Washington Times Columnist to Obama:Resign!

Ben Johnson,The White House Watch

The pages of The Washington Times today reflect the nation’s
disenchantment with Barack Obama’s presidency. The op-ed section contains an
article by Jeffrey T. Kuhner,president of the Edmund Burke Institute for American
Renewal
,entitled,“Don’t
Go on Vacation —Just GO.”

Last September,Kuhner called
for Obama’s impeachment.
This year,he’s taken a new tack:Telling Obama to
quit:

Mr. Obama is the most arrogant,self-absorbed and self-obsessed president in
U.S. history. Nothing is ever his fault. He blames everyone and everything for
America’s economic woes –Tea Partyers,Wall Street,Japanese earthquakes,insurance
executives,oil companies,millionaires and corporate jet owners. He lashes out at
imaginary enemies without ever taking personal responsibility. In his mind,he is
–and always will be –the Anointed One.

There is only one solution:Drive him from office. Americans should forge a
mass grassroots movement demanding that Mr. Obama step down –immediately.
Through bumper stickers,picket signs,posters,T-shirts and rallies,tens of
millions of citizens should express the same message:Leave. It is highly
unlikely he will step aside,but such a movement would cripple the president’s
authority and possibly blunt him from doing further harm. It also would puncture
his boundless ego. A widespread manifestation of no confidence would break him
–politically,morally and psychologically –in order to save America. Mr. Obama is
out of his depth. He lacks the character,intelligence,skills and experience –the
basic competence –to be the leader of the free world.

Resign,Mr. President.

Of course,Obama resigning is as likely to occur as Bill Clinton entering a
monastery;they both love the thrill they get from their self-indulgent pursuits
too much to forsake them for their own good,much less the nation’s.
However,there is some value in his analysis.

A growing number of Democrats are sick of Obama,too. Contrary to what some
people believe,political parties are not primarily dedicated to promoting ideals
or ideologies. They are dedicated to power:getting it,exercising it,keeping
it,and denying it to their enemies. Democrats understand this better than
Republicans,in part because Democrats are the statist party,in part because
Republicans believe in the transcendent values the Left denies. Democrats are
happy Obama is president;they generally agree with him even when they are afraid
to say so;and they hope he will be re-elected in 2012. But they saw the
monumental butt-thumping the American people gave them in 2010,and they aren’t
willing….

Read more.

Leftists: Have You No Sense of Decency Left?

Leftists: Have You No Sense of Decency Left?

Richard J. Little

Having seen the effects of violence first hand in my profession, my deepest sympathy goes out to the families of the victims of today’s attack in AZ. Please pray for them.

However, I am also saddened to see all the knee-jerk comments in our media and many others who are attempting to use this criminal action for political advantage.
I have one question for you who seek to distort this crime to push your political ideology: Have you people no shame?  Have you, at long last, no sense of decency left?
I have heard terms like “ignorant” and “hateful” to describe people who have not the slightest to do with this unspeakable crime and have done nothing wrong but have simply spoken out and acted peacefully in support of Individual Rights, Freedom, and Liberty.
What is “ignorant” and “hateful” is to spread unfounded rebuking and draw negative inferences about people you know not an iota about and who have not a thing to do with this senseless crime – as we have been inundated with these slanderous accusations all day long……
Many people who know nothing about the person who committed this crime want to impugn other people because it fits their ideological bias and their pre-determined narrative that anyone who supports Individual Rights, Personal Freedom, and Constitutional/Limited government must somehow be “violent” or “hateful”.
Or that by opposing actions by politicians which are unconstitutional or destructive of our society you must somehow be “creating an atmosphere of hate” if you exercise your free speech rights to speak out against such actions.
This is total bunk and is simply a shameful attempt to silence those who you disagree with.
Those who support individual rights and free markets are supporting a society based on voluntary association, choice and cooperation among citizens.
Conversely, those who advocate for government-based collectivist “solutions” for every conceivable ill in the world are in fact the ones who call for the use of coercion, and if needed, force to make others comply with their wishes.
As a factual matter, there is not a shred of real evidence that connects Ms Palin, conservatives, or the tea party to this act of violence. No, political ads with “crosshairs” aren’t even close to “proof” of anything as not only did Ms. Palin use this but so did the DNC and the Daily KOS!
If one must look for a political motivation from this deranged individual his listing of the “Communist Manifesto” is probably all you need to know about the alleged shooter’s political influences.
I know the implication that it is likely that this individual was a committed leftist or simply an incoherent individual greatly disrupts your chosen narrative, but hey, why let the facts and the truth get in the way of your emotionally based political ranting.
Jan LaRue notes:
Clarence Dupnik, the Pima County Sheriff, repeatedly ranted in his press conference about some radio and TV personalities whose “vitriol,” “hatred,” and “bigotry” has a bad influence on mentally unstable people, “enflaming the American public.”  Dupnik opposes the AZ immigration law, calling it “racist,” disgusting,” and “stupid,” and said he wouldn’t enforce it.  Apparently, he thinks that only “vitriol” expressed by conservatives has a bad influence on people.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/leftists_have_you_no_sense_of.html at January 09, 2011 – 10:23:32 AM CST

//

The ACLU’s Communist, Atheist Roots

The ACLU’s Communist, Atheist Roots

December 16th, 2010

Dr. Paul Kengor, FloydReports.com

The ACLU seems unusually active right now. What  gives? Maybe it’s   the Christmas season, which always seems to spring the  ACLU into high   gear, making it more miserable than usual.

I tried to ignore the latest round of ACLU legal  challenges against   religious Americans, but they became too much. The  surge has been   remarkably ecumenical, not singling out Protestant or  Catholic   interests.

First, I got an email from Mat Staver’s group,  Liberty Counsel,   highlighting a bunch of ACLU lawsuits. Then I read a  page-one,   top-of-the-fold headline in the National Catholic Register,    “Catholic Hospitals Under New Attack by ACLU,” regarding an ACLU    request to compel Catholic hospitals to do abortions. Next was an email    from a colleague at Coral Ridge Ministries, forwarding a Washington Times article. Then came another email from yet another Christian group on lawsuits somewhere in Florida. And on and on.

That was just a sampling of this year’s Christmas  cheer, courtesy of   the American Civil Liberties Union. At least the ACLU  always finds a   way to unite Protestants and Catholics.

In the interest of faith and charity, I’d like to  add my own   ecumenical offering—a history lesson. It concerns some  fascinating   material I recently published on the ACLU’s early founders,  especially   three core figures: Roger Baldwin, Harry Ward, and Corliss  Lamont. I   can only provide a snapshot here, but you’ll get the picture.

First, Roger Baldwin: Baldwin was the founder of the  ACLU, so far to   the Left that he was hounded by the Justice Department  of the   progressive’s progressive, Woodrow Wilson. Perhaps it was a faith    thing. Wilson was a progressive, but he was also a devout Christian,    and Roger Baldwin was anything but that.

Baldwin was an atheist. He was also a onetime Communist, who, among other ignoble gestures, wrote a horrible 1928 book called Liberty Under the Soviets….

Read more.

Old College Pal: Obama Has “Continuing Commitment to Marxist Ideology”

Old College Pal: Obama Has “Continuing Commitment to Marxist Ideology”

December 10th, 2010

Dr. Paul Kengor, American Thinker

…John Drew was a  contemporary  of Obama at Occidental College and a Marxist himself.  In  fact, Drew  was a well-known campus communist when Obama was introduced  to him as  “one of us.”  “Obama was already an ardent Marxist when I met  in the  fall of 1980,” said Drew, going on the record.
Drew  is certainly  cognizant of the gravity of his statement.  “I know it’s  incendiary to  say this,” he adds, but Obama “was basically a  Marxist-Leninist.”  He  noted how Obama, in Dreams from My Father,  stated that when he  got to college, he attended “socialist conferences”  and “hung out”  with Marxist professors.  But what Obama did not explain  or clarify,  says Dr. Drew, is that Obama “was in 100 percent, total  agreement with  these Marxist professors.”
I  asked Drew where,  precisely, he believes Obama stands today.  Of  course, Drew no longer  knows Obama, and his main goal in reaching out to  me was to clarify  where Obama stood at Occidental, which is information  that cannot be  ignored.  That said, he did tell me this: “There are a  lot of brands of  Marxism.  That was one of the key ingredients of my  argument with the  young Barack Obama.  I see evidence of [a] continuing  commitment to  Marxist ideology every time President Obama traces the  furor of the  public to underlying economic conditions and inevitable  changes taking  place in society. In the Marxist model, the economy is  the driving  force behind change in the other spheres of society.”
Drew  shared those  thoughts with me last spring. More recently, however, we  had an even  more illuminating conversation when I had the opportunity to  interview  Drew while I was guest-hosting the Glen Meakem Program,   a terrific radio-talk show broadcast from Pittsburgh.  Here are edited   excerpts of what Drew told me on the air on October 16, 2010:
Drew: As far as  I can tell, I’m the only person in Obama’s extended circle of  friends  who is willing to speak out and verify that he was a  Marxist-Leninist  in his sophomore year of college from 1980 to 1981.  I  met him because I  graduated from Occidental College in 1979, and I was  back at  Occidental visiting a girlfriend.
Kengor: Was Occidental known for radical-left politics?  Would that have been an attraction to Obama?
Drew:  It was  considered the Moscow of southern California when I was there.   There  were a lot of Marxist professors, many of whom I got to know  pretty  well. … What I know absolutely for sure — and this is where I  really  sought you out and I really wanted to be helpful in terms of the   historic record — was to verify that Barack Obama was definitely a   Marxist and that it was very unusual for a sophomore at Occidental to be   as radical or as ideologically attuned as young Barack Obama was….

