Obama’s Useful Idiots

The campaign to re-elect President Barack Obama is no stranger to pushing collectivist and government-first propaganda to excite its base, but many people have noted that the campaign initiatives are beginning to get creepier than ever before.

A couple months ago, the Obama campaign released an online application called “Life of Julia” which demonstrated how government involvement in the life of a young woman would likely differ under the policies of an Obama Administration as opposed to a Mitt Romney Administration’s policies. Small-government advocates were quick to point out that neither scenario was conducive to removing the government from the most intimate facets of day-to-day life, but the apocalyptic vision of a woman’s life without Obama’s big-government health policies proposed by the current Administration were, to many, downright laughable.

The demonstration plays as follows: Without Obama, young Julia is denied education. Then, she is denied surgery. Poorly educated and in less-than favorable health, Julia is forced to take an undesirable job at the age of 23 after barely scraping by in college. Later in life, she has more problems paying for healthcare and has a baby who she has trouble supporting. And then her kid has the same problems. In old age, Julia has no money and worries all the time.

It sounds preposterous, but you can check it out for yourself here.

The Obama cult of personality and government-always-helps campaign strategy has popped up again in his effort to encourage his supporters to praise the campaign by writing on their hands and sending photos to the campaign showing what makes them love Obama.

Here are some of the reasons — displayed in creepy fashion “#For All” — that some people support Obama.

Supporting Obama for food could actually seem logical, though food stamps may be a better thing for the President’s supporters to write on their hands. According to a recently released Congressional Research Service report, the number of able-bodied Americans now using food stamps nearly doubled, from 1.9 million in 2008 to 3.9 million in 2010, after Obama suspended the requirement for able-bodied adults without children to attempt to work before drawing full nutritional assistance.


And like those in Chicago who, through collectivist action, put on hold the start of school for nearly 350,000 already lagging students in the city.


See: Solyndra, Bright Source, Solar Trust of America, LSP Energy, Energy Conversion Devices, Amonix Solar, Abound Solar, Sun Power, Beacon Power, Ecotality, A123 Solar, UniSolar, Azure Dynamics, Evergreen Solar, Ener1. All are renewable energy firms, many of which received direct subsidies from the Obama Administration; all failed.


Despite promises from the President during the last campaign, large numbers of American troops remain in the Mideast long after Obama’s promised withdrawal dates. Worse, they continue to be killed by the very people they are attempting to train in places like Afghanistan where the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida have taken a strong foothold thanks to failed American foreign policy shared by both George W. Bush and the current President.


Increased drone strikes that routinely kill civilians, the classification of any male old enough to hold a weapon as enemy combatant, indefinite detention and Fast and Furious are all policies that began or continued under the Obama Administration. Also, Guantanamo Bay is still open; and, as a U.S. citizen, your chances of being sent there have increased under Obama.


Hoping you don’t get fooled again?There are plenty more of the one-word pictorial devotions to Dear Leader Obama on his campaign sight here.

Voting Netanyahu 2012?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney have a long-standing friendship that dates back to 1976, when they both worked as corporate advisers to the Boston Consulting Group.

Despite some efforts to downplay the 36-year relationship, both men have noted that they formed a lasting bond during the time they spent working together at the Boston Consulting Group. In a New York Times article from April, Romney and Netanyahu were both quoted saying they share a common worldview in many respects.

Romney told the newspaper: “We can almost speak in shorthand. We share common experiences and have a perspective and underpinning which is similar.”

And Netanyahu described their communication as follows: “[D]espite our very different backgrounds, my sense are that we employ similar methods in analyzing problems and coming up with solutions for them.”

Now with Romney in the running for President, the close relationship between candidate and Israeli Prime Minister is an unprecedented one that may pose some heavy questions about the future of American foreign policy in the Mideast and how Israel-dominated its direction will be.

