Obama Combines the Divisive Tactics of the Nazis and Soviets

 

Obama Combines the Divisive Tactics of the Nazis and Soviets

April 29, 2010

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: And you know, folks, one of the things that really distresses me about all of this is the way Obama is playing this.  He’s actually playing the race card.  He’s doing two things at one time.  The communists around the world always thought that they had to play off the haves versus the have-nots, class warfare.  Hitler and his gang believed you did it on race, you divided people by race.  Obama is doing both.  Obama is playing class warfare and dividing people on the basis of race.  He’s doing them both.  He’s outdoing whatever Hitler and any Soviet commissar ever did, because he’s combining these two things that roil and divide a culture. (impersonating Obama) “Yeah, there’s a point you earn enough money, you have enough.”  BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH:  The Think Progress blog here is a George Soros operation, and they have a post on me today: “Limbaugh suggests Obama is touchy about Arizona law because you can’t produce his own papers.”  Remember when I said that yesterday?  I knew that’d tweak ’em.  I knew that’d tweak ’em.  They quote me as saying, “Papers = Nazi. ‘Your papers, please,’ equals Nazi. That’s why Obama using the term.  I can understand Obama being touchy on the subject of producing your papers.  Maybe he’s afraid somebody’s going to ask him for his,” and then they link to the audio on my website to listen to it.  Then they talk about all the other “false claims,” and Snerdley said during the break, “You know, you’re going to get blowback on this comparison here to Hitler and the Soviets.”  Fine!  Let the blowback come.  What did I say that’s wrong?  What did I say that’s not factually correct?  The Soviets, the communists divided people by class.  That’s how they promoted war and chaos in their culture: Haves versus have-nots.  Obama’s doing that in this country.  Joe the Plumber.  “We wanna spread the wealth around.”  Hitler, as we all know, used race as his divide and conquer technique.  Well, what’s going on now here?  What’s untrue about that?  Did Hitler do that?  Ask the Jewish people and the gypsies. Ask anybody if Hitler did it. Ask anybody if the Soviets did it. Both statements are true.  Are we not being divided by class in this country?  Is that not what this agenda is all about, redistribution?  And Obama is throwing the race card here on this Arizona immigration bill.  So let the blowback come.  I am not afraid of the blowback.  Truth is the truth.  That’s why truth will drive liberals crazy if they listen to this show.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: A couple e-mails say, “Rush, when did Obama play the race card?  What are you talking about?”  What am I talking about?  Over the weekend Obama put out a video urging blacks and Hispanics and women to get reenergized for him.  He did not mention whites — old, female, or young. He only mentioned people of color.  But even he forgot that, he’s out there ripping the law in Arizona, his ripping the governor. Hell, he did it again on Air Force One last night on the way back to Washington, DC, Obama said this to reporters about the new immigration law in Arizona. OBAMA: (plane noise)  What I think is a mistake is when we start having local law enforcement officials in power to stop people on the suspicion that they may be undocumented workers. Because, you know, that carries a great amount of risk, uhhh, that core values that we all, uhhh, care about are breached.  We have to do more though in the context of a comprehensive plan that maintains our status as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. RUSH:  It’s a law.  We are a nation of laws.  You’re the one trampling on laws.  Arizona passed a law because you in Washington are not dealing with the problem, but here’s the thing.  He’s lying. The left is lying when they say, “Local law enforcement officials have the power to stop people on the suspicion that they may be undocumented workers.”  They can’t stop them on that basis!  They have to have committed some other violation that would result in police attention anyway.  I want to know: How does enforcing the law undermine our status as a nation of laws?  Somebody has to explain this to me.  How does enforcing the law “undermine our status as a nation of laws”?  So, anyway, they continue to say that Arizona is no different than a Soviet checkpoint.  “They can stop you just because of the way you look.” That’s not what the Arizona law says.  You must remember: The left, the Democrats, whatever you want to call them, lie, folks.  They lie about veritably everything.

END TRANSCRIPT

Barack Obama, America’s Selective Salary Policeman

Lead Story

Barack Obama, America’s Selective Salary Policeman

By Michelle Malkin  •  April 30, 2010 09:39 AM

Barack Obama, America’s Selective Salary Policeman
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010

President Obama spoke the most revealing and clarifying 10 words of his control-freak administration this week: “I think at some point you have made enough money.” Peddling financial regulatory reform at a rally in Quincy, Ill., Obama then ad-libbed peculiar definitions of what he called the “American way” and the profit motive: “(Y)ou can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.”

Fundamental lesson of Capitalism 101: Governments and bureaucrats don’t make what people want and need. They only get in the way. It is individuals, cooperating peacefully and voluntarily, working together without mandate or central design, who produce the world’s goods and services. They make what people desire and demand for themselves, not what Obama and his imperial overlords ordain that the masses should have.

As usual, Obama’s populist demagoguery is telling in its omissions and selectivity. While he lectures on the morality of salary caps for everyone else, his own cabinet is filled with fabulously wealthy CEOs and statist creatures who have parlayed government employment (a “good” service) into private gain as lobbyists, consultants and advisers (“core responsibilities of the financial system”) and then back again to public stints. Revolving doors have always grown the Beltway economy.

To wit: Austan Goolsbee, head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, is the 15th wealthiest member of the Obama administration, with assets valued at between $1,146,000 to $2,715,000. He also pulled in a University of Chicago salary of $465,000 and additional wages and honoraria worth $93,000, according to the Washingtonian magazine.

What “good” did he provide? The government research fellow and Obama campaign adviser was a champion of extending credit to the un-creditworthy. In a 2007 op-ed for The New York Times, he derided those who called subprime mortgages “irresponsible.” He preferred to describe them as “innovations in the mortgage market” to expand the pool of homebuyers. Now this wrong-headed academic who espoused government policies that fed the housing feeding frenzy is in charge of fixing the loose-credit mess he advocated. This is the “American way”?

After 16 years in Congress, four years in the Clinton administration as budget director and chief of staff, and a lifetime of schmoozing in the halls of power, Obama’s CIA director, Leon Panetta, cashed in big. He’s sitting on up to $4 million in assets. While he has zero experience in intelligence matters, he has extensive experience in parlaying his past political tours of duty into lucrative speaking gigs, consulting fees and stock options. Welcome to Obama-approved entrepreneurship.

By Obama’s definition, first lady Michelle Obama is a model capitalist. Remember: After serving with real estate mogul Valerie Jarrett in Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s administration, Mrs. Obama took a post at the University of Chicago Medical Center, where Jarrett was serving as vice-chair of the medical center’s board of trustees. Mrs. Obama was promoted in 2005 after her husband won his U.S. Senate race with Jarrett’s invaluable aid. As “vice president for community and external affairs” and head of the “business diversity program,” her annual compensation nearly tripled from $122,000 in 2004 to $317,000 in 2005. Even after she went on leave in 2007 to help her husband on the presidential campaign trail, the hospital paid Mrs. Obama $62,709 in 2008, prompting one skeptic to ask: “We know this is Chicago, but isn’t $63,000 quite a lot for a no-show job?”

Jarrett, of course, is now White House senior adviser to the chief spender of other people’s money. And the first lady is now using her new taxpayer-funded position not only to tell folks how they should eat, but also which “good” restaurants and groceries should be built in their neighborhoods.

If there were any doubts left about the Obamas’ ideological commitment to wealth redistribution and a command-and-control economy, those doubts have been thoroughly removed. We have a commander-in-chief who presumes to know when you have earned “enough,” who believes that only those who provide what he deems “good” products and services should “keep on making it,” and who has determined that the role of American entrepreneurs is not to pursue their own self-interest, but to fulfill their “core” responsibility as dutiful growers of the collective economy.

That famous mock-up poster of Obama as the creepy socialist Joker never seemed more apt.

***

I love Scott Johnson’s succinct rejoinder at Power Line: “At some point you have grabbed enough power.”

J D Hauworth for U S Senate Replace RHINO Mccain

Race for the American CurePosted by Keith Sipmann under Advertising , Campaigns & Elections
No Comments 

Obama Sniper Teams Ordered to Rooftops To Quash Radical Tea Party Protest (Video)

by Jim Hoft

UNBELIEVABLE!
On Wednesday Team Obama called in the riot squad to deal with the Quincy Tea Party patriots outside the the Oakley-Lindsey/Quincy Community Center.

Team Obama ordered the riot police to march in and contain the violent tea party protesters.

They didn’t want any violence from these mobsters and radicals.

The police were in full riot gear when they marched in to deal with the protesters.

But, that’s not all.
They also called the riot police to the rooftops to quash the tea party mob.

 

Hat Tip Marvin B. for the rooftop shots.

They were packing heat, just in case the grandmothers started throwing bingo chips at the building.

 

UNREAL…
More video of the tea party riot police here, here and here.

Quincy News has a great shot of one of violent mobsters confronting the riot police.
And, more photos here.

UPDATE: Here’s video of the Obama police state presence at the tea party rally in Quincy.
It is shocking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4Pk0Jygu4I&feature=player_embedded

Better check their bags for bingo chips.

White House seeks to soften Iran sanctions

April 30th, 2010

By Eli Lake, Washington Times

 Obama pushes soft sanctions

The Obama administration is pressing Congress to provide an exemption from Iran sanctions to companies based in “cooperating countries,” a move that likely would exempt Chinese and Russian concerns from penalties meant to discourage investment in Iran.

The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act is in a House-Senate conference committee and is expected to reach President Obama’s desk by Memorial Day.

“It’s incredible the administration is asking for exemptions, under the table and winking and nodding, before the legislation is signed into law,” Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida Republican and a conference committee member, said in an interview. A White House official confirmed Wednesday that the administration was pushing the conference committee to adopt the exemption of “cooperating countries” in the legislation.

Neither the House nor Senate version of the bill includes a “cooperating countries” provision even though the administration asked the leading sponsors of the Senate version of the bill nearly six months ago to include one.

Read More:

New name for Obama: The Manchurian President

April 29th, 2010

WorldNetDaily

President Obama has deep ties to an anti-American extremist nexus that has been instrumental not only in building his political career but in crafting current White House policy, charges a new book.

“The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and other Anti-American Extremists,” is set officially to be released Monday.

The book exposes an extremist coalition of communists, socialists and other radicals working both inside and outside the administration to draft and advance current White House policy goals.

With more than 800 citations, the brand-new, autographed title from WND senior reporter Aaron Klein bills itself as the most exhaustive investigation ever performed into Obama’s political background and radical ties. Klein’s co-author is historian and researcher Brenda J. Elliott.

“The Manchurian President” contains potentially explosive information not only about President Obama but also concerning other officials in the White House, including top czars and senior advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod.

Read More:

Rush Limbaugh: Obama Anti-Arizona Police

April 29th, 2010

Newsmax

Obama seems to distrust policemen

Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh blasted the Obama administration and other critics of the Arizona immigration law for being anti-police and ignoring the role that the rising tide of crime linked to illegals played in the formation of the law.

On his show Wednesday, Limbaugh pointed out that:

* The mainstream media has been notably silent on the violent protests against the law – unlike their coverage of the tea party movement – ignoring incidents of vandalism and other attacks on supporters of the law.
* President Obama and his administration has leaped to the conclusion that police would abuse the powers the law would give them while ignoring the fact that illegal immigrants are breaking the law.
* The sheer cost to taxpayers of illegals using local, state and federal welfare systems has been utterly ignored in the debate.

“I want to know where all the scrutiny from the media is on the anti-Arizona immigration law crowd,” Limbaugh said. “The tea parties were ridiculed and accused of things that they had not even done by President Clinton and President Obama.”

Limbaugh then talked about some of the violent scenes coming out of Arizona, pointing out that within the state the law has been enormously popular.

“I have a picture I’m holding in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers of a piñata with the face of Jan Brewer, the Arizona governor on it, who, by the way, has seen a huge poll bounce ever since she signed the law, more on that,” Limbaugh said. “You got some little kid beating the hell out of a piñata with the face of the governor on it. Where are all the stories of the violence? It’s a little kid beating up on this piñata.”

Limbaugh, alluding to the famous “beer summit” involving Henry Louis Gates and a Cambridge police officer, said that Obama still seems to harbor some animosity against police. The automatic assumption is that police will abuse the law, not that they are defending the public.

Read More:

Question Authority (the Cartoon)

April 30th, 2010

The Insurance Mandate in Peril

April 30th, 2010

By RANDY E. BARNETT, WSJ

A”tell” in poker is a subtle but detectable change in a player’s behavior or demeanor that reveals clues about the player’s assessment of his hand. Something similar has happened with regard to the insurance mandate at the core of last month’s health reform legislation. Congress justified its authority to enact the mandate on the grounds that it is a regulation of commerce. But as this justification came under heavy constitutional fire, the mandate’s defenders changed the argument—now claiming constitutional authority under Congress’s power to tax.

This switch in constitutional theories is a tell: Defenders of the bill lack confidence in their commerce power theory. The switch also comes too late. When the mandate’s constitutionality comes up for review as part of the state attorneys general lawsuit, the Supreme Court will not consider the penalty enforcing the mandate to be a tax because, in the provision that actually defines and imposes the mandate and penalty, Congress did not call it a tax and did not treat it as a tax.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) includes what it calls an “individual responsibility requirement” that all persons buy health insurance from a private company. Congress justified this mandate under its power to regulate commerce among the several states: “The individual responsibility requirement provided for in this section,” the law says, “. . . is commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce, as a result of the effects described in paragraph (2).” Paragraph (2) then begins: “The requirement regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature: economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased.”

In this way, the statute speciously tries to convert inactivity into the “activity” of making a “decision.” By this reasoning, your “decision” not to take a job, not to sell your house, or not to buy a Chevrolet is an “activity that is commercial and economic in nature” that can be mandated by Congress.

Read More:

Smart Aleck-in-Chief?

April 30th, 2010

By DANIEL HENNINGER, WSJ

 Obama is the first modern President to start singling out his critics individually

Here’s a quiz: For which of the following reasons is the 44th president of the United States bad-mouthing Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, bankers, mine operators, insurers, Glenn Beck, the tea party, the Supreme Court and whoever he hammers as we go to press:

a) He’s rallying his base.

b) He’s rallying the Democrats’ base (one overlaps but does not equal the other).

c) He’s changing the subject from 9% unemployment.

d) To reverse his sinking approval ratings.

e) It’s what Saul Alinsky would do.

f) It’s what Barack Obama likes to do.

Astute readers instantly saw that the answer is, all of the above. (Incidentally, the left’s notion that Mr. Obama had to prove he could “stand up” to the Republicans must be laughable to the man who stood down the Clinton machine to win.)

Republicans such as Mitch McConnell, a target of Obamian invective, are calling it conduct unbecoming a president. They are right. Carter, Reagan, both Bushes and Ford didn’t do it. People assume the hyperpolitical Bill Clinton did it, but if memory serves, his public persona was presidential to a fault, even as he brimmed with Vesuvian anger.

Read More: