Obama Chooses American Defeat

Obama Chooses American Defeat

James G.

In April, 2007, at the height of
American casualties during the Surge in Iraq, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
(D. Nev.) famously announced
“the war is lost.” His remark attracted national headlines – and a big push-back
from Republicans, who, in the wake of the 2006 elections, controlled neither
House of Congress.

An American President – George W.
Bush of Texas – had refused to accept defeat. He changed his military leaders,
launched the Surge and victory followed. And, even though, the Republicans had
lost control of Congress, President Bush’s control of the Executive branch and
the American people’s refusal to accept defeat prevailed over leading Democrats’
desire for American defeat.. It enabled the forces of the Sunni Awakening,
General Petraeus and the coalition’s troops to crush the Iraq

Over a thousand American soldiers died  in
after Leader Reid’s remarkable press conference.

Democrats, like Reid, who’d predicted
defeat, never changed their views.  Now, President Barack Obama has just
guaranteed that Senator Reid’s remark will come true. Iraq is not Vietnam and
the Middle East is not Southeast Asia. Yet, the parallels – 36 years after a
Democratic Congress cut off U.S. funding for South Vietnam – are

Once again, a leader of the
Democratic Party has opted for American defeat – after a splendid American field
army has achieved military victory. Former New York Times Baghdad
bureau chief John Burns predicted  disaster as a result of Mr. Obama’s decision
on Hugh
on October 24.  “We’ll see” was the most optimism Pulitzer-Prize
winner Dexter
could muster  on his New Yorker blog.

These guys aren’t
. But, with Michael Yon, these famous war correspondents are
not hopeful about whether America’s sacrifice in Iraq will be

How can Democrats ever be trusted
with America’s national security again?

It’s a simple as

Read Fred and Kimberly Kagan’s
excellent piece this weekend in the new issue of the  Weekly
for the post-mortem. The Kagans were part of the intellectual
brain trust behind the Surge – the Surge which President Obama has just thrown


Mr. Obama, if we’re gonna start quoting The Beatles…

Mr. Obama, if we’re gonna start quoting The Beatles…

Stu Tarlowe

President Obama, in his remarks following the
announcement of the death of Muammar Gaddafi, said, “Libya will travel a long
and winding road to democracy.”

To many of us “of a certain age”, that phrase evokes
the Beatles tune “The Long and Winding Road.”

And, for me at least, hearing President Obama employ
the title of a Beatles tune put me in mind of any number of other Beatles tunes
that I can relate to Barack Obama and his presidency.

Mr. President, I’m Looking Through You, and
I’m seeing The Fool on the Hill.

When I think of what you’ve done, and what you’re
doing, to this great nation, I think Isn’t It a Pity.

Tell Me Why your wife Michelle acts
like Her Majesty, jetting Here, There and Everywhere with her
entourage and telling us to eat carrot sticks while she dines on Savoy

You have vilified some of our most productive citizens
by calling them Piggies and making Baby, You’re a Rich Man a
term of opprobrium. You Can’t Do That.

The Free Market system works, if you just Let It
. But you want to turn Wall Street into Penny

Your economic policies make me want to yell
Help! and Run For Your Life. I’m afraid that When I’m
I’ll still be working Eight Days a Week just to pay the

Plenty of folks who voted for you are already saying
I Should Have Known Better.

I hope that by the next election enough Americans wise
up and say Not a Second Time. They might even tell you to Get Back
(To Where You Once Belonged)
, whether that’s Indonesia or Back in the

It Won’t Be Long before election time, and I
hope you’ll be singing I’m a Loser. Otherwise, I’ll Cry

Terror Link Downplayed in Courthouse Break-In

Terror Link Downplayed in Courthouse Break-In

‘Pictures of courthouses, water systems’ from around the US found in the van used by five men believed to be Moroccan Muslims.

Jim Forsyth

Five men in their twenties, described as French-Moroccan Muslims, are being questioned by the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force and by officials of the Department of Homeland Security after they were arrested inside the 120 year old Bexar County Courthouse in downtown San Antonio shortly before 2 this morning, 1200 WOAI news reports.

Officials say three of the men crawled through a window to get into the 120 year old Courthouse, which is a landmark in downtown San Antonio, and theother two were found in a van parked in front of the building.

Inside the van, officials say they found “photographs of infrastructure” including photos of shopping malls, water systems, courthouses and other public buildings which they say were taken in cities nationwide.

“They got travel documents, parking passes, they have been all over the country,” one law enforcement officials who asked not to be identified told 1200 WOAI’s Michael Board on the scene.  “A lot of photographic equipment, a lot of documentation equipment inside their vehicle.”

Officials say the five men entered the country legally on visas from Heathrow Airport in London.  They didn’t immediately know how long the men have been in the U.S., or what places they may have visited.

