By Semperpapa
It is hard to fathom, but it cannot be swept under the proverbial rug any longer: the enemy of America is already inside the gate.
And the Trojan horse trying to bring the country down is represented by a president that is no longer hiding behind cunning and subterfuges, but actually openly and brazenly pursuing multiple policies of defeat for the very principles of our Nation.
Mr. Obama and the progressive leadership of the Democrat Party, are no longer hiding their intentions to radicalized every aspect of the American republic in order to create enough instability that the people will be looking at the government for "salvation". Such move will then guarantee liberal control of the lives of the American people.
For decades, liberals have based their strategy on the enumeration of anything they perceived to be unjust in the American system: from economic to social aspects, the way to gaining control of the hearts and souls of the people has been to point out and emphasize to the maximum, any potential grievance that the masses may have. The adoption of community organizers and union thugs is at the very base of such a policy.
Community organizers, like Mr. Obama, have only one scope: to foment discontent in the common folks and to create a class division between them and the rest of society.
Union leadership is not any difference, pinning the worker against those who are the providers of jobs.
In past moments in history, community organizers and union leaders might have had a reason to exist, a legitimate place in the socio-economic conscience of the American people. Racial, age and gender discrimination created a necessity for some people to stand up and say "enough".
In today's climate, though, the necessity of such activism is all but gone. What is left is the hunger for power that representatives of activism have absolutely no intention to relinquish.
Today's activists are inclined to not only expand upon crisis by blowing them out of proportion, but they go as far as manufacturing the crisis in order to remain relevant to the social discourse in our country.
The names are the same they have been for the last four decades: Al Sharpton, Jessi Jackson, Richard Trumka, Andy Stern.
In the case of the good reverends Sharpton and Jackson, these two gentlemen have been going around the country for decades self-proclaiming to be the leaders of the black population of the United States. While they preached and agitated the black masses against social and economic entities in America in the name of equality, they were actually blackmailing these entities into conceding favors and large sums of money to the reverends in exchange for avoidance of bad public relations. Even large corporations like Honda and Coca Cola have felt the squeeze of the reverends.
And who can blame them. A multi million dollar operation like Coca Cola is very much receptive to the accusations of racism and discrimination. The loss of any percentage of business results in millions of dollars losses for a business in such a competitive arena.
No business can sustain the attack of a determined activist who wants to extort money by alleging discrimination, and that is exactly what these criminal minds bank on.
Large corporations, even as they are maligned so fervently by liberals, they still are able to provide good jobs for thousands and good dividends for their stock holders, and they do so while under pressure from thugs like the good reverends from the outside and the union bosses on the inside. Yes, that is a pure case of the enemy already being inside the gate.
But still the most dangerous example of the proverbial Trojan horse is that of liberal progressive elected politicians and appointed progressive radicals. And the current administration probably holds the record on the subject.
It is not a surprise that the worst radical in this Nation's leadership structure is the man in the White House, President Barak Obama. He is one of those community activists described above. A politician who has never worked a honest day in his life but instead always worked at creating malcontent among those who would pay attention. He has made a career, and a lucrative one at that, in pinning people against each other, all the way to his campaign for the presidency and the shameful campaigning he is currently on for his re-election.
And no, I am not considering shameful that he is campaigning, but rather the fact that he is doing so in very lavish style at the expenses of the American taxpayers who have already been pillaged by his goons. What I also find dishonest and offensive is the way Mr. Obama tries to blow smoke into the eyes of the American people, confident that his lack of personal and political integrity will go unnoticed by all of us the "little people".
Typical is the way he run to Oklahoma to tell the people that the piece of the Keystone pipeline to be constructed in Oklahoma and Texas was one of "his top priorities", just weeks after he had killed the real Keystone pipeline project and the thousands of jobs that came with it.
I don't mind politicians blowing their own horns, as it comes with the territory. Sometime ago, a much wiser man said that "politics is amoral" and that is the very truth.
But it is the blatant lies and distortions that get the best of my patience.
As the legend goes, Ulysses was not alone in the Trojan horse after it was wheeled within the walls of Troy, but the Greek warrior was surrounded by his faithful appointees. And Obama is nothing less.
From characters like Valery Jarret to Holdren, Salazar to Solis to Chu and all the other cabinet secretaries and various czars, the governing reins of the country have been turned over into the hands of probably the most radical leftist bunch of individuals that has ever held power in our country, and the results are tangible.
Every totalitarian regime has its leaders, its elite society and the masses.
The leader is the one who decides who the elite is, via the ruffian behavior of those eager to be part of the elite. The masses are the ones who cower in the proverbial corner and allow the leadership to keep their tyrannical foot on their collective necks.
In the United States we have the Obamas in the leadership role. We have Congress and Washington establishment plus academia, the media and Hollywood as the elite class and than there is the rest of us, the masses.
What it comes down to is what makes America different from other countries: the foundations of our system, via the Constitution, based on the supremacy of the individual versus the political leadership. Unfortunately, the past few years have witnessed the erosion of these very principles thanks to the elitism politicians have been exhibiting.
The attitude has changed drastically from the notion that politicians are there to serve the will of their constituents to the self-serving pandering and undisturbed pursuit of personal gratification, being it for abuse of power and/or great financial gain.
What is left is for the people to take the country back from those who today are actively planning for the total demise of an entire nation. The real tragedy is that America's demise is not just horrible for the American people, but it is also a global tragedy, as the beacon of hope and freedom that America has traditionally been associated with, will also be gone, if we allow Obama to have his way.
During his campaign, Obama boasted that his election was going to radically transform our country, and the American people actually voted for that bewildering notion. There is nothing wrong with the United States that would require a radical transformation. How can a person say they "love" their country and at the same time wanting to "radically change" it?
Yes, the answer lies in the fact that Obama and those ideologically like him, truly despise our country and everything it stands for. While they like and abuse the freedoms America offers, they actively plan for its destruction (not unlike Islamic terror supporters like CAIR).
The enemy is already inside the gate, and it has been for many years already. It has used the very principles they want to eradicate against the people and we are allowing it to happen in the name of peace and non-confrontation. We are just as responsible!
Just my thoughts!
Monday, March 26, 2012
For Sale: America's Safety and Security
By Semperpapa
The safety and security of our country has been for sale for some time, not only by Democrats and liberal progressives in general, but, admittedly, by some of the so called conservative presidents of the recent past.
While the actions of Bill Clinton and especially the anti-America Barak Obama have been blatant and right out there in the open, I still raise an accusatory finger at George W. Bush for the lack of determination in enforcing the illegal immigration issue. Under his watch, the security of our border did not improve, but deteriorated instead.
On the other hand, the current administration is being very forthwith and shamelessly open in creating the necessary environment for voter fraud n the coming November elections. the regime is even using the Dept. of Justice to stop individual states from taking necessary steps to curtail voter fraud.
In South Korea, though, the anti-American attitude of president Obama has reached the international diplomatic arena, as an open mike caught a confident Obama telling Russia president Medvedev that after his re-election he would have more flexibility in surrendering the United States to the will of our great former enemy.
What flexibility is Obama alluding to?
Simply put, after November, Obama is technically not worry about re-election (that is if he cannot find a way to subvert the Constitution even further) so he will not be compelled to pander to moderation , but indeed will be free to do anything he wants in regard to curtail America's ability to deter our enemies.
The only hope, I have stated before, is to insure that the tyranny of the current Obama administration is limited to one, very unfortunate term.
Just my thoughts!
The safety and security of our country has been for sale for some time, not only by Democrats and liberal progressives in general, but, admittedly, by some of the so called conservative presidents of the recent past.
While the actions of Bill Clinton and especially the anti-America Barak Obama have been blatant and right out there in the open, I still raise an accusatory finger at George W. Bush for the lack of determination in enforcing the illegal immigration issue. Under his watch, the security of our border did not improve, but deteriorated instead.
On the other hand, the current administration is being very forthwith and shamelessly open in creating the necessary environment for voter fraud n the coming November elections. the regime is even using the Dept. of Justice to stop individual states from taking necessary steps to curtail voter fraud.
In South Korea, though, the anti-American attitude of president Obama has reached the international diplomatic arena, as an open mike caught a confident Obama telling Russia president Medvedev that after his re-election he would have more flexibility in surrendering the United States to the will of our great former enemy.
What flexibility is Obama alluding to?
Simply put, after November, Obama is technically not worry about re-election (that is if he cannot find a way to subvert the Constitution even further) so he will not be compelled to pander to moderation , but indeed will be free to do anything he wants in regard to curtail America's ability to deter our enemies.
The only hope, I have stated before, is to insure that the tyranny of the current Obama administration is limited to one, very unfortunate term.
Just my thoughts!
Friday, March 9, 2012
Celebrating The Birthday Of The Prophet
By Semperpapa
According to the Christian Post, an imam from Queens, New York is planning on starting a campaign to make April 26 a national holiday.
April 26 happens to be the day the prophet Muhammad is supposed to have been born.
The imam, Mohammad Abdul Qayyoom, the celebration of the birthday of the prophet is one way to have a set celebration for Muslims, as the following of the lunar calendar for holidays like Ramadan, are not set for a specific day.
Qayyoom wants the one day, April 26, to be like Christmas or Valentines Day for all Muslims and folks of other faiths to celebrate.
Well, considering that political correctness has been successful to kill the Christian significance of almost all holidays, one would think that the attempts of Qayyoom will be unsuccessful as the anti-religion folks in America will be surely pushing for the famous separation of church and state.
But I am not certain that the will be the case, as it is possible that organizations like the terrorist supporting CAIR may be able to skew the outcome.
Personally, I welcome the celebration of the birth of a pedophile, blood thirsty false prophet at a national level, because it fits perfectly with the direction the current administration is trying to take the country.
Forget about Jesus Christ, or wishing Merry Christmas or Happy Easter, but on April 26 we will all wish each other "Allah Akbar" and maybe slaughter ourselves some damn Jews.
Just my thoughts!
According to the Christian Post, an imam from Queens, New York is planning on starting a campaign to make April 26 a national holiday.
April 26 happens to be the day the prophet Muhammad is supposed to have been born.
The imam, Mohammad Abdul Qayyoom, the celebration of the birthday of the prophet is one way to have a set celebration for Muslims, as the following of the lunar calendar for holidays like Ramadan, are not set for a specific day.
Qayyoom wants the one day, April 26, to be like Christmas or Valentines Day for all Muslims and folks of other faiths to celebrate.
Well, considering that political correctness has been successful to kill the Christian significance of almost all holidays, one would think that the attempts of Qayyoom will be unsuccessful as the anti-religion folks in America will be surely pushing for the famous separation of church and state.
But I am not certain that the will be the case, as it is possible that organizations like the terrorist supporting CAIR may be able to skew the outcome.
Personally, I welcome the celebration of the birth of a pedophile, blood thirsty false prophet at a national level, because it fits perfectly with the direction the current administration is trying to take the country.
Forget about Jesus Christ, or wishing Merry Christmas or Happy Easter, but on April 26 we will all wish each other "Allah Akbar" and maybe slaughter ourselves some damn Jews.
Just my thoughts!
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Separation Between Liberalism and Conservatism
By Semperpapa
There is a very strong reason for me being Conservative and for my fighting for it: I care deeply for America and for the American people.
What America represents is the last bastion of freedom left in our world. The forces of tyranny are strong and world wide, many openly defying the innate desire people have to be free, while others are masquerading behind what they call democracy, but in effect not much difference within totalitarianism.
The difference is that when a regime takes freedom of action away from the people and places them into the hands of political figures, the result is, unequivocally, abuse of power.
Our Declaration of Independence declares openly that our freedom is given to man by the Creator, as opposed as by man, and the Founding Fathers were convinced that the yearning for liberty and self determination is part of the gift of life given to mankind by God.
Last century, Adolf Hitler elevated himself to the level of deity for the German people and was able to convince them that their sacrifice was needed for his personal enhancement.
Imperial Japan elevated the Emperor to the level of a God, to the point that until the day when Hiroito got on Japanese radio to tell his people the war against the United States was lost and it was time to surrender, his subjects had never heard his voice before.
For Nazi Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union, national guidance and allegiance was remitted to the state and its representatives.
For us Americans the strength of our country is not based on the strength of the government, the power of the President or of Congress, but on the very aspects of our society that our enemies hate the most: freedom and power of the people, given to the people by God. But the genius of the Founding Fathers is that even absence of faith was NOT to be detrimental to one's freedom and prosperity.
I felt this way as I was growing up in Italy and spending all my adult life in the United States only reinforced my beliefs. And reinforced my conservatism.
I believe in a country where liberty of action is at the basis of our very existence, even if sometime the freedom we enjoy is in contrast with my personal beliefs. Case in point is the Westboro Baptist Church and their disgusting protests at Military funerals. I hate what they do, and I deeply despise these miscreants for doing it, but preventing them from expressing their views would allow the government to be able to prevent me and any other American from speaking, should they not agree with my words.
Liberals, instead, believe that the fastest way to "happiness" is through the imposition of their ideology upon everyone else. The amusing part is that liberals are never happy, always geared to force the government to manipulate, infringe and control the people according to each desire.
One of the most excruciatingly painful example of my point is the 2nd Amendment right.
In general cases, we conservatives do not want every person in America to have a gun, as a matter of fact, I personally know many folks who I am happy do not own firearms.
Liberals, instead, they want ALL guns to be banned, totally disregarding the Constitution and my right to be armed.
Some liberals will tell you: "I am a gun owner and I don't want the 2nd Amendment repealed" and I mostly believe them, but the point remains that there are over 22,000 gun laws on the books in America and yet the Left screams for more at every possible turn.
Instead of demanding that the existing laws be applied rigorously, they stand on the side of criminals and want the government to institute even more legislation.
I do have a sense of comfort, though, when I think about the defeat of the Left political agenda and all its representatives: If conservatives win, everyone in America will benefit, they they like it or not; if liberals win, everyone in America will then be miserable, that they like it or not.
So the choice is simple: being as happy as one is willing to work for or being as miserable regardless of how hard you work.
And that's the real separation between liberalism and conservatism.
Just my thoughts!
There is a very strong reason for me being Conservative and for my fighting for it: I care deeply for America and for the American people.
What America represents is the last bastion of freedom left in our world. The forces of tyranny are strong and world wide, many openly defying the innate desire people have to be free, while others are masquerading behind what they call democracy, but in effect not much difference within totalitarianism.
The difference is that when a regime takes freedom of action away from the people and places them into the hands of political figures, the result is, unequivocally, abuse of power.
Our Declaration of Independence declares openly that our freedom is given to man by the Creator, as opposed as by man, and the Founding Fathers were convinced that the yearning for liberty and self determination is part of the gift of life given to mankind by God.
Last century, Adolf Hitler elevated himself to the level of deity for the German people and was able to convince them that their sacrifice was needed for his personal enhancement.
Imperial Japan elevated the Emperor to the level of a God, to the point that until the day when Hiroito got on Japanese radio to tell his people the war against the United States was lost and it was time to surrender, his subjects had never heard his voice before.
For Nazi Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union, national guidance and allegiance was remitted to the state and its representatives.
For us Americans the strength of our country is not based on the strength of the government, the power of the President or of Congress, but on the very aspects of our society that our enemies hate the most: freedom and power of the people, given to the people by God. But the genius of the Founding Fathers is that even absence of faith was NOT to be detrimental to one's freedom and prosperity.
I felt this way as I was growing up in Italy and spending all my adult life in the United States only reinforced my beliefs. And reinforced my conservatism.
I believe in a country where liberty of action is at the basis of our very existence, even if sometime the freedom we enjoy is in contrast with my personal beliefs. Case in point is the Westboro Baptist Church and their disgusting protests at Military funerals. I hate what they do, and I deeply despise these miscreants for doing it, but preventing them from expressing their views would allow the government to be able to prevent me and any other American from speaking, should they not agree with my words.
Liberals, instead, believe that the fastest way to "happiness" is through the imposition of their ideology upon everyone else. The amusing part is that liberals are never happy, always geared to force the government to manipulate, infringe and control the people according to each desire.
One of the most excruciatingly painful example of my point is the 2nd Amendment right.
In general cases, we conservatives do not want every person in America to have a gun, as a matter of fact, I personally know many folks who I am happy do not own firearms.
Liberals, instead, they want ALL guns to be banned, totally disregarding the Constitution and my right to be armed.
Some liberals will tell you: "I am a gun owner and I don't want the 2nd Amendment repealed" and I mostly believe them, but the point remains that there are over 22,000 gun laws on the books in America and yet the Left screams for more at every possible turn.
Instead of demanding that the existing laws be applied rigorously, they stand on the side of criminals and want the government to institute even more legislation.
I do have a sense of comfort, though, when I think about the defeat of the Left political agenda and all its representatives: If conservatives win, everyone in America will benefit, they they like it or not; if liberals win, everyone in America will then be miserable, that they like it or not.
So the choice is simple: being as happy as one is willing to work for or being as miserable regardless of how hard you work.
And that's the real separation between liberalism and conservatism.
Just my thoughts!
When All Else Fails, Re-Write History
By Semperpapa
Obama is having his little presser, first of 2012 and "coincidentally" right on Super Tuesday.
The media will be throwing soft balls at him, as the need to boost their support for the fail administration is as urgent as ever.
So the first question is about Iran and Syria and about what some of the Republican candidates comments have been regarding the lack of coherence the administration has demonstrated on the subject.
So Obama is trying to re-write history. He says that when he came into office, Iran was united in the development of their nuclear weapon program and behind the regime (yes, blaming Bush again), and that thanks to his leadership, the international community is more then ever united against Iran's achievement of nuclear weapons.
Well, how nice to have selective memory, history re-writing ability and a channel distribution like the American mainstream media.
Of course, what Obama is not mentioning is his total and disgusting ineptitude and ignorance of the Iranian popular uprising of Summer 2009.
Not he nor anyone else in the administration had the balls to come out in support of the people of Iran in their struggle for freedom.
Suddenly, Obama's engagement in the issue of Iran is netting all these results, right?
And as far as the international community, Russia is building Iran's missile shield and anti aircraft capability, while China continues to provide Iran with its endless supply of currency in exchange for Iran's oil. Not much of an assistance from those countries in the effort to insure that the region does not witness a nuclear proliferation race.
Similarly, India is still considering participating in the sanctions against the Teheran regime.
All the while, via clowns like Leon Panetta, Obama makes sure that any inside information coming from Israel about any possible military action against Iran is properly leaked to the media (and that is the reasoning behind Israel's position that they do not need to communicate to anyone about their military decisions and their insistence that they must have the ability to defend themselves.
So yes, another chance for Obama to change history, to avoid having to answer for the fail policies of his tenure.
Just my thoughts!
Obama is having his little presser, first of 2012 and "coincidentally" right on Super Tuesday.
The media will be throwing soft balls at him, as the need to boost their support for the fail administration is as urgent as ever.
So the first question is about Iran and Syria and about what some of the Republican candidates comments have been regarding the lack of coherence the administration has demonstrated on the subject.
So Obama is trying to re-write history. He says that when he came into office, Iran was united in the development of their nuclear weapon program and behind the regime (yes, blaming Bush again), and that thanks to his leadership, the international community is more then ever united against Iran's achievement of nuclear weapons.
Well, how nice to have selective memory, history re-writing ability and a channel distribution like the American mainstream media.
Of course, what Obama is not mentioning is his total and disgusting ineptitude and ignorance of the Iranian popular uprising of Summer 2009.
Neda's Death
Not he nor anyone else in the administration had the balls to come out in support of the people of Iran in their struggle for freedom.
Suddenly, Obama's engagement in the issue of Iran is netting all these results, right?
And as far as the international community, Russia is building Iran's missile shield and anti aircraft capability, while China continues to provide Iran with its endless supply of currency in exchange for Iran's oil. Not much of an assistance from those countries in the effort to insure that the region does not witness a nuclear proliferation race.
Similarly, India is still considering participating in the sanctions against the Teheran regime.
All the while, via clowns like Leon Panetta, Obama makes sure that any inside information coming from Israel about any possible military action against Iran is properly leaked to the media (and that is the reasoning behind Israel's position that they do not need to communicate to anyone about their military decisions and their insistence that they must have the ability to defend themselves.
So yes, another chance for Obama to change history, to avoid having to answer for the fail policies of his tenure.
Just my thoughts!
Monday, February 20, 2012
Equality Of Hypocrisy
By Semperpapa
I am continuously stunned by the issue of "equality of income" being brought up by the progressive drones and by the ignorant followers in the media and other liberal enclaves.
What does "equality of income" really mean? Are these fools really believing that there should not be any difference in the retribution that a worker should receive regardless of experience and ability?
It is utterly preposterous to believe that there should not be any difference in income between someone who takes the risk of starting a business, who takes the creativity and personal chance of starting a business and the person they hire?
It is a reality that these individuals who take the chance and build a business based on an idea and a service they believe could make life easier for people and their business profitable, will invest a much greater amount of personal time and finances into the venture. Many of these business owners, ironically, greatly reduce their personal income when the business hits hard times, in favor of maintaining the income of their workers.
And yet, the current regime clearly and skillfully intends to create a divide between the business owner and the very workers. The media calls it class warfare, a very misguided term.
The warfare the current regime and the left in general is fostering in America is clear: American vs. American, based on support for the regime. If you are supportive of the tyrannical policies, you are allowed to prosper, otherwise you are maligned and marked for destruction. All clearly and fundamentally contrary to the Constitution.
But the hypocrisy goes deeper.
Mark Cuban, owner of the NBA team Dallas Maverick is a big time liberal, supporter of Obama.
But as Cuban is the owner of the NBA team, I find it inconsistent to learn that Dirk Nowitzki has a salary of over $19 Millions to increase to over $22M in the 2013/2014 season, but Brandan Wright's salary is barely higher than $900K or Ian Mahinmi's is barely over the $800K.
Can Mr. Cuban tell me why the discrepancy? Could it be that the contribution of Nowitzki to the success of the team is higher than that of any of the other players on the roster?
So why isn't Cuban paying his players the same? He should pay all the players the same salary as Nowitzki, for sake of "income equality".
And the argument could also be made for Mr. Cuban himself. Why is he a millionaire and owner of the team? why does he not share the ownership, and the millions, with all people involved in the Mavericks' organization equally? I am sure that the locker room attendants' salaries are not as high as his profit.
I do not hear Obama calling on the professional sport team owners to equalize the income inside their organizations.
Similarly, I am absolutely positive that when some big name like George Clooney, Mat Damon, Susan Sarandon or Scarlet Johansson are cast for a cinematographic role, their compensation is not equal to that of every other actor in the production. So, what makes Clooney's booking more worthy of a higher pay check than any of the other actors?
Name recognition? Acting abilities? The prospect that having a name like that on the movie marquee would attract more viewers and therefore make more money for the producers?
Yes, yes and definitely yes.
Again, I don't hear Obama accuse Hollywood of income inequality. No call for "fair share" from Obama for Steven Spielberg, Michael Moore or Tom Hanks.
The truth of the matter is that in a truly equal society, the very essence of freedom is only in the opportunities available to every member of it society.
Opportunity is synonym of freedom. The opportunity to work as hard as it is in our capacity to achieve a better level of financial independence possible. Most of all, independence from any form of governmental coercive control of the conditions by which free expression of one's strengths and capabilities are exercised.
Instead, government has become as intrusive as any liberal government in the world. America used to be a beacon of freedom and opportunities for the rest of the world, but the liberal politics of the last 100 years has created the basis of the decline of our principles.
Sure advancements have been achieved. The Civil Rights movement is possibly greatest sample, but, as it happens so often, good advances are taken hostages by those who aim at exploiting other people's suffering in order to maintain personal power and significance (i.e. the revs Al Sharpton and Jessi Jackson).
For the progressive liberal movement, the only equality they have at heart is that of their hypocrisy.
Just my thoughts!
I am continuously stunned by the issue of "equality of income" being brought up by the progressive drones and by the ignorant followers in the media and other liberal enclaves.
What does "equality of income" really mean? Are these fools really believing that there should not be any difference in the retribution that a worker should receive regardless of experience and ability?
It is utterly preposterous to believe that there should not be any difference in income between someone who takes the risk of starting a business, who takes the creativity and personal chance of starting a business and the person they hire?
It is a reality that these individuals who take the chance and build a business based on an idea and a service they believe could make life easier for people and their business profitable, will invest a much greater amount of personal time and finances into the venture. Many of these business owners, ironically, greatly reduce their personal income when the business hits hard times, in favor of maintaining the income of their workers.
And yet, the current regime clearly and skillfully intends to create a divide between the business owner and the very workers. The media calls it class warfare, a very misguided term.
The warfare the current regime and the left in general is fostering in America is clear: American vs. American, based on support for the regime. If you are supportive of the tyrannical policies, you are allowed to prosper, otherwise you are maligned and marked for destruction. All clearly and fundamentally contrary to the Constitution.
But the hypocrisy goes deeper.
Mark Cuban, owner of the NBA team Dallas Maverick is a big time liberal, supporter of Obama.
But as Cuban is the owner of the NBA team, I find it inconsistent to learn that Dirk Nowitzki has a salary of over $19 Millions to increase to over $22M in the 2013/2014 season, but Brandan Wright's salary is barely higher than $900K or Ian Mahinmi's is barely over the $800K.
Can Mr. Cuban tell me why the discrepancy? Could it be that the contribution of Nowitzki to the success of the team is higher than that of any of the other players on the roster?
So why isn't Cuban paying his players the same? He should pay all the players the same salary as Nowitzki, for sake of "income equality".
And the argument could also be made for Mr. Cuban himself. Why is he a millionaire and owner of the team? why does he not share the ownership, and the millions, with all people involved in the Mavericks' organization equally? I am sure that the locker room attendants' salaries are not as high as his profit.
I do not hear Obama calling on the professional sport team owners to equalize the income inside their organizations.
Similarly, I am absolutely positive that when some big name like George Clooney, Mat Damon, Susan Sarandon or Scarlet Johansson are cast for a cinematographic role, their compensation is not equal to that of every other actor in the production. So, what makes Clooney's booking more worthy of a higher pay check than any of the other actors?
Name recognition? Acting abilities? The prospect that having a name like that on the movie marquee would attract more viewers and therefore make more money for the producers?
Yes, yes and definitely yes.
Again, I don't hear Obama accuse Hollywood of income inequality. No call for "fair share" from Obama for Steven Spielberg, Michael Moore or Tom Hanks.
The truth of the matter is that in a truly equal society, the very essence of freedom is only in the opportunities available to every member of it society.
Opportunity is synonym of freedom. The opportunity to work as hard as it is in our capacity to achieve a better level of financial independence possible. Most of all, independence from any form of governmental coercive control of the conditions by which free expression of one's strengths and capabilities are exercised.
Instead, government has become as intrusive as any liberal government in the world. America used to be a beacon of freedom and opportunities for the rest of the world, but the liberal politics of the last 100 years has created the basis of the decline of our principles.
Sure advancements have been achieved. The Civil Rights movement is possibly greatest sample, but, as it happens so often, good advances are taken hostages by those who aim at exploiting other people's suffering in order to maintain personal power and significance (i.e. the revs Al Sharpton and Jessi Jackson).
For the progressive liberal movement, the only equality they have at heart is that of their hypocrisy.
Just my thoughts!
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
No More Star & Stripe, Only White Flag For America
By Semperpapa
The everlasting symbol of the current White House: the white flag!
And no I am not being duplicitous with my words, just observant.
What I am talking about is the sudden announcement yesterday of the decision that Obama wants to reduce the number of American nuclear weapons by 80%.
This move, according to the usual apologists from the regime media like the Associated Press, is just Obama making good of his campaign promises and desires to eliminate, as the American president, nuclear weapons worldwide.
Surely a noble goal to have, together with the lowering of the ocean waters and the elimination of poverty and the coexistence of radical Islam with the West, but seemingly not much more than a utopian bunch of bull crap.
The truth of the matter is that the belief the world is under any circumstance safer today that it was during the Cold War is false. In some respect it is actually more dangerous than that, as the mutual assured destruction policies of deterrence may have no meaning any longer.
For instance, after the fall of the Soviet Union, intellectual knowledge regarding nuclear weapons from America's past foe, has been on sale to the highest bidder. Considering that a lot of the world's wealth has been concentrated in the Middle East and in view of the advancement of radical Islam we are witnessing thanks to the so called Arab Spring, the chance of nuclear weapon technology, or any other weapon of mass destruction technology for that matter, to fall in the hands of radical Islamists is very high.
Ron Paul's indifference to the possibility not withstanding, the ability of radical Islam to have access to such weapons is not something that common sense people can actually embrace. Call me crazy, but a culture that is in love with the mere idea of mass human death and destruction in the name of a pedophile prophet should not be allowed to possess the very tool by which they could easily achieve their bloody scheme.
But Obama is determined to surrender the Nation to the enemies of America without not even a hint at self defense. Why?
I know that the apologist and cult-like followers of Obama will respond that Obama got bin Laden, after all the sole achievement of positive nature from this administration, but considering that the ability to reach Osama was created by George W.'s policies and the actual action was conducted by Navy SEALs, members of the hated US Military, it is really humorous that the liberals place so much upon that sole event to demonstrate Obama's national security "achievements". All the man had to do was say "GO" after having weighed in any potential personal political repercussion from the action.
The reason for the waving of the white flag is the elections of November 2012. Obama is appeasing all the tree-hugging, flowers-in-the-barrel, I-Pad waving hippies of 2012. His action against bin Laden, the use of drones, the failure to close Guantanamo have alienated the lunatic left fringe, even if the destruction of the American economy and the emasculation of the Military has regained Obama some of the much needed support.
What is amusing to me is that Obama could do anything he wants without risking the delivery of votes next November from the fringe of American domestic enemies inspired by the Obama media. No matter what, the unwashed masses of the American Marxist left will vote for the man.
So here we are, cutting our nuclear arsenal by 80%, working to cut the Military budget by $1 trillion, and all the while Iran is marching undisturbed toward nuclear proliferation, North Korea remains an unknown entity with nuclear weapons and the Middle East is on the verge of exploding into an Islamic caliphate with Nuclear Iran as its strong harm, not to mention the Pakistani nuclear arsenal a coup away from being in the hands of al Qaeda.
This is all so reassuring, isn't it? And we have not even mentioned Russia!
But it is all in the plans, the plans of reducing our nation to the level of a third world country, breaking it down financially and culturally so that once at the very bottom of the socio-cultural abyss, progressives will ride in on their horses and save the day, asking ONLY, as a repayment, unlimited power for the foreseeable future.
And even the price of few hundred thousands innocent Americans, especially if from the throngs of those who cling to their Bibles and their guns, is acceptable for the achievement of power.
It was in China for Mao (40~70 million Chinese peasants sacrificed) or for Stalin in the Soviet Union (20~40 million Russian peasants sacrificed), it would be for king Obama and queen Michelle.
Just my thoughts!
The everlasting symbol of the current White House: the white flag!
And no I am not being duplicitous with my words, just observant.
What I am talking about is the sudden announcement yesterday of the decision that Obama wants to reduce the number of American nuclear weapons by 80%.
This move, according to the usual apologists from the regime media like the Associated Press, is just Obama making good of his campaign promises and desires to eliminate, as the American president, nuclear weapons worldwide.
Surely a noble goal to have, together with the lowering of the ocean waters and the elimination of poverty and the coexistence of radical Islam with the West, but seemingly not much more than a utopian bunch of bull crap.
The truth of the matter is that the belief the world is under any circumstance safer today that it was during the Cold War is false. In some respect it is actually more dangerous than that, as the mutual assured destruction policies of deterrence may have no meaning any longer.
For instance, after the fall of the Soviet Union, intellectual knowledge regarding nuclear weapons from America's past foe, has been on sale to the highest bidder. Considering that a lot of the world's wealth has been concentrated in the Middle East and in view of the advancement of radical Islam we are witnessing thanks to the so called Arab Spring, the chance of nuclear weapon technology, or any other weapon of mass destruction technology for that matter, to fall in the hands of radical Islamists is very high.
Ron Paul's indifference to the possibility not withstanding, the ability of radical Islam to have access to such weapons is not something that common sense people can actually embrace. Call me crazy, but a culture that is in love with the mere idea of mass human death and destruction in the name of a pedophile prophet should not be allowed to possess the very tool by which they could easily achieve their bloody scheme.
But Obama is determined to surrender the Nation to the enemies of America without not even a hint at self defense. Why?
I know that the apologist and cult-like followers of Obama will respond that Obama got bin Laden, after all the sole achievement of positive nature from this administration, but considering that the ability to reach Osama was created by George W.'s policies and the actual action was conducted by Navy SEALs, members of the hated US Military, it is really humorous that the liberals place so much upon that sole event to demonstrate Obama's national security "achievements". All the man had to do was say "GO" after having weighed in any potential personal political repercussion from the action.
The reason for the waving of the white flag is the elections of November 2012. Obama is appeasing all the tree-hugging, flowers-in-the-barrel, I-Pad waving hippies of 2012. His action against bin Laden, the use of drones, the failure to close Guantanamo have alienated the lunatic left fringe, even if the destruction of the American economy and the emasculation of the Military has regained Obama some of the much needed support.
What is amusing to me is that Obama could do anything he wants without risking the delivery of votes next November from the fringe of American domestic enemies inspired by the Obama media. No matter what, the unwashed masses of the American Marxist left will vote for the man.
So here we are, cutting our nuclear arsenal by 80%, working to cut the Military budget by $1 trillion, and all the while Iran is marching undisturbed toward nuclear proliferation, North Korea remains an unknown entity with nuclear weapons and the Middle East is on the verge of exploding into an Islamic caliphate with Nuclear Iran as its strong harm, not to mention the Pakistani nuclear arsenal a coup away from being in the hands of al Qaeda.
This is all so reassuring, isn't it? And we have not even mentioned Russia!
But it is all in the plans, the plans of reducing our nation to the level of a third world country, breaking it down financially and culturally so that once at the very bottom of the socio-cultural abyss, progressives will ride in on their horses and save the day, asking ONLY, as a repayment, unlimited power for the foreseeable future.
And even the price of few hundred thousands innocent Americans, especially if from the throngs of those who cling to their Bibles and their guns, is acceptable for the achievement of power.
It was in China for Mao (40~70 million Chinese peasants sacrificed) or for Stalin in the Soviet Union (20~40 million Russian peasants sacrificed), it would be for king Obama and queen Michelle.
Just my thoughts!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
