeless cause cannot be morally justified.
5. Beneficial outcome: The outcome of the war must be better than the situation that would exist had the war not taken place.
6. Proportionality: The violence and destruction must be proportional to the injury suffered.Does that sound to you like any of the “conflicts” that we have recently found ourselves embroiled in? America has not fought a “just war” since WWII.

Now, Evangelical favorite Rick Santorum wants to bomb Iran.

My greatest concern from a military point of view is not that Iran may bomb us, but that we are vulnerable to an attack here at home. Fighting in Afghanistan, or keeping Iran from getting a bomb, will not increase security here at home. The enemy is already amongst us. Perhaps we can catch them at the airport!

(Oh I am going to lose half of my friends because of what I am about to say…but I’ve got to say it.)

Much of the reason we are such interventionalists in the Middle East is the position held by most Evangelicals that we have a religious obligation to defend Israel. To say otherwise is to be called “anti-Semitic,” “anti-Israel,” or “un-Biblical.” Listen to how often the Republican candidates mention the word “Israel.” This a Pavlovian trick that makes Evangelicals mouth’s water.

I am not anti-Israel nor anti-Semitic. I am pro-America. If we don’t return to an America-first policy we won’t be able to defend ourselves, let alone our friends in the Middle East.

America has spent a generation arming Israel. Estimates are that Israel is currently in possession of as many as 400 nuclear warheads. American foreign aid to Israel paid for most of their weaponry. They are far and away the most powerful, well armed military in the Middle East.

I understand that God has an “everlasting covenant” with Israel. I understand that those who “bless Israel” will be blessed. I understand that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. But I can not find one Biblical admonition to “protect” Israel. I do find the Lord asking us to “pray for the peace of Jerusalem.” Do we “bless Israel” by sending foreign aid to her enemies?

Is it the obligation of the US Government to defend the nation of Israel? The Covenant was a Covenant between God and Israel. God will keep His promise. Why do Christians see it as our obligation to do for Israel what God has promised HE will do? A broken, financially bankrupt America cannot protect Israel. Only God can do that.

The Kingdom of God is a Spiritual Kingdom, not a natural one. It is the “Spiritual Israel” that God has made the Covenant with. Remember, He told us that “My Kingdom is not of this world.” It is to natural-Israel that Jesus will return and set up his “everlasting Kingdom.” Does He need our intervention to help him keep His Word?

Remember that popular bumper sticker after 911…THE POWER OF PRIDE? Perhaps that is our problem.

Warvangelicals are more concerned with protecting Israel than they are in protecting America. There is nothing “Christian” about invading a sovereign nation and killing innocent women and children. Has the American military now become the “Army of God.”

It is not popular to say it in Evangelical circles, but Christians should not rejoice in the killing of innocent Muslim women and children. Each one is a potential child of the Living God and Christians should be more interested in flooding the Middle East with Bibles rather than bombs. Just War…remember? Currently, they are more interested in “spreading democracy” than they are in spreading the Gospel.

God is judging America, not because we are turning our backs on Israel, but because we are a decadent, insolent, greedy, blood-thirsty nation that winks at the shedding of innocent blood in the womb, while we “high-five” the killing of innocent children in other parts of the world. We have rejected God. Our works are “continuously evil in His sight” and our hands are stained with innocent blood.

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: Deut. 30:19.

America is dying because we have chosen death and Warvangelicals are the varsity cheerleaders of the War Party.

There, I said it. Are we still friends?

Read Article

Slime time radio host Rush Limbaugh took to the air yesterday and declared that GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul “sounds like an Islamic terrorist”.

Limbaugh was commenting on the incident involving Congressman Paul’s son, Senator Rand Paul, who was detained by the TSA in Nashville after refusing to submit to an enhanced pat-down.

by John Rubino on January 22, 2012

As the Greek default (and it is a default no matter what they end up calling it) is finalized this week, the consensus seems to be that failure to reach a deal would cause a global financial apocalypse. [...]]]> Why Isn’t Illinois A Bigger Story Than Greece?

by John Rubino on January 22, 2012

As the Greek default (and it is a default no matter what they end up calling it) is finalized this week, the consensus seems to be that failure to reach a deal would cause a global financial apocalypse.