One of Romney’s closest foreign policy advisers is Dan Senor, a high-profile and decidedly neocon foreign policy expert whose resume includes advocating a number of Bush-era Mideast foreign policy initiatives. But even when George W. Bush was hesitant to unleash an American or Israeli military assault on Iran because of a stretched-thin military battling in Iraq and Afghanistan, people from Senor’s school of thought were openly calling for the United States to embark on an aggressive bombing campaign against the nation. Senor has exhibited a career-spanning support for Israel and was reportedly one of the key orchestrators of Romney’s recent legally questionable campaign fundraising event in Israel where he received money from a number of unnamed donors who were alleged to have been linked with illegal diamond trading.

Indeed, Senor is not the only pro-Israel advocate tied to the Romney campaign. In a recently leaked video, Romney admitted that his campaign uses the same consultants that manipulate campaigns the world over to garner favor for the globalist-backed candidate in a given race. He said:

I have a very good team of extraordinarily experienced, highly successful consultants, a couple of people in particular who have done races around the world, I didn’t realize it. These guys in the US – the Karl Rove equivalents – they do races all over the world: in Armenia, in Africa, in Israel. I mean, they work for Bibi Netanyahu in his race. So, they do these races and they see which ads work, and which processes work best, and we have ideas about what we do over the course of the campaign. I’d tell them to you, but I’d have to shoot you.

Romney’s allusion to his international thought shapers raises questions about the true origin and purpose of events that have transpired in recent weeks throughout the Mideast and what Israeli-manipulated shenanigans may unfold over the next month leading up to the election.

Here’s another telling remark from the same Romney speech:

[I]n the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we had hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean, that was the focus, and so him solving that made all the difference in the world. I’m afraid today that if you simply got Iran to agree to stand down on nuclear weapons, they’d go, “Now hold on. It’s really a-” I mean, if something of that nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.

Will a manufactured Iran crisis arise before November? Only time will tell, but it is getting pretty close to October surprise season. And given the amount of speculation that the recent round of Mideast riots are part of a psyops ploy, it isn’t implausible.

Paying attention to American/Israeli news coverage, one cannot help but notice Netanyahu’s recent push for media visibility in the United States. He has essentially inserted himself into the 2012 Presidential campaign.

Netanyahu has repeatedly made critical statements about Obama’s foreign policy stance of crippling economic sanctions and patience to stifle Iran’s nuclear ambitions, saying that the United States must essentially draw a line in the sand and dare the Iranian regime to step over it.

He had this to say on MSNBC’s “Meet the Press”:

I actually I read this in the American press. They said, well, you know, if you take action, that’s– that’s a lot worse than having Iran with nuclear weapons. Some have even said that Iran with nuclear weapons would stabilize the Middle East– stabilize the Middle East. I– I think the people who say this have set a new standard for human stupidity. We have to stop them. Don’t rely on containment. That is not the American policy. It would be wrong. It would be a grave, grave mistake. Don’t let these fanatics have nuclear weapons. It’s terrible for Israel and it’s terrible for America. It’s terrible for the world.

Whether Obama or Romney assume the office of President following the election matters not to Netanyahu, because Israeli influence in America’s military-industrial complex and legislature guarantees American backing of Israel should it launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran. But his relationship with Romney and Romney’s promise to telephone him with questions like “Would it help if I say this? What would you like me to do?” before making key American foreign-policy decisions make Netanyahu’s most-favorable option clear.

With the prospect of a virtual handover of Mideast foreign policy decision-making to the Israeli government, American voters can bet that Netanyahu, with the help of Mossad, will do everything in his power to ensure that Romney takes the White House.

Many “conservatives” reading this are likely saying to themselves, “Good, anything to get Obama out of the Oval Office.” And unfortunately, they have been brainwashed into believing that support for Israel is a biblical mandate that directly affects American prosperity through divine intervention. (That doesn’t sound all too different than the way some other cultures make policy decisions, does it?)

But the harsh and unavoidable reality for more pragmatic thinkers is that Romney’s willingness to give Israel such a powerful role in American policy goes against any true patriotic value left over from our Nation’s founding.

During his farewell address in 1796, President George Washington gave a grave warning against the very kind of relationship the United States has cultivated with Israel, a relationship that Romney seeks to further embolden with Israeli power in American decision-making.

Washington warned:

[A] passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

… Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

… Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Of course, more prophetic was probably Washington’s understanding that money and zealotry would lead the Nation astray and into a spiraling collapse as he said later in the speech: “I dare not hope they [these counsels] will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit…”

There are thousands of reasons to support “anyone but Obama” for President and maybe even a few reasons to believe that Romney would make a good President. His slobbering love for Netanyahu and willingness to wholly entangle the United States in the battle between Muslims and Jews are not those reasons. Anyone who believes otherwise cannot be called a true conservative, and most definitely not a patriot, in the sort of Nation envisioned by America’s Founding Fathers.

Justice Report Clears Holder In Fast And Furious

A report released by the Justice Department on Wednesday says that 14 employees of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives face “disciplinary action” in regard to roles played in the fatally flawed Fast and Furious gunrunning operation, though no criminal charges have been recommended.

The report says that Fast and Furious was plagued by “misguided strategies, tactics, errors in judgment and management failures” on the part of agents, prosecutors and senior ATF officials in Washington. The Justice Department investigators also contend that Attorney General Eric Holder was not informed of the operation until after the death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in December 2010.

Holder said in a statement: “It is unfortunate that some were so quick to make baseless accusations before they possessed the facts about these operations accusations that turned out to be without foundation and that have caused a great deal of unnecessary harm and confusion. I hope today’s report acts as a reminder of the dangers of adopting as fact unsubstantiated conclusions before an investigation of the circumstances is completed.”

As a result of Fast and Furious roles outlined in the report, Kenneth Melson, the former director of the ATF, retired from the department and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein resigned from his post. The Justice Department has not released further information about the other involved employees.

Federal Government Not Willing To Rethink NDAA

Many civil liberties activists felt that a small victory had been achieved when Federal Judge Katherine Forrest temporarily suspended the National Defense Authorization Act’s indefinite detention provision in response to a lawsuit brought forth by renowned American journalists and intellectuals earlier this year. But this week, an appeals judge reinstated the provision at request of the Administration of Barack Obama.

Forrest ruled last week that the indefinite detention provision of NDAA could implicate American journalists for providing “material support” to entities that the Federal government defines as terrorists for simply covering issues surrounding the groups. This, the judge argued, posed threats to Constitutional free speech and freedom of the press.

“First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away,” Forrest wrote in her opinion. “This Court rejects the government’s suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention.”

When he signed the bill into law last New Year’s Eve, Obama claimed that: “The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”

Despite his assertion, the President’s Administration, evidently alarmed by Forrest’s suspension of the indefinite detention provision until language in the bill is clarified, asked for an emergency stay on the order. Within hours of the request on Monday, U.S. Court of Appeals Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to intervene and place a hold on the injunction.

Indefinite detention is alive and well. Barring Forrest’s previous ruling means the President again has the power to put any American citizen who “was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners” in a military detention center until “the end of hostilities.”

Amid Solyndra Failure, Chinese Solar Panels Were Bought For Fed Building

If you can’t beat them, let them win.

That appears to have been the attitude of American bureaucrats who deemed it acceptable to use stimulus funds acquired via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to purchase Chinese solar panels for the Senator Paul Simon Federal Building in Carbondale, Ill.

In 2010, the contractor hired to install the panels questioned the Federal government as to whether it was even legal to purchase the Chinese panels with stimulus funding, but the bureaucrats dismissed the query, according to The Washington Times.

Significance of the transgression has heightened in the years since the installation of the panels with the highly publicized failure of taxpayer funded firms like Solyndra LLC and Abound Solar. Both firms were involved in the manufacture of solar panels similar to those purchased from China for the building.

Since the companies’ bankruptcy filings, government officials have repeatedly blamed failure of the taxpayer-subsidized green-energy experiments on unfair competition from China.

Hezbollah Chief Wants U.S. Laws Against Islamic Ridicule

At behest of Hezbollah Chief Hassan Nasrallah, tens of thousands of protesters have gathered in Beirut, Lebanon in protest of the anti-Islamic film that is alleged to have sparked massive unrest throughout the Mideast.

According to RT, many of the protesters have adorned themselves with green and yellow headbands bearing the words “At Your Service God’s Prophet” to signify membership to Hezbollah.

“America, hear us – don’t insult our Prophet,” the protesters have been heard chanting.

“Prophet of God, we offer ourselves, our blood and our kin for the sake of your dignity and honor,” Reuters quoted Nasrallah during a rare address to the protest crowd.

The Hezbollah leader is reportedly calling for the government of the United States to make it a criminal offense to ridicule the Islamic prophet in the public sphere and is calling for punishment against those involved in the production of “Innocence of Muslims.”

“The US should know the film has dangerous repercussions,” Nasrallah said, according to Press-TV.

OWS Protesters Outnumbered By Cops

Occupy Wall Street protestors took to New York City’s financial district Monday to mark the one year anniversary of the movement against corporate greed in the United States; according to reports, police outnumbered protestors.

Protesters who began taking to the city’s streets over the weekend were met with heavy police presence by NYPD officers clad in military and riot gear who barricaded many streets throughout lower Manhattan.

About 100 protesters had either been detained or arrested near the New York Stock Exchange by noon Monday as police filled buses with the activists.

Smaller OWS-related events also cropped up in other cities throughout the Nation, though with less fanfare than the New York gathering.

Many observers of the OWS movement say that because of a lack of defined goals and failure to put forth a solid ideological statement, the anniversary resurgence of OWS will be short-lived.

A recent New York Times article explains:

As the Occupy movement turns 1 year old, its primary target — Wall Street — keeps churning out scandals. Major banks have been caught rigging key interest rates, laundering money and taking risky bets that lose billions of dollars.

Yet the movement cannot claim any new policy, law or regulation as its own. Unlike the Tea Party on the political right, there is no cohesive Occupy group promoting candidates in November’s national election.

Can Green Tea Kill Cancer?

Recent studies have added to the knowledge about the many health benefits of green tea, noting that chemicals found in the drink can actually help regenerate brain cells. Now, researchers studying the same chemicals have found that they can also shrink cancerous tumors.

Chemicals present in green tea, such as epigallocatechin 3-gallate or EGCG, are gaining prominent attention as new research demonstrates an impressive ability of EGCG to halt cancer growth and improve cardiovascular health.

Research from the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, published in Nanomedicine, says EGCG extracted from green tea could be a powerful weapon in treatments for tackling cancer with no side effects. Scientists at the university developed a method for delivering the natural compound directly to tumor cells and found that nearly two-thirds of the tumors shrank or disappeared within a month.

Dr. Christine Dufès, a senior lecturer at the Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, said: “These are very encouraging results which we hope could pave the way for new and effective cancer treatments.

“When we used our method, the green tea extract reduced the size of many of the tumors every day, in some cases removing them altogether. By contrast, the extract had no effect at all when it was delivered by other means, as every one of these tumors continued to grow.

“This research could open doors to new treatments for what is still one of the biggest killer diseases in many countries.”

The tests are believed to be the first time that this type of treatment has made cancerous tumors shrink or vanish.

Gingrich: U.S. At War With Libya

In a scathing rebuke of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy, former House Speaker and failed Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich described the events in Benghazi, Libya, and other U.S. consulates throughout the Arab world last week as acts of war.

Responding to Obama’s speech following the news of the murder of the U.S. ambassador to Libya in which he described the deadly Libya protest as a “senseless act of violence,” Gingrich writes in a recent op-ed:

These are not acts of senseless violence.

These are acts of war.

Our ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were not killed by a senseless mob. They were killed by a purposeful group of men armed with sophisticated weapons. These killers had tracked Ambassador Chris Stevens down to the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, where he was much more vulnerable to attack and had less protection. They waged a coordinated, military-style assault.

Our four dead are combat casualties as much as anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan.

While American involvement in the overthrow of the Libyan government took place without much fanfare, the United States is definitely at war with Libya. Experts agree that it is the same type of endless military conflict in which the Nation has been entangled for the past decade in Afghanistan.

Can America Survive Mideast War?

Gauging the response from the hawkish, neocon wing of the American populace along with some fence-sitters, it is apparent that the Nation’s handlers of disinformation are doing a spectacular job at steering public opinion in favor of an all-out international brawl in the Mideast.

Most recently, this has been demonstrated by the unbelievable narrative that transpired in Benghazi, Libya, and Egypt. Protesters have attacked American consulates and murdered the American ambassador to Libya and three other Americans.

American blood has been spilled in Libya, Egyptians have torn down the American flag at the embassy in their country and the anger and violent protests are spreading like wildfire across the Arab world. But, of course, there must be a reason. Could it be American freedom of speech?

The unrest is said to have been sparked by a film made in the United States that is extremely offensive to Muslim believers. There are many reasons which make the film an unlikely catalyst for the current anger in the Mideast; you can read about them in Bob Livingston’s “Freedom Watch” in today’s issue.

But to pretend that the film was what really sparked this unrest makes it much easier for America’s warmongers to validate what is about to come to a head in the Mideast region, while simultaneously covering more than 70 years of American hegemonic failure.

Less-informed Americans are led to believe some extremely nonsensical and historically contradictory things about the Nation’s ambitions in the Mideast. These ambitions were solidified with a 1944 State Department memo describing Mideast oil as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.”

Over the course of the following decade, American foreign policy in the Mideast was quite simply to remove anyone who displeased the Nation’s puppet masters and to create a sense of celestial manifest destiny for Americans who might shun the idea of becoming involved in a region that had been embroiled in holy war for a large portion of recorded history.

President Harry Truman in 1946 ordered the Soviets to get out of Kurdistan and Azerbaijan in northern Iran under threat of a “super bomb.” This was an effort to ensure that Iran would remain friendly to the United States in the future, and not object to imperialist U.S. objectives in the meantime.

Two years later in 1948, the United States manufactured what is, to this day, one of the primary publically acceptable reasons for the Nation’s nearly perpetual war stance in a region worlds away even when the United States falters domestically under massive debts and economic woes.

U.S. and British interests worked with the United Nations to create the Zionist homeland of Israel by ceding 54 percent of Palestine to the Jews who made up roughly one-third of the population. This quickly prompted Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Syria, who opposed the newly proclaimed state, to attack unsuccessfully. The war ended in the exodus of nearly 800,000 Palestinians into surrounding Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Gaza and the West Bank. Israel promptly took control of 77 percent of historic Palestine and was vindicated by American support.

To put it into vastly oversimplified terms, what followed involved a series of upheavals and U.S. interventionist money-pumping in Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt. Beyond proxy war with other major world powers like Russia, the United States has interest only in Mideast oil reserves and the avoidance of nations in the region throwing out brutal regimes in favor of ones that would upset the global wishes of Western monied elite.

The cycle has been a vicious one, the latest reincarnation of which was witnessed in the Arab Spring of recent years. But the result will be the same as it has for decades. The United States supported the party that would soon empower Saddam Hussein in 1963, al-Qaida boogeyman Osama bin Laden years before the 9/11 attacks (because he irked the Russians in Afghanistan), and the revolution that created the current situation in Iran. The United States also destroyed bin Laden and Saddam, and it will likely soon do quite a number on Iran.

Does the Nation simply like playing God with the Mideast and reaping the rewards of oil control and continual busywork for the military industrial complex? Surely, the best and the brightest in American foreign policy know well that Arab people will likely never accept Western culture and values and will continue to revolt against them in horrific ways.

Whether they buy into celestial reasons for blind support of Israel and its imperialist ambitions or actually think American intervention in the Mideast has ever been about peace, Democracy or nuclear weapons (none of which have been found in large quantities in the region), there is something that Americans should be very worried about right now: The situation, regardless of the Nation’s arrogance, is very quickly becoming more unmanageable than before.

Israel continues to push the United States to aid in a strike against Iran, which has the backing of Russia and China. Meanwhile, Iran is gaining favor among the populations in Nations the United States has already gone to great lengths to destabilize in recent years: Libya, Egypt, Syria and Afghanistan. War with Iran could mean another 10 years of the past decade’s wars at best and, at worst, all-out war in the Mideast that will spread across the planet, the likes of which Americans haven’t seen in a long time.

Given the shape the Nation is in at home, one can only hope America could triumph in such a conflict. Then again, perhaps that isn’t the goal.