Liberals gin up their engines for kamikaze missions

Washington Examiner ^ | 01/21/10 | Chris Stirewalt

[TigerLikesRooster]

Liberals gin up their engines for kamikaze missions

By: Chris Stirewalt

Political Editor

January 21, 2010

Pundits on the Left are suggesting that the reason Massachusetts voters rejected Martha Coakley -- aside from her personal failings as a candidate - is that Democrats in Washington failed to pursue a sufficiently liberal agenda.

As Sen. John Kerry and the other leaders of the Massachusetts Democratic Party were still standing on stage, jaws slack and eyes vacant, commentators Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC said that the vote was proof that President Obama and his team had to act urgently to jam his health care bill through Congress by any parliamentary means necessary. Maddow, astonishingly, said it had to be done in 30 days.

Over at the Boston Globe, which was the only organization to have a worse showing in the election than the Coakley campaign, editorial writers pretended that Republican Scott Brown's election had been a certainty for some time. If they thought so, they certainly hadn't shared it with their readers.

If you relied only on the Globe for your news, the last poll you read about before Election Day was the one from Jan. 6 from the paper and the University of New Hampshire that showed Coakley winning in a 17-point walk over Republican Scott Brown.

The Globe editorial, having dismissed Brown's win as an event as common as the start of the maple syrup harvest, then picked up the argument that now was the moment for a kamikaze mission to pass the Democrats' health plan.

"Both houses of Congress have already passed credible reform bills. At this point, President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should bring the legislative process to a close by pushing House members to pass the Senate version," counseled the Globe.

[sergeantdave]

“I forgot to bookmark it and have been looking for it.”

Are you perhaps thinking of “Report From Iron Mountain?”

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

Expect Obama and company to double-down covered up by a deceptive shroud of populist demagoguery. Lying and deception are second (actually first) nature to these people.

[doberville]

Thank you for your well presented information.

There is much here to ponder.

[patton]

That is where I saw it. History International, I think.

[J Edgar]

Thanks for the info and insight.

[GeronL]

Fabians? They called George Bernard Shaw a Fabian. He was talking about death camps and poison gas a decade before Hitler did it. He admired Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini.. still did AFTER the war.

[gibtx2]

no question they want us to become unhinged. I want them to be voted out of office in disgrace... humiliation .. no other way .. discredited for generations to come.... that is the only way this works.

[dljordan]

“Are you perhaps thinking of “Report From Iron Mountain?”

No, this was the minutes from the RIIA conference in Australia or New Zealand, I forget which.

[BP2]

There are many lessons in history that can aid us, as we are key players in the repeating and epic battle of Socialism versus Capitalism.

Please read on (more insight on Fabien Socialists and Revolutionary Communists) from Post 28 above:

In 1890, Woodrow Wilson wrote an essay entitled Leaders of Men.

Wilson said that a “true leader” uses the masses of people like “tools.”

Wilson continued, “The competent leader of men cares little for the internal niceties of other people’s characters: he cares much–everything–for the external uses to which they may be put ... He supplies the power; others supply only the materials upon which that power operates ... It is the power which dictates, dominates; the materials yield. Men are as clay in the hands of the consummate leader.”

“Woe be to the man or group of men that seeks to stand in our way,” said Wilson in June 1917 to counter protesters of his Progressive policies. Obama has made similar statements.

In just two months of early 1913, Wilson and Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act, the Federal Trade Commission, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Federal Farm Loan Act and America’s income tax in the Revenue Act of 1913. All of these measures were attempts to expand the tax base while defining the basic policy of the United States with respect to the organization and control of industry.

It is utterly staggering how much Progressive legislation Wilson, with the help of the 62nd Congress, passed in the first few months of 1913 — take a look at the Wiki page on the 62nd Congress to see the whirlwind of legislation they enacted in February and March 1913: the 62nd Congress - Major Legislation.

Thankfully, Pelosi and Reid screwed up in 2009 while trying to pass their Progressive ObamaCare changes in one MASSIVE omnibus bill; the 62nd Congress did their changes the “right way,” QUICKLY and in smaller pieces. Expect the Progressive Congressional Democrats in 2010 to try this tactic next!

If you compare Obama and Woodrow Wilson, you’ll notice a lot of similarities. One key difference however is obvious — Obama’s appeals to disaffected groups such as blacks, Hispanics, Arabic and other minorities — a quality he is more than willing to exploit for his own political gain and for the advancement of Socialism. Note that Obama's approval rating with Blacks and Hispanics still remains around 90 percent!"

Since Obama no longer has control of a filibuster-proof Senate, he will be forced to try a more aggressive strategy with his most-loyal supporters. He will use the anger of minorities to nudge and pressure Banks and other industries to fall under more government influence, to ensure the "fat cats" don't cause a financial crash again.

Obama will try to pit the throngs of inner-city minorities against the growing tide of Conservatism that comes from the Tea Party movement and other Conservative groups. He wants a fight as it suits his goals of division and rebirth from chaos — THAT is the chronological evolution that Communists and Socialists believe in.

It’s important to note that Obama does not seem to want to TAKE OVER industry (at least at this stage) — just REGULATE IT SO SIGNIFICANTLY so he can usher in his Social Change and redistribution of wealth. In this regard, Obama who was a New Party Socialist when he first ran for office in 1996, acts more like a Western Marxist.