Read more.

Left-Winger Confirms Obama Corruption Scandal

Left-Winger Confirms Obama Corruption Scandal

August 18th, 2010

Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

Obama Convict

A radical left-wing activist has confirmed Republican charges that the Obama administration runs an extensive and potentially illegal propaganda campaign from the White House. We noted yesterday that Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a 36-page report noting that the president has used taxpayer dollars to finance “a sophisticated propaganda and lobbying campaign” made up of “inappropriate and sometimes unlawful public relations and propaganda initiatives.” Often, this involves “covert propaganda,” in which officials ask others to repeat White House talking points without mentioning their connection to the president. (Read our summary here.)

Evidently, 36 pages was not enough. The committee missed an event.

Sally Kohn wrote in The Huffington Post yesterday that she attended a May 12, 2009, meeting in which multiple Obama administration officials asked the radical Left to promote its legislative agenda.

I reported on this “cultural policy” summit called by Valerie Jarrett nearly a year ago. Dozens of the most extreme activists on the left-wing’s fringe met in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with eight Obama administration officials, all of whom report either to Jarrett or First Lady Michelle Obama. The meeting’s summary noted that “more than 60 artists and creative organizers…came together for a White House briefing on Art, Community, Social Justice, National Recovery.”

Among other things, Kohn confirms Jarrett was present, although the meeting’s notes tried to airbrush her out of the summit.

The Obama administration officials made it clear they wanted the fringe leftists to help shape the president’s agenda, then promote the Obama party line. Tina Tchen, who works in Jarrett’s Office of Public Engagement, told attendees, “The administration wants to sustain energy from the election process and turn it toward the agenda.” Buffy Wicks, who would later take party in the infamous NEA call, “asked briefing participants to think through how their networks and organizations can participate in areas such as the arts in education, healthcare and preventative care, energy and environment, or economic opportunity.”

The activists then broke into groups to “ideate” on how to best promote the president’s legislative agenda. Michelle Miller of the SEIU suggested participants: “Create a counter narrative to the Luntz memo/Republican talking points designed to destroy health care reform. They can offer creative, humorous voices that can think outside of white papers or New York Times op-eds to communicate effectively about the importance of health care reform and diminish the increasing attacks on our movement for reform. For example, the satirical webisodes SEIU is producing with comedy writers with content from Lutz [sic.] memo.”

Sally Kohn’s panel lamented the failure of the 2007 amnesty bill but hoped, “Artists and cultural organizers can play a critical role this year on helping advance the legislation, as well as over the coming years helping bring the humanity and personal/family stories of the issue to light.”

Kohn revealed yesterday that this meeting was the beginning, not the end, of the radical Left’s collusion with Obama. “The White House convened a weekly meeting called ‘Common Purpose’ at which DC progressive organizations were invited,” she wrote. At these Common Purpose meetings, “the White House dictated its agenda and appealed to the professional left for back-up.”

In other words, Obama administration officials, led by Valerie Jarrett, have directed a year-long covert propaganda campaign from the White House aimed at securing support for its agenda from the most radical elements of the political spectrum.

Kohn is no right-winger. She is a self-described “Jewish lesbian” who once wrote a diary entry on DailyKos entitled, “Why I Have a Little Crush on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”

Neither were the other participants anything but beyond the pale. The invitation list included several associates of Van Jones and a number of left-wing conspiracy theorists who believe the CIA sells crack in minority neighborhoods.

Perhaps the worst example of the people Obama is willing to play ball with is someone who calls herself “Rha Goddess.” Rha’s biography describes her as “the former International Spokeswoman for the Universal Zulu Nation.” That group teaches “The Bible has been tampered with and must be reinterpreted” in accordance with the Koran. Its manifesto teaches its members their opponents are “a race of Devils,” whom they “should fight in The Name of Allah, Jah, Jehovah, Eloahim, The Creator, The Most High Supreme One, God.”

Kohn’s revelations should provide fresh fodder for investigators, and a clear window into the radical bent of this administration.

The question we should all ponder is: Which is more frightening, the Obama administration’s covert propaganda campaign or the anti-American extremists they got in bed with in order to execute it?