Black Student Wants Government to Steal for Him
Slave owners were making a profit from the forced labor of others. So it’s rather disturbing that we hear the following from a young black man at a historically black Howard University where Rand Paul gave a speech:
“Good afternoon, Senator. My name is
Keenan Glover, I’m an administration of justice major from Rochester,
New York. A freshman, as well. You say you want to provide a government
that leaves us alone. Quite frankly, I don’t want that. I want a government that is going to help me. I want a government that is going to help me fund my college education. I want a government that won’t define me by my FAFSA [Free Application for Federal Student Aid]
or by my family’s income. I’m a dollar sign with a heartbeat in this
nation. This society is a mirror image of Capitol Hill. Do you, Senator
Rand Paul, have a solution to come up with new American values so that
the citizens of this nation have a worth of more than dead presidents
and Ben Franklin?”
Here are some examples of how liberals cover their evil programs with positive terms. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) is one example. Who could be against protecting patients and offering affordable healthcare? It does neither.
Social Security. “What, you’re for social insecurity?” “Gay” instead of same-sex sex. Pro-choice rather than “killing pre-born babies.”
Franky Schaeffer, before he lost his mind and his way, described the tactic this way:
“Think of the use of labels to categorize
political activity. Some labels are used to neutralize the actions of
certain groups; others denote being ‘one of us,’ acceptable.
“The words ‘right wing,’
‘fundamentalist,’ ‘pro-life,’ ‘absolutist,’ and ‘deeply religious,’ are
put-downs more than categories. Conversely, think of the unspoken pat on
the back and blessing that the following words convey: ‘moderate,’
‘pluralistic,’ ‘liberal,’ ‘civil libertarian,’ ‘pragmatic,’ and
‘enlightened.’”[1]
These are cover words for theft by government action. Let’s call it what it is. Before the government can give money away, it must take it from somebody. It must steal before it can get so it can give in order to ingratiate itself to the voting public.
The late Margaret Thatcher said it best: “There is no such thing as public money. There is only taxpayers’ money.”
Is it any wonder that a majority of Democrats, who are recipients of much of the theft that comes from tax payers, have a favorable view of the federal income tax system?
“Besides Democrats, those most favorable
to the federal income tax system were liberals (47 percent), non-whites
(47 percent), 18- to 39-year-olds (46 percent), and those making less
than $50,000 per year (44 percent).
“Notably, the less wealthy and young people are less likely to pay any federal income tax.”
Herbert Spencer said, “That which fundamentally distinguishes the
slave [from the freeman] is that he labors under coercion to satisfy
another man’s desires.”A black student should understand this, but this one doesn’t. His ancestors were forced into slavery; he’s chosen slavery.
Boston Bombing: David Remnick Waxes Sympathy Over Evil
It is one thing to never forget, no matter the evil with which we are faced, our own humanity. It is quite another, however, and quite dangerous, to forget that we are dealing with evil. Such a thing not only invites more evil; worse still, it is a cruel slap in the face to the victims of evil.
And it was the victims I thought of as I read David Remnick's Saturday New Yorker essay, a poorly timed and even shameful attempt to define evil by something other than evil.
Remnick's thoughtlessness does not come from reporting on the background of the two men suspected of unspeakable acts, but in his attempt to ask us to sympathize with them as he defines them by their luxury problems:
Anzor’s elder son, Tamerlan, appeared
never to connect fully with American life. “I don’t have a single
American friend,” Tamerlan told a photographer named Johannes Hirn, who
asked to take pictures of him training as a boxer. “I don’t understand
them.”…
To see Dzhokhar’s name, to see his face. I
think this had to do with his older brother. Unless he was some sort of
sleeper agent, I think his brother had a pretty strong influence.
Tamerlan maybe felt like he didn’t belong, and he might have brainwashed
Dzhokhar into some radical view that twisted things in the Koran.” …
Dzhokhar’s Twitter feed—@J_tsar—is a
bewildering combination of banality and disaffection. (He seems to have
been tweeting even after the explosions at the finish line last Monday.)
As you scan it, you encounter a young man’s thoughts: his jokes, his
resentments, his prejudices, his faith, his desires.
March 14, 2012—a decade in america already, I want out …
The American dream wasn’t for everyone.
What they could not anticipate was the abysmal fate of their sons, lives
destroyed in a terror of their own making. The digital era allows no
asylum from extremism, let alone from the toxic combination of
high-minded zealotry and the curdled disappointments of young men. A
decade in America already, I want out.
Maybe Stalin took in stray cats and maybe Saddam Hussein slept with a stuffed rabbit. We know Lee Harvey Oswald and Timothy McVeigh felt out of place, and that Jeffrey Dahmer was lonely. And now we know that, like millions of American men their age, Tamerlan (26) and Dzohokhar (19) Tsarnaev had all kinds of crybaby problems.
Fill in the blanks all you want with those details, but shame on anyone who attempts to define evil by something other than the following…
Tamerlan and Dzohokhar Tsarnaev -- the brothers suspected of placing and detonating two bombs in a dense crowd gathered to watch Monday's Boston Marathon -- both lived in America. In fact, both lived among the middle class in one of America's greatest cities and enjoyed the education, leisure time, and social media luxuries that come with such a life.
In short, like so many in America, the Brothers Tsarnaev lived a life that many, both inside and outside of this country, would crawl over glass for.
Tamerlan and Dzohokhar not only emigrated with their family to the greatest and most prosperous country in the world; they also lived in a country that would feed, clothe, and educate them, but still not -- and this is important -- stop them if they chose to move to a place where they might not feel so isolated and out of place.
Despite what Remnick might have you believe, the two men suspected of mingling into a crowd filled with innocent children and finding that to be the perfect spot to place their deadly explosives, were neither victims of a sweeping history involving Stalin's madness, nor lost souls in an America they couldn't understand. No, they were men with almost limitless opportunities and choices -- including the choice to return to the Motherland (as Tamerlan reportedly did.)
Instead, though, they apparently made another choice -- to murder and maim as many innocents as they could, including 23-year-old Lu Lingzi, 29-year-old Krystie Campbell, 8-year-old Martin Richard, and Sean Collier, a 26-year-old police officer.
And after the success of a monstrous act that also maimed 170, the brothers reportedly made the choice… to party.
Unfortunately, Remnick's piece is likely to set The Media Narrative around these suspects. Sadly but quite predictably -- and with no apparent concern for the feelings of the victims -- media elites are already using social media to gush over and viralize Remnick's piece. And it should come as no surprise that the New York Times actually beat Remnick to the "poor widdle terrorist" punch yesterday.
Much of this is and will be motivated by the left's bizarre desire to forever rationalize radical Islam. For some reason, Islamists are the only racist, sexist, homophobic theocrats the media can't summon outrage against. I suspect it is also the result of industry-wide disappointment over the fact that the bad guys aren't right-wingers. (Would Remnick have summoned such eloquence for the savage second coming of McVeigh? Would the media be gushing over it?)
So what we have here is the media still looking for a way to blame the most inviting and inclusive country in the world for not being inviting and inclusive enough.
Whatever the media's motive, what we are seeing is moral illiteracy on steroids.
It is wrong and it is grotesque.
***ADDED: What a non-shock to discover Remnick is able to summon more empathy and eloquence for terrorists accused of mass murder than he did for the ridiculously peaceful Tea Party. Story here. Original story below...
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/04/20/Boston-Bombing-RemnickWaxes-Sympathy-Over-Evil
PK'S NOTE: Christie is NOT a conservative. He proves it again and again.
Gov. Christie to Expand New Jersey Gun Laws
Although New Jersey already has the second most stringent gun laws in the nation, Governor Chris Christie is expanding them to include guns rarely (if ever) used in crimes--guns like the Barrett .50 cal.
The Barrett .50 is hugely popular with upper-end gun aficionados. But with ammo for the weapon at almost $5 a round, its price makes it far less popular with run of the mill, average gun owners.
Nonetheless, Christie wants the gun banned and he wants to put controls on ammunition.
Christie also wants to limit childrens' accessibility to violent video games by providing that "a legal guardian provide consent" when a teen buys a video game rated "Mature" or "Adults Only."
Will these measures reduce gun crime? Christie said, "I don't know." He added, "Bad people are going to do bad things and so, would greater penalties deter people? You hope they do."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/04/19/Gov-Christie-To-Ban-Guns-Not-Used-In-Crime
PK'S NOTE: He is an American citizen (albeit recently); read him rights! If they can do this to this guy, they can do it to any one. Yes, question him but rights apply to all Americans. Graham and McCain are idiots and it is scary that they're in power of any sort.
Former DOJ Attorney Says Gov’t Is Making a Mistake Not Reading Boston Suspect His Miranda Rights — What You Need to Know
A former U.S. Department of Justice prosecutor says the federal government made a mistake in not immediately reading captured Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda rights and instead invoking a public safety exception.
Justice Department officials confirmed
to multiple news outlets Friday night that Tsarnaev did not receive a
Miranda warning and instead will be questioned by a special
interrogation team in the hope that he could give up more information,
such as whether he and his brother acted alone or if they received
training or direction from anyone abroad.
But Aitan Goelman, who served as a
Justice Department attorney for nine years and prosecuted the Oklahoma
City bombing case, said Saturday that he thinks the government is taking
a risk in invoking the exception that says police do not need to
give Tsarnaev the well-known warning and can still introduce any
statements he makes in court — because it might not hold up.
“The government is taking a chance in interviewing the suspect without reading his Miranda rights,” Goelman said on Fox News.
The public safety exception originated
in a 1980 New York case where a police officer was arresting an
individual matching a suspect description from a woman who said she had
just been raped. When the officer frisked the man, he found he was
wearing an empty shoulder holster, and after handcuffing him, asked
where the gun was. The man gestured and said, “The gun is over there,”
at which point the officer discovered a loaded handgun. The U.S. Supreme
Court ultimately ruled that the immediate need to protect the police or
public from danger permitted the officer to question the man right away
— and made his pre-Mirandized statements admissible in court.
“In that case the danger to the public
was immediate,” Goelman said on Fox News. “Here I think we’re talking
about potentially interviewing this guy when he wakes up in a hospital
after the police have been satisfied that the immediate danger is gone. I
think it’s a risk…there is a chance that any statement he makes after
giving an un-Mirandized statement might be suppressed [in court].”
Goelman noted that suppressing any statements from Tsarnaev — who became a naturalized U.S. citizen
on Sept. 11, 2012 — might not be completely detrimental to the case
because the government appears to have a lot of other evidence against
him already.
The public safety exception is not
permanent, and is meant to run out once the questions are no longer
about stopping an immediate danger to the public. Additionally, it’s
still unclear when Tsarnaev will be questioned — he is said to be
hospitalized in serious condition following injuries sustained in a
shootout with police Thursday night, and possibly during his capture on
Friday.
“There is a public safety exception in
cases of national security and potential charges involving acts of
terrorism, and so the government has that opportunity. Right now,
though, I believe that the suspect has been taken to a hospital,” U.S.
Attorney Carmen Ortiz told reporters Friday night.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who had said the government should hold Tsarnaev as an “enemy combatant” and not read him his Miranda rights, released a joint statement late Friday with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) reiterating that point.
“Now that the suspect is in custody,
the last thing we should want is for him to remain silent. It is
absolutely vital the suspect be questioned for intelligence gathering
purposes. We need to know about any possible future attacks which could
take additional American lives. The least of our worries is a criminal
trial which will likely be held years from now,” Graham and McCain said.
“Under the Law of War we can hold this suspect as a potential enemy
combatant not entitled to Miranda warnings or the appointment of
counsel. Our goal at this critical juncture should be to gather
intelligence and protect our nation from further attacks.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/20/former-doj-attorney-says-govt-is-making-a-mistake-not-reading-boston-suspect-his-miranda-rights-what-you-need-to-know
Napolitano To Rep: Questions About Boston Saudi Student 'Not Worthy Of An Answer'
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan’s questionDuncan: “We have someone who’s being deported due to national security concerns. We’ve got this guy who was there, we know he was there…and yet we’re going to deport him? We’re going to remove him from the scene?”
Napolitano: “If I might, I am unaware of anyone who is being deported for national security concerns at all related to Boston.”
Duncan: “He is being deported.”
Napolitano said as she understood it, the man was not technically a person of interest or a suspect, and “this is is an example of why it is so important to let law enforcement do its job.”
Duncan: “I want them to do their job. Wouldn’t you agree with me that it’s negligent for us as an American administration to deport someone who was reportedly at the scene of the bombing and we’re going to deport him, not to be able to question him anymore?”
Napolitano: “I am not going to answer that question it is so full of misstatements and misapprehension that it’s just not worthy of an answer…there’s been so much reported on this that’s been wrong I can’t even begin to tell you, congressman. We will provide you with accurate information as it becomes available.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/04/18/napolitano-to-rep-concerned-about-possible-terrorist-links-of-Saudi-student-not-worthy-of-an-answer
Another Terrorist Attack, Another Saudi Cover-Up?
Even as our focus remains on the manhunt for the second Chechen suspect, this Saudi story still simmers.
Abdulrahman Ali Al-Harbi with Azzam with Saudi diplomat Azzam bin Abdel Karim in a Boston hospitalAfter
the FBI rescheduled another postponed briefing on the Boston Marathon
Massacre for 8 p.m. on Wednesday night – and then canceled that one, too
– that was it. I was going to give the news circus a rest until
morning. Came the dawn I heard that terrorism expert Steven Emerson had dropped a bombshell Wednesday night on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program. Emerson reported that Abdulrahman Ali Alharbi, the Saudi national first identified as a “person of interest” and then downgraded, like a tropical storm, to “witness,” would be deported from the United States “on national security grounds.” This, Emerson added, “is very unusual.”
Yes. But also no. Amid similar conditions – a terrorist attack, an ongoing investigation and Saudi diplomatic pressure – we have seen Saudi nationals spirited out of the country en masse in the past rather than be exposed to any part of an investigative process.
I refer, of course, to the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001,
when, following a private meeting on Sept. 13 between President George
W. Bush and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to
Washington, “something strange began to happen,” as former Florida Sen.
Bob Graham writes in his 2004 book “Intelligence Matters.” (As Senate
Intelligence committee chairman, Graham co-chaired the Congressional
Joint Inquiry into 9/11.)
What’s almost worse is that for nearly three years, as Graham reports, “the White House and other agencies insisted that these flights never took place.” Bush lied, Saudis flied.
It seems beyond question that such Saudi collusion will be omitted from the archives at the George W. Bush library, which opens later this month in Texas – thanks to $500 million from anonymous donors.
But such collusion was just the beginning of the perfidious role the Bush administration played to strong-arm and block the investigation of Saudi involvement in 9/11 – a role that now makes me deeply regret voting for President Bush, particularly in 2004. The Bush administration cover-up would climax with the redaction of a 28-page chapter of the 9/11 Commission report regarding foreign, particularly Saudi, support for some of the al-Qaida hijackers.
We, the People, still can’t read those redacted pages – and, as Bob Graham wrote last Sept. 11 in a plea to re-open the 9/11 inquiry, they “represent only a fraction of the evidence of Saudi complicity that our government continues to shield from the public.”
I return to this unhealed wound in our recent past to make a point. The attacks of 9/11 and the Boston bombing may prove to have nothing to do with each other – except insofar as tearing our civilizational fabric in ways that can never be mended. But once again, the Saudi hold over the U.S. government has been exposed.
Eerie parallels with 9/11 go beyond the very special treatment seemingly accorded to 20-year-old Alharbi, who, as Walid Shoebat has reported at his essential website, Shoebat.com, comes from a Saudi clan that proudly claims many al-Qaida members and Gitmo prisoners to its name.
It was Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal who, the New York Times reported, “hurriedly” flew to Washington in 2003 to meet with President Bush over Saudi concerns that classified sections of a released congressional report linked senior Saudi officials to the 9/11 attacks. As noted, these sections and more remain under government lock-and-key.
This week, it was Prince Saud again, at age 73 still foreign minister, who was visiting Washington. His photo-op with Secretary of State John Kerry, scheduled for the Tuesday morning after the Boston bombings, was abruptly canceled due to “scheduling” concerns – an alibi openly derided during a State briefing by the Associated Press’ Matt Lee. A closed meeting, however, took place. “Let me provide a readout of the meeting for all of you,” State spokesman Patrick Ventrell schoolmarmishly intoned, likely driving Lee’s acid skepticism.
Later that same day, Alharbi, whose startling clan ties alone bear painstaking scrutiny, went from “person of interest” to “witness.”
On Wednesday, Reuters reported that President Obama held an unscheduled meeting with both Prince Saud and Saudi Ambassador Adel al-Jubeir at the White House.
That night, Emerson dropped his bombshell about Alharbi’s hasty deportation.
I can’t connect these dots. I can’t predict whether Alharbi will be deported in the end. But I lay them out there for posterity before they vanish in the rush to the next story, because the fact remains we seem to be reliving disturbing patterns from our past, even down to some pretty unusual details.
After 9/11, there was a lethal (still unsolved) anthrax attack. After the Boston bombings, two ricin-laced letters were intercepted en route to Republican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi and President Obama. (A suspect, Paul Kevin Curtis, has been arrested.)
After 9/11, Mohamed Atta’s father made the news by attesting to his son’s non-participation in the attacks, even insisting that he was still alive. Yesterday, Alharbi’s father made news by criticizing the media for reporting that his son had come under suspicion.Another coincidence: Both attacks were preceded by intensive efforts in Washington to legalize illegal aliens. Of course, in 2001, we were talking about 3 million illegal aliens, and in 2013 the baseline is 11 million. This surge is largely because Bush never secured the border (another reason I wish I hadn’t voted for him).
All coincidence aside, there is a crucial question our recent experience compels us to ask: Is a Saudi cover-up happening again?
http://www.rightsidenews.com/2013041932375/editorial/us-opinion-and-editorial/another-terrorist-attack-another-saudi-cover-up.html
Glenn: “After what I have learned this week I’m a changed person."
I want you to listen to me carefully for the next 20 minutes.This is very, very important. What we do going forward from here will determine the fate of our nation. Make no mistake. This story is number 2 because of what I know. What we do will make this the most important story of our lifetime. What’s happening now is very important. What happens in the aftermath will make it the most important, because it will either save our country or we will be done.We’ve had a press all week that has been celebrating the idea that this might have been a Tea Party person that wanted to perpetrate this crime. Now never before in my history have in my history of broadcast, in my history as an American, have I ever heard the press gleefully wish that they want an American to be responsible for an American tragedy.
I’ve never heard people want to believe the worst in people. It;s what makes us America. We trust each other. We like each other. We want to believe the best in each other.
But our media wants to believe the worst of about 50% of this country. When I talk about progressives, I’m not talking about the average person. I’m talking about maybe 8% of our population that they truly understand what progressivism is. I believe the average Democrat, even the average progressive doesn’t really know what they’re doing. I mean they think they do. They’re not. They have not done the years of homework and study that I have on that movement.
I still believe the best in our country. But hear me clearly – after what I have learned this week I’m a changed person. After what I have learned this week, I believe our country is over. America is dying and breathing her last gasp. If we do not resuscitate on this story, we close the lid and close the book on our country and begin to write a new book. Now that doesn’t mean that you’re not the author. That there’s not a constitutionalist that is the author of the new book. It just means what we have is over and a struggle begins for a new Republic.
That sounds awfully dramatic. But when you have the press not only rooting for it to be a white American that blew up Americans, but then on top of it, in total denial that Islamic extremists even exist, and that caliphate is somebody that anybody wants. That Jihadists even exist.
Think about the thing we were discussing passing this week. Gun control because we have to be able to protect. Because the government can protect you. We were talking about talking about making it more difficult to buy guns while somebody just blew the legs off American citizens. With what? Guns? No. With something that my grandmother used all summer in her kitchen.
At the same time we’re talking about comprehensive immigration reform on things that nobody has even read. Meanwhile who has been blowing the legs off of our citizens? People who are foreign nationals here on a Visa. Here under amnesty. Because our immigration, and amnesty situation is so screwed up, that these guys did they really escape persecution? We’re finding out now that mom is in jail because she was a thief. This summer she was stealing. We just heard the audio of the dad back in Russia. He sounds pretty much like an extremist.
But that’s not the worst of it.
I want you to listen carefully. Yesterday, the F.B.I. released the pictures of and video of two men they say were suspects in the Boston bombings. These are the one was killed last night, and the other hopefully being killed right now. They say they believe the two men carried and placed the two bombs that killed the three innocent Americans including an eight year old boy and injured more than 200 Americans.
Absent from their announcement was any mention of the Saudi national. Now the documents were brought to our attention at TheBlaze, and those documents indicate that this guy is scheduled for deportation next Tuesday due to issues related to national security. The document goes on to say that the individual is linked to the Boston bombing. That’s what the federal document says.
This is the same person that we were initially told was a person of interest. This was the Saudi national in the hospital. His apartment was in Revere, Massachusetts. It was raided. The items were removed. And then we were told he was just a possible witness. And then we were finally told by the authorities he had nothing to do with the attack in fact he wasn’t a witness to the crime. Why was he in the hospital? How did he get to the ground zero? What was he doing there? He wasn’t even a witness? Really?
This guy who wasn’t a witness is suddenly being deported next Tuesday, whisked off our continent to go back to Saudi Arabia, and he wasn’t even a witness – yet the documents he’s being deported voluntarily on terror charges linked to the Boston bombing.
I want you to hear me clearly. If you think everybody in the government is bad you’re wrong. The only reason TheBlaze knows this because we have several — I can’t count them on both hands – several sources who’re brave, valiant Patriotic Americans that work in all departments at all levels of this governmnent. Who have contacted TheBlaze one way or another, and said “help, help, help.”
There are several dedicated Americans in the law enforcement community that decided they could not stand idly by, and let the truth be swept under the rug. That a deportation order was being issued. It was issued Tuesday 4:00 p.m. by an organization or a government entity that most people have never heard of called the National Targeting Center. It’s a little known federal antiterrorism division.
After reporting this on TheBlaze.com yesterday, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement categorically denied, calling it grossly in error. ICE claimed there was a Saudi national in custody waiting deportation but it was completely unrelated to the Boston bombing.
After that the story discrediting me and TheBlaze was carried by a number of national media outlets, and some of those national media outlets were given the story by “The Blaze” top executive to top executive.
After a number of those media outlets discredited us or tried to with the ICE disclaimer, we received another call from yet another Patriotic citizen in our government. This one from a high ranking congressional aide who told us that the deportation order that we had just reported on had just been requested and delivered to his boss. He requested anonymity to protect those who had secretly ordered report, but read to us the eight page report that we reported yesterday and throughout the day.
Director of the Department of Homeland Security, the head of the department that you created to keep Americans from having their legs blown off, Janet Napolitano yesterday was asked about the Saudi national and his pending deportation. She refused to answer. ICE angrily mocked our story calling it false. The F.B.I. has changed their story about the man every day since the bombing. Made no mention of him at yesterday’s news conference., even though there is still a standing order of deportation and on the documents it says linked to the Boston bombing.
Now you ask yourself, what’s going on? Why did the President just happen to stop by when a Saudi official happened to be in an office?
Anybody who has ever been been around Presidents, Prime ministers, kings, knows. I have done it myself. ‘I cannot meet with that person.’ ‘Glenn, you’re going to go into this office and you’re going to talk to him.’ ‘I don’t want to talk to him. Who the hell is he?’ ‘Go in and talk to him.’ Five minutes in, ‘Hey Bill’ ‘Oh Glenn’ ‘Oh Mr. President how are you?’ That’s the way it works.
Why was the President meeting with somebody unscheduled earlier this week? A Saudi official. Who is this Saudi man who was in the hospital, given a new international cell phone and apologized to according to him in Saudi press? Who is he, I wonder? Why would anyone linked to the bombings be deported? If he’s involved wouldn’t he be prosecuted? If he’s a witness why wouldn’t you want him to testify? Why would you allow someone who was standing by the bomb be deported? Why would he leave? And why hasn’t anyone in the media taken an interest in finding out why? Why are they silent?
“The Blaze” is interested. And TheBlaze will not comply. We will not sit down. We will not shut up. We will not be intimidated. We look hard into looking who he is. Who he’s connected to, and why he seems to be offered a ticket to freedom even though he’s been linked to bombing. Don’t believe me? Don’t believe me. Six Congressmen have verified.
One of our brave sources asked me to do something very specific and when I was told to do it I said ‘That’s crazy talk. What does the hell does that mean?’ They told me what it meant. I can’t at this time tell you what it means. But I want to do it one more time.
On Monday I reveal everything we know. So let me just say this to those at the highest echelons of government. No the tagging system. They know about events. Not files, events.
Let me send this message very clear: We know who this Saudi national is. It is in your best interest of the integrity of the people of United States of America. It’s best coming from you, not from a news organization. It’s best coming from you. You have until Monday. We have information on who this man is. And listen to me carefully. In your little “event” world, we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man. I know that doesn’t make any sense to you right now. But on Monday it will.
It makes sense to somebody in Washington.
I don’t bluff. I make promises. The truth matters. I’ve had enough of what you’ve done to our country.
I thought I had heard and seen it all. I thought I didn’t trust my government. Oh no, no, no, no.
There is no depth that these people will not stoop to. They have until Monday and then TheBlaze will expose it.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/04/19/glenn-%E2%80%9Cafter-what-i-have-learned-this-week-im-a-changed-person-%E2%80%9D/
PK'S NOTE: Yes, this is a boring topic but it is important to read and understand what is coming.
Fed Fueling Stock Market Inflation
The stock market has recently matched the highs reached before the 2008 financial meltdown.Inflation is allegedly tame and within "acceptable" limits.
Fact or fiction?
The Federal Reserve has engaged in monetary easing for almost 5 years now. From QE 1, to QE 2, Operation Twist, and most recently, QE 3, the central bank has infused almost $3 trillion into the monetary system.
The Fed's efforts have been geared to kick-starting the economy. When combined with massive federal deficits in excess of over $900 billion per year since 2008, this loose monetary policy, along with an expansionary fiscal policy, should normally set the stage for a significant inflation risk in an economy, particularly after 5 years.
The consumer price index for February 2013, however, shows an unadjusted inflation rate of 2% for the preceding 12 months.
With inflation allegedly under control, the Fed is continuing to pursue a loose monetary policy which is very similar to the loose monetary policy that got our nation into the housing bubble of 2005 to 2008!
The Federal Reserve is following a policy of Keynesianism 2.0 as outlined in a paper by Ulrich von Suntum, which suggests "...a new form of Keynesian policy, which rests on monetary rather than fiscal policy. In this approach, instead of borrowing in order to create a substitute demand, the state creates additional credit in order to restore private investment. While this might imply temporarily negative central bank interest rates, it does not require direct interventions in the private capital market by either the central bank or the government. It is argued that such an approach is both cheaper and more effective than the traditional deficit spending policy is."
Suntum's paper is consistent with the Fed's own research and provides an understanding of the basis for a great deal of the Fed's monetary easing policies today.
The reality of the Fed's actions, when combined with expansionary fiscal policy, is that neither fiscal nor monetary policy is effective any longer in dealing with the systemic structural issues in the Western world's economies.
Additionally, the Federal Reserve's policies are borderline negligent and irresponsible. The Fed is creating the next bubble that will make the housing bubble bursting look tame.
When interest rates have been maintained at near zero rates for over five years, entire economic structures and systems/businesses become dependent upon such low rates.
The Fed's current policies fail to reflect that economic uncertainty is preventing the expansion of the U.S. economy as opposed to the cost of funds. Ben Bernanke's doctoral thesis asserts this very point about the impact of uncertainty on investment.
Uncertainty exists in many forms. At present, the uncertainty of the impact of the Affordable Care Act, the unknown impact of the Dodd-Frank bill, the impact of shrinking household incomes due to FICA increases and medical insurance costs, as well as unstable state and local governments, have all combined to cause consumers and businesses to be reluctant to spend.
When there is a reluctance to spend and significant money is concurrently infused into the economy, a logical alternative is that the funds will be invested in the financial markets.
The amount of cash that is currently idle on corporate balance sheets and on the financial statements of many Americans has likely fueled this recent surge in the stock market. Rather than spend on consumables and investment due to uncertainty, money is surging into the stock market.
The net benefits of the Federal Reserve deliberately following a loose monetary policy are clear. While the net benefits may be clear, the economic downside is dangerous over the long run.
Some of the benefactors of current monetary policy include very weak or damaged industries and governments that are able to use "cheap" funds to prolong the day of reckoning for decades of financial neglect and overspending.
For the housing market and those homeowners now underwater, the cheap interest rates promote temporary and artificially higher home prices until monetary easing is halted.
As a CPA, I have learned that for every buyer there is a seller. In other words, the "good deal" that exists for those beneficiaries of loose monetary policy makes them victims of the "bad deal" when the market corrects.
Decisions are being made today due to significantly lower cost of funds that will not appear to be such great decisions in the long run.
The value of allowing an economy to correct for excesses is that it encourages people not to engage in that behavior again. When irresponsible behavior is rewarded by irresponsible actions on the part of the Federal Reserve, the stage is set for the next economic calamity.
A decline in the stock market in the United States of between 10 to 15% by the end of 2013 is very likely. This decline will be fueled by profit takers, and the eventual ending of quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve towards the end of this year.
As occurred with the housing market, all of those who benefited on the way up will now be seeking additional federal bailouts. This time, however, the sole responsibility for the disaster belongs in Washington.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/04/fed_fueling_stock_market_inflation.html#ixzz2R1uabnDa
Obama Fizzles Out
The man is slipping from the limelight. The marquee man from MSM and Hollywood and Vine is headed for Sunset Boulevard.
Right from the start of his 2008 campaign, the MSM gave Obama the star treatment. He was their main event. He was billed as a transformational figure -- a visionary who would (1) unify the country and (2) lead us to a fairer economic prosperity and (3) bring us respect abroad in a world of lessened tensions.
In 2009 Newsweek editor Evan Thomas summed up the MSM adoration of Obama when he said, "I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above -- above the world, he's sort of God.
The god-factor resulted in a de facto "don't ask don't tell" pact between Obama and the media. The media didn't ask Obama to detail his hope and change and he didn't tell. Gods don't have to explain themselves. It was just hope and change -- trust me ("Just give us our orders" Chris Matthews). That gave Obama an air of mystery that simply enhanced his front-page appeal.
The mystery element has been crucial to Obama's success. It made him impervious to conventional political attacks and attacks on his person. A twenty-year association with an America-bashing Reverend Wright? His association with Ayers? His college records? How petty. How droll. These might be questions one asked of an ordinary politician, but not a man of high-minded vision who would unite us on our path to his mysterious place where all of us get a fair shot and a fair shake and leave our petty biases and prejudices behind.
Moreover, his demeanor was that of a leader above the fray and hurly-burly of beltway politics. Not only was he a man of style and grace with a captivating smile, but a seer whose political vision was neither of the hackneyed leftist or rightist variety. Obama was charting a new "centrist" course through the Scylla and Charybdis of the old antagonisms between left and right. One doesn't ask such a figure for his passport or birth certificate.
The de facto "don't ask/don't tell" pact Obama had with the media began to crumble as far back as 2011 with this outburst from HardBall Matthews
Since
then it has became harder and harder for MSM to spin Obama as a
visionary and unifier with transformational powers in domestic or
foreign policy.
(1) The great unifier?
Obama the great unifier who is above the fray of politics-as-usual? In fact, it is readily apparent that he is just the reverse. When it comes to getting out the vote, it's identity politics in spades (Okay -- choke on that). Out comes the community organizer -- resentment mongering, class warfare, evil bankers.
As Karl Rove recently wrote in a WSJ article,
(2) Leading us to a fairer economic prosperity?
The domestic policies he has put forward so far have all the innovative cachet of a plain old tax-and-spend left-wing Democrat. They might as well be the initiatives of a Carter or even a Johnson. How does Obama's war on poverty differ from President Johnson's? Granted the level of nastiness and coercion, especially from Holder's DOJ, has risen to a Mafia-like shakedown level but the economics are basically the same. His latest "compromise" budget proposal has even drawn ire from both sides of the aisle. If his own party is willing to take him to task he has definitely lost his transformational status.
(3) Respect abroad in a world of lessened tensions?
As regards his foreign policy, which was to create "mutual respect" between the Islamic world and the U.S., even Thomas Friedman of the NYT admits that the Arab Spring and Obama support of the Muslim Brotherhood is a bust. And as for in general improving the image or status of the U.S. abroad by leading from behind -- well, it doesn't seem that Russia, China, or North Korea have quite got the respect part. What the president has accomplished is alienating and diminishing our status with former allies. To wit, the recent snub of the legacy of Margaret Thatcher which just makes him seem small and unpresidential.
It's hard to spin any of this into superstar status. It has become well-nigh impossible to see anything special or visionary about Obama's presidency. Clearly, he is on the path from being seen as a transcendent, transformational leader to being seen as a humdrum, run-of-the mill progressive with all the charisma of a Dukakis. Next we will see a cartoon from Ramirez with Obama's head sticking out of tank emblazoned with "tax-and-spend."
But the decline and fall of the MSM spin is giving some rise to the "fringe" CPA spin on Obama. The CPA thesis (spin) is that Obama, like his classmates in pre-law at Columbia (class of '83), was smitten by the Cloward-Piven-Alinskyite strategy to bring down the white-power, racist capitalist system and turn America into a socialist state. The CPA plan is that America could be destroyed from within by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare, and entitlements. This would proceed by inducing more and more of the American populace to become dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, and unemployment. The resulting collapse of the system would trigger the crisis needed to bring in a socialist state as the saving alternative to the failed, evil capitalist system. Indeed, that may be what motivates President Obama. But all of that is dismissed by MSM as lunatic hysteria.
But the CPA spin, if anything, is beginning to seem less looney and the MSM spin of Obama, as the transformational visionary who would bring us unity at home and abroad, is looking more and more like a stupid teenage crush.
Even the thoughtful and fair-minded Ben Stein is troubled with the vision of a CPA President,
They are stuck with their Beau Brummell in the White House looking more and more like just another hackneyed leftist politician of the Carter-Mondale variety who never really had anything new to offer. The MSM is left with a red face and a would-be in the attic.
Right from the start of his 2008 campaign, the MSM gave Obama the star treatment. He was their main event. He was billed as a transformational figure -- a visionary who would (1) unify the country and (2) lead us to a fairer economic prosperity and (3) bring us respect abroad in a world of lessened tensions.
In 2009 Newsweek editor Evan Thomas summed up the MSM adoration of Obama when he said, "I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above -- above the world, he's sort of God.
The god-factor resulted in a de facto "don't ask don't tell" pact between Obama and the media. The media didn't ask Obama to detail his hope and change and he didn't tell. Gods don't have to explain themselves. It was just hope and change -- trust me ("Just give us our orders" Chris Matthews). That gave Obama an air of mystery that simply enhanced his front-page appeal.
The mystery element has been crucial to Obama's success. It made him impervious to conventional political attacks and attacks on his person. A twenty-year association with an America-bashing Reverend Wright? His association with Ayers? His college records? How petty. How droll. These might be questions one asked of an ordinary politician, but not a man of high-minded vision who would unite us on our path to his mysterious place where all of us get a fair shot and a fair shake and leave our petty biases and prejudices behind.
Moreover, his demeanor was that of a leader above the fray and hurly-burly of beltway politics. Not only was he a man of style and grace with a captivating smile, but a seer whose political vision was neither of the hackneyed leftist or rightist variety. Obama was charting a new "centrist" course through the Scylla and Charybdis of the old antagonisms between left and right. One doesn't ask such a figure for his passport or birth certificate.
The de facto "don't ask/don't tell" pact Obama had with the media began to crumble as far back as 2011 with this outburst from HardBall Matthews
There's no Peace Corps, there is no Special Forces, there is no 50-miles hikes, there's no moon program, there's nothing to root for. What are we trying to do in this administration? Why does he want a second term? Would he tell us? What's he going to do in the second term? More of this? Is this it? Is this as good as it gets? Where are we going? Are we going to do something the second term? He has yet to tell us. He has not said one thing what he's going to do in the second term. He never tells what he's going to do with regard to reforming our healthcare systems, Medicare, Medicaid, how is he going to reform Social Security? Is he going to deal with long-term debt? How? Is he going to reform the tax system? How? Just tell us. Why are we in this fight with him? Just tell us, commander, give us our orders [italics added] and tell us where we're going,By 2011 even [sic] Evan Thomas felt comfortable blasting his former "God."
He's
not being honest about just how bad this is going to be -- no, he was
partisan. He was God [bleep] Democrat! He was just, you know -- being a
party guy.
(1) The great unifier?
Obama the great unifier who is above the fray of politics-as-usual? In fact, it is readily apparent that he is just the reverse. When it comes to getting out the vote, it's identity politics in spades (Okay -- choke on that). Out comes the community organizer -- resentment mongering, class warfare, evil bankers.
As Karl Rove recently wrote in a WSJ article,
President
Obama likes pretending he floats above politics. In fact, he is the
most compulsively partisan president in modern times. Everything he says
and does is better understood through a partisan lens.
The domestic policies he has put forward so far have all the innovative cachet of a plain old tax-and-spend left-wing Democrat. They might as well be the initiatives of a Carter or even a Johnson. How does Obama's war on poverty differ from President Johnson's? Granted the level of nastiness and coercion, especially from Holder's DOJ, has risen to a Mafia-like shakedown level but the economics are basically the same. His latest "compromise" budget proposal has even drawn ire from both sides of the aisle. If his own party is willing to take him to task he has definitely lost his transformational status.
(3) Respect abroad in a world of lessened tensions?
As regards his foreign policy, which was to create "mutual respect" between the Islamic world and the U.S., even Thomas Friedman of the NYT admits that the Arab Spring and Obama support of the Muslim Brotherhood is a bust. And as for in general improving the image or status of the U.S. abroad by leading from behind -- well, it doesn't seem that Russia, China, or North Korea have quite got the respect part. What the president has accomplished is alienating and diminishing our status with former allies. To wit, the recent snub of the legacy of Margaret Thatcher which just makes him seem small and unpresidential.
It's hard to spin any of this into superstar status. It has become well-nigh impossible to see anything special or visionary about Obama's presidency. Clearly, he is on the path from being seen as a transcendent, transformational leader to being seen as a humdrum, run-of-the mill progressive with all the charisma of a Dukakis. Next we will see a cartoon from Ramirez with Obama's head sticking out of tank emblazoned with "tax-and-spend."
But the decline and fall of the MSM spin is giving some rise to the "fringe" CPA spin on Obama. The CPA thesis (spin) is that Obama, like his classmates in pre-law at Columbia (class of '83), was smitten by the Cloward-Piven-Alinskyite strategy to bring down the white-power, racist capitalist system and turn America into a socialist state. The CPA plan is that America could be destroyed from within by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare, and entitlements. This would proceed by inducing more and more of the American populace to become dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, and unemployment. The resulting collapse of the system would trigger the crisis needed to bring in a socialist state as the saving alternative to the failed, evil capitalist system. Indeed, that may be what motivates President Obama. But all of that is dismissed by MSM as lunatic hysteria.
But the CPA spin, if anything, is beginning to seem less looney and the MSM spin of Obama, as the transformational visionary who would bring us unity at home and abroad, is looking more and more like a stupid teenage crush.
Even the thoughtful and fair-minded Ben Stein is troubled with the vision of a CPA President,
And what will become of America when Obama has disarmed us, as he openly plans to do? There will be no more glorious America. These truly may be the final days, the end times. I guess at some level, possibly a very deep level, Mr. Obama does not want America to survive. The Manchurian Candidate. I pray I am wrong.So the MSM is stuck. The CPA spin is looney and their own spin has unraveled. For the MSM, Obama might as well be Humpty Dumpty. All the MSM horses and the MSM men can't put the spin back together again. The MSM is locked into a position where Obama is neither demon nor savior. There is no story there.
They are stuck with their Beau Brummell in the White House looking more and more like just another hackneyed leftist politician of the Carter-Mondale variety who never really had anything new to offer. The MSM is left with a red face and a would-be in the attic.
No comments:
Post a Comment