Showing posts with label Leftist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leftist. Show all posts

Sunday, August 18, 2013

How Textbooks Push Children to the Left | FrontPage Magazine


Are you surprised that leftist ideas have penetrated the minds of the people?  Chalk up this reality to the leftist teachers and, especially, to the left-oriented textbooks now in use in our secondary schools.  One book in particular that has been gaining traction in New York City in recent years is “The Americans.”
Although even the leftist teachers claim not to like this textbook used in U.S. history (a one-year course required in NYC for all juniors) because it is so skimpy on facts and is written in an opaque style, any informed reader would have to agree that it is one of the most politically correct textbooks one could imagine. Reading this book, one gets the message that the history of America is a theme of victimization. The list of victims is well known: Native Americans, women, labor, immigrants, blacks, farmers, urban dwellers, the mentally ill, migrant workers, unions, etc. “The Americans” is a somewhat diluted version of Howard Zinn’s openly communist college textbook, “A People’s History of the United States.” It is also worth adding that this reference to Zinn’s “communism” is not putting labels on anyone, and is not a McCarthy-like type of red-baiting of an innocent individual; Zinn openly announced his communism decades ago when he taught at Boston University.
CONTINUE READING:  How Textbooks Push Children to the Left | FrontPage Magazine

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Debunking Media Myths About Student Voters (in NC) | Pundit House

Leftist groups in North Carolina and beyond continue to hold a losing hand in the voter ID game; but with the help of the highly partisan media, they’re trying to bluff their way out of it.
Case in point is the voter ID bill and the superb corrections the NC Senate made to the final version in the area of student ID cards. The House had allowed for 76 different college ID cards to count as “valid ID” for voting purposes; but the Senate, realizing the potential for fraud, simply said “no.”
Before the ink was even dry on the bill, the Soros-backed “Blueprint NC” mobsbegan a campaign to reverse this sensible law. Using their typical agitation rhetoric, one leftist activist called the student ID provisions, “unnecessary, mean-spirited changes that target and punish college students who want to participate in the civic life of their college community.”
While not nearly as colorful, the truth is that no college students will be denied their right to vote. The only impact will be that students will be forced to do one endeavor they have never been required to do before voting: To put it bluntly, they will soon have to . . . well . . . to think before they vote.
In case those words offend any college students reading this column, I have some news that might soften the blow of this “draconian” measure: You won’t need to think too soon, because the Legislature delayed implementation of that provision until January 1, 2016.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

American Thinker: The Collectivist Mind Game, Part 2: Demonizing the Opposition

Most modern-day leftists in Western countries have abandoned the idea of a violent revolution, having replaced it with "the long march through the institutions" as part of the culture war to transform the society through cultural hegemony. Instead of commanding firing squads, they play mind games of manipulative illusions, in which the demonization of dissent plays a crucial role. The basic premise hasn't changed: as much as the statists want you to love them, they want you to hate their opponents even more.

Until a time when political opposition can be eliminated completely, having opponents can still be useful: you can steal their ideas, take advantage of their desire to help the economy, and blame them for any of your own failures. In the meantime, certain rules must be followed to control the public opinion and, through it, the opposition itself.


Maintain the perception of being constantly under attack. Don't examine the opponents' beliefs, nor answer their arguments. Discredit any media channels that offer them a platform. Enforce the following media template: the opposition is evil, treasonous, unfathomable, and psychotic. They can't be reasoned with. They are inspired by fascism and financed by a conspiracy of shady oligarchs. Defame their donors. Whatever the mischief you're planning to pull off, accuse them of doing it first; then proceed as planned, describing your actions as a necessary intervention. And ridicule, ridicule, ridicule!


This is what made it easy for Stalin to purge his opponents: by the time he charged them with treason, the orchestrated media coverage had already made them universally hated. Having purged all of his enemies, Stalin continued to manufacture the evidence of their presence. There came a time when even the true believers were being rounded up and forced to confess publicly about one or another fabricated "crime" against the people and the Party. Some did it to avoid torture, some to save their families, and some even cooperated out of the altruistic desire to support the illusion and keep everyone else's beautiful dream alive. Unfortunately for them, that beautiful dream required human sacrifice.

At the same time, Stalin used the only remaining high-ranking Jew in his government, Lazar Kaganovich, as a perpetual scapegoat. Himself a ruthless henchman who organized a number of purges, Kaganovich ended up serving in the capacity of an unpunishable bumbling idiot, a "token Jew," and a darkly comic relief. Implicitly blamed for one government blunder after another, this Joe Biden of Stalin's regime was moved from ministry to ministry only to be blamed again and reassigned to yet another top-level position. As expected, the people's reaction was a universal loathing and bewilderment: how can Comrade Stalin be so soft and trusting of this evil Jew? Kaganovich outlived them all; he died in 1991, among friends and family, at the age of 97.

Across the ocean, years later, the same rules still apply. The perception of a relentless struggle with the opposition must be permanent and persuasive. Even in the times of calm and prosperity the people must think that the opposition is holding them hostage and only the firm, wise guidance of the People's Leader is saving them from imminent ruin. When the opponents are too few, too weak, and too disoriented to put up a real fight, their power and influence must be exaggerated.

Ever since "crybaby" John Boehner became the GOP House Speaker, the media grotesquely overstated the effectiveness of his fruitless, anemic leadership. Among other things, this patent exaggeration allowed Obama to maintain his saintly image while shifting the responsibility for the staggering economy onto "Republican obstructionism."

The following quotes by "citizen journalists" exemplify the public outrage created by the media template of demonizing the opposition. Unlike the honed professionals who can mask their agenda with superficial objectivity, these amateurs let their emotions run wild without realizing that they are being played. Like children, they connect the preprinted dots and eagerly tell us what they see:

Opposition is anti-American: The Republican leaders have remained consistent with their agenda of obstructing the President clearly putting their party ahead of the American people.

Opposition is racist: How far do you think Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner and his cohorts in the House will go in their campaign to defeat America's first black President?

Opposition is grotesquely absurd: The clowns - Boehner and McConnell - ignored the needs of the nation to do what they thought was best for themselves . . . to solidify their positions of power and secure their own political futures by tearing down President Obama and America in the process.

Opposition is deceitful: In their effort to make President Obama look weak, Republicans played a dangerous game with the debt ceiling and in the process threw away America's triple-A credit rating... Those Republican obstructionists really know how to twist the facts to support the anti-Obama political campaign.

Opposition is undemocratic: They have essentially fought to block anything and everything the Democrats have proposed and offered nothing in the way of alternatives. So egregious is their barricade of democracy that they have no defense against charges of deliberate sabotage at the expense of American citizens.

Opposition is mind-boggling: Missing from President Obama's acceptance speech in Charlotte last Thursday is one potent argument: An attack on obstructionist Republicans in Congress. ... It's a mystery because a major reason the economy has not done better under Mr. Obama is that Republicans have blocked virtually every initiative he has proposed, even when the president, especially in the early months of his administration, tailored many of his proposals to attract Republican support.

Opposition is guilty of treason: If an enemy declared war on the American economy, the United States would spare no effort to remove that threat to its prosperity and national security. So it was with Osama Bin Laden... But when the Republican Party threatens ... to sabotage the U.S. economy if its debt ceiling demands are not met, the media instead calls that treason a "debate." ... And that's not politics as usual. That's treason.

Just like painting by numbers doesn't make one an artist, actors or singers who are good at articulating prepared lines don't automatically become articulate thinkers. Being in the business of selling emotions rather than rational arguments, they connect the same old media dots as any other amateur -- but do it with extra flair and aplomb. Extrapolating the lines allows them to see horns on the head of the opposition. VoilĂ ! They can't shut up about such an amazing insight.

Harry Belafonte even went as far as suggest that Obama should "work like a third world dictator and just put all these guys in jail" -- because, obviously, since the Republicans "are violating the American desire," the "only thing left for Barack Obama to do" is to pull a Stalin: praise Barack and jail the opposition.

Even if he said this in jest, Belafonte's call for political repressions is a logical extension of the ideas shared by many celebrities who have been swayed by and are now promoting the leftist cultural hegemony. That includes Woody Allen, who said this in an interview to a Spanish-language magazine: "It would be good... if [President Obama] could be dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly."

