What difference does it make? Part II

Now, we know that Susan Rice knew the talking points were changed before she read them on 5 tv shows. The State Department changed the CIA report they were given by scrubbing any mention of al Qaeda or terrorists attacking the consulate in Benghazi. Clinton and Rice knew that what Rice reported on five morning shows consisted of lies. Barack Obama knew that Rice was lying. Obama and Clinton carried the lies forward, and they intentionally misled the American people, over and over.

But, what difference does it make? What difference does it make if our President and his administration lie to the American people? Some pundits on the Left say that the truth is coming out, so it's not really a big deal. The system is working and America is a swell place where truth wins -- Obama and Clinton will now cooperate and get the information out to the people, so no harm, no foul. What difference does it make, if we finally get the information and something is done to fix the situation? It's okay Mr. Nixon, we corrected the situations which led to the break in, and now all the information is out, so forget about it -- what difference does the coverup make now? Just go back to work as President and forget about it.

Hillary has asked a question that challenges the American people. Does it make a difference? Does it matter if the President and Secretary of State lie to the American people? Does it matter that these lies hampered the FBI investigation and prevented us from capturing the murderers who killed the Ambassador and three heroes who tried to save him? Does it matter that Obama and Clinton tried to cover-up the lies? Obviously, most people on the Left, and many Centrist Republicans, believe it doesn't matter, that the truth makes no difference in politics unless the truth fits the political goals of those in power. Does the truth matter to the American people? That's the question. How strong are we? That's another pertinent question.

Defeating Hillary and Progressivism

It won't be easy defeating Progressivism, because the ideas have infiltrated the public consciousness even though very few people holding Progressive ideas know much about the political philosophy or its history. It sounds good to be Progressive, to promote human rights, equality and social justice. For those who don't understand modern Progressivism and how it evolved, read the 4 part series put out by the Center for American Progress.

Progressives have been inspired by the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It sounds amenable to our own Bill of Rights until you drill down and understand the goals. The UN and Progressives have fought to expand rights to include economic, social and cultural rights, not just political and civil rights. Progressives are advancing toward a right to a decent living, a right to housing, a right to food and clothing, etc. The US welfare state has made great strides toward these Progressive goals with housing subsidies, foodstamps and many other welfare benefits, but Progressives want much more, and not just in the realm of welfare for the poor.

Progressives are also fighting for justice to answer past injustices done against blacks and women and LGBT and Hispanics, just to name the major aggrieved groups. Progressives want to actively promote the rights of these aggrieved groups so that affirmative efforts create equality. I will not get into the philosophical argument regarding negative rights vs positive rights, because I want to address a different issue. Presently, the Democratic Party is using the Progressive agenda to maintain power. The political Left is very active organizing communities around the rallying cry of social justice. This class warfare manifests itself in a war waged by the middle class and the poor against the wealthy. Democrat politicians are portraying Republicans as the party of the rich and powerful old white men. These rich and powerful old white men are shown as gatekeepers preventing the middle class and poor from advancing. Our society has been taught this in public schools and through media for decades, so that practically all remnants of free market/ limited government principles have been erased from the American mind. We are ripe for global violation of our sovereignty as Universal Progressivism puts pressure on all nations to abide by Universal Human Rights. Americans will not really value sovereignty as they're told over and over it's one world and solidarity is vital.

Along with the class war is the racial war, the gender war, the sexual war, the environment war, and I'm sure there will be others. Barack Obama was announced with historic grandeur as the First Black President. The multi-faceted Democratic Party strategy for 2014 and 2016 is to combine these wars against the GOP until the GOP is destroyed. The Left is attempting to relegate the GOP to the past, reactionaries blocking progress. Hillary will be seen as the Historic First Woman President, and women's issues will take center stage in the media. You'll hear the constant drumbeat of how it's women's time to shine -- women will bring peace and compromise, honesty and integrity, openness and communication. Wome will be more attuned to injustices done to the poor and the middle class. Women will more sensitive to sexual differences. Women will be less divisive and better able to bring about harmony and understanding. Women will be less competitive and more cooperative, so the country's tranformation from a competitive, capitalistic economy to an economy that's cognizant of human needs will be better handled by a woman.

You get the picture. This whole blog is about why these ideas have to be defeated, but I will repeat the whys over and over and over going forward.

The new and improved Hillary Clinton

I remember when Hillary was designing the most God-awful, Rube Goldberg national healthcare plan back when she and Bill and Al and Tipper thought the nation had fully embraced the Progressive dream. Hillary and Bill miscalculated, the healthcare monster was slayed, and the over-reach created the Gingrich Revolution in 1996 which sent Bill running to the center and sent Hillary quietly to traditional First Lady functions.

Hillary came back out of her shell in her 2008 bid for the Presidency when she announced her Progressivism. Then, when it appeared that moderation might carry the day, Hillary tried to straddle the divide between Center-Left liberals and true-blue Progressives. After losing to Barack Obama, and during her stint as Secretary of State, Hillary has played it safe, presenting herself as a hard-working team player, competent, indefatigable and consistent. Lately, Hillary is emerging as America's leader on women's issues. Hillary is the perfect model for 21st century feminists. The Left's hope is that Hillary can expand her influence beyond feminists to working women and housewives of all stripes. Plus, Hillary's tough, man-like work-ethics as Secretary of State will surely draw male votes. And Bill, America's original First Black President, can make sure the minorities turn out. Hillary will have to work out something behind the scenes with Trumka and and his ilk, because Hillary will need independents, and being too pro-union could hurt.

It's easy to discern the Democratic Party strategy for 2014. Obama was the historic black President, and Hillary will be marketed as the historic female President. Sorry Hispanics, you'll have to wait for the historic Hispanic President in 2022. The historic gay President will not have a chance until 2030. Be prepared for all the hoopla and marketing. Obama has a large vote creation machine, but Hillary can match it through MoveOn and the Center of Progress and all the Soros funded, Progressive organizations which will solidly support Hillary and organize communities to get out the vote. Harold Ickes and John Podesta will be on board, as always. There's a good chance American voters will be fooled again with the Progressive promises that are purified of socialism during the campaign and presented as the Left's version of smart government, American strength, equality, fairness, social justice, freedom for the suppressed, and apple pie. They'll get to the socialistic parts after Hillary's victory. By then the country ought to be so weakened by 8 years of Obama that Hillary will be able to get anything passed. The GOP will be so desperate they'll surrender and do what they're told to do.

On the other hand, Americans might see through the marketing glitz and realize that Hillary is an economy-destroying Progressive who'll be worse than Obama before it's all over.

Morning Joe 8/31/2011 -- Political footle

On Morning Joe today Scarborough perfected his whistle and horn clown act as he berated Rick Perry for being a dime-store conservative, stating that Perry was once a Democrat who switched to Republican for opportunistic reasons. Scarborough was set off by a report that Perry sent a letter to Hillary Clinton in the early 90s asking her to not forget the needy in Texas as she developed her healthcare plan. Joe was once a registered Democrat and his hero, Ronald Reagan was a union-leader, Democrat before switching to the Republican Party, but Scarborough had his act in full gear, so thinking rationally was not an option. Scarborough might be right about Perry, but, Scarborough, of all people, has not room to honk his horn and blow his clown whistle. Scarborough calls himself a "small" government conservative like Paul Ryan, but then he goes on to praise FDR and what FDR did in the 30s. Yes, FDR is the epitome of "small" government conservatism. Scarborough is politically all over the map, and what's most important to him, it seems, is that he's not ignored. He will dismiss criticism like this as coming from Cheeto-eating bloggers typing in their underwear, but I don't eat Cheetos and I'm fully dressed, and Scarborough is a Republican joke -- and a loud joke -- bonk,bonk, whistle, bonk, hee-hee, look at me, look at me!

Scarborough, Donnie Deutsche, Mike Barnicle and Arianna Huffington -- a balanced round table -- all called for a president who can make big things happen, and it doesn't appear to matter what big things they do -- attempt to cut government like Reagan or extend a depression through years of unnecessary suffering like FDR with all his interventions -- either one, just do something big! The political class can't stand it that we don't have a President strong enough to take complete control-- Scarborough said although Reagan got in trouble for underhanded dealings trying to knock-down the USSR, he was still great because he got the job done, and FDR violated the Constitution but he "saved" the country. Holy crap -- what can I say?

George Pataki was on the show, and he was asked why he's not running for President -- Pataki said he loves his family. The Morning Joe crew wondered why Christie, Ryan and Jeb Bush aren't running. It might be because we're finally seeing the facade ripped off the job of President. It's a hyped-up job with unrealistic expectations, and the only people willing to run, it seems, are people like Clinton and Obama with huge egos, or those like Bush who were groomed by political families or handlers in one political party of the other. No healthy person with a good life would dream of going through the madness surrounding the President. Someone like Ron Paul who wants to get a message across will run, but they know their chances are next to none of winning, except winning by changing the conversation about the role of government. It's a shame we can't right-size the job and elect someone like Paul who would fight for limitations rather than expansion of the office's power.

As I suspected, the pressure to implement a New New Deal is building -- on the Right and Left there is hunger for a Big Infrastructure Project that will say to China -- look at us, we're relevant too! This is more statist madness. It's a shame that this direction is taking hold. Where is the resistance? Government stimulus has proved over and over and over again that Keynesian economics don't work, but we go back to it. Why? 

Oh yes, let's negotiate with the Muslim Brotherhood

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/01/hillary-we-welcome-dialogue-with-the-muslim-brotherhood/

American politicians and government officials will never learn in the Middle East. Of course we don't know the true intentions of Clinton and Obama, but if they think they can work some deal with the Muslim Brotherhood on "democracy" and women's rights, they're delusional. Surely they've read the history of such "negotiations" and "deals" regarding all the myriad issues we've dealt with there -- if not, suffice it to say, we have a poor track record of affecting change. Perhaps they don't want our advice or to live by our values -- perhaps. 

Our best bet is to announce neutrality concerning Egypt -- Egypt and Egyptians can do what Egypt and Egyptians want to do -- American will not intervene, nor will we send aid. We will mind our business and Egypt can mind its business, and Israel can mind its business. We have a lot of untended business at home, thank you. If Egyptians get tired of the Muslim Brotherhood, then they can throw them out, or they can embrace the Muslim Brotherhood and live in happiness -- it's none of our business.