Saturday, February 24, 2018

THE BANKSTER BOYS BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER ARE STILL AT IT...... OBAMA'S DREAM OF A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE!

BARACK OBAMA and ERICK HOLDER: BUILDING OBAMA’S MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP requires destroying white middle class first. BLACKS HAVE ALREADY SELF-DESTRUCTED!


THE LEGACY OF A LOOTER: THE BARACK OBAMA STORY

"Obama is no fool and he understands -- having encouraged Black Lives Matter and the war on police and law enforcement, having facilitated ballooning welfare rolls and doubling student debt to $1.35 trillion, having presided over a flood of immigrants illegally crossing the southern border, and having pushed unprecedented deficit spending that added nearly a trillion dollars annually to the federal debt and doubling that debt in eight years to $20 trillion -- that the U.S. is nearer collapse than at any previous time. And every Marxist knows that socialist transformation first requires collapse of the old order."


BANKSTER ERIC HOLDER DECLARES THAT OBAMA IS  (still) “READY TO ROLL” FOR A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE!

 

 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/08/seth-barron-obama-and-building-of.html

 

 

“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of  groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”


THE OBAMA COUP: IT STARTED IN CHARLOTTESVILLE

 

 

"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


http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/08/did-barack-obama-start-charlottesville.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




THE PSYCHOPATH WHO WOULD BE DICTATOR FUNDED BY HIS
CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS AND REELECTED FOR A THIRD TERM BY
MEXICO
MICHAEL BARONE:

The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story

Former president Obama and attorney general Eric Holder are agitating again.  After witnessing the loss of their presidential candidate and the flickering remains of the faux "Russia collusion" case, they are not deterred. &n...: This isn't just about gerrymandering or district borders.� It always comes down to


Holder and Obama playing 'impeach Trump' in Pennsylvania

Former president Obama and attorney general Eric Holder are agitating again.  After witnessing the loss of their presidential candidate and the flickering remains of the faux "Russia collusion" case, they are not deterred.   Rather than politely passing the torch, they are attempting to torch our entire election process in their obsessive attempt to destroy Trump's presidency.
During Obama's reign, we witnessed his flagrant flouting of United States laws, his weaponization of federal bureaucracies, his ham-handed interference in local criminal activities, and his illegal meddling in foreign elections –  Egypt and Israel being the more egregious examples.  Now he is back on the political scene, shrouded in the shadows, conniving, advising, and fundraising for the recently founded National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC).  The NDRC's stated goal is to end gerrymandering after the elections in 2020.  Year 2020 is an obvious and legal target.  Every ten years, after the national census is completed, congressional delegates and districts are reconfigured, added, and eliminated, based upon the population shifts in each state.  In Pennsylvania, the state legislature is empowered to implement redistricting, and these functions are carried out in a timely and orderly manner.
Not content to wait until 2020, however, the NDRC hatched a scheme to wrest power away from key state legislatures.  Pennsylvania has proven to be a prime target.  Here's why.
The Pennsylvania Legislature is controlled by Republicans who created the district maps, as authorized, after the 2010 census and elections.  (It is essential to note that each party in power draws district maps to its advantage.)  The legislature is still controlled by Republicans, but Pennsylvania's governor is a Democrat: Tom Wolf.  Wolf went along with the districts until Pennsylvania's Supreme Court suddenly became controlled, after the last elections, by Democrat justices.  When the governor and Legislature could not agree on a new map, the Democrats brought an "illegal gerrymandering" case through Pennsylvania's judicial system, knowing that the Democrat-controlled Supreme Court was predetermined to support their case.  Accusing the Republicans of being avaricious in their redistricting, the new Democrat-devised map is equally slanted.  The redrawn map confusedly renumbers districts; eliminates potentially four Republican seats, thereby abolishing some Republican "incumbency advantages"; and makes a mockery of the Democrats' professed motive of district neutrality.
Exacerbating the chaos is the Democrats' pernicious timing.  Their new map dropped just before parties were endorsing candidates for the May 15, 2018 primary.  As a result, all candidates, including all those running for Congress, have been endorsed and their petitions circulating.  In practical terms, that translates into needless expenditures of time and money, where committees will be forced to duplicate the nomination and endorsement process.
While "illegal gerrymandering" is the tagline for obliterating Pennsylvania's legislative landscape before the 2020 Census, the endgame is President Trump's destruction.  Implementing a presidential impeachment is a power that resides solely in the House of Representatives.  Currently, not that many Democrat representatives have called for Trump's impeachment, though the subject is bruited about frequently.  Should Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in the next election, watch the impeachment games begin.
Ms. Lechter is a practicing attorney in Philadelphia and an endorsed candidate for Pennsylvania's Republican State Committee.


THE BANKSTERS' RENT BOY'S SERVICE TO 

PLUNDERING BANKSTERS.... WHO CAME OUT ON THAT 

ONE?

Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors


are employees of financial industry giants -Goldman Sachs

($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207)

and Citigroup ($358,054).

When President Obama's official portrait by Kehinde Wiley came out, its easily manipulated vector graphics made it an easy target for parodies and satires.  The funniest one, passed around from viewer to viewer, on Facebook, was by...: Another Obama legacy myth heads for the scrap heap of history.




When President Obama's official portrait by Kehinde Wiley came out, its easily manipulated vector graphics made it an easy target for parodies and satires.  The funniest one, passed around from viewer to viewer, on Facebook, was by an unknown satirist here.
Or here:
It's funny because it says something so true about President Obama and his much vaunted Iran deal with the mullahs, which is the single foreign policy element of his legacy he and his minions defend hardest.  The mullahs rolled in cash as a result of rolling Obama and his gullible team over the deal, knowing that Obama was desperate for some sort of legacy.  They shook $1.7 billion out of him, based on $400 million in funds the old shah of Iran had deposited in the U.S. for military purchases.  After that, they made off like bandits with the loot.
Hundreds of millions of dollars rolled in on pallets on secret flights to the mullahs, in addition to cash released from other sources.  From there, it was spent on financing terrorism and insurrection in places such as Yemen, as well as in the Syrian conflict and beyond.  As Iran fell into disrepair, its people choked by the effects of global sanctions, the mullahs lived it up, got rich, and then used that cash to spread trouble.
It's an ugly picture, and since then, the Obamatons have attempted to spread a myth to draw attention away from their rotten deal: that the cash from America was really Iran's cash all along, and the mullahs were just getting what was owed to them.
It's horse hockey.  The estimable Lee Smith, writing in Tablet magazine, exposes how that $1.7 billion was anything but the rightful property of the mullahs.
First, when Iran submitted its claim in 1981, the US filed an $817 million counterclaim for Iran's violations of its obligations under the FMS program. As Rick Richman explained in a 2016 Mosaic article, "with both the claim and the counterclaim still pending, it was possible that Iran owed billions of dollars to the U.S., not the reverse."
Second, a 2000 law signed by President Bill Clinton, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, said that Iran's FMS account could not be refunded until court judgments held by the U.S. government against Iran for damages from terrorist acts against American citizens were resolved to America's satisfaction.
So, it turns out, the mullahs had had many judgments against them for inflicting terrorism on Americans, and some of them sued.  Courts ruled for them, and the cash should have been paid from the original $400 million.  It wasn't, but the judgments stood, and in the past, this has been the big obstacle for Iran to get its money back.  Second, it wasn't its money anyway, given that Iran under the mullahs had violated the terms of the parked cash anyway.
And now the Obamatons defend their bad deal with Iran by saying it was all Iran's money anyway?  Never mind the dead terrorist victims over the years.  Give 'em nothing?
Someone seems to have a guilty conscience.
With Smith's reporting, another Obama myth is busted.

"These portraits are as dishonorable, phony, and fake as the news regurgitated daily, 24/7, on CNN and MSNBC, as inauthentic vaporware as the ex-president's legacy, thankfully to be discarded in its entirety as his replacement promises to rebuild America, its military, its health care system, its economy, its trade agreements, its infrastructure, and its honor (the last two neglected since Eisenhower), all of which were seriously diminished by his predecessor."


"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these."


A COMMENT ON FRONTPAGEmag


I know bad art when I see it, and that is bad 
art.

Plus the guy who painted Big O specializes 
in paintings of black females holding the 
heads of decapitated white females (no joke, 
look it up. Here's one:



Demonstrating once again a serious deficit of seriousness, almost alone in taking himself seriously, as most people won't any longer, Barack Hussein Obama unveiled two portraits of himself and his wife. One cannot help but be reminded that...: Two works of industrial design barely adequate for a Hallmark card.� And yet...appropriate.

The presidential portrait: Weird, but fitting for a narcissist-in-chief



Demonstrating once again a serious deficit of seriousness, almost alone in taking himself seriously, as most people won't any longer, Barack Hussein Obama unveiled two portraits of himself and his wife.
One cannot help but be reminded that these two works of industrial design barely adequate for a Hallmark card embarrassingly look like cartoons painted on high-grade canvas.  Wholly improperly conceived as either serious art or dignified enough to be hung along the row of presidents similarly honored in the corridors of the White House, not only do we see in these mind-numbingly tasteless works a deficit in seriousness, but we see an absence of cultural depth.
One might argue that these attempts at "art" are about as lacking in styletastedignity, and honor, and accomplishment, as were the ex-president's excruciating eight years foisted on a people who are celebrating his visage fading in the distance of the nation's rearview mirror.  As was his presidency and his speech to the fawning attendees at the unveiling, it is all about posing, pretense and airs, and imagery.
There you have it: the ex-president sitting in a field of flowers exactly the way his would-be flower children fans see him.  A Buddha-like god figure among the daffodils, images conjured up of a pollution-free world filled with Nobel Prize-winners for Peace whose reigns were filled with blood and gore, disasters and suffering, drowned children washed up in waves on Europe's beaches, a half million dead and five million displaced – all of whom crossed the other way the ex-president's Red Line.
These portraits are as dishonorable, phony, and fake as the news regurgitated daily, 24/7, on CNN and MSNBC, as inauthentic vaporware as the ex-president's legacy, thankfully to be discarded in its entirety as his replacement promises to rebuild America, its military, its health care system, its economy, its trade agreements, its infrastructure, and its honor (the last two neglected since Eisenhower), all of which were seriously diminished by his predecessor.
NOTE: Within hours of the unveiling, it was noted that Obama painter Kehinde Wiley was, along with his wallpaper pattern backgrounds, notorious for a pair of paintings depicting white women beheaded by black women. Wiley being gay, it's likely that a psychologist would call this "displacement."




THE PORTRAITS AND THE OBAMA REALITY DISTORTION FIELD













       

Federal portraits often aren't that great. There's plenty of evidence of that all around Washington D.C. And famous people are surprisingly hard to paint. There are plenty of strikingly different portraits of George Washington. So the normal response to the Obama portraits would be a shrug, and maybe a few jokes if you don't like them. And maybe even if you do.
But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these.
Philip Kennicott / Washington Post: The Obamas' portraits are not what you'd expect and that's why they're great
Tim Teeman / The Daily Beast: - Michelle Obama's Portrait Isn't a Photograph. Get Over It
Really, do we actually have to do this?
Obama's robot in Disney's Hall of Presidents isn't a phone either. And he looks ridiculous.
It's really okay to admit that something involving the Obamas is flawed. At least it is unless you're in a cult. In that case you have to write your counterintuitive "The portrait's terribleness is what makes it awesome" pieces. And we already got so many of those about everything Obama did that even a New York Times scribe mocked the "It's not a weakness, but a strength" meme.
This isn't journalism. It's not a free press. It's a bunch of cult members rushing out to explain that the flawed thing is flawless. You're the flawed one for not seeing its gloriousness. All hail the beloved leader.
Not hard to see why the media loves North Korea.
The Obama reality distortion field corrupted our country. It reduced the media to shrieking, lying idiots who responded to losing the election by calling for a coup. But those are political differences. When you can't even admit that Michelle Obama's portrait looks nothing like her, that's a denial of reality.
And it's just sad.

Behind the portrait of Barack Obama




The selection of the artists painting the Obamas' new portraits commissioned for the Smithsonian revealed much more than two pieces of "art."
One would surely think that the chosen artists of the former president and first lady of the United States would have been carefully vetted – for quality of work, appropriateness of artistic style for the venue, and reputation in the community.
Barack Obama's selection of Kehinde Wiley for his portrait is proving to be more atrocious than the painting itself.
The major media outlets, though, such as CNBC, were quick to observe a momentous occasion, breathlessly reporting that "The Obamas made history not only as the country's first African-American presidential couple featured in the gallery but also for selecting the first African-American painters to receive a presidential portrait commission from the museum."
That same CNBC piece also recounted the history of Obama's personal selection of Wiley, writing that Obama "thinks 'it's safe to say Kehinde and I bonded'" and "how much he and Wiley had in common."
It was the painting itself, however, and not the artist, upon which my friends in the conservative Twittersphere focused at first.  I couldn't help offering my own opinion, sarcastically tweeting my suggested title: "Obama Manspreads in Sea of Poison Ivy."
Others noted the oddness of a "sixth finger," the unusually large proportions of Obama's hands, and the prominent vein on the side of his head.  Some, after showcasing the presidential portraits that preceded Obama's, observed the obvious and radical change in tone.  I'm no art critic, but if past portraits were considered stately, this one, if not more interesting and colorful, also has an aura of something else entirely.
That "something extra" is apparently the calling card of the artist.  And, fittingly, the provocative nature of such a selection is also the calling card of Obama.
Of course, in all the mainstream media gushing about the painting and its painter, a disturbing career history and reputation were left unquestioned.  With just a little research, it's not difficult to discover.
In a 2012 piece on Wiley in New York Magazine, the very first paragraph described a painting in his studio that "stands out: a tall, elegant black woman in a long blue dress – the canvas is enormous, eight feet by ten feet – calmly staring down the viewer.  In one hand, she holds a knife.  In the other, a cleanly severed brunette female head.  'It's sort of a play on the "kill whitey" thing,' Wiley says."
Described as "a riff on classical depictions by Caravaggio and Gentileschi of the biblical story of Judith beheading Holofernes," the painting is actually one of two that Wiley has painted in the same "riff."
That piece also noted the disturbing description of the openly gay Wiley's chosen models – "the boys" – as well as his 2002 creation of "his own Sistine Chapel ... which featured guys in modern hip-hop garb posing as saints in front of swarms of sperm."
The Daily Caller reported that in 2015, the Village Voice described Wiley's selection of male street models as "predatory" and "perverse."  An art blog, Mr. Sawyer's Opus, described Wiley's themes of gay culture and his habit of filling the backgrounds and frame designs of many of his works with dozens of spermatozoa.
And since Wiley often uses "riffs" of the setting and poses of other famous portraits as his theme, it is interesting to note the identity of the leaders found in similar-looking paintings: Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il.
Back in 2010 on the pages of American Thinker, I wrote about the "blank screen" that Obama told us he offered, noting that in The Picture of Dorian Gray, author Oscar Wilde wrote: "It is not [the sitter] who is revealed by the painter; it is rather the painter who, on the coloured canvas, reveals himself."
And since Wiley enjoys producing these "riffs" of famous artwork, should we assume that he managed to paint a "riff" of the U.S. presidency that's actually displayed in the Smithsonian Institution as a serious piece of our nation's historical art?  Is this a joke on Obama, or is it on us?
As a side note, just imagine if Trump selected an artist with a similar but reverse outrageousness for his presidential portrait.
For now, this is the "message" we're supposed to hear, as Obama noted in his Instagram post following the unveiling:
Thanks to Kehinde and Amy, generations of Americans – and young people from all around the world – will visit the National Portrait Gallery and see this country through a new lens.  They'll walk out of that museum with a better sense of the America we all love.  Clear-eyed.  Big-hearted.  Inclusive and optimistic.  And I hope they'll walk out more empowered to go and change their worlds.
Obama certainly did promise transformation.  No matter how successful Trump is in his undoing of what Obama had wrought, it is Obama's portrait, however, that will endure, preserved in a museum, forever transforming the lineup of presidential portraits.
As I said, I'm certainly no art critic.  But the quality of the portrait that spoke to me the loudest was actually not the sitter nor the painter, and was probably not the intended message.  It was the overwhelming botanical background: that the man "we've been waiting for" who could stop the rise of the oceans is not  "standing over the world as "a sort of God," but is instead enveloped in a suffocating sea of ivy.









AFL-CIO Unions Prod Employers to Hide Illegal Migrants From Enforcement Agencies



The Democratic Party’s allies in the AFL-CIO’s unions are pressuring unions and companies to protect illegal-alien migrant employees from deportation, effectively converting the pro-worker unions into wage-cutting front-groups for employers.

The conversion is described by the New York Daily News, which showed how progressive lawyers train local Teamster union leaders to negotiate workplace contracts which minimize employers’ cooperation with immigration enforcement agencies. The article says:
At a Wednesday class, funded by the Consortium for Worker Education, Mike Spinelli of Local 553 listened carefully as trainer Luba Cortés walked everyone through the difference between an administrative warrant and a judicial one. …
Spinelli paid particular attention because many of his members — immigrants who work at a Long Island dairy farm — were profoundly shaken when federal [immigration enforcement] agents raided nearly 100 7-Eleven stores last month in a search for undocumented workers.
“We deliver all the dairy to all the 7-Eleven stores in the city — you can imagine how scared some of these guys are,” he said. “It’s a scary time in general, and we’re hoping this can help the workers feel prepared and help protect them — and also so employers know they don’t have to just roll over.”
Unions once existed to push up workers’ wages by denying employers the ability to hire other people from outside the picket line.
However, since before 2008, unions have been enrolling illegal migrants who illegally crossed the line between the United States and other countries.
Since at least 2013, top union leaders are also working with the Democratic Party preserve the inflow of migrants across the line because migrants are likely to support the party — even though the additional migrants allow employers to pay lower wages to Americans. That changes came when President Barck Obama and his progressive allies pressured AFL-CIO leader Richard Trumka to reverse the unions’ traditional hostility to wage-cutting illegal immigration.
The Daily News article showed how progressive lawyers are now trying to insert illegal-friendly, enforcement-hostile clauses in union-employer contracts. The article quotes Richard Blum, a lawyer with the pro-migration Legal Aid Society, describing a negotiating guide supplied by the AFL-CIO:
“Some laws require an employer to do X — and the union can get language in a contract that says they will do X but nothing more,” Blum told The News. “Unions can also bargain for notification when something is happening so they can offer help or possibly intervene, or for a guarantee that if a worker is required to get more paperwork, they be given the maximum time available, and returned with full seniority. Or if they can’t return, they get severance, things like that.”
President Donald Trump reportedly won a respectable share of union votes in the 2016 election partly because he promised to protect Americans from employers who hire cheap-labor migrants after they cross the line. A March 2016 interview by the National Public Radio with Teamsters member Antonio Caracciolo reported:
CARACCIOLO: Well, you know, in the Home Depots in Long Island and New York City, the immigrants hang out there for day labor. And when they – they chased them out of Alabama. They don’t hang out there as much anymore. And know the state of Arizona and Alabama, where they were challenging people for citizenship, the illegal immigrants left the states. The jobs become more available. When there’s less people, there’s other jobs available. The employers who were employing those illegal immigrants, they have to turn to more-skilled workers. As less people are available for the workforce, the individuals who are hiring have to pay more.
The New York Daily News reports that the Teamsters’ membership now includes “airlines [employees], truckers, dairy farmers and more — [and] also has a sizable share of immigrant workers, roughly a third, 40,000.”
Companies want more imported workers because the nation’s formal unemployment rate is low. Without a reserve army of unemployed people, companies are forced to compete for new workers by offering higher wages, bonuses and training opportunities. For example, a new chart shows that annual wage growth (including inflation) rises above 2 percent once the “prime age non-employment rate” drops below 23 percent.


Four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market.
But the federal government inflates the supply of new labor by annually accepting roughly 1.1 million new legal immigrants, by providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by doing little to block the employment of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.
The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration floods the market with foreign laborspikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.
union


THE DEMOCRAT PARTY and the RISE OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST WELFARE STATE and MEX FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “The Race” NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOus.


http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/02/larry-elder-who-said-this-about-illegal.html

Not long ago, both Democrats and Republicans advocated safe, secure borders and an immigration policy of admitting immigrants who benefit, not burden, Americans. Que pasó? ….. LARRY ELDER – FRONT PAGE MAG



BARACK OBAMA: JAMES WALSH


THE OBAMA HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA


 How the Democrat party surrendered America to 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 



The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”

Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “The Race”


FIFTEEN THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE RACE”
by Michelle Malkin
Only in America could critics of a group called "The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."
  
THE PSYCHOPATH WHO WOULD BE DICTATOR FUNDED BY HIS
CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS AND REELECTED FOR A THIRD TERM BY
MEXICO

MICHAEL BARONE:
The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story


GET THIS BOOK!

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses



BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY

 Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.

*
Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?


Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers.


When President Obama's official portrait by Kehinde Wiley came out, its easily manipulated vector graphics made it an easy target for parodies and satires.  The funniest one, passed around from viewer to viewer, on Facebook, was by...: Another Obama legacy myth heads for the scrap heap of history.

"These portraits are as dishonorable, phony, and fake as the news regurgitated daily, 24/7, on CNN and MSNBC, as inauthentic vaporware as the ex-president's legacy, thankfully to be discarded in its entirety as his replacement promises to rebuild America, its military, its health care system, its economy, its trade agreements, its infrastructure, and its honor (the last two neglected since Eisenhower), all of which were seriously diminished by his predecessor."


"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these."


A COMMENT ON FRONTPAGEmag

I know bad art when I see it, and that is bad 
art.
Plus the guy who painted Big O specializes 
in paintings of black females holding the 
heads of decapitated white females (no joke, 
look it up. Here's one:



The presidential portrait: Weird, but fitting for a narcissist-in-chief


Demonstrating once again a serious deficit of seriousness, almost alone in taking himself seriously, as most people won't any longer, Barack Hussein Obama unveiled two portraits of himself and his wife.
One cannot help but be reminded that these two works of industrial design barely adequate for a Hallmark card embarrassingly look like cartoons painted on high-grade canvas.  Wholly improperly conceived as either serious art or dignified enough to be hung along the row of presidents similarly honored in the corridors of the White House, not only do we see in these mind-numbingly tasteless works a deficit in seriousness, but we see an absence of cultural depth.
One might argue that these attempts at "art" are about as lacking in styletastedignity, and honor, and accomplishment, as were the ex-president's excruciating eight years foisted on a people who are celebrating his visage fading in the distance of the nation's rearview mirror.  As was his presidency and his speech to the fawning attendees at the unveiling, it is all about posing, pretense and airs, and imagery.
There you have it: the ex-president sitting in a field of flowers exactly the way his would-be flower children fans see him.  A Buddha-like god figure among the daffodils, images conjured up of a pollution-free world filled with Nobel Prize-winners for Peace whose reigns were filled with blood and gore, disasters and suffering, drowned children washed up in waves on Europe's beaches, a half million dead and five million displaced – all of whom crossed the other way the ex-president's Red Line.
These portraits are as dishonorable, phony, and fake as the news regurgitated daily, 24/7, on CNN and MSNBC, as inauthentic vaporware as the ex-president's legacy, thankfully to be discarded in its entirety as his replacement promises to rebuild America, its military, its health care system, its economy, its trade agreements, its infrastructure, and its honor (the last two neglected since Eisenhower), all of which were seriously diminished by his predecessor.
NOTE: Within hours of the unveiling, it was noted that Obama painter Kehinde Wiley was, along with his wallpaper pattern backgrounds, notorious for a pair of paintings depicting white women beheaded by black women. Wiley being gay, it's likely that a psychologist would call this "displacement."




THE PORTRAITS AND THE OBAMA REALITY DISTORTION FIELD











     

Federal portraits often aren't that great. There's plenty of evidence of that all around Washington D.C. And famous people are surprisingly hard to paint. There are plenty of strikingly different portraits of George Washington. So the normal response to the Obama portraits would be a shrug, and maybe a few jokes if you don't like them. And maybe even if you do.
But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these.
Philip Kennicott / Washington Post: The Obamas' portraits are not what you'd expect and that's why they're great
Tim Teeman / The Daily Beast: - Michelle Obama's Portrait Isn't a Photograph. Get Over It
Really, do we actually have to do this?
Obama's robot in Disney's Hall of Presidents isn't a phone either. And he looks ridiculous.
It's really okay to admit that something involving the Obamas is flawed. At least it is unless you're in a cult. In that case you have to write your counterintuitive "The portrait's terribleness is what makes it awesome" pieces. And we already got so many of those about everything Obama did that even a New York Times scribe mocked the "It's not a weakness, but a strength" meme.
This isn't journalism. It's not a free press. It's a bunch of cult members rushing out to explain that the flawed thing is flawless. You're the flawed one for not seeing its gloriousness. All hail the beloved leader.
Not hard to see why the media loves North Korea.
The Obama reality distortion field corrupted our country. It reduced the media to shrieking, lying idiots who responded to losing the election by calling for a coup. But those are political differences. When you can't even admit that Michelle Obama's portrait looks nothing like her, that's a denial of reality.
And it's just sad.

Behind the portrait of Barack Obama




The selection of the artists painting the Obamas' new portraits commissioned for the Smithsonian revealed much more than two pieces of "art."
One would surely think that the chosen artists of the former president and first lady of the United States would have been carefully vetted – for quality of work, appropriateness of artistic style for the venue, and reputation in the community.
Barack Obama's selection of Kehinde Wiley for his portrait is proving to be more atrocious than the painting itself.
The major media outlets, though, such as CNBC, were quick to observe a momentous occasion, breathlessly reporting that "The Obamas made history not only as the country's first African-American presidential couple featured in the gallery but also for selecting the first African-American painters to receive a presidential portrait commission from the museum."
That same CNBC piece also recounted the history of Obama's personal selection of Wiley, writing that Obama "thinks 'it's safe to say Kehinde and I bonded'" and "how much he and Wiley had in common."
It was the painting itself, however, and not the artist, upon which my friends in the conservative Twittersphere focused at first.  I couldn't help offering my own opinion, sarcastically tweeting my suggested title: "Obama Manspreads in Sea of Poison Ivy."
Others noted the oddness of a "sixth finger," the unusually large proportions of Obama's hands, and the prominent vein on the side of his head.  Some, after showcasing the presidential portraits that preceded Obama's, observed the obvious and radical change in tone.  I'm no art critic, but if past portraits were considered stately, this one, if not more interesting and colorful, also has an aura of something else entirely.
That "something extra" is apparently the calling card of the artist.  And, fittingly, the provocative nature of such a selection is also the calling card of Obama.
Of course, in all the mainstream media gushing about the painting and its painter, a disturbing career history and reputation were left unquestioned.  With just a little research, it's not difficult to discover.
In a 2012 piece on Wiley in New York Magazine, the very first paragraph described a painting in his studio that "stands out: a tall, elegant black woman in a long blue dress – the canvas is enormous, eight feet by ten feet – calmly staring down the viewer.  In one hand, she holds a knife.  In the other, a cleanly severed brunette female head.  'It's sort of a play on the "kill whitey" thing,' Wiley says."
Described as "a riff on classical depictions by Caravaggio and Gentileschi of the biblical story of Judith beheading Holofernes," the painting is actually one of two that Wiley has painted in the same "riff."
That piece also noted the disturbing description of the openly gay Wiley's chosen models – "the boys" – as well as his 2002 creation of "his own Sistine Chapel ... which featured guys in modern hip-hop garb posing as saints in front of swarms of sperm."
The Daily Caller reported that in 2015, the Village Voice described Wiley's selection of male street models as "predatory" and "perverse."  An art blog, Mr. Sawyer's Opus, described Wiley's themes of gay culture and his habit of filling the backgrounds and frame designs of many of his works with dozens of spermatozoa.
And since Wiley often uses "riffs" of the setting and poses of other famous portraits as his theme, it is interesting to note the identity of the leaders found in similar-looking paintings: Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il.
Back in 2010 on the pages of American Thinker, I wrote about the "blank screen" that Obama told us he offered, noting that in The Picture of Dorian Gray, author Oscar Wilde wrote: "It is not [the sitter] who is revealed by the painter; it is rather the painter who, on the coloured canvas, reveals himself."
And since Wiley enjoys producing these "riffs" of famous artwork, should we assume that he managed to paint a "riff" of the U.S. presidency that's actually displayed in the Smithsonian Institution as a serious piece of our nation's historical art?  Is this a joke on Obama, or is it on us?
As a side note, just imagine if Trump selected an artist with a similar but reverse outrageousness for his presidential portrait.
For now, this is the "message" we're supposed to hear, as Obama noted in his Instagram post following the unveiling:
Thanks to Kehinde and Amy, generations of Americans – and young people from all around the world – will visit the National Portrait Gallery and see this country through a new lens.  They'll walk out of that museum with a better sense of the America we all love.  Clear-eyed.  Big-hearted.  Inclusive and optimistic.  And I hope they'll walk out more empowered to go and change their worlds.
Obama certainly did promise transformation.  No matter how successful Trump is in his undoing of what Obama had wrought, it is Obama's portrait, however, that will endure, preserved in a museum, forever transforming the lineup of presidential portraits.
As I said, I'm certainly no art critic.  But the quality of the portrait that spoke to me the loudest was actually not the sitter nor the painter, and was probably not the intended message.  It was the overwhelming botanical background: that the man "we've been waiting for" who could stop the rise of the oceans is not  "standing over the world as "a sort of God," but is instead enveloped in a suffocating sea of ivy.







AFL-CIO Unions Prod Employers to Hide Illegal Migrants From Enforcement Agencies



The Democratic Party’s allies in the AFL-CIO’s unions are pressuring unions and companies to protect illegal-alien migrant employees from deportation, effectively converting the pro-worker unions into wage-cutting front-groups for employers.

The conversion is described by the New York Daily News, which showed how progressive lawyers train local Teamster union leaders to negotiate workplace contracts which minimize employers’ cooperation with immigration enforcement agencies. The article says:
At a Wednesday class, funded by the Consortium for Worker Education, Mike Spinelli of Local 553 listened carefully as trainer Luba Cortés walked everyone through the difference between an administrative warrant and a judicial one. …
Spinelli paid particular attention because many of his members — immigrants who work at a Long Island dairy farm — were profoundly shaken when federal [immigration enforcement] agents raided nearly 100 7-Eleven stores last month in a search for undocumented workers.
“We deliver all the dairy to all the 7-Eleven stores in the city — you can imagine how scared some of these guys are,” he said. “It’s a scary time in general, and we’re hoping this can help the workers feel prepared and help protect them — and also so employers know they don’t have to just roll over.”
Unions once existed to push up workers’ wages by denying employers the ability to hire other people from outside the picket line.
However, since before 2008, unions have been enrolling illegal migrants who illegally crossed the line between the United States and other countries.
Since at least 2013, top union leaders are also working with the Democratic Party preserve the inflow of migrants across the line because migrants are likely to support the party — even though the additional migrants allow employers to pay lower wages to Americans. That changes came when President Barck Obama and his progressive allies pressured AFL-CIO leader Richard Trumka to reverse the unions’ traditional hostility to wage-cutting illegal immigration.
The Daily News article showed how progressive lawyers are now trying to insert illegal-friendly, enforcement-hostile clauses in union-employer contracts. The article quotes Richard Blum, a lawyer with the pro-migration Legal Aid Society, describing a negotiating guide supplied by the AFL-CIO:
“Some laws require an employer to do X — and the union can get language in a contract that says they will do X but nothing more,” Blum told The News. “Unions can also bargain for notification when something is happening so they can offer help or possibly intervene, or for a guarantee that if a worker is required to get more paperwork, they be given the maximum time available, and returned with full seniority. Or if they can’t return, they get severance, things like that.”
President Donald Trump reportedly won a respectable share of union votes in the 2016 election partly because he promised to protect Americans from employers who hire cheap-labor migrants after they cross the line. A March 2016 interview by the National Public Radio with Teamsters member Antonio Caracciolo reported:
CARACCIOLO: Well, you know, in the Home Depots in Long Island and New York City, the immigrants hang out there for day labor. And when they – they chased them out of Alabama. They don’t hang out there as much anymore. And know the state of Arizona and Alabama, where they were challenging people for citizenship, the illegal immigrants left the states. The jobs become more available. When there’s less people, there’s other jobs available. The employers who were employing those illegal immigrants, they have to turn to more-skilled workers. As less people are available for the workforce, the individuals who are hiring have to pay more.
The New York Daily News reports that the Teamsters’ membership now includes “airlines [employees], truckers, dairy farmers and more — [and] also has a sizable share of immigrant workers, roughly a third, 40,000.”
Companies want more imported workers because the nation’s formal unemployment rate is low. Without a reserve army of unemployed people, companies are forced to compete for new workers by offering higher wages, bonuses and training opportunities. For example, a new chart shows that annual wage growth (including inflation) rises above 2 percent once the “prime age non-employment rate” drops below 23 percent.


Four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market.
But the federal government inflates the supply of new labor by annually accepting roughly 1.1 million new legal immigrants, by providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by doing little to block the employment of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.
The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration floods the market with foreign laborspikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.
union


THE DEMOCRAT PARTY and the RISE OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST WELFARE STATE and MEX FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “The Race” NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOus.


http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/02/larry-elder-who-said-this-about-illegal.html

Not long ago, both Democrats and Republicans advocated safe, secure borders and an immigration policy of admitting immigrants who benefit, not burden, Americans. Que pasó? ….. LARRY ELDER – FRONT PAGE MAG



BARACK OBAMA: JAMES WALSH


THE OBAMA HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA


 How the Democrat party surrendered America to 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 

The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”

Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “The Race”


FIFTEEN THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE RACE”
by Michelle Malkin
Only in America could critics of a group called "The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."
  
THE PSYCHOPATH WHO WOULD BE DICTATOR FUNDED BY HIS
CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS AND REELECTED FOR A THIRD TERM BY
MEXICO

MICHAEL BARONE:
The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story


GET THIS BOOK!

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses



BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY

 Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.

*
Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?


Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers.




No, the $1.7 billion Obama forked over to Iran wasn't 'its own money'




When President Obama's official portrait by Kehinde Wiley came out, its easily manipulated vector graphics made it an easy target for parodies and satires.  The funniest one, passed around from viewer to viewer, on Facebook, was by an unknown satirist here.
Or here:
It's funny because it says something so true about President Obama and his much vaunted Iran deal with the mullahs, which is the single foreign policy element of his legacy he and his minions defend hardest.  The mullahs rolled in cash as a result of rolling Obama and his gullible team over the deal, knowing that Obama was desperate for some sort of legacy.  They shook $1.7 billion out of him, based on $400 million in funds the old shah of Iran had deposited in the U.S. for military purchases.  After that, they made off like bandits with the loot.
Hundreds of millions of dollars rolled in on pallets on secret flights to the mullahs, in addition to cash released from other sources.  From there, it was spent on financing terrorism and insurrection in places such as Yemen, as well as in the Syrian conflict and beyond.  As Iran fell into disrepair, its people choked by the effects of global sanctions, the mullahs lived it up, got rich, and then used that cash to spread trouble.
It's an ugly picture, and since then, the Obamatons have attempted to spread a myth to draw attention away from their rotten deal: that the cash from America was really Iran's cash all along, and the mullahs were just getting what was owed to them.
It's horse hockey.  The estimable Lee Smith, writing in Tablet magazine, exposes how that $1.7 billion was anything but the rightful property of the mullahs.
First, when Iran submitted its claim in 1981, the US filed an $817 million counterclaim for Iran's violations of its obligations under the FMS program. As Rick Richman explained in a 2016 Mosaic article, "with both the claim and the counterclaim still pending, it was possible that Iran owed billions of dollars to the U.S., not the reverse."
Second, a 2000 law signed by President Bill Clinton, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, said that Iran's FMS account could not be refunded until court judgments held by the U.S. government against Iran for damages from terrorist acts against American citizens were resolved to America's satisfaction.
So, it turns out, the mullahs had had many judgments against them for inflicting terrorism on Americans, and some of them sued.  Courts ruled for them, and the cash should have been paid from the original $400 million.  It wasn't, but the judgments stood, and in the past, this has been the big obstacle for Iran to get its money back.  Second, it wasn't its money anyway, given that Iran under the mullahs had violated the terms of the parked cash anyway.
And now the Obamatons defend their bad deal with Iran by saying it was all Iran's money anyway?  Never mind the dead terrorist victims over the years.  Give 'em nothing?
Someone seems to have a guilty conscience.
With Smith's reporting, another Obama myth is busted.


JAMES WALSH

AMERICAN? TRAITOR: BARACK OBAMA’S

HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA

 How the Democrat party surrendered America to 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 

The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”

Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “The Race”


No comments: