Wednesday, June 24, 2020

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA - THE SHADOW BEHIND BLACK LIVES TERRORIZE


THE OBAMA MARXIST-MUSLIM BANKSTER-FUNDED THIRD TERM for life:


http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/03/obamas-marxism-still-hankering-for.html

 

"Cold War historian Paul Kengor goes deeply into  Obama's communist background in an article in American Spectator, "Our First Red Diaper Baby President," and in an excellent Mark Levin interview.  Another Kengor article describes the Chicago communists whose younger generation include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power." Karin McQuillan

"We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C.

home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his 

legislative agenda.  None of these people care about the American people, or 

the fact that Trump won the election because millions of people voted for 

him."   Patricia McCarthy / AMERICAN THINKER.com


Black Lives Matter Founder Mentored by Ex-Domestic Terrorist Who Worked with Bill Ayers 

Patrisse Cullors BLM
CNN
7:08

The co-founder of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, Patrisse Cullors, was the protégé of a communist-supporting domestic terrorist for over a decade, spending years training in political organizing and absorbing the radical Marxist-Leninist ideology which shaped her worldview.
Eric Mann, who mentored Cullors for over a decade in community organizing, was a member of radical-left militant groups: Students for a Democratic Society and the Weather Underground, which bombed government buildings and police stations in the 1960s and 1970s.
In a newly resurfaced video from 2015, Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors reveals that she and her fellow BLM founders are “trained Marxists.”
In the video, Cullors is interviewed by Jared Ball of the Real News Network and discusses the direction of the BLM movement.
“The first thing, I think, is that we actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers,” she said. “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories. And I think that what we really tried to do is build a movement that could be utilized by many, many black folk.”
In previous interviews in 2018, while promoting her then-new book titled, “When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir,” Cullors describes her introduction to and affinity for Marxist ideology.
In an interview with Democracy Now!, Cullors describes how she became a trained organizer with the Labor/Community Strategy Center, calling it her “first political home” and the center’s director, Eric Mann, her personal mentor.
She told The Politic that it was there that she was trained from her youth and grew as a leader.
The Labor/Community Strategy Center describes it’s philosophy as “an urban experiment,” utilizing grassroots organizing to “focus on Black and Latino communities with deep historical ties to the long history of anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, pro-communist resistance to the U.S. empire.”
The center teaches and studies the history of the “Indigenous rebellions against the initial European genocidal invasions,” the “Great Slave Haitian Revolution of the 1790s,” and the “Great Slave Rebellions that won the U.S. civil war for the racist north.”
The center also expresses its appreciation for the work of the U.S. Communist Party, “especially Black communists,” as well as its support for “the great work of the Black Panther Party, the American Indian Movement, Young Lords, Brown Berets, and the great revolutionary rainbow experiments of the 1970s,” while flaunting its roots in the new communist movement.
Speaking with ACLU’s At Liberty weekly podcast, Cullors described the center as her “foundation,” claiming it was there that she developed the skills which helped her found the Black Lives Matter movement, after having been recruited by its director, Eric Mann.
Mann, an avowed communist revolutionary, was the New England coordinator for Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) in 1968. The following year, a more radical wing splintered from the SDS, led by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, calling for violent “direct action” over civil disobedience.
The splintered faction became known as the Weather Underground, with the stated goal of overthrowing the U.S. government. As a result, the FBI classified the organization as a domestic terrorist group in 1969.
Mann led a group of fellow Weathermen who launched their own violent direct action at the Harvard University Center for International Affairs.
In an article titled: “Band Invades, Violently Disrupts Center for International Affairs,” the Harvard Crimson reported that a band of 20 to 30 activists invaded the Center for International Affairs, “roughing up” several staff members and employees before fleeing.
Several slogans, including “Pig,” “Fuck U.S. Imperialism,” and “Imperialists Screw All Women,” were sprayed on the building’s walls. Rocks thrown by the group broke several windows and a telephone was damaged to prevent police from being notified.
Undergraduates who saw the group leaving the building and chanting “Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh; NLF is going to win,” said they recognized some of them as members of Weathermen, a militant spin-off of the older New Left Caucus of SDS.
Mann was later charged with five counts of assault and battery, disturbing the peace, damaging property, defacing a building, and disturbing a public assembly, for which he spent 18 months in prison.
At the 2010 United States Social Forum in Detroit, under the slogan “Another World Is Possible. Another U.S. Is Necessary,” the Labor/Community Strategy Center sponsored a session titled: “Transformative Organizing Theory: Conscious Organizers Seek to Build Anti-racist, Anti-imperialist Politics Rooted in Working Class Communities of Color.” In it, Cullors––rising to prominence––was chosen by Mann to be a panelist along with him.
There, Cullors spoke about growing up as a working class, queer, Black woman, in a single-parent household, with a father who was in and out of prison.
Cullors stated that “positionality in this country is supposed to devastate us” and had done so somewhat successfully, while stressing the need to “fight this thing.”
Both Cullors and Mann strongly endorsed Bernie Sanders. Cullors was a primary speaker at a Sanders campaign event the day before Super Tuesday, which Mann attended.
Cullors, viewing Biden as far too moderate, pushed for the latter to end his campaign, accusing him of having an “old guard mentality” and coming from an “old establishment.”
Now with Biden leading as the Democratic presidential nominee, Cullors and Mann are finding a sympathetic ear for their radical agenda.
As Breitbart news reported, a group of 50 leading national progressive groups representing millions of active members across the country, are pressuring Biden to adopt the radical platform of the Movement for Black Lives which was co-written by BLM.
The group is calling for Biden to immediately incorporate their radical policies, including putting forward a transformative and comprehensive policing and criminal justice reform laid out by the Movement for Black Lives (M4BL).
Citing his “moral responsibility in this moment” to make amends for past harms he had caused, the groups demanded that Biden make commitments such as advance reparations and defund police, prisons, and weaponry in order to fully fund healthcare, housing, education, and environmental justice.
“We ask that you revise your platform to ensure that the federal government permanently ends and ceases any further appropriation of funding to local law enforcement in any form and redirect those and additional resources towards much needed community-led and community-controlled public safety efforts,” the letter reads.
Follow Joshua Klein on Twitter @JoshuaKlein.

There is Nothing ‘Loony’ About Bill Ayers as Obama’s Muse



This past week several people called my attention to a post by Scott Johnson on his influential PowerLine blog that addressed the literary relationship between Barack Obama and his radical friend, Bill Ayers.      
In the post Johnson spoke of his high regard for David Garrow’s “staggeringly researched” 2017 Obama biography, Rising Star. “Without resolving all mysteries,” Johnson writes, “[Garrow’s] scholarship belies the notion that [Dreams from My Father] was ghostwritten by Bill Ayers or other such collaborator.”
Johnson emailed Garrow to follow up on the authorship question, and Garrow responded, “I don’t recall exactly where the Bill Ayers [stuff] got started, but it, like the Frank-Davis-as-father notion, is just beyond loony, ’cause Dreams is already *in galleys* when Barack and Bill first get to know each other.”
do know where the Ayers stuff got started because I started it with a major assist from American Thinker on these pages on October 9, 2008. I never said Ayers wrote Dreams, but I presented overwhelming literary forensic evidence that Ayers, a skilled writer and editor, helped Obama shape Dreams.
I did not advance this theory casually. I understood then what Obama biographer David Remnick would later affirm, namely that my theory, “if ever proved true, or believed to be true among enough voters, could have been the end of [Obama’s] candidacy.” 
My research on this topic, aided by several helpful literary detectives, culminated in my 2011 book, published by Simon & Schuster, Deconstructing Obama. I think I can safely assume Garrow has never read it. I would invite those curious about the evidence to read the book or even to read the preliminary article cited above.
That Garrow does not know the source of a theory he dismisses offhand as “beyond loony” is, unfortunately, altogether typical of establishment political writers. His airy dismissal, in fact, reinforces the theme of my forthcoming book Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency.
In the book, I use the phrase “samizdat” -- Russian for underground press -- to describe the loose coalition of conservative blogs, online publications, talk radio shows, and legal monitors such as Judicial Watch that challenged the Left -- and, occasionally, the “responsible” right -- for control of the Obama narrative.
For eight-plus years, the samizdat broke virtually every major unflattering story about Obama and his presidency, some of which the major media grudgingly confirmed, some of which they continue to suppress. In the book I tell how the individuals in question managed to break these stories out. In every case, as you might imagine, the samizdat journalists were met with condescension, if not outright contempt, from the major media.
Obama’s biographers were among the more contemptuous. Curiously, the four major biographers are all named David -- Mendell, Remnick, Maraniss, and Garrow. The last three are Pulitzer Prize winners. To his credit, Garrow was the only one of the four who refused to prop up what Remnick called Obama’s “signature appeal: the use of the details of his own life as a reflection of a kind of multicultural ideal.”
The story Obama told about his happy multicultural family at the conventions was pure fiction. According to Garrow, Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, and Barack Obama Sr. “never chose to live together at any time following the onset of Ann’s pregnancy.” Garrow quotes approvingly one unnamed scholar to the effect that Obama Sr. was no more than “a sperm donor in his son’s life.” All of this was common knowledge in the samizdat as early as 2008, but it came as news to many of Garrow’s readers in 2017.
Like his fellow Davids, however, Garrow has no use for information gleaned from the samizdat, especially information I introduced. On the subject of the Obama poem “Pop,” for instance, Garrow notes, “Most commentators presumed that Obama had written about his grandfather, Stan Dunham, not Frank Marshall Davis.”
This much was true, but “hostile critics,” Garrow continues, insisted the poem was about Obama’s bi-sexual Communist mentor, Davis. The “hostile critics” Garrow cites in the footnotes are historian Paul Kengor and me.
Instead of giving me credit for being the first to decode “Pop,” Garrow describes me in the footnote as “someone who is cited with the greatest reluctance.” What I did to deserve this slight is left unsaid, especially since Garrow knows I nailed the identity of “Pop” two years before anyone in the mainstream media did, including the other Davids.
As to Bill Ayers’s involvement in the writing of Dreams, Garrow does not even deign to dismiss the possibility. He has a discovery of his own, namely that outside literary help came from a law school buddy of Obama’s named Rob Fisher.  This is an important find if for no other reason than it undercuts Obama’s 2008 boast to a crowd of schoolteachers, "I've written two books. I actually wrote them myself."
An established economist before starting law school, Fisher became good friends with Obama at Harvard. There, they co-authored a manuscript that perhaps prophetically was never finished. One completed chapter dealt with the always sexy topic of plant closings.
“The quest is to develop guidelines,” they wrote, “on how politically progressive movements can use the market mechanism to promote social goals.” Garrow quotes the unfinished manuscript extensively. Its style is wonkish and ungainly throughout.
Sentences like the following suggest that one author wrote as awkwardly as the other: “While Yuppies can afford the expensive frivolities provided by The Sharper Image, others receive insufficient nutrition to allow their minds to develop properly.”
I do not question Fisher’s involvement. Obama needed all the help he could get. What I do question is Fisher’s ability to provide the poetry, the rage, the postmodern rhetoric, and the Homeric structure that inspired Oona King of the London Times to overpraise Dreams as “a beautifully written personal memoir steeped in honesty.”
Garrow seems to dismiss my thesis for no more substantial reason than his belief that Dreams was already in galley form when “Barack and Bill first get to know each other.” Garrow traces the first meeting of these two gentlemen to a breakfast some time in early 1995. He bases this timing on the suspiciously well-remembered account of a common friend who claims to have introduced them.
Garrow, however, has a problem with chronology. He writes that Obama took six weeks off from his law firm job “in late spring 1994” to finish Dreams. He needed time to complete the book’s third section, the one on Africa. Garrow claims Obama worked largely from letters he sent in 1988 while in Kenya and retrieved from his girlfriend at the time, Sheila Jager.
David Maraniss told a different story in his 2012 bio. According to Maraniss’s source, Crown editor Henry Ferris, Obama made an additional trip to Kenya for further research. Obama confirmed this trip when interviewed by Marannis. Garrow makes no mention of this mysterious trip, which would have taken place in 1994. No one else does either. Like much in his life, Obama appears to have made it up.
A more likely possibility is that Obama lied to Ferris about the trip. Instead of going to Kenya, Obama may have contented himself with going to the local library and pillaging the memoirs of longtime Kenya resident Kuki Gallmann
This is the theory proposed by tireless researcher Shawn Glasco. He was intrigued by the many words and phrases in Dreams that also appeared in Gallmann’s book, African Nights, which was published in 1994. These include Baobab [a tree], bhang [cannabis], boma [an enclosure], samosa [a fried snack], shamba [a farm field], liana [a vine], tilapia [a fish], kanga [a sheet of fabric], shuka [decorative sashes], and many, many more. 
Based on Garrow’s imprecise timeline, Obama flew to New York to hand the completed book off to Ferris no later than early June 1994. In other words, he spent six weeks to finish the last third of the 400-page book between “late spring” 1994 and early June 1994, which is, in fact, late spring.
In his 2009 book, Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage, celebrity biographer Christopher Andersen offers a much more credible account of how Obama managed to finish a project that hung over his head ever since he finished law school.
According to Andersen’s two sources in Chicago’s Hyde Park, Obama found himself deeply in debt and “hopelessly blocked.” At “Michelle’s urging,” Obama “sought advice from his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.” Noting that Obama had already taped interviews with many of his relatives, both African and American, Andersen elaborated, “These oral histories, along with his partial manuscript and a trunkload of notes were given to Ayers.” Andersen’s six-page account makes sense, logically and chronologically, but Garrow fully ignores it.
Andersen is a best-selling, mainstream author. He even appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball to discuss the book. Said Chris Matthews at the end of the interview, “You‘re amazing, successful guy. You have a winning streak here.” Matthews likely did not read the book. Garrow did read it and cites the book in the footnotes but, oddly, not on the subject of authorship.
Garrow nonetheless offers some valuable insights into the Ayers-Obama relationship, insights that I believe strengthen my thesis. Once Ayers helped launch Obama’s political career in 1995, Garrow writes, “Barack and Michelle began to see a great deal more of not only Bill and Bernardine [Dohrn] but also their three closest friends, Rashid and Mona Khalidi and Carole Travis."
According to Garrow, the three couples attended "almost nightly dinners” together up until the time Obama ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004. This information, of course, makes complete hash out of Obama’s infamous claim during a 2008 debate that Ayers was “just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.”
Khalidi, a radical Palestinian, begins his 2004 book, Resurrecting Empire, with a tribute to his own literary muse. “First, chronologically and in other ways,” writes Khalidi, “comes Bill Ayers.” Unlike the calculating Obama, Khalidi had no reason to be coy about this relationship.  He elaborates, “Bill was particularly generous in letting me use his family’s dining room table to do some writing for the project.”  Khalidi did not need the table.  He had one of his own. He needed help from the skilled neighborhood editor and writer who obviously could and would provide it.
There is nothing “loony” about Bill Ayers helping a good friend finish his book. That is what Ayers did. He was grooming Obama for higher office and was savvy enough to keep his writing relationship with Obama under wraps. Being a friend of a terrorist, Ayers knew, would not exactly help Obama’s career.
Jack Cashill’s most recent book, a political thriller called “The Hunt” co-authored with Mike McMullen, is available wherever you buy books. For a signed collector’s edition, see www.TheHuntBook.com.


Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation



*
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.”
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.

BARACK OBAMA: Was he America’s first closet Communist president?


Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA.  These facts are not in dispute.  Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control.  Our press chooses not to report them.

Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David AxelrodValerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.

OBAMA’S WAR ON THE JEWS

The Democrats are now officially the party of Jew-hatred. This is largely due to the disastrous presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. PAMELA GELLER
*
*
Abunimah’s piece -- and Obama’s numerous anti-Semitic associations -- got little attention. Throughout his life Barack Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others.  PAMELA GELLER


THE OBOMBS AND HARVARD
OBAMA AND HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS… Did he serve them well?
Malia, Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/03/malia-michelle-barack-and-college.html

Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”

GOOGLE WHAT THE OBOMB DID FOR HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS

Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard.

“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM


On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his watch.  Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for the purpose of political advantage.
Another prominent Democrat who supports the 
anti-capitalist Occupy movement is a self-declared
 communist named Bill Ayers, in whose living 
room Barack Obama launched his political career. 

"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by 
President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in 
office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES

Illegal Immigration and Marxism
Even though the law doesn’t allow them to vote, illegal immigrants are changing the landscape of the U.S. government, especially in California, by impacting the census’ through mass migration. California allows illegal aliens to vote.

 

Red Tide Rising


On September 21, a protest was held in Aurora, Colorado demanding abolishment of U.S. borders and the Immigration & Customs Enforcement agency.  Over the last three years, a myriad of similar anti-ICE, open-border demonstrations have been held in cities across America, all of which have been encouraged and supported, tacitly or otherwise, by the Democratic Party.
One of several Democratic front groups that participated in the protest calls itself the Party for Socialism and Liberation/Denver.  To make sure its Marxist ideology doesn’t go unnoticed, the group’s Facebook page reads “Building a Worker’s Paradise in the Heartland of World Imperialism.”  PSL/Denver’s name includes the word socialism, but the communist flag flown at its Aurora protest shows that to this profoundly anti-American group, socialism and communism are heads of the same snake.
The open borders demonstration was also attended by members of Rocky Mountain Antifa and Denver Communists, two other openly Marxist Democrat front groups.  In this video, a member of Denver Communists confirms that the protestors are demanding elimination of U.S. borders and an end to enforcement of U.S. immigration law.  An image on the group’s Facebook 
page shows members carrying a banner 
demanding no borders and no nations.  

A borderless world without nations represents the culmination of the communist dream of a world united under the banner of the hammer and sickle.  For that dream to be realized, America’s sovereignty must be yielded to an international governing body run by the UN, a one-world globalist organization run by an international assortment of socialists-cum-communists.  Those who call for a borderless world with no nations are effectively calling for a permanent end to the United States in favor of a “new world order,” a world where Americans would be indoctrinated to no longer see themselves as citizens of their country, but as Citizens of the World.
Occupy Denver is another anti-capitalist group that showed up for the demonstration in Aurora.  Hundreds of Occupy affiliates are active in cities, towns and campuses across America.  Like other Democrat identity politics groups, Occupy affiliates are openly pro-communist -- Occupy Denver’s Facebook profile picture contains an image of “the Raised Fist,” one of communism’s most recognizable call to arms.  Like other Democrat front groups, Occupy Denver helps the Democratic Party advance its hostility toward the police by mocking and ridiculing law enforcement officers, as shown in this photo on the group’s Facebook.  Another photo on the group’s Facebook supports the Democrats’ class warfare election strategy with an ‘us vs. them’ propaganda graphic declaring that the poor in America are exploited victims of oppression, who therefore have a right to “destroy the system,” by violence if necessary. Victim vs. oppressor ideology is the means of achieving political power outlined in The Communist Manifesto.
The ties that bind the modern Democratic Party to pro-communist groups and organizations are unmistakable.  Nowhere is that more evident than its ties to the Occupy movement.  At an Aug. 19, 2012  pre-rally “People’s Assembly” meeting in the nation’s capitol, former labor boss/lifelong Democrat Mike Golash, leader of Occupy DC and a member of the openly-communist Progressive Labor Party, left no doubt about the intent of the Occupy movement when he was caught on video telling student occupiers “Our goal is to make revolution in the United States, overthrow the capitalist system and build communism in America.”  

Another prominent Democrat who supports the 
anti-capitalist Occupy movement is a self-declared
 communist named Bill Ayers, in whose living 
room Barack Obama launched his political career. 

And, when Occupy Wall Street protests burst on the scene in 2011, the two most high profile Democrats in America -- President Obama (“We are on their side”) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (“God bless them”) -- enthusiastically supported the 99% vs. the 1%, victim vs. oppressor protests, as did virtually every other high level official in the Democratic Party.
The Aurora protestors who demanded no borders and no nations -- and millions more like them who share their borderless world ideology -- have three things in common:
● They all are Americans who harbor deep contempt for their country.
● They all are communist revolutionaries committed to overthrowing America’s two-party capitalist system by any means necessary.
● They all support and are supported by the modern Democratic Party, a once-patriotic party that has quietly defected to the side of the hammer and sickle.  
The choice you face in 2020
Overwhelming evidence shows that the red tide of communism is rising in America, and rapidly so.  Whether it succeeds in upending our constitutional republic will be determined by the next national elections.  
An electrical engineering graduate of Georgia Tech and now retired, John Eidson is a freelance writer in Atlanta.

 

 

 

CAN YOU THINK OF EVEN ON THING BARACK OBAMA DID FOR BLACK AMERICA EVEN AS HE OPERATED 'LA RAZA' OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE?

 

Obama Still Leading from Behind

Encouraging rioters and protecting cop killer Joanne Chesimard, aka Assata Shakur, icon of Black Lives Matter.
Wed Jun 10, 2020 

“Black people have a reason to hate. That’s how it is. For your sake, I wish it were otherwise, but it’s not so. So you might as well get used to it.”
That sounds like a Black Lives Matter speech but it’s actually the character identified only as “Frank” in Dreams from My Father. Young Barry’s grandmother had been frightened by a large black man, and as Frank explained, “your grandma’s right to be scared.” Back in the day, Frank explains, he would have to step off the sidewalk to let white folks pass. Barry’s grandfather probably never told him about that because it “makes him uncomfortable.”
Dreams from My Father is a fictitious account, as official biographer David Garrow explained in the 2017 Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, but it does contain real events and characters. Garrow revealed what the “composite character” author had already acknowledged, that “Frank” is Frank Marshall Davis, an African American Communist so dedicated to the all-white Soviet dictatorship he landed on the FBI’s security index.
Before Barry goes off to college, Frank warns, “they’ll train you so good, you’ll start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that shit.” According to Frank, if the student should want to start “running things,” then whites will “yank on your chain and let you know that you may be a well-trained, well-paid nigger, but you’re a nigger just the same.”
In Chicago, the student meets the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, “a dynamic young pastor. His message seemed to appeal to young people like me.” As the Rev. Wright explains, “life’s not safe for a black man in this country, Barack. Never has been. Probably never will be.” That too sounds like the creed of Black Lives Matter, as David Horowitz explains, created in 2013 by self-styled Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries “who selected as their movement icon convicted cop-killer and Black Liberation Army member Assata Shakur.”
In February 2015, at the height of their riots and incitements, President Obama duly invited BLM to the White House. They were better organized than he had been, the president said, and “I am confident that they are going to take America to new heights.”
After the death of George Floyd at the hands of a Minneapolis cop, Black Lives Matter headed a nationwide spree of arson, looting and violence that claimed the lives of police officers, including African Americans such as David Dorn. In a virtual town hall on the matter, former president Obama named none of the victims and failed to condemn any of the violence and destruction. On the other hand, he invoked “institutionalized racism,” the “original sin” of our society.
The task of the protesters, Obama said, is to make such sinners feel “uncomfortable,” the same term Frank used back in the day, and “seize the moment.” That leaves plenty to ponder for people of no color and African Americans alike.
Born in 1905, Frank Marshall Davis studied journalism at Friends College then transferred to Kansas State. In Livin’ the Blues: Memoirs of a Black Journalist and Poet (University of Wisconsin Press, 1992), Davis proudly notes his inclusion in Who’s Who in the Midwest and Who’s Who in America. So in Frank’s day, there was plenty of opportunity for blacks in America, and things were bound to get better.
Frank warned that college is “an advanced degree in compromise” and the Rev. Wright said “life’s not safe for a black man in this country,” and never would be. Yet somehow the Hawaiian-born student formerly known as Barry Soetoro earned a law degree at Harvard, became a U.S. Senator, and in 2008 was elected president of the United States, the most powerful person in the world.
In 2015, during his second term, the composite character president brought Black Lives Matter to the White House. As the current insurrection surges, the former president mounts the bully pulpit, invoking the “original sin” of institutionalized racism. He exhorts the protesters to “make people uncomfortable” and “seize the moment.”
Leading the charge is Black Lives Matter, whose icon is Assata Shakur also known as Joanne Chesimard. In 1973, Chesimard shot and killed New Jersey state trooper Werner Foerster in execution style, at point-blank range. The convicted murderer escaped prison and fled to Cuba, an all-white Stalinist dictatorship leading the world in black political prisoners.
In 2013, on the 40th anniversary of Foerster’s murder, Joanne Chesimard became the first woman to make the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist list. While living in Cuba, FBI agent Aaron Ford said, she “continues to promote her terrorist ideology. She provides anti-U.S.-government speeches, espousing the Black Liberation Army’s message of revolution and terrorism.”
In March of 2016, President Obama visited Cuba to push for an end to the U.S. trade embargo. He did so with no conditions on the Castro regime such as free elections, release of political prisoners, and no demand for the return of Joanne Chesimard, also known as Assata Shakur.  When her protector Fidel Castro died in November, 2016, Obama recalled “the countless ways in which Fidel Castro altered the course of individual lives,” and hailed “the enormous impact of this singular figure.”
In 2016, the Stalinist’s life mattered. In 2020, the former president is still leading from behind as rioters loot, burn, and kill police officers in the style of Joanne Chesimard, an inspiration to violent leftists of all skin shades.
Weather Underground terrorists Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert named their son Chesa, after Joanne Chesimard, and the child was adopted by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. Chesa Boudin is now district attorney of San Francisco.
“It’s time for radical change to how we envision justice,” the victorious Boudin said last year.  “I’m humbled to be a part of this movement that is unwavering in its demand for transformation.”

 

 

Michelle Obama castigates whites for ‘running from us’

 


Speaking at an event in Chicago called the “Obama Foundation Summit” (were any heads of state present?), Michelle Obama let slip her resentment of white people. The grudge goes back to her childhood, and she does not seem to see much progress in the behavior she attributes to Caucasian-Americans. Fox News reports what the New York Times doesn’t:
White Americans are “still running” elsewhere when minorities and immigrants move into their communities, Michelle Obama observed Tuesday. (snip)
In a sit-down interview with journalist Isabel Wilkerson, in which Obama was accompanied by her brother, Craig Robinson, an executive with the NBA’s New York Knicks, Obama described when she first became conscious of what’s been called “white flight.”
We were doing everything we were supposed to do – and better,” Obama said of her family, recalling when they got a new address on Chicago’s South Side. “But when we moved in, white families moved out.
“I want to remind white folks that y’all were running from us,” she continued, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. “And you’re still running.”
This is remarkably un-self-aware, considering that the Obamas currently reside in Kalorama and Martha’s Vineyard. How many blacks live near their two mansions?
“I can’t make people not afraid of black people,” she said, according to The Hill. “I don’t know what’s going on. I can’t explain what’s happening in your head."
Maybe what’s going on in the heads of white people is the same as what was going on in Jesse Jackson’s head when he said:
“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”
It would be wonderful if black crime rates were similar to those of whites and Asians, but they aren’t. That’s is why many minorities flee from ghettos as soon as they are financially able – a group that includes Barack and Michelle Obama.
Mrs. Obama is stoking racial resentment with her remarks, an emotion that the Democrats use as part of their electoral strategy to drive black turnout.
At least her statement castigating whites is consistent with her oft-expressed position that she has “zero interest” in running for president.
Here is video of her remarks on race:
Photo credit: YouTube screen grab
Hat tip: Ed Lasky


"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES
October 3, 2019

The Political Civil War is real

The American Political Civil War, which began in November 2016, has so far witnessed leftist Democrats initiating a series of unsuccessful offensive maneuvers against the president and his allies.  The unrelenting Russian collusion bombardment did not produce the shock and awe promised by leftist operatives such as Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi.  And so a new front was opened up against the president, having the appearance of impeachment proceedings that dealt with a routine phone call from President Trump to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky.
Sometimes aggression must be met head on, with resolve to stop it in its tracks.  History reviles Neville Chamberlain not because he was unsuccessful in halting German expansion, but because he couldn't identify or didn't want to acknowledge the clear evidence of imminent war. 
Chamberlain's self-deception and fear helped pave the way in allowing an aggressor to gather strength and strike when he had amassed enough power.  In the same way, it was the self-deception and cowardice of Republican members of Congress that allowed the Democrat impeachment machine to gain control of the House during the midterm elections. 
But the leftist Democratic Party has taken a different approach toward total political and social conquest.  Unlike the German war machine that promised peace but delivered war, leftist Democrats do not promise any compromises.  Instead, they are openly mobilizing for political war and are prepared to deliver on that threat, no matter the cost to the country.
And to be clear, it will continue to be an all-out, extremely aggressive assault on the president and any American who wants nothing more than to live in peace and raise a family.  To pretend that what is happening today is merely dirty politics as usual would be the equivalent of British citizens identifying descending V-1 rockets in the battle of Britain as no more than pesky mosquitoes.  
It is, thus far, a bloodless, political civil war to change America forever.  And it has already seen a coup attempt against the president by the Left that desires a winner-take-all conclusion.  And because Leftist Democrats never conceived that anyone other than a person they selected would become president, the rules, laws, and language must change and contort to fit their agenda so they can finally seize power.  Once in power, the rules and laws dictated by the Left will become unrecognizable, and there will be no bridge to cross to get back to the Constitution.  
Politically speaking, these leftist radicals have proven that they will attack all those who want to remain living in a Republic.  As in every past revolution into socialism, the socialist victors demand complete obedience from the conquered. 
In their own words, leftist Democrats confirm that they are counting on a misinformed public in order to gain power.  Take, as an example, the statement made by Jonathan Gruber, the architect of Obamacare, where he brags to a group of people how in order to pass Obamacare he relied on "the stupidity of the American voter."  Although Gruber doesn't explain how the American voter becomes so "stupid," the evidence is clear that the corrupt, indoctrinating media play a crucial role.  They dole out misinformation and deceit, as does the leftist education system.
There are no more pretenses, as the corrupt major media have all but announced their alliance with the far left's aggressive goals.  An article in the October 2018 edition of Investor's Business Daily points out this blatant one-sided absurdity that passes for today's media:
To say that the big networks haven't exactly had a love affair with Donald Trump, as they did with President Obama, is an understatement. A new survey shows that not only is coverage of Trump overwhelmingly negative, but the President's biggest accomplishment — the roaring economy — gets almost no attention.
The article goes on to say Trump receives 92% negative coverage and that the Media Research Center watched network TV for four months and found that the coverage surrounding Trump's economic boom was only 0.7% of the entire coverage.
It cannot be overstated that for America to "change," there had to be a push to revoke some or all of the Bill of Rights.  That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal.  Only because outsider citizen Trump became President Trump do we now know that there was no chance that justice would have ever been served for the victims of the scandals of Benghazi, the IRS, and Fast and Furious while Obama was in office.  Just like the leftist Democrats of today, Obama was protected by America's version of Pravda.
The ongoing coup attempt against President Trump and his administration will continue.  The American people will get deluged with fake news and lies from hostile media sources.  There still exists a sliver of hope in the name of William Barr.  But even Barr holding a winning hand is not enough to turn the tide against the waves of corruption slamming into America.  It will also take the selfless efforts of the average American who demands liberty.  It will take the courage and grit of ordinary men and women to secure a victory — not just for the president, but for America's bright future and the joy of living in ultimate freedom.
Mecha's  (M.E.Ch.A.) own slogan reads, "For the race everything. For those outside the race, nothing." (CALIFORNIA’S ATTORNEY GENERAL XAVIER BECERRA IS A MEMBER OF THE MEX FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT OF M.E.Ch.A.)
LA RAZA: The Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “THE RACE” and the Reconquista and surrender of America to NARCOMEX
VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY?
The comparison to the Nazi Party is well deserved. La Raza openly supports pushing all but Latino Americans out of a portion of the United States (ethnic cleansing), they call for 'Reconquista' or the re-conquest of the American Southwest by Mexico (the re-occupation of the Sudetanland), and the establishment of 'Atzlan' which is the utopian all-Latino version of the American Southwestern states (Adolf Hitler planned to called his utopia Germania).
"Despite the fact that the majority of documented hispanics oppose illegal immigration, as do the majority of Americans, Aztlan and La Raza race hate groups have become the self-appointed voice for a separatist movement that threatens a violent overthrow of the Constitutional system and a barbaric program of ethnic cleansing. This is held up by the media as 'diversity' and to vociferously oppose it is scorned as racism."
Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."
"We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within  our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan”  or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New  Mexico and Texas into the country of Mexico."
"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens --- was the last gasp of white America in California." --- Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party… NOW THE PARTY for LA RAZA SUPREMACY… do a search for Barack Obama and LA RAZA.
"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."  --- Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times  
“Make no mistake about it: the Latino community holds this election in your hands. Some of the closest contests this November will be in states like Florida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico -- states with large Latino populations.”   PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA  
“I know how powerful this community is. Just think how powerful you could be on November 4th if you translate your numbers into votes.”    PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA 

SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF BARACK OBAMA IS A PRO-MUSLIM, ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-CHRISTIAN, ANTI-JEWISH DICTATOR IN THE MAKING FOR GLOBALIST BANKSTERS AND BILLIONAIRES.

 

 

When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist.  For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar. 

 

 

The Crisis Obama Let Go to Waste

Barack Obama's legacy is nothing if not consequential.  In his decades as "community organizer" among Chicago's poorest, most desperate neighborhoods, he did nothing other than perpetuate complete dependence on Big Brother.  His Affordable Care Act, and its accompanying criminal penalties for not engaging in commerce, scythed a mile-wide berth into the already frayed concept of a citizenry living free from government coercion.  More ominously, Obama was able to entwine his instinctive Marxism with a vision for America's path forward in a way his predecessors had been unable to. 
The singular cunning of Obama was his success in realigning the "victim" hierarchy almost completely from class to race.  Free citizens in a market society can climb or descend the social ladder, but race remains a constant throughout.  Race is our most recognizable difference, no matter its superficial nature.  In the deepest recesses of our prejudices, race is pure tribalism.  And in the darkest hours of human history, at our most trying moments, and during our most vicious wars, people of all tribes have taken refuge not within their class, but within their race or ethnicity.  The examples of Nazi Germany, of Bosnia, of Rwanda, and of the Armenians in Turkey are but a few examples of the horrors lifelong friends and neighbors of the same class can inflict on one another in the name of racial identity politics.
This isn't to say Marxism hasn't been peddled before under the guise of racial identity grievance.  Indeed, Lenin himself was able to provoke satellite regions like Ukraine and Kazakhstan to revolt from czarist Russia in the name of ethnic separatism.  In the United States, it has been tried repeatedly since the 1960s.  But as our nation's first (half) black president, Obama was able sow division with absolute authority, and with minimal criticism by a political class that either openly supported his aims or was petrified of soliciting unsubstantiated accusations of racism. 
And sow division he did, with every chance he got. 
When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist.  For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar.  When asked to justify his close association with this shameless bigot, Obama shrugged off such concerns, comparing Wright to "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with."  Obama distanced himself from Wright only when it started affecting his poll numbers.
When armed Black Panthers were caught threatening voters outside a Philadelphia polling station in 2008, the Department of Justice under the Bush administration charged (and convicted) them with violations of the Voting Rights Act.  Once in office, Obama had political appointees in the DOJ dismiss the charges.
When Cambridge Police (both white and black, not that it should matter) arrested his black friend Henry Gates for disorderly conduct, Obama, after admitting that he didn't know all the facts, stated that the police "acted stupidly."
After Trayvon Martin was shot by Afro-Peruvian (AKA "white Hispanic") George Zimmerman, Obama intoned, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon."  This implies that Martin was shot because he was black, and not because he was repeatedly pummeling Zimmerman's head into the pavement.  Even Eric Holder's investigation concluded otherwise.
After black nationalist Xavier Micah Johnson opened fire and murdered five Dallas police officers in 2016 (as they protected a Black Lives Matter march), Obama gave a eulogy at their funeral.  The eulogy itself stands as perhaps one of the most despicable moments of the Obama presidency.  He used the podium to equate the murder of the Dallas police officers with the recent shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile (both of which were investigated and found justifiable, and neither man was "unfairly targeted" because he was black, as Obama asserted).
It was a speech as deft as it was cynical.  Reading through the text, one realizes more clearly the manipulation taking place that, when spoken, is less detectable.  He subtly but unmistakably steers the speech from a tribute to the murdered officers to a damning indictment of our alleged systemic racism, coupled with a defense of the paranoid style of the Black Lives Matter movement.  By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the events to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for the actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson. 
One wonders if, had he attended Sterling's funeral, he would have lectured the audience about murdered police.
At this point, I must interject a side note regarding the aforementioned shootings.  Philando Castile was shot in a horrible case of mistaken identity.  He closely matched the description of a suspect from a recent armed robbery, and the officer thought he was reaching for a gun he admitted to having.  Alton Sterling (who had a long arrest record that included battery, burglary, and weapons charges) was shot because he was physically fighting with police, despite being tasered several times.  Police shot him when he reached for the loaded .38 caliber revolver in his pants.  His shooting was completely warranted, and Baton Rouge is a safer place without him.  Neither the tragic shooting of Castile nor the justified shooting of Sterling can in any reasonable way be attributed to racism, nor can they be remotely likened to the premeditated slaughter of the five Dallas officers.  But such are the dots that Obama connected to hustle his race narrative.
Obama is notoriously thin-skinned to criticism, or to the suggestion that someone, somewhere, might be smarter than he.  This is the guy who claimed, with a straight face, that he was a better speechwriter than his speechwriters, more knowledgeable about policy than his policy directors, and a better political director than his political director.  Still, one assumes he was adroit enough to recognize that objections to his policies, or questions of their constitutionality, were not the default reactions of repressed racism.  If he had thought they were, he would have said so.  On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his watch.  Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for the purpose of political advantage.
Obama also understood the political pitfalls inherent in hiding behind the race card in efforts to deflect policy debates he could not win.  So he did one better.  He let his media sycophants do it for him.  For the duration of his presidency and beyond, these shrieking curs claw the flesh off their faces at the slightest hint of criticism of Obama, his policies, or his style of governance.  I am unaware of a single instance in which he publicly censured his groupies for their utter lack of nuance.
Therein lies the biggest tragedy of Obama's legacy.  As a biracial president, he had a foot in both black and white America.  He was uniquely positioned to use this to the advantage of the entire country, to serve as a bridge of healing and progress between races who have butted heads for far too long.  Instead, for eight continuous years, he chose to do the exact opposite.  He entrenched identity politics as deeply as he could, ripping open wounds in the process, and divided this great nation perhaps past the point of no return.  He did this to spread a thoroughly debunked ideology, the achievability of which his ego will never allow him to admit he was mistaken about.
In a 2008 speech in which Obama attempted to justify Jeremiah Wright's irrational hatred, he said, "At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings."  Never before has a poker player so inadvertently revealed his own hand.  When Obama spoke those words, he was no doubt doing what he does best: thinking of himself.

Pollak: Barack Obama Wrote the Playbook on Political Division

 


Left-wing pundits have accused President Donald Trump of using his tweets last weekend to launch a divisive re-election campaign.

David Axelrod, former adviser to President Barack Obama, tweeted: “With his deliberate, racist outburst, @realDonaldTrump wants to raise the profile of his targets, drive Dems to defend them and make them emblematic of the entire party. It’s a cold, hard strategy.”
That is debatable — but if so, Axelrod should know; Obama did it first.
By 2011, Obama knew that re-election would be difficult. The Tea Party had just led the Republicans to a historic victory in the 2010 midterm elections, winning the House and nearly taking the Senate. The economy was only growing sluggishly, and Obama’s stimulus had failed to keep unemployment below eight percent, as projected. Moreover, the passage of Obamacare had provoked a backlash against Obama’s state-centered model of American society.
Facing a similar situation in the mid-1990s, President Bill Clinton had “triangulated,” moving back toward the middle, frustrating the GOP by taking up their issues, such as welfare reform.
But Obama rejected that approach. Having watched his icon, Chicago mayor Harold Washington, settle for an incremental approach when faced with opposition in the 1980s, only to die of a sudden heart attack before fulfilling his potential, Obama chose the path of hard-left policy — and divide-and-rule politics.
The first hint of his strategy emerged during the debt ceiling negotiations in the summer of August 2011. As Bob Woodward recounted in his book about the crisis, The Price of Politics, then-Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) had wanted to reach a “grand bargain” with the president on long-term spending cuts. But Obama blew up that agreement by demanding $400 billion in new taxes, to his aides’ surprise. Obama wanted an opponent, not a deal. (Last week, Boehner told Breitbart News Tonight that Obama’s decision was his worst disappointment in 35 years of politics.)
In the fall of 2011, a new left-wing movement, Occupy Wall Street, was launched. A mix of communists, anarchists, and digital pranksters, the Occupy movement cast American society as a struggle between the “99 percent” and the “one percent.”
Obama and then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) embraced the movement — and failed to distance themselves from it even as it collapsed into violence, sexual assault, and confrontations with police.
Instead, Obama picked up on Occupy’s themes and used them to shape his campaign.
In December 2011, Obama gave a speech at Osawatomie, Kansas — a place steeped in radical symbolism — at which he doubled down on his left-wing policies. He focused on the issue of economic inequality, and attacked the idea that the free market could lift the middle class to prosperity. “This isn’t about class warfare. This is about the nation’s welfare,” he insisted.
Then, in the spring of 2012, Obama made a controversial play on race. When a black teen, Trayvon Martin, was killed in Florida during a scuffle with neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, Al Sharprton — who was serving as an informal adviser to Obama at the time — made the local crime story into a national racial controversy. Obama, following Sharpton’s lead, weighed in: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Obama said at the time.
Poll numbers suggest that race relations, which had been improving, dropped precipitously after that. But to Obama, it was worth it: the campaign needed to find a way to motivate minority voters. (Vice President Joe Biden did his part, telling black voters that GOP nominee Mitt Romney was “gonna put y’all in chains.”)
Trump is pushing a non-racial, nationalist message. But if he actually wanted to divide America for political gain, he could learn from the master.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.


Heading for civil war

Donald Trump’s opponents are completely unhinged. The hate and slander directed towards the president and his supporters is off the charts. The vitriol comes not just from the Democrat party, the media, and the world of entertainment, but also from a sizable proportion of the federal bureaucracy and many seemingly ordinary people.  
The media coordinates this campaign and amplifies the hate at every opportunity. Media twist every event, be it big or small, into a criticism of the president. The goal is always to present Trump in not just an unfavorable light but to make him appear too loathsome for polite society. And Trump is not the sole target of this demonization. It is directed at his supporters, too. 
Where will all this lead? No less than Angelo M. Codevilla fears it could ultimately result in a bloody civil war. And if it comes to that, there's no doubt where he places the blame.  
The story of the contemporary American Left's sponsorship of hate and violence began around 1964, when the Democrats chose to abandon the Southern constituencies that had been its mainstay since the time of Jefferson and Jackson. In less than a decade, the party found itself increasingly dependent on gaining super-majorities among blacks, upscale liberals, and constituencies of resentment in general -- and hence on stoking their hate. 
For the past half century, America's political history has been driven by the Democrats' effort  to fire up these constituencies by denigrating the rest of America.
Codevilla notes that prominent Democrats like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton have led millions of their followers "to think and act as if conservatives were simply a lower level of humanity, and should have their faces rubbed in their own inferiority."
It’s not surprising that many ordinary followers have concluded that harassing conservatives in restaurants, airports, and public functions is "not just permissible but praiseworthy, and if thousands of persons who exercise power over cities, towns, and schools have not concluded that facilitating such harassment and harm is their duty."
This is the toxic environment that the Democrats, in conjunction with the media, have created. Has Pandora's box been opened? Are we beyond the point of no return? Are leftists and their liberal soulmates too obtuse not to expect that hate and violence will someday be answered in kind? These questions are up in the air. Right now, one thing is clear. As Yeats wrote: "The best lack all conviction while the worse are full of passionate intensity."
Codevilla's worry about a civil war dovetails with The Fourth Turning,: What the Cycles of History Tell Us About American's Next Rendezvous with Destiny (1997)  by William Strauss and Neil Howe. To my reading, these authors predict a Fourth Turning Crisis period around the years 2020-2022. Then, many things that Americans have always taken for granted will unravel. 
Just to touch on a few of the changes that Strauss and Howe see: today's soft criminal justice system will become swift and rough. Vagrants will be rounded up and the mentally ill recommitted. Criminal appeals shortened and executions hastened. Pension funds will go bust and Social Security checks become iffy. The full spectrum of society will be under distress. All the problems will be combined into one -- the survival of society.  
Aren't the seeds already planted for a crisis? Trust in Washington and in government institutions is at an all-time low. Political violence is tacitly condoned and often openly encouraged by Democratic officeholders. The political establishment encourages massive Illegal immigration. The mainstream media is highly partisan and corrupt beyond reform. The American flag, the country's history, and even its nationhood are openly despised in universities. American public schools are a disgrace despite the money poured into them. The country is burdened by a $22 trillion national debt to which many trillions more of unfunded government liabilities must be added. Students owe a trillion dollars in school loans that can never be repaid.
Someday there has to be a reckoning for all this dysfunction. Irrespective of the election results in 2020, the time frame of 2020-2022 sounds about the right for things to come to a head. It would be prudent to be ready. 

Hatred is Hatred, whether from the Left or Right

The Reverend Not So Sharpton is not considered a hater.  He was much sought after by 12 of the Democrat presidential candidates, who made the pilgrimage to his humble abode to kiss his ring.
When it was time to renew his television show, his credentials were examined (but the ratings were ignored), and yes, he was qualified because he is still black.  That seems to be the reason Al is a television star.  Al is paid $500,000 annually by MSNBC for his television work, and he pays himself over $200,000 from his civil rights non-profit organization.
You might think a television star with a net worth of up to $5 million and annual income of over $700,000 could pay his bills, but Al still owes $4.5 million in state and federal taxes, and he often forgets "to pay travel agencies, hotels, and landlords," according to the records.  In 2015, Al paid almost $2 million on his back taxes.
In 2004, Al bought himself a Rolls-Royce Phantom for his 50th birthday.  That is the most expensive production car in the world, with a base price of $475,000.
That is one Baptist who was not held under water long enough!
Just kidding, but he is not my kind of Baptist.
A black killer in Dallas who killed five police officers and injured 14 other innocent people said, "I want to kill white people, especially white cops."  When asked if the shooting should be considered a hate crime, President Obama said, "It's hard to know what his motives are."  Can't Obama understand clear English?  The killer was a hater, and his race or political position did not matter.  By being a defender of hate, does that make Obama a hater?
It seems hate is identified depending on the hater and the hatee.
A French rapper named Nick Conrad has a song titled "Hang Whites!" that declares, "I enter day care centres, I kill white babies, Grab them quickly and hang their parents, Take them apart to pass the time."  In one scene, the rapper and an associate drag a white person along a street and kick him in the head.  The lyrics include calls to kill white people and their children.
That's hate by a self-described "black artist, Parisian, proud sophisticate" — or more precisely, a French jerk who shot to fame with his hate-filled "song."
Thaddeus Matthews, Memphis disc jockey, interviewing Charlotte Bergmann, a black, female conservative Republican candidate for Congress, called her a "token negro" and "curly-haired nigga."  He added, "I'm so sick of your s---, yourself, and I'm about to put your a-- up outta here," he said.  "You are a token negro that white folk have control over."  As she got up to leave, she tried to shake his hand, and he refused, saying, "I don't need to shake your hand.  I'm scared because some of that whiteness might rub off on me." 
Thad, the black hater of whites, is still a disc jockey in Memphis.  Charlotte won her primary but lost in the 2018 general election.
The mother of Michael Brown (the teen thug who was killed by a police officer in Ferguson after Brown tried to take the officer's gun) is running for city council!  But Momma's comments will haunt her.  She wrote on social media after two police officers were shot, "If my FAM woulda got JUSTICE in August maybe those two comps wouldn't have got shot LAST NIGHT..."  Also, "F--- THEM 2 COPS...DON'T GOT NO SYMPATHY FOR THEM OR THEY FAMILIES…Aint no FUN when the Rabbit got the GUN."
That too is undisguised, unreasonable, and uncontrolled hate and indicates a problem in public education.
Maggie Gallagher cited a book that expresses extreme hatred toward conservative Christians in America who "tend to hold relatively high levels of social power."  So Many Christians, So Few Lions: Is There Christianophobia in the United States? was authored by George Yancey and David A. Williamson, who asked people about conservative Christians.  "'I want them [conservative Christians] all to die in a fire,' said one man with a doctorate[.] ... 'The only good Christian is a dead Christian,' said another man with a doctorate.  'I abhor them and I wish we could do away with them,' said a woman with a master's degree.  'A tortuous death would be too good for them,' said a college-educated man.  'They should be eradicated without hesitation or remorse,' said an elderly woman with a master's degree."
Hate is not defined by education, race (and yes, of course blacks can be racists), religion, national origin, politics, or financial status.
"Look at thus [sic] chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist's arrogated entitlement.  All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps.  Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine?  Yes."  This was so eloquently spoken by white Georgetown University professor Christine Fair. Chrisy is no longer teaching at Georgetown; she is "on leave."
No sane person will defend hate, but many haters use hate as a weapon and often go into battle with Christian conservatives.  Since the progressive cannot defend his castle in ruins (liberalism), he fires the only bullet in his possession: "You're a hater."  That is supposed to settle the argument in favor of progressives!
Pseudo-intellectuals like Georgetown's Michael Eric Dyson said after George Zimmerman was acquitted in the killing of Trayvon Martin that it would be a good thing for more white children to be murdered so Americans could better understand racism.  Mike is also a Baptist preacher, but not a historical or biblical Baptist, for sure.
Sarah Jeong is a member of the New York Times editorial board.  She wrote: "Dumba-- f------ white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on a fire hydrant."  Also, "Are white people predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically only being fit to live underground like groveling goblins[?]"  Finally Sarah's "White men are b-------"; "#CancelWhitePeople"; "oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men" and "f--- white women lol."
Sarah is still with the Times!
According to a report from Newsweek, Trinity College professor Johnny Eric Williams is making waves again.  Breitbart News reported in June 2017 that Williams had argued that first responders should have let Representative Steve Scalise die after he was shot during a practice for the congressional baseball game.  Williams also shared a blog post by an anonymous author that asked black people to withhold life-saving help from white people in need.
In a recent social media post, Williams wrote that "whiteness is terrorism[]. ... If you see them [whites] drowning.  If you see them in a burning building.  If they are bleeding out in an emergency room.  If the ground is crumbling beneath them.  If they are in a park and they turn their weapons on each other: do nothing," the post read.
Of course, hatred is hatred whether from the Left or right or in the middle; however, all the haters quoted today have been from far out in left field.
Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years.  Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning!  EBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com.  Follow him on Facebook at Don  Boys, Ph.D. and visit his blog.  Send request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his  articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.



Class Conflict within the Democratic Party



Over many decades, the American Left, the Democratic Party and their mutual propaganda arm, the self-styled “mainstream media,” have successfully portrayed conservatives and the Republican Party as a coalition of the wealthy and intolerant.  Further, the Democrats and the left have claimed that they are the true champions of the working or middle class as they unceasingly fight to defeat and marginalize this evil menace. 
The reality, however, is that this cabal has virtually no interest in defending or aiding the working class as they are, in fact, the party of a bifurcated constituency: the wealthy and those dependent on the largess of the government.
Of the fifty wealthiest congressional districts throughout the country, the Democrats now represent forty-one.  Of the remaining nine represented by Republicans, three are in Texas, the only red state on the list of fifty districts. Not coincidentally the residents of these same fifty districts are supposedly among the most well-educated and sophisticated.  This transformative process is not a recent phenomenon as the trend began in the 1980’s and accelerated rapidly in the early 2000’s.
America’s elites, now overwhelmingly represented by the Democratic Party, have a single overriding interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle.  This is manifested in their mistaken belief that conservatives (i.e. the “right”) are hell bent on enforcing their version of morality on the nation, thus potentially calling into question the lifestyles of the rich and solipsistic. 
The veracity of this claim is immaterial as it would require an element of deliberation not emotion --  a trait in extremely short supply among the nation’s privileged class, nearly all of whom have difficulty in generating an original thought due to the ill-education rampant in America’s universities.  Thus, the mindless accusations of racism, misogyny and Fascism directed at the conservative rubes in middle America are acceptable, and in far too many instances believed, particularly as many had the temerity to vote for Donald Trump – who, although wealthy and Ivy League educated, is considered the ultimate unsophisticated rube.
As conservatives are the dominant force in the Republican Party and this nation cannot function politically with more than two major political parties, the alternative is the Democratic Party.  An entity dominated by the American Left, an assemblage whose core philosophy is antithetical to the interests of the wealthy and privileged.  Yet, determined to protect their lifestyles and vilify conservatives, they willingly ally with the left and overwhelmingly support virtually any Democratic candidate.  In the recent 2018 mid-terms, Democratic House candidates outspent their Republican opponents by a two to one margin thanks primarily to this wealthy but myopic assemblage. 
Their colleagues in the Democratic Party, and the preponderance of the membership, are those dependent on the largess of the federal and state governments.  On the other hand, the growing segment of the citizenry who are working and self-sufficient are increasingly joining those who believe in limited government in migrating to the Republican Party-- a process that is accelerating with the policies and tactics of Donald Trump in combating the entrenched left and their determination to culturally and economically transform the nation.  The Republican Party will inevitably become the party of the working or middle class.  As such, they could potentially dominate the political agenda for the foreseeable future.
The left and the Democratic Party, in order to offset this possibility, must aggressively seek to increase the number of dependents by promoting the legalization and ultimate citizenship for untold millions of illegal immigrants and promising all Americans cradle to grave economic security.  In order to enact this strategy to defeat the Republicans, the left must have the active participation and financial support of the nation’s wealthy-- which they have. 
The Democratic Party has evolved into essentially an incompatible two-tier class-driven entity encompassing the nation’s wealthiest and the nation’s poorest.  Nonetheless, it is at present a convenient home for the elites to hold off the imaginary horde of conservatives outside their gilded doors. 
However, the voting numbers within the party are overwhelmingly with those who generally support the leftist philosophies of redistribution (e.g. socialized medicine and guaranteed incomes) and curtailing of freedom (e.g. speech, assembly and religion).  While it may not manifest itself to the affluent who have cast their lot with the Democrats, the redistribution of wealth must, by necessity, come from the wealthy, as that is where the bulk of the nation’s wealth resides.   It is also this same small-in-numbers group that benefits the most from freedom of speech and assembly. 
Once fully embroiled in this marriage of convenience, a divorce will be impossible as the co-inhabitant of the Democratic Party, the dependent class, must continue grow in order to electorally defeat the Republicans and protect the left’s agenda.  Further, the oversold expectations promulgated by the left will never be satisfied regardless of how many promises are made or token redistributive programs are enacted by the current ruling class.  Only a complete transformation of this nation into a failed socialist state will satiate the left, their acolytes and their attendant army of dependency.  A goal more in reach than ever thanks to the inability of the nation’s elites to give a damn about the future of the country.
There is not a more short-sighted and self-absorbed group of citizens in this nation than the white, wealthy well-educated urban and suburban voters.  They are willing to rend the fabric of this nation in order to protect their privilege and lifestyle.  While the vast majority of Americans will ultimately pay the price, the current ruling class and their progeny will have far more to lose. 
Xavier Becerra
As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work cleaning up his inline reputation and record. KATY GRIMES

 

CHICANO MARXISTS PREPARE FOR BATTLE WITH TRUMP ADMINISTRATION

 

https://sacramentocitizen.wordpress.com/2017/01/05/chicano-marxists-prepare-for-battle-with-trump-administration/

 

As Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán, we are a nationalist movement of Indigenous Gente that lay claim to the land that is ours by birthright. As a nationalist movement we seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza and promotes our identity as a Chicana/Chicano Gente.

By Katy Grimes and Megan Barth
CA Marxists Ramping Up Destabilization of the Golden State
Immediately following the November election, California Governor Jerry Brown appointed U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra (D) to replace State Attorney General Kamala Harris, who won election to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.
The goal by these extremists in California is to push the state, and eventually the country to such a crisis, a reorganization is the only cure. That is what Communists do. Modern day “Progressives” as they like to be called, like Brown and Becerra, refer to themselves as Multiculturalists and Progressives. But as history very clearly demonstrates, using Marxism as the cure to anything in society is a very dark fairytale.
The term “progressive” is simply another way of saying “socialist” or “Marxist;” But it’s as important to recognize how liberation theology factors into the radical Latino lawmakers: In Latin America, the big enemy is not Marxism, it is capitalism. And the main enemy of liberation theology, according to its founder, the Rev. Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, and many of its adherents, is the United States–Michael Novak, the author of the 1984 ”Freedom With Justice: Catholic Social Thought and Liberal Institutions.” Novak describes liberation theology as “gaining its excitement from flirting with Marxist thought and speech.”

Xavier Becerra
As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work cleaning up his inline reputation and record.
According to a NewsMax account on Free Republic:
“I got to be the first in my family to go to college” thanks to MEChA, Becerra said.
Hannity repeatedly pressed Becerra on why he would belong to a group that preaches racial discrimination, prompting the Bustamente backer to complain, “Are you calling me a racist?”
When the Fox host pointed out that MEChA favors the return of California to Mexico, Becerra still declined to criticize the group, saying, “I got a lot of help from people in the organization who have promoted education for kids and who continue to do that. … What I know is what they do.”
MEChA is a Hispanic separatist organization (400 chapters nationwide and in many high schools) that encourages anti-American activities, civil disobedience, and romanticizes Mexican claims to the “lost Territories” of California and the Southwestern United States, in a Chicano country called “Aztlan.” The official national symbol of MEChA is an eagle holding a machete-like weapon and a stick of dynamite.
The Fabian Society and Fabian Socialism uses the teachings of John Maynard Keynes as their catechism of political economy. Like Marxism, it embraced the idea of a Communist Utopia, where the State owned everything and controlled every aspect of the public’s lives. They have installed Fabian Socialism and Keynesism as the new faith, both in the Universities and in Government bureaucracy. Keynes supported statism and socialism, and managed and planning economies. U.S. President Barack Obama has long advocated the use of Keynesian economic concepts — despite the fact that John Maynard Keynes was incompetent, a fraud, and accused of being a pedophile.
These groups have worked diligently behind the scenes to implement their Socialist policies into our government, labor unions and throughout academia. They have infected the working class, demanding higher and higher wages, resulting often in welfare and other government handouts once their employers are ruined. They use illegal immigrants as messengers of their ideology, demeaning patriotism, and America. And they have manipulated the political process so that only those candidates well-versed in Marxism receive the attention of the corporate Media.
Illegal Immigration and Marxism
Even though the law doesn’t allow them to vote, illegal immigrants are changing the landscape of the U.S. government, especially in California, by impacting the census’ through mass migration. California allows illegal aliens to vote.
Former Mechista Rep. Xavier Becerra, the U.S. congressman for California’s 31st District, says what all leftist Latino lawmakers say: their (illegal) constituents still pay taxes and contribute to society, therefore they should vote. — “An individual doesn’t have to be a citizen to pay taxes – you pay taxes if you work in this country, you pay taxes if you purchase something,” Becerra said.
Led by Los Angeles County Federation of Labor head Maria Elena Durazo, a group of socialist and Communist California labor officials and Democrat Party operatives created a program to target Latinos and immigrants (illegal and legal) to permanently drive California politics far to the left, Democrat political consultant Richie Ross wrote in CalBuzz in 2010. Ross openly boasts of targeting the Latino community’s fear of anti-illegal immigration measures, to drive the community even further into the arms of the Democratic Party.
In 1994, then-Governor Pete Wilson put Proposition 187 on the ballot.  It was called the nation’s first anti-immigrant initiative, but in fact the goal of Proposition 187 was to make illegal aliens ineligible for public benefits including public social services, public health care services, and public school education. It came in the middle of a deep recession in California and was popular partly because the fiscal estimate from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office said that it would save the state about $200 million/year.
Latinos and Communists
The two most significant Marxist groups in the United States, the Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of America, are both committed to increasing the Latino vote in order to give Democrats a permanent electoral majority.
Maria Elena Durazo,Los Angeles County Federation of Labor head, is closely associated with both groups. She is is also well connected to former LA Mayor and Gubernatorial hopeful Antonia Villaraigosa, as well as former California State Senator Gil Cedillo, both long time immigration activists.
“Durazo, Villaraigosa and Cedillo, all trained under legendary Los Angles Communist Party USA activist, Democratic Party activist and “immigration reform” pioneer Bert Corona,” Trevor Loudon wrote in 2013. All three have long ties to both the Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of America, and coincidentally were all prominent California supporters of presidential candidate Barack Obama and long time ally of both the Communists and DSA.
(former mayor of Mexico’s second largest city of Los Angeles) Villaraigosa has a long history with MEChA. As a student, he headed the UCLA chapter of MEChA, but left UCLA six weeks before graduation to become a full-time organizer with Corona’s Centro de Action Social Autonoma.
Another radical activist isRep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), a co-sponsor of the 2010 Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Gutierrez,  a former member of the Marxist-Leninist Puerto Rican Socialist Party, chairs the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Longtime amnesty activists Gutierrez and Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA), both members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, worked on the amnesty effort.
Communists seek to use amnestied illegals to build a “permanent progressive majority.” Most thinking Americans know that Democrats only care about illegals for the winning voting bloc they can provide, but most are unaware that this idea was hatched and developed by the American Communist Party, which Richie Ross clearly explains in his op ed:
The campaigns we developed broke new ground, organized new union workers, and increased the political impact Latino voters have had on California politics – simultaneously tripling their number of registered voters, increasing the Democratic share of that vote by 50%, and doubling the percentage of the total votes cast in California from Latinos.
Through the rest of the 1990′s our campaigns focused on legislative races in Los Angeles.  We succeeded.  But it was all small.
In 2000, our message was controversial (until it worked).  “If you want to make a difference, voting isn’t enough.  Don’t bother voting unless you sign our pledge to get 100% of your family to vote.”  Latino turnout rose… and accounted for 14% of the votes cast according to the State’s voter registration and voting history records.
The Enemies Within
Trevor Loudon’s 2013 book, Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress, “profiles fourteen Senators and more than fifty Representatives. Their ties to Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Workers World Party, the Institute for Policy Studies, Council for a Livable World and other radical anti-American organizations.”
Loudon identifies Bert Corona, as the “Communist Father of the ‘Immigrants Rights’ movement” in 1960. In 1964, Corona, Cesar Chavez and future Democratic Socialists of America member Dolores Huerta forced Congress to end the guest worker “Bracero” program. Later, Corona sought ways to address “problems confronting Mexicans in the United States who had no visas or citizenship documents” – in other words, illegal aliens – including “how to defend persons detained by immigration authorities and how to help immigrants acquire disability and unemployment insurance and welfare.”
Loudon writes:
On March 11, 1998, Los Angeles Democratic Socialists of America leader Steve Tarzynski wrote an email to another Los Angeles DSA leader Harold Meyerson.
Tarzynski listed 25 people he thought should be on an “A-list” of “25 or so leaders/activists/intellectuals and/or “eminent persons” who would gather periodically to theorize/strategize about how to rebuild a progressive movement in our metropolitan area that could challenge for power.”
Included in a suggested elected officials sub-group were Mark Ridley-ThomasGloria RomeroJackie GoldbergGil CedilloTom HaydenAntonio VillaraigosaPaul Rosenstein and Congressmen Xavier BecerraHenry Waxman and Maxine Waters.
In further preparation for battle, the California legislature just hired former Attorney General, Eric Holder. “Having the former attorney general of the United States brings us a lot of firepower in order to prepare and safeguard the values of the people of California.” Kevin de Leon, the Democratic leader of the Senate, said in an interview. “This means we are very, very serious.”
Very serious, and very Marxist, indeed.
Part 2 of this series will be published next we


How Obama Impacted the Military

Radical changes imposed on our military by progressives, begun in earnest during the Obama administration, are negatively impacting our combat readiness and jeopardizing the lives of our men and women in uniform and, ultimately, our national security.  In Stand Down:  How Social Justice Warriors Are Sabotaging America’s Military, author James Hasson elucidates how Barack Obama fundamentally changed military culture to make our nation less secure. Hasson, a former Army captain, Army Ranger School graduate, and Afghanistan veteran, argues that military readiness was sacrificed for identity politics and progressive rhetoric. He lists examples such as policies that established “safe spaces,” prohibited “micro-aggressions,” denigrated “hyper-masculine” traits, implemented unwise “green” standards and injected “social justice” guidelines in military operations.
In his revealing book, Captain Hasson describes how Obama’s military appointees, mainly progressive ideologues lacking military experience and hailing from academic, political, and the private sectors, were placed in charge of seasoned combat generals with decades of combat experience.  The priorities, experience, and philosophies of the officers and appointees couldn’t have been more disparate. 
Many senior military staff members suffered in silence at Obama’s attempt to use the military as a “laboratory for progressive social engineering,” according to Hasson.  Exemplifying this shift was the naming of Navy ships after Leftist political heroes. Socialist labor-activist Cesar Chavez and slain gay-rights advocate Harvey Milk -- who left the Navy for being gay -- were among those who Ray Mabus, Obama’s secretary of the Navy, announced would have ships named after them.  This practice flew in the face of the hallowed Navy tradition of naming ships after presidents and war heroes.  
Obama, who, Hasson says, took pride in his lack of military knowledge and experience, made widespread changes to personnel policy, budgetary expenditures and resource allocations that harmed readiness, training and troop safety.  Obama’s transgender policy of “mixed genitalia in the bathrooms,” took precedence over established military culture.  Soldiers were judged by the gender they wished to be rather than their biological sex.  Obama essentially used the military to lead social change in American society rather than preserving time-honored traditions that emphasized troop cohesiveness and readiness. 
The author explains that the cornerstone of every military policy is its impact on combat.  The military is most concerned with physical outcomes, the determinant of ultimate success.  That focus was weakened by the transgender policy instituted by the Obama administration allowing soldiers to serve under the sex that conformed to their gender identity even without sex reassignment surgery or other physical changes.  This practice had a profound effect on fitness, performance, and deployability.  Hasson recognizes that transgender soldiers have served in the military in the past but according to the physical fitness, grooming, and housing regulations that conformed to their biological sex. 
Other issues nclude the quandary that arose when a recruit identified as non-binary.  Military leadership was stymied by the dilemma of applying appropriate standards for such individuals.  The military must find those most qualified to serve and reject those suffering from mental conditions such as anxiety and depression.  Transgender people suffer from markedly higher rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide than the general population.
Obama’s new policies also negatively impacted the education of cadets, Hasson asserts.  Military academy courses on American history were overhauled to focus on race and the pervasive narrative that America is a racist country.  The international history class focused on gender and a semester of military history was completely deleted from the curriculum.  How can military students become successful warriors if they eschew military history, are educated to disdain their country, and view history through the lens of race and gender? 
Today’s military academies have a higher percentage of civilian, liberal professors who have promoted a permissive atmosphere that has contributed to a deterioration in the level of discipline, Hasson adds.  The current environment with its “safe spaces” and emphasis on race, gender, sexual orientation and social justice, as well as rights, are antithetical to the military’s hierarchical structure and its emphasis on duty, merit, discipline, and competence.
As part of the Obama administration’s social engineering agenda that attempted to erase the differences between men and women, the Army was coerced to lower its standards for Ranger school to admit women who didn’t qualify for the special-forces unit.  Military brass was pressured to provide ample pre-training instruction and multiple do-overs exclusively for female candidates.  Further, despite extensive studies that found lowered standards for women to meet progressive goals, they were forced to deny the study results.
When Marine infantry units integrated women, the male-female units had higher injury rates, slower casualty-evacuation times, poorer marksmanship skills, poorer preparation of fortified fighting positions and overall lower battle-essential skill sets than all-male units.  Although all-male units outperformed coed units in 70% of combat tasks and mixed units were not recommended, Obama still issued a directive to integrate the Marine Corps infantry companies.  Hasson characterizes this policy as “fulfilling the dreams of progressive ideologues at the expense of a service member’s life.”
When the Army was ordered to promote “social justice,” combat veterans in 2012 were required to don fake breasts and bellies to understand how pregnant soldiers fared during training.  In two separate, college ROTC events in Philadelphia and metropolitan Phoenix in 2015, cadets were required to walk in high heels to raise awareness about sexual violence against women. 
In 2013, a Pentagon training manual for Equal Opportunity Officers and Non-Commissioned Officers (NCOs) presented white, heterosexual, Christian males as recipients of unearned social privilege and cited the disadvantages of blacks, women and homosexuals.  The manual listed the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a left-wing organization that maligns conservative groups alongside neo-Nazis and the KKK, as a resource that officers could use to obtain more information about hate groups and extremism.  After pushback from legislators and religious groups that railed against the false labeling and listing of mainstream Christian groups as “hate” groups because they don’t subscribe to far-left ideology, the Obama Department of Defense removed the list, but retained all other SPLC materials and data. 
All these diversions took a toll on military training and readiness, wasting valuable time and resources that could have been dedicated to drilling and essential tasks. 
Hasson acknowledges that the Trump administration has pushed back on many misguided “reforms” instituted by Obama and has reprioritized the military’s warfighting culture, rejecting political correctness, social engineering, identity politics and other policies that serve no real military purpose and undermine combat readiness and performance.  The author ends his excellent book with a prescription for returning the military to its critical mission.  He recommends the military refocus on appropriate academy education, readiness, deployability and eligibility based on physical fitness, merit and discipline and move away from social justice, political correctness, carbon emissions and other pet progressive projects.  Such a move will return the military to full combat readiness, protect the lives of our soldiers, and, ultimately, safeguard our national security.