The world calls it “What goes around comes around.” The Bible calls it “Reaping what you sow.”
As a result of unfathomable evil, America has witnessed innocent people suffer grave injuries and a precious child lose his life too soon.
After the fact, the question that should be asked is: what went around that resulted in such a horrendous tragedy coming around? What was sown that has resulted in reaping so much heartbreak?
Following the Boston Marathon bombing, Barack Obama mentioned the “full weight of justice” and finding out “why” the “tragedy” took place. The problem with the “why” is that the truthful answer to that question would likely be rejected by a nation whose egocentric godlessness may have contributed to the evil sprouting up all around us.
The better question is: could the death and destruction we’re experiencing be a direct result of beckoning murder and iniquity into our midst?
Over the last 40 years, a gruesome procedure called abortion has snatched 60 million human beings from the womb, and the harsh truth is that the decision to do so has certainly plowed the fallow ground and sown the seeds of death. That sowing has resulted in an alarming yield of misfortune, or in the more familiar vernacular, what’s gone around has come around.
Terrorism, by definition, involves an element of surprise coupled with extreme violence being visited upon the vulnerable. Terrorism is cruel, cowardly, and driven by a religious fervor that is based on the belief that certain people are unworthy of life.
Neophyte politician Barack Obama met his match in Dick Cheney a mature, experienced statesman. Obama may think Rules for Radicals techniques will work on Dick, but he is dealing with a valiant, unmovable warrior. Obama is used to undying adulation and goes largely unchallenged in spite of providing minimal strategic policy details. Obama hasn’t a clue what he is doing and Dick Cheney is neither flummoxed nor threatened by bravado. Barry picked a fight with the wrong guy and if anyone should be anxious about the outcome it should be Obama.
Naive people enamored by rhetoric never bothered to research Obama’s past history or consider his lack of experience. The irresponsible choice of electing Obama was like asking a yellow cab driver to pilot a stealth bomber. If the pilot manages to get airborne there’s a good chance those who placed him in the cockpit will be victimized by his landing. Dick Cheney, an accomplished fighter pilot, recognizes the dire threat Obama poses to the nation and is attempting to divert disaster.
No one can deny Obama is a skilled orator, but when you get past his tri-weekly soliloquy photo-ops and the soaring violins cease the content leaves a lot to be desired. Obama is inexperienced, has a paper-thin resume and is driven exclusively by ideological leftist agenda. He is a man without conviction who tries to play both sides of the aisle, “…a double minded man, unstable in all his ways.” Obama’s rhetoric contains bitterness toward the history of the country he leads and promotes an agenda intended to right perceived wrongs, regardless of cost.
Obama loathes disparagement and becomes agitated if challenged. Dick Cheney is someone who is unwavering in his core beliefs and endures criticism with a strength, which comes from making the hard decisions. Obama continues to maintain the stance that since the election deemed him winner the option for political policy debate is closed. “Some Americans are angry, others want to refight debates that have been settled, most clearly at the ballot box in November.” Obama is used to having his every word breathlessly jotted into composition notebooks and regurgitated as gospel on mid-terms. However, Washington D.C. is not the University of Chicago School of Law and Dick Cheney isn’t one of his students and won’t readily submit to dictatorial edicts.
Although Obama has oratory proficiency that can be likened to ice skater Kristy Yamaguchi doing triple salchow jumps, Dick Cheney is a political Zamboni. He is highly articulate, intelligent and able to make all things clear and straightforward. He exudes undeniable gravitas and is adept at succinctly sweeping away the debris of deceit without histrionics and inappropriate emotionalism.
Since January 20th Cheney has been quietly standing in the wings watching the show, listening to the rhetoric as Obama undermines national security, defends terrorists, takes a wrecking ball to the reputation of the Bush Administration and exalts his own tenderfoot self as the authority who knows everything from the economy to subduing nuclear bullies. Dick Cheney has been observing a kindergarten dress-up where yesterday Obama was the sheriff and today the president.
