Video: Obama’s Terrorist Pal Cheers America’s Death
The Leadership Lie
by Michael Oberndorf
The liars in the Ministry of Propaganda, aka, the “mainstream” media, have long been aware that if you tell a lie often enough, people will come to believe it. Concomitantly, a working premise for them is that a lie is as good as the truth, if you can get people to believe it.
A word these congenital liars constantly use that should immediately raise huge red flags in voters’ minds, when applied to politicians, is “leader.”
For years, the leftist propagandists have pushed the false notion that those elected to
government are our leaders, instead of the public servants the Constitution intended. The fundamental premise that our republic was built upon is that government derives its authority, and only exists, through consent of the governed. Thus, those who physically make up the government – individuals elected, appointed, or hired – are there not to tell us, the citizens, what we must do, but the exact opposite. They are not there to lead us, but to follow our wishes as to what we believe are our best interests, and to act accordingly.
This is not to say that we are to micromanage every issue by voting on a referendum. That is pure democracy, which is really no more than mob rule, and it eventually leads to totalitarian dictatorship. To the contrary, in a republic we are supposed to elect people whom we trust to be intelligent enough to listen to us, their constituents, and then use their judgment as to how best to accomplish our goals. They are intended to act as our representatives.
That government officials are our “leaders” is a leftist, statist, totalitarian concept that assumes all rights are granted by the State. This denies our founding principle that certain rights, codified in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, are granted by God, and cannot – I repeat, cannot – be taken from us by government. Thus, those whom we have given permission to act in our behalf have absolutely no authority to limit our rights, or to create new ones, without our clear and unequivocal consent. They are our servants, not our leaders.
Leaders are common and necessary within the military. An army cannot function if every order is debated and subjected to a vote. Someone needs to be in charge. Leaders, in terms of government, are figures whose orders also must be obeyed. An example would be a military governor, set up under conditions of martial law, such as during Reconstruction. This is the equivalent of a dictator. It is no coincidence that Kim Jong-il, dictator of North Korea makes Koreans call him “Dear Leader.”
The Propaganda Ministry constantly refers to the president as our leader, which he is not. His job is to act in our best interests, within the bounds set by the Constitution. He is not there to dictate how we must behave, what products and services we must purchase. He certainly has no authority to “lead” us by dictating salaries of people working for private companies.
The media say the same thing about our “leaders” in Congress. This is especially true of the Senate, where corrupt arrogance is the rule of the day. Harry Reid epitomizes this, demanding that taxes be raised, despite the fact that raising taxes: a) will likely destroy what is left of our economy; b) will fail to raise anywhere near the revenue needed to begin to reduce the Democrat-created deficit; and most importantly, c) is expressly against the wishes of a large majority of Americans who have made it crystal clear that they are taxed enough already, and want taxes and spending reduced, quickly and drastically.
An excellent way to grasp what our government was meant to be is to go to the Repeal the 17th Amendment website, and read up on what a senator was supposed to do, when they were chosen by the various state legislatures, not by state-wide popular vote. Go also, to the Tenth Amendment website for more insights on who the leaders of our country really are. An educated electorate is America’s most formidable weapon.
We must lead, or we will be misled.
Liberal Media Chicken Littles: ‘The Republican Sky Is Falling!’
In 2010, Speaker Nancy Pelosi stared into the camera with make-up-by-Joker-Products face and proclaimed “Democrats will hold the House” in the upcoming midterms. On November 2nd, the Tea Party helped to deliver us from evil.
The elections of November 2010 went into the history books as a massacre of epic proportions.
It was Little Big Horn, with Democrats playing the part of Custer and his men.
It was Tyson brutally KO’ing Marvis Frasier in a scant thirty seconds.
It was an Iron Chef battle with Bobby Flay squaring off against the guy microwaving burgers at your local McDonald’s.
Read More at American Thinker By Sonny Palermo, American Thinker
Photo Credit: Donkey Hotey Creative Commons
WeinerGate: MSM Ignores Trifecta Of Sex, Politics, And A Rising Political Star
With the exception of Jonathan Allen and Ben Smith of Politico, who both deserve credit for covering the Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) story we broke here at the Bigs on Friday night, the mainstream media’s silence on this objectively important story has been deafening. And now that 24 hours have passed since the story originally broke, there’s simply no way to blame the MSM’s lack of interest on the holiday weekend.
After all, this isn’t just any story. Regardless of how it all eventually breaks, what we have here is either the story of a high profile, recently married New York Congressman who’s seriously considering a Mayoral run in Manhattan, tweeting his “junk” to a young woman two decades his junior — and lying to the media about it. Or we have a story involving a high-profile Congressman’s Facebook and Twitter account being hacked with pornographic pictures.
So ask yourself: how does the MSM justify all but ignoring something so juicy? And then if you’re still not convinced of the story’s newsworthiness, remind yourself that these events are not unfolding in one of those odd, square-shaped states our journalist-class fly over every once in a while. This is a New York story that involves the trifecta of politics, sex, and a rising political star. Furthermore, the icing on the cake is Bill and Hillary Clinton. Last July, in a ceremony officiated by former President Clinton himself, Rep. Weiner married Hillary’s top aide, Huma Abedin.
Now, please don’t bother to answer any of the above questions. They were rhetorical and answered by the “D” after Rep. Weiner’s name. Naturally, the hacking of a Facebook account connected to one of the best known and most outspoken Democrats in Congress is a bonafide story … unless you’re afraid of where that story might lead. And if you’re interested in what a WeinerGate story looks like when a news outlet is terrified afraid of where it might lead, read this.
And while you’re reading that and wondering where all the coverage is, here’s a refresher course in Congressional sex scandals that did manage to dominate the news over the past few years. No doubt you’ll find a few of these names familiar: Larry Craig, David Vitter, John Ensign, Chris Lee, and Mark Foley. To answer your question… Yes, they’re all Republicans.
Read More at Big Government by John Nolte, Big Government
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed States Obama Told Him…he Was Still A Muslim…
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, in which President Obama told him that he was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the stepson of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.
Finally, during the week of 14-18th of January 2010, just on the eve of my winter tour to the US, Rachel picked up a Nile TV broadcast in which Egyptian Foreign Minister Abul Gheit said on the “Round Table Show” that he had had a one on one meeting with Obama who swore to him that he was a Moslem, the son of a Moslem father and step-son of Moslem step-father, that his half-brothers in Kenya were Moslems, and that he was loyal to the Moslem agenda. He asked that the Moslem world show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic American problems (Healthcare), that he would show the Moslem world what he would do with Israel. (more here)
This is according to Israel Today here. Here is the passage from the May 2010 issue of “Israel Today.” It is on page 3 in an article titled “Obama, a ‘Strategic Catastrophe,’” by Aviel Schneider:
The feeling among the Israeli public is that Obama is appeasing the Muslim world at the expense of Israel. “The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim,” said Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit on Nile TV.
That could explain why Obama has instructed that the term “Islamic extremism” no longer be used in official government documents and statements. Furthermore, the US is now accusing Israel of harming American interests in the Middle East. General David Petraeus, the head of US Central Command, said Israel’s intransigence on resolving the conflict with the Palestinians is endangering US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even the US Congress considers Obama’s behavior toward Netanyahu humiliating. Three-quarters of the House of Representatives, 337 of 435 members, signed a bipartisan letter to Clinton expressing “deep concern over recent tension” between the two countries, and demanding that it be smoothed over quickly and in private.
Pro-Obama Media Always Shocked By Bad Economic News
Unexpectedly!
As megablogger Glenn Reynolds, aka Instapundit, has noted with amusement, the word “unexpectedly” or variants thereon keep cropping up in mainstream media stories about the economy.
“New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly climbed,” reported cnbc.com May 25.
“Personal consumption fell,” Business Insider reported the same day, “when it was expected to rise.”
“Durable goods declined 3.6 percent last month,” Reuters reported May 25, “worse than economists’ expectations.”
Read More at Human Events by Michael Barone, Human Events
Video: Swat Team Of Liberal Sheriff Guns Down Marine
A Marine who was fatally shot in his Arizona home earlier this month reportedly never fired upon the SWAT team that fired at him 70 times. Pima County Clarence Dupnik, who blasted Rush Limbaugh for the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords team was responsible. The so-called drug raid, turned up no drugs.
Loading ...
The Huffington Post Gets Punk’d
Despite a newfound reputation as an unbiased news source, an influx of hundreds of millions of dollars, and the new ownership of a massive media conglomerate, The Huffington Post is apparently incapable of fact-checking the articles that appear on its website. An entry posted late this morning on the website attributes an apparently erroneous quotation to Sen. John McCain.
The line comes in a Huffington Post article written by legal scholar Bruce Fein entitled, “McCain Dethrones the Rule of Law.”
This author reported last month that Fein, who wrote the first article of impeachment against Bill Clinton, has drafted articles of impeachment against Barack Obama over the president’s unwise, unauthorized, and unconstitutional military action against Libya. This author is fully supportive of Fein’s goals and actions on this matter.
Unfortunately, it appears an online prank got past him – and The Huffington Post.
Too-Subtle Satire
Fein quotes McCain as saying, “Any [p]resident, Republican or Democrat, should be able to deploy armed forces whenever and wherever he deems necessary.”
This author has written extensively about the president’s usurpation of the Congress’ war-making power, as well as the collective Congressional abdication led by John McCain. After reading Fein’s article, I started to include the quotation in a short post on the topic. However, I could find no authentication for it anywhere.
It appears to have originated on the website of the Arizona Sunlight, which bills itself as “the home of John Semmens’ semi-news, a satirical review of the events shaping our nation and the world.” The original source of the words is a May 21 post entitled, “Wrangling Over the War Powers Act.”
Immediately before the McCain “quotations,” Semmens attributed a number of humorous, fictitious quotations to Sen. Carl Levin, D-MI. “The War Powers Act was passed in 1973 by a Democratic Congress to protect the country from being dragged into an unnecessary war by a Republican President,” Semmens has Levin declare. “Its attempted use by Republicans to try to tie the hands of President Obama is politics at its worst.”
Someone reposted Semmens’ satire on FreeRepublic.com, where not all of the readers got the joke. It likely passed from there to Fein.
The Rest of the Article is Fein
All the remaining quotations in Fein’s article – from James Madison, James Wilson, Thomas Paine, Abraham Lincoln, Justice Robert Jackson, and John Bassett Moore – are authentic. The Founding Fathers vested the decision to go to war solely in the hands of the legislative branch.
Unfortunately, all the remaining quotations of Senator McCain are authentic, as well.
McCain did, indeed, say: “No president has ever recognized the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, and neither do I. So, I don’t feel bound by any deadline.”
In a 1994 debate over the presidential use of military force, McCain said if the president unilaterally initiates a war Congress has no “right to declare peace,” because “the president of the United States is given the responsibility, the most grave responsibility of sending into harm’s way our greatest national treasure, our young men and women.”[1]
McCain’s blasé indifference to the Constitution, or the law, simply made the satirical quip seem all-too-believable.
Impeachment or Indifference?
If McCain never uttered the exact words in question, he has supported the concept of unlimited, unilateral war-by-decree. The 2008 Republican presidential candidate has told news outlets Barack Obama has the unquestioned authority to send troops into Libya without congressional approval. In his 1994 debate, he stated, “[A]t no time during those [Cold War] years would I have contemplated prohibiting the president of the United States from military actions any place in the world.”
If that does not excuse the misquotation, at least it makes it more understandable. It also renders Fein’s analysis of McCain accurate despite it.
If McCain finds these matters mundane, the law could not be more insistent.
Barack Obama sent U.S. troops to Libya while the Congress was in recess, without prior approval. He has since extended this war beyond the 60-day period provided by the most liberal reading of the War Powers Resolution.
George F. Will recently told Laura Ingraham that Barack Obama is “traducing” the law. Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman accused Obama of “shredding the Constitution,” saying his action “defiantly violates the law.”
Republicans Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, Walter Jones, John Cornyn, and Richard Lugar, among others, have been critical of the president’s policy. So, too, have Democrats like Dennis Kucinich, Jim Webb, Barbara Lee, and Maxine Waters.
On the other hand most Democrats and such Republicans as John McCain, John Thune, and Mark Kirk have defended Obama. Others, including blogger Pamela Geller, have been hopelessly contradictory about American policy toward Libya.
Congress has chosen to take no action over the matter. Senators Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, as well as House Speaker John Boehner, have chosen inaction in the face of intransigence.
However, the House passed two amendments last week, authored by Republican Scott Garrett of New Jersey and Democrat John Conyers of Michigan respectively, stating that the National Defense Authorization Act does not authorize the war in Libya and prohibiting the use of U.S. ground troops in the conflict.
As Obama promises “no let-up” against Muammar Qaddafi, Congress is moving toward a vote against any authorization of the war at all.
This unprecedented state of affairs demands redress. Fein could not have been more correct about the bulk of his article.
Is There an Editor in the House?
I learned during my many years as a Managing Editor that scrupulous authors, including first-rate scholars, make honest mistakes. Dealing with various subordinates (and not infrequently, superiors), I emphasized that editing requires more than cut-and-pasting articles as they arrive in one’s inbox; they must be, well, edited, as well as fact-checked, before they appear under the publication’s masthead. Witnessing deadline-driven errors and editorial laziness firsthand makes it easier to spot in other publications.
One would think it would be harder to find in a multi-million-dollar venture like The Huffington Post.
Then again, many of those millions come from the denizens of the Shadow Party. In March 2009, The Huffington Post received a $1.75 million grant to begin an Investigative Fund from George LaMarche, a member of Democracy Alliance – another funnel of Soros’ mega-bucks into politics. According to Dan Gainor of the Media Research Center, HuffPo’s “investigations merged with the possibly even more left-wing Center for Public Integrity, on whose board Arianna Huffington sits.” CPI received $651,650 from George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) in 2009.
Gainor recently published a comprehensive study exposing Soros’ contributions to at least 30 mainstream media outlets.
In February, Arianna Huffington sold her website to AOL for $315 million.
Somehow this influx of money could not assure one article was adequately verified before being posted.
Once again, a citizen journalist has fact-checked the “mainstream media” and found it in error. Wise readers would bypass the mainstream altogether and begin by reading this website instead.
ENDNOTES:
1. This took place during debate over an amendment introduced by Sen. Arlen Specter, then a Republican senator from Pennsylvania, banning Bill Clinton from sending troops to Haiti without congressional authorization. (It was defeated on August 5, 1994, by a 63-31 vote.) McCain’s words appear in 140 Congressional Record, 1994, 190809.