Tuesday, April 10, 2012

A liberal mind is impervious to responsibility

"Obama denies responsibility" is an accurate title for this article, but it is so trite! Saying Obama denies responsibility has about as much news content as "dog bites man"    both happen every day, and are not newsworthy.

The latest attempt by Obama to shift blame to Bush, however, takes this blame game up a notch.  Obama officials last week pointed to rising costs under the Bush administration to suggest that the $820,000 Vegas conference could have been avoided  if only the Bush-era  General Services Administration (GSA) had acted. In other words, out-of-control spending is still Bush's purview. 

Obama's creative adaptation of Truman's dictum.
Why do we need Obama occupying the oval office? I mean, we have teleprompters and Carey or another spokesperson can say "It's Bush's fault". Where's the news content? If the administration has nothing new to report, they could at least sell the airtime and pay down our crushing debt, which increased from about 60% GDP when Obama took office to over 100% GDP in a mere three years.

Blaming Bush for the Vegas bash was too much for the former head of the GSA, Lurita Doan, blasted the Obama administration Monday for blaming his predecessor over the lavish Las Vegas. Doan, headed the agency under then-President George W. Bush until her resignation in 2008, told Fox News that President Obama's team is trying to "divert attention" from its own scandal

Harry Truman had a famous dictum as a sign on his desk: "The buck stops here". What has Obama taken responsibility for? Whenever economy perks up a little, Obama takes credit for the "right direction", but when the news are bad, it's "we didn't realized how bad it was", which translates as "it's all Bush's fault" from Obama-speak. 

Who still believes this buffoon? There are some true believers. Van Jones, Obama's former "green czar", recently opined that "even if Obama came out as gay he would not lose the black vote". Not much concern with merit there. What about the white voters? They seem to be still enamored with Obama's race. How else do you explain the enthusiasm and the dominance of white twenty-somethings in Chicago, IL in the photo below? They still believe. Based in what? That's a wrong question. They believe in who, they have bough the personal story. I can understand how Obama's victory in 2008 was a result of  the help of mass media, which helped Obama to avoid difficult questions, and he was not properly vetted. I thought Obama's background as a socialist was enough to suggest his dreams were empty rhetoric about hope. Hope triumphed over historical experience. By 2012 Obama's agenda has failed all around, so what's the excuse of placing hope above experience now? 
Chicago office of Obama 2012 reelection campaign
 — young, white and clueless.
Here's how I feel about such gullible sheep: they are ignoramuses and hypocrites who are generous with other people's money. Obama's policies have fleeced our country  he has added more debt than ... anyone in the history of civilization. The ignorant youth do not know history, and do not even understand the contemporary politics. Who's going to pay for all these goodies? Other people who make money. That makes these supporters hypocrites. They are ignorant of the fact that a large portion of this debt will fall on their shoulders in the form of higher taxes and Social Security payments.
Have they read "Fleeced" by Dick Morris?
According to MSNBC, young “voters preferred Obama over John McCain by 68 percent to 30 percent — the highest share of the youth vote obtained by any candidate since exit polls began reporting results by age in 1976.” How's that "hopey, changey" thing working out for them?

Less than 50% of the people 16-24 years old are currently employed - a record low. The unemployment among the black youth is almost twice the rate of whites, so Obama has not even had a positive impact on his favorite demographic. The official unemployment, of course, underestimates the reality, but is useful as a relative measure. According to these official data below, the average rate of youth unemployment during Obama's term has been nearly double that of Bush's entire two terms.

Forgive them, oh Lord, for they know not for whom they vote.

It's ironic that Obama's young supporters are among the people who're doubly "fleeced" by his policies  — presently through the loss of employment opportunities and in the future through higher taxes to cover the debt Obama incurred on their behalf. 

There is a saying that "a liberal mind is impervious to experience". In my humble opinion to vote for Obama in 2008 could be excused by ignorance (a triumph of hope over experience), but to vote for him in 2012 is simply irresponsible. My upgrade of the above dictum is: "a liberal mind is impervious to responsibility" - that's why the seek to "spread it around".

Monday, April 9, 2012

Social justice, according to DOJ

Zimmerman family challenged the Attorney General Eric Holder on New Black Panther Party (NBPP).  One of the family members wrote in an open letter to the Holder:
I am writing you to ask you why, when the law of the land is crystal clear, is your office not arresting the New Black Panthers for hate crimes?
The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets?
The letter concludes that the lack of interest in this matter Eric Holder and the DOJ is ‘based solely on your race’.

A black leader who actually has integrity, Allen West, has called this bounty a hate crime, and urged the Justice Department to prosecute the NBPP for the bountyThe Department of Justice, however, said it had "no comment" on the on  the bounty on George Zimmerman.

Spike Lee had originally tweeted an incorrect phone number for George Zimmerman, causing an elderly couple to flee their house in fear of their lives. Then, he apologizes for getting the old couple in trouble, and retweeted the correct address for Zimmerman. The couple is still fearing to go back to their house and is asking for Spike Lee to issue a formal apology to ensure their safety.

Why is Spike Lee not charged with reckless endangerment, and a hate crime?

The irony is that Zimmerman can justifiably claim claim that Spike Lee, Black Panthers, and the NBC, which admitted to putting a falsified audio tape on the 911 call on air, are all potentially responsible for any harm that could come to Zimmerman or his family. What about a fair trial? Considering the bias projected by mass media's representation of George Zimmerman, he would need to go to Mars to get a jury which is not biased one way or another in this case.

Holder has no shame and is unlikely to do the right thing -- to execute his duties as Attorney General without regard to race, by protecting the "due process", and ensuring the safety of Zimmerman's family. Hopefully, this case will show very clearly the the reality of the so-called "social justice" -- it is a euphemism used by a bunch of racists in power to justify their selective application of laws.

US economy: lies, damn lies and statistics

The unemployment report released last Friday showed a nominal decrease of unemployment from 8.3% to 8.2%. However, the mere 120,000 jobs created created broke the pattern of robust job creation during the last two months that was boosting Obama's reelection chances. The economists were expecting over 200,000 new jobs.  The real numbers reflect a worse reality - in March, the number of unemployed dropped by 133,000, but the overall labor force declined by 164,000. That means the economy shed a total of 31,000 jobs. Meanwhile, the government reports lower unemployment.

There's a saying about the malleability of statistics: there are "lies, damn lies and statistics". Only by discounting a large number of discouraged job-seekers can the government report a statistical reduction of unemployment, in stead of an actual reduction of employment.

The labor non-participation has reached a record 88 million. The issue of how this rate the unemployment rate is officially calculated is becoming a part of the political discourse. A Republican congressman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) intends to press GOP leaders to include the number of individuals who gave up looking for work in the percentage of jobless claims.

For example, the most recent unemployment rate released on Friday, at 8.2% unemployment, is the so-called U-3 rate calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). It also calculates more inclusive measures U-5 and U-6. The more realistic U-5 rate of 9.6% it includes the “total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force."

Thus, the measure proposed by Representative Hunter would not require any additional numbers to be calculated; it would simply elevate the statistic that the BLS already calculates each month. That would add a lot of realism to the discussion, and not allow the statistical unemployment rate to decrease, while the number of actual employed people is falling.

The lack of realism in official statistics is obscuring not clarifying the direction of the economy. The Dow ended below 13,000 and logged its fourth straight daily loss. One of the reasons may be that during the weekend the traders had a chance to  reevaluation the latest unemployment report, which was released last Friday. The stocks tumbled heavily at the open, clawed their way up to recover some ground, then finished near their lows by the end of the day.

Yes, you did, Barry.
The job gains of the last couple of months were helped by unseasonably warm weather, and may have cannibalized job gains of the spring. It has given an entirely unrealistic perception of an accelerating recovery.

Barack Obama has been the undertaker of this economy, but he refuses to accept any responsibility. It's time for him to ask: "Did I do that?" ask Steve Urkel from TV show Family Matters used to do after causing some mishap. He won't. So, I've asked and will now answer:

"Yes, he did."

Egalitarian fraud

The Democrats often complain that requiring IDs for voting is an intolerable burden, and disproportionately affects minorities.

The conservative activist James O’Keefe decided to demonstrate to the Attorney General Eric Holder, just why he should be concerned about lack of voter ID laws – by walking into Holder’s voting precinct and showing the world that anyone can obtain Eric Holder’s ballot. Literally.