When presented with the Guantanamo Bay challenge from a Democratically controlled U.S. Senate Obama was stunned. They, “…handed him a stinging setback by blocking funds to shutter the prison until he presents a detailed plan on what to do with the 240 terrorism suspects held there.” Psychologists say that narcissists externalize blame and true to form Obama did so in a speech at the National Archives addressing the nation’s security issues. Rather than admitting zero plans and that his second day in office hyped-up proclamation to release Gitmo detainees was a tad premature, he blamed the Bush Administration saying, “We are cleaning up something that is quite simply – a mess – a misguided experiment that has left in its wake a flood of legal challenges.”
To call what he has been left a “mess” reveals naivety, blatant unawareness and astounding arrogance. Does he appreciate the mess Bush/Cheney dealt with after 9-11? “The totality of the destruction of the 7 World Trade Center buildings is beyond imagination. Massive steel buildings with concrete floors, glass and offices simply pulverized, except for the steel. Bar joists and concrete reinforcement became a tangled mess that was difficulty to recognize. Deck form and concrete disappeared into dust. Office and victims became dust and ash.”
After a few months, quiet man Cheney obviously felt it was time to step forward and set the record straight ducking under the ropes and entering the ring.
Ideological Obama accused the Bush Administration of lying saying, “All too often, our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.” Obama’s comments engaged Cheney and the light-weight president was forced to box a seven-foot, fire-breathing hulk bearing down on him, while he boxed air. Obama, decked out in designer boxing duds was on notice to duke-it-out with a fearless, mean, sucker-punch guy, dressed in a ripped T-shirt with duct tape wrapped around his knuckles.
Cheney leaned against the ropes as towel-boy Emmanuel dried off Barry’s profusely sweaty forehead. Cool, calm Richard had Barry on the defensive. Cheney stared down Barack’s narcissistic soft spot and elicited a reaction. In self-protective mode, Barack portrayed himself to stand for the values of our Founding Fathers. He made a huge mistake when he said, “Every now and then, there are those who think that America’s safety and success requires us to walk away from the sacred principles enshrined in this building. And we hear such voices today.” That was when Cheney sprinkled resin on his clenched fists.
Cheney remained calm and at just the right moment came off the ropes sans teleprompter, script or backdrop of the Constitution as filler. His conviction is his core and his strength and in clear and concise terms retorted to the absurdity of Obama’s policy to release enhanced interrogation memos, coddle terrorists, and transfer them to American prisons or to call security measures torture. Cheney scored a right to the abdomen saying, “There is never a good time to compromise when the lives and safety of the American people are in the balance.”
Obama came back with a wordy, lengthy speech like a boxer dancing around the ring. Cheney, sure-footed and unafraid, entered the center and said, “Releasing the interrogation memos was flatly contrary to the national security interest of the United States.” Barry gasping for breath cited human rights, the closing of Guantanamo Bay vowing no retreat on the Cuban prison. Cheney responded with a jab to the bridge of his nose asserting this type of irresponsible policy as “rooted in politics not the safety of Americans.”
Barack Obama forced to wipe the trickle of blood from his nose while holding up falling boxer shorts with the other hand, coughed up blood as he tried to reassure a booing crowd that “super-max” jails might be an option for the most dangerous Al Qaeda detainees. Huh? Circling Obama, Cheney mocked him, “The administration has found that it’s easy to receive applause in Europe for closing Guantanamo…but it’s tricky to come up with an alternative that will serve the interest of justice and America’s national security.” Swish Barry’s ideological front tooth went flying.
Obama down for the count crawled around on his belly, attempting to address the use of enhanced interrogation. Obama appealed to the moral fiber of the American conscience saying, “We must leave these methods where they – belong – in the past. They are not who we are. They are not America.” Cheney came in with a left to the chin and replied to the most liberal, pro-choice President in American history calling him a person who engages in, “contrived indignation and phony moralizing on the interrogation methods applied to a few captured terrorists.” Cheney rightly reminded his audience that, “…people who consistently distort the truth in this way are in no position to lecture anyone about “values.”