CLICK HERE for Photo Gallery from the Scene

Officials immediately blocked off a two square block area of downtown San Antonio around the Courthouse, and bomb sniffing dogs fanned out throughout the building.  About two hours later, the streets were reopened, indicating nothing dangerous was found in the building.

“They are going to be held for interrogation by the FBI, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the joint terrorism task force,” the law enforcement source said.

The men are described as in their early twenties.  One law enforcement official said the men told him they climbed to the fourth floor of the courthouse at 2AM “to get a better view of the city.”

There is a military intelligence convention underway at the city’s Convention Center several blocks away, with top intelligence officials including White House officials set to speak, but investigators didn’t say whether there was any connection.

Investigators were tight lipped about the incident this morning.

“All that, coupled with the fact why they can’t explain why they are in the building at 1:22 in the morning raises questions,” the law enforcement officer said.

Morning Bell: 1,000 Days Under President Obama

Morning Bell: 1,000 Days Under President Obama

Posted By Mike Brownfield On October 17, 2011 @ 10:00 am In Entitlements | No Comments

Today marks the 1,000th day of Barack Obama’s presidency, and unfortunately for America, those days have been marked by deeper deficits, lost jobs, prolonged unemployment, and bigger government. Meanwhile, many of those charged with leading the federal government have all but abdicated their responsibilities.

The national debt stands at $14.9 trillion–$4.2 trillion of which has been added since Obama took his oath of office. Fourteen million Americans are unemployed–that’s 9.1 percent of the workforce. The unemployment rate has been above nine percent for 840 of the 1000 days, and the average unemployed worker has been without a job for more than 9 months. All told, 2.2 million jobs have been lost under Obama’s watch, despite the White House’s claims that the President’s $787 billion stimulus would create 3.3 million net jobs by 2010.

Unfortunately, instead of leading America toward fiscal sanity and a stronger economy, the President is taking the country in the opposite direction. Last week, his latest proposal to “stimulate” the economy with another $447 billion in spending failed to pass the Senate, but instead of recognizing that more taxing and spending is not what America wants or needs, he’s redoubling his efforts. Today, the President is starting another bus tour [1] to sell a different version of the same plan–this time broken up into pieces of taxing and spending still big enough to choke a horse. It’s the same plan, only in different packaging. Former Congressman Ernest Istook explains the danger:

Even segmented versions of Obama’s $447 billion plan can be used to squeeze in those worst parts. That’s because it’s almost impossible to get both the House and the Senate to enact identical versions of a bill, thus requiring a conference committee to “work out the differences”–which sometimes includes adding distasteful details.

While it’s good news that the Senate rejected the President’s jobs plan, the bad news is that the Senate has utterly failed to help put America back on a strong fiscal path. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) point out [2] that it’s been 900 days since Senate Democrats last adopted a formal budget plan, calling it “a national disgrace.”

As required by law, House Republicans presented a budget in committee, brought it to the floor, and passed it earlier this spring. It was an honest, detailed, concrete plan to put our budget on the path to balance and our economy on the path to prosperity. But Senate Democrats, during this time of national crisis, failed even to present a budget plan — in open defiance of the law and the public they serve.

What we have seen from the Obama Administration is bigger government, more regulations, and massive amounts of government spending in the hopes of stimulating the economy. The trouble is that it hasn’t worked, as the numbers show. Obama promised [3] that his $787 billion stimulus would save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010. It didn’t, and given the jobs that were lost, he came up 7.3 million jobs [4] short of his goal. His health care plan, better known as Obamacare, did not reduce health care costs as promised and is in fact responsible for increasing costs in 2011 [5]. On top of that, the law will price many unskilled workers out of full-time employment [6].

And those are just the big-ticket items. Over the last 1,000 days, America has seen increased regulations, a 9,000-earmark omnibus bill, a government union bailout, a Wall Street reform bill that will do more harm than good, a nuclear arms treaty that is detrimental to missile defense, a refusal to expand domestic energy production, federal overreach into education, an undermining of the rule of law, and a dark cloud hanging over our military’s future due to a failure to ensure adequate defense spending.

In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal [7], James Freeman writes of an interview with billionaire Mortimer Zuckerman–Democrat, real-estate mogul, and New York Daily News owner. ”Among business executives who supported Barack Obama in 2008, [Zuckerman] says, ‘there is enormously widespread anxiety over the political leadership of the country.’ Mr. Zuckerman reports that among Democrats, ‘The sense is that the policies of this government have failed.’” Given the track record of the Obama Administration over the last 1,000 days, they would be right. Bigger government has not put America on a stronger fiscal path, it hasn’t created jobs, and it hasn’t built a stronger economy.

There is a better way. Heritage’s Saving the American Dream [8] plan charts a course that fixes the debt, cuts spending, and restores prosperity. It redesigns entitlement programs, guarantees assistance to those who need it, and saves the American dream for future generations. If Congress and the President want to move America forward, create new jobs, and spur businesses to grow and invest, then piling on debt, raising taxes, and increasing spending is not the answer–no matter how much Obama would like it to be.

Quick Hits:

  • Several hundred Occupy Wall Street protesters were arrested [9] over the weekend after refusing police orders to leave public areas. In Rome, protests turned into riots [9], causing $1.4 million in damage.
  • President Obama helped dedicate [1] the Martin Luther King, Jr., memorial in Washington yesterday. During his speech, Obama said that King would have supported the Occupy Wall Street protests.
  • Despite the continuing protests, only one in three likely voters blames Wall Street for the country’s financial troubles, while 56 percent blame Washington [10], according to a new poll.
  • U.S. stocks were headed for a flat opening Monday [11]. Investors remain nervous over Europe’s debt crisis and are skeptical that leaders can come up with a plan to address it in time for the European Council meeting in Brussels next weekend.
  • PODCAST: Former Attorney General Ed Meese and graduate fellow Marion Smith discuss the Constitution [12] and providing for the common defense. Click here to listen. [12]

Obama’s Fundraising Fail

Obama’s Fundraising Fail


The media will not hype it, but the Obama re-election
effort is on track to fail at raising the promised billion dollars for his
re-election campaign.  After it’s hard to raise money when you look like a loser
and part of your base is alienated. Although news reports credit him with $70
million in the most recent quarter, that includes money raised by the DNC. His
own campaign only got $42 million, nowhere what he needs to hit a billion.
William Jacobson
examines the latest data and makes some shrewd observations.

Obama raised $42
his campaign in the third quarter, plus another $27.3 million for the DNC.
Naturally, the top line $70 million joint number is being hyped.

  • Obama is nowhere near on
    track to raise the $1
    wants for his campaign.
  • Obama’s $42 million haul is less than
    the $50
    George W. Bush raised in the third quarter of 2003,
    the comparable time period.
  • The high campaign number of donors and low average
    donation numbers does not reflect wide support, but gimmicks like
    the $3 dinner

The Obama Problem

The Obama Problem

By Monty

The Obama Problem is simple to explain but impossible
to solve.  The problem is Obama himself, and most people not named Barack or
Michelle understand that.

President Obama’s political career is in free-fall.
He will not be reelected.  Many Democrats and media personalities now understand
what appeared impossible even mere months ago.

Mr. Obama burst onto the political scene as a
relatively unknown wunderkind.  He could read a mean teleprompter and did so
with fanfare at the 2004 Democrat Convention.  He had good speechwriters, an
intelligent and disciplined campaign strategy, a carefully crafted biography,
and a highly compliant media.  He was charismatic and eloquent.  Joe Biden
awkwardly described him as “the first mainstream African-American who is
articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”

The Perfect Storm

The 2008 election was the political equivalent of a
perfect storm.”  Two factors were key to Obama’s election:

  1. Americans were disgusted with Washington, and
    especially with George Bush.  The media anointed Obama as their man.  They
    publicized his strengths and hid his weaknesses.  They painted him as an
    outsider, someone who could bridge the gap between political parties and make
    Washington function.  The media engineered Obama into the nomination and threw
    Hillary Clinton overboard in the primary process.
  2. The Republicans chose a sure loser to run — shopworn
    Washington-establishment figure Senator John McCain.  McCain offered nothing
    that had not already been rejected by the public.  He was little more than an
    elderly George W. Bush who carried the additional baggage of a Washington
    insider.  It is likely that any Democrat would have easily beaten

When the perfect storm cleared, Obama was president.

No president in recent history began his term with
higher expectations and goodwill than Barack Obama, but the promise and
exhilaration that accompanied his election was short-lived.  In less than three
years, Obama plummeted from the heights (his “Messiah” entry) to the depths (a
“worse than Jimmy Carter” figure).

The turnaround was astonishing in its speed and
magnitude.  To put matters in perspective, it took George Bush almost eight
years to hit bottom.  And Bush always had little support from the media, a force
that continues to protect Obama.

How Things Went So Wrong So

To understand Obama’s loss in popularity, it is
necessary to recognize that Barack Obama was a fluke.  He was an unlikely
candidate, pushed to his party’s nomination as a result of the media.  His
election was another quirk, more aberration than achievement.  The perfect storm
virtually ensured that the Democrat candidate would win in 2008.  It is not a
strain to conclude that the mainstream media, rather than the electorate, put
Obama into the highest office in the land.

In hindsight, a great mistake was made. Even the
fawning media and the Democrat establishment now recognize that, although are
unwilling to publicly admit it.  Their behavior is analogous to refusing to
discuss a friend’s terminal illness in the hope that it will somehow go

The media and the Democratic Party are at risk if the
tragedy they foisted on the nation continues.  Their future is intertwined with
the Obama Problem.  Both sponsored him, and both may ultimately be held
accountable.  The battle so easily won in 2008 may cost them subsequent battles,
if not the war itself.

Both know the risk.  They just have no easy way of
solving the problem.

Opinions regarding the factors responsible for Mr.
Obama’s political demise abound.  A full menu is available — the economy,
broken promises, cronyism, socialism, bailouts, corruption, disillusionment,
inexperience, incompetence, Chicago-style politics, etc.  Pundits have a
target-rich environment from which to approach the failure of the Obama

The factors above are relevant but one level removed
from the root cause.  The real problem is that there never was any substance to
Obama.  He was the political equivalent of a Potemkin village.  There was
nothing behind the façade.  There was no “there” there.  All of the problems
arise from this obvious flaw.

President Obama is little more than a run-of-the-mill
Hollywood extra hired to play president of the United States.  A brilliant
marketing campaign coupled with the perfect storm put him in office.  The
marketing campaign was so good that it merits a case study for the Harvard
Business School.

The “man with no past” and a Hollywood veneer turned
out to be a perfect candidate.  “Sizzle” rather than substance was sold.  Little
was known about Obama and his past, allowing David Axelrod to market the
political equivalent of a Rorschach blot.

Voters saw in Obama whatever they desired in a
candidate.  To some, Obama was a breath of fresh air, a man of principles.  To
others he was an outsider, not a crass politician.  Others saw him as a chance
to prove that they were not racists.  Still others saw him as the reincarnation
of Roosevelt or whomever else they admired.

Obama was a blank slate to be imagined or drawn upon
by the voters.  He was their chameleon, and each voter could use his or her
imagination to create the ideal candidate.  Not surprisingly, voters bought this
product that existed only in their minds.  They elected Chauncey Gardiner.
Unfortunately, this fraud did not come with Peter Sellers’ range or abilities.

A brilliant marketing strategy can make a first sale,
but performance and satisfaction are required for the second.  Axelrod’s skill
in marketing had no counterparty in production.  No one seemed to be concerned
about delivering a product that actually worked.

Obama entered office unorganized and unstructured.
Nothing in his background suggested that he knew anything about management,
organization, or leadership.  Nor did anyone see the need for bringing in talent
with these skills.  As a result, the Hollywood mannequin was almost immediately
exposed as nothing but flair, hype, and hot air.  The public had bought a
product that did not perform.

Marketing can do many things, but it cannot sell a
product that people have tried and rejected.  That is Obama’s reelection
problem.  At the risk of being unsophisticated and abusing the concept of
Occam’s Razor, Obama’s reelection problem can be expressed in one simple
sentence: “Now, too many people know him.”

Obama’s only strength was Axelrod’s ability to play on
the imagination of voters.  That strength no longer exists.  People now know the
product and have rejected it.  They did not get even Chauncey Gardiner.
Embarrassed and angry, the public is stuck with Chance the

The irony is that Mr. Obama has not changed.  He is
the same man who was elected.  His problem is not communicating, Republicans,
George Bush, tsunamis, or anything else.  His problem is the man in the mirror.
There is no more there than an image.

Obama was all hype and no substance.  That realization
has dawned on voters, resulting in  horrendous polling.  Richard Nixon was never
liked, but he was at least thought competent.  Obama was liked but never
competent.  Now Obama is living proof of the old adage that familiarity breeds
contempt.  He is neither liked nor competent.

Even the hapless Jimmy Carter did not attain that

President Obey-Me Is Not Being Obeyed

President Obey-Me Is Not Being Obeyed

By James

Rejection is no fun, especially if you’re a heavenly
rock star with a savior complex.  When people with narcissistic personalities
come into psychotherapy, they often complain that nobody loves them — and they
can’t understand it, because aren’t they just the most lovable fluffy dolls in
the world?


This is not Harry Truman.  It’s not Herman Cain.  It’s
a guy who loves being worshiped, and he can’t accept it when the crowds stop


Narcissists are not nice.  They treat others as
puppets on strings.  The rest of us get  drawn in by their superficial charm,
and then, after a while, we figure out that we’ve been had.  As soon as we walk
away, the result is a towering rage by the narcissist.  We all know people like


This is all routine psychiatric manual


If you can handle a little more, President Obama is an
interesting mix of narcissism and “Oppositional
Defiant Disorder
.”  No other president in history has actually given his
fellow Americans the fickle finger of fate in public, to the cheers and
applause of his own followers.  This is not  Thomas Jefferson or Abe Lincoln.
This is immature kid


So here we are.  Our moronic MedioCrats have gotten
America stuck with a man who was never tested by adversity.  Unlike Herman Cain,
Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and the other GOP candidates, he isn’t used to
scraping his knees on the playground and then just going “pick yourself up, dust
yourself off, start all over again.”


Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers sang “Pick yourself up”
in the 1936 hit Swing Time (Jerome Kern and Dorothy Fielding).  That
was in the depth of the Great Depression.  “Pick yourself up” is the song of
ordinary Americans who tackle the hard jobs, which is why it was so popular.
It’s still a great


America doesn’t sing “Pick yourself up” anymore.  All
we sing is “I’m a victim!  My parents don’t love me!  I don’t want to pick
myself up, dust myself off, and start all over again!  Help me!  Give me free
”  Tens of millions of kids have been raised by moms without dads,
and they are mommified — they expect fulsome flattery just to get out of bed in
the morning.


If you doubt that, check out the photos of thousands
of rich kids with Apple iPads sitting on Wall Street, trying to figure out what
they’re supposed to be protesting.  The “Days of Rage” are really the “days of
narcissistic rage.”  These kids are as phony and self-indulgent as the Obey-Me
administration.  If you don’t adore them for giving us the finger, there is
something wrong with you.  And why aren’t you paying for their health care for
the rest of their lives?


According to Michael
in the New York Post:


I have heard basically the same story four times in
the last 10 days, and the people doing the talking are in New York and
Washington and are spread across the political spectrum.

The gist is this: President Obama has become a lone
wolf, a stranger to his own government. He talks mostly, and sometimes only, to
friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett and to David Axelrod, his political

Everybody else, including members of his Cabinet, have
little face time with him except for brief meetings that serve as photo ops.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner
both have complained … that they are shut out of important

The president’s workdays are said to end early, often
at 4 p.m. He usually has dinner in the family residence with his wife and
daughters, then retreats to a private office. One person said he takes a stack
of briefing books. Others aren’t sure what he does.

If the reports are accurate, and I believe they are,
they paint a picture of an isolated man trapped in a collapsing


Before saying anything else, please do not forget who
sold us this immature Napoleon Bonaparte.  It was the power clique of the left,
the Democrats and the media, who are just different faces of the same beast.
Obama’s rage and withdrawal into his private cult was predictable in 2008 and in
2004, when he rocketed to stardom with his Democratic Convention speech.
Narcissists are incredibly stuck and predictable — unless they’ve been honed
and polished by difficult life experiences, that is.  If the MedioCrats couldn’t
spot Obama as a grossly immature, utterly self-centered individual, it is
because he reflected their own psychology.  It was a hall of


We are therefore seeing not just Obama himself.  If
you look at the over-the-top rage and self-regard of the radical left, they are
all little Obamas.  Paul Krugman is just another Obama, ranting in his little
corner of the NYT op-ed page.  George Soros has written (in his autobiography)
about his own grandiosity.  Hugo Chávez expressed outrage at the “horrible
repression” of those thousands of kids camping out overnight on Wall Street, and
El Jefe Hugo is just another Obama.  He is a generalissimo of the left, like
Castro and Putin, Marx, Lenin and Stalin, the whole panoply of towering egos.
Malignant narcissism and self-glorification is the mass neurosis of the radical


If you doubt that the “Rage” campers are like that,
just listen to their rhetoric.  They are “progressives,” which means they are
way ahead of everybody else.  Progressive is a new name for “vanguard of the
revolution,” the preferred piece of self-flattery until the Soviet Union fell


The left has seen a century of murderous failures by
the radical left, and they still don’t get the point.  They are stuck on stupid, as
General Russell Honore said during Hurricane Katrina.  Mental fixedness is
another marker of the extremist left.  Like Woody Allen in
, slipping on the same giant banana peel over and over
again, they can’t get out of their own mental traps.


This stuff is all part of the human condition, and
it’s been around since King Herod the Great and Oedipus Rex.  The trouble is
when a truly immature narcissist, surrounded by his own tiny inner cult, gets
elected to the highest office in the land.  Americans have never been dumb
enough to do that, though they came close with Woodrow Wilson and


This time we, the American people, have really blown


The result is dangerous.  It’s not just the
incompetence, fraud, and  mismanagement, though those are bad enough.  What we
are facing today is genuine danger to our national security and


That’s the most troubling fact to see, but I’ll bet
that in major capitals around the world, it is beginning to hit home.  If we can
see it, you can bet that others — intelligence agencies and power-mongers
around the world — see the same things.

They will try to exploit our weak and fragile
president as much as they can.

Why America Needs Herman Cain

Why America Needs Herman Cain

By Ed

Niccolò Machiavelli once said that “the man who adapts
his course of action to the nature of the times will succeed, and likewise, the
man who sets his course of action out of tune with the times will come to


What I’d like to argue in this essay is that based on
the current “nature of the times” in America, Herman Cain must be the GOP
nominee for president.  In fact, Cain’s nomination represents what could be the
last and best opportunity Americans have to pry our battered country out from
the clutches of the increasingly strident, divisive, and Marxist pro-Obama
Democrat left.


Conversely, if the nomination goes to Rick Perry or
Mitt Romney, it will simply confirm my suspicion that the GOP base is absolutely
clueless when it comes to appreciating the unique contours of the American
left’s long-term strategy to undermine our nation’s constitutional heritage and


The left has successfully poisoned any possibility for
a white conservative to attract enough minority voters on a platform based on
America’s colorblind founding principles.  Even a Romney or Perry victory, in
other words, will leave America as viciously divided as ever and will merely set
the stage for more Republican compromise with political opponents who rarely if
ever compromise.


Martin Luther King, in his 1963 “Letter from a
Birmingham City Jail,” said that when the “disinherited children of God sat down
at lunch counters they were in reality standing up for the best in the American
dream and the most sacred values in our Judeo-Christian heritage.”  In addition,
said King, “[black people] were carrying our whole nation back to those great
walls of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the
formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of


King’s early Tea Party proclivities don’t seem to
garner much attention these days.


Indeed, soon after King issued those inspiring
remarks, the anti-American left began a long-term and sinister project to wed
Marxist ideology to racial politics in order to frighten white conservatives
into questioning the very basis of their country’s constitutional identity.  The
left’s goal back then was, according to philosopher Eric Hoffer, to “soften up
the white majority and beat it into a pulp.”


The left’s long-term objective was to both define a
new standard of civic righteousness and increase the power of the state by
championing the cause of America’s minority populations against what the left
considered the “oppressive” merit-based ethos of “reactionary” white America.
Epithets such as “Oreo” and “sellout” and “acting white,” for example, were
fashioned by leftists in order to intimidate both whites and minorities into
questioning the commonsense beliefs about personal initiative and self-reliance
built into the European Enlightenment tradition.  Duke professor Stanley Fish,
for example, captured the essence of this racial strategy a couple of decades
later in a defense of affirmative action that he wrote
for the Atlantic back in 1993:


Individualism, fairness, merit — these three words
are continually in the mouths of our up to date, newly respectable bigots who
have learned that they need not put on a white hood or bar access to the ballot
box in order to secure their ends.


And over the years, while a sincere but incredibly
naïve GOP pinned its election fortunes on the “economy,” thousands of teachers
in thousands of classrooms across the country found more and more reasons not to
present America’s founding tradition in a positive light.


Indeed, in one of the most prophetic books written in
the last few decades — Beyond All Reason: The Radical Assault on
Truth in American Law
— constitutional law professors Daniel Farber and
Suzanna Sherry argued in 1997 that the quiet invasion of “radical
multiculturalism” in American law schools has put professors “who cling to
Enlightenment aspirations” at some risk “of being labeled racists or bigots.”
Radical multiculturalists were able to accomplish this amazing feat by
relentlessly advancing the claim that “conceptions of merit are invented by the
powerful to reinforce their dominant position in society.”


The reason why Ronald Reagan’s conservative
“revolution” miscarried so quickly, in other words, is precisely the same reason
why constitutional law “scholar” and class warfare socialist Barack Obama
captured the most powerful office in the world so soon after Reagan left it: a
perfect storm or “righteous wind” that combined weak-kneed “compassionate” white
conservatives newly softened and distressed over the moral underpinnings of
their own merit-based ideology with legions of self-righteous champions of
“people of color” eager to unleash academia’s long, simmering, and toxic blend
of Marxism, social justice, and identity politics.


Mr. Obama stewed for years in this racially charged
environment — not only in college, but in the pews of his pastor Jeremiah
Wright’s black liberation “theology” church.  The effects of Obama’s one-sided
and rather crude education slipped out occasionally on the campaign trail in
2008.  At a Florida fundraiser, for example, Mr. Obama insinuated
that Republicans would create a state of fear by using Obama’s race as a means
to harvest votes for John McCain:


We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run.
They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid
of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention
he’s black?


The Wall Street Journal‘s James Taranto was
one of the few observers at the time to expose Obama’s pathetic attempt to
malign an entire political party as racist:


Obama is baselessly accusing Republicans of racial
prejudice, or at least of cynically pandering to racial prejudice. But by
wording this ‘accusation’ as a prediction, Obama is able to cast aspersions
without needing any evidence to back them up. He implicitly ascribes to the GOP
the view that voters are prejudiced against blacks, then calls on voters to
prove they are not by voting for Obama.


