Category Archives: Marxists

Just Tell The Filthy, Stinkin' Truth, Mr. Obama

by David Kupelian

David Kupelian is an award-winning journalist, managing editor of WND, editor of Whistleblower magazine, and author of the best-selling book, The Marketing of Evil His newest book, How Evil Works, released to much critical acclaim in the spring of 2010. “Mr. President, on what occasion do you lie?”

Obama Grin
President Obama Loving the Limelight

That was Barbara Walters during her painfully fawning interview with Barack and Michelle Obama last Dec. 23. For ABC News “20/20′s” “Christmas at the White House” segment, the president and first lady were seated on a couch—relaxed, jovial, holding hands—their West Wing surroundings magnificently decorated for the holidays with dozens of exquisitely adorned Christmas trees and “visions of sugar-plums” everywhere. Walters got the interview rolling with tough questions like (to Obama), “If you were a superhero and you could have one super power, what would it be?” (Answer: “flying.”) And (to the first lady), “If you were to die and come back as a person or a thing, what would you want it to be?” (Answer: “Bo,” the family dog.) And (to both of them), “I’m looking at you. You’re holding hands. That’s very sweet. How many years married?”

“Twenty, next year,” said Obama. “And [you] still hold hands?” rejoined the adoring Walters. “Absolutely,” replied Obama.

Then, against this backdrop of irresistible holiday warmth and good cheer, came the big question:

“Mr. President,” Walters inquired delicately, “on what occasion do you lie?”

“Usually, the only time I lie,” responded Obama, “is very personal interactions with family members, [when] you say, ‘You look great,’ and they don’t. ‘Wonderful dress…’ Uh, not so much.”

Chimed Michelle: “Things where the truth would hurt other people.”

“Right,” echoed Obama, “the things where truth would hurt other people. Not too many big things. I said during the campaign that I’ll always tell you what I think, and I will, always tell you where I stand. I’m not perfect, but you’ll know what I believe.”

There you have it, folks. Welcome to The Matrix – where the elite media specialize in creating virtual reality scenes like this one, which are so pleasant and seem so real—except that they bear virtually no resemblance to reality. For there, seated in the midst of this elegant, Norman Rockwell-esque Christmas setting, was Barack Obama, the perpetually churning and discontented radical, taking a needed break from his relentless campaign to “fundamentally transform”—that means destroy—the American way of free enterprise and free people. Barack Obama, the man who lies as easily as breathing—a serial deceiver regarding his birth, his childhood, his education, his influences and associations, his religion, his accomplishments, his policies, his true beliefs and his plans for America’s future. Barack Obama, the man whose entire presidency has been a seamless fabric of deception and duplicity, tells Barbara Walters and the American people that the only time he lies is to protect a family member from hurt feelings by occasionally offering reassurance that an unflattering dress is “wonderful.”

Wow. The level of ongoing media dishonesty in covering Barack Obama is, of course, surreal. But let us now focus our attention on the man who is, in all likelihood, the most perfectly dishonest person ever to occupy the Oval Office. After all, the correct answer to Walters’ question is obvious. When does Obama lie? Every single time he speaks to the American people. Indeed, as another long-time ABC News personality, Pulitzer prize-winning columnist George Will, pointed out recently in the Washington Post: “Barack Obama’s intellectual sociopathy—his often breezy and sometimes loutish indifference to truth—should no longer startle.”

“Sociopathy” is a strong word, but used by many to describe Obama – not necessarily as a clinical psychiatric diagnosis, but just because the symptoms fit so darn well, as per this typical description: “Sociopaths are often well-liked because of their charm and high charisma, but they do not usually care about other people. They think mainly of themselves and often blame others for the things that they do. They have a complete disregard for rules and lie constantly. They seldom feel guilt or learn from punishments.” Remind you of anyone?

A vital, creative power

One veteran psychiatrist I know suggested a slightly different diagnosis for Obama, but similar to “sociopathy” in many ways – namely, “malignant narcissistic personality disorder.” The modifier “malignant” signifies the version of “narcissistic personality disorder” that may cross over into criminality, he explained.

He even reviewed with me a list of some of the major symptoms of NPD, comparing them with Obama’s behavior as president. Among the key markers: 1) a grandiose view of one’s achievements (everything with Obama is “historic”), 2) an utter inability to handle criticism (everyone criticizing Obama or his policies is attacked as extremist or racist, his White House even condemning Fox News as “not a real news organization”), and 3) lack of genuine empathy (Obama gave a televised speech on the day of the Fort Hood terror attack in which a Muslim U.S. Army major shot 45 Americans, 13 fatally. With the entire nation reeling in shock and yearning for strong, reassuring words from their commander in chief, Obama instead engaged in small talk and an inane “shout-out” for two full minutes before even mentioning that the worst terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11 had just occurred hours earlier.)

To be sure, many mainstream analysts, including Pulitzer-winning columnist and former psychiatrist Charles Krauthammer, have repeatedly pointed to Obama’s extreme narcissism. Regardless of the “diagnosis,” one thing is certain: We’re talking about a person who absolutely does not consider serial lying to be in any way immoral or problematic.

Far from it. For a super-ambitious and vainglorious person such as Obama, lying is a vital and creative power. Lies open doors that would otherwise remain shut. Thus in a very real sense, for Obama, lies are “magic words,” the invocation of which represents the exercise of real power—power to impress voters, raise money, demonize critics, win elections, pass legislation and transform a nation. Ordinary people don’t possess this power, as they are constrained from such brazen lying by their conscience and/or the fear of being caught. But a highly narcissistic person like Obama feels he has the freedom—indeed, the mandate—to reshape America by creatively speaking into existence his preferred version of reality, without regard for any higher standard of truth. In other words, to lie.

Here’s how psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, M.D., explains it in his classic best-seller, “People of the Lie”:

Malignant narcissism is characterized by an unsubmitted will. All adults who are mentally healthy submit themselves one way or another to something higher than themselves, be it God or truth or love or some other ideal. They do what God wants them to do rather than what they would desire. “Thy will, not mine, be done,” the God-submitted person says. They believe in what is true rather than what they would like to be true.

...In summary, to a greater or lesser degree, all mentally healthy individuals submit themselves to the demands of their own conscience. Not so the evil, however. In the conflict between their guilt and their will, it is the guilt that must go and the will that must win.

The reader will be struck by the extraordinary willfulness of evil people. They are men and women of obviously strong will, determined to have their own way. There is a remarkable power in the manner in which they attempt to control others.

As we will now see, Obama has been preparing to “control others” for a long time.

‘I serve as a blank screen’

In his second autobiography “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama makes an audacious admission: “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” While it’s amazing that anyone could openly brag about such a manipulative life-strategy, Obama has long cultivated his appealing yet ambiguous public persona in preparation for a career as political messiah. For instance, he voted “present” no less than 129 times while a member of the Illinois state Senate to avoid taking a position that might alienate one side or the other—including on bills he had supported and even sponsored! Taking a position, you see, might have compromised the purity and universality of his “blank screen,” which would one day serve to reflect the aspirations for “hope” and “change” of millions of Americans.

Appearing as all things to all people has been key to Obama’s meteoric rise, requiring constant deception. As one blogger put it recently:

He is Muslim, he is Christian, he is a capitalist, he is a socialist, he is black, he is white, he is a constitutional professor, he is an average collegian who smoked dope and did cocaine, he is a foreigner, he is American-born, he is “EVERYMAN.”

With America now in precipitous decline on his watch, many have tried to explain the enigma of Obama and his prodigious ability to lie so confidently, comfortably and continually:

  • Some cite the disturbing degree to which Obama manifests full-blown clinical symptoms of narcissism and/or sociopathy, as previously discussed.
  • Some cite his far-left ideology: Whether you label it liberalism, progressivism, socialism, left-wing radicalism, Marxism, communism, anti-capitalism, European-style social democracy or statism, leftist “true believers” have always justified as moral not just lying, but ruthless suppression of dissent, violence and tyranny—as long as these measures seemed to advance their glorious utopian cause. “Exhibit A” for this point would be the entire 20th century.
  • Some cite Obama’s childhood, which was awful, and others cite his early influences, which were more awful. A Berkeley, Calif., psychotherapist who writes under the pseudonym Robin of Berkeley weighs in this way:
  • My gut tells me that Obama was seriously traumatized in childhood. His mother disregarded his basic needs, dragged him all over the place, and ultimately abandoned him.

    But I think there may be something even more insidious in his family background. While I can’t prove it, the degree of Obama’s disconnect reminds me of my sexually abused clients.

    With serious sexual abuse, the brain chemistry may change. The child dissociates—that is, disconnects from his being—in order to cope. Many adult survivors still dissociate, from occasional trances to the most extreme cases of multiple personality disorder.

    Apparently, young Barry was left in the care of communist Frank Marshall Davis, who admitted to molesting a 13-year-old girl. As a teenager, Obama wrote a disturbing poem, “Pop,” that evoked images of sexual abuse—for instance, describing dual amber stains on both his and “Pop’s” shorts.

    Would trauma explain Obama’s disconnect? In many ways, yes. A damaged and unattached child may develop a “false self.” To compensate for the enormous deficits in identity and attachment, the child invents his own personality. For Obama, it may have been as a special, gifted person.

  • Some cite Obama’s religious background—his 20-year affiliation with his “spiritual mentor,” the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who preached raw hatred of America, capitalism and white people, and whose “black liberation theology” gospel amounted to Afro-centric Marxism dressed up with Bible verses. Complicating this picture and suggesting even more questions is the well-documented fact that during his youth in Indonesia, Obama was raised and schooled as a Muslim.
  • Some cite his background in “Chicago politics” – a euphemism for wall-to-wall corruption and criminality. Indeed, the state of Illinois, where a staggering total of four recent governors—Otto Kerner, Dan Walker, George Ryan and Rod Blagojevich—have gone to prison for corruption, remains a political cesspool to this day, as confirmed by a recent study from the University of Illinois at Chicago’s political science department. Obama is a product of this legendarily corrupt “Chicago machine” and played the game ruthlessly while rising in the ranks there.
  • Some cite Obama’s education, the most important part of which, by his own admission, came via Saul Alinsky. During the 2008 campaign, Obama said of his years steeped in the Chicago Marxist’s revolutionary “community organizing” methods: “It was that education that was seared into my brain. It was the best education I ever had, better than anything I got at Harvard Law School.”
  • In “Rules for Radicals,” Alinsky counsels wannabe revolutionaries that they must be willing to ignore the dictates of their own conscience to advance the left’s agenda:

    In action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of “personal salvation”; he doesn’t care enough for people to be “corrupted” for them.

    That, friends, is one of the most twisted things I’ve ever heard. To believe it and act on it is to abandon your greatest gift, your moment-to-moment connection with the Living God—your conscience. Maybe that’s why Alinsky dedicated “Rules for Radicals” to “the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer.”

    In the final analysis, Obama lies because that’s how he gets his way, and getting his way is all he cares about.

    Editor’s note: The preceding is excerpted from a longer piece by David Kupelian in the July issue of Whistleblower magazine, “WHY OBAMA LIES: Exploring what’s behind the president’s glaring and unprecedented dishonesty.” One of Whistleblower’s most popular issues ever, “WHY OBAMA LIES” features groundbreaking analysis of President Obama by multiple psychiatrists who reveal him to be a seriously damaged, fundamentally dishonest and even delusional person, as well as a comprehensive list, running throughout the entire magazine, of Barack Obama’s lies, each followed by PROOF of the statement’s falsehood.

    The Boiling Point Inside And Outside The Burqa and Hijab

    moprotest
    Women in Burqa and Politics
    WRITES WALLACE, A STRIDENT FELLOW, choosing his words carefully, as he outlines his recent travail:

    "Now I don't want to sound like a racist, but I was shocked when I moved to England and discovered that my new neighborhood was majority Muslim—mosques, hijabs, halal shops, etc...

    "I am all for diversity, but if you want me to be tolerant, I expect the same in return. Don't get me started on this topic. Anyway, when I walked to the marketplace and realized I was the only one NOT wearing hijab, and was being ogled by stall keepers who claimed they didn't know English—I made a comment later about feeling like I had wandered all the way to Pakistan, and my Pakistani ex accused me of being racist for saying that, so tell me, am I a racist based on this simple remark? or was I merely observing the obvious?

    "Pfff... I don't think any race is better than another—its oppressive cultural and religious practices I have a problem with... "

    I don't know where that fellow had originally lived before taking off to England, but he should consider Dearborn, Michigan in the good ole USA. The blighted streets lined with hourly-rental motels that lead from Detroit into the suburb of Dearborn gradually give way to busy avenues dotted with mosques and thriving small businesses. Arabic signs advertise attorneys and physicians, passers-by speak Levantine and Gulf dialects of Arabic, and on the sidewalks women wear the colorful headscarves of hijab.

    Dearborn is a microcosm of the Middle East planted in the Midwestern United States. The roughly 40,000 of Dearborn's 100,000 residents that are Arab American defy the myth many Americans hold of a unified Muslim world, filled with parading masses bearing the likeness of Ayatollah Khomenei. While there are some radical Islamists, Dearborn's growing Muslim population runs the gamut from international traders to educated professionals to local business owners.

    Every Arab nationality and religious sect is found here, from Yemeni traditionalism to secular modernity. The development of Dearborn seems like that of any other American city in which there has been a large influx of immigrants. The development of the mosques tells another story.

    After a series of conflicts and scandals traced to radicalized leadership in the mosques, tensions have escalated and continue to poke holes in the fabric of an integrated Dearborn. Race isn't the issue, the issue is the forced accommodation to Muslim customs. Earlier in the 20th Century, Muslims attempted to moderate and integrate, to forge a community uniquely both Muslim and American, but the effort was sabotaged by extremist elements.

    Muslims have been establishing themselves in western countries for at least 35 years. The terror plot in England to blow up planes was not among native Pakistanis but among youths who were born in the west. The spreading of the jihadist problem is much worse than most in the west believe, as some polls indicate that 70% of Muslims worldwide support Hezbollah and Hamas. They are not all extremists or fascists, but most rank and file Muslims certainly sympathize with them.

    That's a problem. Why did Nasrallah apologize for killing Arab children in Nazareth? It wasn't because they were Israelis, it was because they were not Jews. If every Jew in Israel would convert to Islam, there would be no more war with Israel so it is definitely not about land. The issue is religion. The holy war is a religious war. Mainstream media hates to see it characterized this way, but it's the raw, unvarnished, politically incorrect truth. But of course we all know the media cares nothing for the truth.

    There is concern on the wires that every time someone of a certain stature has the gall to speak out against this Muslim usurpation of Western generosity "big oil money will take over and flood the air with propaganda" against this person. Or if a book critical of Islam is published, both this book and its author are routinely ignored by the media powers.
    Britain is a right mess in places. According to one Brit, writing on the Apostates of Islam BBS, there are no white zones in Oldham and one can't find a English corner shop hardly anywhere in the cities nowadays.

    He goes on to lament that there are "no pig ornaments in windows, and Brits are not allowed to say Christmas holidays (instead it's winter fest), and Easter is almost non existent. Whites [historical Brits] can't fly the Union Jack and if you dare speak out you may get arrested.

    Well, I don't know anything about pig ornaments hanging in the windows, but there is a strong odor of political correctness in sublimating traditional Western holidays while simultaneously the apotheosis of Muslim ones jar local sensitivities worldwide, even here in America.

    "When will they realize it's not about the color of their skin (unless they already do) but their religion and culture. There's a big difference in being a racist and being anti-religious and they are just playing on the fact they have a different skin color and now are trying to make out that anyone who speaks against Islam is a racist and inticing religious hatred and the whites have fallen for it, too. I think that if white people became Muslim they would never be fully accepted and if Islam does take over I would not have any sympathy for the whites who joined them. They've had plenty of warnings."

    Sounds like the boiling point is getting closer.

    Sadly, even should public opinion shift considerably the civil rights laws protect Muslims in jobs, government positions, and our military—and the prisons are a veritable recruitment center for them.

    The first amendment is construed by most as a blanket right to this religion by most lawmakers today. It's a sacred cow on both the right and the left.

    abdullahdelancey
    Abdullah Delancey
    Areas like Dearborn, Lodi and large areas of most big cities have large populations of them; as they know they can coerce their brethren more easily in this land of "sin". It's also foolhardy to openly wear a t-shirt that has one of those cartoons of Mohammed upon it in those areas and Canada, where 40,000 this past year were made citizens. A Muslim with former ties to Nation of Islam is in a run for Congress representing a large Islamic constituent in Minnesota, where in the year 2000 only 9% of the population classified themselves as non-white. People change. Maybe. Maybe not.

    But population changes are natural and vital, yet the sheer speed of the population surge, and the forces behind these swift changes are the disturbing factor for many observers, including this humble blogger. And that force—in a phrase—is illegal and unchecked immigration of all sorts of people, changed and unchanged.

    US college towns are swamped with foreign students and most major universities are given huge endowments to basicly bribe the academics to speak highly of them; with the attendant online student associations and web sites—often paid with government money. Georgetown University, a prestigious Jesuit school in Washington, DC is the latest to sell its soul to the Muslim invaders.

    Sounds like the boiling point is getting even closer.

    There is concern on the wires that every time someone of a certain stature has the gall to speak out against this Muslim usurpation of Western generosity "big oil money will take over and flood the air with propaganda" against this person. Or if a book critical of Islam is published, both this book and its author are routinely ignored by the media powers.

    islamcrescent
    Islamic Crescent
    Deepening the mistrust is the notion that once the West does awaken from its slumber, all religion will be persecuted, particularly Christianity, as if this were not already the case. The Left has long waged war against Christianity, and now seems to have found a temporary ally in Islam, strategic for the moment, until the time arrives to execute its final solution: have all religion either abolished or amalgamated into a single world religion.

    Sounds like the boiling point is getting even closer.

    Another voice pipes in: "Only a few of the major editorialists actually give Islam any negative attention, Malkan, Charon, Coulter, Buchanan and some off them are nuts—most others compromise shamelessly—even that mouthy bastard O'Reilly on the "No Spin Zone" hasn't either the brains or guts to say Islam has a problem&151;even though he claims he's on a hit list from Al Qaeda. And neither Hannity or Colmes is much better. It makes me wonder who the major shareholders are."

    I'll tell you, my friend. Saudi Arabia is the 4th largest shareholder in Fox News. Yep, feels like the boiling point is getting even closer, too.

    The Cracking Left As Evidenced By Odd Bedfellows

    Jolly Nick Cohen has said it so well, I won't even begin to add to his eloquent insights into the confusion of the Old Left with the New Reality in his bruising piece originally reposted here on Oct 24, 2006, called: "Where Have All The Pacifists Gone?" Now if only the Left will crumble into dust and blow away. Here are the first few paragraphs of the right persuasive piece.

    Nick Cohen
    "You Can't Read This Book" by Nick Cohen
    BEFORE YOU GO TO A LEFT-WING meeting, brace yourself for the likelihood that everyone you meet in the hall will be standing on their heads. Do not be surprised to see communists supporting fascism, feminists throwing their arms around misogynists and liberals volunteering to be advocates for tyranny. It’s been like this since 9/11 turned the world upside down, and the temptation for a journalist is to play the cynical reporter and pretend to be unshockable. I try my best to be a hard man, but the shocks keep on coming. Take the fates of two venerable left-wing institutions, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Searchlight.

    For 18 months I’ve had CND workers telling me how they have been forced out by the same people who disgraced the anti-war movement – the Socialist Workers Party, Ken Livingstone’s homeboys from Socialist Action, the Jeremy Corbyn wing of the Labour Party . . . the friends of the indefatigable George Galloway, in short. I couldn’t see how to write about it. How could I prove that they were victims of a political purge rather than guilty of poor performance? In any case, there was always an element of a Quaker-communist alliance about the old CND, and the ideas it produced weren’t always wrong. CND’s policy of unilateral nuclear disarmament was political poison for Labour because it was so clearly in the interests of the Soviet Union, but CND had a second argument that was truer than its legions of critics in the 1980s admitted. Nuclear power breeds nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons breed more nuclear weapons, CND’s argument ran. Unless proliferation stops, they will get into the hands of men who are prepared to use them.

    That was then. Anyone who now believes CND is as much against proliferation as for unilateral disarmament would have been surprised by this autumn’s annual conference. Among the guests was the startling figure of Dr Seyed Mohammad Hossein Adeli, the then Iranian ambassador. Iran is building the nuclear power stations CND once protested against – an odd project for a country with one of the largest reserves of oil in the world. Not only the US government but the United Nations and the European Union suspect the Islamic Republic wants the bomb. The obvious course for those sincere about nuclear disarmament is to oppose Tehran as vigorously as they oppose a replacement for Trident. But there’s the rub. Standing by its principles would, if only for a moment, have put CND on the same side as George W Bush and Tony Blair, and that would never do.

    Betrayal has defined the liberal left since Iraq because anti-Americans find their comrades in the Kurdish socialist movement or the Iraqi Communist Party or Arab liberal parties an embarrassment and cannot stick by them or even acknowledge their existence. Given that record, I guess it was inevitable that CND, whose governing council is stuffed with people who call themselves “socialists”, “workers” and “communists”, would take the next step and betray the Iranian left.

    Read it all.

    A Spiritual Failing of The Left

    Sarah Palin
    May she take another shot some day...

    HOLD ON TO YOUR HAT HARRY. I don't think I can let you off the hook that easily—I think we can agree that the problem with the most liberal of the liberals—those who want to engage in political talk at the dinner table, and then woe to you if you disagree, is at heart spiritual. They remind me of those people referred to in the old Hebrew testament who built that tower in Babel so they could be like God.

    Wasn't there also a reference to them by Dostoyevsky, the fussy Russian writer? The liberal mind set seems to be: stay up in heaven God. We've got this. We're on the job. We can handle it. And if you're not proud of us, we'll take the credit anyway. And so they continue to make a mess of things, by any means necessary. Thus their disdain for people like humble but decisive George W. Bush, or more recently, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann who exhibit something I would call a humble arrogance. The political hoi polloi and even their leadership however seem to best operate from a position arrogant humility often seen in money-grubbing televangelists.

    But like a good watch, Sarah Palin takes a lickin' but she keeps on tickin' and you can read that any damn way you please.

    On July 3, 2009, Palin announced that she would not run for re-election in the 2010 Alaska gubernatorial election and would resign before the end of the month. In her announcement, Palin stated that since August 2008, both she and the state had been expending an "insane" amount of time and money ($2.5 million) responding to "opposition research", 150 FOIA requests and 15 "frivolous" legal ethics complaints filed by "political operatives" against her. She also dovetailed to a decision to not seek re-election and to resign from office in an effort to would being a lame duck politician who is ineffective or is "milking" the taxpayers by drawing a paycheck and funding useless travels. Adding, "I'm not putting Alaska through that...

    Palin and her husband Todd had personally incurred more than $500,000 in legal fees defending against ethics charges brought against her as governor even though all the complaints were dismissed. Lt. Governor Sean Parnell, said it “really had to do with the weight on her, the concern she had for the cost of all the ethics investigations and the like—the way that that weighed on her with respect to her inability to just move forward Alaska’s agenda on behalf of Alaskans in the current context of the environment.” The Alaska Governor transfer of power to Sean Parnell occurred in Fairbanks on July 26, 2009.

    In December 2010, new rules governing Alaska executive branch ethics, stemming from Sarah Palin's tenure as governor, took effect. "These include allowing for the state to pay legal costs for officials cleared of ethics violations; (and) allowing for a family member of the governor or lieutenant governor to travel at state cost in certain circumstances..."

    Party Of The First Part

    We here at the Scenewash Project offered this article as a bread crumb...

    ...and were confronted by another attempt by a "universalist" friend to stall the game, transfer too much of the blame, and take a pass on the shame...

    13judges
    Music For Patriots
    Poor petulant white brother, how might we comfort you?

    Our response:

    A black man wrote that piece, friend. So your response to his observation is your own world view in a word or two, comfort thyself white man, but beware, there are others who cannot no matter how much they try, so you must deny, defy, belie all fair chance and do it for them. Ah, the old white man's burden argument, all knotted up Gordian-style to keep tight the rope where one is one's one hangman...

    You be the judge. But let's consider another false play by those who play tricks with the American value system, in this case Muslims who tend to identify themselves as Muslim Americans. Gloria Gilson writes:

    We should only call Muslims as “Muslims who live in America,” NEVER EVER “Muslim Americans” or "American Muslims." No other faith believer so self-stylizes him/her|self in this manner. Methodist American, Christian American, Jewish American, Sikh American. None of that. Muslims do this as another avenue to push their political religion by co-opting the well-deserved decent-ness of America. In short, Muslims are stealing yet something else, this time our reputations.

    Muslims are not Americans; they are not here for the opportunities and the freedoms that the concept of Americanism—limited government, personal responsibility—has given to so many. Rather, Muslims are here for colonization and conquest. They cannot be considered Americans because of their adoption of Islam. Sharia (total government) and American constitutional law (government contained/controlled by the people; hey, at least that's the theory) couldn’t be farther apart.

    By their own admissions Muslims tell us repeatedly that their one and only allegiance is to Islam. On this score I believe them.

    To be sure. It's no secret to thorough readers of our work that we prefer to call an American an American. But our particular generation of immigrant is in great numbers bringing with it a peculiar baggage we prefer to be left among the political reeds of one's origin when staking a claim on American soil and spirit. As Theodore Roosevelt wrote in 1919:

    "In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

    "There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...

    "We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...

    "And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

    When Friends Become Tall Timbers (Tales)

    urban-war
    Race to find the bait...

    HAVE YOU EVER WANTED more? I mean lots more, MORE of this, MORE of that. Have you ever heard the phrase "All property is theft!" and wanted to extend your fist into the private property of that public mouth from which you heard those ridiculously poetic words just shouted? Where is more? Evermore. Who is less? Nonetheless. Is the universe chaotic? Psychotic? Programmable nonsense. Or is this wild wobbly marble of unintended consequences the ultimate parade of unscrutinized order? Existential Baby, shake, rattle and roll, always a suspect, never a friend...

    Posted by: aware54397
    Apr 19, 05:35 AM

    Until the mid 1800's society was surging. Since then it is the State that has surged. The last hundred years has been the time of domination of every possible thing by the State. Now we will enter the time of regretting the politicization of everything when the bill finally comes due.

    The concept of the State was always a lie, which is why so many fail to understand why good ideas always seem to go wrong with government. It starts with "helping" a guy down on his luck and turns him into a perpetual demander of other people's money enforceable through the State. A thimble of "help" followed by a trainload of corruption engineered by a true criminal class of professional politicians.

    All forms of government is bent to revert to its true nature sooner or later. It just took ours a little longer than most, but thanks to legal plunder and distracted citizens we have arrived. Now we will rue the day we ever trusted government to be "good". Over the next decade or so many will pay with their lives for this.

    When the Western state finally crumbles, what happens next? You be the judge. Or, uh, is that somebody else's job?

    Let us be frank when we ask ourselves just what on God's Green Acre we think of when we think of the state? How are the so-called Peoples' Councils that Marxists clang and clamor for any different than City Hall and the Orange Cap Patrol that either bring a snarl or a smile to our random faces now?

    I watched with glee
    While your kings and queens
    Fought for ten decades
    For the Gods they made
    I shouted out,
    Who killed the Kennedys?
    When after all
    It was you and me.
    —Jagger/Richards

    When does a peaceful conservative or a merry prankster stop trying to prop up an essential but failing institution or state? Especially one being pummeled not only by its immediate enemies but by the very writing on the wall? What does a conscientious conservative or pansy pied piper do next when the thunder and the lightening and the rain has turned to blood, fire and thuggery on both the plains and the mountains, in the cities and the rivers?

    When the once cringing sound of "all private property is theft" no longer seems absurd, perhaps we can finally re-emerge as rugged individualists who realize the world is exceedingly too complex for any one nation to simplify, but it is fair and simple enough for the many to restore (for all the smart reasons) given the grace and timeliness of knowledge, so as to simply enjoy it within the complexities of our own simple lives...

    It was in the calm and peace of his house in Hastings that Desai was able to analyse what he felt about Marx. Tall and narrow, the house commands a panoramic view of the English Channel which Desai has quickly learnt to love. He delights in waking up to a view of the sea and, for the first six months, kept photographing its changing moods.

    "It changes one's view of life," he enthuses. "It is fascinating, uplifting, a joyous thing." He bought the house in Hastings because he "wanted somewhere to put my 10,000 books". Every Thursday evening, Desai makes the one hour 40 minute pilgrimage from London Bridge to Hastings, and returns on Monday. "It is here in Hastings I do all my cooking, all my writing, all my thinking," he says. "This is a marvellous place. It is now my main home."

    The shift to Hastings also represents his own spiritual, emotional and political journey. His reassessment of Marxism began 20 years ago. In his youth, he, like many others, had assumed that capitalism would be vanquished, sooner rather than later, by socialism.

    Yes, Martha Manwaring. Life is short, but every once in a while one may discover that the hard-boiled social philosophers accustomed to the occupational depths of conflict crave the simple joys, too. This Marxist clown, with all due respect, has grown to realize what we petty capitalists here at the Scenewash Project were brash enough to quip while whingeing among a few card-carrying Marxists brought together by the Internet of the day some fifteen years ago.

    It was I, wrote Gabriel, who said, "Frankly lads, in my estimation, Capitalism is the purest form of Communism ever practiced!"

    Expectingly, I and thee watched their eyes roll then! But fear not!

    For now we have the global debt crisis and Gentleman George Soros cascading along the scars and scabs of Kierkegaard Boulevard to prove it!

    Feingold Challenges Jeffrey Immelt On New Position

    Immelt-Obama
    GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt and President Barack Obama
    We actually applaud this surprising move by former Wisconsin Democratic senator Russ Feingold (recall that Feingold was swept out of office last year in a tsunami of Tea Party expression). Just in case you're keeping score, here's the opening shot in the corporate corruption wing of the Obama School of Economic Whatevers:

    Friend,

    IT'S EVERYTHING THAT'S WRONG with corporate power today: News broke last week that General Electric, America’s largest corporation, made $14,200,000,000 in profits last year and paid $0 in taxes—that’s right, zero dollars in taxes. At the same time, C.E.O. Jeffrey Immelt saw his compensation double. Now I hear that GE is expected to ask 15,000 of their unionized workers to make major concessions in wages and benefits.

    But what really adds insult to injury is the prestigious and influential position Jeffrey Immelt holds as chair of President Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. That’s wrong. Someone like Immelt, who has helped his company evade taxes on its huge profits—and is now looking to workers to take major pay cuts after his compensation was doubled—should not lead the administration’s effort to create jobs.

    We cannot stand by and watch while we are led down this road. Mr. Immelt must step down from the president’s jobs panel—and if he won’t, President Obama needs to ask for his resignation.

    Help us build public pressure on GE’s Jeffrey Immelt to step down or President Obama to get his resignation from the jobs council: Sign our petition at www.ImmeltMustGo.com today!

    Jeffrey Immelt is a crook and a thief. There are many like him, but for now, we are criticizing this one. He and the president seem to have a lot in common, and appear to be the best of buds.
    How can someone like Immelt be given the responsibility of heading a jobs creation task force when his company has been creating more jobs overseas while reducing its American workforce? And under Immelt’s direction, GE spends hundreds of millions of dollars hiring lawyers and lobbyists to evade taxes. All of this at a time when Fox News and the right wing are demonizing public workers, like teachers, as the cause of our economic problems.

    It’s time for policymakers to stop coddling corporate interests, and get to work creating jobs and wealth for Main Street. We shouldn’t reward wealthy CEOs and Wall Street for behavior that undermines the nation’s economy.

    Be a part of this meaningful fight. Help us tell President Obama that if GE isn’t paying taxes or treating workers well, Immelt Must Go!

    President Obama has been talking about how we must “win the future,” and I agree with him in that goal. Jeffrey Immelt is not the person for that job.

    Thanks for uniting as a progressive,

    Russ Feingold
    Founder
    Progressives United

    Feingold, despite his generally far leftist stance on most issues, this time is right on the mark. Serenedipity. Sort of like when far leftist Dennis Kucinich and libertarian Ron Paul find themselves arguing for the same crucial point in the House. As aggressive constitutionalists, we usually find Mr. Feingold's progressive recipe for success instinctively less than desirable, having no faith in Big Government to look after my own best interests, for richer or poorer, in sickness or in health, but when it comes to the wildly dishonest, greed-gorged antics of corporate raiders who loot the land and its people without conscience, I have no choice but to drop my shoulders just enough to service my own burden and to join the call for immediate corrective measures. We call for simple and plain considerations. This just looks bad.

    Jeffrey Immelt is a crook and a thief. There are many like him, but for now, we are criticizing this one. He and the president seem to have a lot in common, and appear to be the best of buds.

    This nation, however, struggling against a global economic bully called the deficit, might stand a fighting chance to recover from what ails us if both men retired to their next roles as men of leisure, formerly of a certain public prestige. But since it is easier to dismiss Mr. Immelt from his awkward position right now, dismissal is exactly what should be done.

    Just look at the numbers.