Tag Archive for: Barack Hussein Obama

Changing Hearts and Minds

 

Globalism is a replacement ideology that seeks to reorder the world into one singular, planetary Unistate, ruled by the globalist elite. The globalist war on nation-states cannot succeed without collapsing the United States of America. The long-term strategic attack plan moves America incrementally from constitutional republic to socialism to globalism to feudalism. The tactical attack plan uses asymmetric psychological and informational warfare to destabilize Americans and drive society out of objective reality into the madness of subjective reality. America’s children are the primary target of the globalist predators.


On October 30, 2008, in Columbia, Missouri, candidate Barack Hussein Obama declared to an unsuspecting public, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming America.” It was the promise of a radical leftist to change the culture of America and move the nation from constitutional republic to socialism. John Dewey’s destruction of American minds through progressive education had a partner in Obama and the Culture War president Obama unleashed on America.

To move our constitutional republic to socialism and beyond, globalism’s leftist progressive movement adopted the binary victim/oppressor social structure of cultural Marxism. Classical Marxism identifies the oppressors as the bourgeoisie (owners of production) who exploit the proletariat (workers). The metric of classical Marxism is economics. Cultural Marxism re-labels the participants and defines culture, not economics, as the metric of exploitation. It is one species of the genus Marxism as described by James Lindsay in Chapter 11. In cultural Marxism, white males are the identified oppressors and everyone else is their victim.

Both classical and cultural Marxism seek to replace the existing order with collectivism, each selling its own idealized form of a secular heaven on Earth. Today’s social justice warriors who sign onto this leftist lunacy are ignorant of history, arrogant, and too childish to examine the objective reality of the offer. Leftist ideologues actually believe the fantasy of a Marxist Utopia, and don’t realize that the paradise they advocate is the powerless state of infantile dependence, the opposite of individual freedom. When infantile dependence is advanced into adulthood, it awards the state total control.

Cultural Marxism dominates today’s far left Democrat Party. Author and political analyst David Horowitz provides important historical context to the radicalization of the Democrat Party in America on his website Discover the Networks: Democratic Socialists of America (DSA):[i]

At the height of the Cold War and the Vietnam War era, the Socialist Party USA of Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas split in two over the issue of whether or not to criticize the Soviet Union, its allies, and Communism: One faction rejected and denounced the USSR and its allies…. The other faction, however, refused to reject Marxism, refused to criticize or denounce the USSR and its allies, and continued to support Soviet-backed policies…. This faction, whose leading figure was Michael Harrington, in 1973 took the name Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC); its membership included many former Students for a Democratic Society activists.

DSOC operated not as a separate political party but as an explicitly socialist force within the Democratic Party and the labor movement. As such, it attracted many young activists who sought to push the Democratic Party further leftward politically. Among the notables who joined DSOC were Machinists’ Union leader William Winpisinger, feminist Gloria Steinem, gay rights activist Harry Britt, actor Ed Asner, and California Congressman (and avowed socialist) Ron Dellums.

By 1979 DSOC had made major inroads into the Democratic Party and claimed a national membership of some 3,000 people. In 1982, DSOC, under Michael Harrington’s leadership, merged with the New American Movement to form the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Harrington’s strategy was to force a “realignment” of the two major political parties by pulling the Democrats emphatically to the left and polarizing the parties along class lines. He expected that this would drive business interests away from the Democrats and into the Republican Party, but that those losses would be more than offset by an influx of newly energized minority and union voters to the Democratic Party, and that over time the Democrats would embrace socialism as their preferred ideology….

Harrington sought to establish DSA as a force that worked within, and not outside of, the existing American political system. DSA draws heavily from the ideas of the late Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci. As the Orange County (California) DSA stated in its February 1984 newsletter, Gramsci’s writings “have…formed a vital part of the ideas that brought about the formation of today’s DSA.” …

In 2008, most DSA members actively supported Barack Obama for U.S. President. Said the organization: “DSA believes that the possible election of Senator Obama to the presidency in November represents a potential opening for social and labor movements to generate the critical political momentum necessary to implement a progressive political agenda.” …

In 2018, 28-year-old DSA member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rose to prominence when, with no prior political experience, she was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. Another newcomer to Congress in 2018 was DSA member Rashida Tlaib. That same year, DSA member Julia Salazar won a seat in the New York State Senate.

