Posts Tagged → Obama
“Decline & Fall of the American Empire”: Couldn’t Have Said It Better Myself
For those of us who have struggled to make sense of last week’s historic vote, this writer sums up most of the most important take-aways. I urge you to read his article:
The Decline and Fall of the American Empire
By Rabbi Pruzansky
Posted on November 7, 2012 | 60 Comments
The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted. As I write, with almost all the votes counted, President Obama has won fewer votes than John McCain won in 2008, and more than ten million off his own 2008 total.
But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.
Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.
That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate. The notion of the “Reagan Democrat” is one cliché that should be permanently retired.
Ronald Reagan himself could not win an election in today’s America.
The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff. Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote; so too those who anticipate “free” health care, who expect the government to pay their mortgages, who look for the government to give them jobs. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.
Imagine two restaurants side by side. One sells its customers fine cuisine at a reasonable price, and the other offers a free buffet, all-you-can-eat as long as supplies last. Few – including me – could resist the attraction of the free food. Now imagine that the second restaurant stays in business because the first restaurant is forced to provide it with the food for the free buffet, and we have the current economy, until, at least, the first restaurant decides to go out of business. (Then, the government takes over the provision of free food to its patrons.)
The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation (by the amoral Obama team) of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government. Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese. They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.
It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.
That suggests the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that, as Winston Churchill stated so tartly, “the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Voters – a clear majority – are easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. Said another way, too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich. Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending. How could Obama get away with such rants to squealing sign-wavers? See Churchill, above.
During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back: “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” Truer words were never spoken.
Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico (even if they came from Cuba or Honduras), and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone. How could he do and say all these things ? See Churchill, above.
One might reasonably object that not every Obama supporter could be unintelligent. But they must then rationally explain how the Obama agenda can be paid for, aside from racking up multi-trillion dollar deficits. “Taxing the rich” does not yield even 10% of what is required and does not solve any discernible problem – so what is the answer, i.e., an intelligent answer?
Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.
Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises, and by talking as the adult and not the adolescent. Obama has spent the last six years campaigning; even his governance has been focused on payoffs to his favored interest groups. The permanent campaign also won again, to the detriment of American life.
It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. Conservative ideas failed to take root and states that seemed winnable, and amenable to traditional American values, have simply disappeared from the map. If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future. The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved.
A second cliché that should be retired is that America is a center-right country. It clearly is not. It is a divided country with peculiar voting patterns, and an appetite for free stuff. Studies will invariably show that Republicans in Congress received more total votes than Democrats in Congress, but that means little. The House of Representatives is not truly representative of the country. That people would vote for a Republican Congressmen or Senator and then Obama for President would tend to reinforce point two above: the empty-headedness of the electorate. Americans revile Congress but love their individual Congressmen. Go figure.
The mass media’s complicity in Obama’s re-election cannot be denied. One example suffices. In 2004, CBS News forged a letter in order to imply that President Bush did not fulfill his Air National Guard service during the Vietnam War, all to impugn Bush and impair his re-election prospects. In 2012, President Obama insisted – famously – during the second debate that he had stated all along that the Arab attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi was “terror” (a lie that Romney fumbled and failed to exploit). Yet, CBS News sat on a tape of an interview with Obama in which Obama specifically avoided and rejected the claim of terrorism – on the day after the attack – clinging to the canard about the video. (This snippet of a “60 Minutes” interview was not revealed – until two days ago!) In effect, CBS News fabricated evidence in order to harm a Republican president, and suppressed evidence in order to help a Democratic president. Simply shameful, as was the media’s disregard of any scandal or story that could have jeopardized the Obama re-election.
One of the more irritating aspects of this campaign was its limited focus, odd in light of the billions of dollars spent. Only a few states were contested, a strategy that Romney adopted, and that clearly failed. The Democrat begins any race with a substantial advantage. The liberal states – like the bankrupt California and Illinois – and other states with large concentrations of minority voters as well as an extensive welfare apparatus, like New York, New Jersey and others – give any Democratic candidate an almost insurmountable edge in electoral votes. In New Jersey, for example, it literally does not pay for a conservative to vote. It is not worth the fuel expended driving to the polls. As some economists have pointed generally, and it resonates here even more, the odds are greater that a voter will be killed in a traffic accident on his way to the polls than that his vote will make a difference in the election. It is an irrational act. That most states are uncompetitive means that people are not amenable to new ideas, or new thinking, or even having an open mind. If that does not change, and it is hard to see how it can change, then the die is cast. America is not what it was, and will never be again.
For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin. A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. That Obama’s top aide Valerie Jarrett (i.e., Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett) spent last week in Teheran is not a good sign. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality. As Obama has committed himself to abolishing America’s nuclear arsenal, it is more likely that that unfortunate circumstance will occur than that he will succeed in obstructing Iran’s plans.
Obama’s victory could weaken Netanyahu’s re-election prospects, because Israelis live with an unreasonable – and somewhat pathetic – fear of American opinion and realize that Obama despises Netanyahu. A Likud defeat – or a diminution of its margin of victory – is more probable now than yesterday. That would not be the worst thing. Netanyahu, in fact, has never distinguished himself by having a strong political or moral backbone, and would be the first to cave to the American pressure to surrender more territory to the enemy and acquiesce to a second (or third, if you count Jordan) Palestinian state. A new US Secretary of State named John Kerry, for example (he of the Jewish father) would not augur well. Netanyahu remains the best of markedly poor alternatives. Thus, the likeliest outcome of the upcoming Israeli elections is a center-left government that will force itself to make more concessions and weaken Israel – an Oslo III.
But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire, nor is there is an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The most powerful empires in history all crumbled – from the Greeks and the Romans to the British and the Soviets. None of the collapses were easily foreseen, and yet they were predictable in retrospect.
The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come. Across the world, America under Bush was feared but not respected. Under Obama, America is neither feared nor respected. Radical Islam has had a banner four years under Obama, and its prospects for future growth look excellent. The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.
Two bright sides: Notwithstanding the election results, I arose this morning, went to shul, davened and learned Torah afterwards. That is our reality, and that trumps all other events. Our relationship with G-d matters more than our relationship with any politician, R or D. And, notwithstanding the problems in Israel, it is time for Jews to go home, to Israel. We have about a decade, perhaps 15 years, to leave with dignity and without stress. Thinking that it will always be because it always was has been a repetitive and deadly Jewish mistake. America was always the land from which “positive” aliya came – Jews leaving on their own, and not fleeing a dire situation. But that can also change. The increased aliya in the last few years is partly attributable to young people fleeing the high cost of Jewish living in America. Those costs will only increase in the coming years. We should draw the appropriate conclusions.
If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.
http://rabbipruzansky.com/2012/11/07/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-american-empire/
“Leave Everyone Behind”
“Leave everyone behind,” instead of “Bring everyone home” alive or dead, seems to be the reaction of president Obama to last month’s military assault on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
New emails from the White House, surreptitiously released by someone from within the administration, demonstrate that Barack Hussein Obama knew exactly what he was doing as events were happening real-time in Libya a month ago.
That Obama selected to do nothing, to not answer the distress calls made on official phone lines, to not send ever-ready special forces to intervene, to save American lives, demonstrates that he is a false commander in chief, a coward, and a liar.
Obama lied and lied and then lied some more about what happened in Libya. Turns out, he knew exactly what had happened, and yet he selected to blame it all on a fake movie that was never shown publicly, and blame the First Amendment to the Constitution. Obama sold out his own country. He apologized for our freedom of speech, rather than put the blame on those who deserved it. Obama did not defend his country.
But maybe he doesn’t think of America as his country. He has not answered Donald Trump’s challenge to provide his college transcripts, his visas, his passport request demonstrating that he was a foreign student in college. Obama is the least known, the least vetted of any president, and the mainstream media has done that on purpose. Obama may well have been born in Hawaii, but his upbringing in Indonesia and Kenya created an angry, anti-American activist, who didn’t so much come home to America as he used his mother’s citizenship to gain access to America. The rest is history. Obama is the Manchurian Candidate, except that he actually became president.
Obama still wows crowds. For some reason that I cannot understand, voters look at him and ignore all of the damning, disqualifying facts, and they say they are going to vote for him. Look at the photos of his public appearances. If you told these folks that he was a robot, they’d say “OK, OK,” and continue cheering him on. Got me. Maybe video games have something to do with this state of mind. It’s unfamiliar to me. It is surreal to see a man so damned by his own inactions, his own lies, still retain such credibility with so many citizens. America is in trouble, even if Romney wins. There’s a rot here, folks, deep in the core of our identity. We have to fix it.
Why America Needs a Mormon President
Why America Needs a Mormon President
By Josh First
October 22, 2012
Among many other reasons also pleasing to Americans’ innate sense of fairness, America needs a Mormon president like America needed a Quaker president (Nixon), a Catholic president (Kennedy), and a black president (Obama). Expanding inclusiveness compels Americans to set aside theological differences, drop old bigoted views, accept diversity of faith and opinion, and embrace all the colors in the rainbow. A Mormon candidate for president is the latest color, and he deserves to be judged for his good character as have others before him.
Mormonism is an innately American faith, and perhaps it’s such a quintessential American faith that it may be our most American faith. So it’s rich irony that Mormonism is “new” to so many voting Americans.
Based on Christianity, Mormonism uniquely melds both America’s founding faith and its frontier identity. The frontier experience that created America from the ground up and shapes our most cherished liberties to this very day. Freed men, indentured servants, pioneers, adapting Indian tribes, all who lived the frontier experience contributed to all others living an individual freedom unimaginable in feudal Europe. Throwing off the British yoke unleashed a wave of liberty and creativity only recently checked by the very government grown out of its own founding documents.
Every one of America’s founding documents and rights therein is a product of the frontier, each a distillation of experiences and expectations by those who had come to live beyond the long arm of an unjust law. From “We Hold These Truths Be Self Evident,” to the Third Amendment’s prohibition against quartering soldiers in private homes, and so on, the frontier experience shaped every subsequent generation’s expectations. Even those living in liberal urban enclaves can own a gun for protection, if they so choose.
Enter the Mormons. Very much a distinct and integral part of the larger, defining westward migration that took the American frontier from Upstate New York to the California coast, the early Mormons saw themselves as an extension of the Biblical Jews, whose own frontier experience at Sinai and in its wilderness had rendered a code of life similar to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.
Reaching their own ‘promised land’ in their own de facto colony, the early Mormons established independence in what is today Utah. Yes, polygamy in Western Civilization was last practiced hundreds of years ago, and it is odd to see people doing it today. Happily, polygamous Mormons are a minority. Overall, and most important, Mormons are a happy, friendly, law-abiding, quietly spoken, hard working, patriotic, tax-paying bunch. They are people we’d like as neighbors. Have you met a mean spirited, unpleasant Mormon? Neither have I.
In 1908, the famous author Zane Grey was so powerfully impressed by “Emmet,” a Western hunting guide, that he wrote often about him in his Field & Stream magazine stories. His first description verged on Biblical: “Emmet was a Mormon, a massively built gray-bearded son of the desert; he had lived his life on it; he had conquered it and in his falcon eyes shone all its fire and freedom.” That Mormons are emblematic of American liberty is not a new idea, and hopefully this 2012 election will re-introduce it powerfully.
Several years ago, I climbed on board a helicopter for a real estate project, and met two kindly older men. They worked for the Mormon church, and were buying farmland. Turns out, the Mormons own a lot of farmland, on which they grow corn, wheat, barley, and other grains. They also own factories that manufacture those grains into food. They also own planes, trains, trucking companies, ships, logistics and distribution centers that, literally vertically integrated from the ground up, freely and cheerfully give that food away to hungry people of all faiths across the planet. If you ask me, this is a good religion; it is a positive force. It gets my deepest respect and appreciation.
Mitt Romney is a bit too nice. He sometimes lacks that overt fire and passion that leaders typically use to inspire. Frustratingly, he has changed some political positions to suit political exigencies. But right beneath his smiling demeanor is a son of the American desert, a son of the American frontier, a true son of America. We really need that noble character right now, as we return back to our roots and to the basic elements that make America great, and as we move away from being ‘transformed’ into something unrecognizable and perpetually broke.
Tonight is the last of the presidential debates of what is the most defining, most important presidential election of my lifetime. Afterwards, for the next two weeks Mitt will be on the campaign trail. Join him, if you can. Please lend a hand one way or another. Go door-to-door with literature, make phone calls to voters, donate ten bucks, or talk to your family and friends about the kind of political change we can believe in and that we need. Our nation’s future depends upon it.
Follow the conversation at www.joshfirst.com or on our Josh First Facebook page
What a Fall Day for Middle America
What a Fall day to remember.
Flag football with Son and his team, including a Kids vs. Parents game that the parents lost, to the kids’ supreme pleasure.
Bought and then replaced the battery in my daughter’s car.
Split the last of the oak and stacked most of it.
Gathered the loose oak bark and piled it around the magnolia tree, where Viv wants good bark mulch.
Viv clipped long grass around the stone wall out front and put away lots of lawn stuff that’s been around for a few weeks, with Nina’s help, including piles and piles of brown oak leaves.
This is the typical, pleasant life of Middle Americans all over the country on a beautiful Fall day. It’s a way of life that most Americans take for granted. It’s a way of life fully in Obama’s cross hairs, as he seeks an America where “everyone gets their fair share.” That forced redistribution of wealth is now and will continue to end the Middle American lifestyle.
How pleasing it is to see both Gallup and Rasmussen polls showing Romney pulling ahead of Obama nationally and in the swing states. Obama is claiming just seven states now, and that’s not many. This election is looking like it might be a blow-out, as Middle Americans realize just how much everything they take for granted is under assault and at risk with the Obama administration.
Who Won the VP Debate?
Last night USA VP Joe Biden and US Congressman Paul Ryan debated for the VP position.
Plenty of pundits weighed in during and after the debate, including me, and I won’t re-hash that here. We sent out several real-time tweets about Biden’s rude behavior and NPR reporter Martha Raddatz’s anti-Ryan aggression. Raddatz was supposed to be an aloof moderator, but as would be expected, she represented her NPR credentials to the T. She interrupted Ryan 31 times and was named by CNN commentators as “the third debater.” Raddatz is a demonstrated partisan Leftwinger, an activist posing as a news reporter.
Biden brought artificial passion, which is in demand after Obama’s catastrophically bad performance at last week’s presidential debate. Despite Biden’s disrespectful behavior, his constant laughing, interrupting, obnoxious sneers and running commentary, he did appeal to a certain group of highly partisan Democrats who are looking for a sign of life.
Ryan was both reserved and serious, and a little lackluster. Voters want real passion, real interest in the issues, a genuine drive for action. Ryan did not demonstrate that kind of passion. That is a hall mark of political insiders.
Neither candidate won, but if Ryan was too quiet, Biden was too goofy. He reminded people of a nervous person who is laughing out loud to appear confident, when inside he is not. And the Obama campaign has reason for losing confidence: The national polls are demonstrating a slow and steady turning of the American voter, away from the Obama Administration and toward the Romney-Ryan campaign. A majority of Americans are now supporting Romney, and the former swing states are lining up behind Romney. A greater question is this: After losing this election, will liberals admit the inferiority of their beliefs?
Surprisingly, to Me Anyhow, Romney Wins Round One
Mitt Romney is a heck of a nice guy, a good guy, an accomplished guy.
He has more competence in his pinky than Barack Hussein Obama has in his whole body. He is genuinely friendly.
But Romney is not known for being a toe-to-toe fighter, a brawler, or a passionate advocate for core American principles.
But last night, enough of all those attributes aligned for long enough for Romney to clearly outshine Obama in the first presidential debate.
Obama was petulant, smirking, arrogant, and glaring. He seemed bored, and above it all; all he needed to do was check his watch (George Bush Sr., 1992), or sigh dramatically (Al Gore, 2000), and he would have fully conveyed his displeasure at being at a debate, defending his policies.
Obama was anything but presidential.
At a rally today, Obama was heard on the radio saying that the Romney at last night’s debate was not the same Romney that Obama has been describing in his attack ads, including the one that Obama himself backtracked from because it was an outright lie.
Why didn’t Obama say that to Romney last night? Is he afraid to actually debate him?
Those who watch Obama’s personality and analyze his background would not be surprised if Obama is actually physically afraid of Romney. One of the most telling photos of any president was the one taken in the White House war room, as the Bin Laden raid unfolded. Obama is seen cowering, obviously afraid. The man simply lacks courage.
Those who know my political beliefs know that I was not a big Romney supporter. Without rehashing them now, suffice it to say that his strong points can also be his weakest points.
Last night, however, Romney gave me cause to open my wallet and make a donation to his campaign, something I had been reluctant to do after the anti-conservative Rule 15 fight on the RNC floor.
Mitt, you earned my support.
Benghazi: The Twelve Dollar Word for Screw-Up
Benghazi: The Twelve Dollar Word for Screw-Up
By Josh First
September 20, 2012
Benghazi is the Libyan city where America maintained an embassy. By long settled international law, an embassy is sovereign soil, an inviolate extension of the nation that owns it.
So the recent attack on the United States embassy there was an attack on the United States. All-out wars have begun over similar incidents. It is as serious an international incident as can happen.
So what happened after the attack? Our current government blamed a United States citizen who had exercised his First Amendment right to make a purported expose movie about Islam. That is, although the attack occurred on September 11th, an important American holiday due to catastrophic Muslim attacks against American citizens, our elected officials (Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice) continue to ignore the evidence.
And the evidence is now clear that the attack was planned long in advance by heavily armed terrorists, one of whom was released by the Obama Administration from Guantanamo Bay prison.
Because bigger political purposes are served by blaming America’s free speech rights, these elected officials continue to ignore the evidence that undermines their public statements.
If lying to the public got Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton impeached, then why isn’t Obama in hot water? Obama is not getting heat from the mainstream media, because they agree with his blame-America thinking. His contempt for American freedoms is on display. His willingness to use the office of the presidency to name and abuse individual citizens for political gain undermines the office he now holds, but in the interest of expanding government power, his friends in the mainstream media will always look the other way.
Benghazi is now a twelve dollar word for a screwed up situation, both abroad and at home, and nothing is a bigger screw-up than a lying, deceitful president who undermines the Constitution he was elected to uphold.
www.joshfirst.com and on Facebook
Obama Attacks First Amendment, Defends Islamic Murderers
If you had a question about where Obama’s loyalties lie, you could read his small, short, and shocking statement about attacks on US embassies and staff.
“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”
In other words, America’s First Amendment is at fault, not the violent and cruel behavior that led to a documentary film about Islam. Islam is based entirely on mocking, debasing, and exterminating all other religions and especially Christianity and Judaism. The Koran is filled with hate speech towards everyone else. But Obama doesn’t call them on that. No, instead he defends the Islamic imperialists who are tearing apart, burning, and bombing US embassies and killing our staff there. If you needed proof that, no matter where Obama was born, he’s not an American, this statement is it. Obama loves violent Muslims and hates free speech.
Please do your best to boot him out in eight weeks.
Dems Re-Hire God, Maybe
An international gasp awakened rank and file Democrats to the fact that Obama was leading them over a cliff, as a result of, most recently, eliminating the word “God” from the Dem platform and ditching the Jews by the side of the highway.
So this afternoon “God” was reintroduced to the briefly God-less at the DNC convention.
But it’s uncertain just how popular this action was, because if you watch the video (http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3872849) of the convention floor vote, you can hear and see that the Dems are evenly divided on both God and security for Israel.
Moreover, there’s an Arab Muslim couple that is severely disappointed, the man gesticulating wildly, jumping up and down, yelling. His face and upraised arms are now the symbol of that historic, disagreeable floor vote.
One more thing catches me eye: The mainstream media had that video all over the web two hours ago, and now you can only find it on C-SPAN. Think the mainstream media is in the pocket of the Democratic Party?
Nahhhh…the media burial of this supercharged, radioactive video is purely coincidental.
Really, it is.
And the Democratic Party believes in God, really.