Tag Archives: Republicans

by | March 4, 2013 · 12:59 pm

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 38

OBAMA’S LEGACY

The president has almost four years left to serve.  It is presumptive to judge his legacy at this point. But it is not too early to look at the last four years and discuss what he may want his legacy to be. After all, aren’t presidential or anyone’s legacies derived more from results rather than words?

English: President Obama in Tucson: "The ...

English: President Obama in Tucson: “The Forces that Divide Us are Not as Strong as Those that Unite Us” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I can not score the president’s  work on important issues, such as unemployment, energy self-sufficiency, taxation policies, immigration, debt reduction, balance of trade, strategic military, or foreign policies. Or even health care. You see, I believe  none of these issues in themselves are important to President Obama. He gives constant partisan speeches on the issue of the moment. Sometimes on both sides of the issue. But the issue is never the issue. In President Obama’s world issues are the tools used to destroy the opposition. He has total flexibility and even moral authority to use any side of any issue at any time to attack the opposition. How else could any rational person, let alone a sitting President, be openly in favor of  Sequestration, sign it into law, threaten to veto any legislation that tries to change its implementation and blame the Republicans for the projected spending cuts?

Let’s take the immigration issue. Obama’s only interest in immigration is to secure the vast majority of the Hispanic vote for the Progressive Party, formerly called the Democratic Party.  The last thing he wants is for the Republicans and the Democrats to work together to bring about an immigration policy that is good for the Nation, fair for the immigrants and acceptable to both parties. If that happens, how can he use the immigration issue to attack the opposition. Remember when he was first running for President, he clearly told Hispanics that he would bring about immigration reform as his first legislative effort. But, no, socializing the health industry was a more important use of the issues available to him. The Hispanics could wait. They would vote for him anyway. His analysis was brilliant. The opposition still hasn’t figured out what happened. Except one seventh of the US economy is now under federal government control. Not a bad start when your real program is to transform American into a Socialist (elitist) top down managed economy like Europe or Cuba.

When you can take a issue, such as Debt Reduction, that the vast majority of Americans favor and turn it into a partisan attack  on the Opposition that is a political genius at work. President Obama even has respectable, or formerly respectable Democrats, chanting “there is no spending problem.” Where have they been. I thought every informed American knew we are borrowing forty cents for every dollar we spend. How can that not be a spending problem? Turning to Clint Eastwood‘s talking chair we learn if the rich were just willing to pay a little higher taxes, the debt could be paid off. The truth is if we taxed the rich at 100% it would make very little difference in the national debt.

The only result President Obama and his insiders want for a legacy is, they transformed America into a one party government run by a progressive elite. At this point they are on schedule.

by the author of the Jack Brandon thriller novels.                 http://www.factsandfictions.com

Pages: 1 2

4 Comments

Filed under Alinsky, class warfare, Conservative views, Intelligence & Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | February 26, 2013 · 1:49 pm

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 37

OBAMA‘S SEQUESTRATION

Sequestration is as dumb as GOING OVER THE CLIFF. Can you even remember what that was about? We’re talking about 2% of the annual budget. Of course we don’t have a budget even though an annual budget is required by law. So sequestration is 2% of what the president might spend. I’m sure he will try to exceed his past record of overspending one trillion plus. Two percent wouldn’t even be noticed in the final accounting. Government spending will still be more this year than last. How is that for fiscal discipline? Oh, don’t overlook that the 2% is only to be applied to discretionary spending. Mandatory spending where we really spend money won’t be touched. We will still spend one trillion plus more

English: President Barack Obama signs the Budg...

English: President Barack Obama signs the Budget Control Act of 2011 in the Oval Office, Aug. 2, 2011. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

than we take in. Taxing all the rich people in America at the 100% rate will not pay down our $17 trillion debt so you could notice the difference. Only drastic spending cuts, inflation and growth can make real inroads on our national debt. What combination appeals to you?

Where did sequestration come from? It seems very clear that this is one of those Alinsky issues where the issue is never the issue. How else can you explain President Obama being on  both sides of sequestration? The idea, according to the Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance committee, came from President Obama. Some White House staffers said the same thing when the White House backed sequestration. Author Robert Woodward also reports the idea came from the president. It was the president who used sequestration to force a Republican House to come up with a balanced plan.  In Obama terminology  debt reduction  is done through revenue (disguised word for taxes) and investment (another disguise for increased government spending). There would also be token cuts in the rate  government spending increases. Isn’t it strange the Congressional Super Committee failed to reach agreement? Without further deep cuts in federal spending, sequestration cuts will have a marginal effect.

When the failure of the super committee was apparent, President Obama said he would veto any bill to change sequestration. Now when sequestration is imminent, it is now longer the president’s child. He claims it was a Republican idea. It is now an issue to be used to blame the hapless Republicans, who are outgunned when it comes to explaining their views with a message they don’t have. The really stupid part of sequestration is that it is an across the board cut with no discretion for the executive to cut marginal programs and not vital ones. This is a power President Obama doesn’t want for if sequestration hurts no one, he cannot use it to diminish the opposition party. The far left, where Obama lives, is salivating at the chance to cut the defense budget. In the grand scheme of deficit reduction, sequestration is much ado about nothing. Watch the president’s actions. Pay no attention to his words. Like the weather, if you don’t like them just wait a few days.

By the author of the Jack Brandon thriller series.  www.factsandfictions.com

Related articles

2 Comments

Filed under Alinsky, Conservative views, fiscal cliff, Intelligence & Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | February 19, 2013 · 4:09 pm

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 36

PLAYING THE ISSUES

If you have been following my recent blogs, you know I believe President Obama is following the guidance of Saul Alinsky, a brilliant radical tactician. The core of Alinky’s teaching is that “the issue is never the issue.” The only goal is the destruction of the existing order and replacing it with the Progressive (socialist/communist) blueprint for a new and better world where everyone gets a fair shot and everyone pays their fair share. Under this political social philosophy, even a discussion of ends justifying the means is meaningless. If you are striving for power, the means are always morally justified. This strategical approach gives anyone using it incredible flexibility. They can change sides at any time it appears advantageous. The first step in creating a new world is to destroy the current order.

English: Barack Obama delivering his electoral...

English: Barack Obama delivering his electoral victory speech on Election Night ´08, in Grant Park, Chicago. (Wikipedia)

Now for some complexity. All issues are not the same and cannot be treated the same by the Progressives. For our purposes, I will put issues into three categories: The first category is issues that have been with us for several decades. Under this category live issues such as immigration, states rights, taxation, gun control, energy development, abortion, and solvency of our social programs. The second category are those that have been created recently. Here, I put climate control, sequestration, cabinet appointments, the role and size of the federal government, right to work issues, and government spending. Granted, some of these issues could fit under one of the two other categories. The third category contains those issues that appear to be spontaneous such as Benghazi, Syria, Muslim radicalism, international debt problems, unemployment, and job creation.

The flexibility Alinsky believers have somewhat depends on what category the issue is in. Take immigration as an issue. Obama cannot come out against immigration and he doesn’t have to put forward an effective bi-partisan solution. In fact he will not. Published plans, budgets, position papers are not part of Alinsky tactics as they limit changing sides or conditions abruptly. Instead, the immigration issue will be used to damage the Republican Party, the only party that stands in the way of the establishment of a Progressive dictatorship. This president does not want the Democrats and Republicans to come together to pass bipartisan immigration legislation. Instead, he will present obstacles and deal killers.

Since this is a blog and not a book, I’ll deal in this piece with only a few of the many possible issues. Energy policy is a perfect issue. Does any sane person believe America can be energy self-sufficient without the primary use of fossil fuels for several more decades? Yes. A constant search for alternative power sources is good as long as we are focused on creating an energy program in America that creates thousands of jobs and energy self-sufficiency. Windmills, algae, corn, solar panels just are not economically viable nor credible. How can any president not welcome the Canadian pipeline? It is a no-brainer unless your real objective is to create chaos, high unemployment, angry union workers, and blow off a good neighbor. Only Alinksy followers can applaud Obama’s lethargic non-action. Don’t fall for the Progressives blaming the increasing cost of gasoline on Big Oil. They aren’t boy scouts but the price goes up when the Federal Reserve, which is a private company, prints obscene billions of dollars each month that weaken the dollar. Arabs sell oil for dollars. The weaker the dollar, the more dollars it takes to buy a barrel of oil. Keep in mind few transformations ever occur in a country with an sound  economy, near full employment, and a promising future.

One last issue, Benghazi. Could the president have anticipated this crisis? No. But his staff and Cabinet should have. This issue just popped up. The president didn’t know what to do. So he did nothing. Well, he did create confusion. To have this shameful crisis be centered around who created what “talking points” is a mark of Beltway mentally. Fix the blame. Not the problem. Not even Alinsky or Axelrod would have recommended he not call  the Pentagon for action or fail to convene his National Security Council, or travel the next day to Las Vegas to attend a fundraiser, or throw Susan Rice under the bus, or the bumbling concealment of information. In keeping with Obama-type transparency he has even kept the names and whereabouts of the Benghazi survivors secret, in spite of requests from Congress. On the Benghazi issue, the president  damaged himself as well as the nation. Using every issue as a means to attack your opposition often diminishes all of us. Just ask the surviving family members what they think about the issue is never the issue as a principle for presidential leadership.

By the author of the Jack Brandon thriller series.      www.factsandfictions.com

Related articles

3 Comments

Filed under Alexrod, Alinsky, Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, General, global warming, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, political solutions, Progressives

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | February 13, 2013 · 7:30 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 34

WHY YOU CAN’T BELIEVE

THE STATE OF THE UNION IS NOT GOOD.  The Obama presidency is a clear danger to the American way of life. Now, be honest, you don’t believe his administration is dangerous. You don’t believe because every politician you have ever known  cared about issues. They ran on how they would handle the issues facing their voters. You and the media evaluated those office holders on how well they handled the issues important to you. You may not have liked their methods or the exact results, but they talked about your issues and worked on solutions.

President Barack Obama speaks with White House...

President Barack Obama speaks with White House Senior Advisor David Axelrod in the staff work room April 4, 2009, in Strasbourg, France. (Wikipedia)

Western thought is based on working on the parts or pieces of things and then bringing them together. Republicans and Democrats believe putting America back to work requires serious work  on a tax overhaul, reduced and prioritized spending, resource development, size of government, a retrained workforce, and increased exports to come together.  Granted, there is plenty of room here for disagreement, but that is our system and a solution will emerge. That is what we are used to. It’s how and why we chose our candidates. We expect work on the issues, vigorous debates, and a workable solutions.

We have elected a president who does not work to solve issues or to reach agreement through compromise. He uses issues to achieve one end, the transformation or socialization of America. Issues are the tools he uses to destroy opposition, in this case the Republican party, Congress, Wall Street, Big Oil, and the courts. He will and has taken shifting sides on most all issues according to his faithful following of the Alinsky plan, “The issue is never the issue.” The only issue for President Obama and his progressive left following is the acquisition of total power, a one-party political system with only ceremonial roles for Congress, the states, and the courts. Any means to achieve socialism in America he believes is justified. Lying, misrepresentation, switching sides, demonizing the opposition, and the constant use of class warfare rhetoric are there for you to see. But you must be willing to look. For you will not see any detailed proposals or plans or budgets from the Obama presidency. Written plans are a no-no. They make it too easy for the opposition to point out shifting positions, falsehoods, and deceptions. Even the media would jump on inconsistent or shifting plans. So no detailed written plans. Instead, an in-your-face series of speeches and sham press conferences. Even the State of the Union report to the nation is childish in its petulance finger pointing at everyone but the president. The Supreme Leader does not recognize his own mistakes.

Obama’s State of the Union address covered a number of issues he and his co-president, David Axelrod, plan to use to destroy Congress and the Republican Party. Don’t expect any real moves to solve issues. Take immigration: It is to most Americans a very important issue. Hispanics, how do you feel being pushed aside for Obamacare?  As long as you vote for him, he doesn’t care if you are unhappy. Remember the “issue is not the issue.” Immigration is a tool to use in the socialization of America.   To progressives/socialists, controlling the medical industry is more important than dealing with immigration. We need the border controlled and a path to residency, in many cases citizenship, for the Hispanics now here. We need them. Welcome! Mr. President, where is your leadership?

To President Obama: Immigrants are not people needing help. Just a way to embarrass and demonize the Republicans. He will take care of them after the transformation is completed. Just like the socialists/progressives took care of the people in  Cuba, Russia, China, Iran, and Germany. Do we have an all-of-the-above energy policy? If you think we do, stop drinking Obama kool-aid. What’s wrong with the Canadian pipe line through Nebraska? It would bring lower energy prices, give funds to a friendly nation, and create jobs. The private sector unions are even in favor. No real help here. Only words. It is easier to sell socialism to a jobless hurting population than to a economically thriving nation. Create a national crisis then use it against the opposition.

Another issue, the U.S. military. They are an obstacle to a socialist dictatorship. Weaken them by sending an incompetent former senator, who is anti-military, to manage our security. Why would any president do that? How about the nomination of a politicized former CIA officer to run CIA? Where was this champion of national security when all the monumental leaks of highly classified information occurred? Where was he during the national disgrace of Benghazi and the aftermath? I can’t think of a single issue where President Obama took the lead and solved an important issue. He blames the Republicans. Hell, they don’t even know what’s happening.  Are gun and climate control critical issues?

The issue is never the issue. Apply that principle to every issue of the last four years. Maybe it will help you believe we are in dangerous times.

Related articles

Leave a comment

Filed under Alexrod, Alinsky, centralization, class warfare, Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, political solutions, totalitarianism

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,