The Establishment Republicans are only now beginning to see what we "Radical Conservatives" (sic) have been saying all along. Obama and the Socialist-Democrats are seeking a fundamental transformation of America, and their plans do not include the Constitutionally inclined Republican Party.
The Moderates dawdle and fret over the media's "not liking" them, when in fact, they never will. In truth, whenever Boehner and the Moderates do give in, the left-wing media laughs and calls it a "cave," when they of the Right don't give in, that same media complains and calls it "gridlock."
The Republicans, moreover, should only then do what is both responsible and in America and Liberty's best interests, and let the chips fall where they may.
This is how the Republicans won in 2010.....it can happen again
By Barry Secrest
Climate change, anyone?
While the Left-Wing of American politics and its fearless leader, greedily salivate over the mountains of public payola that could potentially be had from an illusory temperature change's fictionally altering the earth's climate, there is another climate change taking place in the US, and this one is far more real and far more dangerous than anyone could ever evaluate with a climate researcher's slide-rule.
This danger belongs solely to the media mistruths of today, which seek to bend fiction into plausible fact, and which have now become as profligate as the stars in the nighttime sky, in America.
Oh, indeed, they were always there, but before, more or less clumped in various areas only. Now, However, these areas of infection within America's fourth Estate, have come together to reveal something more akin to a grotesquely animated rotting corpse than any healthy body of journalism.
No Bias, in the mainstream media, Ladies and Gentlemen?
This, from none other than the political news director of one of the big three news networks in America, who now brazenly urges the political Left to essentially annihilate those who would offer plausible opposition to Obama's grand game plan. They, it would seem, who no longer even try to camouflage themselves, in fact, as it has now become almost business as usual for the media to bend knee in fawning fealty and theatrical submission to El Magnifico's greatness.
Indeed, what had begun as what CBS Insider journalist Bernard Goldberg referred to as "A Slobbering Love Affair" in his 2009 book, concerning the Media's soft-gloved approach to all things Obama, has now devolved even further than that rather aptly described metaphor. After watching only a few moments of the President's 2012 inauguration ceremony, it became painfully clear that the "slobbering love affair" was gone, but only to be replaced by a media reduced to being nothing much more than a pathetically sadistic "cuckold" for the President's public amusement.
In fact, America's Obama-modulated Ministry of Misinformation, that being the new mainstream media, has literally now taken on what could only be described as a 'novel approach' to reporting the news in far too many cases, in order to please his Immenseness. Within this new paradigm of perfidy, with so many news items being either misinterpreted and or novelized in favor of the ruling political class and their impetus, many of us have begun to wonder why those others in the media still even doggedly toil at effecting any sort of allusion towards political centrality.
Are the novella fictions or facile illusions roiling out of the Inner Beltway like the foul product of a malfunctioning bowel, still just not quite enough to keep Americans politically entertained, if not satisfied?
(esp. of a theory or argument) Appearing neat and comprehensive by ignoring the complexities of an issue; superficial.
(of a person) Having a superficial or simplistic knowledge or approach.
Even the inimitable Rush Limbaugh, the titular head of American Conservatism, has now taken to reportingentertainment news segueways, in the course of his daily programming, largely out of a sort of fascinated satirical despair, if nothing else, on his part.
But, it should be further noted, only in Limbaugh's souring view of the exasperatingly low-info miscreants of anti-progress, who find their de-signatured way of life exemplified by the antics of the plastic class in either Hollywood, New York or especially DC, these days.
A Novel Approach to Propaganda
This novel approach for the media is, in fact, based upon the same type of script that a number of fiction novelists use to make their fabled stories both uniquely believable on the one hand while seemingly brilliant studies in plausibility, on the other.
To explain just a bit further, the author or news writer, in this case, will first work out a sequence of events or political points in the form of a timeline, in effect, manufacturing a desired outcome in which the maximum amount of fascinating input can either be achieved or re-edited, in between an amalgam of literary waypoints, much the same as the mortar used between bricks. These customized articles then work as a sort of yellow brick road designed to lead the adoring reader down into the dreamland of an Oz-like construct that bears no actual resemblance to the world in which we actually live.
For example. totalitarian madman Adolph Hitler in his book, Mein Kamph, learned how to use these same types of techniques to a devastatingly debilitating effect on the populace in his efforts at taking over Germany, and later Europe, via a uniquely customized propaganda, or audaciously sodomized facts, take your adulterated pick.
The following are several major points, taken directly from the book, Mein Kamph, which have apparently become the media equivalent of Journalism 101, towards our rather pathetic excuses for American journalists of today:
"Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people."
Ex: Obama's war on women, war on wealthy, racial warfare, class warfare, war on business, banks, Doctors, etc., each identifying and exemplifying a villain to which blame can be either attached or ascribed. A thing that the media has gleefully participated in ad nauseum, over the last decade.
"All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed"
Ex: Fiscal Cliff debate, debt ceiling debate, gun control debate, balancing the budget, etc., many of which required the trotting out of either hurt children (23 executive gun control orders), hurt women (Sandra Fluke), or hurt from the wealthy (Romney responsible for woman's death) etc., et al, each of which put the media into a cuckolded swoon.
"The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses."
Ex: They gonna put ya'll back in chains (V.P. Biden) You didn't build that (Obama) Balancing the budget on the backs of the middleclass (Obama) Forward, The Transformation of America, Yes We can, Change We Can Believe in, etc., all of which have been joyfully proliferated throughout most of the US media, sans few if any critical questions.
"The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another"
Ex: Obama's nationalization of healthcare, the budget deficit battles, abortion, gay marriage, gun control, battle against oil, green campaign, climate change, etc., each rooted in an appeal to individual security rather than liberty, a word you will rarely hear Obama use. Yet a thing that the media seems to have thrown in the refuse pile of useless ideological terms.
"The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood. "
In effect and in this case, Hitler exemplifies the main difference between Liberalism, a form of kneejerk reactionism or hysterical emotionalism, to virtually everything; and it's opposition of Conservatism, that which seeks change on a historically inclined basis; slowly and carefully, constitutionally, while avoiding meddlesome, de-stabilizing change, which can often have disastrous, if not unseen, effects.
Just Another Brick in the Wall
As the wall of the novel or news article is laid, this mortar of warped facts being deposited in between the waypoints, works to harden if not fortify the fictional conclusions which the writer has largely manufactured or twisted into shape in the first place. The writer, therefore, manufactures a more or less suitable ending to his or her inscrutable premise by way of artifice, in meeting the political ends of his or her preferred party in power, that always being the Left-Wing Democrats, and as befits the MSM of today.
These new-news articles become, in effect, short stories or mini-novels, a tactical sort of public dysplasia, which the military would metaphorically refer to as "Fire-For-Effect":
By the time the various sequence of events are realized by the reader, the artifice evidenced along the way will naturally appear summarily brilliant to any garden variety reader. The writer has, in effect, successfully built in his or her own form of euphemistic time travel between artfully manufactured waypoints, in a written uni-verse that they have in fact , fictiously created, in the first place.
But, then, where are the latest examples of our fact-twisting media-fictions?
Here are just a few of the latest examples:
The Fiscal Cliff Debase
Singular in the news of late, and after the Government's ostensibly making most of those horrid Bush tax-cuts the new law of the land. There was also a simultaneous increase in taxes both on the rich and to a very smallish 80% of all Americans. Those Americans, by the way, who were also repeatedly promised "not another dime in new taxes" by the previous term's Obama, nevermind Obamacare's built-in tax increases.
The main lie of the media in evidence on the Bush tax-cut extensions aka the Fiscal Cliff?
The mere fact that Congressional Republicans were simply trying to renew the very same existing tax rates and keep them wholly in place. It was Obama who held up the process by insisting on the addition of a tax increase for those he deemed weren't paying their fair share. While the media and Obama continually referred to the existing tax paradigm as "new cuts, or Bust tax-cuts," they were actually nothing more than a continuance of the same rates in effect for the prior decade.
It's just, very simply put-- that simple--despite the often vast and circuitous media sojourns exhibited to the otherwise. So, who was actually holding America hostage, as Obama put it?
The Debt Ceiling Non-Debate
As the grandiose fiscal cliff debate was bandied about and settled, a new argument began percolating, even before the old one had left off.
In response to the peals of outrage from the media over Congress and their penchant for constantly not giving into the President, at least not in the earliest of stages, here was Obama's Congressional stance as a member of Congress in 2008, on the debt ceiling debate:
The following, in severe alliterative contrast, was Obama's 2012 quote on the debt ceiling as President:
My, my, how "the truth" can change in the same set of circumstances, but only a few years, and votes, later.
This argument, the dreaded debt ceiling altercation, is apparently not an actual ceiling but rather a spastic canvas tarp or perhaps even an attractive multi-transitionaldrape which can easily be elevated and or reset whenever all of those who've spent the People's funding have reached their temporary credit limit. This, as opposed to an earlier law created by this same governing body, capping government debt with the supposed- to-be-difficult to move actual debt ceiling that really does not exist, at all.
When the next to last debate over the Debt Tarp Limit was concluded, The Budget Control Act of August 2011 set forth a number of things that would happen in the future, ostensibly now, if spending cuts could not be agreed upon.
In the agreement, which will be detailed in short here, the Republican Party had partially given into Obama and the Democrats by raising the debt limit by $1.2 trillion immediately then, but by also cutting spending by $ 1.2 trillion over ten years. This would mean a cut of only about $ 120 billion per year. A veritable drop in the bucket when the US is over-spending its revenues by swell over $ 1.2 trillion per year, at present.
Same budget gimmick, different budget day, however, the media and El Presidente' act as if they have essentially stripped the budget completely.
Regardless, in each of these arguments, the media has come down strongly on the side of the Democrats and Obama, as is usual, whereas in the 2008 debate and during the "spend-crazy" Bush Presidency, this same media could be heard to be clearly enunciating their heightened displeasure within the camp of Democrats arguing against any sort of debt tarp-ceiling increase.
Sequestration: Not to be confused with Self-Castration
The sequestration cuts, which are now required (but could have been avoided had an agreement been reached by mid-December of 2011), set forth a number of mandatory spending cuts that would be automatic if Congress granted any increase in the debt limit thereafter without making any cuts. These cuts would be applied to any and every program except Medicaid, Social Security, civil and military pay and veterans.
The cuts would be set at the baseline of 2011 spending levels, meaning an annual increase of 3% plus inflation, for all future years, beginning in 2012, of course. The only way to avoid these cuts would be for either a Constitutional balanced budget amendment to be sent to the states or spending being reduced by a greater amount than the debt limit is increased.
So, what's the point of all of these technical details? Well.... that's where it gets really interesting.
First of all, in order to explain how the media acted in concert with the administration, we will need to look back at the events of August 2011, when the initial agreement had been hammered out. As the Republicans tried to feverishly work out a deal with an administration that could never actually reveal its true aims, the media and beltway politicos began retching violently over the fact that the Conservatives were trying to limit Obama's outrageous spending levels in the first place.
The media continually complained about gridlock and Republican intransigence in virtually every story that came out. No fault, from the Media's novel approach, was ever ascribed towards Obama or the Liberals over not passing a budget in over 3 years, or their hyper-incredible penchant for borrowing and spending. This, despite the fact that America's debt had now surpassed its Gross domestic Product for the first time since WW2. In fact, as the whiney pitch from the Liberals grew louder and louder, the Low-info public tuned in without really understanding the ramifications of what Obama and the Democrats were trying to do.
The media, which has always despised the Tea Party, then set up a bizarre paradigm of perfidy by blaming the fiscally Conservative Tea Party for the entire gridlock episode. In fact, a book was actually written about the entire debacle by Watergate star Reporter Bob Woodward, who laid the blame for the failure, not on the Tea Party, but rather squarely at the President's feet, for essentially moving the goal line at near-agreement by a $ 400 million tax increase, out of fear of his base, and essentially killing the deal altogether.
Oh, that would the Republican Party respect its base even half as much...
But the incredible nonsense didn't stop there. In fact, it would only get worse as one of greatest mistruths of 2011 would finally be laid to rest with little if any notice by the hyper-sycophantic media.
America Loses AAA Bond Rating: Tea Party Blamed
When America lost its AAA bond rating over an admittedly obscene amount of US government spending on August 5th of 2011, the normal response that might have been routinely expected would have been one of concentrated zeal, if not pragmiticized prognosticating, over how it was time for Obama to get serious about a severely reckless US penchant for unparalleled deficit spending. However, rather than the media and the Executive branch's calling emergency legislative meetings over how best to tackle this not-so-difficult problem, the media apparatchiks and the Regime decided on an entirely original, if not outrageous, solution to the problem and the propaganda machine jerked Forward into motion.
You see, Standard and Poors, is a highly respected market analysis company. According to the US Media line, S&P was said not to have based the ratings draw-down due to America's stupendous debt level. Oh no, the problem was, in fact, the Republican Tea Party's efforts at trying to both hold and contain the damaging debt by effectively reducing it and saving America's bond rating. So, in essence, the Tea Party, which had been elected largely to fix the deficit problem, was blamed and crucified by the media and Obama's minions, for their very act of trying to actually correct the problem, in the first place.
Inner Beltway Heresy
Say what? You might inquire? Oh yes, to be certain, that was the supplanted argument going forward. However, there's a really, really super-problem, in this particular argument. To explain, ratings agencies such as Standard and Poor and virtually all others, do not base their ratings on political arguments nor disagreements nor anything like any sort of emotionalized political responses. Quite the opposite, those issues are subjective and cannot be measured on any sort of statistical analysis accounting model:
A top political adviser to President Barack Obama blamed the downgrade of the U.S. credit rating on tea party Republicans, whom he said were unwilling to compromise on how to reduce the federal debt.
Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod told CBS' Face The Nation on Sunday that the decision by the Standard & Poor's credit agency to downgrade the U.S. was strongly influenced by weeks of standoff between Democrats and Republicans over the debt.
Mr Axelrod called the action 'a tea party downgrade' and says it's clearly on the backs of lawmakers who were willing to see the country default to get their way.
Mr Axelrod also criticised Republican presidential candidates for not speaking up in favour of compromise
In a word, it would be virtually impossible to base any sort of rating on the politics of any given situation. Just as in the case of the CBO, ratings can only be based on the cold, hard numbers and the prevailing trend going forward. However, shortly thereafter the Standard and Poor's chief executive, John Chambers, on August 9, stated this:
“We think the debacle over raising the debt ceiling is one illustration of that,” John Chambers, head of S&P’s debt rating committee, said Monday. He said the political gridlock and S&P’s analysis of a rising U.S. debt burden in coming years prompted the downgrade.
It should be noted, however, that this was onlyafter the Italian government raided S&P's offices and even threatened to raid S&P's NY offices, only a day after S&P's US decision:
Are there any true coincidences or did the US bully a ratings organization through one of its lackies?
The Tea Party, by the way, has never fully recovered from this media propaganda effort. However, this particular lie would propogate itself remarkably well, as the various pundits and news stories would continually replay the fiction well into Obama's re-election, and right up until now.
On December 19, 2012, the following story by the Associated Press would appear to very little fanfare, almost as an afterthought, but it would also completely negate the political Left and the media's entire argument on why the AAA bond rating was reduced in just a few short paragraphs:
But the credit ratings agency said in a report Wednesday that if lawmakers can agree on a deficit-cutting plan, the U.S. would likely keep its “AAA” debt rating. Fitch would then raise its outlook to stable from negative.
“Resolution of the fiscal cliff and an increase in the debt ceiling are pressing issues that the President and Congress must address if the U.S. is to avoid a fiscal and economic crisis,” the report said.
So, there you have it, one of the greatest political lies ever told rendered completely baseless, after the initial firestorm had already done the damage, by this rating agency's stance to also lower the US debt ratings, based solely on the deficit and budgetary numbers.
As a proverbial cherry-on-top and as this article was under final edit, one other thing would occur, and it was this quote from President Obama on January 27, 2013:
So, here we have the leader of the free world, once again, spotlighting and vilifying both a news organization and a member of the high-profile opposition, in Limbaugh, using the Saul Alinksy playbook, due solely to their reporting of facts which have often proved damaging to his ulterior agenda.
Where, Ladies and Gentlemen, are the rest of the media in the President's critique, with regard to journalism's primary function of holding power to account? This is the actual climate change that's truly occurring in America and it is far more dangerous than the illusory environmental climate change being spouted by either the Obama Regime or the Left-Wing media and its educational apparatchiks.
All of these points are but the self-evident truths at work today, in America.
Interestingly enough, the President also started out his first term attacking Rush Limbaugh, only two weeks after his inauguration speech, in 2009, almost to the day of this most recent attack, as outlined in our book "A Perfect Liberal Storm" (Page 15)
Indeed, if the social security number was issued in Connecticut, then it ostensibly would have had to have been recycled, correct?
The fact that this particular individual, born in 1890 and verified through the 1940 census, actually lived in the same home and address as Obama, is mere happenstance at best. The additional fact that Obama later took the man's name, before resuming his birth name, after changing from his second name of Barry Soetoro, is also pure happenstance and should bear no further critical rumination.
The linkage between the alias of the newly found name and Michelle Obama, indicating a documentation trail linking Obama's wife to this individual, can merely be chalked up to a bureaucratic mistake in which a perfect storm of errors came together, all at once, linking the long expired individual to both of the Obama's --and at the same documental juncture.
All of this, even while the recycled SSN number went to the same and later occupant of the exact same residence out of millions of alternative re-assignment possibilities. Similar, in fact, to the frequently experienced instances of getting struck by lightning, bitten by a shark, and winning the lottery all at the same time.....while swimming in Lake Michigan.
Amazingly, the White House has responded to a national non-problem with a workable non-solution, concerning a petition which was sent to the "We The People" petition website run by the President's staff.
The petition urged the following:
We petition the obama administration to-Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.
By focusing our defense resources into a space-superiority platform and weapon system such as a Death Star, the government can spur job creation in the fields of construction, engineering, space exploration, and more, and strengthen our national defense.
The President, who many critical Republicans believe fancies himself as "Emperor," is not yet ready to build a Death Star due, at least in part, to its exorbitant cost, among many other reasons.
Indeed, according to White House "Space and Science OMB Chief Paul Shawcross, the cost of such a project would exceed $850 Quadrillion dollars, an amount largely outside of the present White House budgetary concerns, at least for 2013. However, Shawcross did expand on his decline of such a project by indicating the following:
The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We're working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.
The Administration does not support blowing up planets.
Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?
Upon seeing Director Shawcross' rather droll response, many Conservatives were stunned by the obvious evidence of an administration apparatchik who exhibited an actual sense of humor.
Shawcross went on, in his answer, to discuss matters as diverse as marsh mellows, the Kessel Run, the force and even light sabers, which most Conservatives know, were initially invented in order to counter galactic totalitarians who had confiscated the People's blasters at least a millenium ago.
However, for those who might be disappointed, concerning the loss of a possible Death star, take heart. You see, the President also stated that he would cut the deficit in half in 2010 and even later indicated that Obamacare would be an effort to slash medical expenditures massively while granting free coverage to everyone.
These among many other promises which also ultimately proved to be false, therefore, a possible Death Star may yet be completed in the future.
In fact, as far as this rather opaque administration goes, All The President's Men may have already partially constructed a Death Star which could be fully functional and aimed at the southern United States, even now, for all we know. Which leads us into another actual conspiracy concerning the Newtown shooting.
The New Conspiracy Theory
When we read of CNN's Anderson Cooper and his recent rant against the conspiracy theories coming of the Sandy Hook shooting, we could only shake our heads and ponder the fact of why there weren't more such theories coming out.
Indeed, it's only natural, after the plethora of Regime misdirections and outright lies, the never answered questions on Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the Bin Laden death and even the latest, where the media appears to be supportive of a fake trillion dollar coin.
There is a singular effort in America's public to increasingly question and distrust a mainstream media that's quite obviously in the bag for a political initiative geared towards forwarding the Transformation of America.
This, in turn, is reflected in a plethora of stories and theories which try to explain that, which in many cases, defies any logical explanation.
Even after the often ridiculous rants of the prior decade, by these same media Liberals, the regime in power now consistently receives a rubber-stamped approval by the very same journalistic "professionals" who formerly found conspiracy lurking around every corner in the former regime.
Most of us, personally, could never imagine how the Newtown shootings could be faked in any way, and yet, at least some of the evidence proferred does raise questions. The main question being, "why all of these attacks, seemingly occurring on an almost weekly basis, all of a sudden?"
"False Flag," by the way, is not a myth and has been used by governments before in order to misdirect the populace to support initially difficult to inact government initiatives. While it would seem that most theories, including this one, border on the ridiculous, there are those other events that began as conspiracy theories only to be proven correct some time later.
While Anderson Cooper, in the above video, parlays his scorn of the theorist effectively, one cannot deny that Cooper offers little if anything by way of refuting the Professor's claims.
Now, why is that?
Perhaps Cooper feels that the allegations are so ridiculous that they don't warrant any sort of refutative response. Even while we have many in government who continually deny that surmassing a debt so large that it can never be repaid is a thing that is stimulative and that we all should simply ignore as necessary.
But if the media and the political Left view these classroom deaths of over a score of children as tragic, why do they simultaneously, if not ironically, believe that the annual forced deaths of over 1.2 million children by abortion to be both a necessary and good thing speaking boldly to the rights of individuals, even as those same rights are being traded for an illusory security?
Below is a Youtube video which, whether valid or not, details a number of inconsistencies that the high-information types are taking into account with regard to Newtown. Once you see the video, you might also be able to see why many are questioning the details as reported:
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness. It was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity"....
Charles Dickens in part, at least, sums up 2012 almost prophetically, for many of us....
Indeed, as all of the hope for change that was built up by the political Right in 2012 got completely obliterated on November the 6th, it also became time to begin laying out a battle plan for 2013. Regarding the Republican leadership, so far, that plan appears to be to drop their rusty ideologies and run like hell.
For Conservatives, it's clearly a time for an educational reaping of the harvest, but what about the Democrats?
Well, the Liberals' plan continues to be one of mythic misdirection on the one hand, while abruptly wheeling their party hard-over to the Left, on the other. But, while many may have forgotten 2010 in all of this bureaucratic bedlam, many others of us can see a historical repeat of 2010 coming for 2014.
You see, while few still will blame El Magnifico for the coming pain, the Liberals, as a whole, neither cannot nor will not escape the residue of Obama's ideological lunacy. However, all of that aside, now as 2013 is at Genesis becomes where we get to go back and relive all the things that happened for 2012 in the form of Conservative Refocus columns that shined most brightly.
Coming in at the 10th slot, out of well over 100 articles, "Bumbling Brother's" was a labor of love intent on comparing the Obama Regime to a three ring circus that actually worked out pretty well.
When it comes to frivolous Federal expenditures, Barack the Job Slayer and his colorful choom gang will come out hailing the skyrocketing outlays in effusive triplication, with trumpets blazing and disciples bowing. The President's cultish high priests within the media, ready and fully waiting to gather round and shout down anyone who dissents, dutifully emit ad hoc charges of racism, bigotry, sexism and other such derogatory language until the offending party is completely muffled and totally depleted.
However, the main point of the article was this rather astounding fact with regard to US tax Revenues:
While the US is collecting over 20% more in revenue from a mere 313 million people than China is collecting, which has a population of four times America's at 1.3 Billion and has a Communist system, for heaven's sake, the statists in America still managed to overspend their 2011 collections by an astounding $1.3 trillion and in what is supposed to be a Free Market system, to boot.
If you add India and China's total revenue collections together, with a total population of over 2.5 billion people which is well over 1/3 the entire world's population, their collections are then roughly equal to the revenue collection of the United States, even with less than 5% of the world's population.
Coming in at the 9th slot was a simple and quick refutation of Jake Tapper over the Obama "Birther" Certificate recusal that went absolutely ballistic in the number of reads:
Our closing point to Tapper who sought to nullify the issue was simply this:
Interesting, it is, that the only folks who find these questions of Obama's eligibility "ridiculous" are largely the ones on the extreme Left and the Establishment class, such as you within the media, Jake. It reminds me of the Catholic Churches recent admission that the world is round. Like it or not, the doubts will persist until we see some actual evidence that disproves everything we have on file up to this point. And, by the way, it will take a lot more than a poorly forged birth certificate that was "finally found" after a difficult two year search.
Next up, was a column that rehashed our top colmuns from 2011.
Ya just gotta love that.....
At the 7th most popular position, was a quick column which was derived from a news report on a forced rebating position in the Obamacare mandate. Here, insurance companies were forced to rebate "profit" over an acceptable amount back to the proletariat:
You see, one of the most basic theories of Communist Marxism is the fact that Karl Marx, the originator of Marxism, felt that the State should take whatever it needed from the people in order to pay for its costs of providing services to the proletariat, in this case healthcare services to US Citizens, as a Collectivist economic necessity.
In Marxist theory, one of the repeatedly illustrated quotes is this one:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
At number six was a column written in July 2011 that we decided to re-run for July the 4th of 2012, due to its popularity:
The core idea from the Liberal Utopians, i.e. Progressives, suggests the desire for a world completely without natural risk, a thing which is totally at odds with Natural Law. The rueful truth to the Progressives' aims, however, is the greater truth that speaks to the usurpation of a mass grouping of useful idiots and the insidious machinations of a multi-generational Globalist movement which touts a new age, while actually hearkening back to the Dark Ages.
Coming at midway through our most popular of 2012, was a concerted defense of Rush Limbaugh, the Doctor of Democracy, who had gotten himself into trouble over the Sandra Fluke incident, and needed to be defended. The Conservative Media responded quickly and corralled the wagons around Rush while also attacking his attackers and baring long teeth at those who sought to abandon him.
It obviously worked out for Rush; however, things were touch and go there for a few days:
Next up was an article that actually proved to be wrong, in the long run, despite the fact that its reasoning was clearly correct. It's one of the few things we have ever gotten wrong, but at least we appear to be in good company:
Drifting quickly back again to the wise youngster's voice, his subjectivity reminding me a great deal of my own young sons of about the same age, he was highlighting a growing concern for America's future. As I listened to the two discuss America's current generational quandary on the radio, I glanced up at the Charlotte skyline, my vehicle describing a long, lazy arc around the metropolis; uptown buildings leaping from a lush canopy of trees. My gaze returned to the freeway long enough to verify where I and the other vehicles were. I glanced up at the sky scrapers again, consternated that something very familiar was missing. My eyes darted cautiously across the skyline trying to find this missing symbol that should have been embedded deep in the heart of one of America's largest financial centers, and yet the expected elements, long a familiar sight, simply weren't there.
Next up at third most popular. was an astounding post which seemed to prove that there was a number of questions, even to Obama's attorneys, that the President had some clear problems concerning his birth certificate:
NEW YORK, NY – After a Maricopa County law enforcement agency conducted a six-month forensic examination which determined that the image of Obama's alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth posted to a government website in April, 2011 is a digital fabrication and that it did not originate from a genuine paper document, arguments from an Obama eligibility lawyer during a recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing reveals the image was not only a fabrication, but that it was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obama's ineligibility in a court of law.
At second, was a heavily researched article, in which went back in time and pulled out highlights from Obama's fifty, or so, years (No one knows exactly)
In the post we at least try to explain some of the events that shaped El Magnifico's life, without boring everyone to tears. The effort was successful, placing the column at one of the most read of all time, at Conservative Refocus:
So, why did the Associated Press, back on June 27th, 2004, trumpet the fact that a Kenyan-born American named Barack Obama was now being elevated as a US Senator in the East African Sunday Standard newspaper, and is this article actually legitimate?
Indeed, it is, as a matter of fact. When this story was first discovered some time ago, we actually visited the East-African Standard website, clicked on the associated link in the EAS Standard's archived wayback machine, and there both the article and picture magically appeared. Unfortunately, the link has since been taken down, due to unmentionably odd reasons, we might add. But why did this story appear and, once again, is it real? The answer to this question demands a journey all the way back to Obama's origins in order to understand both the man and his often stealthily applied radical ideology, and it can only be accomplished here in two parts:
At number # 1, was easily one our most popular articles ever, which sought to explain why we, who are now ostensibly considered the radicals, being the Conservatives, are actually the true traditionalists of America. Apparently, we got the idea across as a vast number of Americans both read and cheered the article for pointing out a few things being completely left out of the conversation:
A strategic concern it is, within this nation, and now most especially, as many mischaracterize the free market as something greedily contrived and filled with excessive fault, when in fact, it is simply the most natural order of things when it comes to human socioeconomic interaction and the service of others. Many would even further assert that it's high time the balance of our corporate leaders began realizing this to the point of voicing it, and yes, to even those self-acclaimed wiser beings who populate the corporate Media news jungle. So far, this labor of love has largely been left to the Academians, and we all know where that road to serfdom leads.
So, there you have it, the best of our best according to our highly valued readers, but to end I need only point out a passage in an article written not too long ago, about the mean differences of being either a Conservative or a modern-day Liberal:
Our opposition, the Liberals, sees the human race more as an artificial infection that must be controlled and ameliorated, rather than nourished and multiplied.
The Right sees humanity as a natural part of the environment, and a powerful force of nature in its own right, but far less powerful than the might and the energy that exists within the earth and its atmosphere.
The Right believe that we, as a people, naturally belong wherever we might be, and that Natural Law holds each of us as valuable and worthy unto ourselves. The Left seems to harbor a veiled sort of contempt for the embarrassing predicament of their being caught human, who will then try all sorts of ridiculous labors and contrivances to correct their natural conundrum of being born a species less desirable.
Works for me.....as the American epoch of incredulity continues, at least for a season longer.