Back to Basics

It is interesting that the corporate media, like sharks attracted to chum in the water, is just now appearing to treat Benghazi as a political scandal similar to Watergate that took down former U.S. President Richard M. Nixon in his second term. While many people see the comparison, I not only see the comparison, but also sense a collusion of a different, more nefarious and less conspicuous type as well.

As the details of Benghazi are beginning to emerge from “whistleblowers” and the murderous events are being rightfully elevated to the proper realm of criminal conspiracy, other scandals have suddenly seemed to erupt, almost as if cued by a complicit choreographer. Most egregious misdeeds of the Internal Revenue Service, for example, that allegedly targeted Conservative groups, from 501(c)3 organizations to any group with Tea party or Constitution in their names, were suddenly “revealed.”

Other scandals of lesser significance, but nonetheless poking at the embers of public ire and intolerance are popping up as well. Watching the people who are reading the multiple news headlines on various news aggregation sites are like watching spectators at Wimbledon, as their heads move from side to side as they follow the ball in play.  The white noise of new problems are constantly erupting, resulting in a feeding frenzy in the waters surrounding the Executive branch.

While fascinating to watch, has anyone stopped to consider that the process of chumming the waters with a flurry of cascading news events, combined with a docu-dump of 100 pages of Benghazi e-mails is actually a methodically orchestrated diversion? What is it we are not supposed to be seeing amid the white noise of new controversies of varying values? Are we being told that we’re aboard the Queen Mary and being directed to look over the port side at the antics of the sharks attracted by the chumming of the waters while we’re actually aboard the RMS Lusitania sailing through the Irish Channel on the afternoon of May 7, 1915? Meanwhile, a torpedo fired from a German U-boat is traveling directly for our starboard side, and is about to take the entire ship down.

Like a levy that has been suspiciously breached, the informational flood created by these news events is without recent precedent. The timing of this flood is of particularly critical importance. The headlines are diverting our attention away from a critical window of investigative value relating to Benghazi. Could it be that we’re seeing a form of force majeure being implemented to overwhelm and distract us from something far more important to truth seekers and consequently, much more lethal to Obama’s second term? Perhaps the Cloward-Piven strategy adapted and modified for the modern news cycles of today?

The Watergate-Benghazi time continuum

It has become common practice to use the Watergate “scandal” as the basis for any controversy involving the President or the White House, having set some arbitrary high-water mark for behavioral tolerance involving a sitting president. Watergate is commonly used to describe an intricate web of criminal deception that took place during former President Richard Nixon’s second term in the White House, and is routinely identified as the cause that brought down Nixon’s presidency.

It will be exactly 40 years ago this May 17th that the Senate Watergate Committee, a special, broad committee convened by the United States Senate, began hearings to investigate the Watergate burglaries and a criminal cover-up of those activities. At the epicenter of those hearings was then-President Richard Nixon. Just over a year later, the committee released its 1,254 page report of findings. When the dust settled, forty administration officials were indicted and several of Nixon’s aides were charged and convicted for obstruction of justice and other crimes.

A cover-up pointed directly to the White House. Facing impeachment proceedings, then-President Richard M. Nixon resigned, assuming his place in American history as the only president ever to resign. It was described as the worst scandal in U.S. history… perhaps until now.

If history tells us anything, it tells us that it’s not just about the crime, it’s also about the cover-up. It’s about seeking the truth but being stonewalled at every turn, and being treated as subjects undeserving of the truth rather than citizens asking reasonable questions but being denied answers.

The same level of inquiries that unraveled the complexities of the Watergate cover-up are required to unravel the ball of lies that surrounds the September 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including a sitting U.S. Ambassador. Within this ball of lies, however, exists not only the covert agenda of an administration, but the fate of the world. Unraveling this ball of lies will reveal official government actions that have been and continue to be performed in our name but without our consent. It will reveal a government agenda that has have spun wildly out of control, leaving no one accountable as we stand at a very critical moment in world history. It’s about a cover-up of monumental proportions that is reminiscent of, but hardly in league with, the cover-up of a generation ago.

Today, the stakes are much higher, as we stand at the precipice of a global conflict because of deeds being done in our name under a level of unprecedented and unchecked deception. Ultimately, it’s about getting the truth, which has been kept from each of us through lies of commission and omission, clever semantics, and outright refusals to provide answers to important questions. We were force-fed a preplanned lie from day one, much like the thinly veiled cover story of the Watergate burglary, but with much greater consequences.

All investigations, however, must have a beginning. On May 8, 2013, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will conduct a single, day-long hearing on the events that took place in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador.  Interestingly, the hearing is being conducted under the title Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage.

This one day hearing is being convened to “examine evidence that Obama Administration officials have attempted to suppress information about errors and reckless misjudgments,” and will include some witness testimony. That seems to be a fairly ambitious agenda for a single day of investigation in Washington. It is, however, a start, and an opportunity for all Americans to see just how deep the lies go.

Demanding answers

The hearing is a result, in part, of the “interim progress report” released by the House committee on Benghazi last week.

Most decent Americans continue to mourn the injuries and loss of life suffered at the Boston Marathon. Indeed, decent, patriotic Americans are still in shock over the tragedy, and continue to pray for the victims and their families.

There are exceptions, of course. Some dim-witted liberals are trying to blame the sequestration fiasco for the carnage, as if Marathon officials deliberately pulled back on security just to save a few pennies, driven by the GOP obsession with old-school notions like frugality, financial accountability, and the fiduciary responsibility of elected officials with respect to taxpayer money.

Regrettably, morally-despicable extremists on the left are even expressing profound hatred for the Caucasian race and hope that the Boston Bomber will turn out to be a white American!

What inspired, elevated thought from the birds on the left at a time of deep national loss and fear!

As reported, the demented left is well represented at Salon magazine which published the following hate speech and vitriol:

As we now move into the official Political Aftermath period of the Boston bombing — the period that will determine the long-term legislative fallout of the atrocity — the dynamics of privilege will undoubtedly influence the nation’s collective reaction to the attacks. That’s because privilege tends to determine: 1) which groups are — and are not — collectively denigrated or targeted for the unlawful actions of individuals; and 2) how big and politically game-changing the overall reaction ends up being.

This has been most obvious in the context of recent mass shootings. In those awful episodes, a religious or ethnic minority group lacking such privilege would likely be collectively slandered and/or targeted with surveillance or profiling (or worse) if some of its individuals comprised most of the mass shooters. However, white male privilege means white men are not collectively denigrated/targeted for those shootings — even though most come at the hands of white dudes.

Likewise, in the context of terrorist attacks, such privilege means white non-Islamic terrorists are typically portrayed not as representative of whole groups or ideologies, but as “lone wolf” threats to be dealt with as isolated law enforcement matters. Meanwhile, non-white or developing-world terrorism suspects are often reflexively portrayed as representative of larger conspiracies, ideologies and religions that must be dealt with as systemic threats — the kind potentially requiring everything from law enforcement action to military operations to civil liberties legislation to foreign policy shifts.

“White privilege is knowing that even if the bomber turns out to be white, no one will call for your group to be profiled as terrorists as a result, subjected to special screening or threatened with deportation,” writes author Tim Wise. “White privilege is knowing that if this bomber turns out to be white, the United States government will not bomb whatever corn field or mountain town or stale suburb from which said bomber came, just to ensure that others like him or her don’t get any ideas. And if he turns out to be a member of the Irish Republican Army we won’t bomb Dublin.

Just how does Barack Obama prioritize his policy objectives and executive branch policy actions?

Is there a Ouija board that the President can access from his teleprompter, or from the comfort of Air Force One?

Perhaps an elderly lady with a left-leaning crystal ball gives Obama spiritual advice after dusting, vacuuming, and cleaning the Oval Office?

Must be something weird like that because even the most deluded Obamamite cannot explain why Obama consistently works himself into a self-righteous lather about Americans who exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

And the Obama who frets with nearly as much misguided concern over football injuries in the NFL.

Tragically, while Obama frets about the dangers of the US Constitution and pro football, the Islamic terrorist state of Iran drives closer and closer to having a nuclear weapon with which to bedevil and, perhaps, annihilate all of suffering humanity!

Mind you, a nuclear-armed Iran would be a real crisis worthy of presidential concern, especially given the threat that a nuclear Iran would pose to the Jewish state of Israel.

But perhaps that is why Obama is not taking Iran’s nuclear designs seriously? As the most anti-Semitic president in history, could it be that Obama is covertly rooting for Iran to join the Mushroom Brigade?

And might that be why Obama has nominated Chuck Hagel to run the Department of Defense? After all, Hagel is damn near as anti-Israel and pro-Iran as our befuddled prez!

John W. Lillpop
San Jose, California

The glass is half full way to look at it is that starting tomorrow the Obama presidency will be more than half over. Yes, the second term has just begun (which is the “glass is half empty” way to look at it).

“I did it”:

The president gave John Roberts an extra energetic “thank you” this time around to go with the Bear-Gram he sent the Chief Justice after his vote on Obamacare.

The collective media swoon included Diane Sawyer, who can always be counted on for lucid and objective analysis: “The whole city has a smile on its face.”

Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters:

Would the folks at ABC be so giddy if Mitt Romney were being sworn in Monday?

Yes, that’s a rhetorical question.

If the day belonged to Romney, the MSM’s reports would have more closely resembled this.

Gaffey Joe was sworn in today as well, and last night Biden got a little mixed up again:

Speaking at the Iowa State Society inauguration ball, the Vice President said, “I’m proud to be President of the United States”

After some laughter and a nudge from someone on stage, Biden corrected himself.

I think he’s doing it on purpose now.

Totally off-topic: This afternoon I’ll be doing what the Detroit Lions have been doing every year since 1991: Watching the NFL conference championship games on TV. Super Bowl predictions, anyone?

What do you do if the Hollywood stars who supported you no longer want to be associated with the political regime of higher taxes and fewer freedoms … pay or persuade a mega-star to appear in the hopes that this will convince the celebrity worshipers to turn out – if not for you, for the star and a free performance.

But you must keep the event small and exclusive so the weak-minded Hollywood elite think that their attendance is exclusive and reinforces the fact that they are “powers to be reckoned with!”

Unfortunately, for those that have noticed that the emperor has no clothes and is appearing naked in public … this is a collection of court jesters and clowns to entertain the “royals.”

Which brings me to my favorite riddle:

When is a STAR not a STAR?

Answer: When there is a bigger STAR in the room!

WASHINGTON (AP) — Watch out Beyoncé and Katy Perry. There’s another diva set to perform during the inauguration festivities – Lady Gaga.

A person familiar with the inauguration tells The Associated Press that the pop star will perform at Tuesday’s ball for White House staffers. The source spoke on condition of anonymity because that person wasn’t authorized to publicly reveal the information. The staff ball is typically a private affair. During the last inauguration festivities, Jay-Z reportedly performed for that event.

Source: News from The Associated Press

– steve

King syrup and mom’s homemade biscuits for dinner. We five Marcus kids, of which I am the oldest, loved it. It never dawned on us that our great dinner was due to mom and dad being low on funds. When we moved out of the government projects in Baltimore City to our home in Pumphery, a black suburban community, it was like moving to Disney World. I was around ten years old.

I met David and Charles who taught me how to make a bow and arrows. Nobody’s eye got poked out. We fished in Patapsco River. On Sunday afternoons, a majority of the community swam “down the river.” Years later, I learned that the river was supposedly polluted. But I never heard of anyone suffering ill effects from swimming and eating the fish.

We played baseball a lot; two bats, one ball and various old gloves. There was always the threat of Michael Avery hitting the ball into the woods — us not being able to find it, ending our fun.

On Wednesday nights, dad drove us (mom and five kids) to Bible study at his storefront church in Baltimore City. Heading back home, there was a tiny doughnut shop just before the Hanover Street Bridge. On occasion without warning, dad would push the brakes. Excited, we knew we were in for a treat. Best I can remember, he purchased a dozen assorted doughnuts. We were happy.

So why am I rambling about such nostalgia. My point is that in the past, it took far less to make children happy and appreciative.

I am on the Rebuild America Defeat Obama bus tour. At breakfast in a Michigan hotel, Mary and I were discussing the final Romney/Obama debate. A twenty something year old waiter, while pouring our coffee enthusiastically chimed in. What a great kid!

This bright young go-getter said what struck him most during the debate was Obama saying the rich should pay more. He thought, “Why? Why should people be punished (http://www.newsmax.com/Reagan/Obama-Class-Warfare-Romney/2012/07/12/id/445147) for working harder?” My waiter went on to say, “The problem with my generation is that too many of them think they are entitled. Entitled should be erased from their vocabulary.”

Folks, I wanted to give that kid a bear hug right there in the middle of the restaurant. Instead, I was extremely generous with my gratuity. Upon handing him cash, I said, “Thank you for not being a liberal.” This young man gave me hope for our future. I would not be surprised to meet him years later to learn that he had grown to own a chain of hotels or restaurants. Such a scenario is only possible by firing Obama in November.

While my conservative waiter was quite refreshing, I do not believe him to be unique. I do not subscribe to the theory that Liberalism has successfully infected a majority of our youths with EMD (Entitlement Mindset Disease). Liberalism is incompatible with the human spirit.

Despite liberal teachers’ stealth attempts to indoctrinate/infect our kids beginning in kindergarten through college, most humans are instinctively conservative. Liberalism may seduce youths for a season. But upon hearing the truth, seasoned with experience, most will eventually embrace Conservatism.

The reasons for the current Middle East destruction of US Embassies in multiple countries — now increasing every day — falls at the feet of Barack Hussein Obama. Not only has Obama shown extreme and unconscionable weakness with his and his syndicate’s continuing apologies for the USA’s existence (to every Middle Eastern Islamic country worldwide) but, he is now refusing to pay any attention to (and ignores) his daily Intel briefings. Even after the explosions, destruction of our embassies and the sodomizng and assassination of at least one of the 4 murdered-by-Muslims staff members in Libya, Obama is reported to still be refusing to read and discuss any new Intel reports. Instead, he chooses to continue campaigning and let the Middle East and American interests burn to the ground. Note: Apparently, he thinks someone can verbally give him the Cliffs notes’ version while he’s on his way to his next friendly campaign stop.

The Obama non-policies have gutted the US Treasury and destroyed our economy. They have exalted Islam above Christianity and Judaism and placed the USA and its people into Dhimmitude. Obama “godfather” David Axelrod has threatened American polling companies with lawsuits (one already filed against Gallup by the DOJ) if they don’t play ball and report that Obama is trouncing Governor Romney in their polls…irrespective of the true results. And now, they have caused preplanned explosions in Muslim Brotherhood-led countries (remember that Obama has appointed MB members to the highest levels of US National Security) — explosions which are already leading to attempted attacks on other Western countries; the most recent against Germany and Great Britain. And the polls are showing a “widening lead over Romney” for Dictator Obama? Voters would rather have their lives and the lives of their loved ones and country destroyed than elect someone who will place it back on course? Really? Poppycock!

Pay no attention to these Obama-induced polls. The pollsters are running scared and, as usual, it will be up to us to provide the courage and the truth. Obama is decimating the USA and We-the-People on every level possible and we are supposed to believe that the majority of our citizens want it? I for one do not believe that we are that innately stupid. We must vote Mitt Romney (BTW, an actual Natural-born US citizen) into the Office of the Presidency of the United States. I’m just praying that we can survive Obama and his hordes until President Romney is elected.

“I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” — Thomas Jefferson

Ambassador Stevens’s brutal death at the hands of Radical Islam: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/tygrrrr-express/2012/sep/13/kill-every-islamist-and-eat-bacon-their-graves/

British, German Embassies Attacked in Sudan:http://pjmedia.com/tatler/headline/british-german-embassies-attacked-in-sudan/

© Sher Zieve

Bob Woodward on Obama’s haphazard way of dealing with the debt limit talks and his concern to get credit for any budget agreement.  Congress was upset that Obama had defaulted on a deal at the last moment, and now Obama was upset that he would be left out of the deal.

. . . Boehner said he believed that he and the others — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — had a plan. He told Obama: We think we can work this out. Give us a little more time. We’ll come back to you. We are not going to negotiate this with you.
Obama objected, saying that he couldn’t be left out of the process. . . .
Reid, the most powerful Democrat on Capitol Hill, spoke up. The congressional leaders want to speak privately, he said. Give us some time. . . .

. . . Reid arrived in the Oval Office with his chief of staff, David Krone. . . .
It was highly unusual for someone to pass the ball so completely to a staffer. The 44-year-old Krone outlined the plan, including a secret Republican pledge to count $1 trillion in savings from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan toward deficit reduction. That was surprising. Earlier, Boehner had not been willing to accept this accounting gimmick.“I don’t trust these guys,” the president said dismissively. Krone either would not or could not conceal his anger. . . .
“Mr. President, I am sorry — with all due respect — that we are in this situation that we’re in, but we got handed this football on Friday night. And I didn’t create this situation. The first thing that baffles me is, from my private-sector experience, the first rule that I’ve always been taught is to have a Plan B. And it is really disheartening that you, that this White House did not have a Plan B.” Several jaws dropped as the Hill staffer blasted the president to his face. . . .
“You can’t veto,” Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner told the group. “You cannot be responsible for default.” Anything had to be done to prevent it. Anything to preserve the global economy.“If he caves,” said David Plouffe, Obama’s senior political adviser, “it will have long-lasting political repercussions that we may never get out of. If we draw a line in the sand on something this important and cross it, we may never be able to come back.”Accepting a two-step deal would not work, Plouffe said. “We will not get credit for doing anything. We’ll look like we got bullied by a bunch of very unpopular and irresponsible people.”Geithner had to deal with the possibility that the House bill could reach Obama’s desk. “My recommendation to the president would be, we’ve got to sign this. If that’s what they offer us, we sign it.” . . .