Election 2014

Americans May Be Ready to Digest the Truth About Obama

Americans May Be Ready to Digest the Truth About Obama

Despite having the weakest of grasps pertaining to just what it took to build this great nation and what it takes to maintain on so many levels, we know that progressives harbor the summary belief that they ought to run everything. I wouldn’t be first person to make the observation that progressives are also narcissistic in the extreme, as well as often being cases of arrested emotional development.

Case in point: Back in August, atheist scientist Lawrence M. Krauss asserted that religion could be essentially done away with in a generation if we simply changed how children were taught about faith and religious systems is schools. For those familiar with the history of communism in America, this is probably old news – but here we are in 2014, with a prominent liberal scientist espousing the same manifesto component grubby East Coast Marxists were committing to coffee shop napkins back in the 1940s – before going on to become school system superintendents.

“[I]f we can plant the seeds of doubt in our children,” Krauss said, “religion will go away in a generation, or at least largely go away – and that’s what I think we have an obligation to do.”

And if that doesn’t work, I suppose there’s always gunpoint – the route communist ascendency has always taken in the end.

So what is Lawrence Krauss’ field of expertise? Religion? Education? Sociology? Psychology?

Nope. Theoretical physics. So where does he get off pontificating on religion, education and sociology? Well, he’s a progressive, of course – and with a Ph.D. in Physics from MIT, he’s practically a deity.

It was, of course, an imperative for liberals to convince Americans that they hold the intellectual high ground – meaning that they’re smarter than everyone else – for their designs to be successful. Obviously, we would trust them more if we believed that they knew what they were doing.

Having relativized morality, they’ve also factored in the curious notion that they occupy the moral high ground. This, as contradictory as it sounds, creates for them the moral imperative to behave amorally in order to achieve said ends.

They’ve been called “deranged,” too – and now you understand why.

The testimony of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber (another MIT professor, by the way) in a recent panel discussion has been getting some press lately. In addition to having articulated that the “stupidity of the American voter” was instrumental in the effort to get Obamacare passed, his oratory was essentially the smoking gun for the administration having lied to the American people to get that blatantly socialist piece of legislation passed.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the [individual] mandate as taxes,” Gruber said. “If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK, so it’s written to do that. … Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.”

Read more here

 

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
Pre-election Race-baiting Harbinger of Things to Come

Pre-election Race-baiting Harbinger of Things to Come

In the weeks preceding the midterm election, there was a marked uptick in the America-as-racist narrative the political left loves so well. I’m sure that the impetus for these calumnies was the collective desperation being experienced at the time by members of the Democratic Party in positions both high and low; indeed, they knew of Americans’ dissatisfaction with the Obama administration, Democrats and their policies – but that was by no means the only reason for the despicable rhetoric.

I’m talking about contingencies here, and the contingency in this case was to set the stage for blaming any Democrat electoral losses on racism and to ostensibly justify their subsequent political machinations.

As I mentioned in an earlier column, Ferguson, Missouri, where black teen Michael Brown was shot and killed by Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9, is and will continue to be used by the administration and its surrogates to foment racial antipathy.

The shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman in February of 2012 and the ensuing trial helped the government (through Obama’s black nationalist attorney general, Eric Holder, who used taxpayer dollars to subsidize anti-Zimmerman protests during the jury deliberation phase) set the stage for this ongoing narrative of prevalent institutional racism in America, this itself being but one of many fronts upon which the administration has manifested its assault on America at large.

To date, evidence in the grand jury investigation into the actions of Officer Darren Wilson indicates that Michael Brown was a thug wannabe who robbed a store, then assaulted a police officer (Wilson) minutes later and got ventilated for his trouble. Despite this – and the evidence that this was the case even prior to the grand jury being impaneled – those inured to the racial orthodoxy of the left came to the summary conclusion that Brown’s death was a murder based in race hatred. Obama dispatched Holder to Ferguson; his operatives have continued to keep racial tensions simmering to this day.

On Monday, while appearing on a cable news channel with a predominantly black audience, first lady Michelle Obama asserted that black Americans should vote a straight Democratic ticket this week because this would best serve their communities. In typical peremptory liberal-elite fashion – and with that renowned contempt for blacks’ intelligence – she even went as far as to say that who a candidate is, what they’ve said, or what they stand for “shouldn’t even come into the equation.”

Read more here

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
Dems Realizing Obama’s Danger – to Them

Dems Realizing Obama’s Danger – to Them

“This is a serious disease, but we can’t give in to hysteria or fear …”

– Barack Obama, Oct. 18, 2014

The Jews who had emerged from cattle cars, alarmed because they’d just been ordered to remove their clothes, were also reassured by the Gestapo. They’d had a long, hard trip, they were told, and were only being stripped down for a “common shower.” Of course, the “shower” was a gas chamber, and the rest is history.

This is a hell of a psycho-dynamic Obama is using, in my humble opinion. Telling a population that has every reason to be alarmed not to be alarmed and to trust him and his minions when everything they’ve said to date has been a lie (or at least inaccurate, to those who aren’t fully awake yet) is not only audacious, but it smacks of the subtle manipulation one might encounter from a seasoned domestic abuser or crack interrogator.

Speaking of psycho-dynamics: We’re in the final crucial weeks before an election, and Democrats running for office or re-election don’t want Obama to campaign for them for some reason. One could logically argue that the aversion of Democrats toward Obama is political expedience – but this is Obama, the messianic figure who was going to usher in that bright, new age of peace and prosperity. What could have happened?

By all traditionally employed measures, Obama is unpopular. A recent poll found an overwhelming majority of voters in the most competitive 2014 election states saying that events in the United States are “out of control.” At an event last week for one of the few Democrat candidates that would have him (Anthony Brown, who is running for governor of Maryland), Reuters reported “a steady stream” of people walking out of the venue.

This would explain to some degree the political expedience of Democratic politicians avoiding Obama. But what brought Democratic lawmakers and candidates to this point in the first place? What brought Obama supporters to the place where they would prematurely bail on an event at which their heretofore larger-than-life messiah was physically present?

Read more here

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns