Why I’m Not Republican or Democrat – I want to be a Patriot.

My friend Carl sends me this one…very thought provoking.  I don’t agree that tea partiers are Republicans, matter of a fact, I’ve met some serious ones who are Democrats. My experience with the tea party…at least in my part of the world, is that they’re Constitutional loving Patriots. They’re not wearing tags, and just like me, they’re as sick of Republicans as they are Democrats. Now, neither party in Washington have our interests at heart…well, aside from me saying that bit about the tea party, I’ll let you read on. Oh, one more. I’m not excited about Mitt Romney, I don’t agree about Obama, and I’m not a Paulite, but we’ve got serious problems in DC if we don’t start keeping their feet to the fire. 

 

Why I Hate Republicans (Including Tea Partiers), Even More Than I Hate Democrats

 

By Servando Gonzalez
theintelhub.com
May 11, 2012

 A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.

—Marcus Tullius Cicero.

First of all let me make it clear that, as one of my friends put it, I am an equal opportunity offender.

The reason for this is because I have never seen much difference between Republicans and Democrats. To me, both parties are actually the two sides of the same counterfeited coin. That’s why many years ago I began calling it the Repucratic Party — the true and only Communo-fascist party in the coming totalitarian America.

The more I’ve tried to find differences between them, the less I’ve found.

For example, both Republicans and Democrats accept the minor lies told by the politicians of their party (Republicans believe in free trade, Democrats in global warming), as well as the big lies told by politicians of both parties (9/11/2001, War on Terror, death of bin Laden, Arab Spring, etc).

Neither Republicans nor Democrats have ever complained about the daily abuses committed by the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration.

None of them seem to care about the use of torture as a way to extract “confessions,” nor about the end of habeas corpus and posse comitatus or the expansion of the surveillance state.

Year after year, election after election, both Republicans and Democrats seem to agree, and have made an effort to convince us about it, that just by changing the puppets in the White House, while keeping the same scoundrels, rascals, cheaters, tax evaders, swindlers, scam artists, fraudsters, charlatans and scumbags of their party on the hill, everything will be okay in America.

Moreover, while Democrats chant the mantra of social justice, which is actually individual injustice, Republicans sing the siren’s song of national security, which, as it has now become evident, actually means national insecurity.

Still, there are minor differences that make me hate Republicans much more than I hate Democrats. Nevertheless, let me tell you first why I hate Democrats.

I hate Democrats because they are the enemy.

Democrats viscerally hate this country, its people, its Constitution, and almost everything that was good in America: its freedom, the right of its citizens to live their lives unmolested by an intrusive government trying to “help” them, the freedom to openly criticize their elected leaders without fear of reprisals, the respect for the laws of the land. Democrats are commies and don’t make any bones about it.

They loved Stalin and Mao, still love Castro, and now love Hugo Chávez and Obama.

But at least Democrats don’t hide their hatred for everything truly American. Over and over, they have openly told in clear and explicit ways that they hate America.

Michelle Obama expressed it clearly when she had a moment of candor and confessed that the only time she felt proud of being American was when Kenyan-born Barry Soetoro was selected by the Bilderberger conspirators to be the next president of the U.S.[1] Other Democrats, like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Jane Fonda, Maxine Waters, just to name a few, have expressed in deeds, and sometimes in words, their hatred for this country.

In this sense, I appreciate their sincerity.

On the other hand, I hate Republicans (including Tea Partiers, which are nothing but Republicans in disguise) because they are traitors and hypocrites. Currently, they are frantically trying to hide their love for Obama, who has provided them the wars they crave for so much. 

Their total demoralization has manifested in the presidential debates where, after proving over and over that all them, except Ron Paul, are a bunch of unprincipled liars, they have attacked everybody and his uncle except Obama.

Despite their constant claims of patriotism and respect for the Constitution, Republicans have always been eager to justify the trashing of the Constitution — provided the trashers are members of the Republican party. They loved it when George W. Bush approved the Patriot Act, one of the most antipatriotic laws ever signed by an American President, after having been passed without even a reading by a Congress with a Republican majority. 

I fully understand why Democrats who hate this country elected Jerry Brown as governor of California. What is difficult to understand, however, is why Arizona Republicans re-elected John McCone to the U.S. Congress. CFR member McCain has shown many times his hatred for this country. While in Congress, he has supported almost every anti-American law ever conceived. His latest act of treachery is his support for the National Defense Authorization Act, a bill later signed into law by Obama. 

A few months ago, while you were enjoying your turkey meal, the National Defense Authorization Act, another big jump into totalitarianism in the U.S., was approved by Congress. The approval was “bipartisan” and had full “conservative” support.

Given that in the cryptic language of the Washington politicians “bipartisan” actually means CFR sponsored, I bet that the National Defense Authorization Act, like most treasonous laws enacted by their Congress (the CFR conspirators have bought it, so it is theirs, not ours), was created in the secret conciliabula at the Harold Pratt House, headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations.

 The National Defense Authorization Act defines the entirety of the United States as a battleground in the War on Terror. Therefore, you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the Government can label any American citizens as terrorists and they can be indefinitely detained without charge or trial. Similar laws have been enacted in most totalitarian countries. Now, why did John McCain and most Republicans senators support this bill? Beats me! 

If one is to believe professional disinformer Sean Hannity, any of the Republican candidates is better than Obama. According to him, our motto should be “Anybody but Obama.” “I want to win,” said Hannity “and I want to win badly.”[2] He seems to forget that “anybody but Bush I” brought us Clinton, “anybody but Clinton” brought us Bush II, and “anybody but Bush II” brought us Obama. If doing the same and expecting a different result is a symptom of insanity, the U.S. has become an insane asylum. 

Hannity’s idea is an example of politics as football. What is at stake today, however, is not the victory of your football team, but the survival of the American Republic. Actually, thanks to disinformers like Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin, et. al., the election process is not even a football game, but a coin flipping one: heads we lose, tails they win!

Disagreement, particularly political disagreement, is part of the democratic, civilized way of living. Contradictory points of view among different individuals are a strong evidence of freedom and a very healthy feature of a democratic republic. Also, it is a normal fact of life that, with the passage of time, people change their views.

What is not acceptable, however, is contradictory points of view expressed at the same time by the same individual. Inconsistency is the mark of the opportunist and the liar. A better example of inconsistency than Republicans claiming one day that they support the Constitution and next day giving their vote of approval to a law that trashes it is difficult to find. This is precisely why most people don’t like politicians like the ones now running for the presidency.

Republicans claim that they are defenders of capitalism and free enterprise, but they love corporations, the main enemies of competition and true capitalism. When listeners complain about mega corporations not paying taxes, moving the jobs abroad or using semi-slave workers, disinformer extraordinaire Rush Limbaugh answers that they have not violated any U.S. law. He never mentions, though, that big transnational corporations don’t need to violate the laws because they have greased the palms of corrupt lawmakers to pass the laws they need.

Republicans assert that they are anti-abortion, because human life is sacred, but they wait until their children are teenagers and send them to kill and be killed in foreign, unnecessary wars. These are inconsistencies bordering on hypocrisy.

Republicans profess that they are the strongest supporters of the U.S. military, but they remained silent when thousands of them died or were incapacitates for life as a result of bacteria in vaccines they were forced to take — the so-called “Gulf War Syndrome.” Nor have they complained for the government’s cover-up to hide the fact that it was done on purpose to purge the Army from patriotic, but potentially problematic Americans the conspirators didn’t trust. 

In the same fashion, Republicans are famous for complaining about the high U.S. national debt, but they never mention the fact that one of the reasons why the government needs cash is to pay for the interest on the money it borrows to maintain the national (in)security state they love so much. As a matter of fact, Republicans are as addicted to warfare as Democrats to welfare.

As keepers of the integrity of the Republic, or so they contend, Republicans have always been in the first line against illegal immigration. However, despite their zeal to keep the border closed, they never criticized their beloved George W. Bush, the man who opened the borders to an alien invasion and harassed and prosecuted the border officers who tried to do their job.

Moreover, Republicans have always supported the idea of building a high wall to exclude the invaders. Apparently it never crossed their narrow minds that some day that very same wall could be used as a containment device to prevent Americans from escaping totalitarianism in their own country. Actually, the first step has been done with a law canceling passport rights for people who owe taxes. And, mark my words, very soon other excuses will be added to keep the sheep inside the barn.

Another good example of their inconsistency is the Republicans’ criticism of banks bailouts. According to them, and I fully agree about this particular issue, we should let nature run its course, and failed institutions should not be helped, because this will encourage failure, but let them pay dearly for their mistakes. But it is obvious that the Republican Party has failed miserably once and again.

Then, why are Republicans so eager to rescue it?

But the last straw that really made me mad as hell is their treatment of Ron Paul, and I don’t want to take it anymore 

Since the very beginning of the present presidential campaign, Republicans have shown that if there is a person they really don’t want to see in the White House, that is Ron Paul. To avoid it, they have resorted to every trick in the book to sabotage Paul’s campaign. 

While Paul’s arguments about really important things have been ignored, Republicans have wasted their time talking about Obamacare (which is actually Hillarycare, which was actually Rockefeller care), illegal immigration (a non-issue, currently Mexicans are escaping back to their country), health care (which is a disaster precisely because of government intervention),[3] well, you name it.

Apparently, they seem to ignore that what is at stake in this crucial moment of this country’s history is not if we have a border fence, or a health care system even worse than the one we now have, or Mexicans (and some Americans too) escaping back to a better life in Mexico, but if the coming society will be a fascist or a communist one. And I assure you that, except for their preference for black swastikas or red hammers and sickles in their banners, there is no big difference between either totalitarian system.

It seems that the professional media disinformers have already decided behind our backs that the only possible alternative we have in this coming election is either a disaster named Obama or a future disaster named Romney. Contrary to their claims, however, we do have another alternative: neither of them! 

Currently, we have a unique opportunity to drop the bankrupt Repucratic Party where it belongs: the trash can of History. As Ron Paul recently stated, “The country is ripe for revolution.”[4] I fully agree with Congressman Paul, and we’d better do it fast before this unique window of opportunity closes, because the Repucratic carcass is rotting, and the stench is becoming nauseating. 

All things considered, I think that if at some time we realize that there is no way to put Ron Paul in the White House, Obama, not Romney or any other Republican candidate, should be our second best option.

Yes, I prefer Obama in the White House rather than any Republican. Let me tell you why.[5] 

As I have explained in detail in my book Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People, contrary to communists or fascists, whose tactic is to take political power overtly by quick, violent means, the New World Order conspirators have adopted the tactics of the British Fabians: taking control covertly, by slow, gradual infiltration.

Evidence shows they have been very successful at infiltrating the U.S. government, the courts, the system of public education, the academia, the mainstream press and the U.S. armed forces — I didn’t mention the CIA, because since its creation the Agency has been an obedient tool in the hands of the CFR conspirators.

Of lately, however, they have encountered unexpected resistance from the masses. Speaking in May 2001 at a Council on Foreign Relations meeting in Montreal, CFR agent Zbigniew Brzezinski warned that a “global political awakening,” in combination with infighting amongst the elite, was threatening to derail the move towards a one world government.[6]

Apparently, the CFR conspirators have become a little nervous about not been able to accomplish their deadline of having a global New World Order by early 21st century, and this rush has made them make grave mistakes. One of them has been placing their puppet Obama in the White House. 

It is not a secret that, following his masters’ orders, Obama’s long, quick steps to push America into totalitarianism has caused an awakening of a large sector of the American people, galvanizing them to action in ways we have never seen before in the recent history of this country.

Probably the only good thing Obama’s rule has accomplished is to turn things in America so bad and so fast, that it has awakened the people’s consciousness from its media-induced stupor. In this sense, by acting as an alarm clock, he has done us a big favor. Electing a CFR-controlled Republican will put the people to sleep again. 

On the other hand, do some honest Republicans truly believe that corrupt CFR puppet Mitt Romney would be better than corrupt CFR puppet Barack Obama? I don’t think so.

The fact that the CFR conspirators have been desperately pushing first their puppet Newt, then Perry and now Romney is a clear indication that they are concerned about the possibilities of success for their plans to fully implement the Communo-fascist New World Order in America.[7] Currently, the two main obstacles the conspirators face are a free Internet and gun ownership, and they will do everything in their power to eliminate freedom of speech and an armed populace as soon as possible.

In the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, the government confiscated guns from law-abiding citizens who owned them legally. But they didn’t have to pry their guns from their dead, cold fingers — gun owners willingly surrendered their guns to the Louisiana National Guard. Of course, I guess that if a Democrat would have been in the White House things may have been different. But their beloved George W. Bush gave the orders, and the ever faithful Republicans complied.

The elimination of the current Internet, and its substitution by a controlled, censored one is relatively easy. [8] The justification will be a false flag cyberatttack, and it can be done under a Democratic president. But gun prohibition and confiscation is much more risky and it can only be done by a Republican President. A Republican President will easily recreate a Fast and Furious false flag operation as a pretext for passing a gun confiscation law and most Republican gun owners will comply. Is Romney the right guy for the job? I don’t think we should wait and see.

Somebody said that war was too important to leave it in the hands of the military. Well, today that the U.S. government has become a Leviathan avid to control all aspects of our lives, I would say that politics is too important to leave it in the hands of the politicians — particularly in the hands of corrupt, anti-American politicians of the Repucratic Party.

Therefore, instead of “anybody but Obama,” my motto in the coming elections is “anybody but a Repucrat.” If you love this country and want to live in it as a free man,[9] please, make this motto yours. Actually, by participating in this corrupt electoral process we are, wittingly or unwittingly, helping to legitimize the charade. If, by voting for an independent candidate or not voting at all we fail to get the government we want, at least we can have the clear conscience that we didn’t contribute to the mockery.

It is obvious that Republicans will never allow Ron Paul to become their candidate in this coming election. Dr. Paul’s plans are nothing less than overturning the government’s apple cart, and Republicans hate him for this. Unfortunately, and I hope I am wrong, it seems that Paul has decided not to keep fighting if he loses the nomination. If this happens to be the case, I suggest that we focus our efforts to try to convince him to run as an independent. Ron Paul is our only hope for a peaceful solution to the problems we face as a nation.

Some months ago Jesse Ventura offered to run as Paul’s vice-president if Ron Paul decided to run as an independent. I think that the combination of Paul-Ventura is a winning, unbeatable one.

Both of them have demonstrated over the years their honesty and love for this country. Even more, they scare the shit out of the New Word Order conspirators. They fear them as much as they hate them.

If Paul and Ventura reach an agreement and they decide to run as independents, there is only one way the conspirators can stop them, but they know that they have to be very careful about using that last-resort option.

If they go for it, the conspirators may start an unstoppable chain reaction of unforeseeable consequences, none of which would be good for them. 

If, for any reason, the result of the coming election is four more years of Obama in the White House, good for us.

A Republican in the White House will only put the people to sleep, while the conspirators will keep feverishly working in the shadows for the destruction of this country. Anyway, I have the gut feeling that, one way or another, Obama will not spend four more years in the White House.

After the popular vote brought Salvador Allende to power in Chile, CFR agent and war criminal Henry Kissinger said “I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go Communist due to the irresponsibility of its people.” In the same fashion, we Americans don’t need to stand by and watch our country to go Communo-fascist due to the irresponsibility or ill intentions of both Democrats and Republicans.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention a lady asked Benjamin Franklin, what type of government the Constitution had created. Franklin replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.” Let’s show the New World Order conspirators, their minions and the World, that we have what is needed to save this Republic and keep it alive and kicking!

———-

Notes:

 [1] Jaketapper, “Michelle Obama: ‘For the First Time in My Adult Lifetime, I’m Really Proud of My Country’”, ABCNews, February 18, 2008, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/02/michelle-obam-1-2/.

[2] Hannity said this in his radio program, November 28, 2011.

[3] See my article “The Health Care Ferrari,” NolanChart.com, September 6, 2009,http://www.nolanchart.com/article6840-the-american-health-care-ferrari.html

[4] See, Karrah Kaplan, “Rep. Ron Paul: The Country is Ripe for Revolution,” CNN, September 27, 2011,http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/27/rep-ron-paul-the-country-is-ripe-for-revolution/.

[5] I don’t need to explain why Obama is the best second option to owners of gun stores and makers of guns and ammo, because they already know it. To know why I think Obama is nothing but a puppet, see my book Obamania: The New Puppet and His Masters.

[6] See, Paul Joseph Watson, “Brzezinski Decries Global Political Awakening During CFR Speech,” Prison Planet.com, Wednesday, May 19, 2010, http://www.prisonplanet.com/brzezinski-decries-global-political-awakening-during-cfr-speech.html.

[7] See, Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones, “Newt Gingrich: Mr. New World Order,” Infowars.com, November 28, 2011, http://www.infowars.com/newt-gingrich-mr-new-world-order/

[8] See my “Kiss Your Internet Goodbye,” NewsWithViews.com, April 6, 2003,http://www.newswithviews.com/public_comm/public_commentary7.htm.

[9] I despise everything politically correct, so I keep using the word “man” in its traditional use in the English language, that is, implying men and women.

Servando Gonzalez is a Cuban-born American writer, semiologist and intelligence analyst. He has written books, essays and articles on Latin American history, intelligence, espionage, and semiotics. Servando is the author ofHistoria herética de la revolución fidelista, The Secret Fidel Castro, The Nuclear Deception and La madre de todas las conspiraciones, all available at Amazon.com.

Blame it on Bush, No, Wait, I already did…

So, can he “double” blame Bush? He will never admit it, but by the time November gets here, he will have NOTHING to campaign on. Mitt Romney can all but sew it up by asking “Are You Better Off Than You Were 4 Years Ago”? The same question Ronald Reagan asked can put him in office as well. And, I guess THAT can be blamed on Bush as well….from Bloomberg…

Obama Fails to Stem Middle-Class Slide He Blamed on Bush

Barack Obama campaigned four years ago assailing President George W. Bush for wage losses suffered by the middle class. More than three years into Obama’s own presidency, those declines have only deepened.

The rebound from the worst recession since the 1930s has generated relatively few of the moderately skilled jobs that once supported the middle class, tightening the financial squeeze on many Americans, even those who are employed.

 

A job seeker during a job fair hosted by the State of New York on April 12, 2012 in Brooklyn, New York. Photographer: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

 

“It started long before Obama, but he hasn’t done anything,” said John Forsyth, 58, a railroad-car inspector and political independent from Lebanon, Ohio. “He kept pushing this change, change, change, and he hasn’t done anything.”

Underlying the erosion of the middle class, defined by some economists as the middle 60 percent of income earners, are trends that stretch back decades, including competition from lower-wage workers overseas and technological advances that allow factories and offices to produce more with less labor.

As a candidate in 2008, Obama blamed the reversals largely on the policies of Bush and other Republicans. He cited census figures showing that median income for working-age households — those headed by someone younger than 65 — had dropped more than $2,000 after inflation during the first seven years of Bush’s time in office.

Yet real median household income in March was down $4,300 since Obama took office in January 2009 and down $2,900 since the June 2009 start of the economic recovery, according to an analysis of census data by Sentier Research, an economic- consulting firm in Annapolis, Maryland.

1% Get 93%

A president who attacked Bush’s policies for favoring the rich has overseen a recovery in which the wealthiest 1 percent captured 93 percent of per-capita real income gains in 2010, according to an analysis of tax data by Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

On average, families in the top 1 percent saw their inflation-adjusted incomes rise by $105,637 that year from 2009, according to Saez.

While there is no settled definition of middle class, the middle 60 percent of households nationwide in 2010 earned between $20,000 and $100,000, according to the U.S. Census.

In and around Dayton, Ohio, a region that has endured a wrenching shift from dependence on the auto industry to new sources of growth such as distribution warehouses and information technology, disappointment with Obama is often balanced by wariness of his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney.

“I don’t know if there’s anybody I’m going to vote for,” Forsyth said of the candidates.

Limited Opportunity

While the U.S. unemployment rate fell from a peak of 10 percent in October 2009 to 8.2 percent in March, the jobs data that dominate public discussion obscure a shift that has limited opportunity for workers such as Forsyth.

Ninety-five percent of the net job losses during the recession were in middle-skill occupations, such as office workers, bank tellers and machine operators, according to research by economists Nir Jaimovich of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, and Henry Siu of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver.

The job growth since has been clustered in either high- skill fields inaccessible to workers without advanced education or low-paying industries, they found.

In March, 3.2 million fewer Americans held sales and office jobs than five years earlier, and 1.2 million fewer were employed in transportation and production fields, all areas that typically pay middle-income wages, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Dayton’s Dreams

By contrast, the number of better-paid managerial and professional employees grew by almost 2 million over that period and employment in lower-paying service jobs expanded by 1.5 million.

In Dayton — the birthplace of aviation and such inventions as the mechanical cash register, the self-starting car engine, the stepladder and cellophane tape — these trends have diminished incomes and curtailed dreams.

Mandy Copeland, a 34-year-old occupational therapy assistant, and her husband, a heating and ventilation technician, have given up hope of trading their three-bedroom ranch house for a home with a basement that they could turn into a recreation room for their three children.

Eighteen-year-old Alex Ray recently decided he would wait on attending a four-year college and instead spend his first year at a local community college. His father, Tom Ray, a 47- year-old information-technology project manager who only recently regained a wage cut his employer imposed during the recession, praised his son for a “very mature” choice that he estimated would save $20,000.

Falling Birthrate

Fewer children are being brought into the world; the birthrate in Montgomery County, where Dayton is located, has fallen every year since 2007, in keeping with a national trend. Even the rituals of death have changed.

To save money, families are increasingly choosing cremation over burial, said Anne Dunbar, co-owner of a funeral home in the Dayton suburb of Springfield. Others are forgoing memorial services for simple graveside ceremonies. Rather than flowers or donations to a charity, 15 to 20 families a year now ask that newspaper obituaries include a plea for contributions toward funeral expenses, she said.

‘The Real Majority’

The challenges facing residents in this Ohio city about 60 miles north of Cincinnati have been emblematic of the issues that have moved centrist swing voters ever since the 1970 publication of “The Real Majority,” a top-selling political analysis. Authors Richard Scammon and Ben Wattenberg created a mythical 47-year-old Dayton housewife to argue that her most pressing concerns had the potential to turn presidential elections.

Today, the most pressing concern for Lisa Meeks, 47, is making herself “more marketable” to potential employers. Meeks, who left her pre-school teaching position because her hours were reduced, now rides the bus to Sinclair Community College in the morning and then boards another bus to get to her new job, working the evening shift as a call-center manager.

“I’m still seeing people struggling,” said Meeks. “You hear people saying, ‘I’ve put in four job applications and I haven’t heard anything back. What am I doing wrong?’”

Though the scale is greater, the workplace shifts that Dayton and the rest of the country are seeing parallel the Bush- era job trends that Obama criticized four years ago, when he said that during President Bill Clinton’s administration “the average American family saw its income go up $7,500 instead of go down $2,000, like it has under George Bush.”

Stopping Downturn

Arriving in the White House during a financial crisis, Obama concentrated on stopping a downturn that many economists feared could turn into a depression. He pressed for an $831 billion stimulus package and an auto-industry bailout. He cut taxes for middle-class workers and backed a health-care overhaul that he said would help middle-income families by keepingmedical costs down and easing access to insurance coverage.

To promote a skilled workforce, the Obama administration has stressed support for education, including aid to local schools to reduce teacher layoffs. It has emphasized infrastructure improvements to promote competitiveness and backed clean-energy technologies that could provide future jobs.

Romney says deficit spending to finance the stimulus, uncertainty generated by the health law, and tighter regulation of the financial industry have deterred businesses from hiring. He backs reductions in government spending and tax cuts, including for wealthy “job creators” to spur investment.

Nothing Obama has accomplished in office so far has stopped what Siu calls “the hollowing out of the middle.”

No Overnight Fix

Just 19 percent of registered voters believe the president’s policies favor the middle class, compared with 25 percent who say they benefit the rich, according to a CBS-New York Times poll conducted Feb. 8-13. Still, asked to choose which candidate would do a better job protecting the middle class, 49 percent say Obama and 39 percent Romney, according to an April 5-8 ABC News-Washington Post poll.

“The economic crisis, deep recession and wage stagnation weren’t created overnight and they won’t be solved overnight,” Amy Brundage, a White House spokeswoman, said in an e-mail. “While we are making progress and the economy is growing and creating jobs, too many middle class families are still struggling to recover from the worst financial crisis of our lifetimes caused by the reckless economic policies of the past.”

Fundamental Forces

Siu and other economists attribute the phenomenon to such fundamental forces as the movement of production offshore to lower-cost countries and technological gains that have made U.S. companies more efficient. Even with 5.2 million fewer Americans employed since January 2008, the U.S. is turning out more goods and services than before the recession, one reason corporate profits hit record levels and wealthy investors prospered.

Robots are replacing factory workers. Airport kiosks are taking the place of ticket agents. Intuit Inc. (INTU)’s TurboTax software performs the work of accountants.

“This is early days. We see the next 10 years as being more disruptive than the last 10,” said Erik Brynjolfsson, director of the MIT Center for Digital Business and co-author of the book “Race Against the Machine.” He cites developments in artificial-intelligence technologies such as those in Google Inc. (GOOG)’s experimental self-driving car, International Business Machine Corp. (IBM)’s Jeopardy-playing Watson computer, and Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s Siri voice-recognition software.

Plant Closing

That disruption is being felt in the Dayton area. Thousands of auto workers and employees at related parts manufacturers and machine-tool makers lost their jobs after General Motors Co. (GM) closed its plant in nearby Moraine two days before Christmas in 2008. Less than six months later, NCR Corp. (NCR), once called National Cash Register Co. and founded in Dayton in 1884, said it would move its headquarters to Duluth, Georgia, taking more than a thousand jobs with it.

Unemployment in the Dayton metropolitan region reached 12.4 percent in January 2010, though the jobless rate had come down to 8.7 percent in February.

Some of the lost manufacturing and office jobs have been replaced by growth in warehouse centers that take advantage of the area’s location near the intersection of two interstate highways, said Richard Stock, director of the Business Research Group at the University of Dayton.

Caterpillar Logistics, a unit of Peoria, Illinois-based Caterpillar Inc. (CAT), and Carter Logistics LLC opened distribution centers in the area. Employees at those and other warehouses are paid “above a living wage, but they’re definitely for the most part lower-middle-income jobs,” Stock said.

High Skills Needed

The other major sources of growth have been in information technology, exemplified byTeradata Corp. (TDC), headquartered in Dayton, and Reed Elsevier Plc (REL)’s Lexis Nexis unit, which has a facility in the area, Stock said

Aeronautics and advanced materials manufacturing have also expanded around Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, home of the Air Force Materiel Command and Air Force Research Laboratory, Stock said. GE Aviation, a unit of Fairfield, Connecticut-based General Electric Co. (GE), broke ground last year on a $51 million research center in Dayton.

“Those jobs are at the very high-skilled end, jobs that require quite a bit of education,” Stock said. “There are not too many jobs in the middle.”

As a result, pay has declined. Real average weekly earnings in the metropolitan area dropped to $800 last year from $817 in 2007, according to U.S. Labor Department data analyzed by Stock.

Sitting on a metal bleacher watching her 7-year-old son at an early evening baseball practice, Mandy Copeland reflected on the expectations she and her husband had six years ago when she finished the coursework that qualified her for her occupational therapy job.

“We had pretty high hopes,” she said. “Now we’re just happy we have jobs.”

Romney Wouldn’t Have Killed Bin Laden…I did it!

Why is it that you have to read a news story with truth about our country from outside our country? Could it be because we have no news outlets in today’s liberal media. I have already told you about Fox News selling itself to the left. Will anyone actually step up and change their vote because this man places himself above the people who protect and serve? He has not served…he has “glorified” himself to his lovers….from the Mail Online…

 

SEALs slam Obama for using them as ‘ammunition’ in bid to take credit for bin Laden killing during election campaign

Serving and former US Navy SEALs have slammed President Barack Obama for taking the credit for killing Osama bin Laden and accused him of using Special Forces operators as ‘ammunition’ for his re-election campaign.

The SEALs spoke out to MailOnline after the Obama campaign released an ad entitled ‘One Chance’.

In it President Bill Clinton is featured saying that Mr Obama took ‘the harder and the more honourable path’ in ordering that bin Laden be killed. The words ‘Which path would Mitt Romney have taken?’ are then displayed.

Besides the ad, the White House is marking the first anniversary of the SEAL Team Six raid that killed bin Laden inside his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan with a series of briefings and an NBC interview in the Situation Room designed to highlight the ‘gutsy call’ made by the President.

 

Taking credit: President Obama has used bin Laden’s death as a campaign tool

Mr Obama used a news conference today to trumpet his personal role and imply that his Republican opponent Mr Romney, who in 2008 expressed reservations about the wisdom of sending troops into Pakistan, would have let bin Laden live.

‘I said that I’d go after bin Laden if we had a clear shot at him, and I did,’ Mr Obama said. ‘If there are others who have said one thing and now suggest they’d do something else, then I’d go ahead and let them explain it.’

Ryan Zinke, a former Commander in the US Navy who spent 23 years as a SEAL and led a SEAL Team 6 assault unit, said: ‘The decision was a no brainer. I applaud him for making it but I would not overly pat myself on the back for making the right call.

‘I think every president would have done the same. He is justified in saying it was his decision but the preparation, the sacrifice – it was a broader team effort.’

Mr Zinke, who is now a Republican state senator in Montana, added that MR Obama was exploiting bin Laden’s death for his re-election bid. ‘The President and his administration are positioning him as a war president using the SEALs as ammunition. It was predictable.’

 

Target: Bin Laden, pictured in his compound in Pakistan, was killed a year ago

 

Mission: Senior figures gathered to watch Navy SEALs invade the compound

Mr Obama has faced criticism even from allies about his decision to make a campaign ad about the bin Laden raid. Arianna Huffington, an outspoken liberal who runs the left-leaning Huffington Post website, roundly condemned it.

She told CBS: ‘We should celebrate the fact that they did such a great job. It’s one thing to have an NBC special from the Situation Room… all that to me is perfectly legitimate, but to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do.’

Campaigning in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Mr Romney responded to a shouted question by a reporter by saying: ‘Even Jimmy Carter would have given that order.’

A serving SEAL Team member said: ‘Obama wasn’t in the field, at risk, carrying a gun. As president, at every turn he should be thanking the guys who put their lives on the line to do this. He does so in his official speeches because he speechwriters are smart.

‘But the more he tries to take the credit for it, the more the ground operators are saying, “Come on, man!” It really didn’t matter who was president. At the end of the day, they were going to go.’

Chris Kyle, a former SEAL sniper with 160 confirmed and another 95 unconfirmed kills to his credit, said: ‘The operation itself was great and the nation felt immense pride. It was great that we did it. 

‘But bin Laden was just a figurehead. The war on terror continues. Taking him out didn’t really change anything as far as the war on terror is concerned and using it as a political attack is a cheap shot. 

‘In years to come there is going to be information that will come out that Obama was not the man who made the call. He can say he did and the people who really know what happened are inside the Pentagon, are in the military and the military isn’t allowed to speak out against the commander- in-chief so his secret is safe.’

 

Rival: Mr Obama has questioned whether Mitt Romney would have done the same

Senior military figures have said that Admiral William McRaven, a former SEAL who was then head of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) made the decision to take bin Laden out. Tactical decisions were delegated even further down the chain of command. 

Mr Kyle added: ‘He’s trying to say that Romney wouldn’t have made the same call? Anyone who is patriotic to this country would have made that exact call, Democrat or Republican. Obama is taking more credit than he is due but it’s going to get him some pretty good mileage.’

A former intelligence official who was serving in the US government when bin Laden was killed said that the Obama administration knew about the al-Qaeda leader’s whereabouts in October 2010 but delayed taking action and risked letting him escape.

‘In the end, Obama was forced to make a decision and do it. He knew that if he didn’t do it the political risks in not taking action were huge. Mitt Romney would have made the call but he would have made it earlier – as would George W. Bush.’

Brandon Webb, a former SEAL who spent 13 years on active duty and served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said: ‘Bush should get partial credit for putting the system in place.

‘Obama inherited a very robust package with regards to special ops and the intelligence community. But Obama deserves credit because he got bin Laden – you can’t take that away from him. 

‘My friends that work in Special Operations Command (SOCOM) that have been on video teleconferences with Obama on these kill or capture situations say that Obama has no issue whatsoever with making decisions and typically it’s kill. He’s hitting the kill button every time. I have a lot of respect for him for that.’

But he said that many SEALs were dismayed about the amount of publicity the Obama administration had generated about SEAL Team Six, the very existence of which is highly classified.

‘The majority of the SEALs I know are really proud of the operation but it does become “OK, enough is enough – we’re ready to get back to work and step out of the limelight.” They don’t want to be continuously paraded around a global audience like a show dog.

‘Obama has a very good relationship with the Special Operations community at large, especially the SEALs, and it’s nice to see. We had the same relationship with George W. Bush when he was president.’

It was ‘stretching a little much’ for Mr Obama to suggest only he would have made the decision. ‘I personally I don’t think Romney would have any problem making tough decisions. He got a very accomplished record of making decision as a business professional. 

‘He may not have charisma but he clearly has leadership skills. I don’t think he’d have any problem taking that decision.’

Clint Bruce, who gave up the chance of an NFL career to serve as a SEAL officer before retiring as a lieutenant after nine years, said: ‘We were extremely surprised and discouraged by the publicity because it compromises the ability of those guys to operate.

‘It’s a waste of time to speculate about who would and wouldn’t have made that decision. It was a symphony of opportunity and intelligence that allowed this administration to give the green light. We want to acknowledge that they made that decision.

‘Politicians should let the public know where they stand on national security but not in the play-by-play, detailed way that has been done recently. The intricacies of national security should not become part of stump speeches.’

Obama Stepping on His Own Foot..

No one can help you screw up like yourself when you’re on a roll. This one is from Charles Hurt of the Washington Post, and it’s spot on…

 

The past seven brutal days will go down as one of the worst weeks in history for a sitting president. It certainly has been, without any doubt, the worst week yet for President Obama.

Somehow, Mr. Obama managed to embarrass himself abroad, humiliate himself here at home, see his credentials for being elected so severely undermined that it raises startling questions about whether he should have been elected in the first place — let alone be re-elected later this year.

Consider:

• Last Friday, Mr. Obama wandered into the killing of Trayvon Martin. Aided by his ignorance of the situation, knee-jerk prejudices and tendency toward racial profiling, Mr. Obama played a heavy hand in elevating a tragic situation in which a teenager was killed into a full-blown hot race fight.

Americans, he admonished, need to do some “soul-searching.” And then, utterly inexplicably, he veered off into this bizarre tangent about how he and the poor dead kid look so much alike they could be father and son. It was election-year race-pandering gone horribly wrong.

• By the start of this week, Mr. Obama had fled town and was racing to the other side of the planet just as the Supreme Court was taking up the potentially-embarrassing matter of Obamacare. While in South Korea he was caught on a hidden mic negotiating with the president of our longest-standing rival on how to sell America and her allies down the river once he gets past the next election.

• Meanwhile, back at home, the Supreme Court took up the single most important achievement of Mr. Obama’s presidency and, boy, was it embarrassing. The great constitutional law professor, it turns out, may not quite be the wizard he told us he was.

By most accounts, Mr. Obama and his stuttering lawyers were all but laughed out of the courthouse. They were even stumbling over softball questions lobbed by Mr. Obama’s own hand-picked justices.

• Mr. Obama closed his week pulling off a nearly unimaginable feat: He managed to totally and completely unify the nastily-fighting Democrats and Republicans in Congress. Late Wednesday night, they unanimously voted — 414 to zip — to reject the budget Mr. Obama had presented, leaving him not even a thin lily’s blade to hide behind.

So, in one week, Mr. Obama got caught whispering promises to our enemy, incited a race war, raised serious questions about his understanding of the Constitution, and then got smacked down over his proposed budget that was so wildly reckless that even Democrats in Congress could not support it.

It was as if you lumped Hurricane Katrina and the Abu Ghraib abuses into one week for George W. Bush. And added on top of that the time he oddly groped German Chancellor Angela Merkel and got caught cursing on a hot mic.

Even then, it wouldn’t be as bad as Mr. Obama’s week. You would probably also have to toss in the time Mr. Bush’s father threw up into the lap of Japan’s prime minister. Only then might we be approaching how bad a week it was for Mr. Obama.

Not that you will see any trace of embarrassment in the face of Mr. Obama. He has mastered the high political art of shamelessness, wearing it smugly and cockily. Kind of like a hoodie.

White on Black, Black on White?

Normally, I try to leave racial stories alone, but this time the president tagged it…”if I had a son, he’d be like Trayvon”. Well, take a look. The story may not be what it seems, plus, why does this story get the national attention it has? Why is it that the president called his mother and made that kind of statement? The story is a little different, according to snopes, nevertheless, it is a true story, but the headlines barely got out of the mid-South in 2007. Where was Barack Obama, and why didn’t he call the parents of these innocent children? It would have been good, since he was campaigning for “change”. It’s hard not to see which side his bread is buttered on, maybe he should have called them up for a beer summit. I will, however post my friend Carl’s email for asking the question that prompted this post. While I want to be fair, I will post the link for snopes. The story changes a little, and there is an attempt at justifying it at the end with OJ trial. Even snopes doesn’t get this one. These are both racially motivated, you just have to question which is worse…

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/newsom.asp

 

Recently we’ve been bombarded with hourly rants about the heinous, RACIST nature of the incident in Florida where a neighborhood vigilante allegedly “chased down, confronted and murdered” a young black man who was “simply going to the store for snacks.” I don’t know if the allegations are true or not, and I trust the appropriate authorities in Florida will sort it out.

However, the media coverage given to this alleged crime is simply over the top, in my estimation. White (and is it just me? – I think the shooter looks very hispanic) on black violence provokes terrific response from the black community, aided, abetted, encouraged and inflamed by the national media to such an extent that riots and black vigilantism is not only a strong possibility, but a near certainty if the shooter isn’t convicted and executed forthwith.

I want to know where the balance is. Why isn’t black on white crime – especially heinous crime – given the same attention by the national media? They seem to simply note and accept terrible crime perpetrated by black thugs against white victims as simply ho-hum normal. “Move along folks, nothing to see here…” Exactly what should white America take away from that attitude by the national media? Aren’t the lives of innocent white people as important as those of innocent black people? Really… ???

We see instances of wilding against white female joggers by gangs of black thugs and nothing much is said about it on national media. We see horrific, murderous crime against innocent white people by black thugs and nothing much is said about it on national media. Evidently white lives and white dignity are not as important as black lives and dignity to the mainstream national media. Something is very wrong with that picture. Balance is simply not there.

A few years ago, a particularly heinous crime was carried out against two innocent white kids by five black thugs in Knoxville, Tennessee, resulting in the white kids’ prolonged, agonizing and humiliating deaths. They were tortured over a period of four days before they were “allowed” to finally die. They were both raped repeatedly. He had his penis removed while still alive, and she was forced to drink caustic liquids – bleach – to mask the evidence of sexual assault, then partially dismembered while still alive. I expect death must have come as a relief to those two innocents.

It doesn’t get much more heinous than that. But very few people in the country knew about that crime when it happened and it’s nearly forgotten now. It’s mostly well known in the Knoxville area only. The national media didn’t give it more than momentary lip service and it was old news in a hurry. How is that balanced against the hourly rant for Zimmerman’s blood in Florida these days, before the guy is even charged. The New Black Panthers, with a national media blessing, even has a bounty out for Zimmerman’s head.

Where is the balance?? We certainly did NOT see white people (except the Nazis) demonstrating in the street for these black thugs’ blood in Knoxville – and certainly not anywhere else in the country. But then, the national media didn’t report hourly on the crime either. The must not have thought it very newsworthy. They pretty much ignored it because it was a black on white atrocity, not the other way round..

And They Said Sarah Palin wasn’t Prepared…

I don’t know why people can’t understand just how little this man knows and he is president of the United States. He may well have an education, and is able to manipulate people and the system, but to admit that he didn’t realize how North Korea operated is typical of how he has governed the last 3 years. It’s important that this country has a leader that understands he isn’t the emperor of the world, and that he isn’t the center of everything. His socialist thinking has gotten us in a bad place, his leadership has weakened us in the eyes of the world, and his abuse of the law has this nation set back years in productivity. No? Where is production, technology and manufacturing coming from? Look at the label when you buy that cheap plastic toy and food in the superstore…see where they’re buying from and what you perpetuate when you buy it. It’s time we think, act and do like Americans and take this country back.

Obama’s disbelief after staring into N. Korea

By Stephen Collinson 

After squinting through binoculars into a nation frozen in time, US President Barack Obama reeled off a contempt-laden and startlingly frank indictment of North Korea.

The Stalinist remnant of the Cold War was, in Obama’s eyes, nothing but a nation which cannot make “anything of any use”, “doesn’t work”, and even its vaunted weapons exports were hardly state of the art.

“It is like you are in a time warp,” Obama said Sunday, after he toured a rocky border post in the demilitarised buffer zone that has split the Korean peninsular for longer than he has been alive.

“It is like you are looking across 50 years into a country that has missed 40 years or 50 years of progress,” Obama marvelled later, after taking a helicopter back to teeming, prosperous Seoul, just 25 miles (40 kilometres) away.

Obama, who is locked in his first showdown with the North’s new leader Kim Jong-Un over a planned rocket launch, stood behind a bullet proof screen four inches thick and surveyed rocky hills and wooded slopes in North Korea.

He gazed over a windswept no man’s land between the two nations, split by a brutal Cold War conflict six decades ago, after his armoured SUV took a road through a minefield and tank traps.

Then he turned to his left, and looked out across bare fields to a huge North Korean flag — flying at half-mast to remember late leader Kim Jong-Il, who died in December leaving his youthful and untested son in charge.

Behind the flag were simple low military buildings, and in the distance a town could just be picked out in the haze, but there was no sign of North Koreans who live hungry, isolated and cut off from the 21st Century.

Wearing a brown leather jacket and beige slacks, Obama stood in an open bunker and chatted with senior US and South Korean officers, just as Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush did on trips during their presidencies.

Earlier, he had told some of the 28,500 US troops stationed inSouth Korea they were performing honoured service at “freedom’s frontier” and brought news of annual college basketball playoffs from home.

The ramparts of Observation Point Ouellette, a UN-commanded post where he stood, is the closest point to the demarcation line in the 250-kilometre (160-mile) long and 4-km (1.6-m) wide Demilitarised Zone.

Later, Obama shared his observations with reporters as he held a joint press conference with South Korea’s President Lee Myung-Bak, on the eve of a major nuclear summit in Seoul.

And he seemed unable to process the logic of three generations of leaders who had kept their people imprisoned, impoverished and in thrall to successive personality cults.

“If a country can’t feed its people effectively, if it can’t make anything of any use to anybody, if it has no exports other than weapons and even those aren’t ones that in any way would be considered state of the art.

“If it can’t deliver on any indicators of well-being… for its people… then you’d think you’d want to try something different,” Obama said in a highly undiplomatic and unusually frank public appearance.

“There are certain things that just don’t work and what they are doing doesn’t work.”

Well, At Least Obama Will Make History….

Thanks Carl for a great article. I’m putting his comments in blue…to help set the stage.

You’re going to see this all over the internet mis-ascribed as having been published in the Washington Post.  It wasn’t.  It was presented in “The American Thinker,” a conservative political blog.  This is an opinion piece by a very respected political analyst, but he isn’t a hack writer for a rag like the Washington Post or the NY Times.  He has much more integrity than the run of the mill pundits on either of those liberal spewers of political sewage.

I can only surmise why someone would deliberately mis-ascribe the origin of a great opinion piece like this.  Probably was a liberal deliberately trying to marginalize, discredit or kill this with misinformation…

Cashu

Obama: The Affirmative Action President

by Matt Patterson

August 18, 2011

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”) ; and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:

To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.

Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass — held to a lower standard — because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues:

And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon — affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.

Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin — that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.

True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?

In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people — conservatives included — ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all.Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth — it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

20% Of Republicans favor Obama????

If this is a continuing trend, it’s very scary, and it shows just how fickle people are about the Constitution and American freedom. Folks, we need to get to work talking to people. From WND…

WASHINGTON – For critics of Barack Obama, 2012 has been portrayed as a do-or-die year for the country – an election that will determine whether America stays on the road to European-style socialism or veers right to reclaim its positions as the most vibrant economy in the world and the home of individual liberty.

But the 2012 election is looking more like a replay of 2008 than a do-over.

The latest WND/Wenzel Poll shows none of the current crop of Republican presidential candidates has solidified the base of the party, with one in five GOP voters leaning toward support of Obama in November.

The results are from the public-opinion research and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies. The poll was conducted Feb. 1-3, 2012, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.44 percentage points.

“The improvement in Obama’s prospects compared to the four remaining Republican challengers stems largely from two factors,” suggests pollster Fritz Wenzel. “First, Obama has largely avoided the political limelight while the GOP candidates savage each other with increasing intensity. Second, a smattering of evidence indicates that the economy is getting a little better, which helps the White House in the eyes of the voters. Secondly, the bloody fight for the Republican presidential nomination – by most estimations the nastiest GOP fight in memory – has really hurt the images of the challengers in the eyes of both Republicans and, especially, independent voters. For Republicans, each candidate carries with them now some taint that cannot be ignored.”

In every case except the match-up against Ron Paul, more than 20 percent of Republican voters said they are more likely to support Obama than the Republican challenger. And Ron Paul is close, as 19 percent of Republicans said they are more likely to support Obama than Paul.

Making the situation more bleak for opponents of Obama, independent voters are apparently quite put off with the Republican nomination fight. While polls last fall showed them leaning Republican by roughly a two-to-one margin, they are now either split evenly or favoring Obama.

“What must be particularly alarming to every Republican campaign regarding this nasty fight is that, even among those who say they think the nation is heading in the wrong direction, Obama still wins at least 20 percent support in head-to-head match-ups against the four remaining Republicans, and among those who said they were unsure about the overall direction of the nation, Obama wins by overwhelming percentages,” observes Wenzel.

Obama also has made tremendous inroads on enemy territory against each of the four Republicans, winning roughly 20 percent support among conservatives and even those who consider themselves to be very conservative. And, even against Mitt Romney, considered by many to be the most moderate of the GOP bunch, Obama defeats him by a large margin among moderate voters.

“Obama has masterfully positioned himself to lower expectations among the electorate in terms of economic progress, and has sat idly by while Republicans – mostly Romney and Newt Gingrich – destroy each other’s reputations,” said Wenzel. “While the Obama-Clinton nomination battle lasted well into the spring four years ago, it never got as nasty as this year’s fight between Romney and Gingrich, which now appears to be very personal in nature. Obama was able to recover nicely by the time the general election campaign rolled around. If either Romney or Gingrich wins the nomination – and that is a long way from being determined – it is doubtful either will recover to full strength by the fall campaign. This poll indicates that it is more the negativity of the Republican nomination fight and less the small improvement in the economy that has changed the national political landscape.”

Barack Obama

It does help Obama that the recent upbeat economic news appears to have buoyed spirit nationwide. One third of respondents – 34 percent — said Obama has exceeded expectations during his first term in office, while another 20 percent said he has performed as expected. Less than half – 47 percent – said he has fallen short of their expectations for him as president.

Among independents, 60 percent said Obama has either met or exceeded expectations. Among political moderates, 52 percent said the same thing.

Obama would defeat all of the four Republicans if the election were held today, but Ron Paul fares the best against the incumbent. Obama leads Paul, 44 percent to 40 percent, with 16 percent undecided.

“This is likely a reflection of discontent over Obama’s handling of the economy and, in particular, his outsized appetite for deficit spending,” observed Wenzel. “Paul has far and away offered the clearest and most serious plan to cut federal spending, and it appears to be recognized by these survey respondents.”

Romney also is within single digits of Obama, currently trailing, 48 percent to 41 percent. Obama leads both Gingrich and Rick Santorum Santorum by double-digits. Obama leads Gingrich, 50 percent to 36 percent, and Santorum, 49 percent to 34 percent.

Nearly one-quarter of Republicans abandon both Gingrich and Santorum, and Obama leads both men by big margins among independent voters.

See detailed results of survey questions:

Compared to how you expected him to perform as president back when he first was elected, would you say that he has exceeded your expectations or not?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Newt Gingrich, for whom would you vote?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney, for whom would you vote?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Ron Paul, for whom would you vote?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Rick Santorum, for whom would you vote?

If the election for president was today, would you vote for Democrat Barack Obama, would you consider voting for someone new, or would you definitely vote for someone new?

The “Bin Laden” Endorsement of Obama?

Found this one on the examiner.com…made the hair on the back of my neck stand. It should yours too. This country needs a change in government from the ground up to expunge the corruption that Washington, DC is. Think very seriously about sending Obama or someone who will not change the status quo of present day Washington. Your legacy is worth a lot more.

The Muslim Brotherhood President:

Prior to his election in 2008 and even after his inauguration, President Obama has faced rumor, innuendo and attempts to discover his roots, his past, that he has carefully hidden. No one may ever know whether B. Hussein Obama is eligible to be President, but what the people of America deserve to know is whether or not he was put into office for a purpose and what that purpose is. Never mind the different birth certificates released by Obama, ignore the subterfuge surrounding his not releasing his college transcripts and that no one really remembers him at Columbia University, there is only one way to put those issues to rest and B. Hussein Obama is not willing to produce the documents to do so. All of this leaves Americans wondering, at least until American Idol comes on.

Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Hawaii. There is considerable discussion as to whether “Hawaii” is in reference to the fiftieth state, or to a moment in Kenya when someone held him up and said, “We shall call him Barack and we shall call this place Hawaii”. Either way, he was named Barack Hussein Obama II, after his father. Well, according to his mother. After all, only our mothers truly know who our fathers are. Young Barack, eventually became an adult, as most people do, who manage to get through childhood and not stick a fork in an electrical outlet or anger their fathers such that they die in a tragic hunting accident (But, this is not about my brother, may God bless his soul). During his childhood, his formative years, young Barack became known as Barry (allegedly short for Barack, or in honor of Mr. Manilow), and changed his last name to Soetoro, as he was adopted by his mothers husband of the same last name. It was at this time that Barry enrolled in Occidental College, often referred to as Oxy. After a stint there, that no one knows much about and Barry/Barack, whatever his real name is, left, he found his way to New York City, where he, by his own admittance was homeless and on drugs.

While in New York, young, stoned and with no place else to go, Barry decided that hanging out with a young Pakistani made sense. Barry and this Pakistani traveled to Indonesia to visit some of Barry’s family and from there, he and his male traveling companion, went on to Pakistan. Only Barry Soetoro knows what went on in Pakistan during that visit. However, anonymous sources, within and outside of the military have shared and shed light upon the transformation of Barry Soetoro, homeless drug addict, alleged homosexual and aimless college dropout, to Barackah Hussein Obama, world traveler and now President of the United States of America.

In 2005, the US Military became aware of certain allegations regarding Barack Hussein Obama. An al-Qaeda operative disclosed to an operator within the Military that in 2008 a man named Barackah Obama would be made President of the United States of America. When pressed further, the Jihadist stated that the title “Barackah” and all the power and influence that goes with it, was given to an American, by Bin Laden himself. In 1981 both Osama Bin Laden and Barry Soetoro were in Pakistan. Who vacations in Pakistan aside from a young man who left America as Barry Soetoro and returns Barack Hussein Obama? It isn’t like Pakistan is a vacation hotspot, face it, dirt and outdoor plumbing can be found in much more attractive parts of the globe and without all the Muslims. When the reports were written and moved along to Counterintelligence, they “went straight in the garbage can” said an anonymous source.

In 2005, the US Military Counterintelligence unit had information about a Barackah Obama, who was anointed with the title “Barackah” by America’s number one most sought terrorist and the reports ended up in the trash. The tossing aside of this information occurred well after the Philadelphia Meeting of the Muslim Brotherhood, in America, long after the horrors of September 11th, 2001 and long after the November 2002 letter, from Osama Bin Laden, to the American people and no one in the Counterintelligence Unit thought that something such as this warranted looking into? After all, it is common knowledge (which isn’t so common any more) that the Crusades, all three, were defensive measures, to push Islam back out of Europe, after its encroachment, that the basic tenets of Islam are global domination, wherein all non-Muslims have either converted to Islam, become slaves and pay the poll tax, or are killed and that under Islamic law, Sharia Law, Osama Bin Laden had to offer Americans the chance to willingly convert to Islam and had, in his 2002 letter to America. Counterintelligence personnel were armed with all of this information, or should have been (Did they not hear of this thing called Google, which makes finding things on the internets easier?), and they knew Osama Bin Laden was really named Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden and was a strict Wahhabi Muslim, yet they did nothing.

America now has Barack Hussein Obama as President, a man who was bestowed the title and blessings of “Barackah” upon him, by Osama Bin Laden, in Pakistan, in 1981 and not only is nothing being done about it currently, it could have been prevented. Americans, certainly not the media, have wondered aloud, why is it that B. Hussein Obama has fought releasing his records, his transcripts, how he funded a trip to Indonesia and Pakistan when he was destitute, how he qualified to get into Columbia University, much less Harvard Law School and then have a meteoric rise through the Senate, to be the leader of the greatest nation on earth and now it is known why Barackah has covered his tracks so well during the three years he has spent destroying America. Call it a conspiracy, call it a plot, call it anything you like, but the United States of America is now in a full blown Constitutional crisis and it is time Congress did something about it.

Bill Turner

Pastor/Journalist

First American Patriot Church Radio

Examiner.com

Obama Has No Clue on Jobs

Id-i-ot….he didn’t listen…she said he had been hunting for two years. So is he going to personally find everyone a job? To be supposedly so smart, he’s brilliantly stupid. He doesn’t know what’s happening in this county.

During his Google+ hangout Pres. Obama tells a woman that her husband shouldn’t be unemployed from the growth he has seen in the economy. Obama said he finds it “interesting” because he is getting “the word” that someone in her husband’s job field “should be able to find something right away.”

Obama offered to do something if she would just send him her husband’s resume.

The woman wants to know why Obama is extending visas for foreigners when there is tons of demand for American jobs by Americans.

“I don’t know what your husband’s speciality [is], but I can tell you that there is a huge demand around the country for engineers,” Obama told the woman.

“I understand that,” she responded. “But how am — given the list that you’re getting, I mean we’re not getting that. You said in the State of the Union address for business leaders to ask what can they do to bring jobs back to America

During the back and forth between Obama and the wife of an unemployed engineer, Obama asked for his resume.

See video here: Obama Google Conference