That may be true. And if it is, why aren’t we more worried about Illinois? It’s more or less the same size as Greece, its finances are in the same generally catastrophic shape, and its leaders are just as feckless and dishonest. It owes tens of billions of dollars to various investors and stakeholders and will clearly have to stiff many of them at some point. The following article captures the “failed state” dilemma perfectly:

The question isn’t whether Illinois’ finances are in dreadful shape, it’s how to fix the problem. Or perhaps more accurately, will legislators have the political will to fix it when they return to Springfield for their spring session?

Even though the legislature and Gov. Pat Quinn last year imposed a temporary 67 percent state income tax increase, Quinn’s office expects to have a $500 million budget deficit this year.

Quinn is calling for a 9 percent cut in most areas of state government, except education and health care. But even with cuts at that level, the state would have a projected $800 million budget deficit for fiscal 2015, the year when most of the tax hike expires.

Quinn’s budget spokesman, Kelly Kraft, said the state’s fiscal situation is not pretty.

“These projections clearly demonstrate that action must be taken to control not only Medicaid costs but also (pension) costs, or all other areas of government will continue to be squeezed,” Kraft said.

Read Article

[ Apparently only the "overlords" of society have a "right" to photograph you, fingerprint you, swab you for DNA, catalog you, scan your genitals, and so on, but if you are a private citizen who simply likes to take photographs as a hobby, you are now regarded as a potential threat... "Nothing to [...]]]>

[ Apparently only the "overlords" of society have a "right" to photograph you, fingerprint you, swab you for DNA, catalog you, scan your genitals, and so on, but if you are a private citizen who simply likes to take photographs as a hobby, you are now regarded as a potential threat... "Nothing to see here... Move on." ]

=======

A snapshot of our times

by George Will

Shawn Nee, 35, works in television but hopes to publish a book of photographs. Shane Quentin, 31, repairs bicycles but enjoys photographing industrial scenes at night. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department probably wishes that both would find other hobbies. Herewith a story of today’s inevitable friction between people exercising, and others protecting, freedom.

When the Los Angeles Police Department developed a Suspicious Activity Report program, the federal government encouraged local law enforcement agencies to adopt its guidelines for gathering information “that could indicate activity or intentions related to” terrorism. From the fact that terrorists might take pictures of potential infrastructure targets (“pre-operational surveillance”), it is a short slide down a slippery slope to the judgment that photography is a potential indicator of terrorism and hence photographers are suspect when taking pictures “with no apparent aesthetic value” (words from the suspicious-activity guidelines).

One reason law enforcement is such a demanding, and admirable, profession is that it requires constant exercises of good judgment in the application of general rules to ambiguous situations. Such judgment is not evenly distributed among America’s 800,000 law enforcement officials and was lacking among the sheriff’s deputies who saw Nee photographing controversial new subway turnstiles. (Subway officials, sadder but wiser about our fallen world, installed turnstiles after operating largely on an honor system regarding ticket purchases.) Deputies detained and searched Nee, asking if he was planning to sell the photos to al-Qaeda. Nee was wearing, in plain view, a device police sometimes use to make video and audio records of interactions with people, and when he told a deputy he was going to exercise his right to remain silent, the deputy said:

“You know, I’ll just submit your name to TLO (the Terrorism Liaison Officer program). Every time your driver’s license gets scanned, every time you take a plane, any time you go on any type of public transit system where they look at your identification, you’re going to be stopped. You will be detained. You’ll be searched. You will be on the FBI’s hit list.”

Read Article

by Dave Daubenmire

It is amazing to me that people cannot see that politics is a rigged game.

All you have to do is watch the media-circus in Iowa with its constantly changing “front-runners” to understand the degree to which the media controls our elections.

Polls are not news, but they create the [...]]]>

by Dave Daubenmire

It is amazing to me that people cannot see that politics is a rigged game.

