Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Obama's Dreams



Obama's Dreams

 By Thomas Sowell   9/4/2012

After reading Barack Obama's book "Dreams from My Father," it became painfully clear that he has not been searching for the truth, because he assumed from an early age that he had already found the truth -- and now it was just a question of filling in the details and deciding how to change things.

Obama did not simply happen to encounter a lot of people on the far left fringe during his life. As he spells out in his book, he actively sought out such people. There is no hint of the slightest curiosity on his part about other visions of the world that might be weighed against the vision he had seized upon.

As Professor Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago Law School has pointed out, Obama made no effort to take part in the marketplace of ideas with other faculty members when he was teaching a law course there. What would be the point, if he already knew the truth and knew that they were wrong?

This would be a remarkable position to take, even for a learned scholar who had already spent decades canvassing a vast amount of information and views on many subjects. But Obama was already doctrinaire at a very early age -- and ill-informed or misinformed on both history and economics.
His statement in "Dreams from My Father" about how white men went to Africa to "drag away the conquered in chains" betrays his ignorance of African history.

The era of the Atlantic slave trade and the era of European conquests across the continent of Africa were different eras. During the era of the Atlantic slave trade, most of Africa was ruled by Africans, who sold some of their slaves to white men.

European conquests in Africa had to wait until Europeans found some way to survive lethal African diseases, to which they lacked resistance. Only after medical science learned to deal with these diseases could the era of European conquests spread across sub-Saharan Africa. But the Atlantic slave trade was over by then.

There was no reason why Barack Obama had to know this. But there was also no reason for him to be shooting off his mouth without knowing what he was talking about.

Similarly with Obama's characterization of the Nile as "the world's greatest river." The Nile is less than 10 percent longer than the Amazon, but the Amazon delivers more than 50 times as much water into the Atlantic as the Nile delivers into the Mediterranean. The Nile could not accommodate the largest ships, even back in Roman times, much less the aircraft carriers of today that can sail up the Hudson River and dock in midtown Manhattan.

When Obama wrote that many people "had been enslaved only because of the color of their skin," he was repeating a common piece of gross misinformation. For thousands of years, people enslaved other people of the same race as themselves, whether in Europe, Asia, Africa or the Western Hemisphere.

Europeans enslaved other Europeans for centuries before the first African was brought in bondage to the Western Hemisphere. The very word "slave" is derived from the name of a European people once widely held in bondage, the Slavs.

As for economics, Obama thought that Indonesians would be worse off after Europeans came in, used up their natural resources and then left them too poor to continue the modern way of life to which they had become accustomed, or to resume their previous way of life, after their previous skills had atrophied.

This fear of European "exploitation" prevailed widely in the Third World in the middle of the 20th century. But, by the late 20th century, the falseness of that view had been demonstrated so plainly and so often, in countries around the world, that even socialist and communist governments began opening their economies to foreign investments. This often led to rising economic growth rates that lifted millions of people out of poverty.

Barack Obama is one of those people who are often wrong but never in doubt. When he burst upon the national political scene as a presidential candidate in 2008, even some conservatives were impressed by his confidence.

But confident ignorance is one of the most dangerous qualities in a leader of a nation. If he has the rhetorical skills to inspire the same confidence in himself by others, then you have the ingredients for national disaster.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

 

OLD TENNESSEE SAYING



As they say in Tennessee ,
"Y'all can't get the water to clear up,
Until you get the turd out of the creek."

WHY I DO NOT LIKE OBAMA

BEST SUMMATION OF BARACK AND MICHELLE EVER



Mychal Massie is a respected writer and talk show host in Los Angeles.

The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn't like the Obama's? Specifically I was asked: "I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama's? It seems personal, not policy related. You even dissed (disrespect) their Christmas family picture."

The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation. I've made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don't like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.

I don't hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama's raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.

I don't like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no I demand respect, for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagan's made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. His arrogance by appointing 32 leftist czars and constantly bypassing congress is impeachable. Eric Holder is probably the MOST incompetent and arrogant DOJ head to ever hold the job. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?

Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama's have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry, and they display an animus for civility.

I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to now being able to be proud of America. I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.

I have a saying, that "the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide." No president in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed.

And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother's death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father's military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nausea. He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today. He opposed rulings that protected women and children that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel. His wife treats being the First Lady as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement - as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.

I don't like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.

Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin; it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their constantly playing the race card.

It is my intention to do all within my ability to ensure their reign is one term. I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them, as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.

As I wrote in a syndicated column titled, "Nero In The White House" - "Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood... Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement - while America's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed."



Incredible ad by the Catholic Church



Incredible ad by the Catholic Church
Churches don’t normally run political ads but this is not a normal election.



Monday, September 3, 2012

MEDIA BIAS




When a reporter asked "Good Morning America" host George Stephanopoulos at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida if he believes there is a liberal bias in the media, he responds, "I don't." When asked again, he walks away.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/09/01/Stephanopoulos-Doesnt-Believe-There-Is-Bias-In-The-Media

That’s not a bit surprising.  When ask, all Liberals either say there is no bias, or they say there is a right wing bias.  Either they know better and simply refuse to admit it or they are so brain washed that they are not capable of recognizing it.

Just in case it is the latter, I would like to point out this classic example.

In its headline, The Atlantic Wire story for August 27 screams, “Boehner Says Out Loud He Hopes Blacks and Latinos ‘Won’t Show up’ This Election.” 

It wasn’t just the headline, either. Even in its lead paragraph The Atlantic characterized Boehner’s comments as wishing minorities won’t vote. (My bold)

House Speaker John Boehner is the most prominent Republican to admit, out loud, that his party’s strategy for winning in November doesn’t suppose that the GOP can win over some black and Latino voters, but hoping they won’t vote at all.

But this is simply untrue.  Here is what Boehener actually said, and it proves that The Atlantic is purposefully misleading its readers.   “This election is about economics… These groups have been hit the hardest. They may not show up and vote for our candidate but I’d suggest to you they won’t show up and vote for the president either.”

In other words, Boehner was saying that Obama hasn’t excited black and Latino voters and he hasn’t served their interests so he, Boehner, thinks they won’t turn out to vote for Obama.  He wasn’t saying he hopes minorities won’t vote he was saying the President has failed to give them a reason to vote for him.

The Atlantic’s writer purposefully misrepresented what John Boehner said, here.  The headline and the first line are complete fabrications.   They also go on to insinuate that Boehner was talking about voter I.D. laws, which are being pushed by Republicans and criticized as disenfranchising minority and poor voters”

The article presupposes that voter I.D. laws are meant to disenfranchise voters because that would be part of Boehner’s premise of getting blacks and Hispanics not to vote.  He didn’t mention voter I.D. laws or allude to them in any way.  And this begs the question, why mention it in the story, if no one was talking about it?  Where is the relevance to the reportage of Boehner’s comments?

This was a pretty sly piece of propaganda thrown into what is presented as news.  The only reason the voter I.D. law subject was added to the story despite that no one was talking about it was so that the reporter could push the lie that such laws are meant to disenfranchise minorities.

The media has gone beyond bias.  They are now trying I create the news rather than report it.  
This entire story is pure anti-Republican spin, not “news.”





Sunday, September 2, 2012

CHUCK NORIS SPEAKS OUT



 Our country as we know it may be lost forever


IS THIS LEGAL?



IS THIS LEGAL?  IF IT IS, IT SHOULDN’T BE



Just another example of how our colleges and Universities are brainwashing our young, and converting them to Socialism. 

It's getting to the point in this country where you can't hardly find a person under 30 that's not a socialist.