Another prominent Democrat who supports the
room Barack Obama launched his political career.
"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008
by
President Barack Obama. Throughout his
eight years in
office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered
away
at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel
on
the fire of the "Black Lives Matter"
lie. His administration
was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope
with
every new scandal." RICK HAYES
Codevilla notes that prominent Democrats like
Barack
Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton have
led
millions of their followers "to think and act as
if
conservatives were simply a lower level of humanity,
and
should have their faces rubbed in their own
inferiority."
Illegal
Immigration and Marxism
Even though the
law doesn’t allow them to vote, illegal immigrants are changing the landscape
of the U.S. government, especially in California, by impacting the census’
through mass migration. California allows illegal aliens to vote.
Red Tide Rising
On
September 21, a protest was held in Aurora, Colorado demanding abolishment of
U.S. borders and the Immigration & Customs Enforcement agency. Over
the last three years, a myriad of similar anti-ICE, open-border demonstrations
have been held in cities across America, all of which have been encouraged and
supported, tacitly or otherwise, by the Democratic Party.
One
of several Democratic front groups that participated in the protest calls
itself the Party for Socialism and Liberation/Denver. To make sure its
Marxist ideology doesn’t go unnoticed, the group’s Facebook page reads “Building a
Worker’s Paradise in the Heartland of World Imperialism.” PSL/Denver’s
name includes the word socialism, but the communist flag flown at its Aurora
protest shows that to this profoundly anti-American group, socialism and
communism are heads of the same snake.
The
open borders demonstration was also attended by members of Rocky Mountain
Antifa and Denver Communists, two other openly Marxist Democrat front groups.
In this video , a member of Denver
Communists confirms that the protestors are demanding elimination of U.S.
borders and an end to enforcement of U.S. immigration law. An image on the group’s Facebook
page shows members carrying a banner
demanding
no borders and no nations.
A
borderless world without nations represents the culmination of the communist
dream of a world united under the banner of the hammer and sickle. For
that dream to be realized, America’s sovereignty must be yielded to an
international governing body run by the UN, a one-world globalist organization
run by an international assortment of socialists-cum-communists. Those
who call for a borderless world with no nations are effectively calling for a
permanent end to the United States in favor of a “new world order,” a world
where Americans would be indoctrinated to no longer see themselves as citizens
of their country, but as Citizens of the World.
Occupy
Denver is another anti-capitalist group that showed up for the demonstration in
Aurora. Hundreds of Occupy affiliates are active in cities, towns and
campuses across America. Like other Democrat identity politics groups,
Occupy affiliates are openly pro-communist -- Occupy Denver’s Facebook profile picture contains an image
of “the Raised Fist,” one of communism’s most recognizable call to arms.
Like other Democrat front groups, Occupy Denver helps the Democratic
Party advance its hostility toward the police by mocking and ridiculing law
enforcement officers, as shown in this photo on the group’s Facebook. Another photo on the group’s
Facebook supports the Democrats’ class warfare election strategy with an ‘us
vs. them’ propaganda graphic declaring that the poor in America are exploited
victims of oppression, who therefore have a right to “destroy the system,” by
violence if necessary. Victim vs. oppressor ideology is the means of achieving
political power outlined in The Communist Manifesto.
The
ties that bind the modern Democratic Party to pro-communist groups and
organizations are unmistakable. Nowhere is that more evident than its
ties to the Occupy movement. At an Aug. 19, 2012 pre-rally
“People’s Assembly” meeting in the nation’s capitol, former labor boss/lifelong
Democrat Mike Golash, leader of Occupy DC and a member of the openly-communist
Progressive Labor Party, left no doubt about the intent of the Occupy movement
when he was caught on video telling student
occupiers “Our goal is to make revolution in the United States, overthrow
the capitalist system and build communism in America.”
Another
prominent Democrat who supports the
room
Barack Obama launched his political career.
And,
when Occupy Wall Street protests burst on the scene in 2011, the two most high
profile Democrats in America -- President Obama ( “We are on their side”) and Speaker Nancy
Pelosi (“God bless them”) -- enthusiastically
supported the 99% vs. the 1%, victim vs. oppressor protests, as did virtually
every other high level official in the Democratic Party.
The
Aurora protestors who demanded no borders and no nations -- and millions more
like them who share their borderless world ideology -- have three things in
common:
●
They all are Americans who harbor deep contempt for their country.
●
They all are communist revolutionaries committed to overthrowing America’s
two-party capitalist system by any means necessary.
●
They all support and are supported by the modern Democratic Party, a
once-patriotic party that has quietly defected to the side of the hammer and
sickle.
The
choice you face in 2020
Overwhelming
evidence shows that the red tide of communism is rising in America, and rapidly
so. Whether it succeeds in upending our constitutional republic will be
determined by the next national elections.
An electrical engineering graduate of Georgia Tech and now
retired, John Eidson is a freelance writer in Atlanta.
CAN YOU THINK OF EVEN ON THING BARACK OBAMA DID FOR
BLACK AMERICA EVEN AS HE OPERATED 'LA RAZA' OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE?
Michelle Obama castigates whites for ‘running from us’
Speaking at an event in Chicago called the “Obama Foundation
Summit” (were any heads of state present?), Michelle Obama let slip her
resentment of white people. The grudge goes back to her childhood, and she does
not seem to see much progress in the behavior she attributes to
Caucasian-Americans. Fox News reports what the New
York Times doesn’t :
White Americans are “still running” elsewhere when minorities
and immigrants move into their communities, Michelle
Obama observed Tuesday.
(snip)
In a sit-down interview with journalist Isabel Wilkerson, in which
Obama was accompanied by her brother, Craig Robinson, an executive with the
NBA’s New York Knicks, Obama described when she first became conscious of
what’s been called “white flight.”
We were doing everything we were supposed to do – and better,”
Obama said of her family, recalling when they got a new address on Chicago’s
South Side. “But when we moved in, white families moved out.
“I want to remind white folks that y’all were running from us,”
she continued, according to the
Chicago Sun-Times . “And you’re still
running.”
This is remarkably un-self-aware, considering that the Obamas
currently reside in Kalorama and Martha’s Vineyard. How many blacks live near
their two mansions?
“I can’t make people not afraid of black people,” she said, according
to The Hill . “I don’t know what’s going
on. I can’t explain what’s happening in your head."
Maybe what’s going on in the heads of white people is the same as
what was going on in Jesse
Jackson’s head when he said:
“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than
to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody
white and feel relieved.”
It would be wonderful if black crime rates were similar to those
of whites and Asians, but they aren’t . That’s is why many minorities flee from ghettos as soon as they
are financially able – a group that includes Barack and Michelle Obama.
Mrs. Obama is stoking racial resentment with her remarks, an
emotion that the Democrats use as part of their electoral strategy to drive
black turnout.
At least her statement castigating whites is consistent with her
oft-expressed position that she has “zero interest” in running for president.
Here is video of her remarks on race:
Hat tip: Ed Lasky
"That phase of the takeover was started in
2008 by President Barack Obama. Throughout his eight years in
office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment
while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter"
lie. His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the
envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES
October
3, 2019
The Political Civil War is real
The
American Political Civil War, which began in November 2016, has so far
witnessed leftist Democrats initiating a series of unsuccessful offensive
maneuvers against the president and his allies. The unrelenting
Russian collusion bombardment did not produce the shock and awe promised by
leftist operatives such as Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy
Pelosi. And so a new front was opened up against the president,
having the appearance of impeachment proceedings that dealt with a routine
phone call from President Trump to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky.
Sometimes
aggression must be met head on, with resolve to stop it in its
tracks. History reviles Neville Chamberlain not because he was
unsuccessful in halting German expansion, but because he couldn't identify or
didn't want to acknowledge the clear evidence of imminent war.
Chamberlain's
self-deception and fear helped pave the way in allowing an aggressor to gather
strength and strike when he had amassed enough power. In the same
way, it was the self-deception and cowardice of Republican members of Congress
that allowed the Democrat impeachment machine to gain control of the House
during the midterm elections.
But
the leftist Democratic Party has taken a different approach toward total political
and social conquest. Unlike the German war machine that promised
peace but delivered war, leftist Democrats do not promise any
compromises. Instead, they are openly mobilizing for political war
and are prepared to deliver on that threat, no matter the cost to the country.
And
to be clear, it will continue to be an all-out, extremely aggressive assault on
the president and any American who wants nothing more than to live in peace and
raise a family. To pretend that what is happening today is merely dirty
politics as usual would be the equivalent of British citizens identifying
descending V-1 rockets in the battle of Britain as no more than pesky
mosquitoes.
It
is, thus far, a bloodless, political civil war to change America
forever. And it has already seen a coup attempt against the
president by the Left that desires a winner-take-all conclusion. And
because Leftist Democrats never conceived that anyone other than a person they
selected would become president, the rules, laws, and language must change and
contort to fit their agenda so they can finally seize power. Once in
power, the rules and laws dictated by the Left will become unrecognizable, and
there will be no bridge to cross to get back to the Constitution.
Politically
speaking, these leftist radicals have proven that they will attack all those
who want to remain living in a Republic. As in every past revolution
into socialism, the socialist victors demand complete obedience from the
conquered.
In
their own words, leftist Democrats confirm that they are counting on a
misinformed public in order to gain power. Take, as an example, the
statement made by Jonathan Gruber, the architect of Obamacare, where he brags
to a group of people how in order to pass Obamacare he relied on "the
stupidity of the American voter." Although Gruber doesn't
explain how the American voter becomes so "stupid," the evidence is
clear that the corrupt, indoctrinating media play a crucial
role. They dole out misinformation and deceit, as does the leftist
education system.
There
are no more pretenses, as the corrupt major media have all but announced their
alliance with the far left's aggressive goals. An article in the
October 2018 edition of Investor's Business
Daily points
out this blatant one-sided absurdity that passes for today's media:
To say that the big networks haven't exactly had
a love affair with Donald Trump, as they did with President Obama, is an understatement.
A new survey shows that not only is coverage of Trump overwhelmingly negative,
but the President's biggest accomplishment — the roaring economy — gets almost
no attention.
The
article goes on to say Trump receives 92% negative coverage and that the Media
Research Center watched network TV for four months and found that the coverage
surrounding Trump's economic boom was only 0.7% of the entire coverage.
It
cannot be overstated that for America to "change," there had to be a
push to revoke some or all of the Bill of Rights. That phase of the
takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama. Throughout
his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at
the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the
"Black Lives Matter" lie. His administration was rampant
with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal. Only
because outsider citizen Trump became President Trump do we now know that there
was no chance that justice would have ever been served for the victims of the
scandals of Benghazi, the IRS, and Fast and Furious while Obama was in
office. Just like the leftist Democrats of today, Obama was
protected by America's version of Pravda.
The
ongoing coup attempt against President Trump and his administration will
continue. The American people will get deluged with fake news and
lies from hostile media sources. There still exists a sliver of hope
in the name of William Barr. But even Barr holding a winning hand is
not enough to turn the tide against the waves of corruption slamming into
America. It will also take the selfless efforts of the average
American who demands liberty. It will take the courage and grit of
ordinary men and women to secure a victory — not just for the president, but
for America's bright future and the joy of living in ultimate freedom.
Mecha's (M.E.Ch.A.) own slogan reads, "For the race
everything. For those outside the race, nothing." (CALIFORNIA’S ATTORNEY
GENERAL XAVIER BECERRA IS A MEMBER OF THE MEX FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT OF
M.E.Ch.A.)
LA
RAZA: The Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “THE RACE” and the Reconquista and
surrender of America to NARCOMEX
VIVA
LA RAZA SUPREMACY?
The comparison to the Nazi
Party is well deserved. La Raza openly supports pushing all but Latino
Americans out of a portion of the United States (ethnic cleansing), they call
for 'Reconquista' or the re-conquest of the American Southwest by Mexico (the re-occupation
of the Sudetanland), and the establishment of 'Atzlan' which is the utopian
all-Latino version of the American Southwestern states (Adolf Hitler planned to
called his utopia Germania).
"Despite the fact that the majority
of documented hispanics oppose illegal immigration, as do the majority of
Americans, Aztlan and La Raza
race hate groups have become the self-appointed voice for a separatist movement
that threatens a violent overthrow of the Constitutional system and a barbaric
program of ethnic cleansing. This is held up by the media as 'diversity' and to
vociferously oppose it is scorned as racism."
Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing
"La Reconquista" in California."
"We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan” or the reconquest of California, Arizona,
New Mexico and Texas into the country of
Mexico."
"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services
to non-citizens --- was the last gasp of white America in California." --- Art Torres,
Chairman of the California Democratic Party… NOW THE PARTY for LA RAZA
SUPREMACY… do a search for Barack Obama and LA RAZA.
"The American Southwest
seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a
single shot." --- Excelsior , the national newspaper of Mexico
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that
reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican
government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
“Make no mistake about it: the Latino community holds this election in your
hands. Some of the closest contests this November will be in states like
Florida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico -- states with large Latino
populations.” PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA
“I know how powerful this community is. Just think how powerful you could
be on November 4th if you translate your numbers into votes.” PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA
SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF BARACK OBAMA IS A PRO-MUSLIM,
ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-CHRISTIAN, ANTI-JEWISH DICTATOR IN THE MAKING FOR GLOBALIST
BANKSTERS AND BILLIONAIRES.
When Obama
found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he
chose out of the near 1,000 available options to
him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American,
anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. For the next 20 years,
Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth
he shoveled out from the trough at his altar.
The Crisis Obama Let Go to Waste
Barack
Obama's legacy is nothing if not consequential. In his decades as
"community organizer" among Chicago's poorest, most desperate
neighborhoods, he did nothing other than perpetuate complete dependence on Big
Brother. His Affordable Care Act, and its accompanying criminal penalties
for not engaging in commerce, scythed a mile-wide berth into
the already frayed concept of a citizenry living free from government coercion.
More ominously, Obama was able to entwine his instinctive Marxism with
a vision for America's path forward in a way his predecessors had been unable
to.
The
singular cunning of Obama was his success in realigning the "victim"
hierarchy almost completely from class to race. Free citizens in a market
society can climb or descend the social ladder, but race remains a constant
throughout. Race is our most recognizable difference, no matter its
superficial nature. In the deepest recesses of our prejudices, race is
pure tribalism. And in the darkest hours of human history, at our most
trying moments, and during our most vicious wars, people of all tribes have
taken refuge not within their class, but within their race or ethnicity.
The examples of Nazi Germany, of Bosnia, of Rwanda, and of the Armenians
in Turkey are but a few examples of the horrors lifelong friends and neighbors
of the same class can inflict on one another in the name of racial identity
politics.
This
isn't to say Marxism hasn't been peddled before under the guise of racial
identity grievance. Indeed, Lenin himself was able to provoke satellite
regions like Ukraine and Kazakhstan to revolt from czarist Russia in the name
of ethnic separatism. In the United States, it has been tried repeatedly
since the 1960s. But as our nation's first (half) black president, Obama
was able sow division with absolute authority, and with minimal criticism by a
political class that either openly supported his aims or was petrified of
soliciting unsubstantiated accusations of racism.
And
sow division he did, with every chance he got.
When
Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future
electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was
an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy
theorist. For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the
pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his
altar. When asked to justify his close association with this shameless
bigot, Obama shrugged off such concerns, comparing Wright to "an
old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with."
Obama distanced himself from Wright only when it started affecting his poll
numbers.
When
armed Black Panthers were caught threatening voters outside a Philadelphia
polling station in 2008, the Department of Justice under the Bush
administration charged (and convicted) them with violations of the Voting
Rights Act. Once in office, Obama had political appointees in the
DOJ dismiss the charges.
When
Cambridge Police (both white and black, not that it should matter) arrested his
black friend Henry Gates for disorderly conduct, Obama, after admitting that he
didn't know all the facts, stated that the police "acted
stupidly."
After
Trayvon Martin was shot by Afro-Peruvian (AKA "white Hispanic")
George Zimmerman, Obama intoned , "If I had a son, he'd look like
Trayvon." This implies that Martin was shot because he was black,
and not because he was repeatedly pummeling Zimmerman's head into the
pavement. Even Eric Holder's investigation concluded otherwise.
After
black nationalist Xavier Micah Johnson opened fire and murdered five Dallas
police officers in 2016 (as they protected a Black Lives Matter march), Obama
gave a eulogy at their funeral. The eulogy itself stands as perhaps one
of the most despicable moments of the Obama presidency. He used the
podium to equate the murder of the Dallas police
officers with the recent shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile (both
of which were investigated and found justifiable, and neither man was
"unfairly targeted" because he was black, as Obama asserted).
It
was a speech as deft as it was cynical. Reading through the text, one
realizes more clearly the manipulation taking place that, when spoken, is less
detectable. He subtly but unmistakably steers the speech from a tribute
to the murdered officers to a damning indictment of our alleged systemic
racism, coupled with a defense of the paranoid style of the Black Lives Matter
movement. By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the
events to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for
the actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson.
One
wonders if, had he attended Sterling's funeral, he would have lectured the
audience about murdered police.
At
this point, I must interject a side note regarding the aforementioned
shootings. Philando Castile was shot in a horrible case of mistaken identity . He closely
matched the description of a suspect from a recent armed robbery, and the
officer thought he was reaching for a gun he admitted to having. Alton
Sterling (who had a long arrest record that included
battery, burglary, and weapons charges) was shot because he was physically
fighting with police, despite being tasered several times. Police shot
him when he reached for the loaded .38 caliber revolver in his pants. His
shooting was completely warranted, and Baton Rouge is a safer place without
him. Neither the tragic shooting of Castile nor the justified shooting of
Sterling can in any reasonable way be attributed to racism, nor can they be
remotely likened to the premeditated slaughter of the five Dallas
officers. But such are the dots that Obama connected to hustle his race
narrative.
Obama
is notoriously thin-skinned to criticism, or to the suggestion that someone,
somewhere, might be smarter than he. This is the guy who claimed , with a straight face, that he was a
better speechwriter than his speechwriters, more knowledgeable about policy
than his policy directors, and a better political director than his political
director. Still, one assumes he was adroit enough to recognize that
objections to his policies, or questions of their constitutionality, were not
the default reactions of repressed racism. If he had thought they were,
he would have said so. On a fundamental level, Obama understands that
America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed
as under his watch. Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin
itself for the purpose of political advantage.
Obama
also understood the political pitfalls inherent in hiding behind the race card
in efforts to deflect policy debates he could not win. So he did one
better. He let his media sycophants do it for him. For the duration
of his presidency and beyond, these shrieking curs claw the flesh off their
faces at the slightest hint of criticism of Obama, his policies, or his style
of governance. I am unaware of a single instance in which he publicly
censured his groupies for their utter lack of nuance.
Therein
lies the biggest tragedy of Obama's legacy. As a biracial president, he
had a foot in both black and white America. He was uniquely positioned to
use this to the advantage of the entire country, to serve as a bridge of
healing and progress between races who have butted heads for far too long.
Instead, for eight continuous years, he chose to do the exact
opposite. He entrenched identity politics as deeply as he could, ripping
open wounds in the process, and divided this great nation perhaps past the
point of no return. He did this to spread a thoroughly debunked ideology,
the achievability of which his ego will never allow him to
admit he was mistaken about.
In
a 2008 speech in which Obama attempted to justify Jeremiah Wright's irrational
hatred, he said , "At times, that anger is exploited
by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a
politician's own failings." Never before has a poker player so
inadvertently revealed his own hand. When Obama spoke those words, he was
no doubt doing what he does best: thinking of himself.
Pollak: Barack Obama Wrote the Playbook on
Political Division
Left-wing pundits have accused President
Donald Trump of using his tweets last weekend to launch a divisive re-election
campaign.
David Axelrod, former adviser to
President Barack Obama, tweeted : “With his
deliberate, racist outburst, @realDonaldTrump wants to raise the profile of his
targets, drive Dems to defend them and make them emblematic of the entire
party. It’s a cold, hard strategy.”
That is debatable — but if so,
Axelrod should know; Obama did it first.
By 2011, Obama knew that re-election
would be difficult. The Tea Party had just led the Republicans to a historic
victory in the 2010 midterm elections, winning the House and nearly taking the
Senate. The economy was only growing sluggishly, and Obama’s stimulus had
failed to keep unemployment below eight percent, as projected. Moreover, the
passage of Obamacare had provoked a backlash against Obama’s state-centered
model of American society.
Facing a similar situation in the
mid-1990s, President Bill Clinton had “triangulated,” moving back toward the
middle, frustrating the GOP by taking up their issues, such as welfare reform.
But Obama rejected that approach.
Having watched his icon, Chicago mayor Harold Washington, settle for an incremental
approach when faced with opposition in the 1980s, only to die of a sudden heart
attack before fulfilling his potential, Obama chose the path of hard-left
policy — and divide-and-rule politics.
The first hint of his strategy
emerged during the debt ceiling negotiations in the summer of August 2011. As
Bob Woodward recounted in his book
about the crisis, The Price
of Politics , then-Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) had
wanted to reach a “grand bargain” with the president on long-term spending
cuts. But Obama blew up that agreement by demanding $400 billion in new taxes,
to his aides’ surprise. Obama wanted an opponent, not a deal. (Last week,
Boehner told Breitbart News
Tonight that Obama’s decision was his worst disappointment in
35 years of politics.)
In the fall of 2011, a new left-wing
movement, Occupy Wall Street, was launched. A mix of communists, anarchists,
and digital pranksters, the Occupy movement cast American society as a
struggle between the “99 percent” and the “one percent.”
Obama and then-House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
embraced the movement — and failed to distance themselves from it even as
it collapsed into
violence, sexual assault, and confrontations with police.
Instead, Obama picked up on Occupy’s
themes and used them to shape his campaign.
In December 2011, Obama gave a speech at
Osawatomie, Kansas — a place steeped in radical
symbolism — at which he doubled down on his left-wing policies. He focused on
the issue of economic inequality, and attacked the idea that the free market
could lift the middle class to prosperity. “This isn’t about class warfare.
This is about the nation’s welfare,” he insisted.
Then, in the spring of 2012, Obama
made a controversial play on race. When a black teen, Trayvon Martin, was
killed in Florida during a scuffle with neighborhood watch volunteer George
Zimmerman, Al Sharprton — who was serving as an informal adviser to Obama at
the time — made the local crime story
into a national racial controversy. Obama, following Sharpton’s lead, weighed
in: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Obama said at the time.
Poll numbers suggest that race
relations, which had been improving, dropped precipitously after that. But to
Obama, it was worth it: the campaign needed to find a way to motivate minority
voters. (Vice President Joe Biden did his part, telling black voters
that GOP nominee Mitt Romney was “gonna put y’all in chains.”)
Trump is pushing a non-racial,
nationalist message. But if he actually wanted to divide America for political
gain, he could learn from the master.
Joel B.
Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social
Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard. He is a winner
of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author
of How Trump Won: The Inside
Story of a Revolution , which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter
at @joelpollak .
Heading for civil war
Donald Trump’s opponents are completely
unhinged. The hate and slander directed towards the president and his
supporters is off the charts. The vitriol comes not just from the Democrat
party, the media, and the world of entertainment, but also from a sizable
proportion of the federal bureaucracy and many seemingly ordinary
people.
The media coordinates this campaign and
amplifies the hate at every opportunity. Media twist every event, be it
big or small, into a criticism of the president. The goal is always to present
Trump in not just an unfavorable light but to make him appear too loathsome for
polite society. And Trump is not the sole target of this demonization. It is directed
at his supporters, too.
Where will all this lead? No less
than Angelo M. Codevilla fears it could ultimately result in a bloody civil war. And
if it comes to that, there's no doubt where he places the blame.
The story of the contemporary American
Left's sponsorship of hate and violence began around 1964, when the Democrats
chose to abandon the Southern constituencies that had been its mainstay since
the time of Jefferson and Jackson. In less than a decade, the party found
itself increasingly dependent on gaining super-majorities among
blacks, upscale liberals, and constituencies of resentment in general
-- and hence on stoking their hate.
For the past half century, America's political
history has been driven by the Democrats' effort to fire up these
constituencies by denigrating the rest of America.
Codevilla notes that prominent Democrats
like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton have led millions of their
followers "to think and act as if conservatives were simply a lower level
of humanity, and should have their faces rubbed in their own inferiority."
It’s not surprising that many ordinary
followers have concluded that harassing conservatives in restaurants, airports,
and public functions is "not just permissible but praiseworthy ,
and if thousands of persons who exercise power over cities, towns, and schools
have not concluded that facilitating such harassment and harm is their duty."
This is the toxic environment that the
Democrats, in conjunction with the media, have created. Has Pandora's box been
opened? Are we beyond the point of no return? Are leftists and their liberal
soulmates too obtuse not to expect that hate and violence will someday be
answered in kind? These questions are up in the air. Right now, one thing is
clear. As Yeats wrote: "The best lack all conviction while the worse
are full of passionate intensity."
Just to touch on a few of the changes that
Strauss and Howe see: today's soft criminal justice system will become swift
and rough. Vagrants will be rounded up and the mentally ill recommitted.
Criminal appeals shortened and executions hastened. Pension funds will go
bust and Social Security checks become iffy. The full spectrum of society
will be under distress. All the problems will be combined into one -- the
survival of society.
Aren't the seeds already planted for a
crisis? Trust in Washington and in government institutions is at an all-time
low. Political violence is tacitly condoned and often openly encouraged by
Democratic officeholders. The political establishment encourages massive Illegal
immigration. The
mainstream media is highly partisan and corrupt beyond reform. The American
flag, the country's history, and even its nationhood are openly
despised in universities. American public schools are a disgrace despite
the money poured into them. The country is burdened by a $22 trillion
national debt to which many trillions more of unfunded government liabilities
must be added. Students owe a trillion dollars in school loans that can never
be repaid.
Someday there has to be a reckoning for
all this dysfunction. Irrespective of the election results in 2020, the time
frame of 2020-2022 sounds about the right for things to come to a head. It
would be prudent to be ready.
The Reverend Not So
Sharpton is not considered a hater. He was much sought after by 12
of the Democrat presidential candidates , who
made the pilgrimage to his humble abode to kiss his ring.
When it was time to renew
his television show, his credentials were examined (but the ratings were
ignored), and yes, he was qualified because he is still black. That
seems to be the reason Al is a television star. Al is paid $500,000 annually by MSNBC for his television
work, and he pays himself over $200,000 from his civil rights non-profit organization.
You might think a
television star with a net worth of up to $5 million and annual income of over
$700,000 could pay his bills, but Al still owes $4.5 million in
state and federal taxes, and he often forgets "to pay travel agencies,
hotels, and landlords," according to the records. In 2015, Al
paid almost $2 million on his back taxes.
In 2004, Al bought
himself a Rolls-Royce Phantom for his 50th birthday. That is the
most expensive production car in the world, with a base price of $475,000.
That is one Baptist who
was not held under water long enough!
Just kidding, but he is
not my kind of Baptist.
A black killer in Dallas
who killed five police officers and injured 14 other innocent people said,
"I want to kill white people, especially white cops." When
asked if the shooting should be considered a hate crime, President Obama said,
"It's hard to know what his motives are." Can't Obama
understand clear English? The killer was a hater, and his race or
political position did not matter. By being a defender of hate, does
that make Obama a hater?
It seems hate is
identified depending on the hater and the hatee.
A French rapper
named Nick Conrad has a song titled
" Hang Whites! " that declares,
"I enter day care centres, I kill white babies, Grab them quickly and hang
their parents, Take them apart to pass the time." In one scene,
the rapper and an associate drag a white person along a street and kick him in
the head. The lyrics include calls to kill white people and their
children.
That's hate by a
self-described "black artist, Parisian, proud sophisticate" — or more
precisely, a French jerk who shot to fame with his hate-filled
"song."
Thaddeus Matthews,
Memphis disc jockey, interviewing Charlotte Bergmann, a black,
female conservative Republican candidate for Congress, called her a
"token negro" and "curly-haired nigga." He
added, "I'm so sick of your s---, yourself, and I'm about to put
your a-- up outta here," he said. "You are a token
negro that white folk have control over." As she got up to
leave, she tried to shake his hand, and he refused, saying, "I don't need
to shake your hand. I'm scared because some of that whiteness might
rub off on me."
Thad, the black hater of
whites, is still a disc jockey in Memphis. Charlotte won her primary
but lost in the 2018 general election.
The mother of Michael
Brown (the teen thug who was killed by a police officer in Ferguson after Brown
tried to take the officer's gun) is running for city council! But
Momma's comments will haunt her. She wrote on social media after two
police officers were shot, "If my FAM woulda got JUSTICE in August maybe
those two comps wouldn't have got shot LAST NIGHT..." Also,
"F--- THEM 2 COPS...DON'T GOT NO SYMPATHY FOR THEM OR THEY FAMILIES…Aint
no FUN when the Rabbit got the GUN."
That too is undisguised,
unreasonable, and uncontrolled hate and indicates a problem in public
education.
Maggie Gallagher cited a book that
expresses extreme hatred toward conservative Christians in America who
"tend to hold relatively high levels of social power." So Many Christians, So Few Lions: Is There
Christianophobia in the United States? was authored by George Yancey and David A. Williamson,
who asked people about conservative Christians. "'I want them
[conservative Christians] all to die in a fire,' said one man with a
doctorate[.] ... 'The only good Christian is a dead Christian,' said another
man with a doctorate. 'I abhor them and I wish we could do away with
them,' said a woman with a master's degree. 'A tortuous death would
be too good for them,' said a college-educated man. 'They should be
eradicated without hesitation or remorse,' said an elderly woman with a
master's degree."
Hate is not defined by
education, race (and yes, of course blacks can be racists), religion, national
origin, politics, or financial status.
"Look at thus [sic]
chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist's arrogated
entitlement. All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists
laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their
corpses and feed them to swine? Yes." This was so
eloquently spoken by white Georgetown University professor Christine Fair . Chrisy is no longer
teaching at Georgetown; she is "on leave."
No sane person will
defend hate, but many haters use hate as a weapon and often go into battle with
Christian conservatives. Since the progressive cannot defend his
castle in ruins (liberalism), he fires the only bullet in his possession:
"You're a hater." That is supposed to settle the argument
in favor of progressives!
Pseudo-intellectuals like
Georgetown's Michael Eric Dyson said after George Zimmerman was acquitted in the killing of
Trayvon Martin that it would be a good thing for more white children to be
murdered so Americans could better understand racism. Mike is also a
Baptist preacher, but not a historical or biblical Baptist, for sure.
Sarah Jeong is a member
of the New York Times editorial
board. She wrote: "Dumba-- f------ white people marking up the
internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on a fire
hydrant." Also, "Are white people predisposed to burn
faster in the sun, thus logically only being fit to live underground like
groveling goblins[?]" Finally Sarah's "White men are
b-------"; "#CancelWhitePeople"; "oh man it's kind of sick
how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men" and "f---
white women lol."
Sarah is still with
the Times!
According to a report from Newsweek,
Trinity College professor Johnny Eric Williams is making waves
again. Breitbart News reported in June
2017 that Williams had argued that first responders should have let
Representative Steve Scalise die after he was shot during a practice for the
congressional baseball game. Williams also shared a blog post by an
anonymous author that asked black people to withhold life-saving help from
white people in need.
In a recent social media
post, Williams wrote that "whiteness is terrorism[]. ... If you see them
[whites] drowning. If you see them in a burning
building. If they are bleeding out in an emergency
room. If the ground is crumbling beneath them. If they
are in a park and they turn their weapons on each other: do nothing," the
post read.
Of course, hatred is
hatred whether from the Left or right or in the middle; however, all the haters
quoted today have been from far out in left field.
Dr.
Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who
ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA
Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most
recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! EBook is
available here with
the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com . Follow him on Facebook
at Don Boys,
Ph.D. and visit his blog . Send
request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to
his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.
Class Conflict within the
Democratic Party
Over many decades, the
American Left, the Democratic Party and their mutual propaganda arm, the
self-styled “mainstream media,” have successfully portrayed conservatives and
the Republican Party as a coalition of the wealthy and intolerant.
Further, the Democrats and the left have claimed that they are the true
champions of the working or middle class as they unceasingly fight to defeat
and marginalize this evil menace.
The reality, however, is
that this cabal has virtually no interest in defending or aiding the working
class as they are, in fact, the party of a bifurcated constituency: the wealthy
and those dependent on the largess of the government.
Of the fifty wealthiest
congressional districts throughout the country, the Democrats now represent forty-one . Of the remaining
nine represented by Republicans, three are in Texas, the only red state on the
list of fifty districts. Not coincidentally the residents of these same fifty
districts are supposedly among the most well-educated and sophisticated.
This transformative process is not a recent phenomenon as the trend began
in the 1980’s and accelerated rapidly in the early 2000’s.
America’s elites, now
overwhelmingly represented by the Democratic Party, have a single overriding
interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle. This is manifested in
their mistaken belief that conservatives (i.e. the “right”) are hell bent on
enforcing their version of morality on the nation, thus potentially calling
into question the lifestyles of the rich and solipsistic.
The veracity of this
claim is immaterial as it would require an element of deliberation not emotion
-- a trait in extremely short supply among the nation’s privileged class,
nearly all of whom have difficulty in generating an original thought due to the
ill-education rampant in America’s universities. Thus, the mindless accusations
of racism, misogyny and Fascism directed at the conservative rubes in middle
America are acceptable, and in far too many instances believed, particularly as
many had the temerity to vote for Donald Trump – who, although wealthy and Ivy
League educated, is considered the ultimate unsophisticated rube.
As conservatives are the
dominant force in the Republican Party and this nation cannot function
politically with more than two major political parties, the alternative is the
Democratic Party. An entity dominated by the American Left, an assemblage
whose core philosophy is antithetical to the interests of the wealthy and
privileged. Yet, determined to protect their lifestyles and vilify
conservatives, they willingly ally with the left and overwhelmingly support
virtually any Democratic candidate. In the recent 2018 mid-terms,
Democratic House candidates outspent their Republican opponents by a two to one
margin thanks primarily to this wealthy but myopic assemblage.
Their colleagues in the
Democratic Party, and the preponderance of the membership, are those dependent
on the largess of the federal and state governments. On the other hand,
the growing segment of the citizenry who are working and self-sufficient are
increasingly joining those who believe in limited government in migrating to
the Republican Party-- a process that is accelerating with the policies and
tactics of Donald Trump in combating the entrenched left and their
determination to culturally and economically transform the nation. The Republican
Party will inevitably become the party of the working or middle class. As
such, they could potentially dominate the political agenda for the foreseeable
future.
The left and the
Democratic Party, in order to offset this possibility, must aggressively seek
to increase the number of dependents by promoting the legalization and ultimate
citizenship for untold millions of illegal immigrants and promising all
Americans cradle to grave economic security. In order to enact this
strategy to defeat the Republicans, the left must have the active participation
and financial support of the nation’s wealthy-- which they have.
The Democratic Party has
evolved into essentially an incompatible two-tier class-driven entity
encompassing the nation’s wealthiest and the nation’s poorest. Nonetheless, it is at
present a convenient home for the elites to hold off the imaginary horde of
conservatives outside their gilded doors.
However, the voting
numbers within the party are overwhelmingly with those who generally support
the leftist philosophies of redistribution (e.g. socialized medicine and
guaranteed incomes) and curtailing of freedom (e.g. speech, assembly and
religion). While it may not manifest itself to the affluent who have cast
their lot with the Democrats, the redistribution of wealth must, by necessity,
come from the wealthy, as that is where the bulk of the nation’s wealth
resides. It is also this same small-in-numbers group that benefits
the most from freedom of speech and assembly.
Once fully embroiled in
this marriage of convenience, a divorce will be impossible as the co-inhabitant
of the Democratic Party, the dependent class, must continue grow in order to
electorally defeat the Republicans and protect the left’s agenda.
Further, the oversold expectations promulgated by the left will never be
satisfied regardless of how many promises are made or token redistributive
programs are enacted by the current ruling class. Only a complete
transformation of this nation into a failed socialist state will satiate the
left, their acolytes and their attendant army of dependency. A goal more
in reach than ever thanks to the inability of the nation’s elites to give a
damn about the future of the country.
There is not a more
short-sighted and self-absorbed group of citizens in this nation than the
white, wealthy well-educated urban and suburban voters. They are willing to
rend the fabric of this nation in order to protect their privilege and
lifestyle. While the vast majority of Americans will ultimately pay the
price, the current ruling class and their progeny will have far more to
lose.
Xavier Becerra
As Fox News pointed out in a
2003 interview on the Sean
Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society . But don’t go
looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work
cleaning up his inline reputation and record. KATY GRIMES
CHICANO MARXISTS PREPARE FOR BATTLE
WITH TRUMP ADMINISTRATION
As Chicanas
and Chicanos of Aztlán, we are a nationalist movement of Indigenous Gente that
lay claim to the land that is ours by birthright. As a nationalist movement we
seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that
occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the
cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza and promotes our identity as a
Chicana/Chicano Gente.
By Katy Grimes and Megan Barth
CA Marxists Ramping Up Destabilization of the Golden State
Immediately following the November election, California Governor
Jerry Brown appointed U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra (D) to replace State Attorney
General Kamala Harris, who won election to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the
retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all
anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and
fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist,
Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.
The goal by these extremists in California is to push
the state, and eventually the country to such a crisis, a reorganization
is the only cure. That is what Communists do. Modern day “Progressives” as they
like to be called, like Brown and Becerra, refer to themselves as
Multiculturalists and Progressives. But as history very clearly demonstrates,
using Marxism as the cure to anything in society is a very dark
fairytale.
The term “progressive” is simply
another way of saying “socialist” or “Marxist;” But it’s as important to
recognize how liberation theology factors into the radical Latino lawmakers: In
Latin America, the big enemy is not Marxism, it is capitalism. And the main enemy
of liberation theology, according to its founder, the Rev. Gustavo Gutierrez of
Peru, and many of its adherents, is the United States–Michael Novak, the author of the 1984 ”Freedom With Justice: Catholic Social Thought
and Liberal Institutions .” Novak describes liberation theology as
“gaining its excitement from flirting with Marxist thought and speech.”
Xavier Becerra
As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean
Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society . But don’t go
looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work
cleaning up his inline reputation and record.
“I got to be the first in my
family to go to college” thanks to MEChA, Becerra said.
Hannity repeatedly pressed
Becerra on why he would belong to a group that preaches racial discrimination,
prompting the Bustamente backer to complain, “Are you calling me a racist?”
When the Fox host pointed out
that MEChA favors the return of California to Mexico, Becerra still declined to
criticize the group, saying, “I got a lot of help from people in the
organization who have promoted education for kids and who continue to do that.
… What I know is what they do.”
MEChA is a Hispanic separatist organization (400 chapters
nationwide and in many high schools) that encourages anti-American activities,
civil disobedience, and romanticizes Mexican claims to the “lost Territories”
of California and the Southwestern United States, in a Chicano country called
“Aztlan.” The official national symbol of MEChA is an eagle holding a
machete-like weapon and a stick of dynamite.
The Fabian Society and Fabian
Socialism uses the teachings of John Maynard Keynes as their
catechism of political economy. Like Marxism, it embraced the idea of a
Communist Utopia, where the State owned everything and controlled every aspect
of the public’s lives. They have installed Fabian Socialism and Keynesism as the new faith,
both in the Universities and in Government bureaucracy. Keynes supported
statism and socialism, and managed and planning economies. U.S.
President Barack Obama has long advocated the use of Keynesian
economic concepts — despite the fact that John Maynard Keynes was incompetent,
a fraud, and accused of being a pedophile.
These groups have worked
diligently behind the scenes to implement their Socialist policies
into our government, labor unions and throughout academia. They have infected
the working class, demanding higher and higher wages, resulting often in
welfare and other government handouts once their employers are ruined.
They use illegal immigrants as messengers of their ideology,
demeaning patriotism, and America. And they have manipulated the political
process so that only those candidates well-versed in Marxism receive
the attention of the corporate Media.
Illegal Immigration and Marxism
Even though the law doesn’t allow them to vote, illegal
immigrants are changing the landscape of the U.S. government, especially in
California, by impacting the census’ through mass migration. California
allows illegal aliens to vote.
Former Mechista Rep. Xavier Becerra, the U.S.
congressman for California’s 31st District, says what all leftist Latino
lawmakers say: their (illegal) constituents still pay taxes
and contribute to society , therefore
they should vote. — “An individual doesn’t have to be a citizen to pay taxes –
you pay taxes if you work in this country, you pay taxes if you purchase
something,” Becerra said.
Led by Los Angeles County Federation
of Labor head Maria Elena Durazo , a group of
socialist and Communist California labor officials and Democrat Party
operatives created a program to target Latinos and immigrants (illegal and
legal) to permanently drive California politics far to the left, Democrat
political consultant Richie Ross wrote in CalBuzz in
2010. Ross openly boasts of targeting the Latino community’s fear of
anti-illegal immigration measures, to drive the community even further into the
arms of the Democratic Party.