All you have to do is watch the media-circus in Iowa with its constantly changing “front-runners” to understand the degree to which the media controls our elections.

Polls are not news, but they create the news. Knowing the “herd mentality” of most folks, the media, like good sheep-dogs, do their best to drive the flock in the direction they want them to go. Everyone loves a winner and the polls tell us who the winner will be.

It used to be that the American media was somewhat honest…or at least honest in their attempts at reporting a story…but honesty and objectivity have fallen prey to ideology.

I don’t believe any of them. Not Rush, not Hannity, not Faux News, and certainly not Bill O’Reilly. They all claim to be independent, but that is part of the ruse. They all have strong loyalties and they all have someone who pulls their strings…writes their checks…knows what’s in their closets.

Somewhere “behind the curtain”, the decision was made who the “top tier” candidates were going to be. The job of the media is to make sure that the “establishment” favorites are the ones who make it through the primaries to the final stage.

In 2000, in a speech before the Commonwealth Club of California, straight-shooting radio host Michael Savage said:

“As you know, the media is very badly needed to serve as a thorn in the side of government. In order to keep the government reasonably honest we need the media to be constantly poking at it. However, when the media becomes a thorn in the side of the skeptical private citizen, then it becomes an arm of the government. That’s why I say, “Beware the Government-Media Complex.”

Wake up Zombies. “The People” may get to pick the President, but we sure don’t get to pick who the candidates will be. Can anyone explain to me how John McCain became the Republican nominee in 2008? Did it seem to you like the Republican establishment wanted to lose in 2008? Perhaps they knew the mess that lay on the road ahead.

Are things any different today? Even though he has been in constant campaign mode since 2008, Mitt Romney still cannot get more than 25% of the Republican vote. Yet “they” call him the “front runner”, the only candidate “capable of beating Obama.”

The real story is, everyone knows Romney and 75% of them don’t want him. But the media tells us Mitt is the front-runner and “likely Republican nominee.”

How do they know this?

They don’t. They create the appearance of front-runner status through the use of the latest “public opinion polls.” It is the way they steer the sheep to the winner.

Good for her to school such a flatulent egomaniac — who now ranks right up there with Rush Limbaugh as America’s biggest muttonhead….

According to its latest annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) received $487.4 million in tax dollars over a twelve-month period and performed 329,455 abortions.

In addition, the number of adoption referrals made by the organization continued to decline.

The latest annual report covers the period from July 1, 2009 to [...]]]>

According to its latest annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) received $487.4 million in tax dollars over a twelve-month period and performed 329,455 abortions.

In addition, the number of adoption referrals made by the organization continued to decline.

The latest annual report covers the period from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010, the PPFA’s fiscal year. The report states that the organization received “government health services grants and reimbursements” totaling $487.4 million.

Previous Planned Parenthood annual reports showed total funding from “government grants and contracts” (which were $363.2 million in 2009), while this year’s report also accounts for payments from Medicaid managed care plans among the payments the group receives from government .

When compared with previous annual reports, the latest one shows an almost steady increase in the number of abortions performed at its clinics: In 2006, Planned Parenthood did 289,750 abortions; in 2007, it did 305,310; in 2009, it did 331,796; and, in 2010, it did 329,445–a small decrease from the previous year.

Read Article

I never thought I would have to write this: but—incredibly—Congress has now passed the National Defense Appropriations Act, with Amendment 1031, which allows for the military detention of American citizens. The amendment is so loosely worded that any American citizen could be held without due process. The language of this bill can be [...]]]>

I never thought I would have to write this: but—incredibly—Congress has now passed the National Defense Appropriations Act, with Amendment 1031, which allows for the military detention of American citizens. The amendment is so loosely worded that any American citizen could be held without due process. The language of this bill can be read to assure Americans that they can challenge their detention — but most people do not realize what this means: at Guantanamo and in other military prisons, one’s lawyer’s calls are monitored, witnesses for one’s defense are not allowed to testify, and one can be forced into nudity and isolation. Incredibly, ninety-three Senators voted to support this bill and now most of Congress: a roster of names that will live in infamy in the history of our nation, and never be expunged from the dark column of the history books.

They may have supported this bill because—although it’s hard to believe—they think the military will only arrest active members of Al Qaida; or maybe, less naively, they believe that ‘at most’, low-level dissenting figures, activists, or troublesome protesters might be subjected to military arrest. But they are forgetting something critical: history shows that those who signed this bill will soon be subject to arrest themselves.

Our leaders appear to be supporting this bill thinking that they will always be what they are now, in the fading light of a once-great democracy — those civilian leaders who safely and securely sit in freedom and DIRECT the military. In inhabiting this bubble, which their own actions are about to destroy, they are cocooned by an arrogance of power, placing their own security in jeopardy by their own hands, and ignoring history and its inevitable laws. The moment this bill becomes law, though Congress is accustomed, in a weak democracy, to being the ones who direct and control the military, the power roles will reverse: Congress will no longer be directing and in charge of the military: rather, the military will be directing and in charge of individual Congressional leaders, as well as in charge of everyone else — as any Parliamentarian in any society who handed this power over to the military can attest.

Perhaps Congress assumes that it will always only be ‘they’ who are targeted for arrest and military detention: but sadly, Parliamentary leaders are the first to face pressure, threats, arrest and even violence when the military obtains to power to make civilian arrests and hold civilians in military facilities without due process. There is no exception to this rule. Just as I traveled the country four years ago warning against the introduction of torture and secret prisons – and confidently offering a hundred thousand dollar reward to anyone who could name a nation that allowed torture of the ‘other’ that did not eventually turn this abuse on its own citizens — (confident because I knew there was no such place) — so today I warn that one cannot name a nation that gave the military the power to make civilian arrests and hold citizens in military detention, that did not almost at once turn that power almost against members of that nation’s own political ruling class. This makes sense — the obverse sense of a democracy, in which power protects you; political power endangers you in a militarized police state: the more powerful a political leader is, the more can be gained in a militarized police state by pressuring, threatening or even arresting him or her.

Mussolini, who created the modern template for fascism, was a duly elected official when he started to direct paramilitary forces against Italian citizens: yes, he sent the Blackshirts to beat up journalists, editors, and union leaders; but where did these militarized groups appear most dramatically and terrifyingly, snapping at last the fragile hold of Italian democracy? In the halls of the Italian Parliament. Whom did they physically attack and intimidate? Mussolini’s former colleagues in Parliament — as they sat, just as our Congress is doing, peacefully deliberating and debating the laws. Whom did Hitler’s Brownshirts arrest in the first wave of mass arrests in 1933? Yes, journalists, union leaders and editors; but they also targeted local and regional political leaders and dragged them off to secret prisons and to torture that the rest of society had turned a blind eye to when it had been directed at the ‘other.’ Who was most at risk from assassination or arrest and torture, after show trials, in Stalin’s Russia? Yes, journalists, editors and dissidents: but also physically endangered, and often arrested by militarized police and tortured or worse, were senior members of the Politburo who had fallen out of favor.

Is this intimidation and arrest by the military a vestige of the past? Hardly. We forget in America that all over the world there are militarized societies in which shells of democracy are propped up — in which Parliament meets regularly and elections are held, but the generals are really in charge, just as the Egyptian military is proposing with upcoming elections and the Constitution itself. That is exactly what will take place if Congress gives the power of arrest and detention to the military: and in those societies if a given political leader does not please the generals, he or she is in physical danger or subjected to military arrest. Whom did John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, say he was directed to intimidate and threaten when he worked as a ‘jackal’, putting pressure on the leadership in authoritarian countries? Latin American parliamentarians who were in the position to decide the laws that affected the well-being of his corporate clients. Who is under house arrest by the military in Myanmar? The political leader of the opposition to the military junta. Malalai Joya is an Afghani parliamentarian who has run afoul of the military and has to sleep in a different venue every night — for her own safety. An on, and on, in police states — that is, countries with military detention of civilians — that America is about to join.

Read Article