Sunday, July 29, 2018

TEMPLE TO HIS STAGGERING CORRUPTION: THE OBAMA CENTER IN BLOOD SOAKED CHICAGO DELAYED The Obomb is waiting for more funding from Muslim dicatorships

Groundbreaking delayed for Obama Presidential Center in Chicago





The rush to build a monument to Barack Obama in Chicago has run smack into regulatory red tape.  Savor the irony, especially given the massive deregulation President Trump has undertaken.  Keep in mind that this project is not a presidential library that will be part of the National Archives. It is, instead, a monument to the man, and so far as anyone can tell, books are not a feature of the 3 buildings. There will, however, be basketball courts.
The Obama Foundation Friday announced that groundbreaking, planned for this year (less than 2 years after its namesake left office) will be delayed. Lolly Bowean of the Chicago Tribune reports:
The Obama Foundation has pushed back the groundbreaking date for the Obama Presidential Center after the federal review process was delayed for a second time this summer, officials confirmed Friday.
Disappointed Obama fans will have to postpone their pilgrimages. The Foundation says now that groundbreaking will take place in 2019. Given the ability of opponents of any project to sue, demanding environmental impact statements and the like, this may still be optimistic.
Before the presidential center can be built, the federal government will review its impact on Jackson Park, which is on the National Register of Historic Places, and evaluate the project’s environmental effects. Any impact that the review highlights will have to be resolved before construction can be allowed.
There have already been two public federal review meetings. A third was scheduled in June, but then it was delayed until July. Now it has been delayed until late summer, according to the city of Chicago’s website.
The federal review process has to be conducted because of Jackson Park’s historic status and because it involved closing and expanding major streets.
Nobody has yet discovered an endangered species in the dirt of Jackson Park, nor have any American Indian archeological artifacts yet been discovered.
The Obama Foundation, which is sponsoring the project, has been funded by a long list of what Bernie Sanders likes to call “millionaires and billionaires,” but oddly enough reports no donations from Barack and Michelle Obama, who are themselves worth many millions of dollars, having received a huge advance (reportedly $65 million) from a German-owned publisher for post-presidency books. Most foundations that carry the name of an individual or family (the Ford Foundation, for example) were endowed by that individual or family.
There are more potential hurdles ahead, some of them the product of community organizers, more delicious irony:
The news of the delay comes just a day after activists gathered on the South Side at a meeting to discuss placing a community benefits agreement proposition on the February ballot.
“We have a new window of opportunity before the next election to protect the most vulnerable people in our community,” said Parrish Brown, an activist with the Black Youth Project 100 Chicago Chapter, in a written statement. “We’re gathering to make sure Mayor (Rahm) Emanuel and the local aldermen do the right thing, or we’ll have to elect people who will.”
The coalition wants an ordinance that would require that 30 percent of all newly constructed housing near the presidential center be set aside as affordable housing. They want a property tax freeze for the longtime homeowners closest to the site and an independent monitor to make sure local residents are hired to work on the project. In addition, they are now calling for a community trust fund and support for the neighborhood schools.
Almost certainly, the project will be built, and the rush to break ground is quite understandable. History will be delivering its verdict on the Obama presidency, already looking rather incompetent, given the rapid rise in solid economic growth once some the shackles imposed by Obama were relaxed by President Trump.
But I always thought there was something wrong with building monuments to living people.