One has to add the word “white” to “Republican,”
however, for Taranto’s claims about “racial prejudice” to make any


Allan Bloom once said that “society’s greatest madness
may seem normal to itself.”  Indeed, an American candidate for president
succeeded in getting himself elected even after implying that members of the
opposition party in his own country are racists.  However, according to Newton’s
Third Law, the left’s carefully crafted attack on conservative white America was
bound to give birth to its very nemesis: a highly driven, eloquent, and
successful black political candidate who, unlike our current president, has
nothing but effusive gratitude for the opportunities his country has given


Highly esteemed pundits including Daniel
, Dorothy
, and Michael
are coming to recognize that Herman Cain’s unique combination of
business expertise, educational credentials, inspiring background, and love of
country is striking a deep cord among American voters.  But the most important
factor may be, as Ms. Rabinowitz observed recently, “Mr. Cain’s unfailing
capacity to speak as though from a core of fire deep inside


The left has spent decades trying to smother that
fire, and to some degree, most white political candidates for president are now
damaged goods — they tend to find it more prudent to triangulate, manage,
strategize, compromise, and appease.  They are also highly unlikely to
accomplish anything close to marginalizing today’s alarmingly radical Democrat
party.  In short, the GOP needs to elevate and highlight courageous and
passionate Tea Party favorites like Star Parker, Allen West, and Nikki Haley
rather than the more tepid Mitt Romney types.


On a national stage, Herman Cain and other minority
conservative candidates have the ability to send shockwaves not only through the
political landscape, but down deep into the dark corners of academia, where
legions of liberal professors continue to wield a very harmful but successful
narrative in order to beat young America’s potential defenders — both white and
nonwhite — into a pulp.


A Herman Cain-headed ticket for 2012 would be
unbeatable.  It would also represent a new dawn in America where gratitude,
confidence, and initiative would overwhelm the resentment, anger and ingratitude
so characteristic of left-wing political culture.


It’s the nature of the times.

We Need Jobs, Not Another Jobs Speech by the President

We Need Jobs, Not Another Jobs Speech by the

By Neil

President Obama was under a lot of pressure after an
August 2011 jobs report told the tale in no uncertain terms.   Job growth in
that month was zero, and the unemployment rate was stuck at a disturbingly
high level — 9.1%.  Following a much-publicized brouhaha over the scheduling of
a “jobs speech” in September 2011, President Obama finally delivered an address
to the nation in which he outlined yet another stimulus program to create


After all the hoopla associated with the speech,
investors expected something imaginative — something new, different, and
better.  Instead, the president tossed up a $450-billion package that looked
eerily similar to the “stimulus” programs he sold to Congress in 2009 — the
ones that failed so miserably.  Infrastructure spending, aid to states,
high-speed rail, and temporary tax cuts highlighted the president’s proposal,
just like they did almost three years earlier.  Representative Paul Ryan
(R-Wisconsin) gave an accurate
of the president’s proposal: “I didn’t hear any new ideas.”  The
reason Ryan didn’t hear any new ideas is because there weren’t


The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped more than 300
points the day following the president’s speech, or about 3%.  Investors seemed
to be saying, “Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.”  We’ve
reached the point where Barack Obama isn’t believable on Wall Street or on Main
Street.  Only die-hard Obamanistas take our president seriously.  That’s a
dangerous state of affairs, because we face daunting challenges on multiple
fronts both at home and abroad.


In his jobs speech, Obama said, “There should be nothing controversial about this piece
of legislation.  Everything in here is the kind of proposal that’s been
supported by both Democrats and Republicans — including many who sit here
tonight.  And everything in this bill will be paid for.  Everything.”  As usual,
the president didn’t explain how everything will be paid for.


After the jobs speech, President Obama hit the road to
sell his “new” plan to the American people.  At one stop on his journey, the president said, “If you
love me, you gotta help me pass this bill.”  This isn’t about love.  It’s about
jobs, and President Obama’s plan won’t work this time any better than it worked
the last time or the time before that.  I like the way Senate minority leader
Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) described the president’s plan on Meet the
on September 18, 2011: “There’s little to be learned from the second
kick of a mule.”


A few days after he gave the jobs speech in September,
President Obama hustled to the podium again to deliver another deficit speech.
This is what David Brooks, a columnist for the New York Times, said about the president’s deficit speech:


I’m a sap, a specific kind of sap.  I’m an Obama

When the president said the unemployed can’t wait 14
more months for help and we had to do something right away, I believed him.
When administration officials called around saying that the possibility of a
double-dip recession was horrifyingly real and that it would be irresponsible
not to come up with a package that could pass right away, I believed

I liked Obama’s payroll tax cut ideas and urged
Republicans to play along.  But of course I’m a sap.  When the president
unveiled the second half of his stimulus it became clear that this package has
nothing to do with helping people right away or averting a double dip.  This is
a campaign marker, not a jobs bill.

It recycles ideas that couldn’t get passed even when
Democrats controlled Congress.


Brooks was correct.  The president just rehashed the
same old, same old.  Generally speaking, the left loved the president’s deficit speech because it was laced with
“tax the rich” invective, and the right hated it for the same reason.  But — and this is a big
but — liberal Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York) didn’t like it at all.  The tax hikes that the president kept
saying were essential were too liberal for him, and the same is true for the
majority of Democratic senators, no matter what their political bent happens to


The political landscape is taking shape, and Obama’s
tax-and-spend approach is becoming less popular every day as voters are coming
to terms with stark reality.  Keep in mind that in 2009, a heavily Democratic
Congress gave the president carte blanche to deal with our nation’s economic
woes.  The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and other stimulus programs that
cost American taxpayers close to $2 trillion were supposed to revitalize the economy and keep
the unemployment rate below 8%, but they were designed by President Obama to
achieve his objectives, not ours.


People who were hoping for change when they voted for
Obama were disheartened because what they got was the largest and most expensive
boondoggle in American history.  The change that President Obama had in mind was
even more taxing and spending — more than thinking people dreamed possible.
Jobs to him are little more than an afterthought.  Even with increasing
political pressure to do something meaningful to create jobs, Obama still can’t
admit that we have a serious problem and that his approach isn’t


The latest round of political gimmickry should
convince any thinking person that President Obama is just playing games while
our economy crumbles.  As I said in a recent American Thinker blog entry, Senate Democrats didn’t
even take up the president’s “jobs plan” until a few days ago, and
immediately, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) moved “to block Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s attempt to
bring the ‘jobs’ bill up for a vote in the Senate.”  But that’s not all.  Senate
Democrats tacked onto the “jobs” bill a “millionaires’ tax,” and Reid rewrote Senate rules to make it very difficult for the
minority party to force the majority party to take uncomfortable votes.  If
that’s not political game-playing, I don’t know what is.


Making the charade even more surreal, Obama took to
the airwaves again on Thursday and blamed Republicans for standing
in the way of progress.  He even attacked “Mitch McConnell several times by
name, without ever acknowledging the real reason his legislation has stalled in
the upper chamber: Democratic opposition.”


This is the bottom line.  We need jobs — not another
jobs speech by the president.  An unemployment rate above 9% is unacceptably
high, and the economy is moving in the wrong direction.  Almost everyone except
the president seems to know that.  Obama’s jobs and deficit speeches have done
nothing to help solve our economic problems, and time us running short.  We need
change we can believe in, and we need it fast.  Thankfully, November 2012 is
just around the corner.  It will be a referendum on President Obama’s
performance deficit.


Neil Snyder is a chaired
professor emeritus at the University of Virginia.  His blog,
SnyderTalk.com, is posted daily.
His latest book is titled
If You Voted for Obama in 2008 to Prove You’re Not a Racist, You
Need to Vote for Someone Else in 2012 to Prove You’re Not an

Herman Cain Proves the Power of Ideas in the Republican Race

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown,FloydReports.com

America’s media is obsessed with every tick of every poll. The reason they cover polls is
because they don’t want to cover ideas. Republicans should resist being sucked
into this reality show mentality and focus instead on the candidate’s ideas.

used this to great effect in the Florida Straw Poll. His powerful
speech concluded with a riff in which he talked about how the media had
declared,“I can’t win.”He then empowered his audience by telling them,“You
decide who wins,not the media.”Good advice from a candidate that is now watching
this particular race from the frontlines.

The media uses polls to create self-fulfilling prophecies. Media
organizations who are more interested in influencing the outcome of the race
than they are providing unbiased coverage of the race use polls as an instrument
of voter and donor manipulation. They manipulate the desire of us all to be with
a winner.

We have been carefully watching Republican Party contests since the
1970′s,and there are some more interesting markers than polls that can help you
understand what is really happening. Remember ideas have
with Republican primary voters.

First,straw polls don’t matter. If they did matter Pat Robertson would have
been elected president in 1988. He won the straw poll in Iowa and surged in the
media horse race as a result. His victory lead the New York Times to
report:“For the second time in a year,the Rev. Pat Robertson has shaken Vice
President Bush and his other rivals for the Republican Presidential nomination
by winning a test of organizational strength.”

Herman Cain likewise has surged after his astounding victory in the Florida
straw poll. The Cain victory has conservatives chanting “9-9-9″after his bold
economic plan. Cain is calling for a total tax reform which would eliminate
payroll taxes,the estate tax,investment taxes,and replace it all with a simple
flat tax of 9 percent,coupled with a 9 percent consumption tax and a 9 percent
corporate tax.

If Cain is going to win,it will be because of his bold ideas and vision. And
with ideas Mr. Cain excels,and frankly leaves most of the other candidates

So our second point would be….