There's one other important lesson of Wilson's era I wish to point out. Progressive Woodrow Wilson was ushered into the White House when in-fighting between Theodore Roosevelt (with his Bull Moose Party) and William Taft divided the Republican Party vote in 1912.

We saw this in 1992, with nearly 20 percent of the Independent vote going to Ross Perot, helping to elect Bill Clinton. I suspect that the Socialists and their Democratic Party offshoots will try to cause a rift between the Tea Party movement and less-Conservative aspects of the Republican party (aka, RINOs). They want the Tea Party to form a third party, or the RINOs to sit out of the next elections.

Glenn Beck has changed his tune from his initial calling for the formation of a third party, back to Rush's and Hannity’s ongoing theme of "forcing" Conservatism back WITHIN the GOP. Sarah Palin recognizes the perils of a third party, too.

Subversive elements right here on Free Republic, in some cases ON PURPOSE, are trying to divide the “anti-socialist” voting block (Center-Left, Center-Right and Conservative).

As much as I despise RINOs, we need to realize that forcing them to leave the GOP on the national level may likely set up in 2012 a historical repeat of 1912 and 1992 — allowing the Progressive candidate to win the Presidency. It will be a balancing act, in the months and years ahead leading into 2012, to restore Conservatism to the GOP, while not forcing these less-Conservative elements of the Republican Party to feel shut out and fail to vote with the Conservatives.

Obama’s next moves will be to enrage his devout followers to rebel against the system — we are already seeing that in his post-Scott Brown "pivot." He will say that the Republicans support the Banks and the status quo which are “destroying the country,” as Wilson did before him.

Obama’s use of Wilson’s “masses of people” is best countered by Educating the "masses" — who Obama wishes to exploit — that self-reliance, competition and a smaller federal government gives them more opportunities than dependency on a Socialist American government to fix high unemployment and other of "society’s ills and inequities."

[GVnana]

Very interesting analysis.

[BP2]

Thank you.

Obama has blown the ultimate opportunity for a Socialist in the White House — the Congressional rubber stamp. We have temporarily dodged a bullet to the heart of Democracy.

It wasn't until 1917 after Woodrow Wilson won reelection that his Democratic Senate adopted the rule of Cloture to end a Filibuster. This was, of course, after his sweeping changes in 1913 — he didn't want Republicans to be able to unwind his changes.

When the Fabien Socialist loses his ability to control incremental change, he will use Class Warfare, turning the masses against the system and each other. If it results in violence, so be it.

That's the next play in Obama’s playbook, now that he's lost his filibuster-proof majority.

However, I'm optimistic that enough people are catching on to his Columbia-taught “tactics”.

[Jedidah]

One of the best posts I’ve read in a long time.

Let me add, please, that I question the patriotism of any FReeper who sits at home and refuses to vote in November because the Republican candidate isn’t pure enough for their misguided tastes.

This in a time in which we must, indeed, take a stand together, or our nation may fall apart.

[mojitojoe]

Excellent post as always.

[mojitojoe]

When BP2 talks, I listen too. Hands down one of my favorite freepers. Posts are always done to perfection and so informative.

[mojitojoe]

I question the patriotism of any FReeper who sits at home and refuses to vote in November because the Republican candidate isn’t pure enough for their misguided tastes.
_________________________
I agree with you 100%!

[SCalGal]

bookmark

[GVnana]

The man in the photo is most certainly NOT Wainright.

Starting at 0800 that morning, destroyer after destroyer pulled alongside the Missouri, her topside spaces already brimming with sailors and correspondents -- in particular the Japanese press. Allied generals, admirals, and ranking diplomats were delivered. Admiral Nimitz, appointed as representative of all American forces, was piped aboard at 0805. General MacArthur arrived via the destroyer USS Buchanan (DD 484) at about 0830. A naval precedent was set when Admiral Nimitz' blue flag and General MacArthur's red flag flew side by side from the Missouri 's mainmast.

For a bit of irony, MacArthur invited General Jonathan M. Wainwright, Commander of the U.S. Forces which surrendered at Corregidor in 1942, and Lieutenant General Arthur E. Percival, Commander of the British forces that surrendered at Singapore in the same year. Both were terribly emaciated, having been quickly spirited from captivity in a Japanese prison camp in Manchuria.

http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,112200,00.html

[bgill]

It will be a balancing act, in the months and years ahead leading into 2012, to restore Conservatism to the GOP, while not forcing these less-Conservative elements of the Republican Party to feel shut out and fail to vote with the Conservatives.

That's something we all need to keep in mind when we are out talking to our friends and neighbors.

[BP2]

Just as we are grinning at the ongoing fissures developing between the radical Progressives and mainstream Democrats, they are salivating at potential fractures in the GOP between the Tea Party Conservatives and the RINOs.

To reiterate, I eschew RINOs and I want as many Conservatives as possibly in office as possible. But RINOs have a presence in the Northeast — as even Scott Brown shows to some degree. I expect to see mainstream Democrats run against and beat Progressive incumbents in some purple states this November.

From the 2010 Elections, I'd like to see the GOP — or at least an anti-Obama, Conservative coalition with the help of Blue Dog Democrats — push beyond a simple majority and wield a VETO-OVERRIDE majority starting in January 2011. We're going to need to team up to push back Obama’s initiatives this year.

The best way to do that is to distinguish ourselves from the Democrats, while finding common ground with at least some of the less-Conservative segments of the Republican Party.

[bannie]

...and you never back a crazy person in the corner...nor do you turn your back on someone with nothing left to lose.