Category Archives: Politics

Obfuscating The Obvious

The latest attempt by the Obamanista regime to make Queen Michelle appear to be “just one of the regular folks” has failed miserably. At least to some degree.

Last Friday, Michelle Obama was “caught” while shopping “incognito” at an Alexandria, Virginia Target department store. According to the news sources, the First Lady likes to sneak out of the White House without telling anyone. The First Lady’s communications director, Kristina Schake says “it is not uncommon for the First Lady to slip out to run an errand, eat at a local restaurant or otherwise enjoy the city outside the White House gates.” (Source) To back up their story, the dominant liberal news outlets have devoted expensive air time during multiple news shows to gush over how down to earth the First Lady is and to splash photos of Queen Michelle out alone shopping at Target.

 

Michelle Obama pretending to be one of the common folk

 

“Incognito”? Are you serious? She “sneaks out of the White House without telling anyone”? Really? Come on now. Nobody can possibly believe this can they? Well, yes, yes they do. One Target shopper stated on camera, “She’s down to earth. She’s like regular people,” and another, who, when told Queen Michelle was shopping at Target said, “Why wouldn’t she shop at Target? Where else is there to go to get shampoo and toilet paper and bras and cat food and bananas all in one place?” (let’s hope these two have simply had a momentary lapse of reason) (Source)

Have these people lost their minds? Did they leave their intelligence under their bed along with the dust bunnies and cob webs? Even if we purposely disregard the fact that the Associated Press was alerted to this “sneak out” well in advance so they would be able to provide a photographer to capture the “sneak out” on film. Even if we ignore the fact that her cadre of Praetorian Guards were right there with her. Even if we simply dismiss the fact that there are no more then 6-8 people anywhere near the registers (even though there are at least four registers open), people still believe that the Secret Service would allow the First Lady of the United States to go about unprotected in a city where the violent crime rate is projected to rise over 2009 figures. (Source)

It is clear to me that this entire event (and “event” it would have been just contending with the logistics alone) is nothing more than a publicity stunt designed to counter the “let them eat cake” image the Obama’s have projected since King Hussein I took office back in 2008. Personally, I am offended and insulted by the Obama’s in that they would actually treat American’s as being stupid enough to fall this kind of charade. Of course, this falls right into line with the King’s viewpoint that we are a nation of backwoods ignorant folk clinging to our Bibles and guns. And I am offended and insulted by the dominant liberal media’s to play along with this charade as well.

It is blatantly obvious what the First Lady is doing, and the dominant liberal media is not simply playing along, they are helping to perpetuate this false image by obfuscating the obvious. They are insisting that this is a real occurrence, a common occurrence, and they are defining this one-act play as the actions of a common everyday housewife, engaged in the common everyday activities that every common everyday housewife engages in. They want us to ignore what we know to be true, and believe what they tell us – just like any good public relations (or propaganda ministry) would. And that is just exactly what they dominant liberal media has become – the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda for the Obamanista regime. Whether it’s NBC, ABC, CBS, HBO’s Little Billy Maher, or the cadre of clowns at MSNBC, these are the minister’s of propaganda, the doctor’s of disinformation, the obfuscators of the obvious, and no different in my book than Tokyo Rose, Axis Sally, Lord Haw Haw, or Pyongyang Sally. In the case of Queen Michelle’s misleading masquerade as one of the “common folk”, they have not only failed, but failed miserably.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

When Crooks Are Honored, The Inmates Are Running the Prison

Good time Charlie Rangel was honored yesterday with words of adulation and praise for all the wonderful things he has done over the course of his illustrious career. (Source) (Source) The Rangel Celebration is to be highlighted by the unveiling of an official portrait of Rangel, a portrait completed at a cost of $64,000. Delightful.

Should anyone out there be unsure as to just who the recipient of this prestigious celebration actually is (and I doubt there are many), allow me to shed some light on the illustrious Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.). This is the same Charles Rangel who was brought up on ethics charges and found guilty of 11 counts of violating House ethics rules. (Source) These so-called “rules” included violating the solicitation and gift ban, violating postal service laws and franking commission regulations, violation of the letter head rule, leasing a “residential use only” rent stabilized apartment that he used as a campaign office (in order to avoid paying the higher rent associated with actual office spaces), and, among other rules, failing to report rental income on his $500,000 Dominican Republic villa.

Wait, wait, wait. Did I just read that right? Failing to report rental income? Isn’t that what people go to prison for? Isn’t tax fraud a felony? Well, um, yes, it is. (as an aside, one of Rangel’s aide recently said he was guilty of the same thing [Source]). Congress takes care of its own, however, and they did censure ol’ Charlie. You know what a censure is don’t you. It is an official reading of the charges against you on the house floor. And after that, it’s, um, back to business as usual. I would say it is the equivalent of a slap on the wrist, but an actual slap on the wrist does incur a modicum of brief barely noticeable pain. A censure does not. But I digress. We were talking about Charlie’s celebration.

Those in attendance include Speaker of the House John Boehner, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Sen. Chuck Schumer, Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), and others. Not expected to attend is the widow of New York City Policeman Phil Cardillo, or his children. There’s that questioning look again. Who is Phil Cardillo? Allow me to elaborate. On April 14, 1972 a call was made to the New York City police department reporting an officer needing assistance. When Cardillo and his partner Vito Navarra arrived at the address given, it was a mosque. And not just any mosque, but Nation of Islam mosque #7 in Harlem. Knowing only that a fellow officer was possibly in danger, Cardillo and his partner entered the mosque where they were quickly met by a large group of black muslims shouting “allah akhbar,” and who immediately attacked the officers (can you say “set up”?)

Back up arrived and two more officers entered the mosque, only to be attacked and beaten as Cardillo and his partner had been. During the assault the officers were beaten and stomped by dozens upon dozens of black muslims. Other officers arrived, but were unable to enter the barricaded door. A shot was fired and officer Cardillo was mortally wounded with his own pistol. Police forced their way in and saw a large black muslim identified as Louis 17X Dupree running away with Cardillo’s weapon. Dupree and others sought refuge in the mosque’s basement where officers were able to detain them.

What has this to do with Charles Rangel? I’m getting to that. Officer Cardillo’s murder was never solved, and his killer has never been brought to justice. Even with officers witnessing Dupree with Cardillo’s gun, and even with 17 suspects being detained in the basement. The reason for this is because the police were ordered to let the suspects leave the mosque alone and not escorted by any police. The police were then told to leave the mosque as well under threat of bodily harm from a mob of black muslims numbering in the hundreds if not thousands. The result was the suspects were allowed to leave and disappear, the police left the mosque, and officer Cardillo’s killer has never been brought to justice. Oh, I almost forgot to mention. The orders to let the suspects go and for police to leave were given by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and Rep. Charles Rangel as they confronted the police in Farrakhan’s mosque. (Source)

"We showed them, didn't we Louie!" "Yeah, them honkies won't mess with the brutha's anymore!"

I don’t know about you, but in my book Rangel’s actions on that day make him expressly complicit in the murder of police officer Phil Cadillo. Maybe they will include this in Rangel’s day of celebration and the subsequent unveiling of his $64,000 portrait, but I doubt it. Heh, and you thought Bill Clinton was slick!

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

It’s Time to Cull the Herd, and Get Rid of the Old and Disabled

At least that appears to be the Obama Administration’s line of reasoning. It was reported today that the Obama Administration is shutting down CLASS, the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act, a federal program that helps seniors and the disabled who cannot afford to buy long term care insurance. (Source) The CLASS Act is designed to help provide both home and community based services to seniors and the disabled that lack the ability to function in daily life. Things such as adaptive aids and medical supplies, minor home modifications, nursing services, occupational and physical therapy, respite care and other services will no longer be available through the program. The result will be thousands of Americans who desperately need these services in order to survive will be left to fend for themselves and find other means to provide for their often life sustaining needs.

What a charming way to eliminate those who many feel are nothing but a millstone around the neck of America. By comparison, the Nazi’s were much more humane. In Nazi Germany, the elderly and disabled were shipped off to camps where they were exterminated, as opposed to being left to eke out a miserable existence all on their own until they simply die from lack of medical care or assistance. Hitler would be proud, as would Stalin.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Mail Call for September 12, 2011

Mail’s in!

Dear Jimmy Carter: You are absolutely correct (well mostly) when you say that under your administration “we never dropped a bomb. We never fired a bullet. We never went to war.” (Source) You seem, however, to have forgotten that you did facilitate the fall of the Shah of Iran (our ally) and the subsequent rise to power of one of the most dangerous megalomaniacal terrorist regimes in the history of the world. And need I remind you that you also facilitated the rise of al qaeda, the Taliban, and other fundamentalist orthodox muslim terrorist groups which directly led to the attacks on 9/11, by arming them and teaching them military tactics, as well as instructing them in the development and use of chemical and biological weapons. And let’s not forget that you also supported and encouraged Robert Mugabe’s dictatorial rise to power in Rhodesia, as well as the rise to power of Marxist Sandanista Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. And, although your are no longer president, you continue to support the communist dictator regimes of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. As icing on the cake of death and destruction which you have baked, you gave North Korea $4 billion worth of light water reactors and $100 million in oil in an attempt to appease Kim Jung Il and on his “promise” that he would not develop nuclear weapons (which they now have, thank you very much). (Source)

No Mr. Carter, we never dropped a bomb, we never fired a bullet, we never went to war. But you, on the other hand, are directly responsible through your actions both as president, and since leaving office, for the millions of bullets being fired, thousands of bombs being dropped, and scores of wars all resulting in the deaths of millions worldwide, including right here in America. Helluva legacy Jimmy my boy. Helluva legacy.

 

Dear Valerie Jarrett: It is time to accept reality. As you say, there is no jobs bill. But believing in the fantasy that Obama is going to somehow magically draft one is ridiculous. I suspect he will cobble together something that sounds remotely good, and then fill in the blanks once he manages to convince congress to pass it. Rest assured, however, it will fail as his other bills and policies have. (Source)

 

Dear President Obama: I realize you would like to have everyone commemorate 9/11 by engaging in community service. However, you should understand that photo ops are not considered community service. Just so you know. (Source)

 

Dear Hugo Chavez: Go for it my man! Oh yeah! I cannot encourage you enough to continue on your current path to curing your cancer. So please, keep visiting the witch doctors, shamans, faith healers, and your local botanica! Maybe you can take your buddy Fidel with you on one of your visits.  (Source)

 

Dear Debbie Wasserman Shultz: Actually, with nationwide unemployment over 9% and with the federal government now saying that it will remain there until at least 2014 (actual unemployment numbers are higher), and with 46 million Americans now receiving food stamps, and with companies failing left and right (including Obama’s baby – Solyndra), yeah, I think I can say the stimulus didn’t work. By the way, just like Anthony Weiner, you are a putz. Just so you know. (Source)

 

Dear United Nations: I hate to say I told you so, but, well, I did. (Source)

 

Dear OIC: Thank you for reiterating your condoning of terrorism. At least we know where you stand, and that we can continue to look forward to continuing terror attacks, each of which will occur with your blessing and encouragement. (Source)

cc: The World

 

Dear Aman Ali: Of course you should not condemn something you condone. Why be hypocritical? (Source)

 

Dear President Obama: Bwahahahahaha! Sorry. Now adjust your kufi, it’s crooked. (Source)

 

Dear AlGore: Does this mean you’ve purchased the Trinity Broadcasting Company? Just so you know, I don’t buy what they’re selling either. (Source)

 

Dear Paul Krugman: Welcome to the Anthony Weiner Fan Club, you will be receiving your official club membership card and t-shirt soon. (Source)

 

Dear President Obama: You might want to find a different document forger. The one you currently have isn’t producing as well as you may have originally thought. (Source)

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Current Events, Islam, Mail Call, News, Politics

Mail Call, September 10, 2011

The Mail’s in!

Dear Associated Press: It’s not true. Don’t believe it. We are peaceful. Really. On the name of our prophet Mohammed ibn Himar I swear it isn’t true. We are a religion of pieces peace. All our love, Abdul Gewad, C/O Al Qaeda Cultural Center, Islamburg, NY (Source)

Dear Mr. Soros: It’s not that we hate muslims, we just hate muslim terrorists. We also hate those who collaborate with them  as well, which of course includes you. (Source)

Dear Mrs. Obama: I just wanted to pass along to you, that illegal aliens no longer fear much of anything, since your husband became president. In fact, neither do terrorists. (Source)

Dear President Obama: I realize sir that you are on vacation, and probably have yet to receive the memo, but North Korea has just downed one of our military planes. I believe this is your cue to play golf, sir, so if you could please begin moving toward the golf cart. Yes sir, it’s that small car looking thing. No sir, not that one, that is your Chevy volt. It’s the other one. Thank you sir. (Source)

Dear President Obama: Thank you for supporting us over here in Libya! We could not have done this without you!  We have recently been shopping and have found the perfect gift to repay you for your kindness. We will be sending it soon. All our love, Mohammed ibn Himar and the rest of the Libyan Rebels. (Source)

P.S.: By the way, it’s not true that I am still with Al Qaeda. I promise. Really. I swear I mean it this time. Honest.

Dear Jimmy Hoffa, Jr.: If you are going to threaten me, please have the intestinal fortitude to do it in person, preferably in front of my house as that is where I have my range markers set. (Source)

Dear Janet Napolitano: I am not sure if you are aware of this, but it was ISLAMIC terrorists who attacked this country on Sept. 11, 2001. It was not mentally ill Canadians, it was not toddlers, it was not wheelchair bound terminally ill grandmothers, and it was not elderly nuns. It was ISLAMIC TERRORISTS. (Source)

P.S.: They (the ISLAMIC TERRORISTS) can currently be found in Central and South America in various groups and cells (no not jail cells). These would be countries SOUTH of the United States. You know, on the other side of the border you refuse to secure.

Dear Uncle Omar: I told you not to worry! Love, Barry (Source)

Dear President Obama: Your plan worked. (Source)

Dear Anthony Weiner: You’re still a putz. Just so you know.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Mail Call, Politics

My Introduction to Ron Paul Supporters

Recently, well, actually yesterday, as I was on Facebook I noticed a wall posting promoting Ron Paul. Although the posting was decidedly biased in favor of Paul, I went ahead and read the post and watched to pro-Ron Paul video that had been attached to it. Simply put, it was a nice presentation of Ron Paul talking points, most (if not all) I had read before when I did my review of him.

Now, I would like to point out that I do agree with some of Ron Paul’s views, and when I responded to the Facebook post, I indicated the same. I then went on to explain the Ron Paul policies that I did not care for, and I used my review of Paul (as well as the sources accompanying the review) as a source for my response.

Although I would dearly love to include each and every post in that Facebook debate, I cannot. The reason being, is that the Ron Paul supporter (we’ll call him “John”) has either deleted the entire discussion, or has since limited his “wall” posts to his Facebook friends only. Either way, they are now unavailable to me. That being said, however, I was able to copy all of his responses to my posts in this discussion, all but his original post, and my first two responses. Read ahead to witness someone who is so enamored with his political candidate of choice that he will eschew all rational discussion and revert to insults, mockery, and belittlement. If this is any indication of how the candidate himself thinks, then I can assure you that I would rather eat barbed wire than vote for Ron Paul. [Note, I have included those portions of the discussion that I was able retrieve verbatim. Please excuse John’s spelling and grammatical errors, as I think I upset him].

 

Photo of Ron Paul and “John” (face obscured for his privacy), from John’s Facebook photo album

 

The first post by John contained little more than Ron Paul talking points, and although it did not attack any other candidate or point of view, I still responded with my view points (as is common on Facebook), and I pointed out my disagreement with Paul’s stance that the 9/11 attacks were America’s fault, his condoning of embryonic stem cell research, and his view that should individual states choose to legalize heroin, meth, prostitution or shariah law, then that was okay by him. John’s response was:

 

John wrote: “@ thom: you have completely distorted dr. paul’s views – for example: 9/11 is not our “fault”, but we encourage hostility by policing the world and nation-building! they don’t hate us for our “freedom” as some simpletons would have you believe, they focus their irrational hated at us BECAUSE WE ARE IN THEIR COUNTRIES! how you would you feel if china was policing our nation? why do we not follow dr. paul by return to our conservative principles and pulling out of the UN and NATO and NOT police the world and NOT nation-build (neither of which we can afford!), and FOLLOW our Constitution by a congressional declaration of war which republicans and democrats both neglected! “It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.” – Ggeorge Washington “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war.” – Thomas Jefferson (1823) “In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home.” – George Washington suggesting ron paul doesn’t respect the life of an unborn baby is a complete lie – you need to research dr. paul’s record before you make such accusations. che: Ron Paul on Abortion and Stem Cell Research: http://www.facebook.com/l/tAQDoNZs3/www.youtube.com/watch?v=66jpPCIzza8 ron paul on stem cell: http://www.facebook.com/l/kAQB93InW/www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tNLcJ_RVWs&feature=related as far as saying ron paul WANTS to legalize heroin, etc – it is another distortion of the truth! what dr. paul wants IS TO FOLLOW OUR CONSTITUTION and let the states regulate themselves on such matters! “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” – James Madison (Father of the US Constitution and author of Federalist No. 45) how is following the advice of our founding fathers and sticking to our constitutional restrictions of the federal government the same as obama? you probably don’t think obamacare is constitutional, but then you want to grow the federal government’s regulating powers beyond the insight of our founders and cage of our constitution and strip the states of powers. can’t pick and choose when to follow the constitution when it suits you or when not to or you are just as tyrannical as the left (and right). it’s not just about dr. paul, but the constitutional platform which he defends! show me any other candidate that does so and i’ll support them as well, but there is none… i’m serious about that: i challenge you to show me which presidential candidate is as principled and defends the conservative/constitutional platform as dr. paul – i’m all ears!”

 

My response to this was to indicate that I had not distorted Ron Paul’s views. I merely pointed out that in Paul saying that the singular motivation behind the terrorist attacks on 9/11 was America’s presence in a foreign country was akin to saying the attacks were our fault, which is exactly what Paul is saying. We are there so they attacked us. If we were not there, they would not have attacked us. I pointed out that I had studied the koran and that the koran instructs all true muslims to attack and kill all non-muslims whether they are in their country or not, and the subjugation of all religions and all non-muslims is the goal if islam. This is what the koran teaches. I did not say that Ron Paul wanted to legalize heroin, I said (and as it was written, all John had to do was read what I wrote) that Paul’s viewpoint was if a state wanted to legalize heroin it was okay by him. He would allow that. I took that reasoning to its logical conclusion to point out that following Paul’s line of reasoning, if a state wanted to legalize crack houses, meth labs, or brothels next door to elementary schools, or if they wanted to implement shariah law in their state, then he would do nothing to stop them. I also provided a video link in which Ron Paul clearly states that as long as embryonic stem cell research does not result in an abortion of the unborn baby, then he says it is okay by him (Video Link Here). My view is that no unborn child should ever be used for experimental research. Since John challenged me to provide him with the name of another presidential candidate who is “principled and defends the conservative/constitutional platform,” I offered up my candidate of choice, Herman Cain. John’s response, as well as the remainder of our discussion – verbatim, is as follows:

 

John wrote: “@ thom: i don’t know how much more simple i can present the fact our intervention in other countries is the reason they dislike us. how do we know this? BECAUSE THEY SAY THAT’S WHY THEY DISLIKE US! if you think they are lying about why (for some unknown reason), listen to the insight of the Former CIA unit in charge of hunting Bin Laden, Michael Scheuer, who said: “What they hate us for is the unusually virulent strain of obsessive compulsive disorder that’s present in the American governing class, and that’s called interventionism. That’s what the cause of this war is.” … “That’s what the cause of this war is. And neither Mr. McCain, nor Mr. Obama, nor Mrs. Clinton, nor any of the rest of them who are in the campaign-except Mr. (Ron) Paul…”, http://www.facebook.com/l/pAQD3bVbH/www.nolanchart.com/article2888_Michael_Scheuer_Says_Ron_Paul_Understands_Cause_of_Terrorism.html. apparently you know more than the former CIA agent in charge of hunting bin laden… if you think they still hate us for our “freedom”, there is no reasoning with you. i do find it hypocritical of you to think we should continue to abandon conservative values by disregarding our constitution and police the world and nation-building and continue to go further into debt in the process… as far as states exercising their constitutional rights to potentially legalizing some drugs – you described this as “Following this line of Ron Paul’s reasoning” – that reasoning is the reasoning of our founding fathers and our constitutional! let’s do a quick lesson in founding father history 101 – again: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” – James Madison (Father of the US Constitution and author of Federalist No. 45) so let me get this straight – if you had YOUR way, you would remove the leath of the constitution from the federal government and allow the feds to absorp state rights and assume more power… as long as you think it’s ok, but obamacare is unconstitutional. you are just as bad as democrats on ignoring our founding fathers and spitting on our constitutiion. you have NO claim to our history and to Constitutional principle. in your mind, somehow states are soooo incompetent, that they need an unconstitutional federal government to stop them from having “crack houses” next to schools. what state do you live in? how’s this – i trust my state far more than i trust an unconstitutional federal government, but apparently you think that your “opinion” is more important than the designs of our founders and our constitutiion. again, you must be a pretty smart guy… as far as stem cell research – a medical dr. (ron paul) who has the strongest pro-life record going talks about the complications of stem cell research, but your apparently hermain cain declined to sign the pro-life pledge. let’s take a further look into hermain cain’s record: Herman Cain’s political donation record (OpenSecrets.org): 1. Donated to NY Democrat Rep. Jose E. Serrano – $250 on 12/23/1993 2. Donated to Nebraska Democrat Sen. Bob Kerrey – $250 on 9/3/1993 3. Donated to Nebraska Democrat Rep. Peter Hoagland (Nebraska ’s 2nd District) against Republican Jon Lynn Christensen in 1994. He gave $500 to Hoagland – but Christensen won as part of the Republican Revolution of 1994 anyway. 4. Donated to money to Democrat Ben Nelson ( Nebraska ) – $500 on 6/5/1996 and record: 1. Herman Cain supported the TARP bailouts. He even wrote a column to vigorously argue in favor of the Wall Street bailout in 2008, writing: “Wake up people! Owning a part of the major banks in America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a problem.” Cain derided opponents of the bailouts as “free market purists.” That sounds more like something Rachel Maddow would call Tea Partiers than something a true Tea Partier would use as an insult. 2. Herman Cain enthusiastically endorsed Mitt Romney for President in 2008. Herman Cain called Mitt Romney his “No. 1 choice” for president. Remember that Mitt “RINO” brought socialized medicine to Massachusetts as governor, and his “RomneyCare” legislation would eventually form the blueprint for ObamaCare, which all true Tea Partiers strongly opposed! How can a “Tea Party candidate” like Herman Cain endorse someone like Mitt Romney for president? 3. Herman Cain opposes an audit of the Federal Reserve. Actually a former chairman of the Federal Reserve bank of Kansas City, Herman Cain opposes an audit of the Federal Reserve bank and supports its continued existence and manipulation of our dollar. This isn’t even just a Tea Party issue. 80% of ALL AMERICANS want an audit of the Fed. Herman Cain doesn’t. on second thought, hermain cain’s record is clearly conservative and principled/consistent – if one was a political bisexual (and i hate to insult bisexuals with that comparison)… strange cain only got 140 votes in the Iowa Straw Poll…”

 

Thom Paine wrote: @John: My oh my, did I hit a nerve or something? Apparently I did. Rather than conduct a rational discussion, you resort to belittlement (“i don’t know how much more simple i can present the fact…”) and you resort the social network version of yelling (“BECAUSE THEY SAY THAT’S WHY THEY DISLIKE US!”). Then you turn to sarcastic mocking (“apparently you know more than the former CIA agent in charge of hunting bin laden”), and outright insult (“you have NO claim to our history and to Constitutional principle”). Then you return to sarcastic mocking and make a statement that would lead me to believe you are against the First Amendment right of free speech, at least when it concerns those who disagree with you (“apparently you think that your “opinion” is more important than the designs of our founders and our constitutiion.”).

You do not bother to refute the video (in the link I previously provided) in which Ron Paul states in no uncertain terms that stem cell research, as long as it does not result in abortion, is okay. Instead, you resort to sarcastic mocking once again, and then make a comment the Herman Cain declined to sign the pro-life pledge. (“you must be a pretty smart guy… as far as stem cell research – a medical dr. (ron paul) who has the strongest pro-life record going talks about the complications of stem cell research, but your apparently hermain cain declined to sign the pro-life pledge.”) Not only does this have absolutely nothing to do with Ron Paul’s apparent condoning of embryonic stem cell research as long as it fits within certain criteria, but what has Herman Cain not signing the “pro-life pledge” have to do with anything? Did you sign it? If not, am I to assume that you are not pro-life? No, of course not as that would be a ridiculous assumption on the part of anyone who made it. And speaking of Herman Cain, your comment regarding him (“on second thought, hermain cain’s record is clearly conservative and principled/consistent – if one was a political bisexual (and i hate to insult bisexuals with that comparison)…”) is one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard a Christian pastor called. I can only assume that you are not of that faith, but it is your right to follow any religious faith you choose.

With regard to state’s rights, I am simply saying that not all states are fair and just in their governing of their citizens. I know this from experience after working for a state government agency for 20 years. I do happen to believe in state’s rights and a limiting of the federal government. However, in my opinion, Ron Paul would limit the federal government to such an extent as to be largely ineffectual and in essence, leaving the individual states to do whatever they want. In doing so, it is my opinion that we have the “Independent States of America” rather than the “United States of America.” In short, I believe in Limited Government, not No Government.

Now, briefly, back to your reliance on Michael Scheuer, the former head of the CIA bin Laden unit. I am afraid I cannot take anything he says too seriously. No, I do not think I “know more than the former CIA agent in charge of hunting bin laden.” But I have studied the koran (it pays to know ones enemies), and I do know that the koran does instruct muslims to attack and kill non-muslims, whether they are in their country or not. As Mr. Scheuer, aside from the obvious (he did not catch bin Laden, did he? – and no, neither did Obama), Mr. Scheuer is blatantly anti-Semitic, and non-interventionist to the point of blurring the line between that and isolationism. Links are provided here to source my statements concerning Mr. Scheuer: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/02/disgusting-anti-semite-michael-scheuer-says-israel-is-such-an-enormous-detriment-to-the-united-states-video/

http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2010/11/25/inside-the-mad-mad-mind-of-michael-scheuer-appeaser-isolationist-anti-semite-and-america-hater/

I am not a proponent of “empire building” and I do not believe we should be the “world’s police force.” But I do believe that U.S. intervention, in some countries and under certain conditions, is essential to our own national security.

Should you care to continue this discussion, I look forward to it. However, I will ask that you at least be civil and not resort to the tactics you have used thus far. Not only are they insulting, you are demeaning yourself by resorting to tactics generally used by those not as intelligent as I believe you to be.

 

John wrote back to me one last time. Not as part of the discussion, but as a private message:

 

John XXXXXX

  • sorry “thom”, i’m done trying to argue with someone that thinks his opinion should be forced on everyone else through legislation. you are nothing, but a naive pretend conservative that wishes to bypass our supreme law of the land (our constitution) and force through legislation your reservations – one of the most unconservative things one could do, but again you are a hermain cain supporter so you lack a conservative foundation in the first place. hermain cain doesn’t even know the difference between the declaration of independence and our constitution, so it is not surprising that you have little regard for constitutional law. i’m here to support our constitution as secure the liberties of the people as envisioned by our founders – not argue with rhino big government conservatives that are nothing more than mild democrats as hermain cain’s record indicates…

 

When I saw how this was going to end, I decided to use this experience as the basis for a blog post. However, when I went back to retrieve each and every part of the discussion, suddenly they were gone. When I clicked on the “notification” link, I received the This content is currently unavailable” message. I can only conclude from our discussion, that in order to be a Ron Paul supporter, one must eschew all forms of rational debate, one must abandon all opinions not in line with Paul’s views, and one must demonize all who disagree. It sounds almost like a cult.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Who Will Decide The Next President – Part Three

As I have mentioned throughout this series, far too many people will simply vote they way their favorite talking head on their favorite news program tell them to. Little to no research will be done, and most will not even know where the various candidates stand on the issues. And as I have said, this is a travesty. But the question that begs to be asked in relation to this is “why do people vote the way the media tells them to vote?” While there are multiple answers to this, such as people are lazy, people don’t want to be bothered with the whole election nonsense, people don’t understand the issues or the process and trust the media to inform them, as well as many others. There is one answer, however, that does bear some thought, and may very well change the way you think about the media. That answer is “Coercive Persuasion.”

Coercive Persuasion (also known as Thought Control, Thought Reform, or Thought Manipulation) is something we all practice on a daily basis. Every parent, when raising a child, engages in this practice. “Don’t talk to strangers, they could be bad people and hurt you” continually drummed into a child’s head will result in that child viewing strangers with a certain degree of mistrust. This would be a good form of thought manipulation as it instills in the child a way to remain safe. Of course on the other side of the coin, there are bad people in the world who will engage in their own form of though control and counter the parents teaching with, “Not all strangers are bad, some of them are good – would you like to have a piece of candy or see a puppy I have?” These bad strangers will generally strive to build up a friendship with the child until they can gain the child’s trust and once that goal has been achieved; they will proceed with their original plan and harm the child.

Law enforcement and the military utilize coercive persuasion techniques in their training of new recruits, in order to change their thinking patterns to be more in line with their new found jobs of protecting and serving the population of America. There are not many people who will voluntarily place themselves in harm’s way, even to the point of being willing to take a bullet, for a complete stranger. And yet, through their training, this is just what police and soldiers do on a daily basis. Coercive persuasion is also used throughout their careers in order to reinforce the officer’s or soldier’s responsibility to serve and remain loyal even in the face of overwhelming odds.

Corporations and companies also engage in coercive persuasion. “Buy Now! Before they’re all gone!” “Go ahead and get it now!” “Buy this for better health, a sexier body, improved performance, and be the envy of your neighbors!” “Buy your lottery ticket to today for a chance to WIN 10 MILLION DOLLARS!” And my all time favorites: “I’m a raccoon in your attic / a torrential rain storm / a deer on your headlights / etc., buy now and be protected from mayhem like me!” These are all coercive persuasion marketing techniques.

Coercive persuasion is not brain washing. I should point that out here. What you see in Hollywood, “The Manchurian Candidate,” etc., is nothing more than myth. Although it can be done, most people cannot be forced to do something they normally would not do. At least not unless the person had those proclivities to begin with. Coercive Persuasion techniques strive to simply change a person’s perception about things, and thus change the way they think. Fortunately, most people are immune from them, but there are some who simply cannot resist them (hence the popularity and success of the home shopping network), and this is the audience for whom these ads are created. I am very confident that once you realize this is being done, you will be able to point out a plethora of examples that I have not mentioned here.

Coercive persuasion seeks to alter or change the thought processes of an individual or group of individuals, who in turn will not only accept that change, but will go on to promote it as well. This not the same as a convincing debate or discussion which may or may not sway a person’s opinions. Coercive persuasion seeks to change a person’s thinking, their thought patterns to the point where they will believe something they may not otherwise believe. (Note I said believe and not do. Although an extensive conversation could be based on that statement alone, now is not the time, and here is not place.).

Dr. Tim Groseclose, the Marvin Hoffenberg Professor of American Politics at UCLA, who is an authority on the subject, has completed a study on how the media uses these techniques to influence and persuade their viewers to behave in a certain way in the voting booth. Dr. Groseclose’s conclusions have led him to say that if people did not watch the news, and simply focused on the issues and the various candidates stand on those issues, the vast majority of America would vote conservative. An interesting conclusion that really stresses the use and impact of coercive persuasion.

As I sat by the fire quietly contemplating the effects of coercive persuasion on individuals (not really, but it makes a great segue way), I began to wonder about the MSM’s treatment of Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. Romney is generally not vilified in the MSM. Yes, they will throw a barb here and a jab there, question his policies, etc., but generally speaking they refer to him as the darling of the conservatives, the object of tea party affection (and we all know how crazy the tea partiers are, right? At least according to the MSM).

Now I will concede that the left has attacked Romney, but they attack his policies and his stand on certain issues. But with Rick Perry it is totally different. The MSM hates him, and vilifies him every chance they get. “He’s crazy! He’s a clown! He’s just Texas BS! He’s all hat and no cattle!” Chris “Tingles” Matthews has even found time in his busy schedule full of “Obama Fantasizing” to really blast Perry. Why? Why the “pull out all the stops” vilification of Rick Perry? I have to wonder if this is some form of reverse psychology. Does the left realize that the harder they pound on Perry, the more likely the right is to vote for him? And if so, then why continue? Do they really want Perry on the ticket and again, if so, then why? Does the MSM secretly believe that Obama has little or no chance in 2012, and they want someone such as Perry (whose record in Texas is not much different than Obama’s is as President, at least with regard to jobs, the economy and islam). Is this a form of coercive persuasion that is being engaged in by the MSM?

That this is practiced by the MSM, through its constant and unrelenting vilification of the Tea Party movement, should be obvious. It is not enough to say that they disagree with the movement and its supporters, nor is it even enough to rationally explain why they disagree with the movement. No, the MSM & liberal elite engage in a continual barrage of invective filled rants against the Tea Party movement. “They’re crazy! They’re holding America hostage! Their ideas have been disproven by respected experts! They’re terrorists! They’re cannibals!” and so on, and so on, ad infinitum ad nauseum. Why?

Very few conservatives (if any) are glued to MSNBC, and other MSM outlets (unless it is to laugh uncontrollably at Al Sharpton as he pretends to be intelligent). The MSM’s primary audience is overwhelmingly liberal, and makes up the supportive constituency of the liberal elite politicians. So why are these liberal memes striving so hard to erect an unbreachable wall between the liberal citizenry and the Tea Party?

To me, the answer can only be that the MSM and liberal elite recognize that the Tea Party represents a real danger to maintaining their liberal base of support. In other words, if their liberal base of support ever sat down and listened, with an open and unbiased mind to the Tea Party platform, then they too would likely realize that the MSM and liberal elite are, for lack of a better phrase, full of sheep dip, and the resulting exodus from that failed movement would cripple the liberal socialist empire for a seriously long time.

Engaging in this intense and unrelenting attack on the Tea Party, the MSM and liberal elite strive to strengthen the liberal support base. As I said, the primary audience of the MSM are liberals. There are some in that audience, however, who are not liberal, and who are either completely undecided, or partially undecided (undecided with either slightly left or slightly right leanings). It is the hope of the MSM and liberal elite who appear on the MSM programs, to coercively persuade those individuals into the liberal support platform. This is clearly in line with Dr. Groseclose’s conclusions.

Clearly then, the MSM and the liberal elite are waging an unrelenting war against common sense, truth, justice, and conservative Americans. The reward, the “spoils of war” that they are hoping to gain is the hearts and minds of those who have yet to decide with side of the fence they are on, as well as strengthening and ensuring the loyalty of liberals throughout the land. The result of this “war” will be, I fear, a country divided as it has not been divided since 1861.

As I have encouraged before, I continue to encourage Americans everywhere to not be swayed by the talking heads that appear on our television sets. I encourage Americans everywhere to study and research the issues and the candidates thoroughly before November 2012, and make an informed decision, one in support of America, and not in support of any agenda covertly promoted by any individual or group.

I believe that our country is at war, and the war I am talking about is not being waged outside of our borders. It is being waged right here at home, and there is not just one “Tokyo Rose” or “Axis Sally” spewing propaganda at us, there is an entire army of them, and at 6:00 pm each evening (to quote Carol Ann in the film Poltergeist), “They’re Baaack!”

Source

Source

Source

Source 

Source

Source 

Source

Source

Source

Source

Source

Source

Source

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 election, Politics