SIGN UP - IT'S FREE!
SEARCH FSM
| National Debt Clock |
A million seconds pass in 12 days.
A billion seconds pass in 31 years.
A trillion seconds pass in 31,688 years!
January 8, 2010
Exclusive – Oval Office Watch – Friday, January 8
Dorothy Rabinowitz: One 'Allegedly' Too Many - HERE.
The Jihad Decade Cometh - HERE.
Congress horribilis - SEE HERE.
Palin: We Need 'A Commander-in-Chief, Not a Law Professor' - HERE.
The Millennium Barack
Michael LeMieux, NewsWithViews.com
Barack Obama ran his campaign on many issues to “fundamentally change America.” Some of those issues seem to be very lofty goals even if it is not his job to do so or even constitutional, but when has that ever stopped a modern politician.
I have been going back over what Obama has done and said since he has entered federal service and among them are these goals.
1. Ending poverty and hunger in America and around the world
2. Universal Health Care and reducing child mortality rates
3. Protecting the Environment
4. Minority rights and gender equality
5. Fighting HIV/AIDS
6. Strengthening the rule of law
7. Strengthening public education
8.Global partnership for development
Obama ran on the Democrat Party ticket and has espoused an array of items that have earmarked his agenda for change in America. But as I have researched more into the movements that affect America around the world I started seeing some very interesting things that made me wonder just whose agenda is really being plied on the American people. Is it really just the brainstorm of a driven man to "fundamentally change America," or is there more to this story than meets the eye? Read article.
One C?smos: Messianic Mystique and Mythic Mistakes
One Cosmos.Blogspot.com
If mankind is unavoidably rooted in mythos, what is the myth of liberalism? For if we can decode their mythology, then perhaps we can understand the deep structure that binds them to their strange gods (re-ligio meaning literally to "bind").
I suppose I wouldn't so much mind their strange gods if it didn't cost me so much in the form of tribute every April 15. Also, it's not fair, since while we are not permitted (and rightfully so) to establish a state religion, they are permitted to establish a religion of the almighty state.
Let's contrast the examples of Reagan and Obama. Both men rode into office on a wave of myth. However, one was genuine and rooted in the transcendent truth of collective American memory and experience, while the other was a pure counterfeit -- like a psychic poultrice that drew the immature and unarticulated spiritual energy of the left up into it. In this regard, real myths are regenerative (since they are close to the Source), whereas false ones are degenerative and rapidly exhausted. This is why, for example, Christian truth has flourished for over 2000 years, while the myth of Obama couldn't even sustain its spiritually drunken illusion for a year. Read article.
Obama: The God That's Failing
Stuart Schneiderman.Blogspot.com
Some leftists are beginning to denounce Obama for not being sufficiently left-wing. If they really believe what they are saying, they are fooling themselves.
If Obama were seen as a successful president, if the nation were rallying around his agenda, if his poll numbers were rising, then, I believe, these same leftists would be cheering from the rooftops.
They are chagrined because they see their hopes and their dreams, their future, and especially their future power being compromised by someone whose ineptitude they never grasped.
How did they ever imagine that someone with so little experience and such a flimsy resume could possibly walk into the White House, assume the office of the presidency, and turn the nation radically to the left?
If you ask what they were thinking, the answer is that they weren't.
Of course, they will turn on their god before they will question their own judgment. If Obama has to be sacrificed so that they can still believe in their own sublime intelligence, so be it.
When you invest it all in the wrong stock or the wrong team or the wrong manager you are going to go to the greatest of lengths to rationalize your failure: the game was rigged, the opponents were cheating, the god was a Madoff. Read article.
Obama’s Health-Care Gamble - And why he may come to regret it.
Howard Fineman, Newsweek.com
Perhaps not since the New Deal has a new president made such a massive bet on a single domestic initiative. I think I understand Obama's reasoning. It did not take him long (probably after the first round of CIA briefings) to realize that he was not going to be able to satisfy his liberal base on intractable, unwinnable foreign and security policy. It's easier to make history on the home front.
Obama had promised us a transparent "Google Government," but now we know what Obama government actually looks like: ambitious and generous, perhaps, but also secretive, Chicago-style, and way too complicated. Fewer than half of voters now support the legislation, murky as it still is to them. Crucially, support has cratered among independents.
The result is a 10-year, trillion-dollar contraption full of political risk and unintended consequences for a health-care system that constitutes one sixth of the economy. Many of the people who will benefit directly from the reforms, the uninsured, don't vote. Insurance premiums will continue to shoot up for most of us; Democrats fret that they will be blamed for those increases in the 2010 elections. Some regulations on the industry kick in immediately, but most don't begin until at least 2013. And yet, to allow the bill to "save" money in the first decade, most new taxes and fees go into effect immediately. "We're collecting money before we're giving all the benefits!" lamented a Democratic senator facing reelection. "That is a political disaster."
Maybe for that guy and his congressional colleagues, but what about Obama? For now, he is safely behind a blast wall, since many of the law's features wouldn't come into play until his second term, if he has one. But if he's lucky enough to get that far, he will discover that even simple things in government never go as planned; a project as large and complex as his health-care "fix" is certain to be more costly and disruptive than anticipated, and in ways no one can predict. "Never allow a crisis to go to waste," Emanuel declared a year ago. "They are opportunities to do big things." Yes they are, but Obama has to hope he's not creating another crisis in the process. Read article.
A Cold-Blooded Foreign Policy
Fouad Ajami, WSJ.com
With year one drawing to a close, the truth of the Obama presidency is laid bare: retrenchment abroad, and redistribution and the intrusive regulatory state at home. This is the genuine calling of Barack Obama, and of the "progressives" holding him to account. The false dichotomy has taken hold—either we care for our own, or we go abroad in search of monsters to destroy or of broken nations to build. The decision to withdraw missile defense for Poland and the Czech Republic was of a piece with that retreat in American power.
In the absence of an overriding commitment to the defense of American primacy in the world, the Obama administration "cheats." It will not quit the war in Afghanistan but doesn't fully embrace it as its cause. It prosecutes the war but with Republican support—the diehards in liberal ranks and the isolationists are in no mood for bonding with Afghans. (Harry Reid's last major foreign policy pronouncement was his assertion, three years ago, that the war in Iraq was lost.)
As revolution simmers on the streets of Iran, the will was summoned in the White House to offer condolences over the passing of Grand Ayatollah Hussein Montazeri, an iconic figure to the Iranian opposition. But the word was also put out that the administration was keen on the prospect of John Kerry making his way to Tehran. No one is fooled. In the time of Barack Obama, "engagement" with Iran's theocrats and thugs trumps the cause of Iranian democracy.
In retrospect, that patina of cosmopolitanism in President Obama's background concealed the isolationism of the liberal coalition that brought him to power. The tide had turned in the congressional elections of 2006. American liberalism was done with its own antecedents—the outlook of Woodrow Wilson and FDR and Harry Truman and John Kennedy. It wasn't quite "Come home, America," but close to it. This was now the foreign policy of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden. There was in the land a "liberal orientalism," if you will, a dismissive attitude about the ability of other nations to partake of liberty. Read article.
Dooming Europe
Pamela Geller, American Thinker.com
"The Europe as you know it from visiting, from your parents, or friends is on the verge of collapsing." Geert Wilders said this in a speech he made in the U.S. last year. He went on: "We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe's destiny and might send the continent in what Ronald Reagan called 'a thousand years of darkness.'" This applies not just to Europe, but to America as well.
Been to Europe lately? Thought it was bad? You ain't seen nothing yet. The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, hailed by Barack Obama, nailed the coffin shut on national sovereignty in Europe. The people of Europe fought it, but they were overwhelmed by their political elites and the lack of American leadership in this age of our current U.S. president.
Come January 1, 2010, a disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Med Partnership (referring to Europe and the Mediterranean region) goes into effect with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media.
Why should Americans care about this? The reason is that this global gobbledygook is coming to America, thanks to our globalist president. Read article.
Another Failed Presidency
Geoffrey P. Hunt, American Thinker.com
Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.
But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five- point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on? Read article.
Interpol, In Your Midst
Barry Napier, CFP.com
None of us can object to a police force, or an army, because humankind is too adept at being stupid and wicked. But, when a police force or army are used against the people they are meant to protect, they become agents of the wicked who wish to control us.
In an earlier article on Interpol I said that this global organisation now has complete diplomatic immunity to act as it wishes on US soil. It will not be long before it gains similar concessions worldwide. The reason it gained US approval first is that Obama has already promised America to the UN. But, some have misconstrued the situation…
Interpol has no special officers of its own, apart from HQ managers. Interpol acts through local police departments, seconding local officers to do its work in that particular country. This is what will make Interpol’s interventions so secret! The police officer at your door will not be wearing an Interpol badge, but the badge of your own local police force. This is why I referred you to the activity of the SS, who similarly worked through local police officers in countries they invaded. Interpol, then, will be in your midst and you won’t know it! And they will be used to cover-up what Obama and government don’t want you to know about.
Crisis… Interpol Using a Marxist Ploy
Secretary General Ronald Noble of Interpol, said on the occasion of his re-election to office on 20th September, 2005, “It was on that day (11th September 2001) that we first began reaching out to you in times of crisis, rather than waiting for you to ask for help. One can say Interpol was reborn on the 11th September, 2001.” (Acceptance speech, Interpol site).
Sounds good? What if the local social work department knocked on your door and said “We won’t wait until you call us – we will take your children from you right now, just in case”? Or, what if a surgeon called you into hospital and said “Today, I will cut off your left leg, just in case it gets injured sometime.”? Acceptable? I don’t think so.
Interpol says it is intervening whether we ask for help or not. Again, I ask you – what does that sound like? Read article. -
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0) | Sign Up for FSM Updates!