This begs a question: if Obama is not a socialist, why do his supporters interpret his reelection as "the American desire" to establish a totalitarian dictatorship -- and think this would be a good thing? So much for "socialism with a human face."

No wonder the "hegemonized" Hollywood filmmakers (starting with Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator), can never truthfully depict either the Soviet or Nazi totalitarian regimes. Unable to fathom the motives of their fictional villains, they wind up supplanting the collectivist realities of socialism (be it national socialism or international socialism) with grotesque caricatures of improbable monsters, uncultured brutes, neurotic sociopaths, or sadistic, sexually repressed perverts. It never occurs to them that unspeakable crimes could be committed in the name of "the common good" by very ordinary, altruistic people -- out of an all too familiar desire to "do a lot of good things quickly" through dictatorial powers. Such a notion would be too terrifying, of course, because they might just recognize their own reflection in the mirror.

Though many of them may have seen this quote by C.S. Lewis, it is doubtful that their conditioned minds are capable of grasping its meaning: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive... [T]hose who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Their young audiences, deprived of adequate education and learning about history and current events from Hollywood movies and TV shows, will not recognize the symptoms of an encroaching totalitarianism either. Upon hearing a dissenter who disparages the benevolent guidance of the state, they will immediately recognize a stereotype that is being relentlessly demonized and dehumanized on their screens: the ignorant, close-minded, right-wing nut job. Chances are they will smugly ridicule him with the jokes they heard from their favorite media personalities. In another generation, they may as well feel morally obligated to report the dissenter to the authorities -- and be thrilled at the chance to partake in the historic mission of crushing the remnants of the evil reactionaries, even if they happen to be their parents.





Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/the_collectivist_mind_game_part_2_demonizing_the_opposition.html#ixzz2IiKhMMJb

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter
AmericanThinker on Facebook CONTINUED:http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/the_collectivist_mind_game_part_2_demonizing_the_opposition.html#ixzz2IhmqqRPr

Monday, January 7, 2013

Intro: The Manual to Debating a Liberal, from a former Liberal

Posted on Angelfire:


Intro: The Manual to Debating a Liberal, from a former Liberal


A mere year ago, I was a liberal Democrat. I fell under many of the things I describe below, and I used many of the tactics that I describe below. After my ideology changed (to Republican), thanks to much research and being realistic on my part, I realized that many conservatives simply cannot engage liberals in debates very well. Not because conservatives aren’t right- because I truly believe that they are- but because liberals are very good at playing politics. And included in politics are their tactics in debates.

I now present to you the following guide, on how to defeat liberals in debates. I’m pretty confident I would have shredded myself apart from a year ago if I tried to debate myself using this guide, and I think you’ll make good use of it as well. E-mail me at sunnyd1182@yahoo.com if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Sunny S. Sidhu
Former Liberal Democrat, Current Conservative Republican, Future Conservative Republican

Section 1: The Liberal Mindset

In order to debate liberals, we must first understand their mindset. Why they think the way they do, why they believe in their particular stances, and, generally, their world view. This can be summed up rather easily by looking at the types of people who ARE liberals. There are two key groups we must look at (note, however, that there are many exceptions in these groups, but in general, most liberals will fall under at least one of the following categories)

The “Intellectuals”

 College Students, especially those in Ivy Leagues
 College Professors, especially those in Ivy Leagues
 Other teachers, education administrators, and education policymakers
 Journalists and Media personalities

The “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck”

 African Americans, Latinos, and other “minorities”
 Senior Citizens
 The poor and middle class, especially those who live in urban areas
 Feminists
 Environmentalists

Now, there are undoubtedly other groups that could be considered key players in the Democratic/liberal movement, but the above are the most often cases you will run into. There are distinct reasons for why the aforementioned two groups exist; and these reasons must be understood if you are to properly engage a liberal in a debate. For, once again, we must understand their mindsets.

The “Intellectuals”:


The “Intellectuals” are an interesting group of people. They’re typically your academics, people who have very strong academic accomplishments, or believe that they do (these can be interchanged). They often think of themselves as smart people, and associate with like-minded “smart people.” They’re especially found in Ivy League colleges, though this phenomenon easily exists in non-Ivy League schools as well. It extends beyond just the college and university scene, however; other education institutions have similar groups, and the media is full of such people.

These people are usually fairly responsible, fairly intelligent, and are going in a good direction in life- at least academically. However, all of them fall victim to one trap: they believe that everyone else is just as responsible and intelligent as them. Thus, they fall into an ideological world view, which believes that everything can be perfect, and that cases of “human nature” such as greed simply do not exist. (This explains why far left liberals supported communism- they thought people would be happy with “to each according to their need”…clearly, that did not work)

These people believe that things like abortion should be legal, because people will be responsible with it, and not take advantage of it. These people believe that drugs should be legalized, for the same reasons. These people believe that children should be exposed to sex and violence (including things that can be seen as the promotion of them), because children would be responsible with such matters. These people do not think things on television and mass media should be regulated, thinking that all people are responsible enough to handle indecent material. They believe all criminals can be “rehabilitated” and become responsible like them, and thus they oppose things like the death penalty. The list goes on and on, but the key thing you must know about these people: they’re frequently not in touch with reality itself- they’re like bookworms. They don’t realize the problems in the world for what they really are, but think they do.

Therefore, they fall victim to an ideological world view which simply does not work in reality: liberalism.

Everything these intellectuals do now has been done before, in essence: Karl Marx once presented an ideological leftist world view. It didn’t work, but it sure sounded great when he presented his ideology. What looks good on paper may not look good in reality, and that is one thing the “intellectual left” does not understand.
These people also fundamentally believe they are right, and will refuse to argue with anyone who they think is of “less merit” than them; they’re very elitist to a sense, and therefore blindly hold to their ideology despite any arguments thrown at them. It is Ivy League arrogance, journalistic elitism, and whatever else you can name, at its finest.

The “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck”

This group makes up the core of the voting element as far as the Democratic Party goes, and thus helps the most to promote the liberal cause. These are the people who think they’ve been wrong or disadvantaged, or have been told that they’ve been wronged or disadvantaged. They’re also being told that the opposing parties (Republicans and conservatives) are out to wrong them and disadvantage them even further.

These are the things commonly referred to as “playing the race/age/gender/class card.” This is used VERY often by liberals, so get ready to hear a lot of it. It works, it is effective, and this second group of people- the victims- falls for it very easily. As a result, they become slaves of the liberal mindset.

Look no further than how the Democrats try to scare African Americans into believing that Republicans are “holding them down”, how the Democrats try to scare middle class Americans into thinking Republicans are “hurting the middle class,” and how the Democrats try to scare women into thinking Republicans are “against their rights.” Democrats also frequently try to scare Senior Citizens into thinking Republicans want to “destroy Social Security.” Look at the key words mentioned in these accusations; against,holding down, hurting, destroying.

In essence, it is fear mongering targeted at certain groups of people in society, and it works. These Democrats and liberals attempt to spin the issues into backing up this fear mongering, and people listen to it. And as a result, this entire second group is formed- the “victims” of the Democratic Playing Card Deck.

These people often do not know much about the issues, especially as far as fact and reality goes. What they DO think they know, however, is that Republicans and conservatives are completely against them and trying to hold them down (or their issue) in general. They believe the way they do, because of the total spin and fear mongering they hear from Democratic and liberal leaders. They then go out and vote for these said Democrats, and become strong liberals, mostly out of fear and loathing of the other side- values instilled into them. Furthermore, they become very likely to start calling conservatives “bigots” and “racists” because of the lies that the liberal left has drilled into their heads.

Key Liberal Characteristics

Based on the previous two groups, you’ve got one group of people that is ideological, unrealistic, and elitist. Then you’ve got a second group that is fearful, angry, resentful, and therefore has a closed mind towards reality- or any other person’s opinions if they differ from their own.

Section 2: Liberals and their Tactics

Now that we understand the two key elements of liberalism, we can now move on to debates themselves. In debates, liberals tend to use a select few “tactics” very frequently; no matter who the person is, if they’re a liberal, they always make use of the same arsenal. This is likely due to the fact that they’re all promoting the same unrealistic philosophy, liberalism itself, and that liberalism can only be argued effectively in one manner: through the use of these tactics.

The reasoning will be obvious once we are done looking at the weapons themselves. Here they are, in no particular order:

Tactic Number One: Interruption

This one will be used often, throughout the span of an entire debate. If you, as a conservative (or even moderate), are attempting to make a point- especially if you have numbers, facts, and figures to back your point of view up- the common liberal will use this weapon often. Why? Because it stops you from getting your point across- and if you don’t get your point across, you cannot win a debate.

The liberal sees this, the liberal knows this, and thus the liberal will interrupt you often. If the liberal has no numbers, facts, or figures to prove their point with (a common occurrence), the liberal will use the interruption tactic even more. The interruption tactic can be used in combination with another rather strong tactic, bomb-throwing, which we cover next.

Tactic Number Two: Bomb-Throwing

This one is not used as much, as it tends to get offensive, but when it is used, it can lead a liberal to victory in a debate through nothing more than sheer shock-value. It is called “bomb-throwing,” and essentially it is the use of name calling, accusations, and vicious attacks to shut down the opposition. These attacks are usually not even true, but this does not matter- for the attacks are only designed to do three things:

Shock the audience and perhaps paint you out to be evil and wrong

Coerce you to change the subject by trying to defend yourself from these attacks (a natural human impulse on your part)

Anger you and force you to lose your cool, and thus appear immature and unprofessional

Time and time again, liberals use this tactic, and it is effective, because conservatives are simply not ready for it. Conservatives are also generally more classy, relaxed, and well-mannered than their liberal counterparts, so they often do not know how to respond to such viciousness. This trend it starting to change as conservatives have “rebuilt their defenses,” but many still fall for this liberal trap of bomb-throwing.

Tactic Number Three: Raising the Volume

This is yet another tactic that is geared at conservatives in particular, and preys off the fact that conservatives are generally more classy, relaxed, and well-mannered people than liberals. This one makes use of another fact: conservatives are quieter people than liberals, and not anywhere near as fierce. Liberals realize this, and they use it to their advantage when it comes to debate.

Essentially, they raise the volume. They’ll yell, scream, talk aggressively, and be particularly fierce and provoking throughout the debate. They do this to anger their opposition and try to throw them off, and they also do it to try to weaken the conservative’s resolve. They also want to engage the opposition in a “shouting match,” as this plays to a liberal’s favor, since they already do it (and since it makes the audience think of the opposition badly). Additionally, this tactic serves another purpose: it motivates other liberals and gets them pumped up, to the point where they might even get involved in the debate (see tactic five).

Tactic Number Four: The Populist Bomb

This one is a tactic that seems to have been developed by one group of liberals to promote the growth of another; essentially, the “intellectual” left employs the Populist Bomb often to get people to join the droves of the “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck” group. Of course, these said people do not realize they’re being dragged into such a group, but the liberals know it, as they’re trying to get more people on their side.

So what is a Populist Bomb? It’s something known as “telling people what they want to hear.” It employs frequent use of the race card, the class card, and all sorts of other things that we covered earlier- the same very things that created the second group of liberals, the “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck.” It frequently attacks Republicans and any other opposition for the “screwing over” of certain groups (even though these attacks are usually totally false), and it also makes excessive use of “spin.”

By “spin” I mean the Populist Bomb will present some sort of god-like plan to give people some benefits, such as health insurance, while also saying things about how taxes won’t be raised. While these two things contradict each other when one looks into the finances behind such proposals, common people don’t know this, and therefore they’ll believe both statements, and will applaud the liberal who presents them- the Populist Bomb at its finest.

The Populist Bomb is a tactic used by liberals to get people to think they care about the common man and other select groups, and it often is unrealistic and can be countered strongly. It is “pandering to the crowd,” and liberals use it often to make themselves come off as genuinely caring about the public- when in reality it is merely intended to get more votes and support over to their side.

Tactic Number Five: The Liberal Army

This tactic is one that is employed almost everywhere you’ll go, almost in any debate you get into, unless you control the environment of the debate. This tactic speaks volumes about liberals and how truly wrong their philosophy is- yet it is a tactic that is so effective because of sheer numbers.

The “Liberal Army” tactic is simple: you’re in a debate, trying to make your point, and liberals outnumber you and shut you down. They will often try to surround you and put you in the center of the debate, so they can gun you from all angles. They will combine all of the previously mentioned tactics (especially interruption, raising the volume, and bomb-throwing), and since they have the numbers advantage, you will be unable to respond or make any of your points. It is a “pile on top of the ball carrier” tactic that has a 99% success rate, unless the conservative is prepared.

Often, the conservative is not, and they lose the debate out of being totally and completely overwhelmed, as long as being shocked and dazed after being attacked from so many sides.

Section 3: The Counterattack

As with any tactic, there are counter-tactics. Conservatives can easily win debates with liberals, but they must first know about the liberal tactics, which we have just went over. Not only this, but they must know how to effectively respond to the tactics. It is what occurs in response to liberal tactics that leads to liberal victories in debates; it is NOT the liberal’s tactic in itself. Liberal tactics are designed to get conservatives to make mistakes; therefore, conservatives can, with a proper response, eliminate this possibility and take away the liberal’s advantage.

Counterattack to Interruption:

This one is simple, and will really make the liberal come off as unprofessional, and immature. It could even make the difference in who holds the upper ground in the debate, and may shift an entire audience’s views regarding the people in the debate.

Essentially, you must let the liberal finish their points (or lack thereof), and then respond. When you respond, they will attempt to interrupt you often as we’ve already mentioned; let this happen a few times (ask them to stop interrupting if you want), and then when they do it again, step up and say “listen, if you’re going to continue interrupting me and preventing these people [the audience] from hearing both sides of the story, it is pointless to debate anything with you.”

You can also throw in something about how the liberal is preventing the audience from hearing facts, figures, and numbers that the liberal is probably afraid of letting them know about. Challenge them. Say “Are you afraid of my point? Are you afraid of the truth?” They will respond with a “no,” to which you say “then let me finish, and then you can have your chance.”

Do not be particularly aggressive; do not throw around attacks, stay calm, cool, and professional throughout. This will give you the upper hand over a liberal every time- especially when there’s a good open-minded audience.

Counterattack to Bomb-Throwing:

Bomb-throwing is something that’s hard to deal with, as it tries to trick the audience AND you at the same time; it tries to make the audience think of you in a negative light, and it tries to get you angry and to throw you off. It may actually be one of the hardest tactics to respond to, and liberals realize this. This is why they use it.

The response, however, is simple when you think about it. You must turn the bombs around, by staying calm, collected, and cool. You must turn the bombs around, by questioning why the liberal is throwing them in the first place. A relaxed response is something liberals do not expect; when you respond in such a professional manner, the bomb-throwing tactic is immediately nullified.

It is further nullified when you ask why the liberal is throwing the bombs; even speak directly to the audience and say “I question why my opponent here says these things about me, when they have no proof, evidence, or fact to back up their statements” and something to the sort of “I believe everyone should remain professional and relaxed in a debate, and speak about the issues, instead of attacking one another.”

The latter statement is very effective with the audience, and actually turns the bomb-throwing tactic around, flinging it right back at the liberal. The bomb-throwing tactic is immature and unprofessional in the first place, and by responding to it in the above described manner, the audience immediately realizes the liberal is immature and unprofessional.

Counterattack to Raising the Volume:


The entire reason for liberals to use the raising volume tactic in the first place is to anger you and engage you in a shouting match. Liberals are used to shouting, yelling, and screaming, and responding in such a manner shifts the debate into one that is on their terms; this leads them to victory. It makes you look like a hothead who cannot handle pressure, and the audience starts to see you in a negative light.

It also makes the liberal look bad, but they try to counteract this by using the Populist Bomb, combined with this tactic. Therefore, they make it seem like they’re yelling, not because they’re immature, but because they’re “yelling for the people.” It is a very effective trap.

The response? First of all, do not lose your cool. Do not yell back, do not raise your voice, and remain calm and collected. Let them scream and yell. Secondly, “defuse” their Populist Bombs (see next counterattack), remaining calm and collected the whole time.

The result will be obvious: without the Populist Bomb to legitimize the liberal’s yelling and screaming, the audience will start to see the liberal as unprofessional and immature, and as a total hothead, similar to Howard Dean or Al Gore himself. The tactic is thus nullified, but if the liberal continues to use it, it will only make them look worse.