In a shocking new video from Project Veritas a man (picture below) voted on Eric Holder's behalf.
Is that you, Eric?
Didn't recognize you with the sunglasses.
Holder has maintained that voter fraud is not a major problem in the United States, and that voter ID would not curb voter fraud in any case. When a white bearded dude came to vote in the primary on April 3rd and claimed to be Holder and used his address, the poll worker didn't hesitate and promptly offers the young man Holder’s ballot to vote.

Project Veritas has already shown how dead people can vote in New Hampshire, and they have registered celebrities like Tim Tebow and Tom Brady to vote in Minnesota. Now - Washington DC. The voting there lies in a federal jurisdictional area. Will the federal government take up the challenge?

Probably not. Looking incompetent doesn't seem to bother DOJ or the Obama administration enough to overcome their love for "social justice".

Social justice in the USA

There is a confluence of the arts with real events, which illuminates the some serious challenges for the society in the USA. The case of Trayvon Martin has captured the airwaves, and the mass media has rushed to judgement to label the man that shot him, George Zimmerman a bigot and a murderer, in contradiction to his claim to self defense and without deference to the several ongoing investigations, including one by the FBI.

NBC news had to apologize for editing George Zimmerman's 9-1-1 call that made him appear to be racially profiling Trayvon. ABC initially reported no injuries on the back of Zimmerman's head, until it stopped covering his head with its logo in the video, and reported that enhancement of the video of Zimmerman in police station did show injuries. In other words, ABC also tried to obfuscate the issue.

The main culprit in the mass media is the prime-time show host on MSNBC, Al Sharpton, who called for "occupation" of Sanford, FL. He demanded immediate arrest of Zimmerman and has led rallies, blurring the line between activism and journalism.
Jesse Jackson and Al Shaprton - the usual suspects.
President Obama has issued a call for "soul searching" in relation to Trayvon case. Why did he single out this case, and what effect did it have?

According to Obama the answer to the first questions is: "if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon". As for the effect of  a president getting involved, in addition to race-baiters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson -- it has elevated the importance of an issue that was already national news, and being prejudged by the mass media.

A comedy, “Neighborhood Watch” by 20th Century Fox intended for release in early summer is in unexpected trouble, because of it's name. The Zimmerman has not even been charged, but the name "Neighborhood watch" is already seen as sullied!

Is that where we are as a society? Not only will we rush to judgement, we will destroy the legitimacy of neighborhood watchmen?! That would be bad enough, it it was not for the racial issue.

The only evidence of racial profiling in this case is the lie put forward by the NBC. Obama's outspoken concern with the possible racial profiling in the Trayvon case, flies in the face of his silence in the recent black-on-white hate crimes? Why did the mass media and the president not speak out against a the crime against a white kid who was dosed with gasoline and set on fire on his own porch, while his attackers yelled: "You get what you deserve, white boy"?

Why the silence on the recent attack of black teenagers on a white cabbie and his white passenger in Philladelphia? The coverage of the mob attack of seven black teens on a white teenager just blocks from Independence Hall, failed to mention the races. The white teenager went to the hospital, while Fox showed a a purposefully grainy video of the event, and other news organization failed to mention it at all.

Then there's an attack by a black an Atlanta street gang on a Hispanic "faggot" videotaped by the perpetrators themselves? Will this brutal attack be prosecuted as a hate crime?
Social justice is not blind.
That's social justice for you. There are favored groups, and less favored groups. If you're "white" or a "faggot" an assault on you is not as important an issue as an assault on blacks - a group favored by President Obama by default, as his previous jump to conclusion regarding professor Gates showed.

Obama is a racist, so his reaction is predictable, we just have to deal with it. That means not giving up, but the opposite. We need to fight the bigoted pre-judgement in Zimmerman's case, and not allow the concept of "Neighborhood watch" to be destroyed by race-baiters, even if they occupy the highest office. If the country falls prey to the siren song of "social justice" you can kiss regular justice good-bye.

Cynics in Syria

Even as Kofi Annan, the peace envoy from the Arab League and UN was meeting with President Assad in Damascus in late March, Syrian army shelled the northern town of Idlib, and continued its bloody siege of Homs.
Al, how many have you "pacified" today?
Last Thursday the U.N. statement raised the possibility of "further steps" if Syria doesn't implement the six-point peace plan outlined by Kofi Annan, who is also the previous UN Secretary General. Syria has agreed to accept Annan's peace plan on March 25th. It has promised to "immediately" start pulling troops out of protest cities on April 2nd. When the UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan announced the latest Assad's promise, Western nations quickly expressed doubts that the new promises would be kept.

They were right. In recent days, instead of preparing for a withdrawal, troops of the Syrian dictator al Assad have stepped up shelling attacks on residential areas, killing dozens of civilians every day in what the opposition described as a frenzied rush to gain ground. With the deadline looming, Syrian troops on Sunday pounded restive regions in the north and center of the country a day after activists said more than 100 people were killed across Syria.

"Mortar rounds are falling like rain," said activist Tarek Badrakhan, describing an assault in the central city of Homs on Sunday. He spoke via Skype as explosions were heard in the background. The regime is exploiting the truce plan "to kill and commit massacres," he said.

The Syrian regime scuttled the peace process, once again opting for lies to gain time. What will the UN do? The lives of Syrian civilians are on the line, as well as the credibility of UN itself.

Annan said in a statement on Sunday that "the present escalation of violence is unacceptable." What is truly unacceptable is for a joker like Annan to be charged with such a serious mission. After the failure of Arab League's observers in Syria to halt regime's violence, it was clear that only a tough and credible negotiator stood any chance of getting Assad to follow through on his promises.

Annan confronts the price of his failure in Rwanda.
Recall that Kofi Annan was implicated in helping Saddam Hussein violated the oil embargo. "Oil for food" panel rebuked Annan and mentioned corruption. Lastly, the genocide in Rwanda that resulted in a million deaths, happened when Annan was the head of peacekeeping at the UN. Was Annan planning to tell Assad: "While I failed a civilian population from the continent of my own birth, I plan to redeem himself by doing everything possible to ensure the safety of Syrian civilians."

Annan had no business going to Syria as a UN envoy unless he was prepared to say the above. I don't see that type of humanity fueled by humility in Annan. More importantly, it would not sound plausible to Assad. So, this entire expedition was a charade. A tacit agreement between UN and Syria to buy time. The Syrian government has been buying time for over a year, while the UN needs to appear to be attempting to do its job by resolving a rebellion with a negotiated settlement.

The UN's behavior is, therefore, disgraceful. Businessweek just wrote that UN faces a day of reckoning with it's delaying tactics. The scuttling of the Annan's deal was just the latest promise not to be kept by the Assad regime, so why was the UN playing into the hands of a pathological liar?

Just as Annan complained Sunday that the escalation was "unacceptable," Syria said its acceptance of the Annan deal last week was misunderstood and suggested it would not be able to withdraw its troops under current conditions, while killing another hundred.

Assad regime delayed the arrival of observers from the Arab League, then denied their purpose, in a similar way he played Annan. Assad toyed with the Arab League's demands, in the end all they got were lies intended to stall the Arab and Western opposition to his dictatorial rule.

Another fine example of Syrian behavior occurred during a recent "referendum"Syrian artillery pounded rebel-held areas of Homs as President Bashar al-Assad's government announced that voters had overwhelmingly approved a new constitution in a referendum derided as a sham by his critics at home and abroad.

The verdict the some regions there was unanimous: the box "in favor" (of the government) was circled, the box "opposed" was not. 

Those who are opposed were getting their just deserts -- the Syrian artillery has pounded restive voters for almost three weeks in Homs, killing hundreds. The bombardment of Homs was almost as long as the bombardment of Hama 30 years ago, when his father killed over 10,000 to pacify that city.

Assad encourages voting in referendum...
With sad predictability, Annan's peacemaking in Syria failed. In never really had the chance. Assad's new demands of 'written guarantees' were refused by the rebels. Annan has failed again, the diversion is over -- what now? Russia is still supplying Syria with weapons, while the Iranians are helping to smuggle Syrian oil to Europe.

The civil war in Syria shows no signs of abating.