Conservative Refocus

Barry Secrest

The month of August, politically, was quite telling and, at this writing, we're not even done yet.  However, just as Obama's mentor, Black Liberation Theologist Rev. Eugene Wright, will be singularly remembered for his rather broad denunciations of the US:

'America's chickens are coming home...to roost"

The August 2012 batch of American chickens are from a decidedly different clutch than the ones Rev. Wright was referring to. You see, Americans, over these hot days of August 2012, were treated to what we would euphemistically describe as a Progressive Coronal Mass Ejection, which saw the detritus of fatally flawed Liberal non-think literally straining the Progressives' protective shield that is America's Fourth Estate, our self-important media.

August 1-Revenge of the Super-Bitty

The beginning of the month saw a Mr. Adam Smith, who "was" the rather effeminate CFO of Vante, navigate his sedan into a Chick-Fil-A car line for a gratis cup of ice water.  However, he didn't really want a free cup of ice water on that fateful day of August 1st.  He had, in fact, made a fatefully short-sighted decision with the express purpose of vengefully bullying a very gracious female employee of the company for not "signing off "on gay marriage to his satisfaction.

The young lady was only doing her job at the drive-thru window when she was verbally assailed by Smith and bullied for having the audacity to work there, as seen in the YouTube video.

After the incident, Smith was hysterically jubilant and decided to post the video to YouTube to show off his bravo-male prowess.

Unfortunately for Smith, the video went viral, and here is what befell him after that in an unusual spate of poetic justice:

Vante of Tucson, AZ Regrets Actions of Former CFO

The following was the statement issued by Vante, Smith's employer:

Vante regrets the unfortunate events that transpired yesterday in Tucson between our former CFO/Treasurer Adam Smith and an employee at Chick-fil-A. Effective immediately, Mr. Smith is no longer an employee of our company.

Oops! By the way, Mr. Smith, we hear Chick-Fil-A might be hiring due to a massive and recent uptick in business, just in case you're looking to get right back into that ole' saddle.

Smith later posted an apologetic YouTube disclaimer that still somehow managed to vilify Chick-Fil-A for its holding of an opinion divergent from his own, and yet, the month of August would only get worse from there.

August 5th- Dreams from My Imam

Going largely unreported, Obama would quietly circle around the US Constitution on August the 5th and dramatically change American immigration law by decree, in allowing a path of amnesty for Illegal alien squatters without Congressional approval and against current US law.

The problems with Obama's 'illegal' plan are myriad and diverse, to include being severely unconstitutional. However, the one thing that Americans wanted, before anything is done by government with regard to the illegals, was for the border to be secured, and quite simply,  It Is Not.

Well, so much for bipartisanship.....as November rapidly approaches.

August 7th- Romney the Metastisizing Reaper

The 7 th would see Obama's Alinsky-style campaign switch into overdrive as Obama's Super-pac actually accused his opponent, Mitt Romney, of a woman's cancer death; no joke.

The video was a stunning tribute to Hollywood fiction at its best, as it would later turn out.

The earlier story, from the Obama Super-Pac, laid full blame for the death of the video spokesman's wife, by cancer, at Romney's feet. Bain had closed down the steel mill, the health insurance was lost, forget COBRA laws, and the lady died of cancer as a result.

But that was the fiction.

The real truth, revealed by CNN on that same day, indicates that the steel mill had shut down years earlier, and this man's wife was diagnosed with cancer many years later. In fact, she had her own health insurance through her employer before she was actually diagnosed.

In other words, the lady's cancer was diagnosed AFTER she had left her job, where she had been fully insured, much later, due to an injury. Bain's steel mill had no bearing on the lady's death in any way, which proves that the Obama ad was a complete and totally fabricated lie, bearing no resemblance to the actual truth, much like Obama's entire presidency, quite frankly. The only surprising part of the story was the fact that CNN was the outlet which had uncharacteristically cracked the case.

The other side of this story was  how this particular human being, in the video, could use his wife's death, somehow, only for political gain.

This is what we're up against, here in America....

August 8th-Palin and 'Venus envy'

The Washington Posts', "She The People" writer, Diana Reese pretty much took issue with "everything" about Conservative Sarah Palin in her earlier visit to Missouri . Apparently, if one is "politically of the people" one cannot dress "like the people," was the overall sum of Ross' snarky feminist comments regarding Palin's familiar manner. Reese, who is, apparently, also a  stealth WaPo fashion editor, verbally dressed-down Palin's accessorizing , from her sunglasses all the way down to Sarah's shoes, like any proper feminazi elitist-snob would do.

I suppose it's a granted, after the mainstream media had used enough ink to fill Lake Michigan attacking Palin over these last four years, that any garden variety journalist, to include Reese,  still can't quite fathom how it is that Palin has reached super-celebrity status, especially when Reese states that Palin has reached  worldwide fame "somehow."

Then Reese tried to emphasize her superiority over former Governor Palin with a "groan" because Sarah, as she is often want to do, apparently said words which most typical Beltway Insider females would never say on the podium.

Um...H-E-L-L-O, Where in the world has this chick, Diana Reese, been anyway? Just getting back, perhaps, from an elongated alien abduction?

August 9th- Barry Hears a Boo!

The media was all over this one, like Harry Reid on a budget cut, when Obama began whining over Michelle's not getting paid for being first lady...yeah, no joke:

"...I wanna make sure that when she's working she is getting paid the same as men, I gotta say that First Ladies right now don't, even though that's a tough job!"~BH Obama

Indeed, Mr. President, one supposes that 16 vacations in three years on America's dime should easily be pay enough for the First Lady, should it not?

In fact, whatever happened to Obama's constant yammering over public service in favor of going to work for "some big corporation," anyway? Here, by the way,  is a listing of Michelle Obama's "not being paid like a man" exploits:

First compiled by The Washington Examiner:

-- President's Day 2012, Michelle and the girls go to Aspen to ski.
-- Christmas 2011, the first family goes to Hawaii for an extended vacation.
-- Summer 2011, the family visits Martha's Vineyard, Mass., for the annual beach break.
-- June 2011, the first lady, her mother and daughters travel to South Africa and Botswana.
-- President's Day 2011, the first lady and first daughters travel to Vail to ski.
-- Christmas 2010, the first family goes to Hawaii.
-- August 2010, post-BP oil spill beach trip to Panama City Beach, Fla.
-- August 2010, Obama travels to Chicago alone for a weekend 49th birthday bash (and fundraiser).
-- August 2010, the first lady and daughter Sasha travel to Spain for a mother-daughter vacation.
-- August 2010, the family spends summer vacation in Martha's Vineyard.
-- July 2010, the first family goes to Mount Desert Island, Maine.
-- May 2010, the first family takes a four-day trip to Chicago.
-- March 2010, first lady and daughters spend spring break in New York City.
-- Christmas 2009, the family goes to Hawaii for the winter break.
-- August 2009, everyone heads to Yellowstone National Park and the Grand Canyon for a short vacation.
-- August 2009, the first family takes its first vacation from the White House at Martha's Vineyard.

Amazingly, two of Michelle's vacations alone totalled over $ 800,000 "tax free" dollars

All of this, even while America burns in the fires of a debt severely out of control. So, just exactly how much is enough for El Magnifico? Either way, it's good 'work' if you can get it.....

August 1oth-"The American Bankruptcy and Bailout Non-Recovery Act?"

On the 10th, Obama apparently detoured off teleprompter, once again, to tell the American people that he wanted to emulate his GM success with 'every manufacturer in America.'

Yikes!

“Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry."~BH Obama

So, in an effort to get this straight, Obama wants each American manufacturer to declare bankruptcy, then he wishes to step in and eliminate approximately one-half of all the manufacturers' dealers, laying off hundreds of thousands of workers, and then, during the bankruptcy proceedings, Obama wants to give the manufacturers to the Unions?

But it gets better...

He would then place all of the initial investors at the back of the line, disallowing trillions in investments to go back to the original risk-takers and Capitalists, while having a government stake in every company in America, with the Unions having a considerable stake in each company.

I think we get it: Just another link in Obama's Cloward-Piven chain.

No thanks, Mr. President. Indeed, this is exactly what happened with GM, which still hasn't paid back the billions that the company owes to American taxpayers.

August 12th-Pathological and Proud Of It.... Mostly

Obama's Deputy Campaign Manager, Stephanie Cutter, finally admitted to everyone what we all knew, that the Liberals' Obamacare Plan actually deletes over $ 700 Billion from our Seniors' Medicare coverage. Ironically,  the admission comes after the Democrats had continually terrified the populace for over one complete generation, that the Republicans would be the ones to do it:

However, after lying pathologically over many other issues, we were bewildered at Cutter's complete 180 turnabout, or maybe she simply missed that particular Democrat denial memo.

At any rate, perhaps she decided to turn over a new leaf....she is, in fact, about the first Liberal we've heard to actually admit to what the Democrats were trying to keep secret. Obama and the Dems slashed our seniors' Medicare coverage by $700 billion and then tried to blame Paul Ryan for it "by pushing granny over the cliff."

Ironically, Cutter is the same spokesperson who denied knowing the details behind the supposed victim, Soptic, in the 'Obama blames Romney' cancer ad that caused such an uproar. It was later found out that Cutter had been fully involved in distributing the Soptic propaganda, which has later proven to be completely false.

Conservatives simply love it when our opposition counterparts, the Progressives, hire operatives who consistently fail to recall their earlier lies. Oh, and thanks Stephanie. I had earlier remembered $500 billion in a mnemonic rounding-down exercise; I shall remember the full amount from now on--kudo's to you, my dear.

But you know what's really funny in all of this? Any lie that we could try to make up to counter the Libs' lies would pitifully pale in comparison to the terrible truths that the radical Liberals have subjected us to and then denied over these last three years.

The Obama campaign has proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that the truth about them is far stranger than any fiction we could possibly conceive.

August 14th-Obama's Unchained Malady- 'Joe Biden'

"Gonna Put Ya'll Back in Chains,"  Joe says to a predominantly Black audience in Virginia.

Jilted Joe must be getting a little desperate, or maybe he's just getting even for Obama's offering Hillary the VP slot.

Either way, Biden speaks of the Republicans unchaining Wall Street and the banks, which sounds kind of scary-- well--at least until you look at how miserable our economy has been performing.  However, the truth can often be found in opposite meanings, if one but listens closely.

What Vice-President Biden just admitted was that Obama and the Democrats have euphemistically chained the economic engines of the free world, that being America's Wall Street and the Banks. It's not a surprise to many of us, quite frankly; we knew it.

Then Biden went on to state to that "He [Romney] Gonna Put Ya'll Back in Chains," which was an obvious "southern Black vernacular" allusion to certain Obama constituents within the crowd.

However, the irony didn't escape many of us when we thoughtfully stopped to consider the fact that the Party of Lincoln and Martin Luther King, being the Republican Party, was the operative political power in freeing the slaves from their chains.

In fact, it was that "other party" who largely fought against Lincoln tooth and nail.

However, with Black unemployment at an historical high of over 14%, and with 1 million people on welfare and over 100 million on food stamps, it isn't the Republicans who are puttin' the chains on the American People, it's the party of Obama.

Make no mistake, the economic chains of despair, and ultimate dependence on the state, are no less rigid than those chains placed on men over 150 years ago.

A velveted chain and shackle is no less of a hindrance, despite the fact that it just feels a little more comfortable.

August 16th-The Dynamic Dufus Strikes agin'

So, Biden, this time, actually exhorts a crowd of Virginians that "we can win North Carolina."

Oh, my God, are we being invaded by the Commonwealth of Virginia? Sheez, talk about the swing state from hell.....well, at least it's not South Carolina....

All joking aside, Biden's apparently the type of guy who has to take a refresher course on how to chew food. This video was taken while he was delivering a speech in Virgina. Did you hear the Libs' confusion in the crowd when he said "North Carolina?"

At this point, many had to take out their driver's license in order to verify what state they lived in.

I mean, good heavens! I've heard liberals call him a "gaffe machine," but at this point he is "A Walking Gaff-droid" --last night he even forgot what century he's in.

Well, at least this guy's a poster child for "equal opportunity," based upon the fact that, even if you're dumb as a rock in America, you can still find yourself in the number two position of being Leader of the Free World. Well, at least if you're a card-carrying member in good standing of the Democratic Party.

Oh, wait, ID Cards are racist according to the Democratic Party...well, unless you plan on attending the DNC in Charlotte; can't get in there without an ID.

Bunch of racists!

How much you wanna bet Biden winds up in Charlottesville, Virginia on September 2nd? (With a very confused look on his face...)

August 17th- Obama's Unfunded Man-Date

Obama, in this interview, insists that neither he nor his campaign are trying to divide America, and perhaps even the word 'divide' is a bit 'inaccurate' for our purposes, at least in this case.

In fact, maybe Obama is simply trying to partition America into various sub-groupings in an effort to appeal to only those who largely agree with his Progressive mindset. For instance, regarding those of the same-sex persuasion, Obama did a complete 180 turn-about and decided to embrace their plight rather than to disagree with it, as he had for his initial three years. Gaining their love and acceptance, ironically while setting him at odds with the Black Social Conservatives who voted for Obama.

For the workers, which he touts as working again, Obama has embraced the Unions and sent them scads of cash in order to sweeten their relationship--which worked smashingly right up until the point that his Union funding slowed to a trickle in favor of his own campaign--causing the Unions to recently begin protesting the Democratic Party.

As for his energy efforts, we are all aware of both the solar energy debacles and the Federal government funding Obama placed into his now bankrupt energy companies, who then bundled much of the cash and sent it right back into Obama's coiffures, at a massive profit to both themselves and El Magnifico.

All because.... his campaign needed the funding.

And the Obama regime's 'fixing of the debt' has been one of their cardinal administration efforts, so much so, in fact, that he has fixed the debt at a whopping $16 trillion dollars and rising fast. When challenged on his promise to half the debt back in 2009 and 2010, Obama tells us "it was worse than he thought."

However, his campaign did, indeed, need the funding...but did his campaign need the funding , two years ago, even more than the debt needed fixing then, nevermind now? A silly question to be sure, all things being equal.

In retrospect, Obama may not be trying to divide the country so much as he is trying to completely demolish it in one massive "AA" concerted effort.

But, in order to do that, his campaign still needs to be funded....

August 18th-  Hollow Point Bullets for a Hollow Administration

In Mid-August we began learning of Massive government requisitions of hollow point bullets from agencies as diverse as the Social Security Administration to the National Weather Service. Odd? Nah, probably George Soros just purchased a bullet manufacturer or somethin'--nothing to see here....move along...

Also on the 18th was this gem of a quote from Down home Conservative Spitfire, Hank Williams, Jr at a concert in Iowa:

“We’ve got a Muslim president who hates farming, hates the military, hates the US, and we hate him!”

"The cheers that followed were loud and enthusiastic," according to the Des Moines Register...as well they should be.

August 19th- Rise of the Anti-Christ

Here, stories began emerging about Dissident Christians being crucified right outside of Muslim Brotherhood Leader and Egyptian President Morsi's Government Mansion.

 But, in retrospect, do you remember what the clueless Obama administration stated of the Muslim Brotherhood?

On second thought, maybe they're more cunning than clueless... *Shiver*

August 20th-The Case of the Spitacular Troll

So, a Liberal Obama supporter clearly spits on a Romney fan at a lady's GOP political rally. But did you see this story in the media? Probably not, would be our guess.

But do you, perhaps, remember when a group of Tea Partiers were accused of spitting on black congressional members at the Capitol building? Remember all of the hoopla which peppered the mainstream media for days if not months?

No video proof was ever produced, despite a $ 100,000 reward offering from the late Breitbart, by the way. However, as you can see in the above video, the Romney protestor clearly spits on a woman's face, and for heaven's sake, you can even hear the lady doing it.

So, once again, where is the Mainstream Media on this outrageous conduct?

We checked all the major search engines for an entry on this story from the traditional media, other than Fox, and this is what we came up with.....

Also on the 19th was a stunning report from the AP, that we had been looking for in the Mainstream media and that has still gotten little, if any play.

You see, back in early August a report surfaced that an elderly nun had broken into a highly secure federal installation, the only one of its kind in the US, which stores weapons grade enriched uranium, you know, the stuff the Iranians havn't quite figured out how to make just yet.

It apparently took the MSM nearly a month to get the report out, form the inital incursion. Well, better late than never, as they say. But, has anyone actually pondered the whys of how a severe US security failure of epic significance can take second or even third seat to a wealthy Republican's tax returns?When we initially ran the report of the Federal installation incursion by an elderly nun in early August, few if any within the mainstream media, nor even the Right-wing media, seemingly took notice.

The problem? Highly enriched uranium is difficult to come by and is the essential 'holy grail ingredient' for every terrorist organization's nuclear bomb ambitions. In fact, it's what the Iranians are even now trying to achieve in completing their '12th Imam vision' of a destroyed Israel.

So, why the lag-time? For lack of a better analogy, it's the old "frog in boiling water" routine that has become our way of life, these days, in America; just turn it up slowly and they'll never notice.

August 20th-The Liberal's Hypocritic Oath on Fuel

Listen to the hypocritical Democrats, back during the Bush administration, when gas prices rose precipitously.

In the later information cycle, we were to eventually find that Obama actually wants higher gas prices, in the realm of $10 per gallon, in order to perpetrate his ridiculous pipedream of natural energy that has no current basis in reality. Obama's eventual presidential answer to his own earlier complaints voiced back during his days in the Senate?

Well, that's where it gets really interesting.

In the present day, Obama has:

• Quashed numerous attempts to drill-baby-drill,
• Installed a gulf moratorium that is still partially in place.
• Quashed a pipeline from Canada, helping to free us from our Islamic oil dependence
• Provided billions in loans to a Brazilian oil company for more exploration
• Fomented lawsuits, here at home, against US producers
• Sought increased regulation against fracking, which supplies our massively increasing natural gas reserves.
• largely demolished the coal mining industry in West Virginia  and other areas with EPA regulation.
• He was  held in contempt by a judge in Louisiana for evading an order to lift the moratorium in the gulf

With gasoline approaching the same levels that they were at their worst in Bush's term,  the media and Obama have been largely quiet, with many of them ironically now stating that the President has no control over fuel prices. Obama, in fact, is not really worried about America's fuel prices, just as he is not really interested in America's success.

El Magnifico has other designs for America.

Also on the 20th was the word that 800 lb health insurance gorilla Aetna, absorbed yet another smaller regional health provider called Coventry healthcare.

A $7.3 billion dollar 'Obamacare rooted' transaction that promises to fatally reduce competition, once again, in the already flagging health insurance industry. These incremental reductions will eventually leave America with only a few "too big to fail companies," which, ironically, was one of the reasons for the 2008 US financial system meltdown as it regards the banks, supposedly "required" to be rescued because they were "too big to fail."

Go figure.

August 22nd - And You Call This Global Warming?

Conservative Refocus

By Barry Secrest

The initial story from Reuters didn't really make any sense when the article reported that non-Muslims were fleeing Islamic attackers in India, while placing the blame for the fleeing on the ones who were actually fleeing.

So, why wouldn't the Muslims be the ones fleeing, if indeed they were the ones being attacked, was the obvious question before me.

The headline read:

India: Text message threats, rumors came from Pakistan

Not satisfied with the broken logic, I peered to the story box over to the side in the Reuters panel. The line-up of stories had other news on the event,  so maybe I could understand what was happening a little better if I read further. I clicked on the article that had originated several days earlier.

The headline read as follows:

Thousands flee south Indian city after communal violence

The story, once again, spoke to Muslims being alarmed over the attacks that were occurring; however, once again, those who were fleeing appeared to be non-Muslims. Not only that, the story spoke to over 80 'people' being killed; however, the article failed to state who was being killed in these clashes (I bet I know).  But apparently, Muslims around the world were severely outraged at the attacks.

Well, since when have the purveyors of Islam not been outraged about something or the other, I thought? They kill women, Christians and homosexuals almost as casually as one might squish an insect underfoot, while feigning outrage at their desperate need to perpetrate murder in the first place.

Still mystified, I looked over into the side-panel, once again, hoping that this bread crumb trail of elusive facts would somehow come together and make sense. The next article, seemingly the nexus of the series, ran the following headline:

Fleeing violence, India's displaced face disease, death in camps

Would this article finally be the one that might provide the keystone for this elusive story?

I clicked on the article. The captioned picture showed an elderly, white-bearded Indian man who was quite obviously in distress. He did not appear to be Islamic, although I have no idea exactly how I could somehow tell the one from the other. Perhaps it has something to do with the terror displayed on the subject's face, something with which we are intimately familiar  following 9/11.

But, would this article provide some of the facts that had been missing?

Deeper Meanings

The story began as a news piece seeking to explain why over 400,000 Indians were huddled in camps, while suffering all sorts of diseases and maladies in the ensuing squalor. But here, also, the article began to explain what had been missing.

A clash had initially occurred between Bodo tribespeople and "Muslim settlers" from Bangladesh, which had resulted in the deaths of four Bodo youths. The story went on to indicate that the men who killed the Bodo youth were 'unidentified'; however, if the clashes began between Bodo tribespeople and Muslims,  it shouldn't be very hard to understand exactly who these unidentified men were. They were quite obviously our 'violated Muslim victims.'

Right.

But here, again, wasn't it these Muslim settlers who had fomented the initial attacks, anyway?

The story went on to detail how the Bodo had retaliated against the Muslim invaders and killed several of them for their initial acts of aggression in killing the Bodo youth to start with. However, when we retrace our steps all the way back to the initial story, the details become somewhat more meaningful as the reprefaced meanings take on a truer shape.

The initial story spoke to text messages, which had originated in Islamic Pakistan and had then been cleverly distributed extensively throughout southern India, apparently engineered to cause thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of non-Muslims to flee from the southern areas of India, ostensibly leaving the way clear for the Islamists to move in.

But here, again, the actual story tangled up in all of this required a considerable amount of  'piecing the puzzle together' in order to arrive at what is truly happening in India, and even why.

It's called Islamic Civilization Jihad, and it appears to be the answer to our hanging question of "why," while also appearing to be the root of this new terror causing people to flee from their homes in India. A terror which, not coincidentally, is now happening to one of the few remaining actual democracies in that particular part of the world.

So What Is Civilization Jihad?

Civilization Jihad can be defined as any of  several Muslim methods designed for the  eventual Islamization of a country or nation or  non-Islamic society.  These methods include political penetration, settlement and even the legal incursions of Islamic law or Shariah, into a given legal system by any means necessary, including the insertion of political operatives at high levels of government.

Now, after having understood the missing ingredient of this entire story, as it applies to India, one can begin to also understand how it is that a major media news organization would report a story so severely slanted that it would seek to represent the attackers as the victims and the victims as the attackers.

It is, in fact, happening to the mainstream media as well, with a few editorial strokes of the proverbial pen.

This methodology of Civilization Jihad has obviously been very effective as practiced on the Mainstream Media of the world, since 9/11. Many Conservatives, as well as numerous others across the political spectrum, have been increasingly mystified over the last decade at how the Mainstream Media has serially defended the acts of the militant Islamic extremists, rather than highlighting their acts of extreme violence out into the public eye,  for all to see.

When we see the traditional religions of Protestantism and Catholicism being vilified by the media for some imagined chicanery, while the religion of Islam has been largely portrayed as a victim among western societies, despite all evidence to the contrary, many Americans and Euopeans seem to struggle at coming up with a valid explanation for this, and rightfully so.

And yet the answer to this seeming quandary has been leering at us the entire time and is actually quite simple.

The Islamic Civilization Jihadists have successfully penetrated these Mainstream Media organizations to the point that the actual news and the propangandized versions no longer bear any meaningful resemblance to one another.

Civilization Jihad has, in fact, gained a foothold in the world media organizations and is gaining more influence with every day that passes.

Reuters might want to consider doing a bit of organizational soul-searching, along with not a few other media organizations, regarding how they may have been compromised by this insidious Islamist methodology, while it's not too late.  However, this particular instance of  trying to understand a given story from the mainstream media is but one of many personal efforts, repeated many times over the last several years, especially where islamic extremism is concerned,

By the way, we already have an Islamic press; it's called Al Jazeera, and not coincidentially, it's the Obama Regime's favorite news outlet.

Go figure.

Conservative Refocus

By Barry Secrest

The traffic was about as bad as I can remember it being on any day, and this was in a suburban shopping complex located just outside of Charlotte, NC. Cars were careening around from any and every direction, mid-afternoon on a Saturday, in what normally would have been a lull, as the humid, southern heat of the afternoon finally found its purchase.

But this day was obviously different, as the normal throughways of the parking lot had become a desperately vigorous maze , one which could have competed effectively with the mysterious shrub labyrinth in "The Shining." Still mystified, I suddenly jammed the brakes as a sedan, driven by an elderly kamikaze pilot, shot past, her silvery hair seemingly aflame with the need for speed.

"What in the world," I peevishly wondered; then it dawned on me....it was the annual North Carolina tax free weekend, and the shoppers were going absolutely nuts.

As I pulled the big truck into motion again, a spate of Conservative logic tappped me on the shoulder and bade me to take a closer look at what was truly happening.

Relaxing the tax rate stimulates economic activity into hyper-motion, as consumers naturally use every means at their disposal in order to 'buy more' in periods of lowered tariffs.

But, then, doesn't this go against everything that the White House and the Democratic Party have been telling us?

Indeed, it's true. Only a few weeks earlier, and even throughout the President's term, Obama and his team of economic brainiacs have been proselytizing over how increased taxation will ultimately result in more economic activity for everyone, somehow. But then, if one simply takes the hugely popular tax holidays that many US states annually run, and then looks at the stimulating effects that such holidays generate, we can verifiably see what really stimulates an economy. In fact, some retailers report sales increases of anywhere from 30 to 40%, with most verifying a tangible increase in business.

But what about the entire US economy? Could a relaxation in taxes work to stimulate the economy here, as well?

Almost certainly, is the answer, especially if done in such a way as to maximize US tax revenue; in fact it's worked every time it's been tried. From Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush, each time taxation has been relaxed, not only does the US Treasury begin to magically refill itself again, but economic activity takes off into the stratosphere, as well.

In the above tax revenue chart from the OMB, please take careful note of the years beginning in 2003 and on through 2008. The Bush tax cuts began in 2001 and were completely in place in 2003. From 2003 and onward, one can clearly note a dramatic increase in yearly revenues, right up until 2008 when the financial meltdown occurred. In fact, in the years between 2004 and 2008, annual income revenues actually increased by over a half a trillion dollars.

So, what were the Bush Tax Cuts that everyone keeps talking about, anyway?

These cuts were an effort to update the tax code, both in 2001 and 2003, while stimulating growth by moderately cutting taxes across the board for virtually all income groups. Unfortunately, shortly after the first act was passed in 2001, the US was subjected to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which had a withering effect on the US economy, but only for a time.

The later tax act of 2003 helped to put the US economy back on track, while maintaining unemployment levels at approximately 4% throughout the remainder of Bush's term and until the collapse of 2008. The main problem was the fact that the tax cuts were planned to expire in 2010, which is why the batttle has raged continually between "no new taxes" Conservatives and the "tax everything that moves" Liberals throughout the Obama tenure.

So if the tax cuts were such a wonderful thing, then why did the economy meltdown in 2008?

Easy. It had nothing to do with taxes, but rather, the meltdown had everything to do with the US government insisting on giving loans to people who could ill-afford them, and then the banks compounded the problem by crafting ways to hide, deflect or defer the horrid loan losses that eventually burst the bubble. Government meddling in housing and banking is the penultimate answer to the question of "why."

But then, the next question naturally arises as to why Obama doesn't try cutting taxes in order to stimulate the US economy into moving forward again, rather than dolling out money to big corporations and Unions?

Aside from Obama's cronies and the Left-Wing Capitalists, should the unemployed, those on welfare, and the usual Progressive suspects be the only recipients of the nation's increasingly dwindling largesse?

Unfortunately for America, the President's revolutionary answer to this particular question would be a resounding 'yes,' in that none of the actual taxpayers, according to our radical potentate, are worthy or even deserving of a break. It's simply that the nature of this particular redistributive beast of a President will not undertake to stimulate an economy that he presides over, under the auspices of free market principles. In fact, Obama's sudden acceptance of Capitalism's most basic principles would be like finding a communist manifesto scripted on the backside of the Declaration of Independence by Jefferson; it's simply not going to happen, and certainly not by executive decree, in this case.

But, in order to understand how heavily America is overtaxed, below is a graph of the top five nations and their tax revenue, in terms of populace:

As depicted in the chart, despite an enormous amount of yet remaining wealth, the US is paying a comparatively confiscatory rate of taxation, and Obama only wants that number to be greater, as evidenced by his failing to tackle the problem of outrageous spending, new Obamacare taxes, and his continued demands to levy the wealthy even more than already.

So, then, what is the actual problem regarding the US economy?

The below chart tells the actual story far better than words ever could:

Do you see the thin blue line running across the top of this CBO chart?

That line indicates the actual problem that's raging out of control in America today. The US government's level of spending, or 'expenses,' represented by the this thin blue line, is actually running higher than at any other time in US History. At present, our percentage of expense to GDP is running higher even than in World War II when, at the time, most of our energy and funds went into fighting two tyrannical world powers, both to our west and to our east, who were trying to forcefully take over the world during that time period.

So, who are we fighting now that would justify this level of spending over income?

The obvious answer is both "some few of the people" and the Statists currently running the government, many from both parties, but most from the Democratic party.

Indeed, it seems that many individuals, now-a-days, who desire an income, become depressed when they discover that working is a rather dreadful requirement to that end. Remember also, that instant gratification in the video game age has become the rule for quite a few individuals, rather than the exception.

But what about those who have stated, including the President, that Obama has actually spent less than any other President in history?

The answer to that question is "mere wordplay," coupled with a potent disdain by the President for his own voters. Most of us would visibly shrink from telling our faithful supporters an outright lie, while also demeaning their intelligence. However, as hard as it may be to stomach, the President is simply not being truthful.

Below is a chart that tells the actual story of which President has spent the most over the last decade:

Even if you try to take into account the meltdown of 2008, as anyone can see, the debt levels, along with the increase in debt, is undeniable in the years 2009 and 2010 from this US Treasury chart.

It is an unassailable fact that the US Government under Obama has racked up more debt in a mere four years than all Presidents combined in the history of the United States; it's simply that simple.

Okay, then, if that's true, why is it that we recently heard an argument stating that Obama has actually spent less than any other recent President?

Well, it was a misleading ploy that fell flat on its face when we saw how the data was being manipulated.

To understand, below is the chart of extreme misinformation, which cleverly plays with the actual numbers, in an effort at extreme Statist deceit, to a deafening uproar from those who know better. You see, the below chart only tells you of the percentage increase in spending over the prior year averaged out. Obama's first year as President automatically included the $ 800 billion stimulus. Therefore, each successive Obama year should show a hard decrease from 2009, right?

Wrong, is the answer.

Despite our $ 800 billion stimulus, Obama's spending level still shows an annualized increase in spending, when it should show a massive decrease.

So, initially, you might say, "Wow!" On a percentage basis tied to the previous year, they're right! Obama did spend less on a percentage of increase basis...however, the massive economic stimulus is the budgetary elephant in the room that allows this "percentage of increase lie" to proliferate, while also proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that the stimulus was not a one-time item.

You see, what they are also not telling you is how the budget is figured every year.

Under the baseline budgeting method currently in use by our government, and allow me to repeat this one more time, the supposed one-time stimulus act of 2009 totaling $ 831 billion has been criminally included in each successive budget year thereafter, and no, this is not a joke.

Therefore, any lessening of spending, by the officials in charge of spending, is simply chipping away at the bloated and wasting carcus that is our US budgetary spending level, which includes the 2009 stimulus in each successive year.

Still not clear?

Well, who can blame you. More visual evidence certainly couldn't hurt, since many individuals have trouble conceiving of these large dollar amounts.

Please check out the below chart which measures US spending outlays from year to year; if the stimulus is confirmed as not being there in successive years, we should see a drop of almost 1/3 rd of the total in each successive year's spending following 2009.

no matter

But what about Obama and the Democrats' point about taxing the wealthy, and how they aren't paying their fair share?

In fact, history is replete with the dangers of this sort of behavior, which is one very powerful reason to be cautious of any who would seek to take such an advantage when in a position of leadership.

However, the "real truth," regarding the wealthy and taxes, speaks to the fact that the top 25% of all American earners, or "the wealthy," pay over 86% of America's income tax revenues, according to statistics provided by the IRS. This would mean that, of the total revenues currently being collected in the form of individual income taxes, which are at about $ 900 billion dollars per year, over $ 774 billion comes from those people "who are scolded for not paying their fair share." This also would, therefore, mean that all of the people Obama and the Democrats are attempting to rile up over the so called "wealthy" are only paying about $ 126 billion dollars per year in taxes, if any.

However, it gets even better from there.

In 2008, the bottom 50% of all taxpayers paid only 2.7 % of America's total tax bill, which means that, of the $900 Billion in revenues collected, the bottom half of all taxpayers paid only $24.3 billion dollars. Even better than that? Since 1980, the amount payable by the bottom 50% has been reduced steadily downward each year from a high of 7% to the current rate of 2.7%.

The question would, therefore, become, "could this progressively lessening taxcode be at the heart of America's true deficit reduction and spending problems?" An even better question would be, "why do the Liberals consistently center their arguments on the top end of the bracket when these so-called "wealthy individuals" are the ones who are quite obviously footing the bill for virtually everyone else?"

To illustrate the mistruths that the Left is trying to sell, in 2008, there were approximately 236,883 people who made at least $ 1 million or more. If we were to eliminate the Bush tax cut rates for these millionaires, the increase in revenue to the US government would initially total about $ 40 to to $50 billion more per year after adjustments for debt costs. With a US government that currently spends about $ 420 million per hour, we would easily spend this extra amount of taxation in only about a month or so.

Truthfully, there is no conceivable way that America can actually tax its way into balancing the budget, due simply to the fact that, to merely break even this budget year, officials would have to tax virtually every individual and corporate income taxpayer in America at double the current rates, and that still wouldn't be enough to break even ( $ 1.484 Trillion x 2 = $ 2 .97 Trillion) when we consider that America's government spent about $3.6 trillion in 2011.

All of this, then, leaves us only two viable options that will verifiably work together:

The first option being to massively and innovatingly slash our spending and outlays, and the second being to get government back out of the way, and allow the private sector to do what it does best, in the full and complete exercise of society's right to freely trade.

These are the engines that powered America into an industrialized powerhouse that the world would try to emulate.

However, there is that one other little regarded fact that never seems to see the light of day.

We have heard ad nauseum from the political Left ,over the past score of years, how healthcare costs in the United States are dragging America down and ruining our economy. These costs were what ostensibly resulted in a complete revamping of our health delivery system into the artificial restrictions of Obamacare. But in fact, the cost of America's healthcare system almost exactly rivals one other terribly expensive sector of our total economy.

In 2010, America's total expenditure for our "horridly expensive"  healthcare was about $2.3 trillion dollars. However, and rather ironically, also in 2010, America's total expenditure to its Federal government was about $ 2.38 trillion hard-earned American tax dollars.

And yet, where are the calls for a "complete remake" of our terribly expensive government system, especially from those who insisted on essentially nationalizing our healthcare due to its extreme costs? How is it that Healthcare has been crippling our economy while our even more expensive Federal government,  has somehow not?

Maybe it's high time that America itself, gets a tax holiday of sorts, especially since our ideologically intrepid President's every other effort has failed beyond miserably in getting our economy moving.

The Political Left and their extreme demagoguery, along with their insidious attempts at promoting disingenuous class warfare, have been taken to a whole new level, it would seem, especially when these Statists fail to enumerate even these most simplest of truths:

The more one considers the matter, the clearer it becomes that redistribution is in effect far less a redistribution of free income from the richer to the poorer, as we imagined, than a redistribution of power from the individual to the State~Bertrand de Jouvenel

Conservative Refocus

By Barry Secrest

And we thought it couldn't get any worse four years ago?

It has been a notably odd mixture of both pride and prejudice in all things, as we sentimentally noted the solstice measurably giving way to the equinox of 2012, and the long shadows gathering which signal the seasons of harvest.

However, within this endless seasonal cycle of reaping, certain of the historically inclined also recently read, with alarmed trepidation, a largely unnoticed Aljazeera report that ran shivers up many a spine, some of those being not quite ready for this particular brand of reaping.

You see, the Saudi's, for the first time in modern history, and especially as a US ally, announced plans to hold an Islamic summit of virtually all the Muslim nations in August, 2012. The chief concern to the ruling Saudi elites for this gathering?

"Sedition and fragmentation" were the keywords alluded to in the report, along with a desire to "solidify" the Islamists.

Now, if these descriptive words seem rather innocuous, try looking at the world from our own seemingly peculiar angle, which often provides a certain richness in alternative meanings. The opposite meanings of sedition and fragmentation are "obedience and submission."

But it gets better.

The opposite of fragmentation? Entirety, total, whole. So, what if we take each keyword, within all of this, and derive a more intellectually directed meaning?

"Concern" as used in this multi-national context, points to something to be avoided or done away with; sedition and fragmentation are the elements to be corrected or eradicated, the subsequent vacuum being replaced by a more desired obedience and submission, which just so happens to be two primary elements of Islamic fundamentalism.

The final ingredients are entirety, total and whole, indirectly meaning, in essence, one all-encompassing Islamic world predicated on obedience and submission. Now, where have we heard that before?

Could this, in fact,  actually be the initial cornerstone being laid of a dreaded Islamic Caliphate? If so, what might that mean to the free world? Indeed, this is but one piece of the increasingly resolving puzzle and its rather fatalistic inclinations.  The possibilities to bear in mind regarding the establishment of an Islamic Federation are several. Numerous ancient texts of both Christian and Islamic origins  point to the coming of a central figure who will rise to a position of multi-national leadership and make war on those nations who fail to capitulate.

The Islamic world, in many cases, refers to this figure as the 12th Imam, or Al Madhi, while adherents of Christianity and Judaism call a similiar central figure the Anti-Christ. Either way, many believe that a caliphate is one of the earliest ingredients involved regarding the ascendancy of this mystical figure.

However, the interesting question between these two major world belief systems is: Could these two prophesied leaders, The Anti-Christ and the 12th Imam,  possibly be both one and the same?

Resolving the Connections

So where might we locate the next hidden piece?

Well, how about a recent but concerted, while insulting, failure from the leader of the free western world to recognize the avowed capitol of the Islamic world's greatest and most hated enemy, who also just happens to be our closest Mideast ally. Obama Regime spokesman, Jay Carney made it very plain to the White House pool of reporters that the Obama administration did not recognize Israel's Jerusalem as the Capitol of Israel.

Now, that should make the Islamic world cheer quite loudly....or should that be jeer?

But what exactly does this mean? Essentially, it means our own government-sponsored brand of solidarity appears to be wavering that much more with regard to Israel, for one thing.  So, what other detached elements are there of recent events?

Enter former Presidential candidate, Rep. Michele Bachmann who, on a wholly unconnected note, and among a host of House Conservatives, issued a letter of warning to the State Dept., which was entered into the congressional record, concerning the Muslim Brotherhood and its insider connectivity to the US State Department.

The Enemy Within

"Oh, come on," was the injured and choir-like laugh of the usual inner beltway stalwarts, as the Middle-worlders, along with the Left, vehemently condemned our intrepid Congresswoman . The question of  "Who," within the State Dept. could possibly have a definitive Muslim Brotherhood connection (?)  initially occurred to all of us. Unfortunately, the answer is none other than the very powerful First Lady of US politics herself, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In fact, according to the letter, it was Clinton's chief personal assistant, Huma Abedin, the wife of failed Liberal Militant, Rep. Anthony Weiner, of weinie-wonking fame, who held the direct connection to the Islamic operatives.

Huma Abedin's late father, mother and even brother, each apparently participated in the Islamic practice of "Civilization Jihad," which is a technique designed to destroy a targeted civilization from within. The letter was not at all hazy with regard to the stated outcome of Huma's connections, denoting chiefly:

- A personal intervention by Secretary Clinton on behalf of Muslim Brotherhood leader Tariq Ramadan who is an essential jihadist for the cause of Shariah.

- A series of State Dept. meetings with the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) designed to find ways around the US Constitution's Freedom of Speech. The Islamic technique involved in this machination is called the "Istanbul Processes" according to the letter. In this case, it provides a way around the free speech clause to prevent Blasphemy to Islam and its practitioners.

- Efforts to having the US officially recognize the Muslim Brotherhood as a legitimate political entity rather than a root organization of terrorism.

Bachmann's Conservative Congressional cadre' went on to request a response, which sought an agency-confirmed correction of these unconstitutional practices by our leaders.

In order to learn more about this, we would urge you to read Andrew McCarthy's recent piece in "Ordered Liberty" giving full explanation as to why this is so completely and utterly wrong.

I Will Stand With Them Should the Political Winds Shift in an Ugly Direction~ Barack Obama

But then, unfortunately, the pieces of the puzzle didn't end even there.

There was also a recent admonition, appearing in the media, which concerned Obama's ignominious lack of a visitation to Israel. In fact, despite playing nearly 100 games of golf as President, and traveling the world, bowing copiously to world leader after world leader, the President has yet to visit our closest ally in the Mideast, the nation of Israel.

Oh, but he has and many, many times, stated consistently wrong and very,very, wicked witch of the west, Nancy Pelosi, who practically swore on a Bible, and on video (or was that a Koran?), that Obama had repeatedly visited Israel time and time again, despite the fact that he quite obviously had not.

So, why all of the defensiveness, anyway?

Could this lack of setting foot in the holy land, for Obama, be a part of the disconcerting Islamic-Obama puzzle, one might ask?

This particular fact speaks volumes, not to mention the odd bit of lacking Presidential decorum associated with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's last couple of visits. There is a reason why many suspect the President of being just a wee bit more than sentimental regarding his Islamic fundamentalist roots, as opposed to his espoused, and yet ostensibly lacking, Judeo-Christian values.

So, might anyone still think that the pieces aren't resolving into a definite pattern?

Also, in the hard-to-find news, was this little gem concerning how the Obama White House refused to label as terrorists a Nigerian Cult of Muslim fundamentalists whose chief occupation appears to be the killing of Christians in Africa. The group, who call themselves Boko Haram, which means "western education is evil" primarily kills Christians on behalf of organizing Shariah law in the most populous nation in Africa.

So, a White House that hesitates for not even a moment on scripting DHS bulletins warning one third of America that the other two thirds could be Right-Wing Terrorists, because of their scandalous patriotism, but then later balks at labelling an avowed Christian-hating sect of murderous Islamists as terrorists, should leave more than a few some reasons to begin doubting that the Messianic illusion might now be falling apart.

I think we're slowly beginning to get it, now....

But the irony at play in America, praising Islamification and Shariah, while railing against Judeo-Christian values, only got that much worst, as the Axis Press then took to berating, what might have appeared to some, as a new sect of Christian fundamentalism, apparently only dedicated to consuming vast amounts of chicken, when it came under severe attack.

However, it wasn't the Restaurant that did anything, but rather, it was the Chief Executive officer, by stating the following in an interview:

“Guilty as charged,” when asked about his company’s support of the traditional family unit as opposed to gay marriage. “We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that,” Dan Cathy was quoted as saying.

So, with all of the Islamic love flowing around like the oily smoke from a Hookah, why the militant response to the Chick-Fil-A leader's gay marriage haraam?

And why is the high-quality fast food restaurant, Chick-Fil-A, now ostensibly  known to those swarmingly obnoxious Liberals as the Christian Church of Chick-Fil-A and being pilloried to the point of its spokesman even falling suddenly dead.

Adding to the outrage, the radical Mayors of both Boston and Chicago even euphemistically tied themselves to the tracks of religious freedom, when they began searching for ways to refuse to allow the southern-based Restaurant, dedicated only to the extreme mastication of fricasseed foul and waffle fries, to pass unassailed into their cities.

By the way, could anyone ever forget the Liberals' grand acceptance response to the Ground Zero Mosque, by any chance?

However, in yet another grand piece of the puzzle, we personally found it well beyond ironic, that the same morning Chicago's Mayor Emmanuel, a former Obama Chief of Staff, had forged an alliance with a racist sect of Islamic fundamentalism and Jew-hating Islamists, Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, to actually help Emmanuel defend the streets of Chicago against future thuggery, of all things.

Notable also is the fact that Chick-Fil-A, which is being viciously attacked by the Left for coming out in defense of "Family Values," has been vilified and ostracized, while an anti-Semitic, if not anti-Christian group,  dedicated to radical Islam, is being embraced and asked to actually help the city defend against the ruined inner-city detritus of Liberal collectivism's failure.

But, then the religious persecutionof Chick-Fil-A had become so legion, that the ACLU and the GOP actually joined the fight together in raking the Chicago machine over the coals for their felonious government assault against Judeo-Christian religious freedom.

Should Chick-Fil-A, perhaps, incorporate a Mosque into their marketing scheme, in order to gain acceptability in Liberal strongholds? Well....we already know an evangelical church is definitely out...but in fact, a severe comeuppance to the intolerable Leftists was delivered by millions of concerned Conservatives on August the first. Virtually every Chick-Fil-A across the nation was overwhelmed with concerned Americans in heartfelt support of Chick-Fil-A's stance on traditional American values.

It just doesn't get any better than that, ladies and gentlemen......

All of this, retrospectively, is almost enough to make anyone wonder if the end of days are not rapidly approaching, as good increasingly becomes bad and bad becomes supernaturally good. Oh, and within this grand scheme, let us not forget Obama's war against the Catholic Church in the birth control embroglio and his edict to pay-up or else.

Obama's War On Individual Success

To that end, we did have yet another example of topsy turvy values. You see, there was an additional element of radical political, anti-American extremism, this time concerning Presidential politics. Granted, much has been written by the Conservative Media, and not a few others, on the President's most recent foray into non-teleprompted nincompoopery.

But when I personally heard El Magnifico's enthusiastic utterances in Virginia, along with his laying of a claim to virtually everyone's individual success on behalf of an imaginary, jealous proletariat, rather than being stunned, shocked or even angered as many quite obviously were, a resolute, if not unnatural calm settled over me, along with a feeling of complete justification for the long hours endured in the Battle for America over these past three years.

You see, being an ingloriously web-based "Conservative Zealot," as I was recently labeled, out of Carolina, as counterpoint to those obnoxious Liberals and the media, does have its largely covert advantages, especially in the context of being informed.

But, in fact, Obama's uber-silly Marxist musings were no surprise to any of us, at least not to those of us who have been watching "The one we've been waiting for" very pensively. Oh, many have known and largely understood Obama's collectivist goals from the first few days of his autocratic administration, and even well beyond that. But in Obama's Roanoke campaign speech, he uttered what will probably become some of the most notorious remarks, ever, by a sitting US President.

The President began his Totalitarian Toddy with a draught of class warfare, and then threw in a dash of Marxist ideology: it went partially like this:

"If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own."

Now, at this point, we could see that something very insidiously wicked might be headed our way. And even those few words led me to recall the most basic of age-old retorts as I listened, that being, indeed, "success knows many fathers, but failure is an orphan." So Obama is telling us...what exactly? That our individual success is really not ours? That it belongs to others? That it takes a village, maybe?

But then, Mr. President, who does our success belong to and are we not also responsible for our own personal failures by that same measure? Do we lock perpetrators up for their own law-abiding failures, or do we penalize society as culpable, allowing the perp to walk free?

Granted Obama's penchant for blaming other people, other things, or even other events, both natural and not, are famously well-publicized. But as the President was clearly laying the Nation's individual success at someone else's feet, I hearkened back to the time when Obama had delivered his speech on the killing of Bin Laden and how the personal pronouns flowed like aspartame syrup that night in May, belying virtually everything the President actually stated in Roanoke with regard to individual success.

In fact, here were the terms that Obama uttered, as he described his personal brush with destiny in general, in the demise of Mullah Osama Bin Laden:

I can report

I directed

I was briefed

I met repeatedly

I determined

at my direction

I've made clear

I've repeatedly

I called

I, as Commander-in-Chief

I know

 

So...what's all of this "I" stuff from Mr. " You didn't get there on your own" Obama?

According to the "Messianic Magi's" own apparently budding Bolshevist philosophy, we must point out:

"You didn't do that, somebody else did that, you didn’t get there on your own, Mr. President, you didn't kill Bin Laden."

However, this dichotomy in existentially flawed reasoning by the President probably does speak to that age-old Marxist quandary, "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine." So, here and once again, I think we get it, now.

However, there was another side to this argument.

At this point, many businessowners, both large and small, must have remembered the great and terrible trail of tribulation brought upon each of us over the last four years under the assault of collectivist theory, which economically amounts to the age-old definition of combat, that being "Long periods of boredom accentuated by brief moments of sheer terror." Life has not been easy under the capitalist-despising "Messianic Mangler" and his insane Leftist posse; no, not for any of us, to be sure.

But in his speech, it actually got worse from there, as the words plopped out of Obama's mouth and splattered obscenely upon a fawning audience:

"If you've got a business, you didn't build that, somebody else made that happen."

At this, many surprised and not a few probably struggling businesowners' eyebrows immediately shot-up in furrowed consternation, most uttering the highly colloquial, "Huh?"

No, indeed, and to explain, what Obama was trying to stealthily say was, We the Government and the collective, as a whole, are solely responsible for your success. You see, the whole premise of Obama's diatribe was tied into taxing the wealthy confiscatorially, so that more fictitious "bridges and roads" could be built, while requiring the government to take more from the job creators, so that the Statists could work more of their already terrible wonders on an increasingly suspicious America.

In essence Obama was trying to say that, from Government flows all things, while nothing could be further from the truth. The Government has nothing, you see, before it collects its sustenance from the people. The government doesn't make anything in the private sector "happen" beyond maintaining an environment that allows business and individuals to thrive, but this is purely why nations establish governments, in the first place.

However, if we take Obama's arguments one step further backward, it's the government that derives its consent and authority from the people, not the other way around. We authorize the power centralized within our government, at least we do  in America. We do not consent to be completely and totally controlled by our own government in America, and yet, currently, that's precisely what's happening.

When a government becomes so large and burdensome that it creates economic upheaval and uncertainty, that government has simply become too large and needs to be reined in. Unfortunately, this line of thinking has now become something approaching a sin against Statism, which necessitates the need for confession, however uncontrite, these days.

Regardless, all of this is rather depressingly, where we are in America....where apparently, the entire political left and its leaders are now in support of a radical new philosophy:

"If you build it, we will come...and tell you that you didn't."

 

Facebook Group