BUSH Wasn't The Problem......

......and OBAMA sure isn't the solution!  Here is the hard truth. Islamist extremists didn't hate America because of Bush. They hated Bush because of America. And now they hate Obama, because of America.

If ever a US president was going to garner goodwill in the Muslim world it was surely going to be Barack Hussein Obama, with his Kenyan father, his post-colonial consciousness, his years of childhood in Muslim Indonesia, his eloquence on racial issues and the global pop star vibe he generated. He made every conceivable effort in making overtures to the Muslim world. He tiptoed around Iranian sensibilities, extended an open hand to the ayatollahs, refrained even from voicing andy criticism when they stole the election and even when they shot, killed and arrested the young Iranians protesting this outrage.

In Cairo Obama made an eloquent plea for reconciliation between the Muslim world and America. He beat up on Israel, even at one point refusing to be seen in public with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and he made an elaborate bow to a Saudi royal. But none of it won anything from the Middle East. It may be that Bush overestimated what hard power could achieve. But in his first year in office, Obama certainly overestimated what soft power, and his own personality and eloquence, could achieve. We have seen the Left's loss of innocence in the Middle East.

Now we have witnessed the sovereign US territory being breached and US interests are burned and killed. And what is the official response? One administration denunciation after another -- of a movie trailer! There is ample evidence now that Obama's administration has screwed up. The Wall Street Journal was the first and only paper, presently, to report what the government refused to tell the American people fr the past two weeks:
          The deadly assault on a US diplomatic mission in Libya on Sept. 11 was preceded by a succession of security lapses and misjudgments, compounded by fog-of-battle decisions, that raise questions about whether the scope of the tragedy could have been contained.
          US officials issued alerts and ordered security precautions in Egypt ahead of protests and violence on Sept 11, but largely overlooked the possibility of trouble at other diplomatic postings in the region.  The State Department sent out a memo 5 days before 9-11 announcing no credible security threats and chose to maintain only limited security in Benghazi despite months of sporadic attacks there on US and other Western missions. (NOTE) In fact, last week the Overseas Security Advisory Council, who posted the damning memo, took it off their website.

This is scandal of the first order, which in any unbiased media environment would be the biggest story of the year and reason to demand a full explanation from the White House. Did Obama (who only attends 38% of National Security Briefings) and his advisers incorrectly assess the ongoing threat of jihadists, lack sufficient intelligence on the ground in Libya (after chest-thumping about our leading-from-behind strategy in the war) and fail to grasp that blaming a video is only feeding into the twisted mentality of the jihadists (i.e., the West is to blame for violence)?

The administration, either be mendacity or incompetence, put out a false story of the attacks. For more than a week the White House press secretary, Jay Carney, the ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice (above), and Obama told Americans this was about an anti-Muslim video, was spontaneous and did not reflect on the United States or its policies. Then last Saturday, as lawmakers were decrying this as patently false the White House changed its tune. Jay Carney, for the first time used "terrorist'' in connection with the attack. And the president for the first time conceded that the video was a pretext to attack US interests overseas that killed the US ambassador and three other Americans.

''This is a cover-up,'' explains  Rep. Peter King, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, who has demanded the resignation of Susan Rice, ''because her lying explanation on every news and talk show was a failure of foreign policy message and leadership and such a misstatement of facts that I believe she should resign.''  GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney also accused the government of being dishonest. ''I think it's pretty clear that haven't wanted to level with the American people. We expected candor from the president and that transparency he bragged about when he was elected.''   Former New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani, commented that ''this is worst kind of cover-up: the kind that involves our national security. This is a cover-up that involves the slaughter of four innocent Americans." 

The Way I See It....we are seeing the consequences of Obama's empty-chair management style. Right now Americans don't have a President. They have a candidate. He's become the campaigner-in-chief, not the commander-in-chief. It's really a shame. The world is in turmoil. Every night, when Americans watch television, they see the failure of Obama's policies in the Middle East -- his naive approach to Islamic extremist terrorism, that many of us have been warning about for a very long time. But the conduct of the Administration after the attacks is nothing less than a world-class scandal. President Obama has deep, difficult questions to answer about this deliberate cover-up and the political motivations behind it.

I suspect it's because Obama and his cronies have this narrative that they defeated al-Qaeda. They never say the words "Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorism.''  They want to wish it away. President was turning his attention to Asia -- he was going to declare this great victory for himself, and unfortunately, this terrible act of terror intervened in their very convenient narrative. ''This turning into something not short of Benghazi-gate.'' said Democratic Senator, John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee expressing his committee's dissatisfaction with the administration's response to inquires about the attacks. Do Americans really want four more years of this Amateur???

In further news:  On Sept 14, fewer than two dozen inbred, illiterate goatherds pulled off the biggest single destruction of US air power since the Tet Offensive in 1968, breaking into Camp Bastion (an unfortunate choice of name) in Afghanistan, killing Lieutenant-Colonel Chrisopher Raible, and blowing up a squadron's worth of Harriers. And even though it was the third international humiliation for the United States in many days, it didn't even make the papers. It's because the Court Eunuchs at the media are too busy drooling over Obama's appearance as what he calls ''eye candy'' on the couch between Barbara and Whoopi. He's not doing the job of president and it's part of why every thinking person ought to be opposed to his re-election.

ISLAM: The Religion-of-Permanent-Offense !

President Obama's speech at the U.N. General Assembly yesterday referred to ''a crude and disgusting video that sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.''  It's unfortunate that the president, as the leader of largest democratic country in the world, instead of standing up for free speech (guaranteed in the First Amendment), ends up once again apologizing for what was an excuse to attack American interests. If he had any commitment to America's Constitution and the rights bestowed on non-Muslim citizens in the rest of the world.....he might have gotten his inspiration from political commentator, Pat Condell, and have the anger and conviction to say this:

Once again....we see why Islam is as welcome on this planet as an asteroid. We in the civilised world are urged to censor ourselves out of respect for a religion that violates the human rights of half the people on the planet and doubles as a political ideology, indistinguishable from Nazism. It would be funny if it wasn't so obscene. To call these riots as infantile and imbecilic is to give them a dignity that they don't deserve.

Let me get this straight: we're supposed to show tolerance and respect for a religion that doesn't know the meaning of either word and goes out of its way to prove it everyday. We're supposed to amend our values to accommodate a religion that accommodates nothing and nobody. Dream on people! With Islam it is always a ONE WAY street. We've become very weary of manufactured Islamic grievances. It's such a bore when we hear some bearded mullah or some bag-headed buffoon telling us how offended they are. When the Turkish Prime Minister hilariously demands that Islamophobia now be made a crime against humanity we can show him the evidence that Islam is a crime against humanity. And now the Egyptian president is calling for freedom of speech restrictions at the U.N. and showing that stupidity is catching.

When Muslims start showing the same level of outrage about things that are generally offensive, like the massacres in Syria, the thousands of women and girls who are murdered and raped every year in their countries, then we in the West might take them a bit more seriously. Indeed, there is something comical about it being so contrived and cringingly unself-aware that it's impossible to take anything seriously. As it is, there is nothing on this planet less deserving of sympathy or respect then Muslim outrage. It would be a blessing for the whole world if Islamists could rise to the highest form of humanity by emulating the words attributed to Voltaire when he said, ''I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'' 

There was a time when Islam was given the benefit of the doubt by many people in the West, now we think its poison. We wish we never heard of it, because 20 years of baseless grievance mongering and knee-jerk offense has shown us this religion for what it really is and now we don't like it, we don't trust it and we're never going to respect it and we don't care anymore how Muslims feel about that. Everything's an insult to this religion, everything causes offense, nobody gives a damn people....you've done it to death, you killed the goose that laid the golden egg of dignity.

If you think that if you keep up the violence, the West would eventually cave in, it's not going to happen on my watch!  Even if some ass-kissing politicians want to, the people won't allow it, we'll carry on, speaking our minds, openly, freely and because it is our birthright. This can't be taken away from us, it can only be given away -- and we're giving Islam nothing, because Islam gives us nothing -- it's a religion permanently on the take.  Gimme, gimme respect...even though I never earned it. Gimme special treatment or I'll be offended and you'll be called a racist. We're sick and tired of hearing it, sick and tired of the needless conflict and intimidation that comes from this religion at every turn.

For the past two weeks now we've heard from Muslims telling us that we in the West need to understand how important the Prophet is them. We do understand and we don't care, that's the point, we don't care now and we are never going to care. Come out of that medieval cloud you've been under for the past 600 years.  We got rid of the ritual burning and beheading of blaspheming heretics once we separated our church from state business also 600 years ago. It's time you caught up. No amount of violence is going to change anything. The more you riot, scream and shout, the less we are going to listen, it'll simply stiffens our resolve, not to be bullied or pushed around by people whose values we don't respect since you give us no reason to respect them, that's because you are incapable of giving us such a reason.

The Way I See It....the Truth can sound like an insult when you are not used to hearing it. I am sick of the Muslim world's belief in one-way-multiculturalism, under which Islam expands in the West but Christianity and Judaism shrivel inexorably in the Middle East, Pakistan and elsewhere.  We will not be taught what we can and cannot say, no matter how many flags are burned, no matter how many embassies are attacked. Free Speech will prevail as long as Western leaders have the guts to tell the Islamist radicals that they'll have to suck it up if they're going to live in a Modern World......better yet, get real and GROW UP!  That goes for Barack Obama as well.

THE VIEW: Of What You Can Expect !

This week he did it again...this president who has failed so spectacularly! While the world's leaders are meeting in New York for the United Nations summit, and what does Barack Obama do?  No, not schedule a one-on-one meeting with a single one of those leaders -- not even as US embassies are under siege from Muslim mobs in a dozen countries.  NO...he slips off to film a vote-for-me-me-me chat with the leftist ladies of the TV chat show The View. ''I'm just Eye-candy here,'' he glowed, as the girls were wetting themselves as they sat next to him.......and never has he spoken the truth so loudly.

Obama was the president who was chosen four years ago not for what he'd done or promised, but for what he seemed. He was above all eye-candy because he was black but talked kind-of white. He could get almost every black vote - 95% - yet still seem non-threatening to whites. In fact, whites got an instant reward for voting for him - confirmation of their virtue and the broadness of their mind. So good did the Left feel in backing him that the Nobel judges even gave him their Peace Prize, although he'd been in office just 12 days and never accomphished any peace intuitive.

The media, likewise drawn to his ambiguous symbolism and soaring rhetoric adored him and largely protect him still, even though his failures are become dangerously manifest, at home and in the Middle East. It is hard to overstate how great that failure is. So much of Obama's presidency has been a story of grand plans crumbling upon contact with the real world. I recommend that you read the book, The Amateur, by Edward Klein, as spells it out in vivid detail what I'm saying.

Judge it, for instance, from Obama's megalomanical boast after securing the Democratic nomination in 2008: ''I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless. This is the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation....'' Let's ignore that planet-healing nuttiness. Maybe Barack was just excited on the night. Even Michelle was so excited that she admitted that it was the first time she had ever felt proud of America. What a lovely couple.

His broken promise on jobs is the real tragedy, because there are more jobless today than when Obama became president.  I remember seeing rows of black women at one of his campaign rallies chanting ''OBAMA, OBAMA he's going to take care of us!!''  Unemployment is down from its peak but still is at 8.1 %, while black unemployment has since gone from 13.5% to 15%. He sure took care of them. It would be far worse still if another 4 million people hadn't given up completely on work.

The truth is, Obama's huge stimulus spending in 2009 flopped, creating only a fraction of the expected jobs but paid off handsomely for his friends, big donators and the Unions at the nationalized General Motors company. He added another $830 billion to a national debt that under this "drunken sailor'' has soared 60% -- to a frightening $16 trillion and rising. His recent ''sermon'' to the Democratic National Convention saw him whining that he inherited the economic crisis from Bush and he wants more time "to fix it.'' Sonorous promises and sermons of hope, all made stupid by a scary, hard world. Eye-candy melting in the hot sun of reality.

How scarily clear that has become to the rest of the world these past weeks. Remember when Obama became president, he cast himself as a war-ender - a man who by revealing his golden heart would charm America's enemies into laying down their weapons. He famously ''reached out'' to the resentful Muslim world in a speech at Cairo's Al-Azhar University in 2009: ''I consider part of my responsibilities as President to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam where ever they appear.''
That a US president should be an apologist for a medieval faith is bizarre, especially when that faith's tenets are so at odds with the freedoms preached in his own country. But that Obama should imply the fury against the US was best calmed by grovelling and smiling harder, as if the US were at fault, is as mad as it is dangerous.

The Way I See It....Obama has achieved nothing by bowing deeply to the Saudi king, snubbing Israel's prime minister, disparaging Bush's liberation of Iraq and even referring this week to Israel as merely one of our closest allies in the region. (''One of?''  Which of Israel neighbors could be closer...you idiot?)  All Obama has done is legitimise self-excusing conspiracy theories that the cause of the dishonourable weakness of so many Muslim nations is not their own crap culture but a lack of respect from the malevolent West.

And see where that's got him these past few weeks. American embassies and facilities in Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and even Greece have now been besieged by Muslim mobs furious about some stupidly made YouTube film clip. Yet still Obama persist with that eye-candy stuff, making excuses, asking for admiration. He and Hilliary Clinton dutifully damned the Innocence of Muslims YouTube clip, rather than full-bloodedly defending freedom of speech. More amazingly, his officials even blamed the video for inspiring a planned assault on September 11 by a pro-al-Qaeda militia on the American consulate -- an attack that killed the American ambassador.

Blaming Americans for even an al-Qaeda hit to mark September 11?  Shame on you!  And in an interview in last week's 60 Minutes program, he described the riotous uproar in the Middle East as merely "bumps in road'' that have to be endured.  Shame on you again! I didn't realize eye-candy could be quite so poisonous!  Or...alas, so popular.  Time to kick this excuse for a world leader out of his job in November.

The OBAMA You Don't Know: Slumlord Defender

Writing in his 1995 autobiography, ''Dreams of my Father,'' Barack Obama said he became ''a civil rights lawyer'' because ''to lend meaning to a community's suffering and take part in its healing -- that required something more.''  There was indeed something more to Obama's legal career, but it wasn't civil rights litigation at the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnill & Galland, where he was employed for a decade. Most of the entries on Obama's client list for the firm were in real estate, construction and finance.

In March 1994, a year before ''Dreams" was published, Obama was the lead defense attorney on an obscure case in Cook County Court that has heretofore escaped examination by the national media. In this case, Obama defended the Chicago slumlord and powerful political ally who was charged with a long list of offenses against poor black residents. The defendant was the Woodlawn Preservation & Investment Corp., controlled by Bishop Arthur Brazier, a South Side black preacher and political operator. (See photo of this hypocrite)

Brazier, who liked to brag that he was a tireless advocate for the Woodlawn neighborhood, had a burgeoning real estate empire including the low-income housing project at 6223 South University. Today MapQuest describes the Woodlawn area as ''quaint and sedate.'' But in the winter of 1994, it was a frigid hell. Bishop Brazier was closely allied with Obama and his firm, not least because partner Davis was on WPICs Board of Directors. It was Davis that received the summons when the city filed suit on the South University apartments. The charges were shocking!

Brazier's WPIC had failed for nearly a month to supply heat and running water for the complex's 15 crumbing apartments. On Jan. 18, 1994, the day the heat went off, Chicago high temperature was 11 BELOW zero, the day after it was 19 degrees below!  Even worse, the residents were then ordered to leave the complex in the winter chill without the due process they would have been afforded by an eviction procedure. The commissioner of Chicago's Buildings Department slammed WPIC for multiple code violations, including ''failure to maintain adequate heat for every family,'' and ''failure to provide adequate supplies of hot or cold running water.''

Things were so bad that the city's outraged council declared that ''the levying of a fine is not adequate'' and asked the court for a permanent injunction against WPIC, appoint a receiver and impose a lien to pay for repairs and court costs. But Obama did his work so well that in the end, on March 3, 1994, the court simply fined WPIC $50! Only then did Obama tell the court of the forcible removal of the tenants in the bitter cold. A lawyer, who currently works for the city, termed this forcible removal in the frigid Chicago winter ''outrageous'' and said it looked like ''a way to avoid a lengthy eviction process by law. And if the tenants had leases, they should have been bought out with a cash payment in return for leaving the premises early.''

Obama also helped negotiate a real estate deal where the South University apartments became part of a syndication. Brazier remained as the controlling general partner, while the syndicated investors became limited partners. A housing expert with direct knowledge of WPICs real estate dealings told the Washington Examiner that the syndication deal involving the apartments likely was being negotiated when the build lost heat. ''The property was one of five that was bundled together into a partnership and syndicated with tax credits.''  Getting rid of the tenants was the ''prelude to being put into the partnership, which ultimately was for refinancing and syndication.''

The WPIC case illustrates how Obama functioned at the centre of a historic accommodation then developing between the Daley machine and its traditional opponents among the city's liberal reformers. Lubricating the deal was a flood of public, state and federal tax credits and funding for low-income housing projects that would enrich developers and empower ambitious politicians like Obama at the expense of taxpayers and, especially, the poor black people.

Brazier was not merely an Obama legal client, he was a brother-in-arms.. A disciple of Chicago's infamous radical activist, Saul Alinsky (see previous posts), Brazier was also a close political ally of Daley's and one of the key movers and shakers among the city's progressive (commie) political elite who in years ahead would advance Obama at every turn. Obama continued to do legal work with Brazier involving the establishment of four limited partnerships with a crooked developer named Tony Rezko. When Obama became a Senator, he was a champion for pushing for government subsidies targeted directly at Rezko's businesses. Their 15 year relationship is much reported and little understood. Over that time Mr. Rezko continued the corrupt tradition of making faulty apartments for the poor and was finally stopped. Good old Tony is now serving, from 2008, a 10-year federal prison sentence for fraud and attempted bribery on state government contracts.

The Way I See It....Obama surrounded himself with people who got rich on Chicago's $1.6 billion neighborhood demolition program known officially as the Plan for Transformation. Robert Stark, director of Harold Washington Institute for Policy Studies, says, ''When you're talking about demolition of housing, there was a great deal of controversy because the evicted poor people were not given the opportunity to come back to the housing that replaced the demolished housing.'' At least 25,000 low-income apartments in were destroyed under the program, which forced thousands of poor black families -- many of whom lived in Obama's state Senate district -- to move out of the city. Obama's political allies directed the effort without one word of complaint from him.

''What we see is that the Chicago core of the Obama coalition is made up of blacks who've moved up by moving poor blacks out of the community,'' stated the late Robert Finch, freelance journalist. He claims that Obama sold out to a corrupt Chicago establishment."Obama's political base comes primary from Chicago FIRE -- the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate industry. It's also true that key black members of the Obama inner circle (now in the White House) are Daley administration alumni, but they moved up as Obama did.'' Finch singled out Obama's most trusted aide, Valarie Jarrett (see previous postings) as one who stood out among those who made fortunes as real estate operators. Jarrett once worked for Mayor Daley, then later became CEO of the Habitat Co., one of the city's largest real estate development firms. "These political insiders became wealthy while cloaking themselves as reformers. They are people who wear halos when in fact they are predators." Finch summarised, ''I don't think this tiger will ever change his spots now that he has even more power.''

The Jewish Problem With Obama !

Jews  earn  like  Episcopalians  and  vote  like  Puerto  Ricans.
-Milton Himmelfarb

What is it with many American Jews and their blind commitment to the Democrats and their amateur president that insults Israel and its leader, Benjamin Netanyahu. Do I have to remind these very same people what we all overheard Obama replying to Sarkozy's remark at a conference in Europe, ''I can't stand him. He's a liar." by saying back ''You're sick of him? I have to work with him every day.''

The publication of Obama's impolitic comment provided a window into the president's true feelings about ''Bibi'' and his right-of-center government. Obama entered office with the professed goal of bringing about an independent Palestinian state before the end of his first term, and force the Jewish state to resolve the problem.  He blamed Netanyahu, rather than his own misguided policies and the pitfalls of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, for preventing him from reaching that objective.

Just six months before, Obama had set off a firestorm by calling upon the Jewish state to accept its 1967 borders, with agreed upon land swaps, as a basis for resuming negotiations with the Palestinians. Along with Jews everywhere, Netanyahu was shocked and appalled by Obama's display of rank amateurism in the art of diplomatic negotiations.  Like previous prime ministers, Netanyahu was prepared to negotiate on the basis of the 1967 borders, but he wasn't so naive that he would give away that key point without demanding that the Palestinians first agree to recognize the legitimacy of the state of Israel. One wonders what's in store for Israel if Obama gets re-elected.

This and further episodes of Obama's cold-shoulder to Bibi and roughhouse treatment of Israel should cause serious consequences for Obama's relations with the American Jewish community. Among the many factors driving down Obama's numbers among Jewish voters was the president's hostile attitude toward businessmen in general and also his past associations with the anti-Semitic Reverend Jeremiah Wright and the Israel-bashing Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi. As this year's presidential election drew near, Obama backed off from some of his public assaults on Israel and hired a Jewish outreach director to smooth over hurt feelings. How long that will last if he gets back in the White House is anyone's guess.

After decades of involvement in civil rights, Jews felt good about voting for Obama, for not only for a guy they liked but for their own personal redemption. To many Jews, it seemed highly improbable that this guy they liked would chose to alienate Israel, America's oldest and most loyal ally in the Middle East. But when President Obama made his first overseas trip, he chose to visit three Muslim countries--Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia (where he shockingly bowed to the King!). During a landmark speech in Cairo, he announced his intention to seek ''a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world.''

Understandably enough, American Jews were annoyed that the president had failed to include Israel in his Mideast visitations. What rankled them even more was that Obama seemed to adopt the Arab narrative to explain the existence of Israel--namely, that Israel was created because of past Jewish suffering in Europe, particularly during the Holocaust. Nowhere in his speech did he mention the fact that Jews had a 3,000 year long history in the Promised Land.  It slowly was becoming clear to his Jewish supporters that the inexperienced Obama had once again overplayed his hand. In part, the president had allowed himself to be influenced by the growing volume of anti-Israel anger coming from the left-wing of the Democratic Party, especially from radical students on campuses, where calls for the ''delegitimization'' of the Jewish state were almost de rigueur.

A perception began to spread throughout the Jewish community that the Obama administration was not only outwardly hostile to Israel, but perhaps, without even knowing it, hostile to Jews as well. This thesis was forcefully argued by Jonathan Kellerman, professor of clinical psychology at the University of Southern California's Keck School of Medicine. He writes, ''The bifurcation of Israel and Judaism is structurally fallacious. The Land of Israel is an essential ingredient of Judaism practiced fully. Thus it is impossible to be anti-Israel and not be anti-Jewish. And in fact, the war being waged against Israel by the Muslim world is, at the core, a religious dispute. Radical Islamists no longer talk about Zionists; they come right out and broadcast their goal of eradicating worldwide Jewry.'' 

The Anti-Defamation League was the first mainstream Jewish organization to openly criticize the president on the issue of the Middle East. Soon, other groups began to join the chorus. However, the great majority of Jews still remained steadfast behind Obama and his administration's liberal (read Socialist/Marxist) agenda. These simple-minded people were not ready to criticize their country's first African-American president, a man in whom they had invested so many of their own hopes and dreams. To answer the criticisms Obama called together Jewish members of Democratic caucuses in the House and Senate and went through a list of reasons for his actions. He finished by saying, ''Our public disagreement with Israel gives us credibility with the Arab states and compels them to act.'' This disturbed those present, namely that by haranguing Israel in public and portraying it as a villain in the peace process, Washington gained credibility and influence with the Arabs. No one in the room believed that to be true. Quite the opposite, they believed that the bad blood between the Obama administration and Israel encouraged the Arabs to be more, not less, intransigent. Which has been very obvious to most people in the world in the past two years.

The Way I See It....Obama doesn't understand that ally-to-ally differences should not be aired in public. He is isolating Israel and putting Israel in a weakened position. The problem is the naivete of Obama and his advisers, including Valerie Jarrett, who made no secret of her close ties to the Jordanian royal family. They came into office with the assumption that the Israel-Palestinian conflict is by far the most central urgent problem in the region (which it is not) and that it is the key that unlocks everything else in the region. So he and his advisers believed the Israeli-Palestinian situation was ripe for progress, which it absolutely wasn't. Even Romney could see that...and said it.

In my opinion, Obama's problem in dealing with the Middle East conundrum doesn't come exclusively from his advisers, but rather from his one-man style and his inflated view of his own leadership talents. Obama believes that no matter what the odds against it, he can bring everyone together, kumbaya style, so that we can solve hitherto insoluble problems.  Perhaps even more egregiously, he seems to have an exaggerated sense of his on depth of understanding of the Middle East, which is simply not borne out by his background or experience. To all the American Jews out there...this week you celebrate Yom Kipper and it was 39 years ago that Israel fought for its life against Arab aggression....why would you even think of voting for a man who, by his various actions in the last 4 years, weakens Israel's existence for his own agenda. Don't be delusional like so many of those Jews in Florida......Get Angry, Get Up and Vote Republican and forget about the Puerto Ricans!

Romney Shouldn't Say ''Sorry'' !

I see the Obama ass-kissing, leftist media in America are enraged at Romney. And the Amateur in the White House is ''shocked!'' at Romney telling the truth about about how the people on welfare, attached to the teat of Obama's socialist government, aren't likely to vote for him and boy, aren't there a lot of them!

The reality is that there are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. And Romney spoke the unmitigated truth when he was at a fundraiser and voiced his appraisal of the true nature of the presidential campaign. He stated; ''There are 47% who are with him, who are dependant upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. These are people who pay no income tax.''

In a one-minute video clip now being touted by those hostile to Romney as a blow to his campaign, it turns out that Romney has the same opinion of Obama's supporters that Obama does, as demonstrated by his campaign's infamous Julia cartoons: Obama, too, thinks his supporters are a bunch of helpless dependents. Welfare was always a winning issue, but it seemed to become moot at the federal level, after Clinton's welfare reform in 1994. Now, as government dependency has skyrocketed during the Age of Obama, it is back on the table. Romney should be ready to recite the dependency numbers at the drop-of-a-hat, especially now that Obama cancelled, last May, the provision to find work as the welfare cheques were going to come for a limited time.

Romney must regularly point out the millions of long-term unemployed, the millions more who have left the labor force, the untold number of young people who never got into the labor force, the one-sixth of Americans on food stamps, an astonishing 8.7 million now on permanent and total disability! Romney shouldn't be at all defensive about the video clip. Whenever he is asked about it, he should say that the most fundamental difference between him and Barack Obama is that he wants people to have jobs and Obama wants them to be dependent on the government....Commie-style. Then he should should reeling off statistics. He should conclude by saying that we need more people paying taxes because they have jobs and fewer collecting benefits because they don't. If he responds aggressively a few times, reporters will stop asking. Far better to pick up the argument and run with it.

The Way I See It....according to the Census Bureau, 49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit. That's up from 30% in the 1980s and 44% in the third quarter f 2008, a recent growth in art attributable to the bad economy of President Obama's first term.

Mr Romney implied that anyone receiving government benefits wouldn't likely be one of his voters. But there's no clear partisan split among the beneficiaries, especially for broad-based federal retirement and health-care programs. He is also correct in stating that nearly half of Americans pay no federal income tax. Roughly half of U.S. households that pay no federal income tax are exempted because of basic provisions such as limitations on tax for low-income earners. The other half benefit from from targeted breaks (known as ''tax expenditures'' such as assistance for the working poor, seniors and for children in moderate income families.  On thing to remember is that Socialism is great.....until you run out of money!  Ask Greece!

The Tyranny of ''Fairness'' !

As with many "skillful polititicians'', Barack Obama mostly conceals his true intentions and beliefs. But on occasion he makes them perfectly clear. As I pointed out in a number of recent postings, Obama is a "dyed-in-the-wool'' Marxist/Socialist with an agenda to change America into what the the Founding Fathers never envisioned and definitely would break their hearts if they were alive today. In 2008, Obama's entire presidential, campaign had been based on themes of national unity, of transcending partisan differences, on a ''red, white and blue America.'' Once elected, the unifying Obama seemed to vanish. Overnight, his rhetoric radically changed.

''We're gonna punish our enemies and were gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.'' Obama told Latino voters in November, 2010 a month before the Tea Party movement decimated the Democratic Congress. That one sentence ''pretty much sums up Obama's entire presidency," Conn Carroll wrote in the Washington Examiner. A fellow jounalist, Michael Barone, coined the term ''gangster government.''   Burton Folsom Jr., professor of history at Hillsdale College wrote a month earlier, referring to Obama's similar attitude to Teddy Roosevelt's speech on progressiveness in 1910, entitled, ''New Nationalism''; which urged greater government control over the economy and punishing any opposition to it.

One of the most deceptive tricks in Obama's rhetorical arsenal is his use of the term economic fairness. A prime example of the progressives' use , in general, of harmless-sounding rhetoric in their advancement of radical objectives, the ''fairness'' derives directly from the Marxist conception of economic justice.  It is used today with great effect on the ignorant citizenry by the many shades of progressives -- communists, socialists, Democratic socialists -- all over the globe.

A year later in December, 2011 it was obvious to anyone who had a brain in their head that the leader of the Free World was up to something. Obama, in a speech in Kansas, soundly denounced capitalism, saying it ''it doesn't work, it has never worked.''  These words of his echoed those of Michigan's Marxist congressman, John Conyers Jr, who a month earlier told a gathering of the Democratic Socialists of America, ''This system, this capitalist system, is broken and may be un-repairable.''  Obama repeatedly invoked fairness. Fairness, as Obama defined it, is ''when everyone engages in fair play and everybody gets a fair shot and everybody does their fair share." (The fairness expressed by Karl Marx was, ''from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.'' ) 

Raising taxes on the wealthy would only be fair, Obama said, since somebody has to pay for ALL of his ''investments" in infrastructure, education, and ''green'' projects, not to mention the expansion of unemployment benefits, of government bureaucracy and the creation of new jobs programs he is pushing. In truth, Obama's progressive conception of fairness is not the Classic Marxist one, for Marx was the prophet of a revolutionary working class. But today's neo-socialist progressives have completely abandoned and betrayed the working class, along with small-business owners, in favour of a welfare class, a lower and middle class ever more dependent on government hand-outs and a progressive, liberal elite. (Selling their Soul to the Devil)

The Way I See It....Barack Obama has abandoned the ''average, middle-class voter and his middle-class values'' and cobbled together an unholy alliance of state dependents, government hangers-on and political elites who claim the knowledge and capacity to run things. (Yeah...right!)  This my dear American friends is the rise of a ''new governing class'' that insists on enforcing political and economic ''fairness'' rather than letting you decent folks govern yourselves. Welcome to Communism 102! The managed quest for fairness inevitably leads to bureaucratic favoritism, inequalities based on special interests and undue political influence to your daily lives.

If there was any doubt before, it is now clear that this cold, calculating anti-American has given up on the center of American politics and doubled down on his socialist governing model. And this tells us everything about where he is coming from and where he wants to go. If you bend to his will you'll be rewarded, but God help you when he comes to punish you if you doubt his vision.

If he not stopped in 7 weeks time, this corrupt and economically unsustainable fairness train will be used to steamroll American citizens for another four (4) years and what will be left of your democracy, at the end of the line, will be unrecognizable!  Heed my warning you Obama Zombies.

An Act of War....Not a Movie Protest !

Forget the free-speech arguments. In this case, in Libya, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton well knows, the film has even less to do with anything than did the Danish cartoons, the Koran-burning pastor or the schoolteacher's teddy bear or any other innumerable grievances of Islam. When the 400-strong assault force in Benghazi showed up with RPGs and mortars at the American consulate; that's not a spontaneous movie protest ; ambassador Chris Stevens and three others died in an act of war.

Much is yet to come out -- much that could be politically embarrassing. According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted. But no warnings were given for diplomats to go on High Alert and Lockdown, under which movement is severely restricted. There is no denying that the consulate's security was horribly inadequate for the 9/11 anniversary, guarded by by Marines with no ammunition, in a city known as a locus of al-Qaeda activity -- local security seems to have consisted of four Libyans, at least one of whom turned coat and betrayed the Americans he was supposed to be protecting.

One thing has become painfully clear: the Administration was utterly blindsided by these attacks.  There is no denying the sheer stupidity, natural torpor and ineptitude of this blundering superpower. It is now known the Barack Obama skipped his intelligence briefings for the week leading up to the attacks...and the day after the national debacle,  but he did have time to do Letterman and appear on a hip-hop radio show and then he had a fundraising in Las Vegas to attend to. Once there he was surrounded by delirious fans screaming "We love you!," too drunk on his celebrity to understand that this is the first photo-op in the aftermath of a national humiliation. The president was too lazy and cocksure to have learned any prepared remarks or mastered the appropriate tone, notwithstanding that his government spends more money than any government in the history of the planet can surely provide him with both a speechwriting team and a quiet corner on his private jet to consider what might be fitting for the occasion. So instead he sloughs off the words, bloodless and unfelt; ''And obviously our hearts are broken...blah blah..''  Yeah, it's totally obvious.

Republican nominee Mitt Romney stated that Obama's foreign policy has diminished America's global standing and emboldened extremists and urged a tough line on Egypt amid deadly anti-US violence in the region. His running mate, Paul Ryan, called for ''greater moral clarity and firmness of purpose in the confident exercise of American influence.''   He added, ''Egypt receives about 1.5 billion a year in assistance. Washington ought to tell that Muslim Brotherhood gang that they must honour its peace treaty with Israel and protect US facilities if it is to keep receiving our aid." And right on cue, Obama gets on TV to say the Romney and Ryan should not politicise this tragic event with their comments. The truth is hard to take...isn't it Barack?

The Obama Administration was big into grovel mode, with Secretary Hillary repeatedly announcing that ''the United State had absolutely nothing to do with this video'' and "we absolutely reject its content and message.'' As if the rioting mobs -- and the shadowy hands guiding their rage -- will suddenly look at each other, decide they've been silly for unfairly venting their anger at innocent American diplomats and embassies and go home! Rebecca Chedid, a member of the Arab-American National Policy Council, explains, "This not about a movie, tectonic plates are shifting and we have no idea what these new governments are building. They hardly know themselves. There is a vacuum of what does it mean to be Libyan, what does it mean to be a progressive Arab or a moderate Islamist. These events represent the first major test on the international stage for the new governments of Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen to navigate the often contradictory demands of global statesmanship and domestic politics. Only time will tell, we must be hopeful and patient."

The Way I See It....a great scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis, said some years ago that America risked being seen as harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend. Just ask Israel what they make of Mr Obama. This president brings a dangerous combination of arrogance and disinterest to the foreign policy table. He's noted for telling his staff he "knows their jobs better than they do.'' He thought he knew foreign affairs better too, but he doesn't and until he woke up on Wednesday morning, he didn't really care. He believed his own press, and thought the stories of Egypt and Libya were over when the media lost interest in them. As with every other aspect of his rank incompetence, he assumes the media can cover everything up and he can keep the polls goosed with a few nice speeches, while the American voter finds it increasingly necessary to turn to British and Israeli newspaper to get the actual news.

Obama's stooges in the American media bought him a couple of days by focusing on Mitt Romney's temerity in criticising the unbelievable disaster they have been trying to hide, but that's over now that Chris Stevens' body is brought home for burial. Perhaps now the court eunuchs of a biased media might stop misleading the American people and would like to take a serious look into some of the fascinating questions of how this happened and let the chips-fall-where-they-may.

NOTE: Meanwhile, in Pakistan, the local doctor who fingered bin Laden to the Americans sits in jail. In other words, while America's clod/buffoon vice-president staggers around, pimping limply that ONLY Obama had the guts to take the toughest decision anyone's ever had to take, the poor schlub who actually did have the guts, who actually took the tough decision in a part of the world where tough decisions can get you killed, languishes in a cell because Washington would not lift a finger to help him.

Obama Re-MOVES Military Voting !

The Obama administration has frequently thanked the U.S. troops deployed around the world for their ''undying" service and loyalty but fails to comply with a law requiring that it help these men on the front lines to cast their ballots in their home states for the up-coming presidential election. Shameful!

This administration has taken various states to court to block voter ID laws on the grounds it will disenfranchise voters. But it has no qualms about the disenfranchisement of military voters overseas through its failure to comply with and enforce the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act , passed by Congress in 2009 and signed into law by President Barack Obama. This law acknowledges the difficulties caused by time and distance for deployed soldiers in exercising the right to vote, a vote they put their lives on the line to protect and defend. One of the key provisions required each military branch to create an Installation Voting Assistance Office (IVAO) for every military base outside an immediate combat zone.

Last week, however, the Pentagon's inspector general reported that attempts to locate and contact IVAO offices at overseas military installations failed about half the time! "Results were clear. Unfortunately, our attempts to contact IVAOs failed about 50% of the time," the inspector general reported. ''We concluded the Services had not established all the IVAOs as intended by the MOVE Act because, among other issues, the funding was not available."  The estimated cost of establishing functioning IVAOs at all overseas military bases not in combat zones is estimated at between $15 million and $20 million a year. Obama and his gang of amateurs wasted $530 million on Solydra Solar but can't afford a relative pittance to ensure the soldiers are not disenfranchised.

An administration that constantly talks about voter disenfranchisement (lead by an ex-community organizer) appears unconcerned that a study by the nonpartisan Military Voters Protection Project found that in 2008 less than 20% of 2.5 million military voters successfully voted by absentee ballot. That scandalous participation rate brought on the MOVE Act in 2009 to make voting easier. So, is there a method in the government's madness, a reason it doesn't want to make it easier for soldiers to vote? It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that John McCain won 54% of the military vote in 2008 or that a May 2012 Gallup poll  showed Mitt Romney pulling 58% to President Obama's paltry 34%.

The law also requires that states mail absentee ballots to their servicemen 45 days before an election so there's enough time to return and count them. The administration showed its true appreciation for military service when on July 17th the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party filed a suit in the swing state to strike down part of a state law governing voting by soldiers that gives them tree (3) extra days to cast their ballots. The Democrats cynically objected that it discriminated against nonmilitary voters. The National Defense Committee, a veterans organization, notes that ''for each of the last four years, the Department of Defense's Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the president and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote."

The Way I See It....Barack Obama and his chief election strategist, David Axelrod, are disciples of that socialist/radical Saul Alinsky and his methods to "Win At Any Cost." Justice is not embodied in the process, justice is assumed to lie in the agenda. The process is just a means of getting their way. Under Alinsky's rules, any tactic (and any lie) is fine as long as it serves the agenda. The ends justify the means. So neutralize any potential treat to take away votes from the president.

''You guys make a pretty good Photo-Op," Obama joked during a 2009 visit to Osan Air Base in South Korea, greeting roughly 1,500 airmen, soldiers, sailors and Marines, many in camouflage, in an airfield hanger.  They also make pretty good voters, and the indifference of their commander-in-chief in ensuring their right and ability to vote is a national disgrace. The lame-stream media ran that photo but has never mentioned that their "beloved leader'', is screwing with the rights of the troops.

The End of the "New Beginning" !

This week President Obama observed the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and declared that "our country is stronger, safer and more respected in the world." However, conservatives have argued that the Obama foreign policy has been feckless and will lead to disaster. They may turn out to be right, but it's no easier an argument to make than the economic case that Obama's policies will produce prosperity anytime soon. After the events of September 11, 2012, the argument is easier to make.

At the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, what appeared to be a genuinely stupid and spontaneous unarmed mob angered by an anti-Islam video said to have been produced in the United States, gathered in protest. Unfortunately, the embassy responded by issuing an apologetic statement:
          The Embassy of the United States condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers in all religions. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.
The mob was not appeased. One might wonder if it was because of that weak-kneed response....that they then stormed the embassy. The Cairo mob taunted the U.S. with a chant: "Obama, Obama there there are still many Osamas!" 

There were many "Osamas" to launch a fatal attack the next day on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. They killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens (who took over just 3 months ago). These jihadist scum were armed with mortars and rocket-propelled grenades. The Times reported, "Intelligence reports suggest the possibility that an organized group had either been waiting for an opportunity to exploit the protests over the video or even generated the protests as a cover for their attack."

Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton quickly apologized for the Cairo apology and made fresh statements saying that "since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, but there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts."  Mitt Romney also denounced the embassy's apology and criticized the administration for sending "mixed messages." He said,  "It's never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and defend our values."

To understand what's wrong with Obama's & Hilliary's statement, consider the statement from George W. Bush in response to rioting over Danish cartoons of Muhammad quoted in The Times: "The Bush administration offered protesters support, saying that 'We find them offensive and we certainly understand why Muslims would find these images offensive.' The State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack said, 'Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images which are routinely published in the Arab press, as well as anti-Christian images.'  Still the United States defended the RIGHT of the Danish and French newspapers to publish the cartoons. 'We vigorously defend the Right of individuals to express points of view.' Mr McCormack added."

You can see that neither the president or Mrs Clinton vigorously, or even limply, defended the Right of Free Speech. They went only so far as to say that the offensive video did not justify violent acts against American diplomats. With that wimpish reply the emboldened spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood had the nerve to say that the U.S. administration should issue a formal apology for the film to the Muslim world, adding that the U.S. government should prosecute the "madmen" whose activities were harming Washington's relations with Arab and Muslim countries.

In his famous 2009 Cairo speech, portentously titled "A New Beginning", President Obama declared:
         I've come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap and share common principles--principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

The Way I See It....as wonderful as justice and progress and tolerance and dignity may be, America's central principles are principles of FREEDOM. America does not -- and constitutionally cannot -- prosecute people because their speech is offensive. "Mutual Respect" requires leaders in the Muslim world to grow-up and understand and accept that modern concept and it requires American leaders with the firm self-respect to make it clear to these archaic people. (I personally would have liked to see every major newspaper editor have the balls to run those cartoons all over the world.)

The idea that a submissive-sounding president could set things right in the medieval-minded Muslim world always struck me as far-fetched. This week's events render it indefensible. This looks like the end of the "New Beginning." and a good time to throw Obama out before he bows, physically or verbally to another foreign leader.

OBAMA: Lucifer is My Homeboy !

By now, if you have followed my recent postings, you realize that Barack Obama could understand and get along with radicals like Frank Marshall Davis, Derrick Bell, Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers and his co-terrorist wife, Bernadine Dohrn because they share similar ideological influences. One of them is Saul Alinsky, a left-wing community organizer who fought to bring jobs and government services to Chicago neighbourhoods until his death in 1972. If there were an American-hater's Mount Rushmore, Saul Alinsky would be on it.

Alinsky's disciples, the very organizers who had worked with the man himself, were the ones who hired Obama as a community organizer in Chicago in 1985. Obama has also trained hundreds of others in Alinsky's dubious methods. Obama would later say that "his years as an organizer gave him the best education of his life." The immensity of Alinsky's influence in Democratic politics is demonstrated by his influence in the lives of the two top Democrats in the White House: Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Alinsky opens his groundbreaking book, Rules for Radicals with this disturbing dedication:
     Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the Establishment and did so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- LUCIFER.

I suppose it could have been worse. He could have dedicated his book to that deadshit George Soros. Even liberals eventually figured out that they shouldn't be praising Satan in public, so the Lucifer-as-inspiration paragraph was purged from subsequent editions so that Alinsky's ideas could be spread more easily among clergymen. That's exactly what happens to most Democrats ideas -- as soon as they are said out load, normal people react with revulsion, so Democrats learn to pretend they never said them; I did not play the race card!  I did not say I would meet with Ahmadinejad without preconditions!

Obama was a master of Alinsky's tactics and understood his philosophy well. Mike Kruglik, a fellow organizer, elaborated, "Obama was the undisputed master agitation.  With probing, sometimes personal questions, he would pinpoint the source of pain, tearing down their egos just enough before dangling the Carrot of Hope that they could make things better." (Sound familiar???) Alinsky urged his followers not to display class hatred toward the middle classes -- at least not overtly. Instead, he offered a narrative of class condescension, which viewed the confused, aimless and pitiable. Obama still today can be caught displaying this same radical condescension to the middle class and businessmen in general.

In this year's presidential campaign, the two sides seem to operate under different sets of rules. The GOP thinks the game runs under standard rules of fair play. Democrats play under Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals." Alinsky's primer can be summed up, "Win At Any Cost." Justice is not embodied i the process. The process is just a means of getting our way. Under these rules, any tactic (and any lie) is fine as long as it serves the agenda. The ends justify the means. Using Alinsky's rules, you don't let the opposition be heard; rather you drown them out. If the population gets only one side of the story that side wins. Diabolical? Yes...remember who he dedicated his book to. In fact, in an interview with Playboy he said, "If there is an afterlife and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to Hell." Playboy: Why?  Alinsky: "Hell would be Heaven for me. All my life I've been with have-nots. If you're a have-not in Hell, you're short of virtue. Once I get there I'll start organizing them.'' Playboy: Why them? Alinsky: "They're my kind of people!''

The Way I See It....Obama's leftist/neoMarxist liberals always seem to be clamoring to rip out some functional necessity of American society so they can replace it with an ill-defined hodgepodge of ideas that they think will shift power their way . Polarization is at the core of the Left's strategy. What's wrong with giving it back to them and point out how hostile the Democratic Party has become to Christianity. Why not point out the truth that most white liberals ("progressives" is the fad word now) are racists who think black Americans are too stupid and incompetent to compete with white Americans, which is why they push Affirmative Action. Why not note that progressives want poor Americans to stay poor and dependent, because as long as they do, they'll keep voting for the handouts from the Democratic Party.

There's are reason Barack Obama bows to foreign leaders, is constantly apologizing for America and attended an anti-white, anti-American church for 20 years. The sad truth is that this cabal of commies in the White House hate and despise the United States. Why do yo think "hope and change" appealed so much to Obama and his Chicago cronies that he made it his theme? When you look at America as evil, racist, unfair, a horrible place to live inhabited by ignorant trash and no-hopers, what else would you do other than hope for change and force it to happen with Socialist ideas and methods. Americans....if you love your country and the values it represents, those people in the White House not only don't share your values, they hold people like you in utter contempt!

A Svengali in a Cabal of Commies !

"The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the people around him" -- Niccolo Machiavelli

If it wasn't for Valarie Jarrett, there would be no Barack Obama to complain about. Jarrett is the Svengali at ground zero in the White House. She is the first couple's first friend and consigliere. Once asked by a reporter if he ran every decision by Jarrett, Obama answered without hesitation: "Yep, Absolutely."  This is why most of Mr. Obama's senior advisers worry that her direct access to the president has at times led to half-baked decision making and unclear lines of authority.   (Photo: David Axelrod and Valarie Jarrett)

Her official title is a mouthful: Senior adviser to the president and chief liaison to the business community, state and local governments and the political left. But it doesn't begin to do justice to her unrivaled status in the White House. Nor does it explain her responsibility, which had gone largely unnoticed by the public, for the sheer incompetence and amateurism that have been the hallmark of Obama's time in office. Behind its "no-drama" facade, the Obama administration has been rocked by major personal shakeups, many chiefs of staff, but Jarrett is still the indispensable person in the mix.

Her influence stems from the fact that Jarrett is the president's trusted watchdog. She protects the vainglorious and thin-skinned Obama from critics  and complainers who might deflate his ego. "Valarie is the quintessential insider,"  one of her few friends explains. ''She functions as the eyes, ears and nose of the president and first lady. She advises them about who they should see when they visit a city or foreign country. She determines who gets invited to the White House and who is left out in the cold."  Jarrett is supposed to be the point person for the administration's efforts to keep it touch with the outside world. However, if you talk with Democratic donors, businessmen, congressmen, and African-Americans, it turns out the Jarrett is far better at giving people that cold shoulder than at welcoming them with open arms. Like Obama, she especially has a fundamental lack of respect for businessmen, even those who were generous donors. I hear they now support Romney.

Valarie Jarrett comes from the top rung of African-American society and Obama -- a man who struggled for years with questions about his black identity and status -- has always been more than a little in awe of Jarrett's pedigree. No minority group is more conscious of social status than blacks. While whites see the black population in the U.S.as monolithic, there are essentially 5 distinct Black Americas: a mainstream middle class; a large minority living in poverty and dysfunction; a small "Transcendent"  elite with enormous power and wealth; individuals of mixed race; and communities of recent black immigrants. Jarrett comes from one of America's most distinguished black families and are in the class of light-skinned "Transcendent" elites and her body language lets you know it.

This black Svengali has spread her tentacles into every nook and cranny of the executive branch of government. She has an all-access pass to meetings she choses to attend: one day she'll show up at a National Security Council meeting; the next day, she'll sit in on a briefing on the federal budget. "Valarie creates fear. Only the people she feels she can control can get in to see the president. She keeps the Obamas off-balance and keeps them coming back to her, so she can say to them, 'I would do anything for you; I would put everything at risk to show you how trustworthy I am.'" says a former high-ranking staffer. Many evenings she's seen slipping upstairs to the Family Quarters where she dines with the Obamas and their two daughters. She is the only member of the White House staff who goes on vacations with them and can call the president by his first name to his face.

As readers of this Blog are aware, I've just published, in August, a posting on Barack Obama's mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. No president in the long history of the American republic has had a mentor like Obama's. Frank Marshall Davis was a literal, and I mean literal, an ardent card-carrying member of the Communist Party all his life. That's bad enough, but what has come to light is shocking to me and should be for all red-blooded, patriiotic Americans! It seems that not only Obama was connected to Frank M. Davis, but the president's two most trusted friends and advisers Valarie Jarrett and David Axelrod, can also trace their political heritage back to Davis and the Chicago Communist Party USA of the 1940's.

The mid-forties found Frank Davis involved in one of the notorious and blatantly communist fronts in the United States: the American Peace Mobilization. With him was a fellow Chicagoan named Robert Taylor. Taylor was the grandfather of Valarie. Both Taylor and Davis would have frequently encountered another politically active Chicagoan, Vernon Jarrett. Vernon Jarrett and Frank Davis worked together in the communist-controlled Packinghouse Workers Union. Vernon would one day become Valarie's father-in-law and have his communist sentiments acknowledged by her.

So, what about David Axelrod (Obama's chief statagist)? Axelrod is a native New Yorker who in the 1970s found himself in Chicago, where he went to college and worked for newspapers as a political journalist. There, Axelrod was mentored by the Canter family, namely David Canter. The Canter family's Soviet/communist roots are deep. They worked with Frank Davis in writing communist propaganda for the Workers Union, in the pages of the Chicago Star and marched in May Day parades. In other words, Barack Obama's political commie ancestor worked with the political commie ancestors of Axelrod and Jarrett. Amazing but true!

The Way I See It....the ghosts of Chicago's political past are alive and well in Washington today. Today's political family at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue can be traced back to the political family of Chicago in the 1940s. Obama sits in that Oval Office today thanks to four factors: an ignorant American voter, a scandalously biased media, a skillful election strategy by David Axelrod and the careful nurturing of Valarie Jarrett.

There is no doubt that Barack Obama was marked out for high office at an early age. It is also undeniable that pro-Soviet communists worked to enable Obama at almost every step of his career. Manchurian Candidate...anyone?

Obama's Top 10 Class Warfare Attacks !

President Obama is putting his community organizing skills to work, using the iconic Socialist slogan of "FORWARD'' for his campaign, and using class warfare techniques to launch an all-out assault on America's job creators and entrepreneurs. Apparently, "Tax Billionaires" is a better rallying cry for his election campaign than "look at my record."  Here is  list, not for the faint of heart, of Obama's class warfare attacks.

1. Attacking Capitalism:  The Obama campaign is trying to make Mitt Romney's work at Bain Capital an issue of the race, bemoaning how jobs were sometimes lost in the restructuring of a company to help it survive. But Mr Obama, that is how capitalism works and it is exactly what you did during the bailout of General Motors when unprofitable divisions were shut down in order to save the larger company. And you gave 66%  ownership to the United Auto Workers.
2. Tax the Rich:  Even as Obama spends the nation into oblivion, he is trying to make the case that taxing the wealthy will solve the country's budget crisis. Even Nancy Pelosi broke with the president saying the Bush tax cuts should be extended. When you've lost to Pelosi, you've lost the argument.
3. Demonize Corporations:  No president has ever gone after the corporate world as Obama has, demonizing the banks, the oil companies, pharmaceuticals and any entity that could actually create jobs. His hypocrisy holds no bounds as he greedily soaks up campaign donations from the ventures he attacks.
4. Biden, the Hit Man:  Gaffe-machine, buffoon, Joe Biden apparently doesn't have much to do as vice president, so why not trot him out as the administration's hit man, where he can sharpen his boss's anti-wealth attacks. Recently, he ranted, "They don't get who we are!" Oh yes we do, Mr Vice President, and that's why we are on the other side.
5. Unleash the Unions:  Big Labor provides the mentally-deficient foot soldiers for Obama's re-election bid and he returns the favour through appointments and policies beneficial to their interests. And don't forget the Service Employees International Union which deploys an army of thugs to attend left-wing rallies and are not adverse to forcibly bullying its opponents.
6. Promote the Occupy Movement:  Obama has lent his moral support to the Occupy Wall Street movement, even as the protests turned violent and the group became infested with criminal activity. He ignored this and kept saying the movement was a reflection of a "broad-based frustration about how our financial system works." Spoken like the Alinsky-styled community organizer that he remains at heart.
7. Spread the Wealth Around:  As candidate Obama famously told Joe-the-Plumber in 2008, he is all about wealth redistribution (spoken as a true Socialist) and since taking office his budgets have piled up trillions of dollars in deficits trying to do just that. Given a second term, this president will increase taxes every which way in order to pay for more social programs for the downtrodden, keeping an increasing number of Americans on the government dole.
8. ObamaCare's "fairness":  The president's healthcare initiative is one big class warfare gambit as he loads up on tax increases in order to subsidize the uninsured. The problem is that it just won't work. Costs continue to rise, businesses will begin to shed their health plans, and longer waits will become normal at the doctor's office. All out of the misguided notion of "fairness."
9. Double-Down:  Even as his amateur efforts and policies have slowed the economic recovery, created few jobs, added trillions to the national debt and put in roadblocks that curtail U.S. energy production, president Obama continues the same misguided efforts. A true Revolutionary never loses sight of the ultimate goal, with the ends justifying the means and two steps forward, one step back. Could it be that some people are right in calling him a Manchurian Candidate?  
10. Overheated Rhetoric:  No class warfare attack could be complete without resorting to over-the-top rhetoric meant to inflame passions rather than to reach a consensus. Barack Obama has become a master of that art, blaming "millionaires and billionaires" for all the nation's woes in nearly every speech he gives. He reached his rhetorical zenith when he tried to portray President Reagan as a "wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior." Most people didn't like him besmirching the most popular president in the last 50 years..

The Way I See It....a curious spector was hovering over the Democratic convention last week. It was the ghost of Frank Marshall Davis, Communist Party USA member and mentor to a young Barack Obama. I have noted in a previous posting of Davis's unceasing class-based rhetoric and class warfare. Those words were echoing throughout the halls of the convention building, especially from the mouth of the man Davis influenced. I am sad to say that Davis's presence will be more profoundly felt by those who have seen the overall leftward drift of the modern Democratic Party over the years.

So many American communists seeing no chance to be elected in their own right, in the early fifties, opted to hitch their wagon to a different star, namely the most viable left leaning party in America: the Democratic Party. Sure that would be a challenge when they encountered old anti-communist Democrats, but overall, they would be patient and they would seek alliances with Democrats much closer to their collectivist thinking. A steady subversion of the Party was on. This began the long march to transform the Democratic Party from the party of Truman and JFK to the party of Nancy Pelosi, Valarie Jarrett, David Axelrod and Barack Obama. God Help America!

Obama, Democrats Living in "'Fantasy Land"

While Michelle Obama was spinning yarns with half-truths to adoring idiots in tears and roaring approval at the Democratic National Convention, President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party spent last week trying to recreate a world that doesn't exist. Republican National Committee chairman, Reince Priebus told me that, "this race is going to come down to some fundamental things: Are people better off today than they were four years ago and did the president fulfill the mission of his presidency? Forget the bullshit excuses and the whinnying that 'I need more time to fix the mess George Bush handed to me.'"  He also added, "People are forgiving and generally filled with a fair amount of grace when it comes to politicians. However, if you can't point to some of your most basic promises and show that the missions have been completed, I can't imagine how anybody's going to go for four more years of this misery. I guess only if you have shit-for-brains!"

