Friday, October 31, 2008

Wall Street cash favors democrats, contrary to popular media spin

via Drudge Report

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Why would the UN favor Obama? He would give the UN control of the US economy.

A weak, exhausted electorate now all but a slave to international market scams (see current financial meltdown, Hank Paulson, Al Gore, Goldman Sachs, Hollywood, Soros, etc.) will fall easily with the final nail in the coffin: killing the last bit of US initiative in favor of carbon trading scams. ALL DONE THROUGH THE UNITED NATIONS, of course!: A President Obama would mean job- and growth-killing subservience to U.N. dogma on climate change and an EPA empowered to regulate and control our means of production....
  • Placing carbon dioxide on the same level as other pollutants will lead to caps on power-plant emissions, leading to higher energy prices as new plants are not built and existing plants are forced to use expensive CO2 emission controls.

Bloomberg says this move may halt construction plans for half of the 130 proposed new U.S. coal plants. Twenty-five U.S. states now get more than 50% of their electricity from coal.

  • Rust Belt manufacturing states such as Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania would be particularly hard-hit....
  • Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says an
Obama win would help clear the deadlock in talks on a new international agreement on climate change to replace the failed Kyoto Protocol....

This is something the Bush administration has resisted even after the Supreme Court in 2007 said the government has the authority to do so.

  • He "would initiate those rulemakings," his energy adviser, Jason Grumet, said in an Oct. 6 interview in Boston.

"In the absence of congressional action" 18 months after Obama's inauguration, the EPA would move ahead on its own, he warned."...

  • via
This brief article doesn't get into all the other problems connected with the UN, which is accountable to no one and whose employees skim millions off for their personal use every year. (sm)

Labels: ,

Sunday, October 26, 2008

The feminization of America by authoritarian means--the final suffocation of individual minds by the international blanket

  • It's obvious how the media does it. Less obvious why a passive public buys it.
"And, of course, while experience is crucial in assessing Sarah Palin's qualifications for vice president, no such standard is applied to Obama's qualifications for president.
  • (No longer is it acceptable to minimize the work of a community organizer.)
  • They would never and have never tried such an approach with Obama.
But beyond the elites and the media, my greatest concern is whether this election will show a majority of the voters susceptible to the appeal of a charismatic demagogue...Obama's entire campaign is built on
The "change" he peddles is not new. We've seen it before.
  • It is a populist appeal that disguises government mandated wealth redistribution
as tax cuts for the middle class, falsely blames capitalism for the social policies
fuels contempt for commerce and trade by stigmatizing those who run successful small and large businesses, and
Obama's appeal to the middle class is an appeal to the "the proletariat," as an infamous philosopher once described it, about which a mythology has been created. Rather than pursue the American Dream, he insists that
  • the American Dream has arbitrary limits, limits Obama would set for the rest of us — today it's $250,000 for businesses and even less for individuals. If the individual dares to succeed beyond the limits set by Obama, he is punished for he's now officially "rich."
The value of his physical and intellectual labor must be confiscated in greater amounts for the good of the proletariat (the middle class). And so it is that
  • the middle class, the birth-child of capitalism, is both celebrated
for its own good and the greater good. The "hope" Obama represents, therefore, is not hope at all.
  • It is the misery of his utopianism
  • imposed on the individual.
Unlike past Democrat presidential candidates, Obama is a hardened ideologue. He's not interested in playing around the edges. He seeks "fundamental change," i.e., to remake society. And if the Democrats control Congress with super-majorities led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, he will get much of what he demands.

The question is whether enough Americans understand what's at stake in this election
Is the allure of a charismatic demagogue so strong that the usually sober American people are willing to risk an Obama presidency? After all, it ensnared Adelman, Kmiec, Powell, Fried, and numerous others. And while America will certainly survive, it will do so, in many respects, as a different place."
  • via