Views on the News
Views on the News*
May 10, 2014
Almost six years later, and without one single achievement to hang his hat on, this emotional experiment of electing our first black President has gone full cycle. Not only was the guilt of slavery exonerated in 2008, it was buried in 2012, along with four brave Americans. Today, what all Americans face are the emerging details which are exceedingly impossible to deny. From the killing of Border Patrol Agent Terry and hundreds of others slain south of our border to the embarrassing Lois Lerner’s testimony prior to her declaring that she would not testify, to the latest Benghazi unraveling, which has now initiated the overdue call for a House Select Committee, Obama’s house of cards is finally starting to crumble. Consider his intimidation against his political adversaries by his Gestapo like ordering of the IRS, his number one law enforcement stooge who continually refused to enforce our Nation’s laws, and in addition, Obama himself running roughshod over the limitations of his office with regular abandon. Incredibly, all this has taken place while our media has reacted with its blind and deaf mannerisms. Back in 2008, Obama the candidate promised to “fundamentally transform” America, not only here at home but also overseas as well. From day one, he lowered American standards by bowing to foreign officials. He is now ordering a blanket reduction of our military while at the same time cashiering out of the service senior officers who are deemed insubordinate to his demands. We all know what he has done to our medical industry, and it’s just the tip of that authoritative iceberg. He not only refuses to defend our nation’s borders from illegal entries but in fact has signed legal actions with foreign countries against one of our own American States. Yes, we elected our “first black President” and he turned out to be as undeserving as was our supposed intentions. It’s time to realize an end to this experiment, since after all these years of an Obama Presidency, all we hear is how racism’s still alive and well in America, so it seems that no matter what we do, some people will just never be happy, so let’s stop trying!
(“Correcting a Misjudgment” by Jim Bowman dated May 4, 2014 published by American Clarion at http://www.americanclarion.com/correcting-misjudgment-30682 )
Democrats have long since realized that people who are poor and dependent on the government will vote for them, even if it is their liberal policies that created the poverty and dependency. That's why every ghetto in America is controlled lock, stock, and barrel by liberal Democrats. Unfortunately, so many destitute Americans have yet to realize that liberal policies don't fight poverty; they maintain it. Perhaps the worst thing about that is the betrayal of the poor people involved. Most of them are just having a hard time and looking for a little help to make life easier for themselves and their families. Little do they realize that the "help" the liberals are offering is akin to a drug dealer offering them a free sample. Not every liberal intends to "hook" the people they're "helping" on poverty, but they're certainly not very upset when it happens. The more poor dependent Americans there are, the more votes liberals get; the more needed they feel, the larger the budget becomes for the non-functional, big government programs they support. Liberals have a lot of perverse incentives to keep as many Americans poor as possible and they push those incentives in a big way:
· Overuse Of Welfare Programs: Americans are a generous people and most of us are fine with having a safety net that helps people who get down on their luck. The problem with liberals is that they do everything humanly possible to turn that safety net into a hammock. It's a trap that will make you dependent on the government while utterly ruining you as a human being.
· Supporting Illegal Immigrants Instead Of American Workers: Democrats almost across the board are in favor of allowing as many illegal immigrants as possible into the country. There are millions of poor Americans who are out of work simply because they can't work as cheaply as an illegal immigrant who doesn't have health care, doesn't pay car insurance, and who can lie on his taxes with impunity. Few policies would do more to put poor Americans back to work than getting rid of the foreigners who are breaking the law and cheating the system in order to steal their jobs away.
· Fighting FOR Criminals, Not Victims: Crime makes it harder to raise your kids, decreases property values, and stops people from moving freely around their neighborhoods. Lliberals seem to spend all of their time worrying about THE CRIMINALS, not the people they're robbing, raping, and murdering. Liberals are always fighting to get criminals out of jail, looking to change the laws to make it harder to convict people of crimes, and trying to play up conflicts between poor communities and the police.
· Fighting To Keep Poor Americans Out Of Good Schools: Liberals have fought hard to keep poor Americans in lousy, failing schools. Liberals want poor kids trapped in failing schools because giving them the option to flee would take money out of the pockets of their teachers’ union allies. Liberals also fight tooth and nail to kill testing standards and keep lousy teachers in schools.
· Killing Job Opportunities For The Poor: Ronald Reagan was spot-on when he said, "The best social program is a productive job for anyone who’s willing to work." Because of Barack Obama's liberal policies, there are actually a million less Americans working today than there were the day he took office even though our nation's population has grown by almost six million people. Since the poor have less experience and fewer job skills, Obama's job-killing policies are tougher on them than any other group of Americans.
Hopefully after five years of failed Democrat policies, poor Americans will finally wake up to cast off the ruling elites who hook people on government programs for their vote.
(“5 Ways Liberals Hurt the Poor” by John Hawkins dated May 3, 2014 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2014/05/03/5-ways-liberals-hurt-the-poor-n1832944 )
The President’s popularity has totally plummeted in the polls rivaling or even exceeding the worst of President George W. Bush. All the pundits give the poor man an “F” for performance. However Barack Obama defines success differently than the rest of America. Therefore he believes a higher grade for his report card is amply justified:
· Socialists try to
cut down the upper class, to revitalize the lower class and make everyone equal
except the elite 1%. A greater percentage of Americans receive government aid
today than work full-time. GOVERNMENTAL
seniors’ reserve paper dollar stash will be good in the future for
warming their hands. GOVERNMENTAL
· Obama Care has
created such confusion that the entire healthcare system is in total disarray.
The so called rich and experienced doctors are leaving the profession in
droves. GOVERNMENTAL DEPENDENCY,
· The use of the
NSA to spy on all Americans and the abuse of the IRS to stymie any and all
political dissent is not unprecedented since it follows the path of other
fascist leaders of history. GOVERNMENTAL
· The weakening of
The collapse of the college
to job path, the rise of the “to big to fail” and” to big to
jail” bank aristocracy are all examples of a man with the (reverse) Midas
touch, because if he has touched it, it is worse. Therefore,
(“Obama: Mission Accomplished” by Bill Tatro dated May 9, 2014 published by Town Hall at http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/billtatro/2014/05/09/obama-mission-accomplished-n1835710 )
Yes, there is class warfare in America, but it’s not between the rich and poor, but between the political class and the rest of the citizenry who bear the brunt of political power and pay the price in lost liberty, property, and opportunity. In a truly free market, the fortunes are made by those who deliver value to others, quite often to millions of others. Those who think it’s fair to impose discriminatory and punitive higher tax rates on society’s economic benefactors have a warped sense of justice. Many of today’s upper-income Americans obtain much, if not all, of their income through cronyism from those who wield political power in Washington. Such cronyism is the antithesis of true capitalism; rather, it is the age-old story of political elites rigging the system to their financial benefit at the expense of the majority of the population. Cronyism typifies the corruption of the political class. Various economists have pointed out that if all the money spent on federal anti-poverty programs were given to those below the official poverty line, a poor family of four would have an annual income near $70,000. As it is, the poor get less than half the money appropriated in their name; most of it goes to fund the bureaucracies that administer those programs. President Obama instituted a policy whereby monthly payments to retire college-related debt are capped and the balance forgiven if someone works for the government for 10 years. If you work in the private sector, however, and pay the taxes that fund the salaries of public sector workers, you have to keep repaying college loans for a decade longer. There definitely is class warfare in America today, but not enough Americans perceive the battle lines. Those of us who go about our lives earning a living and leaving others alone are the targets of an aggressive progressive political class that is erecting a formidable mechanism of bureaucratic domination, and at this point in time, “we the people” of the private, taxpaying sector are losing the war.
(“The Real Class Warfare in America Today” by Mark Hendrickson dated May 2, 2014 published by Forbes at http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2014/05/02/the-real-class-warfare-in-america-today/ )
Obama will eventually adopt the Russian line on Ukraine if for no other reason than to avoid exposing his own impotence. It’s why Obama has adopted the Iranian position on its nuclear weapons program, accepted Russia’s Syrian WMD deal and why Kerry and his cronies are busy blaming Israel for the collapse of peace negotiations that were actually sabotaged by the PLO leader. If you can’t beat them, join them, and Obama can’t beat them. Joining them is his only option. Whatever else went down there, Benghazi had to be covered up because it was easier to join the Muslim mobs burning American flags by throwing a Coptic Christian into jail and filming an apology. Obama has preemptively surrendered to anyone and everyone. Even countries he opposes on an ideological basis have discovered that if they slap him around long enough, he will come around. Egypt held the line, despite the threats from the State Department and the White House, until Obama decided that it was easier to give in to General Al-Sisi. Obama declared a red line on Syria. Assad is still in power and the red line is crumpled up in an Oval Office desk along with a dozen candy bar wrappers and a dented Nobel Peace Prize. It’s easier for Obama to surrender and pretend that was his policy all along than to put up a fight. It’s easier for him to side with Israel’s enemies than with the Jewish State. It was easier for him to appease Putin before the invasion of Ukraine, now it’s easier for him to throw out a few hashtags and stay well away from the fighting and then at an opportune moment, pressure Ukraine into accepting whatever deal the Russians put forward. Ukraine, like Israel, like so many other allies, will be forced to pay a high price to cover up the ego and incompetence of Barack Obama. Obama’s foreign policy is one big cover up. From Europe to Asia to the Middle East, allies are sacrificed, positions are abandoned and credibility is set on fire to convince Americans that their leader knows what he’s doing. To avoid ever losing a fight and being seen as a loser, Obama preemptively surrenders. The media’s story is that he meant to do these things. Some Presidents cultivated a policy of strategic ambiguity to keep the country’s enemies off balance, but Obama does it to keep Americans off balance about what he really did and what he really meant. Obama makes sure to take at least two positions on every foreign policy issue. He evolves and then devolves and evolves again. He issues statements that sound bold and decisive, but with just enough wriggle room to allow for a sellout. Obama’s speeches are full of double meanings and ambiguities. Benghazi wasn’t an aberration. It was typical of his foreign policy. It was the policy of Hillary Clinton who liked to talk tough, saying of Gaddafi, “We came, we saw, he died”, while her spokesman called Assad a “dead man walking”, but when push came to shove, she abandoned her people to die without asking for military aid. Hillary polished her resume, they went, they died. Why don’t we talk about Obama’s foreign policy? Why don’t we talk about the botched war in Afghanistan, his failure to stand up for the Green Movement in Iran, his push for the Islamist Arab Spring, his fumbling in Syria and his poor relations with traditional US allies in the Middle East? Did Obama sacrifice 1,600 Americans in Afghanistan in a phony campaign for an election talking point? Is there any part of Obama’s universally disastrous foreign policy that we can talk about, or is it all one big cover up?
(“Obama’s Foreign Policy: One Big Coverup” by Daniel Greenfield dated May 9, 2014 published by Front Page Magazine at http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obamas-foreign-policy-one-big-coverup/ )
* There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news. I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning. Updates have been made this week to the following issue sections:
· Social Security at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/Culture/socialsecurity.php
· National Defense at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/defense.php