Buzz Paths

I cannot claim authorship to this.  It was sent to me by a friend who want to remain nameless. It needs to be shared:

The morning of November 7, 2012 contains sobering sunrise. The light of day exposes a view of American society that has been changed forever.

In 1789 Benjamin Franklin stated: “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic.” Our citizens selected that path yesterday and they will never step away from the entitlements they hope will free them from personal responsibility, make their lives easier, and favor from the financial base of a very large and growing central government. In making that choice, the winning electorate discarded any responsibility for the maintenance of the principles that created the success this free society brought to the world through the governance guided by the rule of law designed by our Constitution. In a word, this country is doomed and will not recover from the choice that its voters made yesterday.

The biggest loss in yesterday’s election was the rule of law. A loss brought to the nation by the political party of lawyers. In the next four years at least two Supreme Court Justices will retire and will be replaced by lawyers appointed by a liberal administration changing the balance of power for that will reshape the very foundation of the country. We now have a minority in the Court that does not believe in our Constitution as a foundational document. Ruth Bader Ginsberg in February of this year when commenting on Egypt’s development of a constitution for it’s new government said: “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” Ginsburg said in an interview on Al Hayat television. “I might look at the constitution of South Africa.” This is a radical view of the very fiber of the foundation of the country. Add more of this influence to the Court and our country will not survive.

This new era of leadership is in the hands of a party that attempted to remove the word and the concept of GOD and support for Israel from its basic Party Platform at its National Convention. Supported by a President who announced to the world is a speech delivered in Cairo in 2009 that “America was no longer a Christian country.” He said that at a time when 73% of Americans “…identify themselves as Christians.” He then went on to bow to the king of Saudi Arabia.

Our electorate has chosen to be led by a radical Progressive who compares American Exceptionalism to Greek Exceptionalism. A person who has no belief in the free spirit of the American Individual’s personal desire and responsibility to create essential improvement of society through personal growth in a Capitalist financial system. A president who genuinely believes that our society must be “managed” by an elitist group of bureaucrats in our central government.

We, our electorate, in our adoration of “celebrity”, have expressed admiration for people of no substance. They worship perceived “cool” and admire those the press defines as “good.” What we are left with is an element of those who have discovered “power” and from the seat of government have created an “industry” that has defined a career of “politics” thus creating a class of elites that buy their “station” in society with gifts to the electorate from the public treasury.

So, America, you have done it. In your desire to get your life purchased for you by the politician you perceive will send you security, will give you personal financial stability from the public treasury, you have removed all the strength from very foundation upon which you stand. The financial base those politicians use to buy your vote is no longer funded from the center of our country; it is borrowed money from other societies and their base wealth. We no longer own our own destiny.

We are done. We have crossed the tipping point. I can say to all of my relatives that I lived my youth in a time that will be remembered as the greatest point, the pinnacle, the zenith of our Western Civilization. This was a time of prosperity that was purchased for my generation by our parents to make a better life for us than they had experienced. Some of our parents even gave their lives for us, so that we could prosper and understand the promise of America. My own father is buried in Belgium near where he lost his life at age 31 in December of 1944.

The result of last nights election has been brought upon us by a century, yes, a hundred years of assault on freedom by a Progressive Ideology that has fed itself from the inside of our own body. In the next four years, we will see a steady decline in our environments, our communities, our lifestyle, our dollar, the value of everything we have worked for, the vary freedoms we have sacrificed for and at the end of that period, the voting majority of the population will be so dependent on free stuff from the central government that recovery of the “American Exceptionalism” that made this “the best place on Earth” will be far beyond the reach of the American Citizenry.

We are no longer America, we are toast…

This was sent to me in an email by a friend. I thought it was worth passing along.

George W. Bush speech after capture of Saddam Hussein:
The success of yesterday’s mission is a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq .

The operation was based on the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the Dictatorâ??s footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate them.

Barack Hussein Obama speech, Sunday, May 1, 2011:
And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as I continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by my intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan .And finally, last week, I determined that I had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad , Pakistan .

Hubris (hu·bris), also hybris, means extreme haughtiness, pride or arrogance. Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one’s own competence or capabilities, especially when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power.

An interesting comparison of the two groups. The Tea Party has been portrayed in the media as a bunch of crazy right wing zelots. The Occupy Movement has been hailed as a shining example by the media and Barry and da Boyz. Let take a closer look at the two groups and see how they compare:

The Teabaggers vs. the Fleabaggers

Trying to deflect Donald Trump’s Sheen-esque “violent torpedoes of truth” regarding his birth certificate, Barack Obama told ABC News that Republicans will only be hurting themselves by continuing to raise the question of whether he was born in the United States.  While I’m not sure how much the Republicans would be hurting themselves, it is certainly is a colossal waste of time.

The question is not whether Barack Obama was born in the United States but rather what do all those who invest so much time, energy and emotion in the issue, believe would be accomplished by proving he wasn’t.  If conclusive evidence along with the smoking gun is found proving that Obama was not born in the United States, do these folks believe that Obama would be removed from office?  I have said all along that even if it was proved that Obama was not born in the United States, there is no mechanism in place, nor would any agency such as the FBI, CIA, the military, et al, forcibly remove him from office.  

No, all this would do is to provide La-Liberal-Cosa Nostra with yet another opportunity to attack the Constitution.  You can already hear the liberal drum beat and war chant about how the Constitution is an antiquated worn out relic written over 200 years ago by its framers who in their day could not have envisioned the melting pot that America would one day become, and that the Constitution long ago ceased being representative of the population of today’s America, and it should be balled up and dropped in the nearest confetti shredder, blah blah, so on and so on, ad nauseum.  Accordingly, in order to save Obama, the first item that would have to go in this latest liberal salvo would be that pesky little eligibility requirement that a presidential candidate must be born in the United States.  In the minds of liberals, the fact that something is written in the Constitution does not make it Constitutional.  Say what? [Insert eye roll and head shake here].  But I digress.

So what then is the most that could be expected by proving Obama was not born in the United States?  Drum roll please… a big fat court case.  Does it get any more boring and anticlimactic than that?  Yes a court case, that would drag on and on, and maybe sometime by the year, oh say 2525 when your arms are hangin’ limp at your side, it might, that is might just get to some trial docket somewhere.  Even on the outside chance that Obama is re-elected, he would be long gone from office before any action could come to bear.  Therefore the entire issue is moot.  Yes there is the possibility that this episode might result in more thorough vetting of future presidential candidates to make them prove their eligibility before an election.  In the trail blazing State of Arizona, a bill that would make Arizona the first state to require presidential candidates to prove they were born in the U.S. in order to get on the state ballot has cleared the Legislature, and is waiting for Gov. Jan Brewer to sign.      

Personally, I believe that Obama was not born in the United States if only because if he was, he could easily put the entire matter to rest by providing a birth certificate, not just the certificate of live birth which is not the same thing.  But he has not.  Is it because he won’t, or even more disconcerting – because he can’t?  Regardless, I am simply not able to invest the same emotion as others in this issue because I say again, even if it were proved that Obama was not born in the United States, he would never be removed from office because of it.  He would simply go down in history as little more than a trivia factoid, a mere final Jeopardy question in the category, “Famous Magicians,” the final Jeopardy question:  He was the only President in history to fool enough Americans into electing him despite the fact that he was Constitutionally ineligible:  Who was Barack Obama!  Mahalo and Aloha Alex! 

Is this the case that will break the presidential eligibility question wide open? The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he may not be a “natural-born citizen” as required by Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution. Unlike other eligibility cases that have reached the Supreme Court, Kerchner vs. Obama focuses on the “Vattel theory,” which argues that the writers of the Constitution believed the term “natural-born citizen” to mean a person born in the United States to parents who were both American citizens. “This case is unprecedented,” said Mario Apuzzo, the attorney bringing the suit. “I believe we presented an ironclad case. We’ve shown standing, and we’ve shown the importance of the issue for the Supreme Court. There’s nothing standing in their way to grant us a writ of certiorari.”

View Source: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=232073

A dear friend sent me a link to the Dave Johnson article: Eight False Things The Public “Knows” Prior To Election Day

At first I thought my friend was joking. I then realized he was dead serious.

That of this economic crisis, only a liberal democrat could look upon it and say, “no, no, things are really great and getting better.” They are like toddlers who cover their eyes and say “if I can’t see it, it isn’t there.” In Dave Johnson’s article he makes eye catching bold claims, but provides absolutely no documentation to support his “if I can’t see it, it isn’t there” Kool Aid swilling baseless claims. So to those like Dave Johnson who would choose to cover their eyes and remain blind and pretend it isn’t there, and keep Congress as it is, I would love to simply say then vote to keep them there and you will get what you deserve. But it is not that simple because there are too many other Americans whose eyes are wide open, who are not blind, and WE DO NOT want what YOU deserve.

One thing I think everyone can agree on is that while a president sits in the center seat, it is the Congress who approves his plans, it is therefore far more important to have a sane thinking Congress than a sane thinking president.

“The White House is not going to save the Republic regardless of who is its occupant. It has to be on Capitol Hill where the nation’s lawmakers assemble, that the decision is made on legislation which charts the governmental course of our nation. One of the most dangerous things that has happened in the legislative halls is this growing idea that the President knows it all. He writes out the program for the year and the Senate and House are supposed to say amen.” Sen. Barry Goldwater (R) Arizona, 1962

Let’s look at each point of the above mentioned article:

1) President Obama tripled the deficit. – Yes he did. Your own MSNBC even thinks so: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33348615/ Obama’s economic packages consist of more than just the “Stimulus”. There is also the bank bailout, automaker bailout, mortgage bailout, and a second “stimulus” in the works. The total will be in the area of $2-3 Trillion. The National Deficit and the National Debt are two different things. The National Deficit is the amount that we are in the red this year and the National Debt is the amount total amount that the government is currently behind. The current National Deficit pre-stimulus was about $1.2 Trillion and the National Debt was about $9.5 Trillion.. The Bush Administration inherited a National Debt of $6.5 Trillion and increased it to $9.5 Trillion over 8 years (including two wars). That comes to $375 Billion in deficit spending each year (on average).

2) President Obama raised taxes, which hurt the economy.
Technically Barry did not raise taxes. Congress raised the taxes. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/obamas-budget-a.html I know for a fact as a small business owner. My taxes went up last year. This year it will even be higher. Let’s take a look at just the healthcare bill. I am the owner of a small business with one employee – me.. If my company doesn’t offer it’s employees (me) health insurance, my company will be “fined” or taxed. Now, even though we get health insurance through my wife’s job, my company will get whacked just because it doesn’t offer it to it’s employees (me). Now what is wrong with that picture?

2) President Obama raised taxes, which hurt the economy. Technically Barry did not raise taxes. Congress raised the taxes.

Click on picture for full size

3) President Obama bailed out the banks. On October 3, 2008, the Senate passed the $700 billion bank bailout bill. A Democratic controlled Congress bailed out the banks. And now Barry and da Boyz gave even more money to the banks, and just recently he signed yet another bank bailout

http://www.suite101.com/content/barack-obama-to-sign-in-another-bank-bailout-hr3808-a296644

4) The stimulus didn’t work. Google “Obama shovel-ready” and you’ll find more than enough quotes of Barry describing all the people going back to work because of stimulus-created jobs. You may find one more quote of interest…  In the NY Times Magazine Obama reflects on his presidency, admitting that he let himself look too much like “the same old tax-and-spend Democrat,” realized too late that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” and perhaps should have “let the Republicans insist on the tax cuts” in the stimulus. If “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects”, and if you remember, he really pushed the point only he could create them…”I can say that 14 days after I signed our Recovery Act into law, we are seeing shovels hit the ground.” – Barack Obama, 3/3/09

The Wall Street Journal tells us the “stimulus” didn’t work.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out. It’s simple math. It doesn’t add up

Here is another Wall Street Journal Article regarding the “stimulus”. Cash for clunkers didn’t change how much people spent. It only changed when they spent. It was supposed to help the AMERICAN car manufacturers when in fact the majority of cars bought were foreign!

5) Businesses will hire if they get tax cuts. – Businesses will hire if there is demand for the service or product they offer. This goes back to #1-3. If the consumer doesn’t have the money, they are not buying. therefore, businesses are cutting back and either not hiring or laying off workers. Most of the business owners I talk to are waiting to see what happens after January 1st.

6) Health care reform costs $1 trillion. – Congressional Budget Office estimates released predict the health care overhaul will likely cost about $115 billion more in discretionary spending over ten years than the original cost projections. The additional spending would bring the total estimated cost of the overhaul to over $1 trillion. If you do the actual math, it’s even higher than that.  – ABC News

7) Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, is “going broke,” people live longer, fewer workers per retiree, etc. – According the NY Times, This year, the system will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

#8) Government spending takes money out of the economy. – Abstract: Despite decades of repeated failure, President Obama and Congress continue to promote the myth that government can spend its way out of recession. Heritage Foundation economic policy expert Brian Riedl dispels the stimulus myth, lays out the evidence that government spending does not end recessions–and presents the evidence for what does end recessions. Hint: It’s not another “stimulus package.” Click here for the article. Now, let’s take a look at how this works.  The Federal Government spends like crazy. The money has to come from somewhere. TAX DOLLARS.  So, joe lunch bucket is taxed, businesses are taxed. All the taxes take money OUT of the economy which leaves less money for people to spend.

span>

The liberal Left depressed over Scott Brown’s victory in the Massachussetts election have now begun to categorize Brown’s supporters as mostly the jobless who will soon be saying to themselves “What did I do.” Talk about getting it backwards. I supported Scott Brown over Martha “Marsha” Coakley and I have a job. In fact I have what I consider to be a fairly respectable job as a police Lieutenant, in this career for 25 years. I would love to see the left provide facts or statistics to support their claim that most of Scott Brown’s supporters don’t have jobs. But that’s not as misguided as their belief that those who voted for Scott Brown should be saying “What did I do.” The fact is if Coakley had won, it would be those who supported and voted for her who would be saying ‘What did we do” when they learned of her history of corruption and flawed judgment. Let me school ya folks.

Coakley has quite a history. Back in 1984 the infamous Fells Acres daycare sexual abuse case led to the daycare sex abuse hysteria of the 1980’s. Fells Acres was the infamous case of alleged sexual abuse of children at what was then the highly respected family owned daycare run by the Amirault Family Massachussetts. The allegations included that one of the owners, the man plunged a butcher knife up into the rectum of a child, and the knife got stuck and he had to force it back out again. Another child was allegedly tied to a tree by one of the women and sodomized with a stick they called the “magic wand.” Guess what – no physical injury, ANY INJURY to either child. Listen to that again – a butcher knife stuck up into the rectum of a small child so far that it got stuck before being forcibly pulled out – NO INJURY or any physical evidence. I spent several years of my career as a detective investigating sex crimes against children, and for a child to have a butcher knife thrust into his rectum and twisted and pulled out and leave no injury whatsoever – read my lips: IMPOSSIBLE. Nevertheless, astoundingly the prosecution moved forward with the case based solely on the disjointed and coashed statements from young toddler children.

The Amiraults were sentenced to lengthy terms but the case began to utterly disintegrate on review. One of the harshest hanging judges in Massachussetts known for giving out long sentences stated even he never witnessed such flagrant prosecutorial misconduct in the courtroom, with every dirty trick in the book used by the prosecutor. The case was widely and overwhelmingly recognized to have been a classic case of witch hunting for the political advancement of the prosecutor, and the Parole Board voted 5-0 to commute the sentences of the Amiraults. But as the Attorney General, Coakley even knowing the case was a sham, in an effort to advance herself as a guardian of justice, worked harder than ever before to convince the governor the same guardian of justice agenda as Coakley, who was seeking re-election overruled the Parole Board and an innocent man remained jailed.

A letter to the editor of the Boston Herald by Margaret Hagen, a professor of psychology at Boston University and author of the book, Whores of the Court, sums up the case against Martha Coakley.

“The cynical manipulation by the Middlesex County prosecutor’s office of the child witnesses against Gerals Amirault, who are now young adults makes it depressingly clear that the office of prosecutor is intended by its occupants to serve their political ambitions and not the cause of justice. Martha Coakley and her cohorts and precursors know full well that children who were 3, 4 and 5 years old at the time of the Fells Acres trials some 15 years ago – 15 years filled with constant reasertions by prosecutors and parents of the validity of the original claims – do not, cannot and will not ever be able to have untainted memories of their experiences. Hauling these innocent young people out for a press conference was disgraceful.

These children were victims of politically ambitious and woefully ignorant prosecutors who chose to disregard the coercive interrogations by the inexperienced graduate student assigned to dig the “truth” out of the children, to ignore bizarre claims that defied all rationality (e.g. sodomy with lobsters and knives) and to close their eyes to the utter lack of substantiating physical evidence.”

In the time since the Fells Acres case and the malicious persecution and prosecution of the Amiraults we have seen many changes in the laws governing the way the police are allowed to obtain testimony from children and how that testimony can be used in court, and many of these laws come about specifically as a result of the prosecutorial misconduct by Coakley and prosecution team in that infamous landmark case. “Marsha, Marsha, Marsha.”

But that’s not the end to the Coakley story. Turn the clock ahead to 2005. A Massachussetts police officer Kieth Winfield sodomized a child with a curling iron. In this case physical evidence of injury to the child supported the arrest, but Coakley who disingenuously holds herself out to be tough on these crimes resisted seeking an indictment, and only eventually did so because of intense public outrage over the case. But despite this, Coakley still recommended Winfield be released on his own recognizance without the need to post bail. Thankfully, Coakley’s successor picked up the ball and won a conviction and two life terms for this deviant.

Why did Coakley resist doing her job to get Winfield convicted? Was Winfield’s father being a union representative with ties to Coakley’s campaign a factor? Does it matter? Is that who hard line Massachussetts Democrats want to be their Senator? This is the history of “Marsha, Marsha, Marsha” Coakley, and Kieth Olberman has the temerity to publicly label Scott Brown as the candidate who is “an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against women? Huh?

And the left will have trouble swallowing this too, but this also wasn’t a party line vote. Republicans and probably most Democrats voted the way they always vote – no surprises, so that didn’t win the election. The Republican candidate won this one because Independents and even growing numbers of Democrats recognized Coakley for what she is, and in the larger picture because they are beginning to get more than a little uncomfortable with how much government is looking to take control of their lives, exactly what the founders of this country fought against.

For liberals to suggest that Republicans and conservatives with no jobs are the cause of this election outcome and every other problem is bazzarro world, up is down, day is night denial. We have always had the upper, middle and lower classes, but now we have slowly been adding the new and exponentially growing jobless Democrat feeding parasite class. The difference between jobless conservatives and jobless liberals of the parasite class: the conservatives who are jobless actually want to work. The Democratic Party plan is to provide the parasite class with everything they need to survive and be taken care of without having to do a thing for themselves which is what the parasite class wants. It’s a marriage made in heaven. And in return, the really ingenious part of the Democrat Party plan is that the Democratic Party gets a lifetime of indentured voting servitude from the parasite class who will be glad to oblige.

If the Democratic Party could remain in control long enough with enough consecutive presidential and congressional election victories, that plan might be more worrisome. Thankfully however, because the presidency and control of congress historically always reverts back to the other party after the sitting president leaves office, neither party retains control for longer than an 8 year stretch anymore, thus the Democrats probably could never hold power long enough for their plan to come to fruition. Nevertheless, the disturbing emerging Democrat fed parasite class has arrived. Where’s the Orkin Man when we need him?

Finally, the slickest liberal deflection tactic in reaction to Scott Brown’s victory came from Barak Obama with his assessment that the Massachusetts election was a result of voter anger over the last 2-8 years while managing to completely omit what has happened in this country in the LAST 12 MONTHS under presidential and congressional control of Democrats! Not to mention that for the last 8 years, make that 50 years, that Massachussetts seat in particular has been held by a Democrat. Trying to confuse everyone with confusion, what a clever ploy! Arrogantly insulting the intelligence of all of America has been Mr. Obama’s strategy from the moment he began his run for the White House, and this demonstrates that he intends to stay that course. Clearly he and the rest of his machine have failed to notice that his approval rating has plummeted farther and faster than any other president in history in his first year in office, and gathering speed with each passing day. But then arrogance does that.

Ted Silberstein
Florida Cop

BEIJING (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama said in an interview with CNN on Wednesday he is “very close” to a decision on boosting troop levels in Afghanistan and would make an announcement “in the next several weeks.”

In a transcript of the interview seen by Reuters, Obama said he did not want his successor as president to inherit the Afghan conflict, adding that a “multi-year occupation” would not serve the interests of the United States.

Barry has now been dragging his feet since August. On
August 30, 2009 General Stanley McCrystal submitted his Commander Initial Assessment

You can view it here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19995042/Commander-Initial-Assessment-McCrystal

General McChrystal shocked and angered presidential advisers with the bluntness of a speech given in London the last week of September.

The next day he was summoned to an awkward 25-minute face-to-face meeting on board Air Force One on the tarmac in Copenhagen, where Barry had arrived to pitch Chicago’s unsuccessful Olympic bid.

Remember that back in March Obama unveiled his “comprehensive new strategy . . . to reverse the Taliban’s gains and promote a more capable and accountable Afghan government.” The Dimwit in Chief pledged to properly resource this “war of necessity,” which he also called during the 2008 campaign “the central front on terror.” Barry then sacked his war commander, who had been chosen by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in favor of General McChrystal, an expert in counterinsurgency.

In June, General McChrystal launched his assessment of the forces required to execute the Obama strategy. His confidential study was completed in August and sent to the Pentagon. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Michael Mullen told Congress that more troops would be needed, and a figure of 30,000-40,000 was bandied about.

The figure has clearly spooked the Administration. Soon after, General McChrystal’s confidential report was leaked to the Washington Post The report said that the U.S. urgently needs to reverse a “deteriorating” security situation. Soon the full retreat began in Washington, led by a vocal group within the Administration that wants to scale back the mission. The White House told the Pentagon to hold off asking for troops and General McChrystal not to testify to Congress. Obama asked on the Sunday talks shows, “Are we doing the right thing?”

So now we are coming up on November and Barry is still thinking about it. What more is there to think about?

By the time this week is over, Barry will have visited twenty countries.
Exotic destinations across four continents. War zones. Palaces and ancient wonders of the world. So many invitations, so little time.

Instead of playing rock star, maybe Barry should think about BEING a president and staying home and taking care of the country.

I did not write this and I give no opinion other than to share it for opinions.

I have been having a nagging intuition lately that something is not quite right about Barack Obama. I am not suggesting there is something wrong with the man, per se. Nor am I talking about the crazy, even dangerous, policies coming out of the White House. No, lately, I have been wondering if Barack Obama is, in fact, the person who is actually functioning as President of the United States.

I mean, there’s no doubt that he fills the position of POTUS but is he really the one in command? The man actually seems lost at times. He seems to be reacting to ideas about which he does not really have a clue. He has left the writing of this health care bill to Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives and she, in turn, has farmed the writing out to several fairly radical community action groups. When questioned about health care, he seems not to know or understand the details and even with his silver-tongue seems unable to demonstrate any leadership on the issue.

With respect to Afghanistan and the rest of our foreign policy, he seems equally lost. Especially when it comes to dealing with other world leaders. He makes beautiful speeches but seems to be unable to cut deals which benefit our nation. He seems to be acting as a pawn of much more clever world leaders.

The more I watch the man, the more I see a person who appears to be the “face” of some other entity or group. He seems like a “front man”. And it is becoming clear that his strings are being pulled by someone else. He does not appear to be the man in command of the ship of state. At least, he is not in the driver’s seat.

You might recall that people said about Bush that he was a front man for the neo-cons and that it was really Dick Cheney that was running the show. It turns out that Dick Cheney was not as influential in Bush’s second term as many thought but, perhaps it is true that the neo-cons, whoever they may be, were pulling some of Bush’s strings.
On the other hand, with Obama, it does not appear that there is anyone who is visible to ‘we the people’ or the media who is pulling the strings. If they are there, they are not in elected positions as Cheney was. They are better hidden than that.

We know that he has been and remains surrounded by life-long radicals, professed communists and anti-capitalists, some of whom he has even appointed as czars in his administration. Thirty six czars, to date. But is it Obama who is picking the czars or is it the czars who are running the show and propping up Obama as their front man?

I know all this may sound crazy but, really, when you look at the man without the idolatry and media worship, does he really look like he knows what he is doing? Does he seem to have a direction? Firm convictions? Something he deeply believes in? The more he talks now, the more his words seems empty of content. Platitudes about America and the American people which, when he says them, simply do not ring true. They are words being mouthed but not believed by him.

Okay, so maybe he is really clever, is firmly moving the ship to the left while mouthing the words of a centrist but I don’t think so. What I used to think was that he was a really slick conman who was making us watch his left hand while he was manipulating us with his right. But, now I don’t think that so much. I think the man is more plastic than real. Now I begin to see him as the “Great and Powerful Oz”: a fearsome presence who is being manipulated by men behind the curtain. And while Obama does not have strong convictions, the men behind the curtain do. And they are moving this country down a dangerous path. All the while, we are being distracted by Obama and what he says and does.

Okay, maybe I am simply a mildly paranoid conspiracy theorist. Why, you might ask, have Obama up there? Why not have one of the actual people behind the curtain run for President. Well, being a paranoid conspiracy theorist, I can come up with an answer to that question. Those other people behind the curtain have backgrounds that are so radical that they would never have made it past the first few days of a campaign. Additionally, they are life-long community organizers and they know what kind of face can be effective if you wish to radically change the nation. First, you need a black man to gain the support of the vast black minority. Second, you need a pale skinned black man so as not to be too much of a threat to white Americans. For the same reasons, you need a mixed race man who allies himself with the poor and down-trodden.

And you need someone who speaks well enough to co-opt the language of the right and appear to be a uniter, not a divider. Someone who sees, or at least can articulate, both sides of an issue. This is the kind of man you would pick to be your front man so that while you move things drastically and dramatically left, the vast majority of Americans will not believe that was the intention of the moderate appearing front man.

Yes, Obama was a community organizer. Yes, he could be clever enough to have this all be his idea. But he really wasn’t a community organizer for that long. And when he was, he didn’t do anything truly radical. It was more a time during which he was being trained than a time when he was driven by a personal sense of commitment to anything in particular. There are people who are now in his government who have been community organizers and radical left wing activists for 20-30 years. These people have deeply ingrained commitments to changing the system and have been actively trying to do so for all that time. Obama is not one of them.

In my view, Obama has been trained and used as a puppet by others for a long time. His successes seem to have come too easily, as if they have been orchestrated. His life appears to have been pre-planned. I mean, Harvard Law Review without publishing a single paper of note. That is unusual. A community organizer for a short time, a State legislator for a few years, a freshman US Senator, a convention key-note speaker, and then POTUS. How does that happen? A person with zero governmental administrative experience is running the entire government of the United States.

How do 1,017 page documents get developed and put out in such short order? Who is writing all these proposals? Does it not seem that something is just not quite right here? Forget about the specifics of the policies for the moment. Have you seen this level of activity in the first few months of any other administration in your lifetime? Does Obama seem like the kind of person that could manage this level of activity in so short a time? Too much does not make sense here.
So, slowly but surely, I am becoming convinced that it’s not Barack Obama who is running the show. The White House has been captured by a group of people who are using Barack Obama as their front man. He is nothing but an articulate but empty suit. We have to start looking behind the curtains to find out who is really controlling the “great and powerful Obama.”

Something to think about….