Views on the News
October 13, 2012
Views on the News*
The “Silent Majority” is alive and well and just as powerful as ever. You see them everyday. They’re all around you. They are the folks you see at parties who stand around the edges of a group discussing politics. They’re the people who go to church, nearly every Sunday, and raise their children to be respectful of others and live useful, productive lives. They send their kids to church-supported universities and colleges for a good education, rather than an indoctrination in the ways of the political left. The Silent Majority are the folk who never miss an opportunity to vote. They believe men and women died to give them that opportunity, and they will not abuse the memory of those heroic Americans by not going to the polls to vote. They are, for the most part, conservative in politics as well as religion. Their lives are built around their families and their church. Many are veterans of America’s armed forces. They believe this country is worth fighting for and they will put their own lives on the line to protect her. They view politics as a necessary evil. They believe they should always vote for the man who best represents their belief. They will not support a candidate just because they wear the label of the party to which they, themselves, are registered. The Silent Majority never fails to notice the MSM’s stifled giggles and backhanded insults of conservative politics and they’ve had enough. They’ve watched socialism replace capitalism and love of state replace love of God and they are incensed. They remember the oath they took as members of America’s military, and as police officers, to defend the constitution against ALL enemies, domestic and foreign, and they remember, too, there was no expiration date on that oath. Silent, they may be, but silent they shall not remain. This is the unseen, uncounted, power the pollsters miss. It is the power of deep conviction that things are terribly wrong in America and they, the so-called Silent Majority, have a responsibility to the constitution, to the country, to their fellow Americans, and yes, to their families and themselves, to step up, to lean in, and to reclaim their birthright—before it is lost forever. This Silent Majority is not to be trifled with since THEY coined the phrase: “We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box” and the ballot box is about to be used with devastating effectiveness.
(“Obama: Beware of the Silent Majority” by J.D. Longstreet dated October 6, 2012 published by Canada Free Press at http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50061 )
For there is a growing consensus on the part of a notable segment of the American public, Republican candidates for office, and a number of disaffected Democrats that the coming election is essentially a plebiscite and that the future security, coherence, and prosperity of the nation will be decided on the first Tuesday of November of this year. A victory for Mitt Romney would allow the nation to return to its historical roots as a constitutional republic and free market economy. But if Barack Obama should win re-election, America will inexorably go the way of the crushingly indebted, under-employed, imploding European Union, as well as gradually surrendering much of its autonomy to an advancing Islamic presence and the inroads of Shari’a law. President Obama can be defined by the $16 trillion federal debt, the 8.3% unemployment when he promised to have it down to 5.6%, the annual deficit, which he promised to halve, hovering around $1.5 trillion, as well as the disaster that is Obama’s Islamophilic Mideast policy with our consulate overrun in Benghazi, our ambassador murdered, and Obama told 90 minutes into the assault, goes to bed. Obama has also empowered the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and extended hospitality to Islamic organizations and individuals at home. Obama profits from the loyalty and commitment of seven categories of devout adherents:
· A large dependency class, as Romney justly pointed out, constituting 47% of an electorate that does not pay taxes and in too many cases lives parasitically off government largesse, enjoying the redistributed benefits culled from the salaries, savings, and investments of the productive class;
· The so-called intellectual and celebrity elite: left-wing academics and the students they have successfully indoctrinated, public intellectuals with an ingrained hatred of their own country, Hollywood’s beautiful emptyheads, and almost the entire media empire that has made common cause with the Democrat Party and invested its ideological stock in the president’s plainly neo-socialist agenda;
· The plutocratic left whose obscene money machine funds Obama’s electoral campaign via every avenue of public suasion available;
· A union thugocracy using every means at its disposal, from financial contributions to overt coercion, to ensure the re-election of their candidate;
· The swelling roles of government employees, all of whom are sure to cast their ballots with a view to preserving their featherbedding billets;
· That portion of the educated populace whose trendy, reflex liberalism flies in the face of political and economic reality, namely, that wealth must be continuously created, that untrammelled entrepreneurship is vital to an expanding economy and social stability, that socialized medicine is a bottomless sinkhole producing more rather than less suffering, that “social justice” is merely a slogan behind which oligarchs and bureaucrats enrich themselves and the well-off hypocritically salve their consciences; and
· The dumbing down of American education, the dysfunctional public schools and the university propaganda factories have produced an alarming number of the miseducated and the flatly illiterate who have no understanding of economics, are devoid of historical knowledge and blissfully indifferent to the exigencies of realpolitik, and who are prey to the influence of urban myths and the oiled churnings of the rumor mill.
In sum, given the technically defined poor, the very rich, the public unions, government hires, the intellectual and celebrity carriage trade, the liberal misinformed, and the caste of the under-educated, supplemented by a skewed electoral system in which voter turnout is often trumped by party entrenchment, we may well be looking at a second term for arguably the most destructive President in all of American history, the President who has reduced America’s position in the world to a caricature of its former paramount standing and steered his countrymen, like harried bison, to the precipice of bankruptcy. It should be obvious, then, after nearly four years of gross mismanagement, escalating debt, lack of military resolve, political frivolity, intentionally fomented internal divisiveness, and rampant juridical malfeasance, that the administration of Barack Obama has been an unqualified debacle, and that another four years of the same may well put an end to American dominance and solvency. Unless, by some miracle of destiny, a plurality of American citizens (and Electors) awakens to the bitter truth that the man they elected in 2008 to the highest office in the country is a kind of impostor or confidence man whose rhetoric stands in inverse relation to his achievements, a man who obviously does not regard the country he was entrusted to govern as in any way exceptional or lovable, whose wife is on record as saying that the U.S. is “just downright mean,” a man whose antecedents, formative influences, shrouded résumé, and mendacious biography typify him as something of a stranger to the very inheritance he claims to represent. Nonetheless, there are an increasing number of pundits predicting that Romney will win in a landslide, contending that fewer Hispanic, black, Jewish, youth, and Catholic voters will support Obama this time around, as well as small business owners, blue-collar whites, suburban moms, and military veterans who we can only hope the oddsmaker’s accurate record will remain unblemished, but the various constituencies outlined above would seem to present a major obstacle to his prognostications.
(“The Rebuke of Sam Slick” by David Solvay dated October 9, 2012 published by PJ Media at http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-rebuke-of-sam-slick/ )
The mystery Obama, the hollow receptacle of out-sized fantasies left and right, is not a creation of his own making, political chameleon though he may well be, but instead it emanates instead from a journalistic community that no longer in any way fulfills its designated function, that no longer even attempts the fair presentation of facts and current events aimed at helping the American electorate make up its mind according to its own lights. Rather, left-wing outlets like the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, NBC News, ABC News, CBS News, and the like have now devoted themselves to fashioning an image of the world they think their audiences ought to believe in—that they may guide us toward voting as they think we should. They have fallen prey to that ideological corruption that sees lies as a kind of virtue, as a noble deception in service to a greater good. Theirs are largely passive lies and lies of omission. The active frauds, NBC’s dishonest editing of videos to reflect a leftist worldview, ABC’s allowing Democratic operative George Stephanopoulos to masquerade as a newsman, the Los Angeles Times’ suppressing even the transcript of the video in their possession that shows candidate Barack Obama at a meeting with a PLO-supporting sheik, these are only egregious salients of the more consistent, underlying dishonesty. The real steady-state corruption is revealed in the way Obama scandals like Fast and Furious, Benghazi-gate, and the repeated breaking of federal campaign laws have been wildly underplayed, while George W. Bush’s non-scandals, like the naming of Valerie Plame and the firings of several U.S. attorneys at the start of his second term, were blown out of all proportion. The Obama of the imagination is the media’s Obama. Out of their fascination with the color of his skin and their mindless awe at his windy teleprompted rhetoric, they constructed a man of stature and accomplishment. Now, with the White House on the line, they’re waging an ongoing battle against the undeniable evidence that he has never been, in fact, that man. The result in these quadrennial autumn days has been media coverage of a fantasy election, an election in the news that may bear no relation whatsoever to the election as it is. Polls consistently skewed to favor Democrats in percentages beyond any reasonable construct of reality have left us virtually ignorant of the state of the race. Governor Romney’s unprecedented dismantling of the president in their first debate, with predictable results, was surprising only for Romney’s warmth and clarity. Obama’s hapless fumbling, bad temper, and inarticulate inability to defend his record were actually thoroughly predictable. They were simply facets of the man as he truly is, unfiltered by the imagination of his media supporters: a man who has succeeded, really, at almost nothing but the winning of elections; a man who cannot distinguish between his ideology and life; a man who does not seem to know how the machinery of the world actually works. Perhaps by Election Day, the public will have awakened from the media’s dream.
(“A Fantasy Election, and Imaginary Man” by Andrew Klaven dated October 5, 2012 published by City Journal at http://www.city-journal.org/2012/eon1005ak.html )
What we see happening today didn’t begin with the election of America’s first fraudulent Muslim Marxist in 2008, but is the culmination of 100 years of erosion of the American political system. The truth is, global leftists didn’t believe they could leap to this final stage until 2016 and neither did anyone else. However, the American press and courts made it possible for them to push up their closing strategy by two full election cycles, using the race card to trick Americans into electing someone they knew absolutely nothing about and still know very little about four years later. Sadly, too many Americans don’t know what communism is, or they foolishly think that it died with the fall of the Soviet Union. Nothing could be further from the truth. Communism is alive and well, but it isn’t just in Russia or China anymore. The 2012 election is not a referendum on Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, but is a referendum on American society. It is a contest between two opposite American Dreams and the outcome will tell us nothing about Romney and Obama, but everything about the American people. Communism is defined as “A theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state; A system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state - dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.” America’s first Communist Administration is replacing freedom and liberty as the new American Dream. It was a slow incremental process, while nobody was paying any attention. Politically, everything really started via unconstitutional amendments initiated by Republicans under Taft and ratified by Democrats under Wilson. If you understand the modern face and democratic strategies of communism, then you can begin to fit the pieces of the puzzle together:
· State rights and representation ended in 1913 with the 17th Amendment.
· Decentralized power ended in 1913 with the 16th Amendment, funding central power.
· Claims that the States lost their 10th Amendment rights in the Civil War began.
· Revision of history was underway in academia, the media and the entertainment industry.
· Intellectuals began rewriting new definitions of ancient terminology.
· The promotion of free-stuff eclipsed the promotion of freedom.
· One Nation Under God was replaced with celebrating secularism and diversity.
· Real justice was replaced with social justice, defined and measured by men.
· Unalienable rights from our Creator were replaced with limited man-made rights.
In 2008, nobody knew anything about Obama. Millions of Americans bought into his promises of “hope and change” without ever stopping to ask who this person was, where he came from, how he arose from total obscurity to international fame overnight with absolutely zero accomplishments on his résumé. History was made with the first communist president elected to the people’s White House. In 2012, we have a very different scenario, however. After four years under a communist Obama dictatorship crippling our economy, igniting unrest all over the globe, destroying our Constitutional Republic, stampeding our freedoms and liberties into the ground along with our fundamental social fabric, Americans can now see who and what Barack Hussein Obama is. No true Patriot will be sitting out the election at home this time. No decent American will sit on the sidelines in some futile 3rd party fantasy or protest. There is simply too much at stake. Americans understand that they have only ONE chance to remove a communist from power peacefully and that chance is this November.
(“When did Communism become an American dream?” by J.B. Williams dated October 5, 2012 published by Intellectual Conservative at http://intellectualconservative.com/index.php/when-did-communism-become-an)
Mitt Romney drew a very clear distinction between President Obama’s strategy of passivity based on ‘leading from behind’ and reacting to events after they unfold and Romney’s own strategy based on strength, leadership and action. The consequences of Obama’s strategy of passivity and ‘leading from behind’ for America and Americans, the people of the Middle East and the free world in general have been disastrous and would be catastrophic if he is elected again. Romney severely criticized Obama for his handling of the recent attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi which resulted in the deaths of four Americans and the concomitant attacks on American embassies throughout the Middle East. Benghazi was a national tragedy and Obama’s reaction, including all the lies, distortions, cover ups and attempts to manipulate public opinion, was disgraceful. Romney was absolutely right to go after him because the wounds are still fresh and Obama’s behavior needs to be a campaign issue. So what concrete measures would Romney actually take?
· He would get serious about keeping Iran from developing and possessing nuclear weapons and let the Iranians know in no uncertain terms that the United States will not let them become a nuclear power and that he will use the U.S. military if necessary to keep nuclear weapons out of their hands.
· He would strengthen America’s ties to Israel and reaffirm America’s commitment to her security and survival.
· He would reverse Obama’s cuts to the American military and maintain its status as the strongest, most capable military in the world in order to protect Americans and American interests at home and abroad.
· He would use foreign aid as an incentive and would ensure that recipients have to meet certain conditions to keep on receiving it.
· He would recommit the U.S. to a free, democratic, prosperous Palestinian state living in peace and security with Israel.
Those are a few of the concrete measures Romney said he would take in his speech. There were many others as well but the basic principle behind all of them is the same. Romney explained why his foreign policy is based on America’s best interest: “I believe that if America does not lead, others will-others who do not share our interests and values-and the world will grow darker, for our friends and for us. America’s security and the cause of freedom cannot endure four more years like the last four years. I am running for President because I believe the leader of the free world has a duty, to our citizens, and to our friends everywhere, to use America’s great influence-wisely, with solemnity and without false pride, but also firmly and actively-to shape events in ways that secure our interests, further our values, prevent conflict and make the world better-not perfect, but better.” It is abundantly clear that Obama’s foreign policy strategy of passivity and ‘leading from behind’ has been disastrous and would soon be catastrophic, while it is also abundantly clear that Romney’s foreign policy strategy of strength, action and leading from the front would make the world a much better place.
(“Passivity has lead to disaster and disaster will lead to catastrophe” by Jerry Philipson dated October 8, 2012 published by Canada Free Press at http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50109 )
* 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:
· Bibliography at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/welcome/bibliography.php