Posts Tagged ‘barack obama’

A Cuckservative Potemkin Village

Monday, July 31st, 2017

Eric Cantor and John McCain show us everything that is morally worng with Cuckservatives. They grandstand, virtue signal and lie to get power and feel more moral than those that they defraud every time our demotic excuse for a republic holds another election.

This time, their surrender monkey routine consisted of rejecting the appeal of Obamacare that they swore up and down they would enact before the ACHA inevitably led to the socialization of Amerikan medicine. Cantor, now a charlatan at a boutique investment firm, tells us how the scam worked while Barack Obama was there to safely veto anything that was, you know, radical.

Asked if he feels partly responsible for their current predicament, Cantor is unequivocal. “Oh,” he says, “100 percent.” He goes further: “To give the impression that if Republicans were in control of the House and Senate, that we could do that when Obama was still in office…”

His voice trails off and he shakes his head. “I never believed it.” He says he wasn’t the only one aware of the charade: “We sort of all got what was going on, that there was this disconnect in terms of communication, because no one wanted to take the time out in the general public to even think about ‘Wait a minute—that can’t happen.’ ” But, he adds, “if you’ve got that anger working for you, you’re gonna let it be.”

Cantor, like John Boehner, is blessedly out of office. He can talk all the smack his Beltway buddies will pay him for. Kiss and tell books and interviews are a coin of the sleazy, greasy realm of the loathsome, oleaginous Cuckservative. But what of those still on duty and on the line? You asked and Cantor told you.

In 2015, every Republican senator voted for this bill to repeal Obamacare with budget reconciliation, which was sent to President Obama’s desk for a veto. In 2017, voting on the same bill, some did not. Here are the senators who changed their positions, breaking their promise to repeal Obamacare.

  • Senator Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.
  • Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine
  • Senator Dean Heller R-Nev.
  • Senator John McCain, R-Ariz.
  • Senator Shelley Moore-Capito, R-W.Va.
  • Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska
  • Senator Rob Portman, R-Ohio

These are the Republicans who, given the chance to vote for a clean repeal of Obamacare like they promised, betrayed the American people. Every one of them except for Senator Collins were in the Senate in 2015 and voted for the same bill they voted against today.

Yep. Exact same bill. One difference. POTUS was ready to sign the sucker. This would imply ownership. This would imply consequences. And even worse…it would have Donald Trump’s name on it. That, right there, inspired John McCain. It inspired him to make like Lazarus, rise from his hospital bed, and stick a dagger right into the back of any effort to repeal the hated Obamacare law.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) cast the crucial surprise vote that killed Senate Republicans’ last-resort ObamaCare repeal bill early Friday morning in a shocking moment that at least temporarily ended the GOP’s hopes of eliminating the former president’s signature law. Voting shortly after midnight, McCain — who returned to the Senate on Tuesday after being diagnosed with brain cancer the week before — joined GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and all Democrats in opposing the measure that would have repealed key parts of ObamaCare. McCain cast the no vote two days after a dramatic return to the Senate floor during which he called on his colleagues to work together on major issues, which has long been a Senate tradition until the upsurge of partisanship in recent years.

If Congress were Shakespeare’s Theater of Surrender, McCain could be King Lear and Cantor the weasely Shylock. To these scumbags its all just a LARP. The play’s the thing, governance and actual attention to the issues that got them sent to Washington…Hah! Who cares about those rubes? McCain, who went to the Mayo Clinic to treat his own cancer tumor, can’t imagine why mere proles who served in the Navy like him can’t just shut their yaps and wait for the VA. I doubt Eric Cantor ever spent a day covered by Obamacare.

Besides, they both love Obamacare. It’s raised them so much money. It’s like opposing abortion. Guaranteed votes and money. If craziness like Operation Rescue or Project Veritas ever succeeded, they couldn’t oppose feticide for a living. If the Tea Party ever really made a comeback and trashed Obamacare they couldn’t hate on it for dollars.

Our political milieu is a Potemkin Village. We are shown the happy and positive promises, then media and government together ignore the real problems while jousting after simulated windmills, and We The Saps vote them into office time and again. Any time their cozy little racketeering agenda is exposed, they trot out an aborted baby or new Al-Qaeda second-in-command to keep the groundlings entertained.

With Republicans like Cantor and McCain representing “Conservative” opposition, I think we are pretty much guaranteed an experiment with greater socialism. It’s not like any of them will ever have a kid like poor little Charlie Gard. Death panels, quotas and rationed care are totally for the little people.

A Tale Of Two Terrorists

Saturday, May 27th, 2017

Politics is mass manipulation. It speaks the language of emotions and current events that polarize people. It never gets to the root causes of these events because to do so would implicate politics itself. Mass manipulation is a form of control. Control leads only to more control. This requires ignoring real problems and chasing after symbolic ones.

Almost all of us are accustomed to being manipulated in this way. The right way to become socially popular is to have emotional reactions that other people find similar to their own. The right way to become politically popular is to offer symbols instead of reality. Consumerism and democracy create a bubble around us, in which our own fascinations are more important than reality itself.

This is how we domesticate animals: block out the world, and reduce all questions to the carrot, or the stick.

As a result of this, very few are willing to look at the actual causes of their problems, and focus on the symbol instead, like a bull in a bull fight lunging for that red cape. Even the supposedly “superior” Aryan types do this. And so they are led around by the nose, and find that despite exerting all of their energy in fighting against symbols, they still lose. Again and again.

Consider how this symbolic reality fails with the term “terrorist.” A terrorist is a member of another group waging guerrilla warfare, but doing it in your civilian territory. We recognize some as terrorists, but not others. For example, consider this set of wannabe terrorists:

Abdullah Alrifahe, 27, and Majid Alrifahe, 26, were arrested on May 11 outside a senior housing project in north Minneapolis.

The elder brother has been charged with a single weapons felony and is being held in the Hennepin County Jail on $200,000 bail.

…Police were called and allegedly found a loaded AK-47, a rifle, handgun, a grenade, ammunition, bomb-making materials and a drone inside the car.

These individuals obviously intended to stage terrorist attacks. We know this because they are from a foreign group, they were prepared for war in a civilian area, and their group competes with ours.

While it is never a bad thing to remove such individuals, they serve as pawns of a bigger division. The Left imports them to advance its agenda of breaking down all cultures, tribes and religions so that it can replace them with more mass control. But in turn, you can count on Useful Idiots from both sides to start doing what monkeys do, which is cheer for their team, and in doing so miss the point.

For example, look at this Useful Idiot acting out the Narrative:

A man who was yelling ‘anti-Muslim’ slurs at two young women on a light-rail train fatally slashed the throats of two men and injured a third person when they tried to intervene, police said.

…Police don’t know if the suspect, described as a white man between the ages of 20 and 40, has mental health issues or whether was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time.

When people say they want a party that is neither Left nor Right, what they are reacting to is the fact that our public parties both Left and Right manipulate us with emotional symbols, and both try to hide the source of decay.

For example, Right-wing commentators on Fox News have been demonizing Muslims for some time. They do this because it motivates their audience, a giant herd of people bloated on boring jobs and abundant shopping, to act in a way that supports those commentators and the candidates they depend on to make the news that keeps them employed.

It is not politics, it is business.

At the same time, having a Right-wing Useful Idiot attack some passive Muslims allows the Left to motivate its audience by portraying Muslims as victims and the white majority as bad, therefore Leftism which opposes it must be seen as good.

Both sides serve to hide the actual truth, which is that diversity does not work. It makes enemies out of groups because they are competing for power. Every group wants power, if for no other reason to have its own symbols prevail.

Consider these famous terrorists:

Malvo was 17 when he and his accomplice, the 42-year-old John Allen Muhammad, began their crime spree, robbing and killing people across California, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Maryland, DC and Virginia.

Police did not initially realize the killings, which often involved a single bullet from a distance, were connected.

But the shootings intensified over the course of three weeks in October 2002, and Malvo and Muhammad killed strangers in innocuous places like parking lots, gas stations, and outside schools.

The killings struck fear in Washington DC and surrounding areas in Virginia and Maryland.

The captive Right will immediately point to their Muslim leanings as a way to distract from the obvious truth, which is that they are African and resent (perceived) white dominion over America.

We also tend to use “Muslim” as a proxy for those of middle eastern or African races who seem less familiar with the Koran than a familiar litany of racial grievances against whites. Contrary to what the conservatives will tell you, this is not a religious war; it is a race war. The same was true of the Crusades, the Mongol invasions and the conflict with Mexico.

Just as the race riots in LA helped elect Bill Clinton, having Black snipers wandering around America spurred the fearful sheep into electing Barack Obama. Both candidates promised to end racial strife by pacifying minority groups.

These attacks also help the Fox News style idiots who get a chance for their own burst of cleansing hatred, sort of like they exercise thirty minutes a day. Maybe they spend another thirty minutes screaming at a television screen. Once that is done, they stop thinking about it and go back to jobs, hobbies and shopping. Bloated.

If there is a point to all of this, it is that democracy misleads us by symbols. The symbol is the Muslim fanatic hating us; the reality is that every other ethnic group wants to conquer us, and while we are focused on Muslims, a race war is eliminating us while we stumble forward in the stupor of democratic feeling.

Comey Beheaded

Wednesday, May 10th, 2017

All corrupt parties have a vested interest in chaos, uncertainty and misdirection. They specialize in generating reams of published material about any event. This then joins with those who write to be popular, which means they invent a way to translate popular opinion into a semi-topical screed about recent events, in spreading nonsense and foolishness.

Donald Trump has fired FBI Director James Comey. Apparently this was a shock, and Comey found out about it secondhand; it also seemed like odd timing because Barack Obama has just brought himself and his new multi-million dollar war chest back to Washington, D.C., in an echo of the Clinton Foundation: a front man for receiving funds to distribute to agitators, as Leftists usually do.

A sensible supposition is that Trump has just sent a message to all employees of the US government:

If you have been working with the Establishment/Deep State, you can be fired at any time, even if there is no replacement handy.

We might call this the Trump Personnel Doctrine, or, throw the bad apples to the pigs. During the last eight years, only those who played nice with the Obama regime were promoted, and this took the form usually of sins of omission, or ignoring obvious lawbreaking, than affirmative acts. In particular, they ignored problems that contradicted the Obama doctrine of white replacement and Leftist rule.

Comey presided over the Fort Hood shooting, the Boston Marathon bombing and several other events where the FBI stood down instead of investigating obvious threats who were not of a politically correct category. Investigate whites, ¡Sí!; investigate non-whites, ¡No!. And so Muslim terror was allowed to continue, making the white population cower in terror and emboldening angry minority groups.

Trump probably waited until he had both a clear picture of what Comey had done or failed to do, and a politically opportune time. Barack Obama has just had his hand spanked, much like Vladimir Putin got his hand spanked in Syria. While the pundits bloviate and talking heads chatter, behind the scenes, interesting things are happening.

Democracy Always Converges On The Same Mediocrity

Saturday, May 6th, 2017

With any luck and bravery by the French people, we will be celebrating a different victory than predicted by polls — which do not reflect the socially unacceptable opinions of voters who cannot openly speak what they think — and Marine Le Pen will become the next president of France, continuing the “populist” wave of reactionary nationalist/traditionalist thought into the home of modern democracy.

The talking heads predict otherwise:

The National Front’s Le Pen would close borders and quit the euro currency, while independent Macron, who has never held elected office, wants closer European cooperation and an open economy. The candidates of France’s two mainstream parties were both eliminated in the first round on April 23.

Four new polls showed Macron on track to win 62 percent of the votes in the second round compared to 38 percent for Le Pen, his best score in a voting survey by a major polling organisation since nine other candidates were eliminated in the first round on April 23. A fifth poll showed him on 61.5 percent.

Certainly, conventional wisdom is on their side because of two forces: the Establishment, and the tendency by voters to enact compromise in order to avoid risk. Voters and institutions both suffer from an inertial fallacy, which holds that if what has been working badly has not yet exploded like Communism or National Socialism, the safest bet is to keep voting for it and try to fix the details later.

Of course, like the conservative pacifier of “patriotism, religion and working hard,” the bovine complacency of an inertial vote has not worked at any time in history. Since the Establishment is not rebuked, it takes that as a mandate to double-down on its power and further marginalize its opposition while locking people further into a web of laws, rules, debts, obligations and ideological dogmas.

In fact, we can see how the Establishment controls the outcome of elections in advance through controlling the narrative, relying on the fear of the average person to “step out of line” to keep them voting in an inertial arc:

The French media and public have been warned not to spread details about a hacking attack on presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron.

Strict election rules are now in place and breaching them could bring criminal charges, the election commission said.

A trove of documents – said to mix genuine files with fake ones – was released online shortly before campaigning ended on Friday.

Notice the anonymous assertion that there are “fake files” in with the “genuine ones,” which seems like it affirms the validity of the leak but by asserting that some files are fake without identifying them, casts doubt as to the veracity of any given item.

We can tell that the modern West has been dominated by the stupefactive for many centuries because it replicates fundamental aspects of the failed democracies in ancient Athens and Rome. All democracies end the same way: government becomes the target of all actions, instead of results in reality, so the society simultaneously spaces out and works itself to death for nonsense objectives.

The failure of the French Revolution, which ended in Napoleon, and the Soviet Union, which produced Stalin, follow an identical arc. We might call this “the Napoleonic Arc” because it starts with a revolution against perceived oppression, escalates to actual oppression of a far greater degree, and then ends with fanatical ideological warfare in order to keep the failing nation together.

As part of this arc, government perpetually consolidates its power so that it can keep society together despite the increasing chaos of its population caused by policies of that government. Leftism is popular, but it does not work, even if it takes centuries to see just how bad the problem will become.

Any time humans create a false target like ideology, an elite is produced. These succeed not just in politics, but in the consumer market, because they have adapted to creating products for those who think according to the ideology. Fast food starves in a healthy society, but in one afflicted by ideology, it succeeds because it is more efficient for those living according to that ideology.

This political-financial elite then takes over control of society, aided by government, and dispossesses those who are sane enough to want a normal life instead of craving power and wealth for their own sake. This divides the society into its nu-elites and its remnant of realists:

At the same time, Fukuyama argues that class divisions are primary and come before all other sources of identity. To be sure, Fukuyama is not Marxist. In an essay last year in the Financial Times, Fukuyama writes,” Social class, defined today by one’s level of education, appears to have become the single most important social fracture in countless industrialized and emerging market countries.”

Class, which is the education level, determines the way people think about politics, according to Fukuyama. He imagines that it is the poorly educated who have not done well economically who have become passionately anti-elitist. He recognizes that they do not see themselves in economic terms, but rather racial, ethnicity or nationality terms.

The people in the cities define themselves in economic terms and see themselves as an upper class, even though most of them have come from lower castes. Everyone else defines themselves in terms outside of the terms of this new elite, and focuses on things that have maintained civilization for time immemorial: identity, spirituality, culture, nature and position in community.

In other words, it is the artificial versus the real. The nu-elites are the product of government and ideology; the remnant are the functional people who do not need the nu-elites.

This leads to a radical backlash called “reaction”:

Reactionary thought begins, usually, with acute despair at the present moment and a memory of a previous golden age. It then posits a moment in the past when everything went to hell and proposes to turn things back to what they once were. It is not simply a conservative preference for things as they are, with a few nudges back, but a passionate loathing of the status quo and a desire to return to the past in one emotionally cathartic revolt. If conservatives are pessimistic, reactionaries are apocalyptic. If conservatives value elites, reactionaries seethe with contempt for them. If conservatives believe in institutions, reactionaries want to blow them up. If conservatives tend to resist too radical a change, reactionaries want a revolution.

It is simpler than this journalist makes it out to be: reactionaries are conservatives who refuse to constrain their desires to what “seems possible” in the status quo. They realize there is one ideal state for humanity, and it more resembles something out of The Lord Of The Rings than Brave New World. The $current_year does not matter; one order works, and everything else decays.

This is the environment in which we find ourselves now. Democracy is the political capture of society by ideology; the remnant are realists who want no part of ideology, and focus instead on what has worked through history to produce the best human society, or a Golden Age.

Now that more people have seen what Leftism looks like in practice, since Barack Obama and Angela Merkel took it to its logical extreme, the reactionary movement is gaining force. We realize we do not need our nu-elites, and that we are better off without the political system that put them in power, because it is a crooked game that will produce the same results every time.

Consumerism Dies As Currency Plunges In Value

Sunday, April 30th, 2017

Warning signs abound in the prole reich created by democracy. Despite attempts to bolster the economy — “pump priming” — by importing the entire third world, the economy of the West falters as currency declines in value as a result of Leftist social programs:

Whole Foods had grand plans for a UK expansion too, opening its first outpost in Kensington in 2004 with plans for 40 more. But Whole Foods has stalled: like much of the retail sector, it faces economic headwinds including razor-thin margins, competition from other retailers offering organic food, and increasingly price-conscious consumers.

…One rival chain, Sprouts Farmers Market, was found to be on average 19% cheaper than Whole Foods. Other rivals, including Kroger, picked up Whole Foods customers. Last month, Barclays advised that Whole Foods had experienced a “staggering” decline in foot traffic that it estimated at 3%, or roughly 14 million customers.

Here in the mental state of Read Between The Lies you must parse carefully what the herd says in order to figure out what is rationalization/excuse/justification (REJ) and what is actual cause-effect reasoning. They speak of a number of factors, but the big one is price. Whole Foods is too expensive for what it offers.

This fits into the only sensible analysis of the Obama years. Just as under Clinton, the US switched to demand-side economics, but this delegated the value of our currency to world markets, which promptly rejected the Obama doctrine because our economy was based on a circular Ponzi scheme, making a fragile economy which will explode as consumer demand falls.

Whole Foods and others are dying because, despite our “great” economy, most people are suffering a loss of ready cash because the cash is worth 40% less than pre-Obama money. As a result, they are avoiding places that are financial traps, and instead, quietly going to Walmart and bypassing the whole consumer retail spectacle.

As often happens, bubbles occur where a product is scarce but eventually will become easier to come by. Consumer goods were once a huge profit center in the West, but over time, the equality boom of the French Revolution faded and so consumer goods declined in value. Now, we watch that industry pass away, having made itself irrelevant by raising costs just as the audience needed it to level out.

Latest Russian Election Interference Story Is Fake

Thursday, April 20th, 2017

The Left has been trying to crank up the idea that the Russians hacked our election or otherwise interfered with it on Trump’s side, probably as a precursor to attempting impeachment or invalidating the election.

Their latest efforts will fail like the previous ones. The most recent propaganda piece conjures up a Russian “plan” to disturb the election.

Let us look closer at what is actually said:

The first Russian institute document was a strategy paper written last June that circulated at the highest levels of the Russian government but was not addressed to any specific individuals.

It recommended the Kremlin launch a propaganda campaign on social media and Russian state-backed global news outlets to encourage U.S. voters to elect a president who would take a softer line toward Russia than the administration of then-President Barack Obama, the seven officials said.

A second institute document, drafted in October and distributed in the same way, warned that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was likely to win the election. For that reason, it argued, it was better for Russia to end its pro-Trump propaganda and instead intensify its messaging about voter fraud to undermine the U.S. electoral system’s legitimacy and damage Clinton’s reputation in an effort to undermine her presidency, the seven officials said.

The lügenpresse are counting on the fact that the average voter has zero experience with policy think tanks. Policy think tanks make strategic recommendations and generally have no awareness of actual policy, i.e. what is being done. Instead, they speak in hypotheticals.

For example, that the document says “it was better for Russia to end its pro-Trump propaganda” does not imply that Russia was issuing pro-Trump propaganda, only that it could be assumed as a possibility and therefore, the suggestion can be made to alter that strategy.

The fact that we have two documents, both pointing in different directions, suggests that these were contingency documents, or potential position papers drawn up to deal with different events that might emerge. Nothing suggests these were adopted as policy but the implication is there in the press.

In the meantime, Trump has rebuked Russia by blowing up an airbase they helped maintain in Syria. What he said during the election was that he viewed Russia as a potential ally, not that he would favor Russia.

If we went through Washington, D.C., looking for think tanks that had made policy recommendations (which is enough to make them “Obama-linked” in the press lexicon) we would find all sorts of absurd plans recommending that the USA redirect resources that might not exist toward possible ideas that look good on paper.

This is the type of analysis this Russian think tank offers, couched in bureaucratspeak of potentialities and possibilities:

It is hardly to expect the development of Obama’s environmental agenda from President Trump, who’s known for his skeptical remarks in relation to climate change. At the same time, it seems that the general strategic course of the United States in the Arctic, outlined in the end of the XX century, will continue. An indirect evidence of the continuity of the current Arctic policy of the US is the fact that almost all the key officials of the State Department responsible for implementing the US policy in the Arctic under the Obama administration, retained their positions under the new President.

In this way, the Russian version follows a format we have seen many times before, which is to second-guess other nations and take broad policy positions, mainly as a way of alerting politicians of options and signaling across the sea (indirectly) about Russia’s concerns and thus likely future actions.

This is not the smoking gun the media wants to try to hype it into being. Behind all of these Russia-stole-our-‘lections stories we can see the hands of a powerful Establishment and the Obama-Clinton gang, who are still looking for a path to permanent, Soviet-style power.

How Bad Was The Leftist Regime Under Barack Obama?

Monday, February 13th, 2017

The Leftist press is currently engaged in damage control. Voters, who are an inert bunch because the demands of socializing with others require avoiding extreme opinions, finally woke up to the Obama-Clinton disaster when the economy really crashed. But how bad was it? One source provides a overview of the disaster of the Obama economy:

First, let’s establish that the American economy really is sick. From 2011-2016, we observed the poorest economic expansion on record. Usually, recoveries from sharp recessions are equally sharp. This recovery was a dud. Barack Obama was the first president without a year of 3 percent real GDP growth while in office. Further, from 2011-2016, annual growth averaged more than a full point less than growth from 1965-2010, a period that includes drag from multiple recessions. Similarly, growth in real personal incomes and wages lagged behind the long-term historic average, and by several measures income inequality increased.

Second, the diagnosis. Three factors drive an economy: growth of the labor force, growth of the capital stock, and what economists call total factor productivity—how much output is produced by each unit of labor and capital. The poor economic performance of late cannot be blamed on the labor market. From 2011-2016, employment expanded rapidly, though the wages paid by those jobs were decidedly subpar. But from 2011-2015 (the last year for which data are available), capital formation plummeted—by almost 50 percent compared to the average annual growth rate observed from 1965-2010. Total factor productivity declined even more, from a long-term historic average of 1.1 percent to just 0.4 percent, a plunge of nearly two-thirds.

The media, academia and government elites — the Cathedral — feigned disbelief at the rejection of Obama and everything like him, but the numbers tell the tale. The American middle class was suffering from the burden of redistributing wealth, and they needed relief. For this reason, they elected Donald J. Trump to clean up the mess, and the rest is history.

Return Of Daddy

Friday, January 27th, 2017

A cultural shift is occurring across the West: people are moving away from ideology, or the ideal of what “should” be based on concerns for socializing with others, toward results-based thinking that emphasizes actual production and civilizational stability.

This manifests in a number of entertaining ways:

For the past eight years, and the sixty-three years before that, the West has been ruled by increasing degrees of Leftism. In 1968, they had their social triumph, and then in the 1990s, a political triumph, after which they produced the zombie ideologues who became Millennials and thronged for Obama.

During that time, it was considered normal behavior to be a “free rider,” or someone who took from the society as a whole and contributed less back. This is not solely a measurement of work and money, but often social order. Many people were content to behave badly and let others clean up the mess and struggle to restore the order that once was there.

But once the adults came back into the room, that type of behavior appeared as self-serving and parasitic as it is. This means a cultural shift based on the cultural shift that caused Brexit and Trumprise: people no longer view ideology in itself as a justification for “anything goes.” They want social order again.

This cultural shift is leading to a society that is less focused on symbolic acts for the purpose of socializing, or making others feel good about themselves, and more directed toward actual achievement, guided by principles and standards.

The last eight years showed us a president who was prone to both emotionality and bluster. When Trump made his inaugural speech, Leftist commentators wondered why he did not show emotion as Obama did, who was wiping away a tear during many of his speeches. On the other hand, when Trump dealt with Mexico, he showed not only no emotion but no bluster. He stated his position and kept to it.

America under the Return of Daddy will be quite a different place. Will it be enough? Not in itself, most likely, but instead of viewing this as a pendulum, we should think of it as a change in direction of the nation as a whole. Once we were heading inward, further toward human emotions. Now we are heading outward to subdue the chaos in our world.

Crowdism In Literal Form

Wednesday, January 25th, 2017

We know the Lügenpresse has a clear purpose, but it is not to report the news. It is to present an information/entertainment product that people enjoy, and since the major media consumers are Leftist people looking for alternatives to reality, it leans left.

But this week, the Lügenpresse got caught in a callow lie — by their own hands, no less — when they insisted that the crowd size at Donald Trump’s inauguration was less than that at Barack Obama’s inauguration:

There has been an enormous, brutal argument between the media and the administration about the size of Donald Trump’s Inauguration crowd. The administration has pushed back on media reports that it was sparsely attended. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer leveled a full-throated attack against the press for reporting on the attendance, calling Trump’s Inauguration the “most-watched” in history.

This image went viral, comparing the attendance of both Inaugurals. It has since been proven misleading, at best.

The best part is that the proof is open and visible, thanks to the CNN Gigapixel, which reveals the crowd during the inauguration ceremony and not after or before as the Lügenpresse image comparison posted above portrays.

All of this serves as prelude to an important question: why are we engaged in a penis-size-comparison-contest about crowd size? The Left always wants direct democracy, or whatever is most popular in social circles at that moment wins, but the Right recognizes that humans are mostly muddled thinkers who in groups are subject to fads, manias, panics, phases, trends, paranoia and peer pressure; for that reason, the Right tries to limit democracy, if it does not outright oppose it on the basis that it is the handmaiden of civilization decline.

We are seeing Crowdism in a literal form as the herd attempts to equate popularity with correctness, and use that as a basis to seize power. And yet, this approach has never served anyone well, because whatever is popular is usually the surface viewpoint, a distraction, scapegoat, deflection or other surrogate for actual activity. If our era has an epitaph, this will be it.

Does Barack Obama Intend To Rule America Indefinitely?

Friday, January 6th, 2017

The last few weeks of the rule of Barack Obama have revealed a dark side to his personality: he seems intent on holding on to power even if only by attempting to thwart those who come after him.

During this time, he has blamed Russia for interference in American elections without solid proof, and other members of the government have referred to Russian activity as “acts of war.”

Obama continues to apply pressure on the Russians with a military buildup in Europe:

U.S. and Polish forces will participate in a large “massing” exercise in Poland at the end of January as part of a series of measures aimed at reassuring U.S. allies in Europe after Russia’s 2014 annexation of the Crimea region of Ukraine.

…NATO countries say their planned deployments to eastern NATO countries are purely defensive, but Russia has rebuked what it sees as an aggressive western buildup in eastern Europe.

“Tanks never create peace anywhere,” said Christian Goerke, who heads the party in Brandenburg state. “Quite the contrary, a troop deployment of such a scale is part of always increasing buildup and provocation.”

Unless we think Russia is actively planning to invade the Baltics and Eastern Europe, this buildup makes sense only as a political ploy designed to provoke the Russians, possibly into a preemptive attack.

A war would give Obama an opportunity to indirectly seize control of the United States Government on a permanent basis. He would be able to do this through control of the media if he deemed that subversive forces were making use of it:

It shall be unlawful for any person during any war in which the United States is engaged to knowingly or willfully, by physical force or intimidation by threats of physical force, obstruct or retard or aid in obstructing or retarding interstate or foreign communication by radio or wire. The President is authorized, whenever in his judgment the public interest requires, to employ the armed forces of the United States to prevent any such obstruction or retardation of communication.

In this light, the recent government-memes of Russian interference in the election and “fake news” make sense when combined. Obama, using his typical broad interpretation of his powers, might in the advent of war with Russia declare that Russia is interfering with the media and seize communications. From that base, he could stage a coup, and become permanent General Secretary of the globalist American initiative.

Recommended Reading