Fodder

Most Dems have regained consciousness but still remain dazed, bewildered, deer-in-the-headlights.

Not the far left, not those extremists who until recently controlled the party. They’re guerilla fighters. They’ll sacrifice their own kind for the cause. All of us have just witnessed such an event.

They’re Mac in Steinbeck’s In Dubious Battle, the communist labor organizer who like Obama’s Rham Emanuel would, “never waste a crisis,” this one the tension in CA agriculture in the 30's. Mac used farm workers, fresh from the Dust Bowl, as tools for his greater “cause.” Jim was one of these and was sacrificed one night in a peach orchard, in an encounter with a shotgun.

There are plenty of Jim’s now; they’re everywhere, those moderate Dem’s just sacrificed by radical operatives. They have been beaten nearly to death, fodder for the party machine.

This time the party went too far, alienating most of its members, just as Mac finally crossed the line, ignoring even human life in the quest for an abstract. And this is exactly why last year we could predict, correctly as it turned out, that Obama (who is the perfect stand-in for McGovern or Martine Aubry) meant the death of the Democratic Party in its then present form.

Robert Craven

Taken

In today’s Wash Post two Dem polsters, Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen write that, “... the president has largely lost the consent of the governed. The midterm elections were effectively a referendum on the Obama presidency. And even if it was not an endorsement of a Republican vision for America, the drubbing the Democrats took was certainly a vote of no confidence in Obama and his party. The president has almost no credibility left with Republicans and little with independents,” and we might add, little with moderate Democrats. For many of these, it’s more than disappointment; they hate the guy.

These authors conclude that Obama should announce “immediately” that he won’t run in 2012. That way he can make the tough decisions, “standing above politics, seeking to forge consensus.” He could, “make hard decisions about Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan based on what is reasonable and responsible for the United States, without the political constraints of a looming election.”

Won’t happen guys.

These two lament in the article that Obama’s actions have not been consistent with his campaign rhetoric. Caddell, Schoen and the rest, the taken, the willfully blind may have done their own research but they ignored the results if they did.

Obama acted perfectly in character all along, first saying what was needed to get elected, which by the way included making a bargain with guilty whites.

Now he’s acting just as he did as a state and later US senator - partisan, divisive, and oblivious to the real world concerns of most Americans. Our nursery pals and the rest invented a candidate. If Caddell and Schoen think Obama is listening, they repeat that mistake.

This is not about what is best for the country for goodness sake; it is about what is best for Obama. Where in his writings, his partisan voting record, his past associations or even his family background is it that he or his family ever maintained the interests of the United States as a priority? (See our Mischief of Nov/3 for more on that).

Background: To Obama, the United States is an unsavory institution. We noted family earlier because most agree family has formative dimensions. We know that his dad, a perennially drunk polygamist, was a hater of the West because he said so. We know that his mom while in Indonesia prevented BO from associating with other Americans as these were, “not my people.” Correct. Her people were the hate-America types, socialists, Marxists, the same crew BO chose to pal around with in his later years, his adult life. From Janice Shaw: “America’s supposed decline....is for our president — in accordance with all he was taught by his hate-mongering pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright — a matter of the 'chickens coming home to roost.'"

Do Caddell and Schoen really think this guy is going to do what is best for America? Probably not.



Robert Craven

An Education - At Our Expense

Obama laid waste to our economy. He tanked US prestige in the international community. There is no forgiving that.

BO experimented domestically at our expense, aiming to level the meritocracy he regards as offensive.

Next, he ignored fiscal lessons learned long ago. Even Europe looks sober in light of Obama’s recent binge.

Now we see the headline - “Obama To Be Back On Top.” What’s that mean? So now that he’s the last guy on the block to catch on and maybe apes Clinton, we should forgive him? Never. We want his transgressions to plague him every single day of his remaining term and we want him tossed to the dogs come 2012.

So it’s ok for him to waste two years? Water’s wet in the real world. For two years he tried to prove otherwise, the abstract. Now that he may come to agree, we should celebrate?

Are we here simply to provide therapy for BO so that he may prosper? Is all this really just about one guy? Sacrifice the country so that one half-black guy can achieve fame, so that guilty lefties can feel better about themselves?



Obama is without a sense of either history or economics yet was set free by swooning coeds and nursery types to have his way, to mold as he thought fit a country and a people and enterprises with whom in fact he has very little in common. That, compounded by his chronic lack of judgement explains why he so dangerous.

He is naive, even childish, a product of the faculty lounge. For example, from Vic Hansen, “Obama seems to think that making money is a casual enterprise, not nearly so difficult as community organizing, and without the intellectual rigor of academia — as if profits leap out of the head of Zeus.”

Then offshore, following the example set by his father Obama promotes American guilt at every stop; again parroting his father, he’s a paladin for anticolonialism, lecturing the Western powers that they prosper on the backs of others.

And now after seeing their party murdered, most Dems hope BO will abandon his adolescent ways, that is, the ways of the progressive, the looniest of this bunch. We have predicted that won’t happen and why and we darn sure hope we’re right. We don’t want to see BO move to center for goodness sake. We’ve already had to pay a heck of a price. Why pay for his education? We want to see BO and his wife and all of her 22 assistants (who cost us $900M annually) get the boot.

We’re told that we don’t have to respect the individual but always respect the office. This guy’s making that out to be a chore.

Robert Craven

Handicapped - Race and the Economy

The past two years the Democrats have ministered to the US economy pretty much as they practice their race policy, pretty much as they minister to the blacks. Blacks are treated as a population somehow handicapped, disadvantaged, and key - in need of gov’t guidance and support. A few fall for this nonsense; this serves the party purposes quite nicely. (This stealth approach is at variance with earlier Democratic policy. Then, slavery was actually part of the party platform. At least these folk were honest, cretins to be sure but honest.)

Obama and crew predictably treated the US economy in similar fashion, in doctrinaire style - as if it were handicapped. Everything done by the majority past two years is a perfect fit.

First, the economy was visited by a crisis, this the result of Dem malfeasance regarding supervision of the twins, the discharging of prudence in mortgage origination. The purpose - to buy black votes.

Next, a resuscitation was hampered by the same policy the Dem’s apply to race, and with the same result. It amounts to nothing more than an intrusion, a lack of respect for sake of politics. The party has no decency. Set upon by BO and his type, reminded of (manufactured) handicaps, burdened by layer up layer of interference, and layer upon layer of uncertainty, the economy struggles (or did).

Gov’t spending does not create jobs on net, does not and never has reduced unemployment, at best acts as a wash, at worst a retardant. Some of us knew that early on; all but the most willfully blind know it now. Special privileges, quotas and bureaucratic interference in matters of race - the same result. Both sound great but never work. Money thrown at bigger and better public schools in the ghetto for example might as well be destined for the outhouse.

So a recovery has been thwarted by the left. To simply stand aside, lower taxes and hold on - no way, a violation of party identity, and for BO, an erosion of his political base.


Yet BO’s accomplices cannot stand still, even now. The Fed, having no fear of inflation is buying billions of US debt in an attempt to fire the system (the money comes from..... right - out of thin air). This is again simply interference. Still lower real interest rates in the US will deplete the incomes of savers and pensioners but do little to spark growth, not now. We know the Fed so we know this cute little trick will make little difference to a recovery but it will create distortions, $ moves for example, perhaps higher commodity prices, and perhaps stagflation to boot. Such a waste.

Renew the tax cuts, remove employer uncertainty and you have it - vigor. Simple. Yet such a common sense approach is nothing less than an apostasy to those scoundrels who traffic in the fraud that things are just so, so difficult, so complex that only they, the anointed, carry the wisdom and grace to deliver; it is only they who can provide salvation.

These misfits are soon to be gone. This is why we are optimistic for 2011 and beyond.

Robert Craven

My Son-In-Law

My son-in-law arrived tonight, to Savannah, safe and sound; my daughter Kim and granddaughter Reagan were there to meet him - Carter, an Apache pilot, sent to Afg to protect our ground forces, to escort our medivacs, to rain utter destruction upon those hell bent to destroy us.

It’s very simple, but made out by those who quail at confrontation, as does Obama, to be just so, so complex.

There is a so-called “religion” which calls for the re-ordering of the civilized world, at gun-point if necessary. Not just extremists, all of them, the whole shebang - that’s their anchor (and a pedophilic butcher is their prophet). That would be the muslims.

From an inheritance linked to the dark ages these individuals have inconvenienced all of us. For most of us it means a longer wait at the airport; for my son-in-law, a life-and-death struggle every single day, every single mission. He’s seen these misanthropes join funeral processions to obtain cover; he’s seen them force innocents to take bullets that they might be saved.

And how does he return to this Dear Country? With a great disgust for Obama and his ritual of appeasement; with a disgust for the sanitized rules of combat which not only endangered him and his comrades, but profoundly handicap our efforts there.

Robert Craven

Mischief

In Forbes, Dinesh D’Sousa, pres of Kings College, NYC writes of a, “... philandering, inebriated African socialist who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, (who) is now setting the nation's agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son.” D’Sousa reflects on dad Obama and his campaign against colonialism; the US being the only superpower, that must now mean us and our prospering on the backs of others. And indeed, Obama junior’s actions do seem to fit - the tearing down of American greatness, the obsequious posturing to thugs offshore. D’Sousa continues, “A anticolonialist believes that since the rich have prospered at the expense of others, their wealth doesn't really belong to them; therefore whatever can be extracted from them is automatically just. Recall what Obama Sr. said in his 1965 paper: There is no tax rate too high, and even a 100% rate is justified under certain circumstances.” BO’s tax policy!

Well, likely Dinesh has something. His central point is that at first dad Obama appears a strange choice for the inspirational hero BO repeatedly claims him to be, until one understands that it was dad’s ravings about the cause of anticolonialism that provided the inspiration. It’s certainly not dad’s character or family values, which are down right scary, actually tabloid. This polygamist was a habitual drunk driver who murdered a man in one accident, severed his own legs in another and finally smacked into a tree, thus ending his fine career, which included wife beating. One of BO’s half brothers, also a polygamist and 52, just married a 19 yr old, nearly putting Jerry Lee to shame. We could go on with the fun, but won’t.

So yes, “In the anticolonial view, America is now the rogue elephant that subjugates and tramples the people of the world.” Seems a fit with Obama Jr.

Before encountering the D’Sousa article this pm we had earlier pondered what might be the key giveaway to BO’s real intent, his domestic agenda (taking the flip side of D’Sousa’s piece). We arrived at one single sentence, uttered by Obama Apr/29/10. Most we are sure recall the comment - “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.” This statement got a good deal of press early on but it was mostly surface feeding. In fact we believe it is this sentence that telegraphs more about BO’s corrosive intent on American greatness, about his role as he sees it than an other single clue. Dinesh may agree.

These words my friends can only belong to a committed planner. We know from history (and China, India and half of S America from experience) that planned societies fail. They fail because no one single individual can be that smart. And even if he were, he’s human, thus has pals and enemies. Planning fails because planning involves decision making to arbitrarily exclude some and include or reward others. It follows that power over individual freedoms is gathered in the planning office. It always begins in benign form (ex., BO’s health heist) and ends in more execrable form such as communism or fascism. In fact, Hitler began this journey through national health care.

There can be only one final outcome of a planned society - a police state.

From Hayek’s The Road To Serfdom we read that, “In Germany and Italy the Nazis and Fascists did, indeed, not have much to invent. The usages of the new political movements which pervaded all aspects of life had in both countries already been introduced by the socialists. The idea of a political party which embraces all activities of the individual from the cradle to the grave, which claims to guide his views on everything, and which delights in making all problems questions of the party was first put into practice by the socialists.”


We know, we know, “no way in the US,” you say. But in fact there is a way and it is Obama. The statement, “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money,” is chilling in its implications and a perfect fit to behavior described by Hayek. One individual, seemingly ordained by some greater power to decide just when and to where you are to redirect your income stream. That is, he knows and you don’t what is good for you. He will make that decision. This is how this guy thinks folks! Ponder this for a moment. We don’t know for sure if it’s due to his old man’s inspiration but it’s there and it’s poison.

Earlier such a thing has resided in America only in the abstract, in faculty rooms or at the nursery, never operational. It now resides in substantive form in the White House, diluted perhaps by events of Nov/2 but still potent and dangerous.

Robert Craven

WRONG

Josiah Whitney was chief of the CA Geological Survey from 1860 - 1874. Whitney maintained that Yosemite Valley was created by a cataclysmic sinking of the valley floor. John Muir maintained that the valley was carved by glacial action. Whitney derided Muir as an “ignoramus” and a “mere sheepherder.” Whitney's survey reports suppressed evidence of glaciers, and he never abandoned his viewpoint despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Whitney was more than stubborn and wrong, he was vindictive and a slanderer.

What we witnessed tonight was a similar refutation of an earlier mistaken view. As was Whitney, how could so many be so obviously wrong for so long? Easy. They were at half traction until two years ago. The nursery types, the far left, were never before held accountable, their dogma never closely examined. Suddenly it gained footage. Next were the repercussions. This is what gagged most Americans, exposing the lie.

Muir first, then most other grounded observers saw the fraud of Whitney’s argument. But to admit to a failed career? Whitney could not summon the courage. Nor can our lefty friends. Instead, as did Whitney they strike out.

Too bad. They will remain for years to come only outliers, ignored, bitter and forgotten.

Robert Craven