Pardon Me Brother, But Could You Spare Some Change?

President-elect Obama ran on the promise of change since initiating one of the longest campaigns in history. He said that he was different. He said that he would not continue the failed policies of the Federal government. He said that he would end the war in Iraq. He said that he would unite the people of the United States. He said a lot of things and quite frankly, I don’t believe a word that has come out of his mouth. You see, Obama is a liar.

I don’t mean that Obama is a liar in the leftist sense of the word because when they call someone a liar that simply means that the person does not share the leftist worldview. What I mean is that Obama has a problem with prevarication. I am not speaking about the barely known and unrepentant terrorist family that he shares a neighborhood with or about his total ignorance of Jeremiah Wright’s pastoral and hate filled messages after sitting in the church pew for twenty years. Although, Bill Ayers describing Barrack Obama as a close family friend in contradiction to Obama’s statements and Jeremiah Wright’s screaming tirades from the pulpit that would surely gain the attention of anyone within the congregation, causes one to doubt Obama’s veracity. I mean, even Oprah could only stand a few visits to Wright’s church before she decided to run for her life, but Obama seemingly thought more of his pastor than his own grandmother and he proved it when he threw grandma under the bus in order to try and save his spiritual advisor, but I digress.

What I am referring to when I call Obama a liar is his insipid change message. Sure it sounds great in a sound bite and sure it appeals to people who are disgusted with a government stuck on stupid, but you actually have to mean it when you say it or it is a bald face lie. Despite the President-elect’s constant intonations of “change,” he has done nothing to lay the foundations for such change. When you have hired Rahm Emmanuel as your Chief of Staff, you can’t possibly be serious about change. You may remember Mr. Emmanuel as the elected official who once said “F*** the Republicans” and helped to initiate the bare blade partisanship that now permeates the American Congress. As a former Clinton attack dog, Emmanuel viciously attacked anyone who proved a threat to the Clintons. However, the addition of Emmanuel to the Obama Presidential team is nothing compared to the selection of Biden as a running mate.

Joe Biden is not only a loudmouth who has an amazing record of shooting off his mouth when it has a tendency to damage the Democrats the most, he also has more than thirty years of service as an elected official. How thirty years of entrenchment in the politics of Washington D.C. translates to “change” only the Obama people can explain. Of course, you have use a good deal of mental gymnastics to follow the explanation, but it is a good work out. Additionally, Biden’s experience plagiarizing political speeches has proven entertaining, but how exactly that translates to change has never been explained. As an interesting aside, Biden’s wife is a college English professor and one would think that she would have explained the seriousness of plagiarism to her husband. At institutions of higher learning that I have attended, the faculty called plagiarists thieves. However, I suppose the left leaning professors who support Obama and forgave Biden his theft of another’s intellectual property could be considered change, but if they fail to carry that through to their own students then they are nothing more than hypocrites.

Then there is the appointment of Hillary Clinton to the position of Secretary of State. Hillary was the first lady, Senator from New York, and now will serve as the head of the State Department. Aside from being deeply entrenched in the politics of Washington and knifing her husband’s paramours in the back, what are her qualifications for the position? Sure, she knows where the Democratic bodies are buried, but unless she has photos of Ahmadinejad in homosexual sex acts with Kim Jong Il, Vladimir Putin, and Hugo Chavez I don’t think that the back room political intrigues are going to help. I have heard it said that the reason that Obama appointed her as Secretary of State was to get her out of his hair. While it is difficult to make trouble for the new administration when you are stuck in Azerbaijan negotiating some mindless treaty that could just as easily been handled by an underling, I do not see how this is change. Sure, Hillary will have dozens more stories about dodging sniper fire, evading IEDs, side stepping nukes, or discovering Atlantis, even if they are all figments of her fevered imagination, but change? Hardly, but Obama’s next selection is also interesting.

Tom Daschle, who was appointed by Obama to head the Health and Human Services Bureaucracy, was a former Congressman and U.S. Senator from South Dakota. Senator Daschle served in the Federal government from 1978 until 2004 totaling nearly a quarter century as a Washington insider. Since leaving the Senate Mr. Daschle has involved himself in lobbying to earn a living. One of Daschle’s most notable achievements since leaving office is endorsing the warrantless surveillance program used by the NSA to combat terrorism. You may recall the hue and cry concerning listening in to calls from America to known terrorists overseas. I don’t know about you, but I think that the idea is brilliant. If someone wants to call Ayman al-Zawahiri, I want to know what was said in their conversation and I don’t care if the call originated within the United States. But is Daschle change? I don’t think so.

When one examines the names of Obama’s appointments we find the same old leftist establishment that has been entrenched in Washington for nearly 40 years. How is this change? What did Obama mean when he said change? The fact of the matter is that the American public was bamboozled. Obama said a few buzz words and looked the part and people fell all over themselves trying to get next to him. He is a cult of personality with no substance. So what is he trying to change? Obama wants to change our form of government from capitalist to socialist. That is the change that many Americans voted for and they didn’t even realize it because they were so enamored of Obama. The left has gutted American values, destroyed the American culture, and now seeks to make the individual extinct in the new collective regime. Freedom rarely ends with a gun against your head. Usually it is frittered away by a population that wants someone else to protect and take care of them. What they invariably fail to realize is that in order to achieve that goal they must become dependant upon the government and the price for such dependence are your personal freedoms.

Essentially, you wish to become children again and have momma take care of you. Momma will cook your food, clean your clothes, and provide for your health care needs. All that you must do is to be a good boy or girl. Translated to the government that means that the Federal government will provide for your basic needs and health care and you must be a good citizen. If you do not know how to be a good citizen then the government will teach you and if you cannot be taught, you will be ejected from the body politic. Such will be the fate of all non-conformists. Freedom, independence, and individualism are all lost. If these people would simply move to Red China there would be no problem, but they insist that I must live like that as well and I cannot abide that. Seeking someone else to care for you is your business, but demanding that I come along for my own good is insanity. Nevertheless, that is the change that Obama seeks to accomplish.

I say, don’t tread on me.

Goebbels Resurrected as Chris Mathews!

I was reading Larry Elder’s article regarding media bias and I came upon the statement that MSNBC's Chris Matthews said that as a "journalist," his "job" is to "make (Obama's presidency) work successfully." Funny, I thought that his job was to report the facts of events as they transpired, not to push propaganda down our throats. Allow me to define the term “propaganda” for you. The Webster’s dictionary defines propaganda as: “Ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one’s cause or to damage an opposing cause” Note that the definition does not speak as to the veracity of these attempts to further one’s own cause or to damage an opposing cause. In fact, the first casualty of a propaganda campaign is usually the truth and that is why Saul Alinsky is so important.

Alinsky wrote the Rules for Radicals which is commonly used today against the government, universities, and anybody else that the left has targeted. Alinsky also advocated the use of lies when the truth would not serve the radicals purpose. This is why the left lies like a rug on the floor. Their morals, values, and ideals are not the same as yours or mine. Of course, the left will tell the truth when it is in their favor to do so, but when it is not favorable to them they will lie gloriously and justify the act with the collectivist mantra of that is what is best for the people. These tactics are not new and they can be traced back to the Jacobin Revolution in France.

You may not be familiar with the term “Jacobin,” but its leader, by the name of Robespierre, will probably be more familiar to you. It is from him and the Jacobins that the modern left can trace their intellectual ancestry. According to the Jacobins, if the truth will not serve then a noble lie would work just as well. Additionally, the left’s proclivity for destroying Christianity in order to replace it with the worship of the state also begins here. What then is the role of the press when such events take place? It is to insure the success of the state by reporting propaganda rather than the facts as they occurred without the interference of a political or other agenda.

When politics interferes with the news and the news transforms to propaganda the public is blinded and a great many evils may take place. I believe that this is the current situation in the United States and Western Europe. The peoples of these two spheres of politics are being manipulated by the press and the press is laughing at out ignorance while we blindly grope in the dark. As such, the news media has abandoned the trust of the people in favor of their politics. Examples of the propaganda of the media include:

1. The Washington Post admitted to biased reporting about Barrack Obama

2. The Washington Post also admitted that it did not vigorously investigate Obama’s past and specifically his undergraduate past

3. Major news organizations withheld stories of the Economy’s upturn during the Bush/Clinton race because they feared that it would aid Bush. The stories were reported after the election with the explanation that the markets were overjoyed at Clinton’s success.

4. Katie Couric’s blatant plagiarism of another reporter’s work regarding a personal story of her childhood - If she will lie about something like this, what other lies would she be willing to tell the American people?

5. Dan Rather’s attacks on President George W. Bush regarding his military service while a member of the Air National Guard. The documents upon which Rather’s reporting was based, were proven to be forgeries. However, Rather and CBS News had been warned not to run the story because the document examiner had serious doubts regarding the authenticity of the papers. The liberal bias of CBS News forced the story ahead regardless of the document examiners recommendations.

6. Political donations from innumerable reporters to the DNC and political candidates who were Democrats despite their employer’s stringent regulations against such donations. One female reporter advised that her father forced her to make a substantial donation to a political candidate despite the fact that she was nearly thirty years old when she was caught with her hand in the cookie jar.

7. Most recently was the extreme examination of Sarah Palin by the news media searching for any hint of scandal while completely ignoring Joe Biden and Barrack Obama.

8. The news media actively conspired with the Democratic National Committee on the best way to destroy Joseph McCarthy in news reports. The news blasted McCarthy irrespective of the truth or decency.

9. Despite the intense coverage of Mark Foley during the 2006 elections regarding texting sexually provocative messages to a teenage male intern, relatively nothing has been said regarding Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson, the most corrupt politician in U.S. history. Foley is a Republican and Jefferson is a Democrat.

10. Keith Olbermann and Chris Mathews were recently disciplined for allowing the veil of objectivity to slip while they covered the Republican Convention. Their blatant leftist bias left no doubt that they held the Republicans in contempt.

These are merely a few of the events that made it briefly into the consciousness of the public. I contend that they merely represent the tip of the iceberg. This concept is well known in business circles where the top man only hears what his underlings want him to know. When the CEO finds something akin to what has been delineated above, he usually begins an investigation to find out what else has been hidden from him. Unfortunately, we are not the CEO and we cannot order the Washington Post, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, and others to perform such an investigation. However, we can choose other news sources and that is the major lament of the main stream media.

As the public’s attention is drawn away to other sources, the dollars spent by corporate sponsors also dwindle. Because the news has become more a business than a loss leader, the parent corporations of the news rooms pay attention to these figures and further dictate what will go before the public’s eye adding yet another layer of insulation between the public and the truth. In fact, the blatant media bias has gotten so bad that some reporters are ashamed to admit that they are journalists. Yet the ones who do their best to maintain the illusion of objectivity always bristle when bias is mentioned and attempt to explain that media bias is a term that only fevered conservatives use when they have nothing else to talk about or something that only Fox news does.

The fact that many who bring you the news also brought you leftist politics should mean nothing to you, according to those in the business. Their time spent in the offices and campaigns of the leftist leadership is supposed to give them a handle on politics and paths to decision makers that can be exploited for later stories, but what actually happens is that these people merely become whores for the Democratic National Committee. The DNC says jump and the news media asks how high. That this linkage is dangerous to freedom should be obvious to anyone, particularly given the recent election of Barrack Obama.

Obama has lied repeatedly about his past and his associations. Worse, he was trained as a street collectivist organizer in Alinsky’s doctrine for radicals and while Obama calls Bill Ayers an “associate,” Ayers refers to Obama as a family friend and one who identifies with Ayers political philosophy. None of this was ever brought to the citizen’s attention by the main stream media. They helped Obama to hide it by ignoring the questions just like the Washington Post did. To this day, no American knows who Barrack Obama really is and what his agenda is that he plans to pursue. Obama said, “Yes we can” and America swooned like a love sick school girl. Obama said, “Change,” and he gave us Joe Biden and Rahm Emanuel to bring it to us. I believe that the United States has been the victim of a con job the likes of which the world has never seen with the world media acting as Obama’s front men.

I have no doubt that Obama could end up being the worst President in the history of the United States and the media will hail him as a modern Pericles. That is what Chris Mathews was talking about when said that it was his job to insure that Obama's Presidency was successful. Mr. Mathews calls himself a journalist, I call him a sycophant.

The United Soviet States of America

It is human nature to want to lay down your burdens and allow another to perform work that is rightfully yours. Additionally, it is human nature to believe the best from all when the evidence otherwise is damning. Barrack Obama’s win over John McCain proves that human nature always wins unless it is tempered with self discipline and determination. I have heard the pundits speak of how McCain lost the race and what he should have done better. To be sure, McCain does indeed bear some of the blame for his loss. He could have avoided playing the Democrats game by their rules, for example. He also could have actually attacked Obama’s lack of experience, terrorist friends, and his corrupt financiers. Instead, he wanted to be a nice guy while Obama sent his hounds baying for McCain’s blood while his DNC operatives attempted to place Sarah Palin’s head on a pike.

McCain’s bumbling aside, there was really very little difference between Obama and himself to begin with as evidenced by numerous socialist promises he made in the debates. Add in his contempt for conservatism and the picture focuses to razor sharpness. While McCain did attempt to attack Obama in the last days of the election, it was too little and far too late. Now that the United States of America has chosen Barrack Hussein Obama as its President we finally get to know who this guy is. Because frankly, nobody in the electorate knows anything about him regarding his politics, worse he has no discernible record except at the statehouse. When he was involved in the Illinois legislature he voted “present” over 90 times. I don’t know about you, but I think that over ninety votes of “present” would be enough for a politician who just takes up space like a knick knack. Such a record for one who promised to serve the citizens who made up his constituency is deplorable. Yet, the drive by media was mum and now the future President, Barrack Obama, will have the opportunity to vote “present” for the United States on the world stage.

Then there are the associates of Obama, Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dorn and Rashid Khalidi. Ayers and Dorn are unrepentant homegrown terrorists who plotted to violently overthrow of the Federal Government and murdered innocent people toward that goal. Unfortunately, these two thugs managed to skate their criminal charges on a technicality and departed from the legal system laughing all the way home. Khalidi was a PLO terrorist who is committed to the destruction of Israel by any means necessary, a goal that he has not abandoned and still advocates today. While such friendships are disconcerting, there is ample evidence to suggest that Obama shares their ideologies as well as being far closer to these people than he has led us to believe. While one could look at a politician’s record and ascertain their political thoughts, Obama has been able to hide his true intentions behind his short tenure in Washington and a highly effective counterintelligence program. While the Senator is certainly entitled to his privacy, the need of the American people to know about his relationships with these people and his personal identification with their radical ideologies is great and now, moot.

Worse, Obama is not a capitalist, but a socialist. That is why his Houston office flew Che Guevara’s flag and why the hammer and sickle have shown up at his celebrations. I believe that Obama will worsen the economic picture of America for decades and the House and Senate will feed him the legislation to achieve that goal. In fact, it was Obama that got the ball rolling on the current economic crises when he worked with ACORN, a group that is under heavy fire for its less than legal operating style. ACORN applied pressure to Citibank with Obama’s help and forced the mortgage industry to give loans to unqualified applicants which Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought up, creating a greater housing bubble than that which toppled the Savings and Loan industry in the ’80’s. It is indeed ironic that the man who was there at the creation of our national crises has been elected to fix it. Change indeed.

Where Obama’s loyalties lay is another issue that American’s are ignorant about. While he steadfastly supported Jeremiah Wright when he was under fire, he did not hesitate to sacrifice his own grandmother in order to save Wright. Calling his grandmother a “typical white” as he cast her under the bus hoping to save his pastor, he betrayed the woman who was the mother of his mother and had given him shelter, clothing, and food. While I found this act to be despicable, others merely smiled and nodded. What kind of a man could do that to the woman that gave him hearth and home? That gave him a home when he had no one else? Why would he forsake her in favor of a racist minister? Not one person ever asked those questions of the man who was elected President and yet again, the drive by media was silent.

Then there are the troubling similarities between Obama and Il Duce. Fascism is a product of the left and not the right. Both Hitler and Mussolini took their cues from the American Progressive movement and the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson. In point of fact, both men were staunch socialists. Regarding Barrack Obama, he has been proclaimed the “Great Leader” and the “Alpha and Omega” by American youth. In fact, Obama has his own Fascisti in the Black Panthers who showed up armed at some of the precincts. Nobody is really certain why they felt the need to be armed with the possible exception of influencing voters with the potential for ready violence. Whether we have our second fascist elected to office or not will depend on the Fairness Doctrine. The only purpose of such a doctrine would be to silence the voice of opposition and fascists are notoriously against such voices. If the Fairness Doctrine passes, then I suggest that you have the answer to that question.

We seem to have entered into dark days indeed. A potential fascist as President of the United States, a first lady who has never been proud of her country until she became the wife of the President, and a plagiarist for the Vice President. It is difficult to tell if this is a farce or a tragedy. Regardless, we have made our decision and now we must live with it. So don’t mind Reagan doing 2500 RPM in his grave and in four or eight years our long national nightmare will be over.