Obama's acceptance speech on Thursday conveyed a sort of fantasy-land rendition of where we are in this country -- and it was undone on Friday with the disclosure of the national unemployment rate of 8.1% for August. Only 96,000 jobs were added last month and the overall rate fell from 8.3% in July only because more people stopped looking for work. People who are out of work are counted as unemployed only if they are searching for a job. Priebus elaborates, "What it shows is that the Democrats aren't living on Earth. Only 63.5% of people who are eligible to work are actively looking for work. That's the lowest number in decades. And of that number 8.1% can't find work. Chronic unemployment in America is at a level not seen since the Great Depression. And this is why the president must not be re-elected!"

The next 6o days will no doubt bring out the Democrats and their vile leftist media hacks to couch their rhetoric against Romney and Evans with half-truths and lies. The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto reminds us: ''Obama's journalistic supporters live in a bizarre alternate reality in which a politician's actual words mean nothing. When the president says something foolish and offensive, he didn't say that. Meanwhile every comment from a Republican can be translated, through a process of free association, to: "We don't like black people." It's television manufacturing a virtual reality, which is to say unreality; a dangerous state of affairs.''

Obama is fake, his popularity is fake, but it's also real, because fake is now the ultimate reality. In this fantasy land Obama became a trending topic and everyone followed along through peer pressure.There are many people who are uncomfortable with the way things are and are aware of realities that don't go away when the talking heads begin jabbering about the ideals of Big Government. These are the people who work for a living outside the bubble. When all the bubbles of rhetoric pop, there are still the hard unpleasant realities to deal with. Welfare handouts, bailouts and big money debts can stay buried in them for so long. Government sending money to banks and swapping worthless commodities can only work as long as people believe in them.

Even an unreal economy reported on by an unrealistic media cheering on an unreal leader can only run for so long until reality punches through the illusion, the curtain falls and everyone wakes up to realize that the dream and the fake consensus is over. This is referred to by Professor Glenn Reynolds as the "preference cascade''. He thinks the insanity of the lame-stream media lately is triggered by their sense that a preference cascade is building up in the U.S. which will wash them and their political clients out to sea.

What is a preference cascade? It is a phenomenon that occurs when people  trapped inside a manufactured consensus suddenly realize that many other people share their doubts. In a totalitarian society, the doubter knows that if he speaks up, his will be the lone voice, easily squashed by the enforcers of the regime. When doubters become dissenters and realize they are not alone and the true strength of their numbers becomes apparent, "invincible'' regimes vanish with astonishing speed.

The Way I See It....the same effect can occur without brutal oppression, when fear of ostracism and ridicule cause people to suppress their own doubts. This kind of preference falsification requires strict discipline from the makers of opinion. Since a free society makes it very easy for individuals to change their opinions, they must be prevented from even considering such a change. Manufactured consensus, even laced with lies and half-truths, is very fragile in the competitive arena of ideas, when there is no fearsome penalty to switch. Has the media's manufactured consensus begun unraveling and the cascade beginning?

I see signs of it everywhere. There was the 2010 wipeout of the Democrats in Congress and statehouses. There was the massive consumer Chick-fil-A response to the leftist boycott movement, Obama's campaign staff has had a hard time meeting fund raising goals and filling stands for his appearances. Last week -- expecting a crowd to hear his speech at the DNC convention -- they were even resorting to giving tickets to the event away Free in bars. The cascade is coming and should make our "'dear leader" (oh yes, Saint), sweat for the next 60 days when he can then be shown the Exit door.

Michelle Spins Yarns with Half-Truths !

You learn new things with every election. Before 2008, most of us thought love-of-country was standard equipment on first lady wannabes. Then we met Michelle Obama. She was born in the United States, and her adult life began around 1982. Assuming she wasn't in a quarter-century coma, here are a few things she might have noticed:

1. The space shuttle program and the International Space Station.
2. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the end on the Soviet Union.
3. Our first female Secretary of State.
4. Our first African-American Secretary of State.
5. Hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign aid to dozens of countries.
6. America's effort in stopping the genocide in Bosnia & Croatia.

None of these things managed to trip her pride meter, but when her husband won 64% of the vote in the Virginia primary, Michelle began singing "God Bless America." Before that, she apparently walked around for 26 years wearing a perpetual scowl (yeah, you've seen that scowl). It's a wonder she stayed in the U.S. at all.

Michelle and her minions like to point out that, even though she tells every head of state's wife that "it's Hell living in the White House," she has to ''work twice as hard for half as much," though it's not clear if that is because she is black, because she is a women, or because everyone is just jealous of her finely-toned arms.

At the Democratic Convention she was waxing lyrical about the early days living with Barack and how hard up they were. Of course she didn't bring up her plans to divorce Barack when he didn't win his first election. Then there's the small amount of furniture they had; she relates how Barack just loved this old coffee table he bought. She was wringing out the nostalgia of having an old rusted car that Barack used in his hard work at organizing neighborhoods while it running on-the-smell-of-an-oily-rag. She never related to their relationship with the ultra-left organization known as ACORN (The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). It was all about fighting "the Man'' and keeping the welfare checks coming. When you see the words "community organizer" on Barack Obama's resume, ACORN is the job description. They took fellow Marxist Obama under their wing, planning bigger things for him.

By 2004, with the help of ACORN and many rich Jewish Marxists, her husband held an Illinois state office, and with further influence "half-as-much" was given a job with a salary of $121,910 from the University of Chicago Hospitals. While that might seem like a lot of money to pay someone who has no idea how to cure the sick, it pales in comparison to what was to come.

Not long after Barack was sworn in as a United States Senator, he organized a million dollar plus endowment from the state to the University of Chicago Hospitals. Presto! The hospital system came up with a new salary more appropriate to her skill set: $316,962! How exciting! There are always bills to be paid, appliances wearing out, a coffee table to replace, and who knows what unexpected expenses. I can hear the Board of Directors now, "That extra $195,000 dollars is for the things you do Michelle honey...the talents you display...we can't even put it into words. You're really just that good!!" People...if you think this sounds like fantasy, you probably don't live in Chicago.

What was Michelle doing to earn her $316,962? According to the hospital press release, she was "responsible for all programs and initiatives that involve the relationship between the Hospital and the community." That could mean she was driving an ambulance, but I kind of doubt it. It was important work, the kind of mission-critical endeavor that changes lives. You might be tempted to wonder how that Chicago health care system could live without without her. Well the truth be told, not by her, but others who were there, Michelle's primary job was to redirect any poor, indigent ambulance patients heading her way to some other hospitals in the area so that her hospital wouldn't be up to supplying free, unrewarding care. NOTE: In early 2009, just days before the Inauguration, Michelle resigned from her hospital job. University of Chicago Hospitals immediately downsized the position.

The Way I See It....Michelle's speech was brilliantly delivered about the hardships they faced so their children could have better lives, yet knowing her and her husband's real backgrounds, I didn't buy it. This is the same woman who seriously said only a few years earlier"; "For the first time in my lifetime, I'm really proud of my country." This is what many idiot, would-be voters are forgetting. Now she says to a roaring crowd, "we want to give our children the belief that here in America, there is always something better out there if you're willing to work for it," and was actually espousing The American Dream, which Frank Davis, Derrick Bell and Jeremiah Wright have drummed into Barack's (and then Michelle's) ears that this is a phony dream and only Socialism will give Americans the future they deserve. (See previous posts)

All of the other speakers over those 3 days talked about what Obama does -- the achievement and legislation (much of it hidden from the public) and whatever, and the political implications. Her whole task was to say ''Why, four more years?'' Why? Because essentially he's a Saint. Because of his upbringing (which the media refuse to expose) and because of his humanity he does this because he cares and the brilliance of it is this; it removes from Obama of  any ideological motivation or any having to do with self-interest or ambition. Yeah right!!!!   WAKE UP PEOPLE!