15 August 2011

President Jayson Blair

Longtime readers will know that since 2007 I've been a vociferous critic of Barack Hussein Obama. What you don't know is that on a daily basis, I ask myself, "How did he get elected?" In the same vein I wonder if Cubans ever wake up, sling back a hot cafe con leche and say,"How did we end up with Fidel?"

My brilliantly informed audience (except you Coldtype and LITB) understand the dire straits we're in. For those of us who are ready to be "rigorously honest" realize that Obama and his policies are the reason for the economic and moral malaise infecting us. It's comes down to spending. It's not that he "inherited" anything from Bush. It's that he quadrupled spending in his first year in office.

For those of you who don't know it already: That's what progressives do - tax and spend. That's all they know, and its the engine that drives their Big State agenda. Period.

Since McCain went with the Hobbits reference out of spite, I'm going to roll with it out of humor. It's Mordor on the Potomac folks. The Uruk-Hai are in charge.

By The Numbers

For clarity's sake, let's look at where we are now: (figures gleaned from here.)

* Federal government spending went from $3 trillion in 2008, to $4 trillion in 2009. That is a 33% increase in one fiscal year. Through 2011 the Federal government will spend $6.2 trillion. Government spending on welfare went up (from 2008) 28.5% and spending on health care went up 18%.

* Federal debt as a percentage of GDP is now projected to hit 103% by the end of 2011. It was hovering around 60% (thanks to TARP and Stimulus I) under President Bush. For comparison purposes, Greece's debt as a percentage of GDP is 140%.

* Our Federal deficit for 2011 is now $1.645 trillion. It was $1.293 trillion for fiscal year 2010. Trends indicate that by the time Obama leaves office, Federal deficits will be $5 trillion. For comparison's sake, the deficit in Bush's last year in office was $386 billion.

* Some call it the "Obama Hockey stick" - it shows a massive spike of 55% in debt under Obama. Net Federal debt, for the same period grew by 88%. Photobucket
(article reference here.)

* Obamacare legislation, that no one was allowed to read before voting on it, adds additional taxes and costs. It also removes %500 billion from Medicare.


How it ends

Bottom line; under Obama, home foreclosures are UP, unemployment/underemployment is UP, bankruptcies are UP, taxation schemes are UP, his EPA is churning out regulations by the minute that will do nothing except torment you, the Open Borders crowd wants more and more from you in the way of programs and monies. Another Obama triumph is that the Misery Index has returned. We're now at a 28-year high.

And they're not done.

TeamObama (Debt Man Walking) is looking for "tax loopholes" (ie. revenue enhancements). You can't deduct your home mortgage interest, or property tax payments. That's a "tax break for the rich" - let's get rid of that! You want to have a 401k plan? No-no-no: only "the evil rich" can afford those. You have to pay your fair share! The poor needs more. They need flat screens and 22" rims, and a LINK card to buy booze, cigarettes and Hennessy. They need their housing subsidized. They need their gas, light and heat subsidized. A study was done whereby Obama would confiscate the nations' private retirement plans and put them into one large fund - √° la social security. That way they could 'regulate' them better.

We all know that that is just code for using the monies as a way to fund general operations (entitlements).

THAT is the type of administration that was elected. One that doesn't understand restraint. One that doesn't honor the firewalls within the constitution. And one that does not honor the individual citizen.

70% of the American people didn't want Nationalized Medicine. Did our elected leaders listen? Hell no. 80% of the people want a balanced budget amendment so that future generations aren't dealing with an unsustainable debt burden. Did they pass it? No. Whatever advances the ball - the Leftists will do it.

Leftists are power-hungry and will do whatever it takes to seize and maintain their control over YOU, the individual. You're dangerous, you're a free-thinker, you believe in individual sovereignty and a civil society. We can't have that!

As Alinsky said you've got to pretend you're middle class, in order to destroy the middle class. The Marxist "workers paradise" is now within reach.

Have no fear, Cherished Reader. We will stop them. The Tea Party conservatives, with the help and support of mainstream American citizens are rising to defeat this Authoritarian Nightmare and its host of minions. 2012 will wash the slate clean and we'll have conservatives back in Washington.

The Black Angel

We see what a morass we're in. The question is - "How did we get here?"

How did a man so inept, so incompetent and so immersed in Marxism get to be President? The underpinnings of his rise to power was laid decades ago by the Liberal establishment in Hollywood.

How did 52% of the population turn off their reasoning faculties and pull the lever for an inexperienced, back-bencher Illinois senator?


I can frame the dilemma for you in one phrase: Jayson Blair.

Blair was the celebrated member of the NYTimes newspaper who was caught, not only plaigarizing, but fabricating storyies for the paper back in 2002. It was a big deal for the Times because the Old Gray Lady is used to just circling the wagons and protecting its media creatures - come hell or high water.

"The New York Times is to be commended for ferreting out Jayson Blair, the reporter recently discovered to be making up facts, plagiarizing other news organizations, and lying about nonexistent trips and interviews.

A newspaper that employs Maureen Dowd can't have had an easy time settling on Blair as the scapegoat. Blair's record of inaccuracies, lies and distortions made him a candidate for either immediate dismissal or his own regular column on the op-ed page." ~~ Anne Coulter, May 14, 2003

Of course, after the scandal broke, Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger remained adament that race had nothing to do with having an unscrupulous, corrupt black reporter churning out falsehoods for the front page:

"Mr. Boyd (managing editor) said last week that the decision to advance Mr. Blair had not been based on race...."
"Mr Blair's Times supervisors ... emphasize that he earned an intership at The Times because of glowing recommendations and a remarkable work history, not because he is black."

Sure ... and Barack Hussein Obama is a qualified, brilliant community organizer. THAT qualifies him for the highest office in the land. For the paper, the Standard Bearer for Diversity, to say "race had nothing to do with it" is absurd. Why have diversity requirements and then ignore race? It's like opening a public swimming pool and then demanding that no one get wet.

"If the Times "diversity" program did not consider Blair's race, then it wasn't much of a diversity program, now was it? This is like job advertisements that proclaim, "Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action Employer." Well which is it?" ~~ How to talk to a Liberal, Ann Coulter (p. 186 pp.2 and 5)

Despite all this, Blair was repeatedly published on the front page, promoted, sent Love notes from editor-in-chief Howell Raines. Ignoring the warnings of a few intrepid whistle-blowers, top management kept assigning Blair to bigger stories in new departments without alerting the editors to Blair's history, beause - as Raines said - it would "stigmatize" him. (Speaking of stigmas, after this scandal, does the demand for black heart surgeons go up or down?) Raines jettisoned the Times' famous slogan, preferring the slogan "The The New York Times: Now With Even More Black People!"

I have a suspicion that the same sort of bias promoted and advanced another young black man ALL the way to the White House. So you could say that a version of Jayson Blair is now President of the United States.

And this is where Hollywood comes into play.

Back in 2010, Benjamin Plotinsky wrote a wonderful article for City Journal entitled The Varities of Liberal Enthusiasm"

"Our moviemakers are adept at measuring the zeitgeist of the nation—of its liberal half, anyway—and are a powerful force in shaping it. And for more than a decade, they’ve been churning out what critics call “black-angel” movies. These films feature a white protagonist guided to enlightenment by a black character, usually of divine or supernatural origin or, at the very least, in touch with spiritual experiences that the main character lacks. With the black angel’s help, the white hero finds salvation."

Why are Whites so quick to turn a blind eye to qualifications when looking at a black person? Why are we so quick to forgive, to over look character defects, and to rationalize away the enormous vault of data and history?

Our Media Elites in Hollywood, from Matt Damon to Harvey Weinstein, have turned us around; discombobulating us in a complex fan-dance....all to warp our perceptions in obeisance to the faux-Gods of political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity.

On the one hand I believe their hearts are in the right place, it's just their heads and souls I'm concerned about. As with most Liberal initiatives, it looks good on paper but the full ramifications of the policy aren't taken into account, and they're usually ineffective at best.

From the Green Mile, to Bagger Vance to Gray's Anatomy - we are deluged with images of docile, articulate and educated black men and women who play spiritual superiors to those "poor dumb whites" and their backward views of race.

The message from Hollywood is quite clear: Ignore what you know, and buy into our fantasy.

The fantasy is that the black guy is presented as clean, neat, smart, cheeky and articulate. Your Remember the movie "Remember the Titans"? Coach Herman Boone (Denzel) just wants to give his "players a chance" - and wants to work well with all the white coaches. Of course, the white coaches are skeptical and ~ racist! The poor black kids just keep getting picked on for no reason. And meanwhile, Boone's daughter wants to dress in dresses, play with dolls, doesn't speak in a ghetto dialect and even eschews basketball when she meets the daughter of the white coach.

The star white player, ironically the one who teams up with the other tolerant black player, gets in a car accident and is render a Parapalegic. The stereotype continues unabated, even to the point where the black players teach the white players how to sing and dance in unison as part of their warm ups. Everyone knows that white guys can't dance, have no rhythm and are musically inept! And everyone knows (thanks in large part to the Media) that the opposite is true of blacks.

(As an experiement - watch Soul Train some Sunday. Observe the dancers and imagine that they're white. Then listen to your inner-voice and you'll be surprised that the messages that float up from your deepest self. It's well worth the time if you're introspective.)

From the City Journal article:

"The genre includes, to name just a few, The Legend of Bagger Vance (2000), in which Will Smith—playing a caddie who is really, the film hints, God—restores Matt Damon’s golf game and love life; Bruce Almighty (2003), in which Morgan Freeman, as God, bestows his powers on a manic Jim Carrey; and the awful What Dreams May Come (1998), in which Cuba Gooding, Jr. is a wise soul guiding Robin Williams through the afterlife. These movies have been numerous enough, David Sterritt points out in the Christian Science Monitor, to confuse TV’s buffoonish Homer Simpson: in one episode, “Homer mistook a black man in a white suit for an angelic visitor, all because (according to his embarrassed wife) he’d been seeing too many movies lately."

Far and away the best of the black-angel films is Frank Darabont’s The Green Mile (1999), based on a novel by Stephen King, whose knack for setting his finger on the cultural pulse has made him a multimillionaire. The basso profundo Michael Clarke Duncan plays John Coffey (note the initials), a gigantic black man wrongfully convicted of the rape and murder of two little girls in Depression-era Louisiana and sentenced to death; Tom Hanks plays Paul Edgecomb, a prison guard who discovers that Coffey is not only innocent but also a Christlike miracle worker. Coffey’s laying-on of hands restores a dead mouse to life, cures Edgecomb of a bladder infection, and heals the warden’s wife’s brain cancer. Shortly before he is executed—the jeering of the girls’ anguished parents and the weeping of the prison guards who know the truth recall the account of the Crucifixion in Luke."


A philosopher once said, "The world lives on lies." Throw back the curtain and see who's pulling the strings in the World of Oz! The time for honesty is upon us. Let's not fool ourselves. Liberty and freedom can be lost - as witnessed by the last 3 years under the Dictatorship of Obama (May his name be cursed.)

This Black Angel is nothing more than the Fabian symbol emblematical of their logo: A wolf covered in sheeps' clothing.

People have projected their own faults, judgements and fantasies onto a man who is NOTHING more than a barely experienced, brainwashed, Alinsky Radical. The only thing that got him elected is his Black skin.

The next time you see a TV show or movie, look for the Black Angel phenomenon. Have a healthy skepticism - it may save your life, and the country.


Anonymous said...

Rue-y, you have to post more often and not hit us twice in a couple The purpose of the debt ceiling, as everyone with any sense knew at the time, was to cripple New Deal social programs and social spending.

The "ceiling" was established in the late 30's by the GOP in an attempt to halt the social programs of FDR. It was first set at $45 billion when the debt itself was $40 billion. It was raised to $300 billion during World War II. Then it dropped off to $275 billion. It stayed that way through the Korean War.

The GOP has been a big cause of this financial mess. The Bush tax cuts coupled with his getting us into separate wars is alot of the blame. Obama has taken it another step.


Rue St. Michel said...

I can't post more often because I'm very busy with other things.

By-the-by: Please take the time to read the posting before commenting LITB.

I never once mentioned the debt ceiling ... you know why? Because its a non-issue when you're facing bankruptcy, hyper inflation and civil unrest.

And to GOP can only take culpability for this to the extent that Stim I and Part D were pushed (and voted YES by BHO) by GW Bush. The tax cuts did very little to reduce revenues.

This debacle is 99% in the hands of Barack. You can jib & jive all you want about the GOP but the DNC has had control of Congress since 2006, and the WH since 2009.

Anonymous said...

Rue-y, I know you have a life outside this blog what I meant was I look forward to your postings and wish there were more. That being said....

I did read the posting but took it a step further. Like most right wingers (and many Democrats too) you try to place the blame entirely on the other side. Both sides of the aisle are to blame and to think otherwise is plain foolish.

Obama took over a country that was already in a fiscal freefall. He added on to it. You cannot honestly say that Bush did not start us on to the road to financial ruin. The tax cuts were but one idiotic thing he did.

Things look bleak but it is just further proof that this American society is one based on class. The haves and the have nots. The rich and the poor. The privileged and the workers. A fair market system that is anything but that.

When shall workers like yourself realize this? I shall, with your permission, comment on the necessity of social programs at a later date.


Rue St. Michel said...

Well, thanks Lefty, sincerely. Those are kind words indeed.

You're right but only to the extent that the recession was mild in 2008 (brought on by Democrat malfeasance at Fannie and Freddie which kicked off the "housing collapse"), and BHO's incompetence plunged us into a quasi-Depression.

I know it's not 'cricket' to play partisanship but you cannot escape the fact that Democrats have had an exclusive hand in this disaster - from BHO, to Frank, Raines, Garelick, Reid, Schumer and Pelosi.

You'll also note that entitlement spending is what's killing us; it's not defense (we spend more in education as a % of GDP than we do on defense).

Obama is just throwing money at people in order to buy them; period. He wants people sucking at the teat of Big Government so that they won't vote against the hand that's feeding them. It's Machiavellian.

The constitution has 18 enumerated powers that it grants to the Federal gov't and entitlements aren't part of it.

It is a big Ponzi scheme and is plunder; plain and simple.

Thanks Lefty - ciao for now.

Anonymous said...

Its the Chicago Machine in the WhiteHouse.Things were already bad,but barry just poured more fuel on the fire.

Rue St. Michel said...

The Left's Thirst for Power is never satiated.

Even if we gave 100% of our wealth to the Centralized Federal Gov't, they'd demand more.