Pushing the Bush/Cheney policy against the ropes and inflaming the left the Obama Administration in an attempt to “…stay true to who we are” released five memos revealing the enhanced interrogation techniques utilized to gain information from three high ranking terrorists calling them “torture.” Cheney, a moral man, whose main concern has always been the protection and safety of America, felt a knockout punch was overdue, especially since Barack accused our nation of, “…losing our moral bearings over torture.” Cheney split Obama’s lip by saying, “For all that we’ve lost in this conflict, the United States has never lost its moral bearings…I can assure you [the interrogated terrorists] were neither innocent nor victims.”
Obama shielded his face from an oncoming assault but was unable to protect himself from the onslaught…where truth defeats lies and morality overturns immorality…Cheney’s final blow came couched in a question that probes deeper than the threat of Islamic jihadists. It challenges those who desire our destruction and can be applied to anyone, including his opponent, who hates this nation, its values and judges our moral standards from a place of faulty morality of their own. The knockout came when Cheney said, “It is much closer to the truth that terrorists hate this country precisely because of the values we profess and seek to live by, not by some alleged failure to do so. Nor are terrorists or those who see them as victims exactly the best judges of America’s moral standards, one way or the other.”
With the clang of the final bell the round and the match was over. Cheney retained the championship belt of protector of national security, tested leadership, courage and patriotism, as whimpering, whiny, wounded Obama skulked away.
The dragging manacles scrapping along the halls of power belong to the ghost of Saul Alinsky. He is the phantom influencing the tenor of the politics insuring that left-wing policies are implemented, unobstructed by dissension. Alinsky taught his mentee well and now Barry is able to apply the principles of Rules for Radicals to every person or group who disagrees with him in any venue of governance.
The President is a textbook narcissist. He presents himself as being secure and having high self-esteem but instead has crossed the “border of healthy confidence into thinking so highly of himself that he has put himself on a pedestal.” Obama’s deluded impression of himself causes an inability to handle criticism or disagreement. Narcissists demand constant praise and admiration, expect others to concur with their ideas and plans and are easily hurt and rejected.
Alinsky’s tactics work to Obama’s advantage. He repeatedly utilizes the tenets of Rules for Radicals attacking and targeting those, be they individuals or groups, who do not agree with or approve of his political policy initiatives. Obama appears most content orating between two Greek columns, at an elevated podium, in a stadium full of weeping, cheering devotees, smoke machines puffing away while soaring violins play Handel’s Messiah at his entrance.
Since Election Day, Obama has been acting the part of a narcissistic, alpha-male, marking territorylike a dog racing around a hydrant claiming it as his own. If anyone tries to impede him, he shifts into bullying, aptly applying Alinsky Ghost of RadicalsPast methods, insuring those perceived as a threat are aware he alone is the leader of the pack.
Alinsky scholar, Barack H. Obama, doesn’t take well to other dogs coming around his telephone pole barking and baring their drooling fangs demanding he back off. It appears Obama has decided, in true Alinsky style to“… target, freeze, personalize and polarize” his political opposition.
One shocking example of this is the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS), presently identified as The Department of Haughty Socialists, “Intelligence” Analysis Report. Unclassified and widely distributed entitled, Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. This 10-page atrocity is devoid of facts and based solely on discriminatory, political profiling-type supposition whose presentation illustrates typical Saul Alinsky technique.
The anti-capitalist spirit of Alinsky is goading Obama to take a sword to the reputation of rightwing conservatives, instructing him to target them, freeze negative public perception, personalize the attack and polarize all people on the right without distinction. “The Radicalmay resort to the sword … He hates these individuals not as persons but as symbols representing ideas or interests which he believes to be inimical to the welfare of the people. In this case, this method is being used as patent intimidation and chastisement, resulting from the Rights lack of support for Obama’s narcissistic plans to radicalize and socialize our entire nation.
