Being that it is winding down to election day, I had considered creating a real website just to catalog Obama's falsehoods. Ain't enough hours in the day. Not if the day was 40 hours long. I believe part of the Obama strategy was to overload us with deception so that we would spend all of our time refuting their lies. False witness becomes the new normal and the refuters are left in the dust wondering what happened.
But all of Obama's many fabrications are eclipsed by one big, ugly whopper. I am referring to the tall tale wherein Obama used his own mother to advance his political agenda. Had it been true that Stanley Dunham was killed by greedy insurance barons, it would still seem a bit unseemly to use one's own deceased mother to advance one's career. But when the story turns out to be bogus, Barack Obama is revealed as one of the sleaziest carnival barkers this country has ever seen.
So I am surprised that Team Obama would accuse Mitt Romney of killing an innocent woman to satisfy his own boundless greed. The story parallels the bogus Stanley Dunham saga up to and including the factual inaccuracy of both of these contrivances. This one's going to backfire. No one's going to believe Romney's a murderer but people will believe that Obama is a compulsive liar. Possibly worse, Obama is an unimaginative liar.
Yes, we have heard this one before.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Narcissism Part I
OK, we are posting out of order here but the material is mostly non-sequential in nature. You don't miss much by watching Vaknin's videos out of order.
I wish a non-Larouchian had broken this story but I will take truth where I can find it.
I am not particularly pleased that Lyndon Larouche has found acceptance in Eastern Europe. David Duke is also a rock star over there. I thought these were chess-playing geniuses whose brilliance was hidden from the world by the Great Red Cloak.
The comments at Youtube are interesting. I can't get enough of this stuff.
I made the Chauncey Gardner comparison first. http://obotomy.blogspot.com/2010/01/too-early-for-shrouding-but.html. Can't blame anyone for plagiarism though. According to the stats, no one read the original post anyway.
Vaknin claims to have watched over one thousand hours of Obama (Better man than I) and to have deeply studied his actions. He seems to have nailed his personality in all of its chilling detail.
I wish a non-Larouchian had broken this story but I will take truth where I can find it.
I am not particularly pleased that Lyndon Larouche has found acceptance in Eastern Europe. David Duke is also a rock star over there. I thought these were chess-playing geniuses whose brilliance was hidden from the world by the Great Red Cloak.
The comments at Youtube are interesting. I can't get enough of this stuff.
I made the Chauncey Gardner comparison first. http://obotomy.blogspot.com/2010/01/too-early-for-shrouding-but.html. Can't blame anyone for plagiarism though. According to the stats, no one read the original post anyway.
Vaknin claims to have watched over one thousand hours of Obama (Better man than I) and to have deeply studied his actions. He seems to have nailed his personality in all of its chilling detail.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
The Return of Sam Vaknin
Well, I guess Obama won't get the Larouchian vote.
Am I in "The Twilight Zone?" This is heavy stuff and in my opinion, highly credible. Yet, it gets fewer than 10 views/day on Youtube. Please take the time to watch this video.
THE NARCISSIST
Am I in "The Twilight Zone?" This is heavy stuff and in my opinion, highly credible. Yet, it gets fewer than 10 views/day on Youtube. Please take the time to watch this video.
THE NARCISSIST
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Slob
As I mentioned previously, I did not always dislike Obama on a personal level. But the arrogant, boorish, condescending personality who has emerged over time is hardly a charming figure. I am skeptical of Obama's so called likability.
Monday, August 6, 2012
The Fainting Continues...
We have chronicled the ongoing fainting woman phenomenon at Obama events. The chicks keep falling and the media ignore the story.
The audio is not great so you might have to crank up the speakers.
HORSESHIT ALERT!!!
The audio is not great so you might have to crank up the speakers.
HORSESHIT ALERT!!!
Sunday, August 5, 2012
So You Call Yourself A Liberal
So You Call Yourself a Liberal?
My primary grievance with Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, et al, is that they dumby down political discourse. Liberalism vs. conservatism is a classic false dichotomy. Truth and clarity are sacrificed on the altar of commerce. The Lib bashers apply a pro wrestling formula of good guys and bad guys who cheat to all matters philosophical.
Warning. I am going to link you to Wikipedia. But this concise explanation of liberalism is accurate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism. "Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis)[1] is a broad political ideology or worldview founded on the ideas of liberty and equality."
Ich bin auch ein small l liberal. I believe deeply in liberty and equality under the law (as opposed to a contrived equality orchestrated by elitist thugs.) Interestingly, Milton Friedman referred to himself as a "classical liberal." John Stossel is the only other person I know of who uses that self-description.
If I am a clssical anything, it is a classical couch potato. I cannot use the lofty moniker that great men like Friedman and Stossel use. But I will say that I am both liberal and conservative (both lower case.) Barack Obama on the other hand, is neither. I am liberal in the sense that I believe in the significance of the individual and that I am open-minded. I am conservative in the sense that I respect traditions, customs and institutions that have served us in the past.
I am conservative in that I have grown more respectful of traditional religion over time. For every Fred Phelps and Jack Chick and relgious pedophile, there are thousands of people who upgrade their character via Christianity. Most hospitals were founded by religious organizations. So too were many institutions of higher learning. And Christians were fighting third world famine a century before Bill Gates or Bono were born.
I am conservative in that I believe our forefathers were wise men whose wisdom flourishes with each passing year. Our founding fathers' masterpiece was the US Constitution. Feel free to dismiss them as genocidal slave owners but many of them were abolitionists ahead of their time. Benjamin Franklin started an orphanage for black children in Philadelphia (maybe we can book him on a segregation rap.) John Adams was a fire-breathing liberal who served as defense attorney for the British soldiers who participated in the Boston Massacre. The constant theme of "am I doing the right thing?" runs through the biographies of our founders and is reflected today in our Constitution.
I am conservative in that I believe in the notion of common sense. Political correctness destroys common sense. It cripples our minds. If we don't call it jihad...ohhhh. The Fort Hood massacre would not have happened in an era when common sense was common. A soldier, an officer yet, who kept an ongoing correspondence with enemies of America would have been dealt with swiftly and harshly. Good people would have been saved and we would all have been spared the insulting "workplace violence" explanation.
Most importantly I am fiscally conservative. That is to say, I endorse public fiscal responsibility. Here it gets semantically tricky because if we refer back to the original definition of liberalsim, it would include fiscal responsibility (fiscal conservatism.) I believe wholeheartedly that fiscal conservatism is incompatible with social conservatism (a bureaucratic agenda advanced mostly by nominal Christians.) As such, I generally ignore the culture war hot button issues.
Obama is neither liberal nor conservative. In the words of Bill Clinton, "He is a Chicago thug." If we were to place Obama somewhere along the political spectrum, we would probably seat him with the fascists. But even fascists have principles. Obama's blind lust for power trumps morals, principles and even his rigid ideology. To assign philosphical values to this man would be like analyzing the moral influences or a street gang, a swarm of locusts or a pack of sharks. "I'm getting mine and you can eat your principles!" The 2008 slogan "Yes We Can" would be a diabolical omen.
Let's conclude this with an open question to everyone who has ever called themselves liberal. I believe wholeheartedly that liberals should oppose Obama and all he stand for as vehemently as conservatives oppose him. So here is a question to all my friends who think of themselves as fair and open-minded and enlightened: Do you object to the Obama Administration's use of the IRS to harass nascent Tea Party organizations? If you were disgusted with Nixon's abuses of power, are you also disgusted with Obama's abuses of power? Please answer.
Did I say one question? One more question: Are you disturbed at the Obama DOJ's blatant intimidation of Romney donors? OK, my enlightened, fair-minded, good taste in all things cultural and culinary, conspicuously compassionate, smarter than the unwashed masses, root for the underdog, liberal friends: Can you embrace Obama's flagrant abuses of power and still call yourself a liberal?
Warning. I am going to link you to Wikipedia. But this concise explanation of liberalism is accurate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism. "Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis)[1] is a broad political ideology or worldview founded on the ideas of liberty and equality."
Ich bin auch ein small l liberal. I believe deeply in liberty and equality under the law (as opposed to a contrived equality orchestrated by elitist thugs.) Interestingly, Milton Friedman referred to himself as a "classical liberal." John Stossel is the only other person I know of who uses that self-description.
If I am a clssical anything, it is a classical couch potato. I cannot use the lofty moniker that great men like Friedman and Stossel use. But I will say that I am both liberal and conservative (both lower case.) Barack Obama on the other hand, is neither. I am liberal in the sense that I believe in the significance of the individual and that I am open-minded. I am conservative in the sense that I respect traditions, customs and institutions that have served us in the past.
I am conservative in that I have grown more respectful of traditional religion over time. For every Fred Phelps and Jack Chick and relgious pedophile, there are thousands of people who upgrade their character via Christianity. Most hospitals were founded by religious organizations. So too were many institutions of higher learning. And Christians were fighting third world famine a century before Bill Gates or Bono were born.
I am conservative in that I believe our forefathers were wise men whose wisdom flourishes with each passing year. Our founding fathers' masterpiece was the US Constitution. Feel free to dismiss them as genocidal slave owners but many of them were abolitionists ahead of their time. Benjamin Franklin started an orphanage for black children in Philadelphia (maybe we can book him on a segregation rap.) John Adams was a fire-breathing liberal who served as defense attorney for the British soldiers who participated in the Boston Massacre. The constant theme of "am I doing the right thing?" runs through the biographies of our founders and is reflected today in our Constitution.
I am conservative in that I believe in the notion of common sense. Political correctness destroys common sense. It cripples our minds. If we don't call it jihad...ohhhh. The Fort Hood massacre would not have happened in an era when common sense was common. A soldier, an officer yet, who kept an ongoing correspondence with enemies of America would have been dealt with swiftly and harshly. Good people would have been saved and we would all have been spared the insulting "workplace violence" explanation.
Most importantly I am fiscally conservative. That is to say, I endorse public fiscal responsibility. Here it gets semantically tricky because if we refer back to the original definition of liberalsim, it would include fiscal responsibility (fiscal conservatism.) I believe wholeheartedly that fiscal conservatism is incompatible with social conservatism (a bureaucratic agenda advanced mostly by nominal Christians.) As such, I generally ignore the culture war hot button issues.
Obama is neither liberal nor conservative. In the words of Bill Clinton, "He is a Chicago thug." If we were to place Obama somewhere along the political spectrum, we would probably seat him with the fascists. But even fascists have principles. Obama's blind lust for power trumps morals, principles and even his rigid ideology. To assign philosphical values to this man would be like analyzing the moral influences or a street gang, a swarm of locusts or a pack of sharks. "I'm getting mine and you can eat your principles!" The 2008 slogan "Yes We Can" would be a diabolical omen.
Let's conclude this with an open question to everyone who has ever called themselves liberal. I believe wholeheartedly that liberals should oppose Obama and all he stand for as vehemently as conservatives oppose him. So here is a question to all my friends who think of themselves as fair and open-minded and enlightened: Do you object to the Obama Administration's use of the IRS to harass nascent Tea Party organizations? If you were disgusted with Nixon's abuses of power, are you also disgusted with Obama's abuses of power? Please answer.
Did I say one question? One more question: Are you disturbed at the Obama DOJ's blatant intimidation of Romney donors? OK, my enlightened, fair-minded, good taste in all things cultural and culinary, conspicuously compassionate, smarter than the unwashed masses, root for the underdog, liberal friends: Can you embrace Obama's flagrant abuses of power and still call yourself a liberal?
Friday, August 3, 2012
"Jobs report presents mixed blessing for Obama"
When I saw the headline on Yahoo, I knew it was bad news. A "mixed blessing for Obama" translates roughly into "train wreck" in English. And Yahoo continued their measured analysis.
"New jobs numbers certain to give both Obama and Romney something to flesh out talking points"
Cut to the chase or more specifically, the crash at the end of the fury. Unemployment went from 8.2% to 8.3%. Spin that one, Axelrod. Yahoo is providing you a starter kit.
Chick-Fil-A? Bain Capital? Millionaires and billionaires? The Supreme Court? Widespread racism? They all had keys to the strawberries! So many culprits, so little time.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/jobs-report-presents-mixed-blessing-124411502.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)