Using the term Democratic socialism is a deceptive marketing technique designed to put lipstick on an abhorrent political pig, disguising collectivism’s tyrannical core. It advocates a gradual and peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism by purportedly “democratic” means, and is presented with mystical reverence as deliverance of social justice and income equality. Duped millennials argue that old attempts at socialism were not the “real” socialism—democratic socialism is, and this time, they argue, it will succeed.

Barack Obama sold Democratic socialism to America by calling it hope and change. Today’s radical leftist Democrats, still led by Obama, are the “resistance” movement destabilizing the foundations of America.

The Biden regime’s domestic policies are a continuation and escalation of Obama’s destructive socialist policies shattering the established Judeo-Christian values of American culture. Faith, family, flag, meritocracy, and traditional definitions of race, gender, and sexual identity—all are now deemed oppressive. Traditional American norms are being dismantled and replaced with romanticized notions of a globalized world without territorial borders, cultural borders, sexual borders, or any other defined boundary. The nation is being fundamentally transformed, just as Obama promised, and the indoctrination is happening in schools across the country. As I stated earlier, America’s children are globalism’s primary target; everyone else is just in the way.

Freedom in a constitutional republic requires a common denominator for its citizens. Being American is that common denominator. Membership in the American family is not hyphenated. There are no black-Americans, white-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, or Asian-Americans. There are only Americans who are white, black, Hispanic, and Asian.

The same racism that was used against blacks in America is now being used against whites in America. It is being used to turn young children against each other, against their parents, and against themselves in government schools. Critical race theory, discussed in Chapter 12, is the leftists’ divide-and-conquer weapon of choice to create social chaos in America.

The goal of critical race theory devotees and their cancel-culture campaign is to foment race riots and a race war in the United States. This is such a shocking yet critical concept that I will repeat it: The goal of CRT devotees and their cancel-culture campaign is to foment race riots and a race war in the United States of America. How are CRT and its racist white-privilege narrative designed to foment a race war?? Socialist Saul Alinsky provides the answer in his infamous tactical primer, Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals.[ii] Alinsky instructs radicals to “Rub raw the resentments of the people…all issues must be polarized if action is to follow.” (pp. 116/133, Vintage)

Race is the simplest division to exploit because it is visible. Fomenting racial hostility is a very effective strategy for dividing and conquering a nation. Rule 13 from Alinsky’s primer continues to guide the leftist Democrat War on America:

Rule 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame. (p. 130)

The relentless ad hominem attacks against former President Donald Trump were, and continue to be, targeted, personal, and polarizing. Rule 13 is the quintessential example of focusing attention on the WHO instead of the WHAT, in order to manipulate public opinion.

Truth is entirely irrelevant for Alinsky and his radical leftist followers. Alinsky writes, “The real and only question regarding the ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, ‘Does this particular end justify this particularmeans?'” (p. 24) According to Alinsky, “The third rule of the ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means.” (p. 29)

Changing hearts and minds is a term used in warfare to indicate an emotional and intellectual method of bringing a subjugated population to the side of the conqueror. Alinsky’s Rule 13 is a weapon of war. The ad hominem attacks on Donald Trump are attempts to change the hearts and minds of Americans—Alinsky style.

It does not matter that Trump is not and never was a racist, or that Trump’s policies were extremely beneficial to the black, Hispanic, and Asian communities in America. Trump and his entire conservative/populist movement must be portrayed as racist in order to foment race riots. Even President Trump’s support of law enforcement and ordered liberty has been perverted by the radical leftists into justification for their own racist attacks on white police officers.

The Democrat outrage over the so-called Capitol “insurrection” by Trump supporters—assisted by embedded plainclothes law enforcement—on January 6, 2021, is pure Alinsky-style political theater. An excellent article on the subject published in Frontpage Magazine, July 15, 2020, by John Perazzo, was titled “Why BLM Yawns at Police-Shooting Statistics.”[iii] Perazzo quotes Alinsky as tutoring his followers to “present themselves as the noble defenders of high moral principles and to react dramatically with greatly exaggerated displays of ‘shock, horror, and moral outrage’ whenever their targeted enemy erred or could be depicted as having erred.”

Congressional Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is the queen of Democrat hypocrisy and Alinsky-style outrage. Her insistence upon an extended military presence in Washington, DC, after January 6, 2021, was designed to validate her own fabricated fearmongering narrative, and to “protect” politicians from white Trump supporters. On March 4, 2021, Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) said on MSNBC, “We must do everything we can to protect ourselves.” Our southern border, under President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, is open and unguarded. The racist messaging is that open borders to unvetted migrants of color from hostile foreign countries are less of a threat to the nation than white Trump supporters.

Consider the sequence:

Identify Trump as the target ® attack him as a white supremacist ® continue the attacks on Trump even after he is out of office ® spread the attacks to his supporters ® support reverse racism ® target white police officers ® support violent black supremacist/Marxist movement (BLM) ® involve corporate America in the attacks and the support for BLM ® indoctrinate adults to support reverse racism with the mainstream media echo chamber of CRT ® support defunding the police ® indoctrinate children in CRT with educational curricula that support reverse racism ® foment CRT with governmental policies that create intolerable cognitive dissonance until the fury breaks out into the streets ®incite violence ® blame the violence on white supremacists ® quell the Democrat CRT-incited violence with government violence (military or National Guard) ® present Democrats as saving the country from Trump’s white supremacists.

The sinister political purpose of fomenting race wars in America is the elimination of our constitutional republic and the eventual imposition of one-world government. This colossal humanitarian hoax is being sold to a regressed and frightened American public as deliverance. It is the billionaire globalists who finance the politicians, who fund the radical leftist Democrats, who support CRT, who foment the racial divisiveness and the coming race wars. Follow the money. Always follow the money.

©2024. All rights reserved.

Please visit Linda’s Pundicity page: goudsmit.pundicity.com and her website: lindagoudsmit.com


[i]  Discover the Networks: Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/organizations/democratic-socialists-of-america-dsa/

[ii]  Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals, Saul D. Alinsky, Vintage Books Edition 1989; https://ia800309.us.archive.org/30/items/RulesForRadicals/RulesForRadicals.pdf

[iii]  Why BLM Yawns at Police-Shooting Statisticshttps://www.frontpagemag.com/why-blm-yawns-police-shooting-statistics-john-perazzo/

Barack Obama and His Race Card

Former President Barack Obama once again pulled out the race card for political gain, consequences be damned.

This time at the funeral of civil rights icon John Lewis, Obama compared President Donald Trump to not one but two racial segregationists—former Birmingham, Alabama, Commissioner of Public Safety Bull Connor and former Alabama Gov. George Wallace. The inconvenient truth that Connor and Wallace were Democrats is, apparently, of no relevance to Obama, his fellow Democrats, or most of the media.

About Connor, Obama said, “Bull Connor may be gone, but today we witness, with our own eyes, police officers kneeling on the necks of black Americans.”

Longtime former Bronx Rep. Charles Rangel, whose district included Harlem, also employed the Republicans-are-like-Bull Connor meme. Rangel, though, used it on then-President George W. Bush, who also spoke at Lewis’ funeral. In 2005, Rangel criticized Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina by saying, “George Bush is our Bull Connor.”

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

For those who have forgotten or never knew, Connor is the segregationist Alabama lawman who, in the ’60s, turned water hoses and sicced dogs on civil rights protesters. “You can never whip these birds if you don’t keep you and them separate,” Connor said in 1963. “I found that out in Birmingham. You’ve got to keep your white and the black separate.”

Yes, Obama just compared Trump to that man. Never mind that Trump signed the First Step Act that, so far, has allowed more than 3,000 inmates convicted for crack cocaine—mostly black men—to have their sentences reconsidered and over 2,000 released. Never mind that Trump posthumously pardoned Jack Johnson, the first black heavyweight champion, who was the victim of a racially motivated prosecution.

About Wallace, Obama said, “George Wallace may be gone, but we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators.”

In 1963, Wallace defied federal officers by literally standing in front of the door of the University of Alabama in a failed attempt to prevent the university from integrating. That same year, in his gubernatorial inaugural speech, Wallace said, “In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw a line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say, segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.”

Yes, Obama just compared Trump to Wallace, the governor who tried to stop blacks from getting an education at a public school that blacks qualify to attend. Never mind that Trump is a proponent of school choice, allowing black students, K-12, to take their public school dollars to whatever school they qualify for as an alternative to poor urban public schools.

Since Obama compared Trump to two dead racist Democrat segregationists of the 1960s, it is only fair to ask about Obama’s relationship with two living racist anti-Semites.

During his first six years, Obama invited the anti-Semitic, race-hustling, Tawana Brawley-lying Rev. Al Sharpton to the White House 72 times by December 2014. (Any visits after that time are not available on public record.)

This would be the same Sharpton who, in 1991, fueled a rage in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights, which experienced several days of violent protests in which Jews were attacked by Blacks. A few days earlier, Sharpton was recorded on tape bellowing, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.”

As to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, a smiling Sen. Obama, in 2005, took a photograph with America’s most notorious anti-Semite—and segregationist. (“What the Muslims Want,” No. 10 on the Nation of Islam official website, reads: “We believe that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited.”)

Photographer Askia Muhammad admitted that he did not show the photo to the public until 2018, after Obama left office. Asked whether the photo would have made a difference in Obama’s 2008 presidential race, Muhammad said: “I insist. It absolutely would have made a difference.”

If in doubt about whether the Obama-Farrakhan picture would have mattered, consider what Democratic lawyer Alan Dershowitz said after seeing the photo:

Louis Farrakhan is a virulent anti-Semite. He’s called Judaism a ‘gutter religion.’ He’s anti-American. He is a horrible, horrible human being.

And if I had known that the president had posed smilingly with [Farrakhan] when he was a senator, I would not have campaigned for Barack Obama. It would have influenced my decision. Look, I threatened to leave the Democratic Party if Keith Ellison were elected as chairman because of his association with Farrakhan. You don’t associate with a bigot. You don’t associate with an anti-Semite.

Democrats, such as Obama, can “associate” with racists and bigots like Sharpton and Farrakhan and, with a straight face, denounce Trump’s alleged racism and bigotry. And Obama knows that our left-wing media, of which MSNBC host Sharpton is a part, will not call him out.

Hypocrisy, anyone?

COPYRIGHT 2020 LAURENCE A. ELDER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. His latest book is “The New Trump Standard.” Twitter: .

RELATED TWEET:


A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Here’s the biggest security threat now facing President Trump… and it’s not what you think.

OBAMA’S WAR IS UPON US

How the ex-Radical-in-Chief created a security vacuum that Iran rushed to fill.

Donald Trump has a name for everything and everyone, from Crooked Hillary to Little Rocket Man, who for a time became his best friend. Will he call the next region-wide conflagration in the Middle East, when it breaks out, Obama’s War?

If he hasn’t thought of that already, he should start considering it now. Because the catastrophic policies of our former president have emboldened the Islamic state of Iran and enabled it to threaten the United States and our allies militarily in ways never before possible.

When Obama took office in January 2009, he inherited a strong U.S. military and diplomatic posture across the Middle East.

The U.S.-Israel strategic relationship was at its peak, with the Bush White House openly supporting Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s latest attempt to stop Hamas terror in Gaza.

The U.S. enjoyed a close relationship with a secular Turkey, that itself had strong ties to Israel.

Egypt was at peace, Qaddafi had come into the Western camp and abandoned terrorism and its nuclear weapons program, and the insurgency in Iraq had been crushed.

Al Qaeda truly was “on the run,” while Iran was beginning to feel the crunch of international sanctions over its previously covert nuclear weapons program.

Obama succeeded in reversing every one of these strong U.S. positions, treating Islamic Iran as a friend and Israel as an enemy while promoting the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and its terrorist spawn.

And while President Trump has taken great strides to reverse the enormous damage to our strategic posture Obama caused, fighting his way out of the spider’s web of Iran deal restrictions Obama enacted against the United States has taken nearly two years, time the Iranian regime has put to good use.

Iran today can bracket Israel with more than 150,000 rockets and guided missiles from the North and the South. That’s more than twenty times what it had available during the 2006 war. In addition to its proxies – Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the recently formed Golan Liberation Brigade in Syria – Iran now enjoys a “land bridge” directly linking it through Iraq and Syria to Israel’s northern border.

Terror chief Qais al Khazali, known for his attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, officially opened the land bridge by leading a military convoy from Iraq into Southern Lebanon in December 2017, where he did a stand-up for an Iranian-backed television network while surveying Israel from the Lebanese side of the border.

Khazali was acting on orders from Quds Force terror-meister, Qassem Suleymani, and met up in Beirut with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah before heading to the South.

At the same time, the Iranians and their local minions have been burrowing tunnels into Israel from Lebanon that the IDF began targeting last week.

From its bases in Yemen, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps has lobbed missiles at the Saudi capitol, Riyadh, and at oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Outgoing U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley forced the media to acknowledge these aggressive Iranian actions by unveiling Iranian missile fragments at a press conference at Andrews Air Force base exactly one year ago.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has now revealed that the ballistic missile Iran test-fired last week was capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads to targets as far away as Europe. Even the Europeans finally realize that the Iran deal did nothing to restrain Iran’s nuclear weapons development or tame its aggressive behavior. It was not the U.S. but France that convened the UN Security Council to condemn the Iranian test.

In a nutshell, Iran today is poised to wreak havoc across the Middle East and beyond with military and strategic capabilities it did not possess a decade ago, including the ability to target U.S. aircraft carriers with ground-based missiles.

Short of U.S. military force, the sole limiting factor on Iran’s actions will be the position of Russian President Vladmir Putin. Will Putin seek to restrain Iran? Or give the Iranian regime free reign?

This is one reason why it is so important for the U.S. President to maintain an open channel of communications to the Kremlin, meeting with Putin, say, at G-20 summit meetings and one-on-one.

Why do you think the anti-Israel Left is so eager to hog-tie President Trump in Russia witch hunt investigations, forcing him to downscale relations with the Russians to the point that the two leaders no longer talk, at least not in public? Because they actually favor a strong Iran and see it and Russia as constraints on the evil United States. As Obama put it in his address to the UN General Assembly in September 2016, “We’ve bound our power to international laws and institutions.”

Russia signaled a strategic shift in its position toward a potential Iranian-led regional war on September 17, when a Syrian air defense crew downed a Russian Ilyushin-20 spy plane over Syrian air space, killing all fourteen Russian crewmen on board.

Putin could have called it a “tragic accident,” which indeed it was. Instead, he blamed Israel for the attack.

Until then, Israel enjoyed a special relationship with Russia when it came to Syria. The IDF had a hot line to the Russian defense ministry, which it used to give a heads up before Israeli air strikes against Iranian positions inside Syria. The result: not a single Russia missile was ever fired at an IDF fighter jet.

When a particularly large strike was in the offing, Prime Minister Netanyahu would fly to Moscow to brief Putin ahead of time. With Putin’s green light, Israel then decimated IRGC and Hezbollah positions.

All of that changed after September 17.

Today, Putin refuses to meet with Netanyahu and the Russian military has rejected Israeli efforts to deconflict its operations in Syria with the Russians.

Last month, Russia turned over operational control of its sophisticated S-300/400 air defense batteries in Syria to the Syrian military, a clear sign that restraint toward IDF fighter jets was over.

On November 29, Israeli showed that it takes these moves seriously, launching its first-ever major strike on Iranian Quds Force position inside Syria using surface-to-surface missiles and long-range artillery. By using unmanned weapons, Israel avoided the possibility that Syrian air defense batteries could shoot down an IDF jet or that Israel might inadvertently kill a Russian military advisor.

After that attack, Netanyahu met in Brussels with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, where the two pledged to work in tandem to contain Iranian “aggression.”

“As we have been warning for some time, Iran’s missile testing and missile proliferation is growing. We are accumulating risk of escalation in the region if we fail to restore deterrence,” Pompeo said.

Taken as a whole, I believe Iran actually welcomes U.S. and Israeli military action, now that Russia has made clear it will no longer restrain Iran. Seen from Tehran, they have many cards to play, including the activation of Iran’s vast underground terror networks in North America and Europe and an ability to target U.S. military bases in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the region.

Successive U.S. administrations have a bad track record of holding the Islamic state of Iran accountable for its aggression. We never responded to the 1983 attack that killed 241 U.S. Marines in Lebanon, nor did we hit Iran for its direct material involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks on America.

While Team Trump has reimposed sanctions and escalated the rhetoric, it has yet to take military action against Iran’s Islamic regime. But when that happens, make no mistake: the United States will be fighting Obama’s war.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. The featured photo is by Keith Zhu on Unsplash.

CNN Poll: 29% of Americans think President Obama is a Muslim

This story doesn’t persist because Americans are “racist” or “Islamophobic.” This story persists because of Obama’s behavior: his fulsome praise of Islam, his refusal to call Islamic jihad terrorism by name, his statements such as “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” his aiding the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and al-Qaeda in Syria; and so much more.

obama_turban

“Misperceptions persist about Obama’s faith, but aren’t so widespread,” by Jennifer Agiesta, CNN, September 14, 2015:

Washington (CNN) A new CNN/ORC poll finds that although misperceptions about Barack Obama’s religious beliefs and background persist, they are not as widespread as some recent polling has suggested. Obama was born in Hawaii and is a Christian.

Overall, when asked “Where was Obama born, as far as you know?” 80% of adults said they believe Obama was born in the United States. The other 20% said that he was born outside the country, including 9% who believe there is solid evidence of that and 11% who say it is just their suspicion.

Misperceptions about Obama’s religious beliefs are more common than those about his birth, particularly among Republicans. Overall, 29% of Americans say they think the President is a Muslim, including 43% of Republicans….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Syrians to be distributed across America

Islamic State claims that Pakistan Taliban leader Adnan Rashid has pledged allegiance to its caliphate

New Islamic State video quotes Osama: “Every Muslim…hates Americans, hates Jews, and hates Christians”

Barack Obama = World Chaos

We told you so! Yep, starting way back in 2007 we told you that if Barack Obama was elected President of the United States of America that he indeed would radically CHANGE our country (and the world) into a place with little HOPE and much despair.

Take a look around you, our inner cities are exploding, our enemies are laughing and the Obama’s are livin’ large like some kind of European Royalty in the 1800’s, completely detached from the chaos they have caused. Join our show today as I and The United West team detail the horrible situation before us and provide actionable ways that Americans can recover from a Post-Obama America.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canada’s police edited out Islamic prayers from jihad murderer’s video

Young Muslims trying to reach Syria got instructions from Montreal mosque

Arizona Muslim group: “The Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam”

Yemen’s Shi’ite rebels reportedly holding four Americans hostage

Top 5 questions to ask a Liberal

Greetings from our nation’s Capitol where I am to speak this afternoon at the Faith and Freedom Coalition. And as always, I enjoyed a nice early morning 5-mile run from the bat cave over to the D.C. mall — doggone it is more humid up here than South Florida.

As I was pounding the pavement, I came up with a list of questions I’d like to pose to a liberal progressive. Well, for every mile it seems I came up with one — glad I didn’t try running 8 miles this morning!

Here you go:

1. If former President George W. Bush was un-American for adding $4 trillion to the national debt, then what is President Barack Hussein Obama who is on his way to adding $8 trillion — and still has two more years to go? Yep, under Obama the national debt has risen from $10.67 trillion to almost $17.5 trillion.

2. If as Obama states, “we leave no man behind,” then what of Marine Sergeant Andrew TahmooressiPastor Saeed Abedini and Kenneth Bae — not to mention still-imprisoned Meriam Yahia Ibrahim – who had her chains removed after giving birth to her daughter, Maya? (And by the way, she is still under a death sentence under Sharia law for marrying a Christian). Nah, those folks don’t help Obama’s political agenda and certainly aren’t as important as recognizing illegal immigrant children “dreamers” at the White House.

3. When the average price of gasoline hit $2.50 a gallon, liberals and their media accomplices went apoplectic (you may have to define that word to a liberal friend) on George W. Bush. Why so silent now, when it’s $3.67?

4. If the late and former President Richard Nixon resigned over a bad case of “breaking and entering” (and the liberal media made a big hoopla over that), what does it take for Barack Hussein Obama to consider the same? Or does the color of skin trump content of character in America now? By the way, I’m planning on my computer crashing next year around tax return time.

5. If it is racist to disagree with the proven failed policies of Barry Soetoro, oops, I mean Barack Hussein Obama, then what is it when liberal progressives disrespect, dismiss, denigrate, demean, disparage, discredit and seek to destroy black conservative Republicans? Funny, all those “D” words come from the Democrat party. Don’t believe me, just look for the responses to this post from liberal progressives (so predictable).

Now, just so you’re aware, be careful when asking these questions to be outside the range of spittle and frothing of the mouth. As well, stand clear so as not to be struck by a liberal progressives wild arm-flinging tantrums as they throw themselves on the floor in a mad rage. These are the telltale symptoms of liberals exposed to the truth — similar to exposing vampires to light. But know that this reaction affirms you are right on the issues and confirms the liberal progressive inability to intellectually respond.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.