In 1994, then-Governor Pete Wilson
put Proposition 187 on the ballot. It was called the nation’s first
anti-immigrant initiative, but in fact the goal of Proposition 187 was to
make illegal aliens ineligible for public benefits including public social
services, public health care services, and public school education. It came in
the middle of a deep recession in California and was popular partly because the
fiscal estimate from the California Legislative
Analyst’s Office said that it would save
the state about $200 million/year.
Latinos and Communists
Maria Elena Durazo,Los Angeles County Federation of Labor head,
is closely associated with both groups. She is is also well connected
to former LA Mayor and Gubernatorial hopeful Antonia Villaraigosa, as well as
former California State Senator Gil Cedillo, both long time
immigration activists.
“Durazo, Villaraigosa and Cedillo,
all trained under legendary Los Angles Communist Party USA activist,
Democratic Party activist and “immigration reform” pioneer Bert Corona,”
Trevor Loudon wrote in 2013. All three have
long ties to both the Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of
America, and coincidentally were all prominent California supporters of
presidential candidate Barack Obama and long time ally of both the Communists and DSA .
(former mayor of Mexico’s second
largest city of Los Angeles) Villaraigosa has a long history with MEChA. As a
student, he headed the UCLA chapter of MEChA, but left UCLA six weeks before
graduation to become a full-time organizer with Corona’s Centro de Action Social Autonoma .
Another radical activist isRep. Luis
Gutierrez (D-IL), a co-sponsor of the 2010 Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
Gutierrez, a former member of the
Marxist-Leninist Puerto Rican Socialist Party, chairs the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional
Hispanic Caucus. Longtime amnesty activists Gutierrez and Rep. Xavier
Becerra (D-CA), both members of
the Congressional Progressive Caucus, worked on the amnesty effort.
Communists seek to use amnestied illegals to build a “permanent
progressive majority.” Most thinking Americans know that Democrats only care
about illegals for the winning voting bloc they can provide, but most are
unaware that this idea was hatched and developed by the American Communist
Party, which Richie Ross clearly explains in his op ed:
The campaigns we developed
broke new ground, organized new union workers, and increased the political
impact Latino voters have had on California politics – simultaneously tripling
their number of registered voters, increasing the Democratic share of that vote
by 50%, and doubling the percentage of the total votes cast in California from
Latinos.
Through the rest of the 1990′s
our campaigns focused on legislative races in Los Angeles. We
succeeded. But it was all small.
In 2000, our message was
controversial (until it worked). “If you want to make a difference,
voting isn’t enough. Don’t bother voting unless you sign our pledge to
get 100% of your family to vote.” Latino turnout rose… and accounted for
14% of the votes cast according to the State’s voter registration and voting
history records.
The Enemies Within
Loudon identifies Bert Corona, as the “Communist Father of the
‘Immigrants Rights’ movement” in 1960. In 1964, Corona, Cesar Chavez and future
Democratic Socialists of America member Dolores Huerta forced Congress to end
the guest worker “Bracero” program. Later, Corona sought ways to address
“problems confronting Mexicans in the United States who had no visas or
citizenship documents” – in other words, illegal aliens – including “how to
defend persons detained by immigration authorities and how to help immigrants
acquire disability and unemployment insurance and welfare.”
Loudon writes:
Tarzynski listed 25 people he
thought should be on an “A-list” of “25 or so leaders/activists/intellectuals
and/or “eminent persons” who would gather periodically to theorize/strategize
about how to rebuild a progressive movement in our metropolitan area that could
challenge for power.”
Tarzynski listed himself, Harold Meyerson , Karen Bass , Sylvia Castillo , Gary Phillips , Joe Hicks , Richard Rothstein , Steve Cancian , Larry Frank , Torie Osborn , Rudy Acuna , Aris Anagnos , Abby Arnold , Carl Boggs , Blase Bonpane , Rick Brown , Stanley Sheinbaum , Alice Callahan , Jim
Conn , Peter Dreier , Maria Elena Durazo , Miguel Contreras , Mike Davis , Bill Gallegos , Bob Gottlieb , Kent Wong , Russell Jacoby , Bong Hwan Kim , Paula Litt (and Barry Litt , with a question mark), Peter Olney , Derek Shearer , Clancy Sigal and Anthony Thigpenn .
In further preparation for battle, the California legislature
just hired former Attorney General, Eric Holder. “Having the former attorney
general of the United States brings us a lot of firepower in order to prepare
and safeguard the values of the people of California.” Kevin de Leon, the
Democratic leader of the Senate, said in an interview. “This means we are very,
very serious.”
Very serious, and very Marxist, indeed.
Part 2 of this series will be
published next we
How Obama Impacted the
Military
Radical
changes imposed on our military by progressives, begun in earnest during the
Obama administration, are negatively impacting our combat readiness and
jeopardizing the lives of our men and women in uniform and, ultimately, our
national security. In Stand Down: How Social Justice
Warriors Are Sabotaging America’s Military , author James Hasson
elucidates how Barack Obama fundamentally changed military culture to make
our nation less secure. Hasson, a former Army captain, Army Ranger School
graduate, and Afghanistan veteran, argues that military readiness was
sacrificed for identity politics and progressive rhetoric. He lists examples
such as policies that established “safe spaces,” prohibited
“micro-aggressions,” denigrated “hyper-masculine” traits, implemented unwise
“green” standards and injected “social justice” guidelines in military
operations.
In
his revealing book, Captain Hasson describes how Obama’s military appointees,
mainly progressive ideologues lacking military experience and hailing from
academic, political, and the private sectors, were placed in charge of seasoned
combat generals with decades of combat experience. The priorities,
experience, and philosophies of the officers and appointees couldn’t have been
more disparate.
Many
senior military staff members suffered in silence at Obama’s attempt to use the
military as a “laboratory for progressive social engineering,” according to
Hasson. Exemplifying this shift was the naming of Navy ships after
Leftist political heroes. Socialist labor-activist Cesar Chavez and slain
gay-rights advocate Harvey Milk -- who left the Navy for being gay -- were
among those who Ray Mabus, Obama’s secretary of the Navy, announced would have
ships named after them. This practice flew in the face of the hallowed
Navy tradition of naming ships after presidents and war heroes.
Obama,
who, Hasson says, took pride in his lack of military knowledge and experience,
made widespread changes to personnel policy, budgetary expenditures and
resource allocations that harmed readiness, training and troop safety.
Obama’s transgender policy of “mixed genitalia in the bathrooms,” took
precedence over established military culture. Soldiers were judged by the
gender they wished to be rather than their biological sex. Obama
essentially used the military to lead social change in American society rather
than preserving time-honored traditions that emphasized troop cohesiveness and
readiness.
The
author explains that the cornerstone of every military policy is its impact on
combat. The military is most concerned with physical outcomes, the
determinant of ultimate success. That focus was weakened by the
transgender policy instituted by the Obama administration allowing soldiers to
serve under the sex that conformed to their gender identity even without sex
reassignment surgery or other physical changes. This practice had a
profound effect on fitness, performance, and deployability. Hasson
recognizes that transgender soldiers have served in the military in the past
but according to the physical fitness, grooming, and housing regulations that
conformed to their biological sex.
Other
issues nclude the quandary that arose when a recruit identified as
non-binary. Military leadership was stymied by the dilemma of applying
appropriate standards for such individuals. The military must find those
most qualified to serve and reject those suffering from mental conditions such
as anxiety and depression. Transgender people suffer from markedly higher
rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide than the general population.
Obama’s
new policies also negatively impacted the education of cadets, Hasson
asserts. Military academy courses on American history were overhauled to
focus on race and the pervasive narrative that America is a racist
country. The international history class focused on gender and a semester
of military history was completely deleted from the curriculum. How can
military students become successful warriors if they eschew military history,
are educated to disdain their country, and view history through the lens of
race and gender?
Today’s
military academies have a higher percentage of civilian, liberal professors who
have promoted a permissive atmosphere that has contributed to a deterioration
in the level of discipline, Hasson adds. The current environment with its
“safe spaces” and emphasis on race, gender, sexual orientation and social
justice, as well as rights, are antithetical to the military’s hierarchical
structure and its emphasis on duty, merit, discipline, and competence.
As
part of the Obama administration’s social engineering agenda that attempted to
erase the differences between men and women, the Army was coerced to lower its
standards for Ranger school to admit women who didn’t qualify for the
special-forces unit. Military brass was pressured to provide ample
pre-training instruction and multiple do-overs exclusively for female
candidates. Further, despite extensive studies that found lowered
standards for women to meet progressive goals, they were forced to deny the
study results.
When
Marine infantry units integrated women, the male-female units had higher injury
rates, slower casualty-evacuation times, poorer marksmanship skills, poorer
preparation of fortified fighting positions and overall lower battle-essential
skill sets than all-male units. Although all-male units outperformed coed
units in 70% of combat tasks and mixed units were not recommended, Obama still
issued a directive to integrate the Marine Corps infantry companies.
Hasson characterizes this policy as “fulfilling the dreams of progressive
ideologues at the expense of a service member’s life.”
When
the Army was ordered to promote “social justice,” combat veterans in 2012 were
required to don fake breasts and bellies to understand how pregnant soldiers
fared during training. In two separate, college ROTC events in
Philadelphia and metropolitan Phoenix in 2015, cadets were required to walk in
high heels to raise awareness about sexual violence against women.
In
2013, a Pentagon training manual for Equal Opportunity Officers and Non-Commissioned
Officers (NCOs) presented white, heterosexual, Christian males as recipients of
unearned social privilege and cited the disadvantages of blacks, women and
homosexuals. The manual listed the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a
left-wing organization that maligns conservative groups alongside neo-Nazis and
the KKK, as a resource that officers could use to obtain more information about
hate groups and extremism. After pushback from legislators and religious
groups that railed against the false labeling and listing of mainstream
Christian groups as “hate” groups because they don’t subscribe to far-left
ideology, the Obama Department of Defense removed the list, but retained all
other SPLC materials and data.
All
these diversions took a toll on military training and readiness, wasting
valuable time and resources that could have been dedicated to drilling and
essential tasks.
Hasson
acknowledges that the Trump administration has pushed back on many misguided
“reforms” instituted by Obama and has reprioritized the military’s warfighting
culture, rejecting political correctness, social engineering, identity politics
and other policies that serve no real military purpose and undermine combat
readiness and performance. The author ends his excellent book with a
prescription for returning the military to its critical mission. He
recommends the military refocus on appropriate academy education, readiness,
deployability and eligibility based on physical fitness, merit and discipline
and move away from social justice, political correctness, carbon emissions and
other pet progressive projects. Such a move will return the military to
full combat readiness, protect the lives of our soldiers, and, ultimately,
safeguard our national security.
Seven Times the GAO Found the Obama Administration Violated Federal Law
AP/Jacquelyn Martin
5:32
Democrats and journalists were excited Thursday when the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a legal opinion that the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had violated the Impoundment Control Act by withholding congressionally appropriated aid to Ukraine last summer.
The non-binding opinion was disputed by the OMB, which
released a memo last month arguing that the “programmatic” delay sought to
fulfill , not oppose, congressional intent.
The GAO
decision , which had been requested by Democrat Senator Chris van Hollen of Maryland, disagreed, concluding that the delay had been for “policy reasons,” not “programmatic delay.” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) cited the decision in her morning press conference — though she had trouble pronouncing the word “impoundment” — and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) likewise trumpeted the GAO decision as a vindication of the House impeachment.
Though the GAO works for Congress, it is not the finder of fact in impeachment cases. Moreover, it is not even clear that the Impoundment Control Act is constitution.
Nevertheless, if a mere GAO finding is sufficient to justify impeachment, then President Barack Obama ought to have been impeached at least seven times over for each of the following cases in which the GAO found that the Obama administration had violated federal law.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and United States Secret Service (USSS) were found to have violated section 503 of the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, and the Antideficiency Act, in 2009 after the Secret Service reported that it had overspent on candidate protection in 2008 by $5,100,000, and used money from another program to cover the shortfall. DHS failed to notify Congress 15 days in advance of the “reprogramming.”
The Department of the Treasury was found to have violated the Antideficiency Act in 2014 when it used the voluntary services of four individuals. “Treasury did not appoint any of the individuals to federal employment, nor did any individual qualify as a student who may, under certain circumstances, perform voluntary service,” the GAO found, adding that there was no emergency that might have justified using the individuals to perform several months of work without receiving pay.
The Department of Defense was found to have violated the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2014 and the Antideficiency Act in the infamous Bowe Bergdahl swap, when President Barack Obama traded five high-level Taliban detainees for a U.S. Army deserter. The administration transferred the five Taliban from Guantanamo Bay without notifying relevant congressional committees 30 days in advance, as required by law. Republicans complained; Democrats were silent.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development was found to have violated the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, and the Antideficiency Act in 2014 when the deputy secretary of the department sent an email to “friends and colleagues” asking them to lobby the Senate in favor of a bill appropriating money to the department, and against amendments offered by Republican Senators.
The Environmental Protection Agency was found to have violated “publicity or propaganda and anti-lobbying provisions” in the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act and the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act in 2015 by using some of the department’s social media accounts in rule-making for the “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) regulations (which have since been repealed under the Trump administration).
Two officials in the Department of Housing and Urban Development were found in 2016 to have violated Section 713 of the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act by attempting to prevent a regional director within the agency from being interviewed by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. (Notably, the GAO reversed its earlier decision that the department’s general counsel had not violated the law once it was presented with more evidence.)
The Federal Maritime Commission was found to have violated Section 711 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, as well as the Antideficiency Act, in 2016 when it failed to notify the relevant Senate and House committees that it had spent more than $5,000 to furnish and redecorate the office of its former director in 2010. (The total amount spent was $12,084 over three years, as noted by the GAO in a foot note reference to an inspector general’s report on the excessive expenditures.)
Needless to say, Obama was never impeached.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution , which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak .
No comments:
Post a Comment