Hillary, Your Radical Marxist Roots are Showing

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Hillary is more of an outright Marxist than Obama. Where his socialistic tendencies towards America stem from his hatred of this country’s supposed “colonialism.” We defeated Japan, but never occupied it. We defeated Germany, but never occupied it. The list goes on, but none-the-less America is a colonial power. But I digress, back to Hillary.

In 1971, twenty three Hillary Rodhamyear old Yale law student, Hillary Diane Rodham served a stint as a clerk for what was at the time, the nation’s most Communistic law firm, Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein. This law firm made no bones about it’s connection to the Communist Party. Partner Doris Walker was a CP member at the time and another partner, Robert Treuhaft had left the CP in 1958 after being called before the House Un-American Activities Committee. They labeled him one of America’s most “dangerously subversive” lawyers. His firm made their name defending clients too radical for other lawyers. They defended Communists, draft-dodgers and even members of the militant group, The Black Panthers.

Some of Hillary’s most ardent political supporters are dismayed about her time at the law firm. Of course those opposed to her White House ambitions state that it shows her radical Marxist ideology that she keeps hidden from the public.

I think the biggest item of interest from Clinton’s time at the Communist law firm is her work on a plea negotioan on behalf of armed Black Panthers who stormed into the California legislature in 1967.

In an interview for her book, “Hillary’s Choice,” biographer and author, Gail Sheehy asked Treuhaft about Hillary’s tenure there. He said, “She did want to work for a left-wing movement law firm. Anyone who went to college or law school would have known our law firm was a Communist law firm,” Treuhaft told Ms. Sheehy in 1999.

In a 2007 policy speech on the subject of “Modern Progressive Vision: Shared Prosperity”, then Senator Hillary Clinton said, “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an “on your own” society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a “we’re all in it together” society.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Now I ask you, is America ready for Hillary’s “Progressive Vision”?

And let’s not forget her radical Islamic-Jihadist ties.

Walid Shoebat is one of the founders of the Islamic Association of Palestine, which begat one of the worst terror organizations in our world today, Hamas. After coming to America, he converted to Christianity and now reports on Jihadi activities. He reported a list of 63 names in the US Government that have ties to radical Islam. He said that then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin maintains close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Also on that list, was Najla Ali Mahmoud, the wife of ousted and disgraced Egyptian President Morsi, and his ties to the MB are not speculative. On the contrary, those ties are what prompted the Egyptian Military to take him out of office.

Hillary’s Wellesley College thesis was a 92 page dissertation on, and defense of the saul alinskyradical community organizer, Saul Alinsky. She idolized him, even bringing him to speak at her college in conjunction with interviewing him for her thesis.
She is in agreement with Alinsky on most things, save one.
“I agreed with some of Alinsky’s ideas,” she explained in her 2003 biography, “particularly the value of empowering people to help themselves. But we had a fundamental disagreement. He believed you could change the system only from the outside. I didn’t.”

In this, she is just like Obama in that she understands that much like the famous Cloward and Piven strategy, you cannot effect national change and “fundamentally transform” the United States of America from anywhere except inside the system.

So in summary, I actually fear a Hillary Clinton presidency much more than the Obama tenure. His incessant narcissism and refusal to work with leaders in EITHER party have rendered him much less effective and dangerous than he might otherwise have been. Hillary does not suffer from that problem. She will forge alliances, work with both sides and mow down political enemies to get what she wants, and what she wants is a Marxist America.

Share

Obama, Old Nick, And The Sons Of Alinsky

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Sons Of Alinsky

“Hundreds of agencies, departments, programs, task forces, and commissions are an arsenal that in the wrong hands can be used against the very freedom the government is supposed to uphold, protect and defend.  Rest assured, it’s in the wrong hands.”
Thomas J. Basile

The federal government — at least, the Executive branch, half of the Legislative, and only God knows how much of the Judiciary — has fallen Red-handed into the clutches of the sons (and assorted daughters) of Saul Alinsky, the uncarded Windy City communist who infamously dedicated his subversive rulebook to that evil gadabout Old Nick, better known as the Devil — the same entity that the current President of the United States apparently works for.

Obama taught workshops on Alinsky’s theories and methods for years and in 1985, he started working as a community organizer for and Alinskyite group called, “Developing Community Projects.” While building coalitions of black churches in Chicago, Obama was criticized for not attending church and decided to become an instant Christian. (Obama, Hillary Clinton, Saul Alinsky and Rules For Radicals)

Obama Organizes For AmericaJust add holy water and stir, eh, Barry?  But it wasn’t consecrated H²0 that Obama absorbed in order to re-hydrate his political ambitions; it was liberation theology bile secreted by the anti-semitic “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright.Helluva Good Country

Actions always speak louder than words, especially when the words are uttered by a magic Christian with a glib and permanently forked tongue, and the activities of Obama’s left-wing, Islamophilic administration have made America a far poorer nation — morally, fiscally, and civically — than it was prior to his ill-conceived ascension. But such is generally the case when unchecked radicalism usurps common sense, tradition, and steady progress.  Just ask Citizen Louis Capet, formerly known as King Louis XVI, the 45,000 victims of the French “National Razor,”  or any one of the millions slaughtered over the years by socialist revolutionaries acting under the color of “executive order.”

Happily, the reign of the Alinskyites has not turned lethal, lest you happen to own one of the names on Obama’s disposition matrix or you’re one of the sick unfortunates likely to expire due to the restrictions imposed by the legislative kill pill known in the lexicon as Obamacare; unhappily, the Sons of Alinsky still have 3 years in which to wreak the remainder of their “progressive” havoc. And though Barack Obama’s term of office may expire, Old Nick will be around forever.  And he seems to be a Democrat.

Related articles

PTG

Original Post:  Be Sure You’re Right, Then Go Ahead

Share

More of Obama’s Thug Tactics, con’t.

Share

As reported here at Conservative Hideout previously, the Obama administration is steeped in what can be described as Chicago Thug Political Tactics. Unfortunately, the liberal policies of FDR and LBJ gave vast amounts of money to the political leaders in Chicago to consolidate their choke hold on the city, and therefore, the entire state.

“The New Deal of the 1930s and the Great Society of the 1960s gave the Democratic Party access to new funds and programs for housing, slum clearance, urban renewal, and education, through which to dispense patronage and maintain control of the city.”

Since Obama cut his political teeth in Chicago, learning the ropes not only under the auspices of the Chicago Political Machine, but also as a disciple of Saul Alinsky, he naturally brought these tendencies with him to Washington DC. He has surrounded himself with like-minded individuals who completely understand that they don’t need President Obama’s complicity in their actions. They know what is expected of them and what will and won’t be allowed.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner testifies in WashingtonEnter Timothy Geithner. His ancestry on his mother’s side can be traced all the way back to the Mayflower. He is of German descent, born in America, but spending nearly his entire childhood overseas, mostly in Asia. His academic credentials are impressive, including Dartmouth College, Peking University and Bejing Normal University and also Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.

I think a very interesting point, and one that may indicate at least one reason why he was nabbed by Obama to be his Secretary of the Treasury is worth noting here. It seems that Geithner’s father in the ’80s, ran the Ford Foundation’s microfinance programs in Indonesia, which were being developed by Ann Dunham Soetoro.
ann dunham soetoro
Yes, THAT Ann Dunham Soetoro. Barack Hussien Obama’s mother.

Fast forward to the credit downgrade of the United States by Standard & Poor. That happened in 2011, and it seems that it brought about an ominous warning/threat by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. This has come to light in a legal filing as part of the case Eric Holder’s Justice Department has brought against S&P, following their downgrade of the US credit from AAA to AA+.

The Justice Department’s lawsuit alleges that S&P defrauded investors in the lead-up to the ’08 financial crisis by giving shaky mortgage bonds its highest rating. S&P alleges the suit is in retaliation to the downgrade, stating that Geithner personally called Harold McGraw III, CEO of S&P’s parent company, McGraw Hill Financial.

He said that two days after the announcement of the credit downgrade, Geithner called and warned him that the ratings firm had made an error in its analysis and that “you are accountable for that,” according to a filed legal document.

McGraw said in his deposition that an angry Geithner said on the call that S&P had made previous mistakes and would be “looked at very carefully.” McGraw added that Geithner told him “you have done an enormous disservice to yourselves and to your country” and that the downgrade had caused real damage to the struggling economy.

“Such behavior could not occur, [Geithner] said, without a response from the government,” McGraw said, according to the deposition.

Geithner has denied any such allegations through a spokeperson.

”The allegation that former Secretary Geithner threatened or took any action to prompt retaliatory government action against S&P is false,” Jenni LeCompte said in an emailed statement.

Eric Holder Attends Awards Ceremony At Justice Department

Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department dismissed the charges out of hand.

 

“This is the first time this allegation is being made 2½ years after the call purportedly happened,” a DOJ official said, adding that lawyers involved in the case against S&P had no knowledge of Geithner’s alleged comments.

Now whether anything will ever be proven as to Geithner’s threats. It is clear that this administration continues to bully, threaten, scandalize and demonize anyone who gets in their path.

Share

Gays Persecute Christians, Yet Ignore Muslims That Would Kill Them!

Share

Once again, I’m confronted with a ironic tragedy.  As we have documented, gays are in the process of targeting, and shutting down (or otherwise punishing) Christian run businesses.  However, at the same time that they are fixed against Christians (because God dislikes their behavior), Muslims are actively calling for their deaths!  Here is the latest example, via The Blaze…

“Gays are not killed in islamic [sic] state as long as they don’t force or openly practice their homosexuality in public,” user “@QadeerBaksh” tweeted, adding that such form of government “would look to preserve God’s law in public only bec [sic] God knows what is best for humans.”

Note that we are not talking about the same “god” in this scenario.

The irony is easily detectable ot a thinking human, except that is, gays, who continue to attack Christians (who would pray for them).  And all the while, these same gays ignore the Muslims, who openly advocate killing them.

Share

Classic Conservative Hideout: This is the Tolerance of the Left: Intimidation, Harassment, and Threats (Brett Kimberlin and #FreeKate Edition)

Share

I republish this post, with some edits, every year.  I think it’s wise to review leftist tactics, as well as honor those that have endured much in the cause of human freedom.  There are people our own country that put their safety and livelihoods on the line to promote the teachings of Jesus Christ, as well as the concepts of freedom laid out by our own Founding Fathers. Given that people are placed in physical and legal jeopardy by convicted bombers, or by those that want to legalize sex between adults and minors, it’s wise to expose and discuss the tactics of the left-Matt 

This is a story that I’ve known about for some time now.  It is the story of Ruth Malhotra.  As a student at Georgia Tech, she endured verbal abuse from professors, death threats, threats to be raped, and an otherwise sickening pattern of harassment from the university administration and “community.”  The following is from a Front Page article, by Peter Collier.

A committed Christian, she was personally conservative but not particularly political when she arrived at Tech in 2002. But in the perfervid post 9/11 atmosphere on campus, she found herself gradually pulled into the orbit of the College Republicans and soon galvanized not only by questions of war and peace but also by issues such as race preferences and abortion. And on all of these issues, she found, conservative students faced a tilted playing field. She recalls: “The more I got involved, the more I saw the obstacles conservative students face in expressing themselves. The administration put so many more challenges in our way. We didn’t have the same resources and opportunities that leftist students had. I expected an open forum for ideas, but the administration was clearly biased.”

So were some of her teachers. Malhotra’s first open conflict with the Tech administration came in the spring of 2004, when she enrolled in a course called Foundations of Public Policy. The first day class she told the professor, a woman named Georgia Persons, that she would have to miss one class session because of a conference she was attending in Washington. Persons asked who was holding the conference. When Malhotra told her it was the Conservative Political Action Committee, the teacher warned her that she would fail the course. Malhotra thought this might be more of the in-class hyperbole she’d heard from other liberal professors. But she did indeed fail the first test. Otherwise a 4.0 student, she complained about the grade to the Dean’s Office, also claiming that the professor had made snide remarks in class about Christians and conservatives that were obviously directed at her. After filing a grievance, Malhotra brokered a deal in which she was allowed to withdraw from the class without penalty and the professor would not be allowed to teach it again.

So, the professor attempted to punish a Conservative student?  This has happened many times before, but for Ms. Malhotra, it was only the beginning.

It was about this time that she was called into by a dean who told her that the College Republicans were a “joke” and should cease their activities. Pointing out that her group was merely expressing its opinions the way that the preponderant leftwing groups did, Malhotra was then sent to Tech’s Vice President, who passed her on to President Wayne Clough, who made it clear to her that he found her actions distasteful and not in accord with the “atmosphere of civility” he sought for the campus. When Malhotra pointed out that this atmosphere included—indeed, was defined by—leftist groups violently and often obscenely condemning the President and the war in Iraq, and, for that matter, attacking the faith of conservative Christians like herself—she received a brush off.

This is very typical.  The left accuses others of doing what they do.  They then use power in an attempt to silence any dissent.

Already a controversial figure on campus, Malhotra, now chief plaintiff in the suit filed with fellow student leader Orit Sklar, became Public Enemy number one for the Georgia Tech left. An ad hoc group called CLAM (Conservatives and Liberals Against Malhotra) formed on campus with the sole raison d’etre of harassing her. An anti Malhotra website appeared calling her “christo-fascist” and showing an unflattering shot of her face stippled with digitized swastikas.

Again, this is standard operating procedure for the left.  Demonize the person, so the message will be ignored.

Malhotra was accepted by Tech for graduate school in the fall of 2006. A few months earlier, a judge had heard the first point of French’s four point suit—the one regarding the speech code—and ordered mediation between the parties. The university agreed to change the policy, but almost immediately reneged on its promise. In August, a few weeks before classes began, the judge heard arguments on the speech code and then struck it down.

Never acknowledging the constitutional reason for the court decision, Tech reacted by appropriating $100,000 to bring in speakers (among them, Maya Angelou at a fee of $22,500) and hold “meaningful discussions” as part of a campus-wide initiative called “Common Ground” meant to reaffirm the commitment to “civility” (which the court hearing had shown was nothing more than officially sanctioned politically correct speech) in spite of the legal setback it had suffered.

So, their speech code was struck down, and they acted as if it hadn’t happened.

It was during this kuybaya moment that threats against Malhotra reached a crescendo. “So your not dead yet Ruth Malhotra,” one of them began with uncertain grammar but unmistakable enmity. “But you will be soon.” Another one warned, “Don’t even try to protest National Coming Out Day. If you do, you will regret it, and don’t say you were not warned. You are hated on this campus and you should fear for your life.” Yet another said, “For every time a student is called Nigger on campus—you will receive a bullet to the head.”

The campus police defined the threats as “terroristic.” But although some of the letters were brazenly signed by persons on and off campus, no arrests have been made. And the administration itself, ignoring the opportunity to strike a blow in behalf of the civility it claims to prize, has remained mute about the invisible outrage taking place on its campus. (A public information officer replies to questions about the case by reading a statement which says that Georgia Tech cannot comment because of its commitment to protecting its students’ privacy; when it is pointed out to him that the only student with a privacy issue in this case, Malhotra herself, is willing to waive this privilege, he says that he will consult the school’s legal counsel and is never heard from again.)

When they couldn’t silence her by threatening her with failing grades, they harassed and insulted her.  When the campus denies her free speech, and they lose the lawsuit, they continue as if nothing happened.  When she would not submit to the left, they went where the left always goes-to threats of violence.  Then, when these threats are reported, they are ignored.  From top to bottom, the leftists at Georgia Tech decided to persecute this woman.

In the end,  the left is totally entrenched at the universities.  Given their tactics, they seem intent on staying on the indoctrination reservation.

I think Ms. Malhotra’s lawyer summed it up best.

David French, her lawyer in this case and a longtime litigator in matters of free speech and student rights, is also stunned by what has happened to Malhotra: “I’ve never seen anything quite like this. The tolerant left at Georgia Tech seems to have decided that Ruth must be destroyed to protect `tolerance.’ The administration sees one of its own threatened by death and rape and they just sit there. I’ve seen conservative students suffer a lot of abuse for their beliefs. But I’ve never seen abuse cross over into threats. And I’ve never seen an administration sit on its hands while one of its students is threatened by death and rape. It makes you wonder: have we gone past simple intimidation to death threats now? Is this sort of thing going to become a standard part of left’s playbook in intimidating conservative students? How far will they go?”

I think we’ve all seem where it’s gone in the three years since this article was written.  Just ask Kenneth Gladney, and the 14-year-old kid that the SEIU intimidated.  Also, please remember the people that were harassed and lost their livelihoods for contributing to support Prop 8 in California.  For that matter, think of how the Democrats & MSM has treated the Tea Parties since they decided to stop ignoring them.  They have consistently used the most demeaning of terms and accusations to describe patriots, yet ignores real violence and terror used by the left.

The only thing that stops bullying is a large number of people standing up to it.  Leftist tactics work well against individuals, or small groups.  But what if thousands, or even millions stood up and said, “NO MORE!”  That, my friends, is when the bullies stop cold.  They don’t know how to handle resistance on that level.  Remember that bullies are, at their core, cowards that desperately try to control situations with force, threats, and dirty tactics.  Cause the tactics to not work, and all you are left with is a coward.  -Matt

Share

More ‘Inner Workings’ of the #FreeKate Facebook Page: Control the Message and Punishing Dissent

Share

Please note that most of this post was written prior to the FreeKate Facebook page “hacking.”  I held off on publishing this until I sent information to the IRC Sheriff’s Office.  The post has been edited to reflect new information.   Also note that I have redacted the names of the former Freekate admins at the request of several of them, as they fear for retaliation at the hands of the Hunt family and their supporters.  This is another post showing how #FreeKate efforts shows similarity to liberal movements.-Matt

One thing that liberals seem to love is to control the message.  Usually, that means that they seek to limit the ability of others to discuss important matters.  If you recall, there have been many efforts to reinstate the (un)fairness doctrine, or install something like it, to prevent Conservative Talk radio hosts from taking to the airwaves.  They have proposed placing limits on what bloggers can say.  They have, in fact, brought it up again.  And, they will even attack supporters if they “leave the reservation.”  Remember how Bob Woodward, once an icon of liberal journalism, was treated once he spoke out?  Needless to say, in liberal land, there is no room for dissent.  And, as a “creature” of liberalism, #FreeKate is no exception.

Here is a single example of how supporters are looked at if they become a “problem”…

To give a glimpse of how Kelly Hunt Smith likes donors, here is a screencap…

(16) NEW ADMIN CHAT - khs slappcontributors2a

Again, donors help their cause, but are treated with disdain.

A significant feature of liberalism is a lack of moral principal.  To liberals, the truth is a malleable thing that can be beaten into whatever shape is needed at that moment.  There is no real truth-no moral center, no absolutes.  As a Christian, I can say that it’s absolutely wrong to have sex with kids.  It was wrong yesterday.  It is wrong today.  And, it will still be wrong tomorrow, and a century from now.  It’s an eternal truth that adults should not exploit children for their own pleasure-even if they manipulate the kid into thinking it was their idea, or even acceptable.   For most of us, there is such a thing as a moral absolute.  We have a permanent set of ideas from a God that loves us, and wishes to protect us from unhealthy things.  It’s something that’s bigger than ourselves, and we try to work at living that way.  We often  fall short, but we try.

For far too many liberals however, there is nothing bigger than themselves.   Without a moral center, they can justify lying, threats, and almost any level of hate needed to get where they are going.  Something might have been “kinda-sorta wrong” yesterday, but today, it’s OK, within some arbitrary limits.  Tomorrow, it might be perfectly fine and unrestricted.  In fact, it might all be acceptable, provided that one is not caught.  If one is caught, then the persons responsible for pointing out the facts are blamed, attacked, and smeared.   (If you recall, the bloggers that “caught” Anthony Weiner in his original sexting scandal were accused of “hacking” him) Without a central set of moral concepts, they stumble from sin to sin, deceiving, and being deceived.    Everything is OK, with the notable exception of disagreeing with them.  Lacking the rudder provided by a functional  moral code, the ends justify the means. In the case of #FreeKate,the end is sex with minors, the means is smearing any opposition as “hate.”  In other words, they are liberals.

And how does #FreeKate respond to truth?  Since they cannot refute it, they attack the people that present it.  Support Honesty, myself, R.S. McCain and anyone else that has presented actual facts about that case are “haters.”  They won’t debate what we’ve said.  They’ll call us “liars,” yet cannot cite a single example of a lie being told.  They just attack us as “haters.”

In fact, Support Honesty has gone as far as to publish this…

We have reached out to Kaitlyn Hunt’s attorney’s office through their website, as well as multiple emails to the Hunt family themselves, as well as several open invitations extended to the Hunt family and their supporters online to give opportunity for anyone to correct the record on anything on this site that factually inaccurate. We welcome anyone interested in fact-checking this site and providing documentation proving where the content here is mistaken.

Despite receiving no response at all from the Hunt family or their attorney to correct the record, Kelley Hunt Smith has on at least two occasions accused this site of lying without backing that claim up with any evidence. My email address is author@supporthonesty.net and I welcome any corrections Mrs. Hunt Smith, her family or her supporters can back up with something more substantial than “because Kelley says so”

I do not expect anyone to believe anything on this site simply at my insistence; I provide references to all source material for each of the facts I list here for this reason. I encourage everyone to do their own homework, review the relevant documents and the statements made by the Hunt family, apply critical thought and come up with your own conclusions.

We back up facts with solid documented proof. We think it would be awesome if Kelley Hunt Smith would do the same.

Of course, there has been no response.  If #FreeKate used facts, they would lose. Reality is against them, so they attack the people that present it.  Reality is the ultimate enemy of any liberal movement, and#FreeKate.  I’ll extend the same offer, but since they have no documented evidence, I don’t see me getting a response.

Just like the Tea Party is racist, and Conservatives are greedy and evil, liberals attack their enemies so their followers won’t listen to them-and realize that the liberals have been lying to them all along.  In this regard, #FreeKate is no different.

To follow up on my prior post about accusing the accusers, here is another screencap indicating that Kelly Hunt Smith, Kaitlyn Hunt’s mother, told admins at the FreeKate Facebook page to publish personal information on someone who pointed out facts about the case…

(13) NEW ADMIN CHAT - khs targeting jeanette2b

And, it appears that even some of the FreeKate admins thought that it wasn’t a good idea, but it was done anyway.  Instead of refuting what Jeanette Victoria said, they decided to get “dirt” on her and publish it.

Here is one of the FreeKate admins reporting about how she went to Facebook pages critical of FreeKate, and attempted to have their comments deleted, and the users suspended…

(13) NEW ADMIN CHAT -blocking reporting truth tellers2a

Here is an example of how the #FreeKate supporters were able to get an entire Facebook group suspended.

(1) NEW ADMIN CHAT - deleted a page2a

Again, there is no effort to spread their message here, or actually promote their own point of view.  They were actively preventing other people from sharing theirs.  When we see liberal groups shouting down opponents, or using thugs to disrupt peaceful demonstrations, or public events, we see the comparisons.  Remember this from the Texas Abortion debates…

Yes, those are pro-abortion protesters trying to drown the speaker out with the call, “Hail Satan.”

Or, you can read up on how liberals heckled school children for singing “God Bless the USA” in a public park. 

Or how union goons disrupted a Special Olympics event.

Is it wrong to keep Special Olympics participants from being congratulated by the governor?  It is if you have no morals!

And this from earlier this week, Wyblog tells us how some political candidates aren’t allowed to speak.

Just like any liberal run activity, only the #FreeKate narrative is permitted, and all others will be silenced!

As I have volumes of information that I am still going through, I found additional information that shows that Kelley Hunt Smith was active in “digging up dirt” on the victim’s mother…

-1-Investigators-Messages 2013-09-08 17-30-32a

Note that they were contemplating using a school district staff person to assist them?  Now, if that school district staff went through educational records in order to dig up “dirt,” would that not constitute a breach of privacy?  Or, do the ends justify the means?  To clarify, at the time of this writing, it is unclear what level of assistance was given, if any.

And, of course, even mentioning the facts of this case makes one a “target.” In a feeble attempt to intimidate your humble corespondent, Rachael Carson Zerbe, the suspected author of the “Jailbait Manifesto,” has decided that commenting on a national news story, or on publicly posted manifestos, constitutes harassment…

 

You see, #FreeKate supporters can harass, attack, insult, prevent others from speaking out,  “dig up dirt,” and what not. However, if someone simply discusses the case, and particularity the facts of the case, they are suddenly guilty of “harassment.” Again, this is a typical liberal tactic.  Instead of promoting a cause, or stating their case, they seek to silence anyone who discusses the actual facts of it.  Are we to assume that to Rachael Carson Zerbe, the First Amendment applies only to her, and perhaps to people that agree with her?  She can say anything she likes, but if one quotes and discusses it, and worse, disagrees with it, they are guilty of a “crime?” At any rate, nice try, but the last time I looked, Freedom of Speech applied to all American’s, not just you.

Note that in my communications with the IRC Sheriff’s office, Rachael, and her complaints of “harassment,” were never a topic of conversation.

In an additional turn, A different tactic has emerged-one I had not yet seen out of the #FreeKate crowd. One claimed supporter is now threatening the professional careers of people that speak out against adults having sex with minors.  Apparently, Summer Koryo has been targeted…

 

This would not be the first time that someone’s professional career has been threatened by a leftist. After all, if they have little to no morals, and have to silence dissent, this kind of threat might be expected. However, to get someone’s professional license pulled, they are going to have to lie quite a bit.  Given the track record of #FreeKate, I don’t see lying being an obstacle.

Frankly, Summer doesn’t seem at all alarmed, nor do I think she needs to be.  I’ve seen this tactic used before, in other situations, but I see no professional  licensing body pulling a practitioner’s license for publicly opposing sex with minors.

In the end, like any other liberal movement, #FreeKate seems expends far more time and energy trying to attack and silence people that discuss them than promoting anything substantial, other than making it legal for adults to have sex with minors.  And frankly, they are even having a hard time doing that.

I, for one, refuse to be silenced.

Share

#FreeKate #KatesFight Update: Law Enforcement Involvement and the Consequences of Standing up to Bullies

Share

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

Edmund Burke

First off, I’d like to apologize for being cryptic the other day.  I really do hate when people do that, particularly bloggers.  However, here is where I explain what I’ve been up to, and how that applies to #FreeKate, now #KatesFight.

As I have been indicating on Twitter, sources have been coming to me with the inner workings of #FreeKate, including their admins.  I had been posting screencaptures of those, and will continue to do so.  In fact, I still have tremendous amounts of information that I have not had the opportunity to read fully, which explains my decreased posting.   I have also been given information regarding the potential misuse of money obtained in the fundraising efforts of #FreeKate.  Consequently, the IRC Sheriff’s office was notified that I held potential evidence, and they reached out to me.  After phone and email communications with their office, I have forwarded information to them.  I do not know at the time of this writing how useful that information will be, but I gladly sent it along, and, I will likely send even more, as it becomes available.

I did that, and openly state it, with the full recognition that it will result in retaliation from the #FreeKate or #KatesFight crowd.  Much of my recent coverage of that movement has been in comparison to other liberal movements that use Alinsky tactics to silence, smear, or otherwise punish anyone who exposes them, or even disagrees with their narrative.  So far, they have performed as predicted.  And, I project that they will continue to do so.

So, why all this then?  Why go over all of this?  Too many times, good, well meaning people are punished into silence by regressive tactics.  Businesses are forced to close.  People are bullied and intimidated.  Some are terrorized in their own homes and business.  All because #FreeKate or #KatesFight, like other liberal entities, use bully/mob tactics to silence dissent, as they can’t withstand it.  With all of the lies told by the Hunt family and their supporters, they HAVE to threaten and silence people that mention the truth.  Their cause collapses in the face of facts (an upcoming post will expand on that). As for myself, not only have I stated the facts of the case, I have supplied law enforcement with potential evidence.   That means that they likely will have to redouble any efforts against me, as they don’t want others to come forward and hand over their evidence to the police as well.  In other words, they might try and make an “example” out of me.

I know that there are people that are holding even more evidence against the Hunts, but are in fear for their personal safety.  I have relayed that fact to the IRC Sheriff’s office as well (I have not given them names).  I hope that by making a public stand, and weathering whatever nonsense comes my way, that the others will come forward as well.  It only takes a few people to make a stand, and others answer the call to get involved.

Another, and perhaps more personally, I have little room for bullies in my world,  I have spent years of my life advocating for bullied teens.  When I see how the #FreeKate movement has treated the Smith family, blaming them and their minor daughter for behavior of an adult, I am alarmed.  When I see that they dig up “dirt” on their victim’s mother, the detective investigating the case, and people that expose their lies, I recognize their Alinsky tactics.  And, if we continue to allow these tactics to work, they will continue to be used-not just by #FreeKate, but by other entities as well.  The fact of the matter is that if enough people stand up to the bullies, their tactics will not longer work.

So, I will stand against the lies, the threats, and the thug tactics.  I refuse to be silenced, and give the bullies of the world an easy win.  I am not a victim, nor will I allow myself to be one.  For every tactic that is used against me, there will be a post explaining it.  I will display their activities to all who want to read it.  I will not advocate violence, or encourage others to engage in it.  The truth is the sharpest sword, and that will be my “weapon” of choice.   The world needs to know what their tactics are about, and why people use them.  It’s actually an incredible opportunity to expose leftist bullying tactics to the greater world.  So then, #FreeKate, or #KatesFight, or whatever you’re calling yourselves these days; do your worst.  I’m not going to lay down, and I’m going to document every dirty move you make.  I am not your typical target.  I know your tactics.   I will not cower.  I will not be goaded into stupid threats and counter-threats.   I will not be silenced.

Share

‘Hail Satan’ Update: Reinforcements Needed

Share

evil

Last week, the CH 2.0 covered the fact that the pro-abortion protesters pulled out an interesting Alinsky-type tactic in their fight against the pro-life crowd.  They took to chanting “Hail Satan.”   While I’m quite sure that the pro-abortion folks think that they are simply ridiculing and demoralizing the Christian pro-life protesters, we know that this is something more-a lot more.  The Other McCain has more…

It was therefore somewhat confusing to learn last week that, in the fight to save innocent unborn lives in Texas, the forces of evil were so numerous and vocal as to discourage Christians:

The battle over the bill has attracted nationwide attention to Austin. During confrontations between supporters and opponents of the legislation at the state capitol last week, a group of anti-abortion protesters began singing the Christian hymn “Amazing Grace.” They were heckled by pro-abortion activists who chanted “Hail, Satan.” It was reported last week that a group called Grassroots Campaigns was offering to pay abortion supporters between $1,300 and $2,200 a month to participate in “our Pro Choice Campaign in Austin.”
One abortion opponent said he was exhausted by the “spiritual warfare” over the abortion bill.
“I have never seen the left do more spiritual warfare than I have so far this week,” Thomas Umstattd Jr. wrote at his blog. “Those of us who have been at the Capitol are worn out. I am weary to my bones. We need reinforcements.”

Will pro-life reinforcements turn out Monday at the Capitol? The reputation and honor of Texas is at stake in this spiritual warfare.

The good folks down in Texas need our help.  If you cannot go, pray.  And, get everyone else praying for these people as well.  The pro-abortion folks think that they are just engaging in bullying.  It is far more than that, but they aren’t going to get that until later, when they’ll find Satan’s retirement plan less than desirable.   However, we can let the good guys know that we have their back.

I’m sending this out to several churches.

Share

David Axelrod States the Obama Thinks That Boston Marathon Bombing Related to “Tax Day”

Share

And the liberal lie smear game just keeps on coming.  Former Clinton adviser and current Obama minion, David Axlerod, is suggesting that the President himself thinks that “tax day” is the motivation for the Boston Marathon bombing.

As you can see, this was another Alinsky type attack.  It was a bit more subtle.  It was like saying, we really don’t know, but it was tax day, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, and David Axelrod is an expert at it.

Welcome to the post reality world!


You can support the CH2.0 with your Amazon purchases, at no additional expense!

Share

According the DHS and CIAC, We Christians are Taking God and the Bible “too Seriously”

Share

And, the war on Christians continues to ramp up.  The Clash Daily has printed a letter from a Colorado law enforcement officer, who claims to have attended a training provided by CIAC, which is a “fusion center.”  These centers exchange information between state and local law enforcement agencies, and DHS.  We looked at how these centers work back in 2009, when the infamous DHS report was preceded by the equally offenseive MIAC report.  Here is the letter…

From: rtrowbridge@prowerscounty.net To: forknown@hotmail.com Subject: CSP Training Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 10:30:22 -0600

On April 1, 2013 I attended training in La Junta, Colorado hosted by the Colorado State Patrol (CSP).  The training was from 12:00 pm to 4:00 pm and covered two topics, Sovereign Citizens, and Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs.  I was pretty familiar with motorcycle gangs but since we often deal with the so-called sovereign citizen groups I was interested to see what they had to say.  The group consisted of police officers, deputies, and CSP troopers.  There were about 20 people in attendance.

Trooper Joe Kluczynski taught a 2-hour section on sovereign citizens.  Kluczynski spent most of his two hours focusing on how, in his view and apparently the view of Homeland Security, people turn to the sovereign citizen movement.  Kluczynski started off by saying there are probably some sovereign citizens in this room and gave a generalized list of those groups that have sovereign citizen views.  Among those groups, Kluczynski had listed, were those who believe America was founded on godly principles, Christians who take the Bible literally, and “fundamentalists”.  Kluczynski did not explain what he meant by “fundamentalists” but from the context it was clear he was referring again to those who took the Bible literally or “too seriously.”

While Kluczynski emphasized that sovereign citizens have a right to their beliefs, he was clearly teaching that the groups he had listed should be watched by law enforcement and should be treated with caution because of their potential to assault law enforcement.  Kluczynski explained why he believed these groups were dangerous saying they were angry over the election of a black president.  When someone in the group suggested the failing economy was probably much more to blame, Kluczynski intimated that those who are not going along with the changes in America will need to be controlled by law enforcement.  Kluczynski even later questioned some of the troopers present if they were willing and prepared to confiscate “illegal” weapons if ordered to.

Kluczynski’s assignment with the CSP was an Analyst for the Colorado Information Analysis Center, (CIAC).  CIAC is funded by Homeland Security funds and run by the CSP.  Kluczynski said he gets his information from the Department of Homeland Security.  Kluczynski said he was leaving the CSP at the end of that week (March 29, 2013) to begin his new career with Homeland Security.  I thought he was perfect for the job.

Ron Trowbridge
Undersheriff
Prowers County Sheriff’s Office

The linked article at the Clash Daily, linked above, has much more information, and I recommend you check it out.

So, this shows all the hallmarks of the last report.  There are targets to be smeared.  The smear is to link normal patriotic Americans with hate groups, racists, and extremists.  Then, when the time comes to round up the enemies of the state, authorities are properly and sufficiently propagandised to ignore the truth and follow orders.  Then again, planting the seed in law enforcement’s heads that Christians might be interested in assaulting them might make officers want to “shoot first and ask questions later.” At least that’s the idea.  Our leftists tend to underestimate the strength and determination of real people, so many will remain solidly on the side of law.  Hopefully there will be enough.

And, as I predicted in 2009, how long will it take before DHS is echoing the CIAC  training materials?

Share

The Psychology of Gun Control

Share

gun_control_works

Last week, I saw a picture that shows the psychology of gun control perfectly.  Here’s the pic…

psychology gun control

The real psychology of gun control is far more subtle than the public debate would imply.  It is also far more powerful.  The state always wants order, and power.  While order is desirable, the state’s means of enforcing it is shown by the man with the whip.  It is based on fear, threats, and injustice.  It is not just, it is violence.  As for the people?  Most of them bowed.   But when one stood up, others were emboldened to stand as well, and even thought the state continued using it’s whip, he was eventually broken when all the people stood up.

To look at this further, we have to turn it around, and realize that many people are being conditioned to be compliant, even to their own detriment.  To get there, we need to look at learned helplessness.  It’s a psychological state in which a person does not try to help themselves.  It is, in fact, so pervasive that people do not think to help themselves, because they do not believe that anything can be done for them.  To illustrate, let’s use an old analogy.  I don’t know how factually true it is, but it does capture this quite well.

When a baby elephant was born in the circus or zoo.  A rope would be tied to one leg, and secured with a stake in the ground.  Try as it might, the baby elephant could not escape.  Eventually, it would quit trying, and accept it’s captivity.  As the elephant grew into adulthood, it would continue to be restrained in the exact same way, even though it could easily pull the rope and stake right out of the ground.  Based on it’s learning and conditioning, it no longer contemplates its escape, and passively accepts it’s captivity.  It has learned to be helpless.

That state of passive captivity is exactly where the state wants all of us.  And, the political left attempt to create this by use of the Alinsky Method.  People that dissent, believe in freedom, and such are singled out and destroyed.  They are harassed in public, and in their own homes.  Their children and tracked and harassed.  They receive death threats, false lawsuits are filed.  Basically, the target is relentlessly isolated and attacked until they submit.  They want the target to submit and be passive, and they want to people witnessing it to not get any bright ideas about having independent thoughts of their own.  Also, when children are singled out for punishment in school for being Christian, or c0llege students are threatened with failing grades for not embracing the “tolerance” of the regressives. we see the isolation and attack mode that seeks to create passive sheeple, and punish those that stand up.

How this applies to gun control is simple.  A firearm provides a sense of security and confidence.  As the old saying goes, “God made man, but Samuel  Colt made them equal.”  Meaning, that it became very difficult to intimidate and subjugate a man that is armed.  It is a catalyst for independence, as when a human can defend themselves, they will stand up to the state, community organizers, or union goons.  It’s the “emboldening agent” that could be applied to the picture.  It’s the great equalizer of our Republic. It is the counterbalance to tyranny; the gun owner is confident, and the one(s) that would attack him are wary.  It doesn’t matter that the gun owner cannot impose his will on others, as others cannot impose their will on him.

If you will notice, we see stories about union attacks, and community organizers intimidating people far more in urban areas.  Why is this?  I think most of you will understand why.  In the cities, there are more gun control laws, so these thugs have less of a chance of being confronted by an armed citizen.  In the suburbs, and especially in rural areas, the thug’s shenanigans would be confronted with the sound on dozens of “metallic clicks.”  It’s hard to intimidate someone that can fight back, even if he or she is outnumbered (or, unless the government limits the amount of bullets that go in magazines).

Obviously, the gun owner  can’t stand against the military, nor can he wreck the state single-handedly, nor does he have to.  However, he and a million so of his close friends, could make the country ungovernable.   And when he does that, even more will stand with him.   In that scenario, I wouldn’t want to be the man bearing the whip. Again, it’s about being confident, and not psychologically helpless that wins the day.  It’s a psychological balance of power that is at stake.  And, that’s exactly why the state wants to take the guns-they seek compliant sheeple, and emboldened free citizens with fire arms prevent that.

Share

More Reactions from the SWATting of Aaron Walker

Share

Since my post late last evening, there have been some more developments in the Aaron Walker/Brett Kimberlin story.  First off, Walker himself posted on the matter…

So anyone following along on twitter know the basics.  I was SWATted tonight.  My wife was down in the basement, and unknown to me she had fallen asleep in an uncomfortable position while watching TV.  I was just finishing up a post where I was going to share Kimberlin’s nutty response to my motion for a partial stay when someone decided to recklessly endanger my life.

I mean again.  Let’s not forget the last time someone intentionally engaged in conduct that they knew could get me and my wife killed.  In that case we know who the culprit was: Brett Kimberlin.  He intentionally and gratuitously revealed my real name, home address, work and work address, in court documents and then told the police in a letter that he believed because of his actions that “there exists the very real probability that Mr. Walker could be subjected to serious harm or death now that his identity has been exposed.”  And then he fought tooth and nail to keep that information from being sealed, and then fought to get them unsealed.

Anyway, to the police officers’ credit, they recognized a hoax was a real possibility.  I would describe what they did next as just due diligence.  They had me stand out in the yard and talk to an officer about who my list of suspects were, in my bare feet and everything, and they swept the house and verified my wife was safe and no one else was in danger.  As I became more aware of my surroundings, I saw around 5-6 cop cars at the corner, and a number of officers waiting.  No, it wasn’t a SWAT team.  One weenie-ish SWATting apologist thinks that if they don’t bring out the SWAT van it doesn’t count, failing to understand that like many slang terms, it is not utterly literal.

My wife came out a bit later and she appeared to be okay and I gave her a hug.  She later told me when the officer woke her up, she said, the same phrase, “let me guess, someone called and said my husband shot me…”  She says the cop was surprised that she wasn’t surprised.  Then I spent a good hour or two talking to the police and contacting people with vital information.  That is, for instance, how Patrick Frey over at Patterico’s knew first even before I tweeted anything out about it, because I knew he would have a lot to tell them.  And we will be working with a detective to get at who committed this latest crime against us in the days to come.

As you can see, this was another attempt to silence someone who has blogged about “Team Kimberlin.”

Via Instapundit, we learn that one of Aaron Walker’s lawyers, Bruce Godfrey, has felt compelled to issue a statement defiantly defending taking on Aaron as a client.  Why would that be?  Perhaps, Mr. Godfrey gives us the answer:

I do know that there have been some petty efforts to interfere with my relationships with some legal referral sources of mine. But when I tell you I don’t care, I don’t care. I have no boss to “harass”; this law shop is mine for my clients’ welfare and I answer to no one but my clients and the courts. That’s that.

Either you have the courage to do what needs to be done as an attorney, or you don’t. Fortunately, I do. At the risk of ungentlemanly coarseness, mine are made out of high-quality tempered American brass, and that fact settles the discussion. Indeed, the best way to discourage this sort of nonsense is to respond to it with moral fortitude, measured, reasonable responses and, to the extent strictly lawful, vi et armis.

I’m wonder if the “bad guys” are figuring out that the good guys aren’t going to fold, and have far more collective resources than was initially thought?  That, and they haven’t realized that Alinsky is dead, and so is his method.

Share

The Other McCain Forced Into Hiding by Convicted Bomber? It’s More Likely Than You Think

Share

Sometimes, blogging takes a dark turn-namely when a blogger encounters someone who does not like being a topic of attention.  Enter then, the strange case of Brett Kimberlin, the convicted terrorist that has not reacted kindly to being under the careful examination of Stacey McCain.  Rather than rehashing the entire  situation, here is a quote from Stacey himself…

FROM AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION
Convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin on Monday continued his effort to silence those who write about his criminal past by contacting my wife’s employer, claiming that I was “harassing” him. The resulting security concern required immediate relocation if I was to be able to continue writing about the case of Kimberlin, a violent felon, perjurer and admitted tax cheat who is employed as the director of a 501(c)3 non-profit that has collected $1.8 million in contributions since 2005.

Kimberlin was convicted of multiple federal felonies in 1981 and sentenced to 50 years in prison after he terrorized a small Indiana town in a brutal crime weeklong bombing spree. Law enforcement officials told the Indianapolis Star they believed the bombings were committed in an attempt to distract authorities investigating the 1978 murder of a 65-year-old grandmother, a crime in which Kimberlin was a suspect.

He goes on to chronicle some of Kimberlin’s history, which consists of a bombing, and alleged tax evasion, all while he is involved with at least two non-profit, tax exempt organizations.  And, as you might guess, he is associated with liberal causes.

On Monday, Stacey had written…

FROM AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION
Law enforcement officials have been made aware that convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin appears to be engaged in an attempt to intimidate me into being silent about his sordid criminal history.

Appropriate precautions have been taken to ensure the safety of my family and others who might be endangered if Kimberlin resorts to violence to accomplish his malicious purposes. At the urging of concerned friends, we have vacated our former residence and I am now blogging from a secret location which Kimberlin will be unable to discover or reach. Nevertheless, we sincerely ask for intercessory prayer, that God will send angels to guard us in this grave crisis.

In fact, this crisis is an answer to prayer: My wife and I had been contemplating whether to leave Maryland, and had asked that God would give us a sign. Guess we got what we prayed for — unexpectedly!

Nevertheless, my sudden relocation — The Mother of All Road Trips, as it were — will involve large expenses.  We will have to rent a new house, pay people to pack up the belongings at our former residence, and move everything to the new location.

Remember that this is still a Shameless Capitalist Blog, and keep in mind The Five Most Important Words in the English Language . . .

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!

Well, you have your orders, so get over there and hit the tip jar!

Here are some links about Kimberlin, and his long history of nasty stuff.

The Lonely Conservative wrote a great post about this, calling on an “Army of Davids” to make sure the Kimberline’s history is thoroughly exposed.  She also wrote about Stacey’s “bug out,” and  has some more information on Kimberline.  

TCOTS also has coverage.  

I have always subscribed to the notion that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.  Considering Kimberlin’s past, as well as his current tendency to harass and threaten anyone that discusses his well documented past, he ought to be considered dangerous.  Is there risk in even mentioning this?  Probably, but when this happens, I always think that if we let people be silenced one by one, it’s only a matter of time before we are all silenced.  However, if we band together, not only is it much harder to force us into silence, but we stand a better chance of preventing people like Kimberlin for victimizing others. So, I’m taking my place on the line.

Won’t you join us, and make this viral?

Linked by:

King Shamus

Thoughts and Rantings

Nice Deb

Zilla

Lonely Conservative

TCOTS

Radio Patriot

 Hoge Wash

Ask Marion

Political Realities

Gulag Bound

Thanks to you all!

Share

Ending Bullying With Even More Bullying: Or is it Really About Attacking Dissent? UPDATED

Share

We have frequently noted that one of the main goals of leftists is to silence dissent.  If they try to argue based on facts, they tend to fall flat on their faces.  So, the next best thing is to attack and discredit anyone that disagrees with them, attempting to silence them with wave after wave of ridicule, intimidation and abuse.  For the latest example, we need to look at the incredibly ironic, and excessively hypocritical efforts to end bullying.  While everyone would agree that actual bullying should be combated, it isn’t the real agenda, at least not for our leftist neighbors.  Instead, it is another flavor of political correctness/Cultural Marxism.  The mechanism is simple:  any disagreement with the leftist agenda is hate, and since bullying is hate, any dissent is therefore bullying.

For the latest example, kindly take a look at how an “anti-bullying crusader” treats Christians…

As many as 100 high school students walked out of a national journalism conference after an anti-bullying speaker began cursing, attacked the Bible and reportedly called those who refused to listen to his rant “pansy asses.”

The speaker was Dan Savage, founder of the “It Gets Better” project, an anti-bullying campaign that has reached more than 40 million viewers with contributors ranging from President Obama to Hollywood stars. Savage also writes a sex advice column called “Savage Love.”

Savage, and his husband, were also guests at the White House for President Obama’s 2011 LGBT Pride Month reception. He was also invited to a White House anti-bullying conference.

So, so to set the stage, this guy is a widely know, and apparently well respected (at least in lefty circles) “anti-bullying” expert.

Rick Tuttle, the journalism advisor for Sutter Union High School in California, was among several thousand people in the audience. He said they thought the speech was one thing – but it turned into something else.

“I thought this would be about anti-bullying,” Tuttle told Fox news. “It turned into a pointed attack on Christian beliefs.”

Tuttle said a number of his students were offended by Savage’s remarks – and some decided to leave the auditorium.

“It became hostile,” he said. “It felt hostile as we were sitting in the audience – especially towards Christians who espouse beliefs that he was literally taking on.”

So then, in an effort to end “bullying,” Mr. Savage thinks it perfectly appropriate to engage in some of his own, attacking people that disagree with his beliefs and behaviors.  Because, as we all know, attacking, deriding, and abusing people that disagree with any facet of the leftist platform is somehow not bullying?  Just like, disagreeing with the feminist agenda is a “war on women,” but the same critics that are incredibly abusive towards Conservative women are just fine?  Or, is it that any disagreement with Barak Obama is blatent racism, but attacking Herman Cain, or other Conservative blacks is par for the course?

I would submit that not only is such behavior hypocritical, it is also evil.  And, in fact, we were warned that this would happen…

John 15:21

 New American Standard Bible  (©1995) 
“But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know the One who sent Me.

John 15:18

New American Standard Bible  (©1995) 
“If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you.

There is some good in this, because if you read the book, the good guys win in the end.  Also, be warned that it will get much worse before it gets better.  Or, to put in another way, the left is behaving just as predicted.

Update:  Stacey  McCain has video.

Thanks to Wyblog for linking! 

 

Share

Did Anyone Catch Obama Using Hilary Rosen to Play Good Cop-Bad Cop with Ann Romney?

Share

Well, I get home from work and grocery shopping to see that we had an interesting story unfold.  Hilary Rosen, a Dem operative, slammed Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann, for being a stay-at home mom.  Legal Insurrection has the video…

So then, we have a Democratic operative, belittling the wife of the likely GOP candidate.  On the surface, one might just think that this was a typical Alinskyite smear, and it was.  However, there is another layer to it, but we’ll get to it in a bit.  As for the next move, Ann Romney fired back, and destroyed Rosen…

Then, we see that President Obama chimed in-supporting Ann Romney…

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player
Then, pretty much everyone else in the administration jumped on the “this was bad” bandwagon…

First Lady Michelle Obama also voiced her support for moms with a Tweet, writing “Every mother works hard, and every woman deserves to be respected. –mo.”

And morning TV hosts Mika Brzezinski and Soledad O’Brien condemned Rosen’s comments on their respective MSNBC and CNN shows Thursday, with Brzezinski calling it “an unfortunate statement” and O’Brien slamming Rosen for “pitting women against women.”

And both Obama campaign manager Jim Messina and top adviser David Axelrod tweeted their disapproval of Rosen’s comments. “I could not disagree with Hilary Rosen any more strongly. Her comments were wrong and family should be off limits. She should apologize,” Messina wrote.

“Also Disappointed in Hilary Rosen’s comments about Ann Romney. They were inappropriate and offensive,” Axelrod added.

Is this sounding suspicious to you yet?  Since when does anyone in this administration, especially Axelrod, think that there are any people that can’t be targeted?  And the people from the MSM, defending Ann Romney?  These people ARE the slime machine.  Each holds a PhD in the Alinsky Method, and the smear is a vital tool in their bag of tricks.  Needless to say, this is uncharacteristic-to defend a target.  Also, I think at this point, it is necessary to restate that Rosen is a DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVE.  She works for the DNC, and I seriously doubt that they let anyone go off the reservation.  So, I think there is a plot afoot.  Here it is…

1.  They want to paint Romney as “out of touch.”

2.  They want to perpetuate their “war on women” meme.

3.  They want to attack Ann Romney too, but can’t without looking bad.

4.  They get Rosen to do the dirty deed.

5.  As if it were planned in advance, everyone one in the administration decries this “really bad thing.”

6.  But, the administration gets to portray Ann Romney, who has grown increasingly popular, as a privileged woman with a life of ease, while at the same time, keeping the president, and all of his chief goons, above the fray.  In other words, they launch the attack, and then throw the attacker under the bus.

7.  Even though Rosen is under the bus, for now, they got their attack off, and it is likely their hope that they got a message about her to stick.  Remember, they rely on the uninformed to hear the initial attack, then not hear the rebuttal.

I think the administration played good-cop, bad-cop with Ann Romney.  They got the smear off, and they got to look like the good guys.

We know better.

If I’m right, we’re going to see a lot more of this-with Democratic affiliated individuals and organizations attacking the Romney’s, distracting the public from the economy, and, all the while, the administration claiming to be above it all.

Linked by Theo Spark.  Thanks! 

Share

Pro-Palestinian Group Stalks Jewish Students

Share

Apparently, making a political point means intimidating people that might disagree with you.  The “palestinians” have learned that from the Alinskyites, and is putting it into practice at Atlantic University.  GateWay Pundit has more...

This is a harassment. The radical Palestinian students should be expelled.
YNet reported:

Some 200 Jewish students attending Atlantic University receive fake eviction notice sent by pro-Palestinian activists

More than 200 Jewish students attending Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, were surprised to find “eviction notices” posted to their dorm room doors on Friday.

The students later found out that the fake notices were placed by the Students for Justice in Palestine.

According to the Sun Sentinel, the group’s stunt was aimed to draw attention to their claim that “about 25,000 homes have been demolished since the occupation of Palestine by Israeli troops began in 1967.”

Rayna Exelbierd, a 20-year-old sophomore from Memphis, Tennessee, said “We’re taking it very seriously. We’re considering it a hate crime. The flier promotes hate; it doesn’t promote peace. People were scared by it. People felt threatened by it.”

Well, as to feeling threatened, they are supposed to feel that way.  Doing this is a great way to say, “we know where you live.”

Of course, the basic premise of the protest is rather flimsy.  It’s rather like the palestinians are saying…

We tried to kill you all before, but failed.  We want a do-over!!!

In the end, it is instructive, as it is yet another example of trying to make a point by intimidating targets.  Or, is the intimidation the most important part?

Share

President Obama Darkly Threatens Supreme Court; Does His Behavior Fit Definition of Bullying?

Share

President Obama is a bully. Bullying is a form of aggressive behavior manifested by the use of force or coercion to affect others, and this is exactly what President Obama is attempting to do with his latest speech in which he darkly threatened the Supreme Court regarding their impending decision regarding Obamacare, saying

I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.

His behavior, as I have demonstrated on this blog repeatedly, is bullying, especially because it is habitual in nature (done many times, especially when he isn’t reading a prepared text) and it justified by what he believes is an imbalance of power- as his people once famously stated, ‘elections have consequences’ and now he believes that he has ‘the power’ and others do not. His target or victim changes with the issue, but consists of the Koch Brothers, conservatives, businesses, the Tea Party, and now the five judges on the Supreme Court that are about to use their longstanding power of judicial review to strike down a law that was narrowly passed using kickbacks, parliamentary gimmicks, ‘reconciliation,’ and backroom deals, which repulsed the democracy of our nation so much that in the next election Democrats were wiped out in a historic manner a mere two short years after Obama was elected.

A usual tactic involved in bullying is to socially isolate the victim of the attack, by separating them from the rest of society by describing them as different or ‘unelected’, and therefore then justifying the ensuing attack because they are not part of society. Language like ‘unprecedented’ is not meant to suggest that the Supreme Court using its power of judicial review is unprecedented- it has used it 1300 times over 200 years and a ‘constitutional scholar’ like Obama must know that- but rather it is used to attempt to isolate and separate the victim for the ensuing attack.

Even though I’ve had many workshops on bullying, I don’t pretend to be an expert on it, but I still recognize in Obama a need to dominate and even a casual and friendly observer would agree that the policies that he pushes are authoritarian in nature, which are characteristic of a bully. Other emotions that frequently are associated with bullies is envy and resentment, and this also fits with the profile that the Democrat President has been filling out over the last four years- someone who is filled with class envy and resentment at those who do well in society and desires to bring them down through the force of government- or as he stated recently, even if Congress doesn’t go along with his ideas, he is still prepared to use the power of his office to bully people into going along with his views.

Bullies also frequently desire to control their image, and we have seen quite clearly since Obama has been elected that he has a thin skin and does not take jokes very well. Many Presidents laugh at their own faults and make fun of themselves- such as George W Bush did at the correspondents dinner on many an occasion or George HW Bush did by inviting Dana Carvey to the White House- but President Obama uses comedy to belittle, demean, and attack his enemies, as has been documented on many a blog over the years.

It has often been suggested that bullying behavior has its origin in childhood, and this leads me to wonder just what sort of childhood President Obama had. One can imagine him as a youth as either the target of bullying- and now responding in kind- or as the instigator of it. Adult bullying is characterized by administrative end-runs (like was does in passing Obamacare), well-planned and orchestrated attempts at character assassination (I think today he was going after Big Oil), or other less obvious yet equally forceful forms of coercion (such as darkly threatening Congress recently or the Supreme Court in this particular instance).

As a child I refused to be bullied, and as a blogger I’ve faced many attempts to bully me. And I’m not going to stand for the President of the United States attempting to bully our Supreme Court. I’m not a fan of judicial review and I don’t like activist judges, but the response that decent people would resort to would be arguing their views and policies more clearly and persuasively. President Obama is not a decent person- he is a bully- and so his response as it has always been is to intimidate, use force, threaten power, socially isolate, character assassinate, and bully away.

Vote Republican in 2012 and throw this bully out of office.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Share