The Intelligence and Analysis Assessment warned law enforcement officials of the threat of rightwing extremists. After its worldwide release, the information specified that the supposed impending terrorization is “largely rhetorical”and there are no “…indicated plans to carry out violent acts.” Translation: the report is based on pure speculation and has no specific information to back up accusations. Nonetheless, symbolism, although errantly applied, does give substance to the impressions and thoughts of the uninformed masses, which is precisely its purpose.
The groups, under attack, include anyone who disagrees with big government, those who favor federalism, anyone who opposes illegal immigration, second-amendment rights advocates, pro-lifers, service men and women returning from war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Whether they are individuals or groups like the military, NRA or Birthright, all are now considered a potential terrorism concern to the Obamalinsky administration. It seems as if the specter of Saul Alinsky is whispering to his apprentice reminding him that “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
This administration wants to steer the public away from what they call the “politics of fear” by rejecting the terrorism moniker as fear based, renaming terrorists, man-caused disaster-ists. They then assign the name “terrorist” to Americans in hopes of cultivating an environment of trepidation among the citizens of this nation one-toward-another. Alinsky has taught Obama well that the “…morality of a means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory.” Through the misrepresentation of many upstanding Americans this administration has targeted as a threat to the nation innocent private citizens. Even referring to conservative political banter, on the Internet, as “chatter,” which is the language used to describe intercepted terrorist communication.
Shamelessly, the Intelligence Based on Ignorance Report amassed returning veterans together with, ex-military man turned, Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and a pro-gun, Philadelphia shooter who killed three police officers. What better way to cultivate the soil for a paramilitary group than to wear away the nation’s trust and foundational confidence in the United States military? An Obama paramilitary organization can be counted on to abide by any command from their leader, made-up of illegal immigrants and scores of people made dependent for survival upon his policies. A band of yahoos who are willing to apply the Alinsky principal that, “In war, the end justifies almost any means.”
The extremist report repeatedly mentions this, “historical election” as recruitment tool for the Right. It clarifies that “most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president, but stopping short of calls for violent action.” One problem is that the assessment fails to give examples. It is replete with conspiracy theory, accusations and long-shot associations but extremely deficient in facts, examples or references. Even going so far as to say that “…in the run up to the election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some threatening activity targeting the democratic nominee,” once again no citation or proof, failing to identify the extremists.
Obama, under Alinsky’s tutelage, managed to stir up a good dose of racial suspicion and division, accomplished through personal pit-bull, Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano. Napolitano implicated individuals with policy beliefs adhering to less government, faithfulness to the Constitution, right-to-life, respect for law and opposition to illegal immigration. She did this through nuances implying these values are somehow connected to racial bigotry.
This suspect examination of rightwing extremists naturally brought up the illegal immigration issue, highlighting “prominent,” unnamed civil rights organizations having “observed” an increase in anti-Hispanic crime. Unfortunately, neither was the Hispanic civil rights groups identified, nor was there any statistical data offered to back up the statement. The opportunity to bring balance was curiously overlooked by failing to mention that Hispanic crime is on the rise in our country, or the obvious terrorist aspect of marauding Latino street gangs.
The assessment analysis doesn’t waste an opportunity to intimate that Christianity may play a role in extremism by mentioning “end times” prophecy in the same breath as racist, anti-Semitic, conspiratorial, violent Christian Identity groups. The goal here has an obvious justifiable agenda. Liberal author Mary Beth Rogers said there are, “Only two kinds of people who can afford the luxury of acting on principle, those with absolute power and those with none and no desire to get any…everyone else who wants to be effective in politics has to learn to be ‘unprincipled’ enough to compromise in order to see their principles succeed.”
This report is an effort to convince the public that DHS is concerned with protecting the general public from the danger of potential home-grown terrorist organizations and then morphs into a terrorist extremist itself. The definition of terrorism is the threatened use of force by a person or organized group against people with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments often for ideological or political reasons. The rightwing of this nation is the group being terrorized by the President’s administration. Conservatives are being threatened by the force of words with the intention of menacing and coercing us into surrendering to a left-wing, liberal narcissists ideology and political persuasion.
Saul‘s protégé knows that “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” The danger of being viewed as a terrorist, extremist, being grouped together with militia men who threatened to kill illegal immigrants, domestic terrorists, Ku-Klux Klansmen and White supremacists, is being used as an Alinsky inspired means of control to daunt and smother political opposition.
Barry Soetero, ACORN community organizer, sees us as his own large scale neighborhood and he is applying Alinsky organizing techniques on us to pressure us into submitting to his socialistic plans for this nation. The Narcissist-in-Chief is lifting his leg on a group of people who refuse to allow him to mark us as his own or transform us into the prescription he needs to address his self-absorbed issues by defining us as terrorist extremists instead of the patriotic Americans we are!
Obama’s desire to target, freeze, personalize and polarize fifty-percent of the population and make conservatives or rightwing political adherents a bigger threat to the safety of this nation than true Islamic extremists that desire to see us destroyed. His view of those who disagree with him has been exposed in this report, as well as his pathetic clutching at obscure, pitiable, rare examples in an effort to isolate and shut down opposing political dissent.
Copyright 2009 Jeannieology. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
The Administration has been busily working overtime to violate the right-to privacy of U.S. citizens. They are demanding lists of AIG Executives who received bonuses to be made public to a nation that they’ve successfully provoked to the point of violence. They have also been self-righteously passing bills to place 90% taxation on legal retention bonuses, which they wrote into the bailout bill and knew about before they were granted. Through government fiat and class warfare Congress and the President are seeking to publicly scourge the private sector and put government restriction and caps on how much executives can earn. The groundswell of anger that they have fostered is, at best, disproportionate to the more pressing issues, which should be concerning Americans.
I guess Barry feels the need to keep honest less than one percent of the pilots who have had administrative action brought up against them in hopes of moving toward also disarming the other 99% of those whose records are pristine by haranguing them with field inspections. “The 12,000 Federal Flight Deck Officers, the pilots who have been approved to carry guns, are reported to have the best behavior of any federal law enforcement agency.”
Arming pilots after 9/11 was a security back-up. About 70% of pilots employed by major airlines have military backgrounds and arming them gives that extra layer of security that could make the difference between determent and disaster. This defensive policy insured the protection of Americans on airplanes by pilots who could easily prevent a tragedy. The question that we need to ask is, “Don’t you think Obama’s emphasis is a little perverted and off base?” This type of policy punishes American citizens and caters to a small sector of society, which includes left-wing, anti-gun activists and gleeful terrorist recruits at the expense of American security.
Attorney General Erik Holder and Obama “…in a briefing with reporters, said administration officials are still reviewing individual cases of the approximately 259 detainees to determine which will be put on trial and which may be released.” This is the same Administration who supposedly reviewed the bailout bill but now claim that they were unaware the bonuses they put into the package were included. The Administration is intent on putting the rights of terrorists in such high esteem that it appears their “rights” supersede our President’s concern for our nation’s safety. Terrorists are being vigilantly, guardedly and equitably treated, while Holder and Obama throw caution to the wind when it comes to the security of American pilots, the aircraft they fly and the passenger’s lives they are responsible for.
Right now, enemies of this nation who in a heartbeat would behead you or me on prime time television are safely incarcerated in a facility off the shores of the United States. Pilots who fly most major aircraft in this country are armed in defense of another attack similar to the one that killed 3,000 innocent Americans. In response to the success of both these policies, this ideological Administration is planning on letting enemy combatants, who were picked up on the battle field, loose like rabid rats on American soil. Moreover, they are disarming airline pilots, while malicious, soon to be released terrorists plan on buying airline tickets to peruse our airspace with violent intent. And we’re busy worrying about executive bonuses, and focusing on the economy? The economy of security should be our priority.
The lynch mob is encircling the AIG headquarters in New York while Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul want-to-be types, awaiting release, are planning moving in next door from you and I, complete with machetes, video cameras, bombs and plans to infiltrate our elementary schools on some sunny afternoon in early fall. The American people are being distracted, disarmed, deceived and pursuing the wrong enemy and focusing on the wrong concerns.
Juxtapose the potential for disaster against the “…unnecessary harassment of the pilots.” While our enemies plan our demise, we release terrorists, unmonitored into our communities imparting unhindered access to both us and our families due to lax immigration law. We disarm law enforcement agents who are equipped to keep us safe. We do all this while the President’s pit-bulls are jacking up the rhetoric, making enemies out of Wall Street, who are also, lest we forget, American citizens. Those presently in charge are guilty of providing the perfect diversion that can only benefit those who seek the corporate destruction of our nation and our people, resulting in a “man-made disaster” designed by those who should be preventing one.
Copyright 2009 Jeannieology. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
I have been trying for years to come to a place of being able to understand what to me is an obvious dichotomy between cultural sensitivity, which is defined as “knowing that differences exist between cultures, but not assigning values to the differences (better or worse, right or wrong)” and the definition of culture which is, “a way of life of a group of people–the behaviors, beliefs, values, and symbols that they accept, generally without thinking about them, and that are passed along by communication and imitation from one generation to the next.” Based on these definitions, if we do not accept every culture without judgment, do we become guilty of being culturally insensitive?
If we couple together moral relativism, which the definition implies, and cultural sensitivity we find ourselves trapped in an inescapable paradox. There are groups of people whose cultures are such that the destruction of others makes up the cumulative foundation of all they believe in. As a nation we have suffered great loss as a result of the ethnic expression of jihad war tactics. It is confusing though, aren’t those we presently consider our dire enemies considered such purely on the collective programming of their murderous, fanatical minds?
As a nation if we are to be culturally sensitive, by staying true to the definition, we cannot and should not assign values to any other people group’s cultivated behavior, knowledge, values or motives. If we make an excuse for any one group and then choose to condemn or judge any culture negatively we have entered and under-girded the anathema sphere of insensitivity.
We need to acknowledge the fact that we are doomed, if in order to remain sensitive, we have to forfeit our standard of right or wrong based on a definition, which beckons us to “…not assign values to our differences.” Moreover, if we question the incarceration and treatment of uncivilized, murderers and demonize governments, which strive to protect themselves from destruction, it is we who’ve been deceived. Cultural relativism to be true to what it is must remain amoral, regardless of the consequences of exposure to our civilization or national well being. We can’t have it both ways… either we are, or we aren’t.
Terrorism is warfare tactic in a religious jihad, which is and will be extended worldwide. It is very much a way of life to certain people groups. Their behaviors, beliefs, values and symbols are directly related to the destruction of any living thing or practice that contradicts their interpretation of their holy book. Not only are they deeply rooted and steeped in the culture of terrorism but they fervently communicate and pass on these beliefs and tactics to the next generation of martyrs they are zealously cultivating. This is their culture, are we now to judge it and be credited as insensitive? I think not. Haven’t we already given credibility to their cause by bestowing on enemy combatants American civil rights? Haven’t we extended a gesture of kindness by acknowledging the human rights of inhuman individuals who would behead kindergartners in a heartbeat?
Why do we stop there? Why not supply Camp 3 Guantanamo Bay prisoners with new machetes as a good faith example of our cultural sensitivity and understanding of a cause that is exemplative of their culture? How about fuses, fertilizer and dump trucks? Shouldn’t we make sure that our detainees have a venue to express themselves, either while still in Cuba, or better yet when they are moved to Pennsylvania to a minimum security facility in John Murtha’s district? Why do we shake our heads in disbelief when we hear that, a teenage suicide bomber killed at least 35 people, including five members of parliament in Afghanistan…wasn’t he just culturally expressing himself?
Our beliefs are contradictory. We are caught in a quandary. We can’t apply moral relativism to one issue or one action and then not to others. If we do, we’ve become what we despise. Either we decide what is right and what is wrong on all levels and establish a standard, or we step aside and champion the diversity of different cultures, we erase the moral code and finally establish relativism as our god, even if it means the destruction of our nation, our lifestyle and all that we hold dear. In a land where choice reigns supreme, the choice is now ours.