Counterattack to the Populist Bomb:

The Populist Bomb, while daunting at first (since it turns the audience effectively ‘against’ you), is easy to diffuse. First off, remain calm and cool, and do not get overly defensive. Defensiveness signals weakness, and makes the audience think that the liberal actually is right, which they are not.


The best response is to take the Populist Bomb, and make your own modification to it. You’re going to take the Populist Bomb and turn it into a Realistic Republican Populist Bomb of your own. How can you do this? Simple. You take the strengths of the liberal’s Populist Bomb, and you apply your realistic philosophy and knowledge upon it. This can best be illustrated in an example:

Liberal Populist Bomb: You Republicans do not care about Social Security, and you’re going to destroy it, at the expense of every senior citizen in America. You want to privatize it so that big business and the stock market can get more money, while playing games with the American people’s tax dollars, tying it into the market. You are messing with people’s retirements! We will not let you Republicans destroy people’s retirements!!!

Liberal Populist Bomb Finale: Quit robbing senior citizens and Americans of their social security money! Stop messing with people’s futures for the sake of your own benefit! We will not let you succeed!

Conservative Response: Every American citizen should have the best possible opportunity for a strong and stable retirement. The current Social Security system gives senior citizens money for retirement, but I ask you all: can their retirement funding be improved? The answer is a resounding yes: let people control their own social security money in a private account, which the government can never mess with; let people invest that money in the stock market if they CHOOSE to. This gives people an opportunity which they never could have had before: an opportunity to have much more money for retirement than what plain old basic Social Security gives them! Current Social Security only yields a 2% return on investment once a person retires; privatization could raise that amount exponentially!

Conservative Response Finale: It is your money, your retirement, and you should be able to do with it what you please- and when you’re done with it, pass it on to your heirs- something you cannot do under the current system!

Observe how you’re taking the strength (the benefits for senior citizens and Americans) straight out from the playbook of the liberal’s own Populist Bomb. You’re taking the same emotional and idealistic plea out of their statement, and putting it in your own. However, instead of going on the offensive and throwing around attacks (something liberals will often do in these bombs – remember their use of the “playing card deck”), you’re going to be positive. You’re going to present a realistic, strong case. A perfect Realistic Republican Populist Bomb. Heavy artillery!

Counterattack to the Liberal Army:

The first thing you probably ask to yourself when this comes up is “how am I supposed to outdebate ten people at once?!?” That is a good question, and there really is no good answer, unless you happen to be Ronald Reagan himself, who probably could have outdebated the entire Democratic Party back in his time. But for us common folk, there is a solution, albeit a simpler one:

Change the environment.

What does that mean? Well, you need to make sure you’re NOT outnumbered to begin with. When you engage in a debate, set the terms that it is one-on-one early; this negates the advantage of the “liberal army.” If liberals violate these rules, walk out and refuse to debate with them until they comply to your one-on-one request. If they refuse to, ask if you’re allowed to bring in more conservatives to back you up. If they challenge your strength and resolve, challenge their strength and resolve; after all, they already have the numbers advantage. If they’re so right, why do they need it? Ask them that. Challenge them.

Liberals have large egos and are provoked easily. When you challenge them and imply that they’re being cowardly by not debating you one-on-one, they will likely respond by accepting your challenge of a one-on-one. And if they don’t, well, they prove your point that they are being cowardly. It is simple.

You can even try to ask for a moderator to make sure your debate stays one-on-one, and that it remains under control. Moderation negates many liberal tactics, and gives you the edge, just like a one-on-one debate does.

Section 4: Conclusion, and Good Luck!

Taking all you’ve learned in the above sections into account, you are now well-armed to outdebate any liberal. You now understand their mindset, their tactics, and how to counter those tactics. However, there are a few final universals that you should remember, and they are listed below. Good luck in your debates, and prove to the world how wrong liberals truly are!
  • Do not get angry, ever
  • Remain calm, cool, collected, and relaxed
  • Be professional
  • Use facts, figures, and statistics, but never excessively
  • Use a decent amount of emotion- show people you really do care
  • Be realistic- always imply that you’re the more realistic one, because you are
http://www.angelfire.com/emo2/republican/Manual.htm





Saturday, July 21, 2012

Are You Sure You Are a Democrat?

Today's Democrat Party (the party of ABORTION) is NOT THE PARTY OF YOUR PARENTS OR GRANDPARENTS!

One look at the recent NC State Democratic Convention demonstrates the extreme liberal fringe that makes up today’s North Carolina Democratic Party. Resolutions adopted by the NCDP at their convention include:


• A single-payer national healthcare system (which would be significantly to the left of the job-killing monstrosity that is ObamaCare)


• Repeal of the marriage amendment (that was recently approved by 61% of North Carolinians)


• The full legalization of marijuana (not just for medicinal purposes, which is a position to the left of even California Democrats)


• The abandonment of nuclear energy as part of the U.S. energy policy (which would in turn force us to become even more dependent on foreign oil)


• Full abolishment of the death penalty


• A demand for collective bargaining rights for workers (which would be extremely detrimental to attracting new business investment in North Carolina)


• Opposition to state-level immigration reform (while the federal government continues to ignore the issue)


• The creation of a Cabinet-level Department of Peace and Nonviolence (which is just absurd)

These positions are so outside of the mainstream, one wonders if they were even meant to be serious. Of course, you never know what to expect when you’re dealing with the same body that decided to keep their Party Chairman after his role in the cover-up of a sexual harassment scandal, who continue to support the least popular governor in the country (who may have recently committed fraud by altering official documents to protect her pet spending projects), and who just nominated a candidate for governor who has promised to keep the exact same policies as his predecessor.

PUBLIUS 2012

Note:  CCTA is a non partisan organization.  We do not endorse any particular candidate or political party.  News items are presented for you the reader to help you become informed and reach your own conclusions.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

The Advantages for the Minority Left

November 1, 2011
By Sher Zieve

Leftists have a distinct advantage over we who believe in the God-given rights (as identified in the US Constitution) of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Leftists are not constrained by the “outdated notions” of morality, any consideration that those who oppose them have any rights and—most specifically—those on the Left are not subject to nor expected to exhibit either logic or its attendant reasoned and common sense behaviors.
 
In fact, the US—if not the world—media applaud and support all forms of leftist riots, murders, uprisings, seizure of more moderate governments and other chaos and mayhem reaped upon the “we-just-want-to-work-and-support-our-families” majority population.  The Left delights in—and gets away with—working toward the destruction of all “traditional” aspects of society in favor of replacing them with its own perverse distorted mirror image.  In fact, the Left in the USA can bring down multiple-millions of people and decimate an entire class (that’s currently the middle-class) with only praise from a doting and supportive media.
 
CONTINUED:  http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/41932

Monday, July 25, 2011

If Debt Is The Enemy Then There Are Traitors Among Us

Liberty Extra


By Frank Salvato,

The so-called “debt ceiling default crisis” continues to loom, with enough Progressive-Leftist demagoguery in the air to choke a horse, or, in this case, kill an economy. I roll my eyes at the term “debt ceiling default crisis” because the honest man – an increasingly rare species in federal government – understands that there can only be a crisis should President Obama choose to create one. That said, Republicans, TEA Partiers and Conservatives are in danger of doing the right thing in refusing to enable more debt, but losing the public relations war to what amounts to the traitors among us due to chronic messaging impotency.

CONTINUED:  http://news.libertyextra.com/?v6nUWwvePCjAW4ekFTyNTg16dmt9GfyLv

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Investors.com--Walter Williams

Tax The Rich? Good Luck With That


I've often said that I wish there were some humane way to get rid of the rich. If you asked why, I'd answer that getting rid of the rich would save us from distraction by leftist hustlers promoting the politics of envy.


Not having the rich to fret over might enable us to better focus our energies on what's in the best interest of the 99.99% of the rest of us. Let's look at some facts about the rich laid out by Bill Whittle citing statistics on his RealClearPolitics video "Eat the Rich."

READ THE ARTICLE HERE:  http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/568737/201104111831/Tax-The-Rich-Good-Luck-With-That.htm

Thursday, February 10, 2011

GEARGE SOROS' PLOT TO CONTROL STATE SUPREME COURTS

By NWV News writer Jim Kouri

February 9, 2011
© 2011 NewsWithViews.com

Without notice or fanfare by the news media, multi-billionaire George Soros financed a $45 million campaign to reshape state supreme courts.

The first step in the Soros backed scheme is to keep conservative judges off the courts by taking judicial selection decisions away from American citizens and handing them over to “merit” boards stacked with legal special interests, according to a conservative political consultant.

The second step is to gag any conservative judge who happens to slip by with phony demands to recuse him/herself, claims Peter Schuyler, a former Senate staffer and college professor.

READ MORE:  http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news238.htm

Thursday, January 13, 2011

WELL SAID--Floyd Brown, Floyd Reports.com

It's beyond disgusting.

I wanted to share this email message fom Floyd Reports.  It certainly sums up the situation and my feelings!

"Within hours of the gunshots ringing out in Arizona, the Left was already scheming on how to use this horrendous tragedy to its advantage... as people were grieving and fighting for their very lives, THEY were already pointing fingers and attacking patriotic Americans like you.


The Left has no civility, the Left has no dignity, the Left has no sense of humanity. While millions of Americans prayed desperate prayers for those who were brutally assaulted and their families, these SICK individuals smeared themselves in the blood of the dying to score political points.

Still, I suppose we should have seen it was coming. After all Barack Obama's former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel once said that you should never let a crisis go to waste. So, why shouldn't these violent murders NOT be exploited... used as a tool to bludgeon God-fearing conservative Americans?

These actions by the Left are beyond comprehension. Those on the Left do not care for you... they do not care for this great country. In some cases, it's possible that some of them didn't even care about the victims of this horrendous tragedy... because their only concern was to falsely accuse those who DARE to oppose them of pulling the trigger.

Their message was clear: If you are patriotic "you killed those people," if you believe you have a right to criticize Barack Obama's socialist agenda "you killed those people," if you believe that in this Great Nation that you still have the right to free speech "you killed those people," if you oppose ANYTHING that is on the radical liberal socialist liberty-stealing agenda "you killed those people."

If you oppose ANY aspect of the Left's agenda, BY DEFINITION, you are hateful, you incite violence and you MUST be silenced. In a pig's eye. We will not be silenced."

Tell these elected officials that you are a patriot and while the Stars and Stripes still fly over this land and the spirit of our Founding Fathers still flows in our veins, we will not be bullied or manipulated into silence. Let them know that you are a freedom-loving citizen of America and will not bow to anyone who tries to hijack the horrific shooting of Americans as a way to crush opposition to the Obama Agenda. Tell them that patriotic Americans want ObamaCare repealed and the radical Obama agenda dismantled... piece by piece and brick by brick if necessary.

Floyd Brown
FloydReports.com
SEND FAXES TO YOUR REPS:  https://fs7.formsite.com/C4Strategies/form219/secure_index.html

Local Liberal joins the attack and blame game!

...And of course, those slandered are responsible for the slandering!

THIS IS WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST! 

Some of our neighbors aren't just "on the other side"
Though the extreme leftist media and politicians began the attack barely minutes after the shooting, the liberal left now wants us to believe the people they attacked are to blame.

This is an example, 'Clare' the Liberal writes:

"The bipartisan calls for a return to civility in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy in Arizona this past weekend lasted barely a day.


Americans have rightly begun to examine the recent escalation of vitriolic and incendiary rhetoric in our political discourse. While some initial speculation was too quick to point the finger of blame at specific instances of fear-mongering and violent rhetoric without knowing what actually influenced the gunman, when oft-verbally attacked elected officials are targeted for assassination, it's a matter of basic common sense to call for a toning down of the hateful accusations and hyperbolic hyping of false threats. By simply acknowledging the toxicity of this recent rhetoric, primarily by the Right Wing, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik and many others have come under relentless attack.

:-[ Unfortunately, politicians and pundits on the Right are now responding the same way they always respond to criticism: deflection and denial. They are angry that they would be held accountable and are showing bitter defensiveness by going on the offense against anyone who raises uncomfortable truths like Sheriff Dupnik and some in the media. And they've childishly resorted to their own irrational finger pointing. Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Tea Party leaders and others on the Right are now claiming that the Tucson shooter Jared Loughner is a liberal because he listed Marx's Communist Manifesto among his favorite books (a ridiculous stretch since he also listed Mein Kampf and an Ayn Rand book). Rush Limbaugh said that the gunman has the "full support" of the Democratic Party. And Republicans from Lamar Alexander to Sarah Palin are pushing the message that merely discussing examples of the violent rhetoric which has come to define our political discourse is tantamount to contributing to the ongoing rancor.

In an especially twisted, yet familiar, example of right-wing logic, Arizona State Rep. Jack Harper is actually blaming Saturday's massacre on gun laws he sees as too restrictive and Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik for apparently supporting those laws -- this, despite the fact that Arizona's laws were lenient enough for the clearly disturbed Loughner to obtain the 31-round-per-clip semi-automatic weapon he used in his attack.

And media stars like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin have been quick to use their podiums to try to make this latest debate all about them. Although she holds no official office or leadership position, Palin addressed the country in a web video yesterday in which she decried any scrutiny of recent political rhetoric and even tried to make herself out as the real victim, going so far as to compare herself to Jewish victims of "blood libels."


Attempting to draw a line between what she sees as perfectly acceptable "free speech" and incitement, she said, "when we 'take up our arms,' we're talking about our vote." But isn't that exactly the point? Using incendiary language, such as "taking up arms," can have consequences when there are individuals out there who might not grasp the metaphors, especially when it is accompanied by talk of "Second Amendment remedies" to an election not going the way one would like ... or campaign events at gun ranges ... or grave warnings about "death panels," a "tyrannical government," "Dangerous Liberals" and political opponents being "domestic enemies of the Constitution."

Meanwhile, as we reflect on this awful tragedy, and debate the nature of, well, our debate, the Right continues its pile-on of Sheriff Dupnik, smearing him for the supposed crime of calling it like he sees it while happening to be a registered Democrat."

Beware of folks like Clare, they will never be able to understand or face the truth, God help them (and us) if they win out!

Friday, November 12, 2010

GRASSROOTS ACTION ALERT!

Four "Lame Duck" tricks from Pelosi-Reid


From: Grassroots Action alert@grassfire.net
Our friends at Concerned Women for America have identified the four "Lame Duck tricks" they are bracing for from Pelosi and Reid starting Monday. Please see below.

From the Desk of:  Penny Nance, Chief  Executive Officer
Concerned Women for America

They are baaaaack!

On MONDAY Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and their leftist allies will be on Capitol Hill more determined than ever to force their ambitious wish list of anti-family and anti-values legislation down our collective throats.....unless you and I stop them cold.

Concerned Women for America has identified FOUR KEY LIBERAL AGENDA ITEMS -- radical legislation that we expect will be pushed hard during this "Lame Duck" session of Congress, and we need your help so we can respond at a moment's notice when they try to slip these favorite liberal tricks through
the back door.

Here are the FOUR CRITICAL AGENDA ITEMS we expect from the Reid-Pelosi Lame Duck Congress... starting Monday:

1. TAX INCREASES:  On January 1, 2011 American families and businesses across the nation will be saddled with a $3 trillion tax hike -- the largest in our nation's history.  This tax is an attack on marriage, family and small business!
2. MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING:  Despite a failing economy and failing job market, our government continues to print money it doesn't have -- running up deficits that are putting our children's futures in jeopardy!
3. RADICAL JUDICIAL NOMINEES:  President Obama is solidifying his radical agenda for generations that follow by nominating judges who share his "progressive" ideology. Even worse, he's actively pursuing justices who aspire to use foreign law in interpreting our Constitution!
4. REPEALING "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL":  Pelosi and Reid are eager to force the military to adopt a radical homosexual agenda -- an agenda that undermines our military, and puts people of faith who are serving in a "no-win" situation.

Given their history, I am convinced that Pelosi and Reid will move rapidly on these critical issues -- making it imperative that we can respond at a moment's notice.  That is why CWA is launching a national petition to "Stop The Reid-Pelosi Lame Duck Agenda." If you share my deep concerns that Pelosi and Reid will
ignore the election results and push these pet liberal agenda items through, please go here and sign our petition:  http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?u=34781&RID=26460101

Together we can de-rail the Pelosi-Reid Lame Duck Express before it does irreparable harm to our nation, but the key is for us to respond quickly -- before they can build any momentum.

Even as I write this critical alert, they are carefully plotting and scheming how best to advance their radically-charged agenda as early as November 15!  That's why we can't sit back - not even for a moment!  Please take fast action with me by clicking below and adding your name to our "Stop The Reid/Pelosi Lame Duck" petition.  http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?u=34781&RID=26460101

After signing our petition, help me quickly assemble a strong coalition of conservatives to help CWA challenge and beat back the Reid/Pelosi liberal wish list by alerting your friends and family to follow your lead by clicking below and signing our national petition:  http://www.grassfire.net/r.asp?u=34781&RID=26460101

For decades CWA has been an unwavering presence on Capitol Hill. We are literally in the eye of this growing political storm, and we are ready to storm the political gates to protect our nation, our families and the generations that follow.

Thank you for standing with me!
Penny Nance, Chief Executive Officer

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Michelle Malkin - Townhall Conservative

The Left's Voter Fraud Whitewash"

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt. It's the Democrats' coping mechanism for midterm election voter fraud. Faced with multiple reports of early voting irregularities and election shenanigans across the country, left-wing groups are playing dumb, deaf and blind. Voter fraud? What voter fraud?


More cunningly, these organizations are seeking to marginalize complaints about election integrity by casting citizen watchdog efforts as racist "scare tactics." Echoing President Obama's message to the Democratic faithful on the campaign trail, they are accusing political opponents of suppressing the votes of minorities and the poor. On Tuesday, The New York Times quoted a liberal voting rights advocate, Wendy R. Weiser, wringing her hands over individual Americans taking clean elections seriously:

"Private efforts to police the polls create a real risk of vote suppression, regardless of their intent," said Weiser, director of the Voting Rights and Elections Project at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. "People need to know that any form of discrimination, intimidation or challenge to voters without adequate basis is illegal or improper."

Weiser also turned up in a very similar story minimizing voter fraud and voter registration fraud that was published Tuesday by government-sponsored National Public Radio. The NPR report asserted that "most election experts" believe that fears of voter fraud are "overblown." No word on how many "experts" they surveyed (besides Weiser) to report such a conclusion, which flies in the face of dozens of felony voter fraud convictions across the country over the past two election cycles -- and that's just among ACORN-tied cases.

Overblown?

In North Carolina and Nevada, early voters have encountered ballot machine glitches that favor Democrats in hotly contested races.

In Troy, N.Y., and Daytona Beach, Fla., police investigations into suspected absentee ballot fraud by elected government officials are underway.

In Harris County, Texas, the voter registrar admitted that 20 percent of voter registration forms submitted by liberal activist Houston Votes had problems. Election whistleblowers there are now being investigated by the Obama Justice Department and have been slapped with an ethics complaint by the Texas Democratic Party and a left-wing billionaire George Soros-funded group called Texans for Public Justice.

In Yuma County, Ariz., election officials denied any fraud associated with thousands of requests for "permanent early voter list" status submitted en masse by open-borders group Mi Familia Vota (a social justice satellite group of the Service Employees International Union). But election officials admitted that some 6,000 out of 14,000 requests fielded by the Yuma County Recorder's Office "were reviewed and rejected, under Arizona law, either due to the fact the request was a duplicate or the requestor was not eligible to vote in this election or within the jurisdiction."

Liberals shrugged their shoulders at reports of illegal alien canvassers trolling for votes in Washington State. Never mind the radical goals spelled out by SEIU International Secretary-Treasurer and Mi Familia Vota founder Eliseo Medina, who views illegal alien amnesty as a powerful Democratic recruitment tool to capture millions of new progressive voters.

Funny. For the past two years, Democratic leaders have had nothing to say about the militant New Black Panther Party goons who took it upon themselves to police a Philadelphia voting booth in 2008 wielding billy clubs and shouting anti-white slurs to suppress votes. Now, they're treating citizen election monitors as if they are the jack-booted thugs. When I lauded efforts like the Minnesota Majority, which is training volunteers to watch polls and report on voter fraud, liberal critics accused me this week of "fascism."

Silence dissent. Criminalize watchdogs. Whitewash fraud. Discourage grassroots engagement. Deny, deny, deny. These are the signature tactics of the left in the age of Obama. On November 2, Americans get their chance to say: Enough.

Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2010).
 
http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2010/10/27/the_lefts_voter_fraud_whitewash/page/full/

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Anthony G. Martin, Conservative Examiner

Behind the masks--how the radical Left intends to save elections for Obama


September 6th, 2010
 
When the most vicious attack dogs are backed into a corner, as they say, 'you ain't seen nothing yet.' The mongrels pull out all of the stops, barring none, in order to salvage what little is left of their viability.


This is certainly the case with the Obama minions who are increasingly showing signs of desperation with regard to their public approval...and their looming shellacking at the polls in November.

The radical Left has kicked up its efforts into high gear in a desperate attempt to salvage the November midterm elections this year and to somehow reelect Barack Obama in 2012.

Mainstream America continues to wake up to the fact that they have been duped, that the 'man behind the mask' in the White House is not who they thought, and that the plan for America as implemented by Democrats in Congress since 2006, when they took control of both Houses, is leading the country off the cliff.

The result? The Leftwing consortium of extremist groups has resorted to gutter tactics that one associates with the very worst of the Chicago thugs.

Saul Alinsly, the 1960s radical whom both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton describe as their 'mentor,' described the tactic best in rule number 13 in his book 'Rules for Radicals':

"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

Another way to describe it is 'Disrupt-Discredit-Destroy.'

No greater example of the tactic can be found than the Left's response to Dr. Alveda King's appearance at Glenn Beck's 'Restoring Honor' rally in Washington on 8/28. King, the niece of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., committed the ultimate faux pas in the view of the race-baiters such as Al Sharpton and the NAACP, and thus, a concerted effort was mounted to smear her.

Beck himself has been the subject of outrageous smears, closely akin to that of Sarah Palin. The Huffington Post even offered $100,000 bucks for a non-existent Glenn Beck 'sex tape.'

Meanwhile, the NAACP has joined with the far-Left extremist group Think Progress, arm of the Center for American Progress, to 'highlight' incidences of 'racism' within the Tea Party movement.

It should be remembered that in July it was Think Progress that was caught red-handed manufacturing a fake video depicting non-existent Tea Party racism.

A new website has even been launched, the sole purpose of which is to spout propaganda concerning the supposed racism that is 'rampant' in the Tea Party movement.

And who would be the sponsors of this website? Think Progress, Center for American Progress, Media Matters, and the NAACP.

A much broader consortium of Leftwing organizations is in on the smears, however. The large labor unions, SEIU, the AFL-CIO, and others, are notorious for their sometimes violent attacks against detractors.

Recently the AFL-CIO referred to Sarah Palin as 'McCarthyite,' which, in the view of Leftists, strikes fear in the heart when one remembers that official documents released by the Kremlin during the late 1990s confirmed that most of Joe McCarthy's charges of Communist infiltration of the American government and society during the 1940s and 50s were proved to be 100% correct. But the Left is still counting on the thorough smear-job it accomplished against McCarthy in order to negatively portray Palin.

The AFL-CIO has also joined up with Communists, La Raza, the ACLU, and other unions, for a massive 'voter registration drive' prior to the midterm elections in November.

And ACORN-like voter fraud has already been discovered in Houston, Texas.

The key to understanding the significant threat posed by these groups, and others, is to recognize that the main players are often members of multiple organizations that work behind the scenes toward the same subversive goals. The Tides Foundation, Media Matters, Moveon.org, the Apollo Alliance, Center for American Progress, ACORN (or whatever name du jour they happen to be using), SEIU, the AFL-CIO, and a host of others walk in tandem to target, smear, discredit, and destroy conservative voices.

According to private investigators and other sources, some of these groups often enlist volunteers or pay special operatives to scan conservative websites in order to implement the Alinsky strategy referenced above. And, as this explosive report shows, sometimes the perpetrators work for federal government itself.

Be sure to catch my blog The Liberty Sphere.

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/behind-the-masks-how-the-radical-left-intends-to-save-elections-for-obama?cid=examiner-email

Monday, September 6, 2010

Canadian Prediction on Obama: Howard Galganov

Canadian Prediction on Obama


Ever wonder why we have to depend on the Foreign Press to find out what's "really" going on in our own country. It's a good thing that Obama and the democrats don't own the Canadian press. Here is what Howard Galganov predicts for Barack Hussein Obama –

PLEASE READ:

Barack Hussein Obama: "I Told You So, Yes I Did! " By: Howard Galganov - Montreal, Quebec, Canada

When Obama won the Presidency with the help of the LEFTIST media, Hollywood And Entertainment Liberals, Ethnic Socialists (ACORN), Stupid Non-Business Professionals and Bush Haters, I wrote: It won't take six months until the People figure this guy out and realize how horrible a mistake they've made. And when they come to that realization, the damage to the United States of America will be so great it will take a generation or more to repair - IF EVER.

The IDIOTS who not only voted for this Messiah, but also worked hard to promote his Lordship, are now left holding the bag. Here are two things they will NEVER do:

1. They will NEVER admit to making a blunder out of all proportion by electing a snake-oil salesman with no positive social history or management experience of any kind.

2. They will NEVER take responsibility for the curse they've imposed upon the immediate and long-term future of their country. In essence, the people responsible for putting this horror show in power are themselves responsible for every cataclysmic decision he makes and the consequences thereof.

In just six months, the Messiah's polls are showing the following:

1. On Healthcare Reform - He's going under for the third time with polling well Under 50 percent, even within his own Party. Even though he might be able to Muscle a Healthcare Reform Bill by using Chicago BULLY tactics against his Fellow Democrats, it will just make things worse.

2. On Cap and Trade (Cap and Tax) - The Fat-Lady is already singing.

3. On the Stimulus Package (Tax and Spend) - His popularity is in FREE-FALL.

4. On the TARP package he took and ran with from President Bush - It's all but Good-Night Irene.

5. On the closing of GITMO and "HIS" war on what he no longer wants called the War On Terrorism - He's standing in quicksand with his head just about to go under.

6. On a Comparison between himself and George W. Bush at the same six months into Their respective first term Presidencies - Bush is ahead of him in the Polls.

7. On a comparison between He Who Walks On Water and the 12 preceding Presidents between WW II and now Obama ranks 10th.

8. On a Poll just Conducted, that asks who would you vote for today between Obama and Mitt Romney - It's a dead heat. Between Obama and Palin - Obama's ONLY ahead by 8 Points and she hasn't even begun to campaign. It seems to me that Obama Wants to be everywhere where he shouldn't be.

He's personally invested in 'totally insulting' America's ONLY REAL Middle Eastern ally ( Israel ) in favor of Palestinian Despots and Murderers. He's traveling the world apologizing for the USA while lecturing others on how to do it right, when in fact and truth he has no experience at doing anything other than getting elected.

He went to the Muslim world in Egypt to declare that America IS NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION while he heaped praises on Islam, where he compared the "plight" of the Palestinians to the Holocaust.

a.) The Russians think he's a putz.

b.) The French think he's rude.

c.) The Germans want him to stop spending.

d.) The Indians want him to mix his nose out of their environmental business.

e.) The North Koreans think he's a joke.

f.) The Iranians won't acknowledge his calls.

g.) The British can't even come up with a comprehensive opinion of him.

h.) As for the Chinese, he's too frightened to even glance their way. [After All, China now owns a large portion of the United States.

Maybe if America's first Emperor would stay home more, travel less, and work a little bit instead of being on television just about everyday or stop running to "papered" Town Hall Meetings, perhaps he would have a little bit of time to do the work of the nation.

In all fairness, it wasn't HARD to be RIGHT in my prediction concerning Obama's presidency, even in its first six months, so I'm going to make yet another prediction:

OBAMA WILL PROBABLY NOT FINISH HIS 4-YEAR TERM, at least not in a Conventional way.

He is such a political HORROR SHOW, and so detrimental to the USA and his Own Democratic Party, that the Democrats themselves will either FORCE him to Resign or figure out a way to have him thrown out.

Or - MORE LIKELY THAN NOT, the Democrats will make Obama THEIR OWN LAME DUCK PRESIDENT.

I don't believe the Democrats have nearly as much love for their country as they do for their own political fortunes. And with Obama, their fortunes are rapidly becoming toast.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/note.php?note_id=438930012808&id=769569671

Monday, August 23, 2010

The Professional Left vs. the Amateur Right : The Current Truth

The Professional Left vs. the Amateur Right : The Current Truth

Of all the slips of the tongue and unintentional admissions by this administration, Robert Gibbs' "Professional Left" comment may well be the one they wish they could squeeze back into their collective windpipe the most:

http://thepeoplescube.com/current-truth/the-professional-left-vs-the-amateur-right-t5883.html

Morning Bell

Morning Bell: The Left is in Full Retreat

“Democrats are acknowledging the failure of their predictions that the health care legislation would grow more popular after its passage, as its benefits became clear and rhetoric cooled. … The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed.”
Read the article:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/23/morning-bell-the-left-is-in-full-retreat/

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Obamacare

The Obamacare Disaster Escalating

By Peter Ferrara on 8.18.10 @ 6:10AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/08/18/the-obamacare-disaster

Forthcoming for public release shortly will be my extensive study of the Obamacare legislation, “The Obamacare Disaster: An Appraisal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (Heartland Policy StudyNo. 128, The Heartland Institute, August 2010), available shortly at the Heartland Institute website. Following Nancy Pelosi’s dictum that we will have to pass it first to know what’s in it, I personally slogged through the thousands of pages of this legislative atrocity for the study, as well as thousands of pages of supplemental materials such as government, think tank and media reports.

The bottom line is that you will lose your health care under this legislation, if not your job, your country as they bankrupt America, and maybe ultimately your life or the life of a loved one. All that to make dreamy, emotionalized, liberals happy, even though many of them are not happy because the socialism in the bill is not overt enough. Moreover, the promises made to the American people to pass the bill are shown in the study to be thoroughly false. This pattern of calculated deception, however, did not fool the American people, only members of Congress, many of whom will now pay with their jobs as a result.

But the study is not all gloom and doom. It thoroughly explains the Patient Power reforms that should replace it when it is repealed, drawing on the broad scholarship of the Patient Power movement and its intellectual leaders, such as John Goodman, Grace Marie Turner, Sally Pipes, Merrill Mathews, and Greg Scandlen, among others. It consequently serves as a guidebook for the grassroots Tea Party activists who will lead the long-term crusade for Health Care Liberation.

The Government Takeover of Health Care

Contrary to President Obama’s rhetoric, the Obamacare legislation involves precisely the thorough government takeover of health care. It creates 159 new bureaucracies, agencies, boards, commissions, and programs to rule over health care in America. Government authorities are empowered to tell doctors and hospitals what is quality health care and what is not, what are best practices in medicine, how their medical practices should be structured, and what they will be paid and when. Government authorities will mandate exactly what health insurance with what benefits workers and employers must buy, and the Act imposes tax penalties on them if they do not comply. Government authorities will dictate to insurance companies exactly what health insurance they must sell, to whom they must sell it, and what they can charge. Obamacare even redistributes premium income among insurers under a new “risk adjustment” mechanism.

But this is just the beginning. As in everything President Obama is doing, it lays the groundwork for much more thorough government control and compulsion over time, primarily through bureaucratic landmines involving grants of regulatory authority that will explode when the bureaucracy thinks it can get away with it politically. Among the biggest targets here will be doctors and hospitals, which over time will become complete vassals of the regulatory, bureaucratic state Obamacare establishes.

Higher Health Care Costs

President Obama promised while campaigning for his health reform legislation that it would reduce the “growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government,” in particular by reducing the cost of health insurance by $2,500 per family. But the Obamacare legislation will have just the opposite effect, sharply increasing health costs for families, businesses, and government.

Higher costs for government start with the expansion of the Medicaid entitlement, which was already slated to cost $5 trillion over the next 10 years. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that Obamacare will increase Medicaid enrollment by 24 million new beneficiaries by 2015, adding an additional $410 billion in further federal costs for the program over the next decade alone.

Obamacare increases costs for the federal government further by adopting a massive new health insurance entitlement program for families earning up to four times the poverty level. In 2014, this new program will be providing $3,000 in taxpayer funds to families making $95,000. By 2018, almost $5,000 will be going to families making $102,000. CBO estimates that these subsidies will cost taxpayers an additional $457 billion over the first six years alone, through 2019. The Chief Actuary of Medicare estimates the total cost of this new entitlement will reach over $500 billion over the first six years. This is only the beginning, as this program will ultimately cost far more than now projected.

This is a massive increase in welfare extended to middle and upper-income families, irresponsibly added on top of the runaway, financially intractable entitlement promises we have already made. But Obamacare then adds a third new entitlement program, for long term nursing home care.

For the rest of us, Obamacare will sharply increase insurance costs. That starts with the mandates forcing everyone into comprehensive insurance coverage specified by the government, which will maximize the incentives for overconsumption of health care, to be paid for through the insurance. Then there are all of President Obama’s free new benefits now mandated, such as coverage for alcohol and drug abuse rehab, mental health services, preventive care, maternity benefits for single males and postmenopausal adults, and the elimination of all lifetime limits and caps. Free mandatory benefits raise health insurance costs.

Additional regulatory burdens will further increase costs. The guaranteed issue requirements force insurers to issue new policies to anyone who applies regardless of how sick they are, and the community rating requirements prohibit charging them more because of their illnesses. These requirements, which are just like forcing fire insurers to issue new policies to applicants whose houses are already on fire when they call, at regular rates, raise the costs of health insurance sharply for everyone else.

Two new taxes on health insurance, the Cadillac tax for supposedly high value insurance that will apply to more and more plans every year, and another tax on all health insurance from the start, will add nearly $100 billion to health insurance costs over the next 10 years alone. Then there will be sharply increased cost shifting to private health insurance due to the massive expansion of Medicaid to 24 million more people, and the more than massive Medicare cuts discussed below, as doctors and hospitals try to recoup their enormous losses by charging more to privately insured patients.

Counting just some of these cost increases, one study concludes that under Obamacare a typical family health insurance policy costing $12,300 today will cost $17,200 by 2013, $21,300 by 2016, and $25,900 by 2019. Another study concludes that insurance costs for young (up to 40) and healthy workers will double and triple in many cases.

These cost increases have already begun. But expect the liberal/left to insist that the soaring insurance costs caused by Obamacare prove that the public option, or even more overt socialized medicine, was needed after all. They will seek to prohibit the necessary premium increases, as in Massachusetts, and will be glad if that forces private insurers out of business.

Death Panels

While the liberal/left hides behind literal clowns mocking Sarah Palin for raising the issue of death panels under Obamacare, the legislation as passed documents the essential reality of the charge.

The recently released Annual Report of the Medicare Board of Trustees reveals that the Medicare payment rates for the doctors and hospitals serving seniors will be cut by 30% over the next 3 years. By 2019, those Medicare payment rates will be lower than under Medicaid. The Chief Actuary for Medicare reports that ultimately under Obamacare Medicare payment rates will be only one third of what will be paid by private insurance and only half of what is paid by Medicaid, where the poor often can’t find access to essential care.

Still further Medicare cuts adopted in the Obamacare legislation add up altogether to $818 billion over the first 10 years of full implementation, 2014-2023, and $3.223 trillion over the first 20 years, 2014-2033, for Medicare Part A (HI) alone! Adding in the cuts for Medicare Part B brings the total to $1.048 trillion over the first 10 full years, and $4.95 trillion over the first 20 full years. Eventually, as documented in the government’s own reports, Medicare Part A is cut by 60% per year, Part B by 43%!

These draconian cuts for doctors and hospitals providing the health care to seniors under Medicare were the basis for the CBO score repeatedly cited by President Obama that Obamacare would actually reduce the deficit while expanding or adopting three entitlement programs. This doesn’t even include the further cuts to Medicare Advantage, the private alternative to Medicare which nearly 25% of seniors have chosen for their Medicare coverage because it gives them a better deal, and the further automatic Medicare cuts to be adopted by the unelected, appointed, bureaucrats at the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board under Obamacare.

Such draconian Medicare cuts would create havoc and chaos in health care for seniors. Doctors, hospitals, surgeons and specialists providing critical care to the elderly such as surgery for hip and knee replacements, sophisticated diagnostics through MRIs and CT scans, and even treatment for cancer and heart disease will shut down and disappear in much of the country, and others will stop serving Medicare patients. If the government is not going to pay, then seniors are not going to get the health services, treatment and care they expect. Indeed, the Medicare Chief Actuary reports that even before these cuts already two-thirds of hospitals were losing money on Medicare patients. Health providers will either have to withdraw from serving Medicare patients, or eventually go into bankruptcy.

Apparently, President Obama’s concept of spreading the wealth includes sacking the Medicare system on which America’s seniors have come to rely for highly beneficial medical care, in favor of others who the Obama/Pelosi/Reid progressive vision deems more worthy.

As the government clamps down on private insurers as well as on payments from Medicare and Medicaid, the incentives for essential investment to maintain current facilities, expand and open new ones, and invest in and build out new innovations and breakthroughs, will be eviscerated. Investment in human capital as well as physical capital in health care will plummet, as doctors and other professionals increasingly flee health care. This effective decline in the supply of health care in the face of increasing demand will mean even higher prices and costs.

The study further explains how several provisions of Obamacare give insurers, doctors, and hospitals incentives to deny and ration health care to patients. A central component of the traditional high standard of living in America has been the best, most advanced, cutting edge health care in the world. No more. Obamacare is part of the declining standard of living for America.

America’s Coming Bankruptcy

When he was campaigning for Obamacare, President Obama insisted on national television that the mandate to buy insurance was not a tax. Now that it has passed, his lawyers are in court arguing that it is constitutional because it is a tax.

The mandate to buy insurance is economically, though not legally, indistinguishable from a tax. Even with the budget-crushing new entitlement subsidies in the Act, the insurance will be quite expensive, ranging up to 2 percent of income for people at 133 percent of poverty to 9.8 percent of income for people at 400 percent of poverty. That is like a new payroll tax, breaking two Obama pledges, since it applies just as well to those making less than $250,000 a year.

The study recounts at least 13 tax increases in Obamacare, adding up to at least $500 billion over the first 10 years, not counting the mandates. But that won’t begin to cover all of the spending involved in Obamacare, adding up to more than $2.4 trillion over the first 10 years of full implementation, from 2014 to 2024, and $5.3 trillion over the first 15 full years.

That will further explode the deficit and national debt by at least $2 to $3 trillion over the next 20 years. A major fallacy of the CBO score of Obamacare is that it assumes that only 19 million workers will qualify for the new Obamacare health insurance subsidies described above. In fact, as former CBO Chief Douglas Holtz-Eakin explains, under the incentives Obamacare provides employers to dump their health coverage, at least 43 million are likely to qualify. It could be 2 to 3 times as many, exploding original cost projections beyond imagination. The study explains other factors that will cause higher Obamacare spending and deficits. This would only follow the Medicare precedent, which was originally projected in 1965 to cost $12 trillion by 1990. But when 1990 came, it cost $109.7 billion, 9 times greater.

Patient Power v. Government Power

America does need to ensure that it maintains a health care safety net assuring that no one suffers due to lack of essential health care. But that can be accomplished without any of the big-government components of Obamacare. Indeed, done right, it can be accomplished while expanding the power and control of workers and patients over their own health care and actually reducing rather than enlarging government’s role in health care.

That would begin by repealing all 159 new bureaucracies, agencies, boards, commissions and programs created by Obamacare, and the rest of the legislative atrocity, reducing taxes and spending by the amounts described above, and the federal deficits and debt by at least $2 to $3 trillion over the next 20 years.

The next step would be to block grant Medicaid back to the states following the model of the hugely successful 1996 reforms of the old AFDC program. That would greatly benefit the poor, freeing them from the Medicaid ghetto to enjoy the same health insurance as the middle class. That would include the choice of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), maximizing patient power and control, and market incentives to control costs. Medicare should be reformed to empower all seniors with a Medicare Advantage choice, including the highly beneficial HSAs.

A true health care safety net ensuring essential health care for all can be achieved with state high risk pools, and consumer choice tax credits, ensuring affordability and access to health insurance for everyone. The study explains as well market consumer protection laws prohibiting insurance company fraud, and deregulation enabling a national market competition to truly control costs.

Because of all of the problems created by Obamacare, the misshapen legislation is just the beginning, not the end, of the battle to reform health care policy in America. Obamacare is so fundamentally wrong-headed that it takes us in the opposite direction of the essential reforms that are needed. Perhaps such a disastrously wrong step was necessary to draw the public’s attention to the true patient power reforms that would liberate health care in America.