The 10 Most Destructive Americans of My 8 Decades




America has undergone enormous change during the nearly eight decades of my life. Today, America is a bitterly divided, poorly educated and morally fragile society with so-called mainstream politicians pushing cynical identity politics, socialism and open borders. The president of the United States is threatened with impeachment because the other side doesn’t like him. The once reasonably unbiased American media has evolved into a hysterical left wing mob. How could the stable and reasonably cohesive America of the 1950s have reached this point in just one lifetime? Who are the main culprits? Here’s my list of the 10 most destructive Americans of the last 80 years.
10) Mark Felt – Deputy director of the FBI, aka “Deep Throat” during the Watergate scandal. This was the first public instance of a senior FBI officially directly interfering in America’s political affairs. Forerunner of James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe.
9) Bill Ayers– Represents the deep and ongoing leftist ideological damage to our education system. An unrepentant American terrorist who evaded punishment, he devoted his career to radicalizing American education and pushing leftist causes. Ghost wrote Obama’s book, “Dreams of My Father.”
8) Teddy Kennedy – Most folks remember Teddy as the guy who left Mary Joe Kopechne to die in his car at Chappaquiddick. The real damage came after he avoided punishment for her death and became a major Democrat force in the US Senate, pushing through transformative liberal policies in health care and education.  The real damage was the 1965 Hart-Cellar immigration bill he pushed hard for that changed the quota system to increase the flow of third world people without skills into the US and essentially ended large-scale immigration from Europe.
7) Walter Cronkite – Cronkite was a much beloved network anchor who began the politicalization of America’s news media with his infamous broadcast from Vietnam that described the Tet Offensive as a major victory for the Communists and significantly turned the gullible American public against the Vietnam War. In fact, the Tet offensive was a military disaster for the NVA and Viet Cong, later admitted by North Vietnamese military leaders. Decades later Cronkite admitted he got the story wrong. But it was too late.  The damage was done.
6) Bill and Hillary Clinton—It’s difficult to separate Team Clinton. Bill’s presidency was largely benign as he was a relative fiscal conservative who rode the remaining benefits of the Reagan era. But his sexual exploits badly stained the Oval Office and negatively affected America’s perception of the presidency. In exchange for financial support, he facilitated the transfer of sensitive military technology to the Chinese.  Hillary, a Saul Alinsky acolyte, is one of the most vicious politicians of my lifetime, covering up Bill’s sexual assaults by harassing and insulting the exploited women and peddling influence around the globe in exchange for funds for the corrupt Clinton Foundation. She signed off on the sale of 20% of the US uranium reserve to the Russians after Bill received a $500,000 speaking fee in Moscow and the foundation (which supported the Clinton’s regal lifestyle) received hundreds of millions of dollars from those who benefited from the deal.  Between them, they killed any honor that might have existed in the dark halls of DC.
5) Valerie Jarrett - The Rasputin of the Obama administration.  A Red Diaper baby, her father, maternal grandfather and father-in-law (Vernon Jarrett who was a close friend and ally of Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis) were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government. She has been in Obama’s ear for his entire political career pushing a strong anti-American, Islamist, anti-Israeli, socialist/communist, cling-to-power agenda.
4) Jimmy Carter  - Carter ignited modern day radical Islam by abandoning the Shah and paving the way for Ayatollah Khomeini to take power in Tehran. Iran subsequently became the main state sponsor and promoter of international Islamic terrorism.  When Islamists took over our embassy in Tehran, Carter was too weak to effectively respond thus strengthening the rule of the radical Islamic mullahs.
3) Lyndon Johnson – Johnson turned the Vietnam conflict into a major war for America. It could have ended early if he had listened to the generals instead of automaker Robert McNamara. The ultimate result was: 1) 58,000 American military deaths and collaterally tens of thousands of American lives damaged; and 2) a war that badly divided America and created left wing groups that evaded the draft and eventually gained control of our education system.  Even worse, his so-called War on Poverty led to the destruction of American black families with a significant escalation of welfare and policies designed to keep poor families dependent on the government (and voting Democrat) for their well-being. He deliberately created a racial holocaust that is still burning today. A strong case could be made for putting him at the top of this list.
2) Barack Hussein Obama - Obama set up America for a final defeat and stealth conversion from a free market society to socialism/communism. As we get deeper into the Trump presidency, we learn more each day about how Obama politicized and compromised key government agencies, most prominently the FBI, the CIA and the IRS, thus thoroughly shaking the public’s confidence in the federal government to be fair and unbiased in its activities. He significantly set back race and other relations between Americans by stoking black grievances and pushing radical identity politics. Obama’s open support for the Iranian mullahs and his apologetic “lead from behind” foreign policy seriously weakened America abroad. His blatant attempt to interfere in Israel’s election trying to unseat Netanyahu is one of the most shameful things ever done by an American president.
1) John Kerry – Some readers will likely say Kerry does not deserve to be number one on this list. I have him here because I regard him as the most despicable American who ever lived.  After his three faked Purple Hearts during his cowardly service in Vietnam, he was able to leave the US Navy early. As a reserve naval officer and in clear violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he traveled to Paris and met privately with the NVA and the Viet Cong. He returned to the United States parroting the Soviet party line about the war and testified before Congress comparing American soldiers to the hordes of Genghis Khan. It was a clear case of treason, giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. We got a second bite of the bitter Kerry apple when as Obama’s secretary of state, he fell into bed with the Iranian (“Death to America”) mullahs giving them the ultimate green light to develop nuclear weapons along with billions of dollars that further supported their terrorist activities. Only the heroic Swift Vets saved us from a Manchurian Candidate Kerry presidency. Ultimately we got Obama.

Dishonorable Mentions! (Just missed the list)
John Brennan –Obama’s CIA director who once voted for Communist Gus Hall for president. A key member of the Deep State who severely politicized the CIA. Called President Trump treasonous for meeting with the president of Russia.
Jane Fonda – movie actress who made the infamous trip to Vietnam during the war in support of the Communists. She represents hard left Hollywood that has done so much damage to our culture.
Jimmy Hendrix and Janice Joplin – Both revered entertainers helped usher in the prevailing drug culture and personally suffered the consequences. Karma’s a bitch.
Robert Johnson /BET – Helped popularize ho’s, bitches and pimps while making millions on great hits such as “Jigga my Nigga”, “Big Pimpin’”, “Niggas in Paris” and “Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z.”   Many scholars within the African American community maintain that BET perpetuates and justifies racism by adopting the stereotypes held about African Americans, affecting the psyche of young viewers through the bombardment of negative images of African Americans. Who can disagree?
Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr./The New York Times – Once the gold standard of American journalism, the paper always had a liberal tilt and occasionally made bad mistakes. As the years have gone along, the paper has slid further and further left and today is virtually the primary propaganda arm of the increasingly radical Democrat Party. Still retains influence in Washington and New York.
George Soros – Jewish former Nazi collaborator in his native Hungary who as a self-made billionaire has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into left wing groups and causes. The damage he has caused is difficult to measure, but it’s certainly large. He has funded much of the effort to kill the Trump presidency.
Frank Marshall Davis - Anti-white, black Bolshevik, card-carrying Soviet agent.  Probable birth father and admitted primary mentor of young Barak Hussein Obama.                      
Frank Hawkins is a former US Army intelligence officer, Associated Press foreign correspondent, international businessman, senior newspaper company executive, founder and owner of several marketing companies and published novelist. He is currently retired in North Carolina.  fhawk852@gmail.com

July 29, 2018

Lawless Washington


It is useless for conservatives to hope laws against political corruption and violating national security information and colluding with unsavory types will ever apply to leftists.  When is the last time any leftist in Washington faced any successful prosecution for committing crimes of this sort? 
The infinitesimal peccadilloes Democrats allege that Trump and his campaign staff may have engaged in with an essentially harmless Russian Federation – a nation with multiparty elections and many parties represented in the Duma, freedom of worship and speech, and no plans of world conquest – are nothing, even if true.  Russia, one third the size of the old Soviet Empire, is no real threat to America at all and is, in many respects, a natural ally of our nation in many areas. 
The Clintons' utter disregard for both the law and ethical behavior stretches back to Bill's ghastly reign of depravity and dishonesty in Arkansas and Bill's term as president was perhaps the most lawless in American history.  The left was utterly indifferent to his crimes and sins and all he got was a slap on the wrist for lying under oath before a federal judge and a largely symbolic impeachment that gutless Republicans in the Senate tried as best they could to ignore.
JFK was a rat and a scoundrel who, we have learned in the last decade, not only had extramarital affairs, but seduced underage interns and offered these girls illegal drugs.   His family was closely tied to organized crime, and JFK likely shared a mistress with a Mafia kingpin.  JFK doubtless avoided many problems by the simple expedient of appointing his own brother as attorney general.  The left, whose many cadres surely knew of many of his rotten deeds, completely hid those from America and elevated JFK into the wholly undeserved status of martyr.
FDR, JFK, and Clinton all did things much, much worse than Richard Nixon, but because the left cares only about power and never about ethical behavior, the misdeeds of Nixon were raised to ridiculous heights.  As the hypocritical left kept reminding us during Nixon's trials, the Constitution itself, the left claimed, was in jeopardy.  Nixon did resign – not because of the left, but rather because the right, led by truly honorable and decent men like Barry Goldwater, cared about good government.
Conservatives cannot win a game of who behaved worse and who broke what laws because the left is entirely immune to any real sanction for bad behavior, patent dishonesty, and violation of laws and regulations.  The Establishment – not just the media, but all the agencies of government and particularly the criminal justice system – is either hopelessly myopic or purely cynical about the enforcement of laws dealing with government, national security, and the like.  This has nothing to do with the letter of the law but rather the much more important enforcement of the law.  Federal agents, prosecutors, and judges determine who will be left alone and who will be hounded and perhaps imprisoned.
The unspeakable miscarriage of justice against a good and honorable man like Scooter Libby is a perfect example.  His "crime" was so trivial, so problematic, and so ambiguous that it is impossible to doubt that he was like a black in Mississippi seventy years ago being tried before the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, which trumpeted its interest in enforcing the law.
Even worse than the left's control of the instruments of investigation, prosecution, and trial is the fact that the venue for nearly all of these cases is in the District Court for the District of Columbia, a place as intolerant of conservatives and fawning toward leftists as anywhere in America.
What can be done?  President Trump could, and should, institute a robust investigation with indictment by a grand jury in mind of every potential crime of a political nature committed by leftists and he should fire any prosecutor or FBI agent who drags his feet or obstructs this action.
Then, once a number of leftists face indictment and trial, Trump ought to issue a blanket presidential pardon for everyone who may have committed these "crimes," putting conservatives and leftists on the same level of forgiveness.  Then Trump ought to convene a commission to review all the laws and regulations with recommendations of repeal of as many laws as possible and the creation of a special counsel law for the investigation and prosecution of all of these "crimes" which remain on the books.
The system for regulating the sorts of  "crimes" Trump and his aides are accused of committing is more than just broken – it has never worked.


Obama attacks wealthy in South Africa before returning to his $8-million home




Barack Obama earned up to $20 million between 2005 and 2016.  He lives in an $8-million mansion.  Everywhere he goes, he has a coterie of Secret Service agents protecting him – at taxpayer expense.
But that didn't stop him from complaining about how rich people shouldn't eat so much or live in such fine houses.
At a recent speech in South Africa, former President Barack Obama criticized wealth inequality, saying those who have more money should share their earnings with the less fortunate.
"Right now, I'm actually surprised by how much money I got," Obama said of the more than $20 million he earned between 2005 and 2016.
Obama then chided wealthy individuals for excess, saying, "There's only so much you can eat.  There's only so big a house you can have.  There's only so many nice trips you can take.  I mean, it's enough."
"We're going to have to worry about economics if we want to get democracy back on track," Obama continued[.]  "We're going to have to consider new ways of thinking about these problems, like a universal income, review of our workweek, how we retrain our young people, how we make everybody an entrepreneur at some level."
This is the exact same mindset that allowed communist officials across Russia and Eastern Europe to justify living like kings while the masses stood in line for toilet paper.  You see, Obama earned his millions.  He's smarter than everyone else.  He worked harder than everyone else.  He feels the pain of the poor more acutely than anyone else.  He deserves what he's gotten from the capitalist system where all those other rich people acquired their wealth by climbing on the backs of the working class.
Democracy is in trouble not because of capitalism or because the rich are "too rich."  Democracy is in trouble because arrogant authoritarians like Obama believe themselves to be more virtuous than the rest of us and thus qualified to judge how much wealth is "too much" and how the benefits of living in a capitalist society should be divvied up.
Obama is oblivious to the irony.  It's a very good thing he is out of power and exerting little influence on politics in the U.S.


OBAMA'S DELUSIONAL LECTURE IN SOUTH AFRICA


Ex-president complains about the problems he helped make worse.


Former President Barack Obama delivered a lengthy speech to an audience of around 15,000 people at the 16th Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture in Johannesburg, South Africa on Tuesday.  Obama leavened his standard rhetoric with effusive praise of Nelson Mandela, who, Obama said, was “one of history’s true giants” and someone whose “progressive, democratic vision” was a model for the world. Obama also praised South Africa’s current President Ramaphosa who, according to Obama, “you can see is inspiring new hope in this great country.” Obama evidently believes that “inspiring new hope” includes government expropriation of land without compensation and plans “to accelerate the land redistribution programme.” 
Obama mentioned Russia in passing, declaring that “Russia, already humiliated by its reduced influence since the collapse of the Soviet Union, feeling threatened by democratic movements along its borders, suddenly started reasserting authoritarian control and in some cases meddling with its neighbors.”
Meddling with its neighbors? Is Obama suffering under some form of amnesia or is he just in a state of denial? Under Obama’s watch, Russia meddled in our presidential election in 2016 without any pushback by the Obama administration. Aside from moving into portions of nearby Ukraine and illegally annexing Crimea, Russia inserted itself into the Syrian civil war on behalf of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad after Obama drew back from his infamous “red line” over the Assad regime’s chemical attack against its own people.
Prior to the 2012 presidential election, Obama was caught on a hot mic colluding with Dmitry Medvedev (who was then the outgoing Russian president) to pass along a message to Vladimir Putin regarding missile defense. “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved,” Obama said in hushed tones, “but it’s important for him [incoming Russian President Putin] to give me space. This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” Medvedev replied. "I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”
Obama set the tone of his appeasement towards Russia early in his first term. As Daniel Greenfield has reminded us, during a meeting held in the summer of 2009 at Putin’s dacha, Obama “listened without a word of protest to Putin’s attack on America.” That should be no surprise. After all, Obama himself made a habit of apologizing for America’s alleged wrongs during his overseas trips as president. Obama also went out of his way to praise the Russian dictator. At the beginning of his talks in 2009 with Putin, Obama said to Putin in flattering terms, “I am aware of not only the extraordinary work that you’ve done on behalf of the Russian people in your previous role as prime minis-, uh, as president, but in your current role as prime minister.”
President Trump, in fact, has imposed more severe sanctions against Russia than Obama did, expelled more Russian “diplomats” from the United States, increased U.S. energy supplies to compete with Russian energy, and provided lethal arms to Ukraine. President Trump is building the military back up to a much more effective deterrent fighting force, and has restored confidence among former Soviet bloc nations such as Poland by reversing Obama's abandonment of plans to install missile defense systems in the region.
Obama said in his Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture speech that China’s economy was based on a “model of authoritarian control combined with mercantilist capitalism.” He added that it was “proper for advanced economies like the United States to insist on reciprocity from nations like China that are no longer solely poor countries, to make sure that they’re providing access to their markets and that they stop taking intellectual property and hacking our servers.” Excellent point, but under Obama’s watch China continued to take our intellectual property and hack our servers. The trade deficit in goods with China grew approximately 150 percent during Obama’s two terms in office. His jawboning did nothing. President Trump is at least trying to use some hardball tactics to move China in the right direction.
Obama noted in his speech the downside of globalism, including its effect on workers. He said, “from their board rooms or retreats, global decision-makers don’t get a chance to see sometimes the pain in the faces of laid-off workers.” It is precisely these forgotten men and women whom Obama neglected to address with solutions to their concerns while he was president. In fact, he did the opposite by pushing for amnesty for illegal immigrants, imposing onerous job-killing regulations, and pursuing globalist job-killing agreements such as the Paris agreement on climate change. After Donald Trump won the election, the president-elect tweeted, “The forgotten man and woman will never be forgotten again.” He has kept his word, putting Americans first. Through substantial tax cuts, elimination of burdensome regulations and withdrawal from job killing globalist agreements, President Trump has created the foundation for a booming economy and the creation of millions of new jobs.  
Obama castigated in his Nelson Mandela speech what he labeled “rabid nationalism and xenophobia,” “strongman politics,” and “far-right parties that oftentimes are based not just on platforms of protectionism and closed borders, but also on barely hidden racial nationalism.” He decried what he claimed was the rejection of “objective truth,” referring as an example to the debate over the extent of climate change and its causes.  “People just make stuff up,” Obama said. “They just make stuff up. We see it in state-sponsored propaganda; we see it in internet driven fabrications, we see it in the blurring of lines between news and entertainment, we see the utter loss of shame among political leaders where they’re caught in a lie and they just double down and they lie some more.” While Obama did not specifically mention President Trump or the Republican Party by name, it is not too far a stretch to assume that he had both in mind when he came up with these “pearls of wisdom.” 
It is not “racial nationalism,” “rabid nationalism” or “xenophobia” for the president of the United States to enforce this nation’s immigration laws and place the security of the American people above all else. Obama failed to discharge his paramount responsibility as president to protect the American people. Donald Trump is carrying out his responsibilities as the nation’s chief executive and commander-in-chief.  
Regarding Obama’s lament that people “just make stuff up,” he was guilty of doing just that on repeated occasions while president. He lied repeatedly, for example, about the availability of choice of doctor and insurance provider under Obamacare. He lied about the Iran nuclear deal, or was totally duped by Iran’s thuggish leaders, or both. He lied about the origin of the “Fast and Furious” gun walking program that allowed about 2,000 weapons to fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartel associates, which was started early in the Obama administration’s first term, not during the Bush administration as Obama claimed. He lied when he proclaimed, "There is no spying on Americans." The list goes on and on. 
Finally, there is Obama’s complaint about “strongman politics,” which “are ascendant, suddenly, whereby elections and some pretense of democracy are maintained, the form of it, but those in powers seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning.” Obama is right to be concerned about the ascendancy of “strongman politics.” However, it is too bad he did not worry so much about this phenomenon while he was president. He initially turned his back on the millions of Iranian citizens protesting in the streets in 2009 against a fraudulent election and the repressive theocratic regime running the country. Behind the scenes Obama sucked up to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with personal letters and other assurances that his administration would not rock the boat against the regime, all to keep his dream of what turned out to be a disastrous nuclear deal with Iran alive. 
Obama accepted a gift from Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chávez of a book entitled Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent. Obama said it "was a nice gesture to give me a book. I'm a reader." This was nothing, however, compared to Obama’s obsequiousness to his host in Havana, Cuban strongman Raúl Castro, as the two leaders met to close the door on decades of hostilities between Cuba and the United States. Indeed, Obama offered to open the door wide to re-establishing diplomatic relations and expanding economic ties with the communist country without receiving any commitments in return that the regime would take concrete steps to improve its human rights record. In fact, during their joint news conference, Obama noted in his own remarks Castro’s criticism of “what he views as short comings in the United States around basic needs for people and poverty and inequality and race relations.” Obama added that “we welcome that constructive dialogue as well because we believe that when we share our deepest beliefs and ideas with an attitude of mutual respect that we can both learn and make the lives of our people better.” Obama was engaging in moral equivalency at its worst.
Obama had eight years to address the problems he complained about in his Nelson Mandela speech in South Africa. He failed and in some ways made matters worse. President Trump deserves a chance to try a different approach that puts the American people first.

did you ever hear of HOMELESSNESS before Obama and his banksters showed up???



BOOK:…..TRAGIC!






THE DEATH GAP: 

INEQUALITY IS KILLING 

AMERICA!

  

Barack Obama Lectures World on Racial, Wealth Inequality in South Africa




Former U.S. President Barack Obama, left, delivers his speech at the 16th Annual Nelson Mandela Lecture at the Wanderers Stadium in Johannesburg, South Africa, Tuesday, July 17, 2018. In his highest-profile speech since leaving office, Obama urged people around the world to respect human rights and other values under threat …
AP Photo/Themba Hadebe
   577


Former President Barack Obama on Tuesday delivered the 16th annual Nelson Mandela lecture in Johannesburg, South Africa and called for greater global wealth redistribution, scolding the rich for having more money than they need.

“For almost all countries, progress is going to depend on an inclusive market-based system – one that offers education for every child, that protects collective bargaining and secures the rights of every worker,” Obama began. “That breaks up monopolies to encourage competition and small and medium-sized businesses and has laws that root out corruption and ensures fair dealing in business, that maintains some form of progressive taxation so that rich people are still rich, but they’re giving a little bit back to make sure that everybody else has something to pay for universal healthcare and retirement security, and invest in infrastructure and scientific research that builds platforms for innovation.”
The former president has raised eyebrows over his opulent lifestyle since departing the White House. Obama in February of 2017 vacationed in the British Virgin Islands with Virgin Group founder and billionaire Richard Branson and joined Oprah and Bruce Springsteen on a luxury cruise on Hollywood mogul David Geffen’s $590 million yacht in April of that year.
In a bizarre moment, the former president then criticized himself for amassing too large of a fortune. “I should add, by the way, right now I’m actually surprised by how much money I got, and let me tell you something, I don’t have half as much as most of these folks or a tenth or a hundred thou— there’s only so much you can eat, there’s only so big a house you can have, there’s only so many nice trips you can take. I mean, it’s enough,” he lamented.













Former Pres. Barack Obama: "It is a plain fact that racial discrimination still exists in both the United States and South Africa." https://abcn.ws/2uvBGfv 

Obama also offered up criticism of the current state of race relations in the United States. “It is a plain fact that racial discrimination still exists in both the United States and South Africa,” Obama told attendees of the speech at Ellis Park Arena. “And it is also a fact that the accumulated disadvantages of years of institutionalized depression have created yawning disparities in income, and in wealth and in education, and in health, in personal safety, in access to credit.”
Obama opened by describing today’s times as “strange and uncertain,” adding that “each day’s news cycle is bringing more head-spinning and disturbing headlines.” These days “we see much of the world threatening to return to a more dangerous, more brutal, way of doing business,” he said.
This is the former president’s first visit to Africa since leaving office in early 2017. He stopped earlier this week in Kenya, where he visited the rural birthplace of his late father. Obama’s speech highlighted how the Nobel Peace Prize winner, who was imprisoned for 27 years, kept up his campaign against what appeared to be insurmountable odds to end apartheid, South Africa’s harsh system of white minority rule.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 


The banality of Barack Obama


Obama made a big speech in South Africa and all I can think is: Same old Obama.
His techniques are all there: Nods to the opposition, odd things thrown into sequences of events to deflect attention from his record, and a view of the world that hasn't changed a bit since his days of reading Tom Friedman. Heck, he probably still reads Tom Friedman, and golfs with him out on the toney gated links, too.
He blathers on about the wonders of globalism and takes credit for all of the "progress." Progress, progressivism, get it? He also does quite a bit to ignore his own record, starting with his doubled-down record of lies (Obamacare, Benghazi, Hillary Clinton's emails) and says other politicians do it. Yecch.
Here are some of the most annoying highlights of his dreary speech, which is sure to fade into the ether, given its rote-loathing of President Trump (not mentioned by name but obvious enough) and inability to grasp his own role in all the problems he talks about.
Praise for the big state over the dynamism and enterprise of the private sector, all because of its control:
In those nations with market-based economies, suddenly union movements developed; and health and safety and commercial regulations were instituted; and access to public education was expanded; and social welfare systems emerged, all with the aim of constraining the excesses of capitalism and enhancing its ability to provide opportunity not just to some but to all people. And the result was unmatched economic growth and a growth of the middle class.
Amazing unfamiliarity with how South Africa has fallen apart since Mandela left the scene, with white farmers' farms expropriated Zimbabwe-style, opening the gate for the rest of that same-old-socialism result. Maybe Mandela didn't set up the institutions to prevent that as he should have. Right now, South Africa has tyranny of the majority, the same miserable picture found all over the third world which stays third world, for this reason.
And then as Madiba guided this nation through negotiation painstakingly, reconciliation, its first fair and free elections; as we all witnessed the grace and the generosity with which he embraced former enemies, the wisdom for him to step away from power once he felt his job was complete, we understood that -- (applause) -- we understood it was not just the subjugated, the oppressed who were being freed from the shackles of the past. The subjugator was being offered a gift, being given a chance to see in a new way, being given a chance to participate in the work of building a better world.
Or this:
It is a plain fact that racial discrimination still exists in both the United States and South Africa. (Cheers and applause.)
Using euphemisms for socialism. Name one "closed" economy that isn't socialist. And plenty of those "market-based principles" were little more than crony capitalism, alongside U.S. Democratic Party-linked academics feeding at the U.S. government trough and not introducing "market-based" anything in other than name, as the horrible experience of Russia in the 1990s showed. There's a reason Russia turned to Vladimir Putin:
The introduction of market-based principles, in which previously closed economies along with the forces of global integration powered by new technologies, suddenly unleashed entrepreneurial talents
Bringing up billionaires, not quite getting beyond "fly him out" and getting to how they hand him the six-figure speaking fees, fancy vacations on private islands, and a celebrity lifestyle that characterizes his current hypocritical life. He would have us think he's not enjoying it and all he cares about are the ordinary schmoes - who by the way voted for Trump because of it. Get a load:
Now, it should be noted that this new international elite, the professional class that supports them, differs in important respects from the ruling aristocracies of old. It includes many who are self-made. It includes champions of meritocracy. And although still mostly white and male, as a group they reflect a diversity of nationalities and ethnicities that would have not existed a hundred years ago. A decent percentage consider themselves liberal in their politics, modern and cosmopolitan in their outlook. Unburdened by parochialism, or nationalism, or overt racial prejudice or strong religious sentiment, they are equally comfortable in New York or London or Shanghai or Nairobi or Buenos Aires, or Johannesburg. Many are sincere and effective in their philanthropy. Some of them count Nelson Mandela among their heroes. Some even supported Barack Obama for the presidency of the United States, and by virtue of my status as a former head of state, some of them consider me as an honorary member of the club. (Laughter.) And I get invited to these fancy things, you know? (Laughter.) They'll fly me out.
Here's another whopper of lumped together ideas of problems told in a way that obscures his own bad record in creating them:
And their decisions -- their decisions to shut down a manufacturing plant, or to try to minimize their tax bill by shifting profits to a tax haven with the help of high-priced accountants or lawyers, or their decision to take advantage of lower-cost immigrant labor, or their decision to pay a bribe -- are often done without malice; it's just a rational response, they consider, to the demands of their balance sheets and their shareholders and competitive pressures.
So where was he on the flat tax back when he was president? Flat tax is the only thing that breaks these wrap-arounds on the tax structure. Where was he on illegals that benefited these Democrat-donor tycoons who hired the cheap labor? That's right, practically inviting them in as loyal potential Democrat voters. Where was he on manufacturing? Out denouncing the bitter clingers and saying the jobs would never come back. There are a lot of doozies in that sequence. He throws in bribes for good measure to muddy the waters from his own record. Speaking of bribes, where was he on Hillary Clinton's foundation donations for State Department favors?
It gets worse. Trump voters are his next problem, because Democrats repeatedly say their motivation in voting for Trump is that it's all about their hate for people who 'look different.'
But to say that our vision for the future is better is not to say that it will inevitably win. Because history also shows the power of fear. History shows the lasting hold of greed and the desire to dominate others in the minds of men. Especially men. (Laughter and applause.) History shows how easily people can be convinced to turn on those who look different, or worship God in a different way.
The old bitter clingers, right?
Then there's his tax-the-rich mantra, one that always hits the little guy, not the billionaire Democratic campaign donors he purported claims his aim is at. Look at this drivel and think about Obama's record of hanging out with jet-setting billionaires:
And when economic power is concentrated in the hands of the few, history also shows that political power is sure to follow -- and that dynamic eats away at democracy. Sometimes it may be straight-out corruption, but sometimes it may not involve the exchange of money; it's just folks who are that wealthy get what they want, and it undermines human freedom.
...
And how we achieve this is going to vary country to country, and I know your new president is committed to rolling up his sleeves and trying to do so. But we can learn from the last 70 years that it will not involve unregulated, unbridled, unethical capitalism. It also won't involve old-style command-and-control socialism form the top. That was tried; it didn't work very well. For almost all countries, progress is going to depend on an inclusive market-based system -- one that offers education for every child; that protects collective bargaining and secures the rights of every worker -- (applause) -- that breaks up monopolies to encourage competition in small and medium-sized businesses; and has laws that root out corruption and ensures fair dealing in business; that maintains some form of progressive taxation so that rich people are still rich but they're giving a little bit back to make sure that everybody else has something to pay for universal health care and retirement security, and invests in infrastructure and scientific research that builds platforms for innovation.
That's his solution, tax "the rich" to pay for bureaucrats and put half the Millennial generation in their moms's basements, for lack of work. Sounds lovely. Been there, done that.
And then with perfect opacity, he natters on about how at some point he's had enough - and praises himself for 'giving back' or some such tale, given that he's doing nothing:
I should add, by the way, right now I'm actually surprised by how much money I got, and let me tell you something: I don't have half as much as most of these folks or a tenth or a hundredth. There's only so much you can eat. There's only so big a house you can have. (Cheers and applause.) There's only so many nice trips you can take. I mean, it's enough. (Laughter.) You don't have to take a vow of poverty just to say, "Well, let me help out and let a few of the other folks -- let me look at that child out there who doesn't have enough to eat or needs some school fees, let me help him out. I'll pay a little more in taxes. It's okay. I can afford it."
He blathers on most disingenously, with a long passage about 'facts' which he doesn't have, and Friedmanian talk about 'technology' which adds nothing new, then his biggest problem, which is that he listens to no one but himself and Ben Rhodes:
Most of us prefer to surround ourselves with opinions that validate what we already believe. You notice the people who you think are smart are the people who agree with you. (Laughter.) Funny how that works.
Best I can conclude from this dreck is that Donald Trump has nothing to worry about from this frozen-in-amber soggy socialist thinking, coupled with a very bad presidential record he seems unaware of. Been there, done that, indeed.


OBAMA'S PAYOUT TO TERROR FINANCIERS


The Radical-in-Chief's enabling of the enemy is exposed once again.




Islamic terrorists, whether affiliated with al Qaeda or the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, are enemies of the United States. They have American blood on their hands. The Obama administration aided and abetted these enemies by knowingly funding the terrorists and allowing them to evade the enforcement of U.S. law against them. As Andrew McCarthy once wrote, Obama was an “anti-anti-terrorist.”
For example, as the National Review has just reported, based on a discovery by the Middle East Forum, the Obama administration decided that an al Qaeda affiliate in Sudan was a worthy recipient of U.S. taxpayer funds to the tune of $200,000. The beneficiary of the Obama administration’s largesse, the Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA), also known as the Islamic African Relief Agency (IARA), had been designated by the U.S. Treasury as a terrorist-financing organization a decade earlier. The Treasury Department’s designation was based on ISRA’s links to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist organization, financial support for the Taliban, and fundraising in Western Europe to help finance Hamas suicide bombings.
Not only did the Obama administration disregard the U.S. Treasury Department designation. It overlooked the fact that, as set out in a July 28, 2010 press release issued by USAID (the U.S. Agency for International Development), the executive director of the Islamic American Relief Agency, the U.S. branch office of ISRA, pleaded guilty to illegally transferring funds raised in the United States as purported charitable contributions to Iraq. He had “the assistance of a Sudanese man living in Jordan, who was subsequently identified by the U.S. Treasury Department as a specially designated global terrorist.” Nevertheless, four years laterUSAID itself awarded a grant of $723,405 to a charity known as World Vision Inc. for the purported purpose of providing humanitarian relief in Sudan, out of which $200,000 was provided to ISRA as a sub-grantee. The money was directed “to help provide humanitarian aid, including emergency food, water, sanitation, and hygiene services, to displaced people affected by the ongoing conflict in Sudan,” according to a USAID official. 
Islamic terrorist organizations cause humanitarian suffering on a grand scale, not help relieve it.  Giving money to an al Qaeda affiliate to help provide humanitarian aid is like giving an arsonist the hose to help put out the fire he set.
The Obama administration’s decision to provide funding to ISRA in the face of such evidence of terrorist links was not the product of some inadvertent bureaucratic blunder. It turns out, according to the National Review report, that “government officials specifically authorized the release of at least $115,000 of this grant even after learning that it was a designated terror organization.” World Vision Inc. notified USAID in November 2014 of its belief that ISRA had been designated as a terrorist organization, which the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) confirmed. However, World Vision still wanted to continue working with ISRA because of its “excellent” performance. After OFAC denied World Vision a license to engage in transactions with ISRA because of the terrorist designation, World Vision appealed directly to the Obama administration’s director of USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance for help with OFAC. It wanted a new license to pay ISRA what ISRA claimed to be owed for work performed. OFAC relented, authorizing a one-time transfer of $115,000 “for services performed under the sub-award with USAID.” According to the National Review article, an unnamed World Vision official described OFAC’s decision as a “great relief as ISRA had become restive and had threatened legal action, which would have damaged our reputation and standing in Sudan.” A senior USAID official Charles Wanjue wrote to colleagues: “Good news and a great relief, really!”
In short, the Obama administration knowingly rewarded designated terrorists affiliated with al Qaeda, an avowed Islamist enemy of the United States, with taxpayer funds. Sadly, this was not an isolated incident. The Obama administration had a pattern of aiding and abetting Islamist terrorists, including those sponsored by the Iranian regime.
Indeed, former Secretary of State John Kerry admitted that some of the monies released to the Iranian regime as a result of the disastrous nuclear deal would likely end up in the hands of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which supports terrorist groups, as well as in the hands of “other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists." Just as Kerry predicted, it turns out that at least some of the $1.7 billion ransom payment the Obama administration paid for the Iranian regime’s release of American hostages has ended up in the hands of the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah as well as with the regime’s Quds Force, which is part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. The Quds Force was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2007 for providing material support to the Taliban and other terrorist organizations. Flushed with cash supplied by the Obama administration, Quds’ boss Major-General Qassem Soleimani was emboldened to just threaten the United States, declaring “You know our power in the region and our capabilities in asymmetric war. We will act and we will work…We are near you, where you can't even imagine." 
The Obama administration is also reported to have “derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States,” according to a Politico report. During the course of a multi-year operation, law enforcement agents had “followed cocaine shipments, tracked a river of dirty cash, and traced what they believed to be the innermost circle of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran.” However, Obama’s Justice Department obstructed the investigation. It refused requests “to file criminal charges against major players such as Hezbollah’s high-profile envoy to Iran, a Lebanese bank that allegedly laundered billions in alleged drug profits, and a central player in a U.S.-based cell of the Iranian paramilitary Quds force.” Once again, the Obama administration was helping the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and its terrorist proxy Hezbollah by letting them continue to enrich their coffers with the smuggling of cocaine into the United States. Moreover, the Obama administration failed to strongly press the Czech Republic to extradite a Lebanese arms dealer Ali Fayad the Czech Republic had arrested, who, Politico reported, was “a suspected top Hezbollah operative whom agents believed reported to Russian President Vladimir Putin as a key supplier of weapons to Syria and Iraq.” Fayad was wanted on charges that included conspiring in a plan to murder U.S. government employees and to provide material support and resources to a foreign terrorist organization. The Obama administration in effect gave cover to a Hezbollah terrorist operative who was reportedly in league with Vladimir Putin. Talk about real collusion with an enemy of the United States!
Obama did worse as president than simply try to shield Islamists from legitimate criticism that their supremacist jihadist ideology fueled violence against innocent civilians. His administration’s policies helped fund the Islamist terrorists and allowed some to escape legal accountability for their actions.
Photo: Noofa2401

No comments: