Wednesday, November 7, 2012

The Whirlwind Is Here

By Roger L Simon
November 7, 2012 - 9:00 am - by Roger L Simon

I have to admit something. Unlike most of my PJM colleagues and many in the right punditocracy, deep down I never thought Mitt Romney would win.
I’m not bragging here, not in the slightest. I’m no Nostradamus of any sort and I wish to God it had been otherwise. But if you look back at the collective prediction post of the other day, you will see that mine was very short, almost terse. I was hiding behind Michael Barone, a friend whose knowledge I respect immensely, relying on his views and obfuscating my own, almost willing them away.
Also, I thought maybe it was my DNA – seeing Storm Troopers behind every door – that made me think that way. I didn’t want to be a kill joy.
Still don’t, but analyzing what occurred in any but the bleakest manner is to be Dr. Pangloss times ten. Anyone who continues to think America is a center-right country is chugging so much Kool-Aid he or she is in danger of turning into a blimp and floating off into space. (That includes me for listening to and believing my good friend Hugh Hewitt when he said this repeatedly.)
A country with 8 or who knows what percent real employment, headed for insolvency in a global meltdown, with a national debt reaching to Alpha Centauri, just voted for more of the same. Romney did worse than McCain in many areas.
Boy, have we got work to do.
I don’t blame Mitt Romney. He wasn’t the greatest candidate, but plug in any of the others who were competing and it likely would have been worse. Imagine how Rick Santorum would have dealt with the bogus and repellent “war on women” and imagine an electoral map almost exclusively blue. And that’s just for starters. There was little anyone could do. The electorate had already been brainwashed (more of that in a moment).
Yes, the president has luck that makes the Irish seem like failures: A hurricane arrives in the nick of time to save him from his Libya lies (not that the media wasn’t already covering up for him, but still). And he gets a boost from a Republican governor more interested in his own survival than the country’s.
But even with that luck you would think the electorate would have the brains (self-preservation really) to put him out of office.
So we have a problem with democracy. It’s not working or, more specifically, has been turned on its end, with the masses manipulated against their own self-interest, creating power elites similar to those described in Milovan Djilas’ The New Class.
How did that happen? I think many of us know there are three pillars of our own destruction: the educational system, the media and entertainment (the popular arts).
Those three areas are so corrupted those who legitimately are on the center-right (or anywhere close to it) will increasingly find themselves swimming upstream against a current so great who knows where it will take them. (Think Hayek, Orwell, etc.) We must address ourselves to these three immediately before it is too late. In many ways, it already is. Culture is the mother of politics and mother is turning into Medea.
If it sounds as if I am depressed, I am. Extremely. We are indeed riding the whirlwind. The America we thought we knew was not there. The face of the globe just changed as well. The enemies of democracy are laughing.
There is only one thing left to do: roll up our sleeves. All the way.




President's re-election means Jewish state must 'take care of its own'

TEL AVIV – The state of Israel will not capitulate before President Obama, whose “naive” leadership has hurt the U.S., stated Danny Danon, deputy speaker of Israel’s Knesset.
121107danonDanon, a Knesset member from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud party, was reacting to the re-election of Obama.
“Obama’s victory demonstrates that the state of Israel must take care of its own interests,” Danon said. “We cannot rely on anyone but ourselves. Obama has hurt the United States by his na├»ve leadership in foreign policy, which prefers the Arab world over the Western world, along with Israel. The state of Israel will not capitulate before Obama.”
Earlier this week, WND quoted a senior Palestinian Authority negotiator claiming that if Obama secures another four years in office, he will use his second term to target Netanyahu as the main party to blame for the collapse of Mideast peace talks.
The negotiator further claimed that Obama quietly pledged to the Palestinians a campaign at the United Nations to renew U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which calls for a Palestinian state to be established in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and eastern Jerusalem.
The PA negotiator said the White House had asked the Palestinians to slow their drive for the unilateral declaration of a state at the U.N. General Assembly.
The negotiator further said Obama had promised the PA that the establishment of a Palestinian state will be one of the main priorities for a second term.
“We were told that the negotiations for a Palestinian state will be a main goal for Obama,” said the negotiator. “Netanyahu will be declared the main person responsible for the collapse of the peace process.”
Bee's note:
Ah ha!  Obama's second term is predictable and expected, as this blog posted months ago that a Palestinian official was told by the Obama administration to "be patient and wait until after elections" for Obama to "handle" PM Netanyahu.  Look who was telling the truth - a Palestinian "official"!!  Israel's Deputy Speaker is correct in stating "Israel must take care of its own interests".  I would imagine that means not allowing a Second Term president the pleasure of interfering with Israel's decisions for her own security. 

What Obama Should Have Done in the Last Four Years and Won’t Do in the Next Four Years

November 7th, 2012 - 4:38 pm
by Barry Rubin
Over and over again I’ve written about what President Barack Obama should do. Now the voters have given him a whole new chance. He could take it and change his policy. I don’t believe he will do that but let me lay out both what he’s been wrong and what he should do, just in case Obama is seeking a different approach.
What he did in the first and will do in the second term: Foster revolutionary Islamism in Egypt, the Gaza Strip, Syria, Tunisia, and Turkey.
What he should have done and should do now: Do what Franklin Rooosevelt did in 1941 and Harry Truman in 1947 and George Bush in 1990. Lead an international coalition that will systematically fight against a totalitarian enemy. Today, that means revolutionary Islamism. The loose coalition should include Europe, anti-Islamist Arab regimes (Morocco, Algeria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf Arab states) and pro-democratic opposition movements (Turkey, Lebanon, Iran, and Syria).
What he did….: Support Islamist opposition groups
What he should have done….: Support anti-Islamist and moderate opposition groups
What he did….: Pressed Israel to reduce pressure on the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip and helped bring an Egyptian regime that backed Hamas.
What he should have done….: Supported a reformed—not overthrown—Egyptian regime and Israel in opposing Hamas and subverting its rule.
What he did….: Gave support and aid to the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt despite lip service to defending women’s and Christian rights and the Egypt-Israel peace treaty.
What he should have done….: Clearly condition aid on Egypt to protecting women, Christians, and moderates; take a strong stand on the regime’s permitting cross-border attacks on Israel and gutting the peace treaty. The Obama Administration has, and will have, no credibility with an anti-American extremist and antisemitic Egyptian government.
What he did: Celebrate the Turkish regime as a great example of democracy and moderate Islam. Did nothing as that regime went into a non-shooting war with Israel, backing Hamas, Hizballah, and Iran; rewarded Ankara with special treatment, including letting it organize the Syrian opposition.
What he should have done….: Without provoking a conflict, use U.S. leverage to press Turkey’s rulers to change their policies. No rewards without their help in promoting U.S. goals. Be suspicious of the regime’s intentions and note its suppression of democracy within Turkey.
What he did….: Accepted the Lebanese government dominated by Hizballah and backed by Iran and Syria.
What he should have done….: Back the moderate Lebanese opposition that opposed the regime in order to combat the Iran-Syria bloc.
What he did….: Backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria’s civil war and did not interfere with weapons going to Salafist groups as long as they were not al-Qaida affiliates.
What he should have done….Support moderates and anti-Islamists in Syria against both the Islamists and the regime.
What he did….: Acted as if all of Libya’s problems had been solved; tried to please the regime and show his niceness by not intervening to save Americans in the September 11 Benghazi attacks.
What he should have done: Know that the US is involved in an ongoing conflict in Libya and there will be more attacks in future.
What he did: Nothing.
What he should have done: Investigate the Benghazi incident seriously and honestly (his choice for chief investigator, former State Department hack Thomas Pickering, is an opportunist who will write whatever the White House wants), get those responsible and make sure that nothing like that has ever happened again. Perhaps an apology to the families of those killed would be in order.
What he did….: Pushed the “peace process” for two years though then he did get the idea it wouldn’t work. He also opposed, albeit starting far too late, Palestinian Authority (PA) unilateral statehood bids. But will he continue that revised policy into a second term?
What he should have done: Realize the peace process isn’t going anywhere and understand that’s because PA intransigence and the Hamas challenge that is radicalizing even further Palestinian policy. When the PA subverts U.S. policies be willing to pressure and criticize it.
What he did….: Said he supported the rights of Christians and women from (Islamist) repression. But he never did anything about it, zero. Cozied up to Syria and Iran at the very moment they were violently suppressing dissidents at home and opponents abroad.
What he should have done: Genuinely work to protect the rights of Christians and women as well as the lives of moderates by using leverage.
What he did….: Said that al-Qaida was defeated.
What he should have done: Understand that al-Qaida is not finished by any means. And its partner the Taliban is still going strong. But this issue made less difference since U.S. policy did fight al-Qaida any way.
What he did….: Continued the withdrawal from Afghanistan and tried to cut a deal with the Taliban.
What he should have done: Continued the withdrawal from Afghanistan but follow a realpolitik policy and set into place a strong set of patron-client relationships with those willing—albeit for their own interests—to keep the Taliban from taking power.  The problem is that once U.S. forces are out the regime is likely to collapse and possibly give way to a revolutionary Islamist, anti-American government.
What he did….: Although the U.S. government conducted drone strikes and the killing of Usama bin Ladin, unilaterally, it generally continued to pour money into Pakistan despite its lack of cooperation, activity as a major sponsor of terrorism, and institutionalized anti-Americanism, persecution of Christians, and the spread of radical Islamist ideology.
What he should have done: Move away from Pakistan and rebuild relations with India.
What he did….: Forbade an honest discussion of the enemy and threat in the U.S. military; minimized or denied attacks like the one at Fort Hood were terrorist.
What he should have done: Let the U.S. military educate its people to the actual threat instead of forcing them to pretend otherwise.
What he did….: Put tough international sanctions and on Iran and keep the possibility of an attack against nuclear institutions on the table. He will try to make a deal with Tehran letting it do limited enrichment and drop sanctions in exchange for promises not to develop nuclear weapons. The choice is up to Tehran as to whether to negotiate a deal or simply use talks as one more stalling technique while continuing to hurry toward getting deliverable nuclear weapons. When Iran does get nuclear weapons he won’t do anything, including never supporting an Israeli attack.
What he should do: If he wants to negotiate, first gain credibility in Tehran by being tough on Iranian interests everywhere in the region—he’s doing this in Syria–and bargain toughly rather than do anything to get a deal. When Iran does get nuclear weapons put in place a really tough containment system that would counter Iran’s subversion and terrorism, give strong backing to the internal opposition, and squeeze Iran to the maximum extent.  If an honest assessment shows an Iranian plan to attack Israel or if Tehran seems likely to give nuclear bombs to terrorists, the U.S. government should support an Israeli attack. By not being credible, Obama makes more likely Iran’s obtaining nuclear weapons and that outcome leading to war.
Shall we go on? Well, the U.S. government will go on doing these things for the next four years.

Game Called on Account of Darkness - by Daniel Greenfield

Wednesday, November 07, 2012

Game Called on Account of Darkness

A week ago we sat waiting out the storm when the lights flickered and went out. One moment we were sitting in a lit room, the television flashing picture and sound, the internet feeding news, and then we were in the dark.

At first we expected the lights to come on at any minute. Any hour. Any day. And then living without water or power, day after day, it seemed as if the light would never come back.

And then, unexpectedly, after almost a week, they did.

The lights have gone out in America now. They may come back. They may not. It's up to us. No one is going to come help us do it. Other countries have America. We have ourselves.

Readers will notice that this site did not predict any Romney landslides. It did not engage in empty cheers or promise that he would win half the country and restore moral leadership. That's not what this site is about. This site is about the hard truths and now as we sit in the dark, let's pass out some of those around the room.

We can blame Chris Christie, Sandy or Romney's last debate performance. But let's look at the actual election.

Romney outlasted the primaries because he was the most electable. Two blue state politicians, as bland and inoffensive as possible, ran on the economy, not on war or social issues, and managed to convince many Democrats that they could fix the economy. He got a white turnout to match that of Ronald Reagan and crowded rallies. And none of it was enough.

Romney had an excellent machine. But Obama had the bigger machine that was more than a collection of SuperPACs. It was the urban political machine, with its suburban tentacles, fed by taxpayer money and integrated into every budget. The time when it could be beaten the old way may be passing.

The people who came out to worship Obama stayed home. Romney's rallies drew big crowds. But when all was said and done, the lines of people who feed off the political machine were there, and the handlers of the machine cast their multiple votes and carried off their manifold frauds because their own private economy depended on it.

Every time people ask me why the left has such a grip on this country, my answer is because they worked for it. It's the answer that most people don't want to hear, but it's true. The left has been planning this for a while. They have been playing the long game, building the infrastructure and indoctrinating generations. And to beat them, we will have to do the same thing.

The right is 40 years behind the left and it remains a disorganized collection of potentials seeking a compass point. The "right" that got behind Mitt Romney consists of millionaires who want fewer regulations and easier imports from China, of social conservatives who are mainly ignored, except when voter turnout becomes an issue, libertarians who want more freedoms, and the non-ideological small business middle class and the struggling working class sensing their country and way of life slipping away from them.

Those groups could be welded together into a movement every bit as tribal and protective of its interests, capable of engaging in collective action on behalf of its own interests, as the urban machine vote. And that may already be happening with the Tea Party. But the counter-revolution of the bourgeoisie isn't here yet. And there's plenty of work to do to make it a reality.

The Republican establishment had its shot, twice. It put up moderate non-objectionable candidates. And it lost. It has no policies, beyond keeping the system going, and it has no ideas and no agenda, besides winning. It is a decadent political class fused with an even more decadent pundit class that views elections like these as a game, not as a life-and-death matter. It makes up lies and tells them to its base and hopes that the base will then forgive and forget being lied to and used one more time.

It's not done, by any stretch of the imagination. Right now, Christie is patting himself on the back and drawing up a list of advisers for a 2016 run. And a dozen equally loathsome personalities are doing the same thing. And they may even get their way. But that doesn't really matter. This is a long game and to win it, we have to think long term.

Moderation does not win elections. If you think it does, go look at the smirking face of Barack Obama. And then imagine him running for office back when Bill Ayers was building bombs. America's new rulers were once considered far more extreme and unpopular than the Tea Party. Embracing radical and unpopular ideas is not a losing strategy. It is a short term losing strategy and a long term winning strategy so long as your ideas can be used to build a movement capable of turning those ideas into an organizing force.

The question is whether a right-wing movement can emerge that will make the vast majority of small businessmen in this country feel as negatively about a Democratic president as welfare voters feel about a Republican president?

This election has come close to testing that proposition. The time has come to test it further. The left went after gun owners, the way that it went after business owners, and the NRA used its hostility to build a powerful coalition of gun owners who broke the will of the elected left and made them turn on easier prey.

The key is organization. The left built its machines by convincing entire groups that they had a binding interest in a reflexive opposition to Republicans under a Democratic umbrella. Consolidating an opposition based on the same principles, that same sense that its financial oxygen will be cut if the Democrats win, is doable. But it cannot begin and end with the financials.

This is a cultural war and living in denial of that is senseless. Those social issues? They belong on the table. Because the alternative is that the table will belong to the left and we will be stuck arguing the level of regulation that is appropriate in a society whose entire moral imperative is based on the values of regulation.

Most people, left and right, want a society based on values. Opting out of the values debate means that we lose by default. Yes some of that is unpopular. It will make some elections unwinnable. Much like supporting gay marriage twenty years ago. The left kept going and it won because that is how the game is played.

These are all building blocks, but they are still scattered pieces. The right I am describing is based on the left. It is the mirror image, a counter-revolutionary pushback against the left's intrusions into the lives, values and work of its people. And that isn't enough. A counter-revolution that is reactive will fail. It is why the Romney campaign was doomed from the start. It is why the Tea Party isn't enough. It's not enough to be against things. It's not enough to be for things because they are the opposite of the things that the people you are at war with are for.

A movement needs a deeper sense of passion. It must be fueled by a certainty that it holds the answer to the problems of its society and its civilization. It must believe that its existence would be necessary even if the left did not exist. And it must be willing to do anything to win.

This is not a mere battle of elections. The left occupied and won other fields long before it had a shot at doing anything like taking power. It is first of all a battle of ideas. And it is a battle of structures. And that means a conservative cultural war will be necessary and conservative structures must be built within the system. Rather than making arguments, we must create facts on the ground.

That's a tall order and we are way behind. And tactics like these are not very palatable to many of us, because they resemble what the left does. They would rather expect people to naturally do the right thing. And that's nice. I would very much like people to do the right thing. I would like to stop by one of those long lines that I saw today at the polls, almost as long as the one for free government stuff, and show them a graph of the national debt and the debt that their children will owe. I would like to think that it would change their minds. But I know better... and so do you.

The left got this far by having a plan. We will either find a plan or we will be gone. America will go the way of Latin America, with gated communities, conservative oligarchs, violent ghettos and red politicians screaming about power to the people. There will be no law, just men with guns and newspapers, and generals in convenient positions, and suitcases full of cocaine in the right hands. If you like this system, it's probably only a generation away. Given enough immigration from south of the border-- maybe less. And then California turns into Brazil and America turns into California.

We can stop this, but we won't do it without building a movement that can stand up to the left, without assembling machines that will bring together many of the same people who voted for Obama, and we won't do it if we are too afraid of the consequences of fighting a culture war with the left to get started.

It is dark now. On my side of the coast, the time approaches 1 AM. The dark end of one day and the beginning of a new day. It all depends on how you look at things.

Revolutions are not born out of success, they are born out of despair. They rise out of the dark hours of the night. They come from the understanding that all the other options are running out. Sometimes you have to fall down to rise and sometimes you have to hit bottom, to gather one last breath and fight to reach the top.

This is still a wonderful country. It is the finest place that this civilization has produced. Despite the events of the last day, it is worth fighting for.


America: A Nation's Citizens in Distress

by Bee Sting
Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Romney is not our last hope, we are our last hope - Daniel Greenfield

After a long fight for truth and justice, half of America spoke yesterday and we now must accept "4 more years" with President Obama.  

The party is over for America, unless you are living in  the White House.  Conservatives must begin immediately to work for the love of our country, or America will not be the same ever again.  There will be no stopping "Mr. Flexibility-in-Chief", unless our Congress begins to defend the laws of our land under the U.S. Constitution. 

Eyewitness account of the Boston Tea PartyAmerica does not have room for a dictator or king.  We said "no" to King George the night of the Boston Tea Party.  Why do you suppose the White House hated the newly-founded Tea Party, when Americans banded together to object to Obama's socialist healthcare program?  It was because Americans had had enough of being told what was "best" for them by Big Government.  In America, unlike countries that have dictatorships, or who are under Sharia laws, we have a balance under the U.S. Constitution.  Our freedoms and liberties came at a high price - costing many Americans their lives to overthrow the wishes of one king.  

Obama's ideology is foreign to America and so are his ideas of "transforming" America.  America was transformed when we rejected the King of England.  Obama's transformation has pushed our nation back 200 years!  

Unfortunately, for America, the presidential campaign was all about the "economy" - at least it was for Governor Romney.  I have said often that if Americans did not pay attention to our foreign affairs and Obama's relentless Road to Destruction down a foreign path, the economy would be the least of our worries.  Why?  Because he opened the door and invited into the people's White House, the dregs on this earth who burn our flag and cry Allah Akbar and "death to America".  Didn't anyone notice?  The President-Mad Hatter-in-Chief has been holding his own "Tea" parties, and America will suffer immensely from his choices, by his "friends".  Friends such as the Muslim Brotherhood, and his gifts of BILLIONS of DOLLARS to Islamic countries who stay up nights scheming on ways to destroy the very foundation of the United States.

For the Romney campaign, that was his one issue was the "economy", preferring not to touch on the subjects that were just as important, such as, Benghazi and a President who left our men to die in Libya.  And worse, no mention of the back-door deals of Obama's administration to arm al-Qaeda in Syria, through his best buddy in Turkey.  To-date, no investigation by any congressional committee, to get to the bottom of events that took place on 9/11/12 that allowed Islamic terrorists to torture and murder four Americans in Benghazi.  Would the media have been able to ignore this situation if Romney had brought it to their attention?  

Obama's campaign was all about "Romney" and a billion dollars in ads that were as much about brain-washing as they were destructive, Obama hit the trail, campaigning against his opponent, while never addressing the reasons why he (Obama) had failed America these past FOUR years in both domestic and in our foreign policies.  
The only conclusion one must come to is half of America's citizens prefer to walk blindly into some deep pit (or Lion's Den), by accepting Obama's hand outs - from illegal immigration status, free food and housing through federal programs, right down to free cell phones!  Half of America has chosen and their choices will not move them "forward" - they will soon discover that "free stuff" does not mean "free"!  When that day comes and it will, those who voted for Obama will pay the Piper, as they lose their freedom to choose anything and everything that involves their personal lives.  They have just undone everything our Founding Fathers fought for many years ago.

For the love of our country, this blog and many others have presented the truth - a truth the Media refused to print.  Last night, Americans preferred to vote for a Lie and an Impostor.  

During the past four years some people looked for scapegoats to blame for the Obama Presidency.  They blamed the Jews - if only the Jews had been smart enough not to vote for Obama.  Sound familiar?  Back in the 30's that same type of scapegoating took place and six million Jews were sent to their deaths.  Have we learned nothing from history?  Oh, that's right, history is being re-written and the Holocaust never happened!  The Jewish people do not make up the majority in America - so, stop blaming the Jews for the lack of wisdom among America's citizenship - we're all to blame for what happened yesterday.

If you want to blame someone, begin by blaming the groups and organizations that built up an un-known man by the name of Barry Sorento, changed him into Barack Hussein Obama, and promoted him through the Media into the mystery man who could walk on water and bring "hope and change" to an unsuspecting audience.  
I said last night, immediately after the shocking news that Obama had won, that I love my country, but do not know if I have any fight left inside my soul to go it another FOUR more years, blogging. I only know that none of us can predict the future, as I believe only our Creator counts our steps and knows the beginning from the end.  
I remember another King - a Pharaoh - who mocked G-d.  In today's world, he would have put his feet up on the desk while speaking to Moses.  His mocking cost him dearly and Egypt discovered that there is One, a Holy One, who overrules the best made plans of men.  Nothing new under the sun and that is my comfort.  If I had one gift to give Obama, it would be a carved wooden plaque, with the following words:
GEN 12:1-3 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will show thee:And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Most Americans know that promise made to Israel and some believe while others do not; but that, dear readers, is the sole purpose of this blog.  To present the truth that the Media refuses to report on, and in the process, supporting Israel, America's only ally and democracy in the Middle East.  I can't help but think that America is in distress today, largely due to ancient truths older than 3,000 years.

I will close with Daniel Greenfiled's comment, as that too is truth:  "Romney is not our last hope, we are our last hope."  I think that tiny message is what we need to hear this moment; as we take our eyes off of a man - Romney, and look inside each of our own hearts. Each of us can instill a new hope and it won't come from government or men who speak smooth words.


Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Voting Isn't Revenge, It's Resistance - by Daniel Greenfield

Monday, November 05, 2012

Voting Isn't Revenge, It's Resistance

There are plenty of ways to cast the divisions between parties and movements, but the elemental act of voting divides rhetoric from motive.

Obama called voting the best revenge, because for a sizable portion of his base that's exactly what voting is. Their votes are a violent act, a spiteful assault on a country that they can never participate in for economic or cultural reasons. Change for them is not a positive program, but a negative assault on the national majority. Bankrupting the country by robbing it for their own benefit is their revenge.

Voting for us isn't revenge, it's resistance. It isn't a choice that emerges out of reasoned debate between two sets of values, it's an act of resistance against the revengers, the looters and the destroyers. The voting booth is a form of sabotage against their regime, their corrupt interests and their oppressive regulations.  

These last four years we have endured an intensified occupation of our political, religious and personal freedoms. We have been robbed, lied to, ordered around and in some cases even killed. These crimes have been carried out by elected officials and the election will allow us to remove some of them. It will not end the reign of terror, but if successful, our act of electoral resistance will inflict a severe setback on the plans of their ideological movement and the unelected officials who rely on them for funding and political support. 

The election will not end the occupation, but it will interrupt the forward momentum of the occupiers. It will force them to fall back into their think tanks and formulate new strategies for dismantling the Constitution, eliminating our civil rights and ending elections as anything but empty shows with no meaning.

Some of us act as if elections will be here forever so that we can wait for the next one to come around and the one after that when the right candidate will lead us to victory. They won't be. The ideology that we are resisting believes in populism only when it serves its ends. Its judicial appointees have acted repeatedly to neuter referendums when the results do not go the right way.

The ultimate goal of the occupation is to shift power away from elected officials and into the infrastructure of unelected officials, so that their elected officials can draw on nearly unlimited powers by dictating to the bureaucratic oligarchy of the state, while elected officials not aligned with their movement will be narrowly constrained and have very little influence over the bureaucracy.

The occupation is not here to take power for another four years, but another forty years and another four-hundred years. It is not playing a short term game in a system where power shifts back and forth, but putting in place the infrastructure for the permanent occupation of the United States of America. But despite all its power and control, the miles of video screens that spew forth its propaganda, the billions of dollars that flow from its coffers into the pockets of its supporters and the cultural control that its proponents wield-- it still has one vulnerability.

A piece of paper, a push of a button, and the occupiers have to fall back, gritting their teeth and planning a renewed offensive in the spring.

The left overreached itself in the last four years. Its occupation was poorly managed and the native population has been alienated. While its Chief was sacrificing thousands of American lives to win over the natives in Afghanistan, his occupation of the United States was crumbling. The economy is rotten and the people are tired of being lied to. The resistance is popular and the community organizers are running scared.

This is our moment and in a single day we can push the occupation out of the countryside and back into the cities. We can undermine its morale, strip it of the money with which it bribes collaborators and force it to rethink whether it really wants to spend the next few decades battling to control an unruly population. We can make men like George Soros and Ted Turner decide that their money would be better spent terrorizing Eastern Europe or Africa, instead of America by making oppressing us seem like a bad investment.

The tug of war between the occupiers and the resistance comes down to morale. The occupiers are fighting to impose their will on us. To do that they have to believe that they can win. Each defeat forces them to reevaluate their tactics and each act of resistance drives them to greater acts of ruthlessness which cannot help but make them more unpopular until a point is reached where even they are forced to recognize that their plans are unfeasible.

Our goal is not an absolute victory, but like all resistance movements, it is to remain viable, to be there sabotaging their latest initiative, undermining them and remaining free of their control. The potency of a resistance movement derives from its sense of freedom. The occupation seeks to impose control while the resistance negates it. Our task is easier than theirs and every election is a chance to remind them that they have no won and that they will not win, that they must despair of going the electoral route and must impose their will without regard to popular sentiment. And once they accept that premise and abandon their facade of moderation, then we will be on the road to a true victory.

The occupation needs to believe in its own morality and its own popularity. Every time we take that away from it, we are embittering its leaders and its activists, we are teaching them to hate the people that they claim to want to help and distancing them from the people by making the people into the wedge that denies them power.

Elections must be used to humiliate the occupation, to rub its nose in its own unpopularity, to show that no matter how much it controls the means of communication, its agenda will always be rejected over and over again.

Every form of rejectionism of its agenda further drives home the message that the left can never wield power over the native population except by force. Each vote cast against it, even in blue states, even in places where the left can never lose, is an act of resistance because it reminds the left of the limits of its power and warns it that even in its own heartlands, it is not completely in control.

The left derives its power from the human impulse to conformity. No matter how many people may take issue with its insane and vicious program, most will not dissent from it in public, especially if they are barraged with countless media messages that appear to show that the vast majority of the population is in favor of it.

This national Milgram experiment is aborted every time the left loses a referendum, every time it is defeated in an election, every time it is saddled with another Carter or McGovern, every time the American people wake up and see that the rest of the country is not a hive of Obamanoids, but free people just waiting to find their voice.

Even if we lose this election, it will have been worthwhile to make it as close as possible, to bring out massive rallies of people who are waking up out of the daze and realizing that they don't have to take the occupation and that there are tens of millions of people out there who feel as they do. It will have been worthwhile to deliver a message to the left that its occupation stands on shaky feet and that the next gust of wind may tip it over. It will have been worthwhile in order to remind the left that the people are rising and that while this uprising may not have toppled over their golden throne, the next one might. It will have been worthwhile to remind the left that it is not on the path to a thousand-year world-state but to a collision with growing numbers of people who want their freedom back.

Our vote at its most potent, is not just a protest vote, but a blow aimed at the political heart of the occupation. But even if the blow does not land, then the protest vote reminds the occupation that we are united, not so much behind a man, as against them, and it will remind us that when we come together, we have the power to terrify the occupiers.

Mitt Romney is a symbol, a convenient shorthand for freedom of expression, enterprise and faith. Whether or not he embodies these values is a secondary concern. As Obama became a vehicle for the left to express its identity, Romney has become a vehicle for traditional Americans to express theirs. If Romney wins, then he will become a politician and if he loses, then the symbolic identity, which transcends him, will go on, because it is an expression, not of one man, but of the values of a country.

Resistance is grounded in values. It is grounded in the greater identity of who we are and how we want to live. That refusal to abandon who we are, to resist the political, cultural and religious assaults on our way of life is what determines the potency of a resistance. And though refusal is a negative word, it comes from a positive vision, an inner fire, the glow and light of the values that make us who we are.

The occupation does not have these values. It is a disruptive force that can borrow and mimic warped versions of these values, but it cannot put them forth except as a mockery of the values it has displaced. It urges its followers to vote for another four years of repression as a form of revenge against us because it has no inner light, no goodness and no truth. Inside it is a heart of darkness with no hope, only a ceaseless turmoil of change for the sake of change and destruction for the sake of destruction, power for the sake of power, and revenge for the sake of revenge.

Our resistance is a form of love, love for our country, our communities, our families and our values. That love has motivated us to spend the last four years fighting to preserve these things that we love. It will take us into the voting booth and whatever the outcome, it will keep us warm even in the coldest winter, as we go on fighting through our own Valley Forge for the redemption of our nation.  

The Sultan Knish blog

Monday, November 5, 2012

Election Day - Nov. 6th - The People Speak ...

Obama's own words ... Remember tomorrow, before voting.  


Let's not forget the leaks, lies and deception of this administration
(see below)

Obama dismissed Israel's calls for red lines on Iran as "noise"...and laughed at the possibility he would meet with Iran's PM to discuss their nuclear capabilities. 

US President Barack Obama has agreed to hold direct talks on Iran’s nuclear program with its leaders, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Is this a surprise? On April 16, 2012, debkafile disclosed that Washington and Tehran were conducting back-channel talks in Paris and Vienna, Sources close to Obama have now leaked word to the New York Times that the dialogue is to be elevated to direct talks at summit level. This disclosure, despite its subsequent denial by the White House, has three clear objects:

1. To slow down the Republican contender Mitt Romney’s momentum in opinion polls ahead of the Nov. 6 election. Obama’s campaign advisers believe the president’s willingness to engage Iranian leaders directly on their nuclear program, in contrast to Romney’s tougher stance, will appeal to the American voter’s reluctance for US military action.
2. To preempt Romney’s presumed plan to drop the disclosure of the back-channel dialogue as a bombshell in their last debate on foreign policy scheduled for Monday, Oct. 22 in Florida.

3. To reassure Tehran that the Austere Challenge 12 joint US-Israeli war game starting Sunday Oct. 21 – albeit in reduced form - will not be the opening shot for an “October surprise” on Iran.

And now, Iran is not cooperating with the IAEA in their investigation of said nuclear facilities??

Anyone else smell a rat??

Something else Sen. Paul referred to is coming to focus in more articles that are coming out. It seems to be the story behind the story. Could this be what the cover up is really all about and why they gave the stand down orders and denied giving support? Here is what He has to say about this (this is about at 3 min. and 23 seconds on the video). (mac: a friend of Kimber)

Paul: "I have heard news
 reports that there were special forces in the country that could have been mobilized. Here is the question I have, there are some new reports saying there was some gun running going on from Libya to Syria at our behest to Syrian Rebels and they were worried about this becoming public. But when they called for help it was no longer secret that the CIA was already their in Benghazi and you have to help people at that moment and you can't be saying, "well, we don't want them to know about our operations in Libya."

Obama's sympathies are with Jihad imperialism

November 5, 2012

The Worst News from Benghazi

By James Lewis

It is now apparent that the president of the United States countermanded standing Pentagon orders to help American personnel under attack.  Ambassador Stevens and three others were left to die without AC-130 Spectres and rescue teams that are always on standby in the Africom theater.  Only the White House could have countermanded those standing orders, and we know that POTUS had an emergency meeting with Panetta and Hillary within 55 minutes of the start of the attack.  AFRICOM's General Carter F. Ham was fired -- presumably for wanting to rescue the Americans under fire.
Ambassador Stevens and his people were left to die to protect a deep-cover NSC-CIA operation.  But what could be so important that 32 Americans had to be abandoned to the mercy of al-Qaeda?  Benghazi was a major gun-running operation, funneling armaments from the crushed Libyan regime of Moammar Gaddafi to rebel forces opposing Syria's Assad.  Ambassador Stevens was negotiating with a whole Star Wars barroom thug collection of bad actors, a reported ten different jihadist militias operating in Benghazi.
The most damning Benghazi revelation is the Obama policy that led to the disaster: Obama's four-year policy of secretly supporting violent Islamists against civilized Muslims, like Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak, and modern-minded people in countries like Turkey and Iran.  We used to support moderate Muslims until Obama took over; now we support our deadly enemies.  In Benghazi, some of those gangster types turned against us, tore the cover off the operation, burned out Ambassador Stevens, and killed American defenders with mortar fire.  Our defenders had the AQIM mortar crew laser-marked for jet bombers and gunships that never showed up.
We now have four solid years of Obama administration support for radical jihadi movements against the modern world.  The United States has abandoned any moral basis for its foreign policy.  Prior to Obama, we stood for civilization and against tyranny of all kinds, in the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, and the Cold War.  Today, for the first time in history, an American president is knowingly aiding and abetting ideological barbarism.  Thomas Jefferson fought the Barbary Pirates; Obama is aiding the Barbary Pirates to fight us.
That is the deeper lesson of Benghazi.
Here is a list of Obama's betrayals -- so far.
1. The administration betrayed the democratic forces in theocratic Iran, the biggest danger to peace in the world.  Four years ago Obama did nothing to support the pro-democratic Green Movement that was trying to overthrow the reactionary mullahs.  Obama shielded a war theocracy that feeds on its hatred of the modern world.  He allowed genuine freedom demonstrators to be abused and exterminated right in front of the international media.
2. The administration flagrantly betrayed the civilizing forces in Egypt, the greatest pillar of stability in the Arab Middle East for thirty years.  It was Obama who called for the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, the man who upheld the Egypt-Israel peace treaty for thirty years.  When Obama told Mubarak to step down, the victory of Muslim Brotherhood was assured.  Today they are implementing a sharia constitution for Egypt.  The war theology of Islam doesn't bring democracy.  The "Arab Spring" is a lie, and it always was a lie.  Today Israel is reporting that Brother Morsi will not even talk to the Jewish state, reversing three decades of peaceful relations.
The most symbolic event on Tahrir Square in Cairo was not a phony democracy demonstration, but the violent group rape of ABC News's Lara Logan.  Raping women and underaged girls is a protected act under the desert law of Mohammed; violent rape is approved for slaves taken in war, and war is a constant condition.  (Many of Mohammed's wives fit in this category.)  Under sharia, girls and women are routinely blamed if they are violently assaulted while walking alone without a male family escort.  That is why sharia imprisons women in their houses and forces them to wear black tents in public, always living in fear of legalized physical assault by men.
4. We are now back-stabbing the modernizing forces in Afghanistan in favor of the Taliban, who gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden for planning, training, arming, and executing the attack on New York and Washington on 9/11/01.
5. We even betrayed Libya.  The Bush administration got Moammar Gaddafi to stop his nuclear program, but Obama back-stabbed Gaddafi anyway.  Today radical Islamists control Libya.
6. Obama tried to betray Israel, but the Israelis resisted.  If Obama is re-elected, Israel had better protect itself from this administration's treachery.  The biggest irony of the fraudulent Arab Spring is that all the Arab regimes have been shaken to the core, but Israel is rock-solid.  So far.
Benghazi was the place to transfer control of Libyan arms to jihadi militias operating in Syria, including al-Qaeda.  Some of those jihadis betrayed us by attacking Stevens and his team when they knew they were unprotected.  That morning, a Libyan cop was caught taking photos inside the U.S. compound.  A police car guarding the compound ran off minutes before the assault.  Phone calls to the local police brought no help.  The same Libyan regime that we helped bring to power shafted us.
That is the nature of the beast: Obama thought he could outsmart the jihadi crocodile, and Ambassador Stevens ended up dead.  Trying to buy the loyalty of Muslim fanatics will always end in disaster, because they are theological barbarians: they are willing to die as martyrs, but they are much happier to terrorize, abuse, torture, and kill civilized people first.  Islam is a desert creed that started by conquering the high civilizations of Persia and Byzantium.  The Koran is the only scripture that celebrates war and genocide.  Islam always conquered when it found more people willing to die for its ideology than civilized nations found for theirs.
Benghazi was not an accident.  It was a blunder waiting to happen, starting from a doomed attempt to buy the loyalty of al-Qaeda and its kind with arms to overthrow Assad.
Half of America is still media-blinded, but there isn't a single foreign ministry or intelligence agency in the world that is unaware of Obama's policy of betrayal.  We have squandered trust in America's promises, the keystone of the Western defense arch in the six decades since World War II.
We have known that Obama is a third-world Socialist, because he boasted about it in his autobiographies.  But until now we had no proof that his real sympathies are with jihad imperialism.  Benghazi is a major failure, but the policy it represents is worse than the idea of putting an unprotected U.S. ambassador into bandit country to make a deal with jihadist terror groups, and then failing to protect him when the bad guys turn on him.
Americans had better learn the truth before those same suicidal policies come home to haunt us.

Read more: