Editor’s Note – This very writer has written on this subject several times both here and on my former college blog (LINK – LINK). During 2008-09 I was one of the very few who was not surprised in the least to see Obama appoint several arch antisemites such as Samantha Power and Robert Malley. Why was this writer not surprised? Because Obama came from radicalized leftist academia and antisemitism among university leftists is fashion at most large universities. Obama hung out with Frank Marshall Davis, Bill Ayers, and Obama’s own mother was an academic who specialized in “critical theory” which is Marxism on steroids. Obama even says in his own book that Marxist academics are who he sought out to associate with.
A new, 18-minute mini-documentary follows the journey of Irina, a 23-year-old liberal, Jewish New Yorker who voted for Obama in 2008. Yet as her connection to Israel has grown, and she has learned more about the President’s policies across the Middle East and towards Israel in particular, Irina has come to realize that “when the chips are down,” the President may not “have Israel’s back” as he says.
The short film features:
Exclusive interviews with leading journalists and politicians in Israel
(Bloomberg, London Times, Jerusalem Post, etc.)
Clips from longtime Democratic supporters including: Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz Former NYC Mayor Ed Koch Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Florida Republican Rep. Allen West defended his skepticism surrounding the September non-farm payrolls report in an interview on CNBC early this afternoon. The so called “objective reporter” from NBC’s cable channel, Tyler Mathisen, got rather testy with Allen West and tried to interrupt him so he could not explain his point of view. West would have none of Mathisen’s nonsense. Mathisen is on the verge of becoming unhinged during much of the interview skin to a Chris Mathews meltdown.
Here is the exchange:
MATHISEN: “You are alleging specifically that the president is engaging in a cover-up of the data. You are saying that the administration is actively manipulating that data. Correct?”
WEST: “Well, absolutely. Look at what happened with our GDP numbers. Fourth-quarter GDP numbers last year were 3 percent…”
MATHISEN: “Do you have any basis on which you say that? Do you have any basis on which you say that? Any source? Anyone that has come to you and said, ‘This is the case?’ I mean, do you realize how difficult it would be for someone to pull off that kind of conspiracy, given the number of people in the labor department, given the number of surveyors out there, one of whom would probably say, ‘Wait a minute! That’s not the right number!'”
WEST: “Well, if you would stop yelling in my ear and allow me to answer your questions, maybe we could get to the bottom of this. When you look at the GDP numbers — which have gone from 4.1 percent, then it went to 1.9 percent, then it was at 1.7 percent. It got revised down just about a month ago to 1.3 percent. We’ve got numbers that are all over the place. And we don’t understand the direction this economy is going. … I don’t see these numbers that people are talking about, and I don’t see how they can come back later in this month and say they’re revising the numbers from July and August. So I’m very questionable with what we do see out of this administration, because the numbers don’t add up.
It has been recently revealed that the EPA has far surpassed the dark humor of blowing up kids and people on film that global warming scare-mongers promoted a few years back. In real life, the EPA has been conducting human experiments on people by piping diesel fumes from a running truck mixed with air into their lungs at a North Carolina university. The agency has ginned up yet another green crusade — the lethal dangers of diesel fumes. They even had a gas chamber set up to accommodate the environmental research project that shockingly recalls the death camps in Poland.
Not surprisingly, the EPA is now in the process of being sued for conducting dangerous experiments on human guinea pigs. The courts will decide whether or not serious laws and practices were violated, including the international Nuremberg Code that was set up after sixteen Nazi doctors were executed for medical terrorism. After the barbaric fallout of Nazi Germany, where many people were treated like experimental animals, the Nuremberg Code was designed to be an international governing set of principles to regulate the practice of human experimentation. The whiff of the Jewish holocaust is therefore unmistakable.
When the Nazis found out how difficult it was in practice to shoot so many Jews on the Eastern Front at the outset of the war, they switched to gassing them en masse at death camps with engine fumes. Such gassing methods became notorious at Treblinka, where almost one million Jews were killed.
In the early part of the war, the infamous commandant of Auschwitz, Rudolf Hoess, visited Treblinka. Hoess testified at Nuremberg that the Treblinka motor room used tank and truck engines to pipe diesel fumes into the gas chambers. According to Hoess, it usually took about half an hour before the gas chambers fell silent. Another half-hour passed before the doors were opened.
Hoess commented that the engine fumes at Treblinka were not always entirely effective in killing the Jews. While all the victims fell unconscious, many of them were still alive and had to be shot afterwards. Adolf Eichmann told Hoess that they were experiencing the same problems in other death camps at the time. Auschwitz used Zyklon B, which was far more effective.
The Nazis killed so many people that they were forced to industrialize the process by making crematoriums that turned countless cadavers into ashes. All of the ghastly work connected to this assembly line of death was performed by Jewish victims, called Special Detachment Jews, whom the Nazis specifically kept alive for this very purpose. When the war effort started to go badly for Germany, the Special Detachment Jews were required to unearth old bodies that had been buried and burn them up, too.
When Hoess was forced to oversee such a grisly operation at Auschwitz, he would recover from such horrifying scenes by finding solace in nature: “If I was deeply affected by some incident, I found it impossible to go back to my home and my family. I would mount my horse and ride, until I had chased the terrible picture away. Often at night, I would walk through the stables and seek relief among my beloved animals.”
Hoess’s nature-loving tendencies are far more revealing than most scholars would care to admit. While Jews were treated like experimental animals and were burned up in sacrificial smoke, Hoess said his family lived a free and untrammeled life: “My wife’s garden was a paradise of flowers.” Hoess was far more concerned about untreated stormwater discharging directly from the camp into the nearby Sola River than he was about the incredible slaughterhouse plans that the Nazi leaders were foisting upon him. The cunning of nature was indeed an escape route from moral responsibility.
When Rudolf Hoess stood trial at Nuremberg, he concluded his testimony by saying he was not a sadistic man and that he had never sanctioned the extermination of the Jews. He was even proud of how much more humane the gassing process was at Auschwitz compared to Treblinka.
Rudolf Hoess was SS. The SS was the greenest faction of the Nazi Party. It was run by Heinrich Himmler, who was an animal lover, vegetarian, and organic farming enthusiast. Himmler detested hunting. In an instructional letter sent to Dachau Concentration Camp and Ester-wegen, Himmler stated, “I wish the SS and the police also will be exemplary in the love of nature. Within the course of a few years the property of the SS and the police must become paradises for animals and Nature.” In many ways, the SS was Hitler’s “green” praetorian guard.
Both Hoess and Himmler belonged to a proto-Nazi wandervogel youth group called the Artamanens. The wandervogels of the early 20th century in Germany were nature-loving youth groups that promoted many green ideas and practices. Artaman basically means “country man,” with certain racial-indigenous connotations.
The SS promoted an ideology called “blood and soil,” where evolutionary biological racism, peasant agrarianism, and environmentalism were all fused together into a fascist whole. Many leading SS men actually believed that German racial biology was being destroyed by the cosmopolitan life of the cities, that Germans were being uprooted from their homeland and enslaved to the artificial materialistic values of what they considered to be international Jewish capitalism and communism. The Jews were vilified for their city ways. They were also considered unnatural and outside the evolutionary laws of biological racism. Many Nazis believed that such a violation of the “scientific” laws of Nature had to be remedied.
This flammable cocktail between German biology and environmentalism was at the heart of the holocaust at death camps like Treblinka. When Jews were crammed into cattle cars on the way to Treblinka, the SS broke strict animal transport laws the Nazis themselves established. While the SS side of Treblinka was a virtual garden camp, the Jewish side was a hell on earth. While the SS were all involved in rehabilitating fox populations on their side of the camp, Jews were being exterminated on such a massive scale that the gravestones that still stand today at the Treblinka monument do not have individual names on them, only entire cities. While the SS had beautiful picnic grounds that showcased a little zoo, the last sight that the Jews were given before they entered the gas chambers was the most exquisite flower garden in the entire camp. After Treblinka was closed down, the Nazis planted lupine on top of what was left of the Jewish graves. Lupines are wolf flowers. Hitler used to call the SS his pack of wolves.
While no one died in the EPA’s gas chambers, the agency is increasingly acting like proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing. Under the guise of acting on behalf of everyone’s health, the EPA has crossed a pathological line where people have been potentially treated like experimental animals under questionable methods that conjure up the horrors of the holocaust. More telling is the EPA subjected human beings to a concoction of diesel fumes that it already said was lethal. If the EPA were truly concerned about human health, they would not have performed such experiments on more than forty people in the first place.
Ten percent of our power just like that and some states are already suffering from black outs and brown outs. Is this the change you voted for in 2008? Institute for Energy Research:
More than 34 gigawatts (GW) of electrical generating capacity are now set to retire because of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Mercury and Air Toxics Rule (colloquially called Utility MACT)[1] and the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR)[2] regulations. Most of these retirements will come from coal-fired power plants, shuttering over 10 percent of the U.S.’s coal-fired generating capacity.
This report is an update of a report we issued in October 2011.[3] Last October the original report, we calculated that 28.3 GW of generating capacity would close as a result of EPA’s regulations. At the time, we warned that “this number will grow as plant operators continue to release their EPA compliance plans.” Unfortunately, this statement has proven to be true. This update, a mere eight months later, shows that 34.7 GW of electrical generating capacity will close—a 6.4 GW increase.
According to EPA, their modeling of Utility MACT and CSAPR indicates that these regulations will only shutter 9.5 GW of electricity generation capacity. But events in the real world already show that EPA’s modeling is a gross underestimate.
To calculate the impact of EPA’s rules, we first assumed that EPA’s modeling of the regulation correctly predicted which power plants would close as a result of the regulations. Then, we looked at statements, filings, and announcements from electrical generators where the generators were closing power plants and in which they cited EPA’s regulations as the precipitating cause of the plant closures. We then compared EPA’s modeling outputs with the announcements and created a master list of plant closures as the result of EPA regulations (the master list is below).
Combining actual announcements with EPA’s modeling shows that EPA’s modeling grossly underestimates the actual number of closures. As noted above, EPA calculated that only 9.5 GW of electrical generating capacity would close as a result of its rules. But the reality is that over 35 GW of power generating capacity will likely close—over three times the amount predicted by EPA modeling. Worse, as utilities continue to assess how to comply with EPA’s finalized Utility MACT rule and CSAPR, there will likely be further plant closure announcements in the coming weeks and months.
Obama 2002 speech: “Rich people are all for non-violence”, unless they are perpetrating it.
We often talk about how President Obama has the mindset of a radicalized leftist university academic’ this video is one more example of many. Where was the media to vet him in 2008?
This will make your stomach turn. Your bailout money goes to sponsor Chinese propaganda films sponsored by GM. You can watch a GM CEO Dan Ackerson brag that since the bailout 70% of GM’s manufacturing is outside of the USA. They also announced that much of GM’s R&D will move to China in part so as to give advanced technology to the Chinese Government.
Remember that according to far left university academic theory U.S. wealth is essentially “capitalist ill-gotten gains” and that our wealth needs to be transferred to the rest of the world.
Wow, so much BS in this debate there is not enough time to hope to respond to it all in a timely manner.
Obama’s tax cuts for small businesses aren’t tax cuts at all, they are tax credits meaning that if you jump through government hoop A & B – and then meet stipulation circumstance A, B, C and D – you get a tax credit. Well that doesn’t work because people aren’t doing when is best for their business or the economy, they are doing what government wants. These “tax cuts” are so targeted only a few get them. This is no different from government picking winners and losers. Economic growth happens when people have money AND freedom.
Actually Mitt lowering the rates and cleaning up the deductions has been done before, Reagan did it and it worked. Remember Kemp/Roth in 1981 followed up with TEFRA in 1986? Romney needed to hit the mortgage collapse out of the park and he just didn’t. He needs me on his communications team to show him how. This is not difficult.
Romney – I will eliminate any program I have to borrow money from China to keep going that are not working and important. I hope and wish.
Obama talked about going after some wasteful over duplicated education programs – he went after education programs alright, like the working and very successful DC voucher program…. all to make the teachers union happy (and screwed the kids).
I liked Romney’s “I have five boys” comment – nicest way to call out a lie I have ever heard 😉
Well the stock in those who make small planes will now drop due to that comment Obama. That will cost jobs just in the coming weeks. Mark me.
Obama says Social Security is structurally sound. Like heck it is. Social Security does not even try to grow a pot of money to prefund people’s retirement.
Romney’s point on Medicare is right on. OK Romney now boot that voucher talking point out of the park – you had better….and he didn’t. It is Medicare part D expanded because Part D came in 40% under budget, gives more choice and works. It is not just a voucher system.
Romney hits Obama on his unelected board making decisions about your care in Obamacare – FINALLY! Survey’s of Small Businesses show that ObamaCare is scrapping hiring plans – WHAM – Go MITT!
Romney – government as well as private studies show that millions of people will lose their employer based insurance as a result of ObamaCare – that is true. Obama is pretending like that problem doesn’t exist.
Obama is a broken record “Romney just wants to help the rich”…
Veteran Communications Strategist Lisa Marie Cashman – They are both trying to be too civil.
ME – They are both trying to remember their talking points and get them out, it is better to use such minutia for rebuttals and comebacks. Dear Mitt, please go watch Reagan’s debate with Carter. Thanks.
Cashman – They are both reaching to meet the middle. The independent and enrolled votes are equally important; however Obamacare restricts growth. I wish Romney would hit the tack on the medical devices tax and the real estate tax.
Obama – The IPAB (ObamaCare panel) by law cannot tell doctors what to do – But the ObamaCare board can do is say what they will pay for. And they can say that doctors have to jump through every hoop they wish or they will not get paid on any of their patients…and if they are not paid for the care will not be given. Nice try Barack.
Romney – $90 billion for failed green jobs programs would have hired 2 million teachers – ZAP!!
Mitt – Education funds should follow the child. (Obama – they should follow the teachers’s UNIONS).
The problems with “federal support” in education Obama is that such support comes with thousands of strings attached that pick winners and losers and that make for political agendas and make everything more expensive overall. Race to the Top has been a bureaucratic nightmare.
Mitt, meeting with Democrat leaders in Congress will not be like meeting legislators in your state. The likes of Pelosi and Reid are far more partisan and radical than anyone you face in state government. So either the current Dem Leadership will have to be swept away or you will have to defeat them.
Our friend CSteven Tucker of the Insurance Tips & Advice Blog says – NOT ONE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR OBAMACARE & The Senate has BLOCKED more than 30 GOP proposals. He wouldn’t know working together if it slapped him…
So true Steven. The Republicans were locked out of the room and we didn’t get many of the details of what was in ObamaCare until after it was passed.
Final thoughts – Well “hope and change” vs Romney won’t work. It sold when he faced a non existent Bush domestic policy in his second term vs McCain. But now Obama has a record to defend. Obama has used one office to run for the next and/or used tricks to get his serious opponents tossed off the ballot in Illinois. So he is not used to having to have a record to defend and tonight it showed.
Both sides had a lot of emotional investment in this debate and now that investment is being vented. All in all this debate was not a game changer. Both sides got facts wrong, but Obama was in the larger truth deficit. In the area of “non-verbals” Romney was the clear winner. He was more energized and assertive and as a result he looked more presidential because he came into the debate with a better posture.
When a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) panel associated with the ObamaCare Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) [ Also at times referred to as the death panel – Editor] targeted breast cancer screenings for women over age 40 talk radio and the alternative media was able to make such a stink that even some of the Obama favoring elite media couldn’t help but report on it. As a result it was reversed.
Why is it that women’s and minority health are the first to be targeted for cuts as ObamaCare takes over? It is because those groups vote Democrat in such large numbers, that the Democrat leadership can do whatever it wants and likely keep that group secured as a voting block. With the elite media covering for them most of the time they can get away with it. Do you ever wonder why inner city minorities get the worst teachers, worst schools, worst city services and worst police protection in cities and areas ran by Democrats? It is for the same reason. No matter what the Democrats do they believe they will always get 85% or better of the black vote, so they put resources in swing districts to win swing voters.
Nov. 20, 2009 (Bloomberg) — A medical debate over breast-cancer screening that has turned political may set the tone for a battle over President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul that will resonate for years.
The furor over a federal panel’s recommendation against mammograms for most women in their 40’s shows the obstacles the U.S. may face trimming costs in a $2.5 trillion health system, even when research suggests the cuts may be appropriate, said Uwe Reinhardt, a Princeton University economist.
With a health-care overhaul nearing a Senate vote, Republicans said the recommendations by the panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, for fewer mammograms proved Obama’s agenda will lead to rationed care. Democrats, fearful of antagonizing a key voting group in women, said the U.S. won’t change federal reimbursements to support guidelines that most women shouldn’t get regular mammograms until age 50.
The panel’s suggestions provided “the perfect place to throw a bomb into the health-care debate,” said Representative Lynn Woolsey, a Democrat of California and co-leader of the 82- member Congressional Progressive Caucus, in an interview. “We’re not going to ration anything. We’re going to give people choices based on science.”
‘Worst-Case Scenario’
The new guidelines would reduce annual mammograms by more than half under a “worst-case scenario,” said Junaid Husain, a Boston-based analyst at Soleil Securities, in a note to investors Nov. 17. Senator Sam Brownback, a Republican of Kansas, said the task force’s recommendations represent the start of an Obama administration plan to ration health care to pay for its overhaul.
“There are other ways to reduce costs,” Brownback said in an interview.Data show that 17 percent of breast-cancer deaths occur in women from ages 40 to 50, he said. Those statistics mean the panel “is effectively saying 17 percent wasn’t high enough to warrant spending the money to save lives.”
Democrats active in supporting the health-care overhaul legislation sought to distance themselves from the panel’s advice. Woolsey said resources will have to be used more efficiently, “but we’re not going to start with women.”
Medical economists said the U.S. will have to prepare itself for these kinds of decisions if it wants to cut health- care costs. Health-care legislation calls for comparative effectiveness research, as a way to determine whether treatments and procedures aren’t being overused.
Oh they are basing those decisions on science alright – political science; and politics is exactly why they reversed it. After all if it was based on “real science” and decisions are based on that basis only then why reverse it? Almost one if five breast cancer deaths are women aged 40-50. So to Obama’s appointees one in five breast cancer deaths is a safe gamble to ensure that services aren’t overused. They are not going to start with women? Oh really?
My wife had her routine physical today and she was asked to sign the new “voluntary” HHS data mining form for the BarryCare IPAB rationing panel. She said I’m not comfortable signing this. And, they told her, well we can’t bill Blue Cross if you don’t sign it. Oh, so it’s not really voluntary then? THEN her doctor informed her of the new “guidelines” on pap smears. Kathleen Supercillious has decided that pap smears are only needed every 5 years now. Folks, Ameritopia is already upon us. ” Forward” …. to Cervical cancer.
So I started doing some digging and look at this, not only are these “voluntary” ObamaCare becoming mandated over time, but the IPAB is targeting women’s pap tests for cuts [the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is a part of HHS/IPAB]. What happened to not letting the government get between you and your doctor? Here is the positive spin from NBC News:
Most women can go as long as five years between cervical cancer screenings as long as they make sure to get both a Pap smear and an HPV test when they do get examined, a government panel said Wednesday.
The interval between cervical cancer screenings can safely be extended for women between the ages of 30 and 65, according to the new recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Women ages 21 to 30 should still get a Pap smear every three years, the interval currently recommended. But those younger than 21 and older than 65 can skip the screen altogether, the experts concluded.
The panel is urging a extended intervals in screenings in an attempt to cut back on the number of women who end up being treated for lesions that might resolve on their own.
The downside could be a very small potential increase in the number of women who might die of cervical cancer, experts said.
“It’s a trade-off,” said Dr. Michael LeFevre, co-vice chair of the task force and a professor of family and community medicine at the University of Missouri at Columbia.
Some expert who is also a far left professor that helped come up with this guideline says it’s safe so it must be so right NBC? Let is by clear, like the 17% of breast cancer deaths above, this isn’t science, it is gambling. It is gambling with women’s lives and if they get away with this minorities will be next. These recommendations will be phased into being mandatory over time.
There is a reason why insurance companies have set their guidelines for pap screenings to every three years, they did it because it was better for customers, saved lives, and it increased profits as fighting cancer is the early stages is much cheaper than fighting it at a late stage…BUT that is not the case when you factor in these same patients when they retire and go on Medicare. Fending off and fighting cancer in those over 65 with a history of it is very expensive, so the IPAB is content with letting such citizens die off, but all that death panel talk was just fear mongering…
Related:
Obama’s Own Cousin Dr. Milton Wolf – ObamaCare does harm, rations care – LINK
British National Health Service: late cancer diagnosis kills 10,000 a year – LINK
[Editor’s Note – Bila is one of the best in the business, so naturally her advice is about as solid as any can be, but even so we would like to add a little to it:
The press likes to steer the debate format to 30 or 60 second answers. This favors Democrats because one can spew several lies in such a time, and one cannot respond to such lies with specifics in the same time frame, and since almost every major progressive thinker has written that deception is a valid political tactic it is a problem. Republicans should resist or insist on rules that do not have time limits that are too short. The elite media also likes such short times because it helps create sound bites, gaffes and promotes emotionally charged drama that helps media ratings but is bad for the country.
Debate moderators, such as Gwen Ifel and George Stephanopoulos are entrenched Democratic Party hired guns, who get hired by networks because, well because of just that reason; they will ask questions that will steer the debate about non-issues (like birth control), and will steer the debate away from Obama’s record, don’t let them get away with it. It is appropriate and necessary to take a reporter to task for not doing an ethical job so if that means calling them out and humiliating then Newt style, than by all means do so.]
Tonight, voters across the country will tune in to the first 2012 presidential debate. President Obama and Governor Romney will take the stage at the University of Denver to debate domestic policy from 9:00-10:30 p.m. ET. This is an incredibly important night for Romney, a chance for him to define himself to voters still on the fence and an opportunity to draw a clear, bold contrast between his vision and that of our President.
To be blunt, Romney must have a successful night. In order to make that happen, there are a few things I think he needs to do.
Communications Strategist Jedediah Bila
Governor Romney, here’s my advice:
1) Clearly articulate the discrepancy between Obama’s 2008 campaign promises and what he delivered as President. What did Obama say the unemployment rate would be if his stimulus was passed? Remember when Obama said that adding $4 trillion in debt was unpatriotic? Where was his leadership on tax reform and responsible budgeting? Was entertaining lobbyists part of his plan to change business as usual in Washington? The list goes on and on. People need to be reminded that what they voted for in 2008 is not what they received.
2) Dismantle Obama’s supposed allegiance to the middle class. What about Obamacare’s tax hikes on the middle class? Heritage reminds us: “Obamacare imposes a penalty—or tax increase—on Americans who do not purchase health insurance. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that most of those paying these taxes are middle-class individuals and families making less than 500 percent of the federal poverty level: $59,000 for an individual and $120,000 for a family of four. Three million lower-income and middle-class Americans will pay an estimated $2 billion in these ‘mandate taxes.’”
What about middle-class coal workers suffering at the hands of Obama’s overregulation? Perhaps some Americans weren’t paying attention when Senator Obama talked about bankrupting the coal industry in 2008. Remind them in light of coal plant closures in 2012.
Keep in mind that Obama will present his allegiance to the middle class within the larger context of his class-warfare strategy of imposing tax hikes on small business owners and other hard-working Americans he broadly labels “millionaires and billionaires.” Never–ever–be afraid to tackle class warfare. Let President Obama pit Americans against each other; be the leader who unites us under policies that benefit all.
3) Be bold in drawing a distinction between your vision and that of Obama (as reflected through his policies these last four years). If this is going to be a choice election, the choice needs to be abundantly clear. Part of outlining that distinction is a willingness to get specific. Voters have little patience for ambiguity at this point, particularly those disheartened Independents who fell for ‘hope’ and ‘change’ in 2008. When asked a specific question, give very specific answers–numbers, facts, figures, policy outlines, cost, and benefits. Details inspire voter confidence in you and your vision.
4) Delivery matters. Leave talking points, affected tones, rigidity, and timidity behind. Instead, bring to the stage realness, empathy for the plight of struggling Americans, fearlessness with respect to tackling Obama’s failed policies and this country’s challenges, and confidence about both your policy and your ability to execute it.
You have been painted by the opposition as out of touch, detached, and unable to connect with voters. The only person who can prove that caricature wrong is you. Remember that Ronald Reagan didn’t just get elected because people believed he was the guy who could fix things; he also got elected because underneath all of that political talk, voters saw a real person who connected with them. In the 2008 vice-presidential debate, Sarah Palin reminded voters of that element by focusing her attention not on Biden or the moderators, but right through the camera’s lens on the American people. Remember to talk directly tovoters, and it will make all the difference.
Most importantly, recall that Obama has a tendency to get defensive and arrogant when challenged. Be his opposite. Welcome the challenges and refute the President’s claims with a down-to-earth, fact-filled rebuttal. Always remember that arrogance does not equal confidence. Confidence inspires voters; arrogance conveys that you think you’re smarter than the rest of us. Confidence is appealing; arrogance is not.
5) Finally, own the Bain Capital argument, the tax return argument, and any other petty distraction put forth by Obama to draw the curtain over the unemployment numbers, ballooning debt and deficit, overregulation, and the rest of his policy disasters.
Mitt, you have a choice: Either own the narrative or President Obama will. It’s up to you.
It is good to see Republicans talking about elite media bias and actively taking strategy to counter it. It is important to make examples of elite media reporters by name when they decide to behave like state run media.
It’s hard to compete with someone who gets Nobel Prizes and Grammy Awards just for showing up at the office. In running against someone as highly praised as Barack Obama, Mitt Romney has his work cut out for him. As his supporters point out, Wednesday night’s presidential debate offers the Republican candidate a chance to present his plan for prosperity directly to the country. He needs to take it.
On Sunday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie explained the importance of the debate to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “Let’s face it, George, there’s been a lot of filtering going on,” the Republican chief executive said to the former Democratic aide. “This is the first moment when the American people are going to be able to see these two guys side by side laying out their vision unfiltered. And I think that’s going to be a powerful moment for Mitt Romney.”
The Media Research Center (MRC) on Tuesday documented the purported impartiality of Mr. Stephanopoulos‘ debate analysis since he joined ABC in 1997. According to MRC, the anchor of “This Week” and “Good Morning America” declared the Democratic candidate the winner in eight of the nine general election presidential debates.
Over on “Fox News Sunday,” host Chris Wallace mentioned two stories this week that struck him about media bias. He held up the Washington Post from Wednesday and pointed to the lead story, “Ohio, Florida Give Obama an Edge,” and the sidebar, “For Obama, the Buckeye State May be a Bull’s-eye.” The Fox News anchor noted that his wife had said to him, “I guess the race is over according to The Washington Post.”
He then showed the cover of Time magazine this week, which has Mr. Romney in a church stained-glass window, and noted that with just five weeks before the election, the magazine was focused on the candidate’s religion instead of his economic or foreign policies.
Mr. Wallace also asked his guest, vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan, whether he thinks “the mainstream media is carrying water for Barack Obama.” The Wisconsin Republican replied, “I think it kind of goes without saying that there’s definitely a media bias. … I’m a conservative person, I’m used to media bias. We expected media bias going into this.”
Doug Schoen was Bill Clinton’s pollster in the White House and Pat Caddell had the same position for Jimmy Carter. These are not “right wing” bloggers and pundits. These two men have been as in the center of Democratic Party politics as it gets for the last 35 years.
We have written about the incredible amounts of media bias that has been at a whole new level since 2008, and while that bias has been there since the 1960’s, it has never been as outrageous as it is today.
Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen with Megyn Kelly:
To see the entire video where Pat Caddell makes his case go HERE.
Here is the Gallup Poll that is referred to in the conversation:
September 21, 2012
U.S. Distrust in Media Hits New High
Fewer Americans closely following political news now than in previous election years
by Lymari Morales
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Americans’ distrust in the media hit a new high this year, with 60% saying they have little or no trust in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. Distrust is up from the past few years, when Americans were already more negative about the media than they had been in years prior to 2004.
The record distrust in the media, based on a survey conducted Sept. 6-9, 2012, also means that negativity toward the media is at an all-time high for a presidential election year. This reflects the continuation of a pattern in which negativity increases every election year compared with the year prior. The current gap between negative and positive views — 20 percentage points — is by far the highest Gallup has recorded since it began regularly asking the question in the 1990s. Trust in the media was much higher, and more positive than negative, in the years prior to 2004 — as high as 72% when Gallup asked this question three times in the 1970s.
This year’s decline in media trust is driven by independents and Republicans. The 31% and 26%, respectively, who express a great deal or fair amount of trust are record lows and are down significantly from last year. Republicans’ level of trust this year is similar to what they expressed in the fall of 2008, implying that they are especially critical of election coverage.
More broadly, Republicans continue to express the least trust in the media, while Democrats express the most. Independents’ trust fell below the majority level in 2004 and has continued to steadily decline.
Lyon also talks about how the Obama Administration abuses the Justice Department to frighten reporters.
Amber Lyon
And now CNN is threatening award winning reporter Amber Lyon for blowing the whistle.
Those who know journalism know that CNN International is a joke. It is biased and milk-toast government/corporate sponsored news. We have been aware of this for a number of years, but even so, you can imagine our surprise to see one of the biggest names at CNN go public saying just that. She also talks about how the Obama Administration is abusing the “Espionage Act” to go after reporters who report things they don’t like.
Of course government/corporate sponsored news is nothing new in the elite media:
ABC edited the film “The Path to 9/11” at the insistence of the Clinton’s and the Democratic Leadership and refuses to release the film on DVD (LINK – LINK – VIDEO)
NBC shut down the show “The Playboy Club” (which was more about Chicago politics than bunnies) under pressure from the White House and is not releasing shows to pay services,
The White House launched a profanity laced tirade against CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson for her very responsible coverage of the Justice Department Gun Running Scandal (VIDEO). CBS has now backed off of the story and prevented Atkinson from doing radio interviews for some time after her interview on Laura Ingraham.
Why didn’t CNN’s international arm air its own documentary on Bahrain’s Arab Spring repression?
A former CNN correspondent defies threats from her former employer to speak out about self-censorship at the network.
In late March 2011, as the Arab Spring was spreading, CNN sent a four-person crew to Bahrain to produce a one-hour documentary on the use of internet technologies and social media by democracy activists in the region. Featuring on-air investigative correspondent Amber Lyon, the CNN team had a very eventful eight-day stay in that small, US-backed kingdom.
By the time the CNN crew arrived, many of the sources who had agreed to speak to them were either in hiding or had disappeared. Regime opponents whom they interviewed suffered recriminations, as did ordinary citizens who worked with them as fixers. Leading human rights activist Nabeel Rajab was charged with crimes shortly after speaking to the CNN team. A doctor who gave the crew a tour of his village and arranged meetings with government opponents, Saeed Ayyad, had his house burned to the ground shortly after. Their local fixer was fired ten days after working with them.
The CNN crew itself was violently detained by regime agents in front of Rajab’s house. As they described it after returning to the US, “20 heavily-armed men”, whose faces were “covered with black ski masks”, “jumped from military vehicles”, and then “pointed machine guns at” the journalists, forcing them to the ground. The regime’s security forces seized their cameras and deleted their photos and video footage, and then detained and interrogated them for the next six hours.
So CNN spent $100,000 making this documentary and then refused to air it in spite of Lyon’s work earning awards. Then look at the lengths CNN went to to keep the story quiet – continue reading HERE.
The network is seriously compromising its journalism in the Gulf states by blurring the line between advertising and editorial.
Even so, the network’s relationships with governments must bear closer examination. CNNi has aggressively pursued a business strategy of extensive, multifaceted financial arrangements between the network and several of the most repressive regimes around the world which the network purports to cover. Its financial dealings with Bahrain are deep and longstanding.
CNNi’s pursuit of sponsorship revenue from the world’s regimes
CNNi’s pursuit of and reliance on revenue from Middle East regimes increased significantly after the 2008 financial crisis, which caused the network to suffer significant losses in corporate sponsorships. It thus pursued all-new, journalistically dubious ways to earn revenue from governments around the world. Bahrain has been one of the most aggressive government exploiters of the opportunities presented by CNNi.
These arrangements extend far beyond standard sponsorship agreements for advertising of the type most major media outlets feature. CNNi produces those programs in an arrangement it describes as “in association with” the government of a country, and offers regimes the ability to pay for specific programs about their country. These programs are then featured as part of CNNi’s so-called “Eye on” series (“Eye on Georgia“, “Eye on the Phillipines“, “Eye on Poland“), or “Marketplace Middle East“, all of which is designed to tout the positive economic, social and political features of that country.
The disclosure for such arrangements is often barely visible. This year, for instance, CNNi produced an “Eye on Lebanon” series, which that nation’s tourist minister boasted was intended “to market Lebanon as a tourism destination”. He said “his ministry was planning a large promotional campaign dubbed ‘Eye on Lebanon’ to feature on CNN network.”
Below is a video interview Alex Jones did with Amber Lyon. Now let us be clear – Alex Jones is NOT a reliable source of solid information as half of what he says is exaggerated or worse – with that said, listen to Amber in her own words explain what she witnessed:
[Editor’s Note – heaps of respect for Amber Lyon, and even though her eyes are opening she is still naive about a few things. Most of these “pro-democracy” protesters she talks about in the video are not pro-democracy at all, they are Muslim Brotherhood. In 1979 when Carter helped the current regime come to power they were all about Democracy….all about it until they took power and to think us they stormed our embassy and we had the Iranian hostage crisis.
The Muslim Brotherhood learned from this, they were all about “democracy” in Egypt until they got it and when the Muslim Brotherhood took power the “pro-democracy” people vanished. The same tactic was used to take over Lebanon and was also used in Libya. Once the brotherhood takes power, much like after the election in Gaza, after the election is over there is never another one; political opposition is dealt with most harshly.]
Mike Pence has said as much in letters to his colleagues several times. It is the lesson of 2006 and 2008. It is time for the governing to match the rhetoric, and now people are paying more attention. The GOP will either walk the walk or it will go the way of the Whigs.
“How long do politicians have to keep on promising heaven & delivering hell before people catch on” – Thomas Sowell
I’m not the biggest fan of Eisenhower or Nixon, but they (and Reagan) are clearly preferable to this post-Reagan Republican Party. Those presidents won national majorities for a reason. They weren’t strict conservatives, but they certainly weren’t any less conservative than the Bushes, McCain, or Romney. They didn’t pretend they were going to abolish the welfare state — often, they didn’t even pretend they would cut the welfare state — unlike so many of today’s Republicans, who don’t follow through but do use their rhetoric to polarize. That gives us the worst of both worlds: big government plus the delusional sense within one party that it represents the antithesis of big government and may freely hate other Americans who don’t mouth the mantra. And what goes for big government goes for Judeo-Christian values, a strong national defense, and all the rest: the GOP’s rhetoric occupies a separate mental compartment from its actions, even as its voters and ideological apologists continue to believe that there is a profound moral difference between them and the rest of the country. It’s a losing strategy, and worse, it’s made the country ungovernable even as government grows.
$3.59 – When Barack Obama entered the White House, the average price of a gallon of gasoline was $1.85. Today, it is $3.59.
22 – It is hard to believe, but today the poverty rate for children living in the United States is a whopping 22 percent.
23 – According to U.S. Representative Betty Sutton, an average of 23 manufacturing facilities permanently shut down in the United States every single day during 2010.
30 – Back in 2007, about 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer. Today, that number is above 30 percent.
32 – The amount of money that the federal government gives directly to Americans has increased by 32 percent since Barack Obama entered the White House.
35 – U.S. housing prices are now down a total of 35 percent from the peak of the housing bubble.
40 – The official U.S. unemployment rate has been above 8 percent for 40 months in a row.
42 – According to one survey, 42 percent of all American workers are currently living paycheck to paycheck.
48 – Shockingly, at this point 48 percent of all Americans are either considered to be “low income” or are living in poverty.
49 – Today, an astounding 49.1 percent of all Americans live in a home where at least one person receives benefits from the government.
60 – According to a recent Gallup poll, only 60 percent of all Americans say that they have enough money to live comfortably.
61 – At this point the Federal Reserve is essentially monetizing much of the U.S. national debt. For example, the Federal Reserve bought up approximately 61 percent of all government debt issued by the U.S. Treasury Department during 2011.
63 – One recent survey found that 63 percent of all Americans believe that the U.S. economic model is broken.
$6000 – If you can believe it, the median price of a home in Detroit is now just $6000.
$10,000 – According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 46 percent of all American workers have less than $10,000 saved for retirement, and 29 percent of all American workers have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.
49,000 – In 2011, our trade deficit with China was more than 49,000 times larger than it was back in 1985.
50,000 – The United States has lost an average of approximately 50,000 manufacturing jobs a month since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001.
56,000 – The United States has lost more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities since 2001.
$85,000 – According to the New York Times, a Jeep Grand Cherokee that costs $27,490 in the United States costs about $85,000 in China thanks to all the tariffs.
$175,587 – The Obama administration spent $175,587 to find out if cocaine causes Japanese quail to engage in sexually risky behavior.
$328,404 – Over the next 75 years, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars. That comes to $328,404 for each and every household in the United States.
$361,330 – This is what the average banker in New York City made in 2010.
440,00 – If the federal government began right at this moment to repay the U.S. national debt at a rate of one dollar per second, it would take over 440,000 years to totally pay it off.
500,000 – According to the Economic Policy Institute, America is losing half a million jobs to China every single year.
2,000,000 – Family farms are being systematically wiped out of existence in the United States. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the number of farms in the United States has fallen from about 6.8 million in 1935 to only about 2 million today.
2,600,000 – In 2010, 2.6 million more Americans fell into poverty. That was the largest increase that we have seen since the U.S. government began keeping statistics on this back in 1959.
5,400,000 – When Barack Obama first took office there were 2.7 million long-term unemployed Americans. Today there are twice as many.
16,000,000 – It is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls.
$20,000,000 – The amount of money the U.S. government was spending to create a version of Sesame Street for children in Pakistan.
25,000,000 – Today, approximately 25 million American adults are living with their parents.
40,000,000 – According to Professor Alan Blinder of Princeton University, 40 million more U.S. jobs could be sent offshore over the next two decades if current trends continue.
46,405,204 – The number of Americans currently on food stamps. When Barack Obama first entered the White House there were only 32 million Americans on food stamps.
88,000,000 – Today there are more than 88 million working age Americans that are not employed and that are not looking for employment. That is an all-time record high.
100,000,000 – Overall, there are more than 100 million working age Americans that do not currently have jobs.
$150,000,000 – This is approximately the amount of money that the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress are stealing from future generations of Americans every single hour.
$2,000,000,000 – The amount of money that JP Morgan has admitted that it will lose from derivatives trades gone bad. Many analysts are convinced that the real number will actually end up being much higher.
$147,000,000,000 – In the U.S., medical costs related to obesity are estimated to be approximately 147 billion dollars a year.
295,500,000,000 – Our trade deficit with China in 2011 was $295.5 billion. That was the largest trade deficit that one country has had with another country in the history of the planet.
$359,100,000,000 – During the first quarter of 2012, U.S. public debt rose by 359.1 billion dollars. U.S. GDP only rose by 142.4 billion dollars.
$454,000,000,000 – During fiscal 2011, the U.S. government spent over 454 billion dollars just on interest on the national debt.
$1,000,000,000,000 – The total amount of student loan debt in the United States recently surpassed the one trillion dollar mark.
$1,170,000,000,000 – China now holds approximately 1.17 trillion dollars of U.S. government debt. Yet the U.S. government continues to send them millions of dollars in foreign aid every year.
$1,600,000,000,000 – The amount that has been added to the U.S. national debt since the Republicans took control of the U.S. House of Representatives. This is more than the first 97 Congresses added to the national debt combined.
$5,000,000,000,000 – The U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars since the day that Barack Obama first took office. In a little more than 3 years Obama has added more to the national debt than the first 41 presidents combined.
$5,000,000,000,000 – What the real U.S. budget deficit in 2011 would have been if the federal government had used generally accepted accounting principles.
$11,440,000,000,000 – The total amount of consumer debt in the United States.
$200,000,000,000,000 – Today, the 9 largest banks in the United States have a total of more than 200 trillion dollars of exposure to derivatives. When the derivatives market completely collapses there won’t be enough money in the entire world to fix it.
Unfortunately this is not an unusual happenstance at our universities today. The progressive secular left is very well entrenched in public education and antisemitism is very fashionable on campus and as actively promoted by many faculty and university administrators. Unless one is active on following campus issues, one would have no idea how extreme and prevalent antisemitism on campus has become. Colleges across the country even sponsor “Israeli Apartheid Week” on campus with student funds. At these events they call for the genocide and elimination of Israel.
To combat this, famed actor Robert Davi has narrated and helped create the following video to combat the lies used to indoctrinate students with at these events and to show what happens at events at colleges across the country. This is a must see video.
You had no idea such nonsense is being preached to your kids on campus did you? Most parent’s don’t.
At universities that are not quite so entrenched by progressive secular antisemitism the hated and discrimination is not so bold, but rather is demonstrated in other ways such as the denial of Jewish and Christian student groups for recognition, which is illegal, and groups such as FIRE and the Alliance Defense Fund have been somewhat successful and overcoming such tactics by campus administrators. As a former Chief Justice of Student Government at my alma mater I was made aware of several cases if professors and administrators discrimination against such students (fortunately a warning from me was enough to help make the offender back off in most cases). It amazed me the leaps of “logic” that academics and radicalized administrators would take to justify their illegal actions and it amazed me how they could make the most unreasonable positions sound reasonable in order to justify their outrageous actions.
I contacted R. Tamara de Silva of the Thomas Jefferson Legal Institute, the attorney involved in the case, to comment but she informed me that the judge in the case has asked both sides to not speak to the press. The institute has said that “religious freedom goes to the heart of the First Amendment. The desire of people to freely exercise their religion has been and is, one of the most powerful political forces in the world”.
CHICAGO (CN) – Northwestern University is discriminating against the Jewish faith by dissociating with a Chabad organization that has been on its campus for 27 years, the group claims in federal court.
Chabad-Lubavitch is a hasidic movement and major form of Orthodox Judaism with more than 3,300 institutions, or Chabad houses, worldwide.
“At the very inception of the Tannenbaum House, in the early 1980s, Chabad had to litigate its right practice religion freely in the city of Evanston,” according to the complaint. “The court, in hearing the matter, determined that ‘the real fear of the defendant city and intervenors is that [Chabad] will use its property to permit the plaintiffs to practice their ancient religion in the way they have conducted it for the past centuries.’ Today, Chabad once again has to fight for that right.”
As a university chaplain, Rabbi Dov Hillel Kelin uses a stipend to obtain kosher food from a third-party vendor, Sodexo.
But on Sept. 11, 2012, the university allegedly sent Klein a letter that it was disassociating from Tannenbaum House.
Though the complaint does not quote from the letter, it says hints that allegations of misconduct against Klein are at the root.
“Northwestern had no legal reason to disassociate from the Tannenbaum House,” the complaint states. “The university knew that its proffered reasons were specious and based upon innuendo and falsehood. The reasons offered for that disassociation were wholly pretextual and meant to single out Chabad against all other faiths for removal from Northwestern University.
“Even if the reasons offered for that disassociation were not false, many other campus organizations including religious organizations, had committed the same acts for which Rabbi Klein stood falsely accused,” it continues. “The university was aware of this, and chose only to disassociate with Chabad.”
The Chabad House says Northwestern disassociated “solely on the basis of Rabbi Klein’s, LCI’s and the Tannenbaum Chabad House’s affiliation with Chabad Chassidism.”
“Northwestern University would not have taken this action if plaintiffs were not adherents of Chabad Chassidism,” it adds.
Northwestern has allegedly barred Klein from renewing his contract with Sodexo or “sponsoring a Birthright Israel trip.
“If Rabbi Klein is enjoined from participating in the above referenced activities, and contracts, and if Rabbi Klein is cut off from providing authentic Jewish and Chassidic experiences to Northwestern University students, it would case irreparable harm to Rabbi Klein, to the charter and purposes of the Tannenbaum Chabad House, and to Lubavitch-Chabad of Illinois,” the complaint states. “It would also cause irreparable harm to Jewish students of Northwestern University.”
Klein, Lubavitch-Chabad of Illinois and Lubavitch-Chabad of Illinois dba The Tannenbaum Chabad House sued Northwestern University, University Chaplain Timothy Stevens and Vice President for Student Affairs Patricia Telles-Irvin.
They seek punitive damages for violations of the Civil Rights Act, and an injunction for Klein.
Tamara de Silva represents the Chabad House and Klein.
Northwestern spokesman Al Cubbage told Courthouse News that he was not aware of the lawsuit and declined to comment on Northwestern’s motivation for dissociating from Chabad House.
Israeli Prime Minister Natanyahu’s speech to the United Nations where he explains his nations struggle to survive against the tide of genocidal threats and acts of violence from jihadist states.
Netanyahu also makes the case that Iran should not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. His speech was great politics, but strategically not so much. Due to reported pressure from the Obama Administration Netanyahu postponed his “red line” date to March. The truth is that no one really knows when Iran will have enough enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons, perhaps they do already and by drawing the red line in March Iran has already been given six more months to do what they have been doing. Some have been touting the economic sanctions that are in place against Iran, but this also benefits Iran. Why? Two reasons. Sanctions do not work well against oil producing states and that is just a fact of history and Iran is served by the idea of sanctions because it gives the illusion of “doing something” while giving Iran the time it needs to enrich uranium.
Joe Donnelly is a member of the House of Representatives in Indiana’s 2nd Congressional District (South Bend) and is running for Senate in Indiana against Republican Dick Mourdock.
In the interests of full disclosure, Joe is my Congressman and I have talked with him a few times.
Joe Donnelly is one of “those” swing district politicians. What do I mean by that? Donnelly plays a very dishonest balancing act of keeping his right foot in Indiana and his far left foot in DC. Joe Donnelly is a reliable vote for the far left on any close vote, but on some big votes where the party leadership knows it has enough to pass what they like, Donnelly will vote ‘No’ so he can come home and tell the South Bend Tribune what an independent conservative Democrat he is; all while ensuring that Pelosi and the Democrat leadership get what they want. The most famous player of this game in Indiana politics is former Congressman Tim Roemer, who of course is also from South Bend.
One of the most famous examples of Roemer’s play of this style of politics was on the 1993 Clinton tax increase and budget. Roemer voted to preserve Clinton’s new taxes and spending increases in the new budget 44 times in votes as the Bill was being amended and debated, but on the final vote, knowing it had enough voted to pass the House, he voted ‘No’ so he could come home and tell the people that the Clinton Budget spent and taxed too much.
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell once said that we need ‘Blue Dogs’ like Donnelly because they help cover what the real socialists are doing.
Indiana has a great deal of medical device manufacturing, Bayer, Miles Labs, and countless others have a long history here. While the 2.3% tax that Donnelly voted for on medical devices might not seem like a lot if you are talking about a device such as a personal blood sugar meter from Bayer, which is made in Donnelly’s home district, on a top of the line MRI Machine that tax translates into a $11,500 tax on every machine. In order to stay competitive with overseas competition cuts will have to be made and often that means outsourcing. While not every medical device costs as much as an MRI, X-Ray machines and defibrillator’s etc still cost tens of thousands of dollars so the 2.3% tax makes the difference between being competitive and non-competitive. While Democrats are still struggling to explain how ObamaCare will make health care cheaper by slapping over 20 new taxes on it, the medical device tax is already costing Indiana much needed jobs:
An Indiana company’s decision to scrap expansion plans due to a looming tax on medical devices has renewed pressure on the Senate to consider a House-passed bill repealing the tax.
House Speaker John Boehner, in a written statement, urged the Senate to take up the bill “as soon as possible.”
Companies in the medical device industry for months have been calling on Congress to strip the provision. Amid the complaints, though, several firms have already taken steps to cut back U.S. investment out of concern for the tax’s impact.
Cook Medical, an Indiana-based medical equipment manufacturer, last week said it’s nixing plans to open five new plants in the next five years — claiming the tax will cost between $15 million and $30 million a year, cutting into money that would otherwise go toward expanding into new facilities in the Midwest.
“Unfortunately, we have had to shelve these expansion plans and look overseas for that,” Allison Giles, vice president for federal affairs with the company, told FoxNews.com. “It’s a huge amount for us.”
UPDATE – Bill Clinton’s pollster agrees with Caddell, the elite media has become a threat to Democracy by not informing the American people – LINK.
Pat Caddell is a familiar name in American politics. He has worked for Democrats in the White House since the 1970’s. He is an old fashioned Democrat and has a record of speaking out against government corruption, so it is no surprise that the current White House (Obama) has him essentially blacklisted.
Pat speaks about how corrupt and bias the Washington Press Corps and the elite media establishment has become. We have been cataloging just a fraction of this bias and corruption, and only a fraction of it is all we can report as the problem is every day and there is no way that we could report it all. As Pat points out that major media figures have been caught more than once coordinating defense of Obama and attacks on Republicans. This is also evidenced by that fact that the only tough interview President Obama had in recent memory was from Univision.
Puppet Media
Pat also speaks of something that is often said by political insiders, he refers to the Democrats as “The Corrupt Party” and the Republicans as “The Stupid Party” (a reference to how they are often politicking and media stupid).
Valerir Jarrett is a Chicago Democrat Party power broker and President Obama’s most trusted advisor. The slum lord side of her business has been known to those active in politics for a long time, but outside of Chicago what is less known is that the Chicago Tax Board of Review, which is headed by Cook County Democrat Chairman Joe Berrios, is essentially ran as a RICO enterprise trading influence and donations for big breaks on property tax assessments. We wrote about this as a part of a larger story on Chicago corruption HERE.
[See the RICO filing against the Chicago BOR HERE. The RICO complaint charges the Commissioners on the Board of Tax Appeals and their staff with extortion and bribery. It states that the Commissioners, powerful members of the Cook County Democratic Party and the Machine, grant tax reductions based upon the campaign contributions made by property tax law firms and lawyers who practice before the Board of Review. Institutionalizing “bribery and quid pro quo as the mandatory means for the adjudication of tax appeals” in Chicago.]
Senior White House adviser and long-time Obama confidant Valerie Jarrett’s role in a number of controversial Chicago housing developments has garnered her investments worth millions of dollars while highlighting the administration’s extensive business ties to presidential donors.
Before joining the Obama administration in 2009, Jarrett was president and chief executive officer of the Habitat Company, a real estate development firm founded by major Democratic donor Daniel Levin. Before that, she served three years as commissioner of the Chicago Department of Planning and Development under Mayor Richard Daley.
She valued the investment at between $1 million and $5 million on her 2011 financial disclosure form, up from $250,001 in 2010. A Jarrett spokesman told the Washington Times that the investment was “a direct result of her 13 years working for Habitat.”
Cook County records show the Kingsbury property is worth around $27.2 million, but thanks to a series of legal appeals beginning in 2003, the land and building are assessed at a much lower value for tax purposes. Since 2008, the property has been designated a “special commercial structure” and is taxed at a value of just $6.8 million, or 25 percent of the actual value.
Asked how such a property could enjoy such a low taxable value, an official with the Cook County Assessor’s Office told the Free Beacon that the property’s owners “must have good attorneys.”
Valerie Jarrett and Barack Obama
In addition to Jarrett’s investment through her former employer, she received deferred compensation of more than $556,000 in January 2009, on top of her $302,000 salary the previous year.
Levin, the firm’s founder, has close ties to the Obama administration and the Democratic Party. Levin and his wife, Fay Hartog Levin, are long-time acquaintances of the president’s, and have personally donated nearly $1 million to Democratic candidates and committees since 1989, including about $25,000 each to Obama.
The Levins each hold personal stakes in the Kingsbury development worth at least $1 million as of 2011.
Jarrett’s involvement in Chicago real estate development between 1992 and 2009 was marred with controversy, much of which centered on Habitat’s role as the sole developer for “family public housing,” a status granted under a district court ruling in 1987.
Under Jarrett’s leadership, Habitat oversaw the development of a number of public housing projects, one of which, in the Cabrini Green neighborhood, was dubbed a “national symbol of urban despair.” Others became so run-down the city had to ask the federal government to intervene.
A 2003 Harvard Law Reviewarticle cited the decline of the Cabrini Green development as an embodiment of the negative consequence associated with the “privatization of public housing.”
“They are rapidly displacing poor people, and these companies are profiting from this displacement,” Matt Ginsberg-Jaeckle of Southside Together Organizing for Power, a Chicago community organization, told the Boston Globe in 2008.
Dinesh Dsouza takes CNN Anchor to school over Obama documentary “2016”.
“If you are not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X
Political Arena 
