Archives February 2013

THE U.S. CENSUS CHANGES: NOT ALL BLACK AND WHITE

 Some folks will probably call me a racist. C’est la vie.

The Census Bureau has announced that black Americans will no longer be officially identified as “Negro,” in the Race category, thereby leaving the new official term to either “Black” or African-American.”

Click here: US stopping use of term ‘Negro’ for census surveys – Yahoo! News

Seems to me, if we call Caucasian people “white,” what’s the problem in calling Negro people “Black?” They both identify by color. They are not offensive terms.

Yet, the official title is destined to become “African American” the politically correct terminology of the modern era. But it is a total misnomer.

I have friends who are African-American. Some are black, some are white. So, why does an African-American always have to denote a race? Fact is, it is not a race, the term is associated with a continent. North Africa is highly populated with Arabs, Moroccans, Algerians, Tunisians, Libyans and Egyptians, none of whom generally identify as black. South Africa has millions of white citizens who are native to the country. Therefore, it seems to me that “African-American” – a term requiring seven syllables – should be scrapped for the simple counterpart to White: Black.

I recall this identity issue going on from my early days as a police officer in the 1960s when all black people were officially called “colored.” Then came the 1970s and 1980s which changed to “Negro.” From there, the new century approached and the politically correct term evolved into the totally incorrect term, “African-American” as though it brought some higher degree of respect with the race.

We don’t call Italians, Brits and Germans, “European Americans.” We don’t call people from Brazil or Equador, “South American Americans.” Geez.

I like Black. I like White. There are millions of beautiful black people and white people, and all other races for that matter.

Hispanic is not a race, because any race can be Hispanic, so why designate that as a race? There is Native American, which is PC for “Indian.” And, of course, “Asian” is now designated for people of Oriental heritage, though that is also a continent, not a race.

In the last two decades we’ve seen a surge of interracial marriage and millions born as mixed-face children. Why do we call them “African-American” as opposed to “White?” Better yet, why are these people not categorized “Mixed Race” or the absolute correct term, Mulatto?” Look it up in the dictionary: “The offspring of one white parent and one black parent.” That sums it up. But, it’s sure to offend someone, in some racial category, so let’s leave that one alone.

There’s the old saying that you can please some of the people some of the time, but you cannot please all the people all of the time, so why don’t we just get over it?

That’s as black and white as I can put it.

 

 

PRESIDENT MICHELE OBAMA IN 2016?

The propaganda mill is already being set in motion for the 2016 election campaign, designed to keep Barack Obama in office. How? By laying the groundwork for Michele Obama.

That is, unless Rep. Jose Serrano of New York is successful in spearheading a bill to repeal the 22nd Amendment, limiting the president to two terms. If so, Barack can run until he’s 90 years of age. That’s not likely, but not impossible.

 Click here: New York congressman introduces bill to abolish presidential term limits

But, electing Mrs. Obama, who owns a law degree, would create a proxy president in giving her husband controls over policy and direction for a third term.

How can that happen? The same way Mr. Obama became elected for a second term.

1. Keep entitlement junkies on the hook by the millions, sucking up votes.

2. Keep the fawning media fawning, thus swaying the minds and impressions of millions.

3. Use the high-profile entertainment industry working for them as a surrogate political team.

Of course, there’s more. Add to that, the support of all the socialist organizations, labor unions, Islamist organizations, the likes of Soros and Buffett and money pouring in from everywhere, and you have the groundwork for a presidential winner, even if she has no qualifications.

As Mrs. Obama continues to play the TV circuits and special appearances with and about movie stars and other entertainers, she will be developed into another false icon ready to gobble votes. Check out her recent appearance on the Jimmy Kimmel show, where he asks Michele if there will be a Hillary/Michele ticket in 2016. This is called planting the seed:

Click here: Jimmy Fallon Asks Michelle Obama To Run With Hillary Clinton In 2016

And in case you didn’t know it, the bumper stickers are already in production. Check ‘em out: Click here: michelle obama 2016 bumper sticker – Google Search

The Academy Awards offered another platform for exposure in the Hollywood elite circles, as Mrs. Obama was tapped to present the Best Picture Award via satellite, even though she was unable to attend the Oscars in California. What does Michele Obama have anything to do with movies and/or the entertainment industry? Nothing. Ah, but who cares.

Click here: Oscar 2013-Michelle Obama Awards Best Picture to ARGO – YouTube

Michele shows off her dancing skills…on TV.

 Click here: Michelle Obama and the evolution of “mom dancing” (VIDEO)

 There is a long way to go. In the next year or so, look for Michele Obama to be assigned to head up a “very important” government assignment, chairing a program and/or committee to pass a major bill, all of which will be designed to impose credibility as an administrator. All that will be for fluff, to portray an image to get elected in 2016.

Impressionable teens are being groomed for their first votes in 2016. Minorities are prime targets for mass voting. No one really has to know anything about government, only that they will get something free if their candidate wins. Meanwhile, the Obamas may continue with their international agenda, while we are made to focus on national debts and immigration reform, and we’ll have our first female president, even if she’s only a front person.

Not bad for someone who was never proud of her country until she saw the White House in her crosshairs.

Michelle Obama 2016 Rectangle Decal

Google “Michele Obama Bumper Stickers” –  Thousands already in the marketplace.  The engines are running full steam ahead.

 

 

IS HILLARY THE BEST OR WORST SECRETARY OF STATE?

 

     There’s a lot of spin going around the media circuit priming Hillary Clinton as the heir apparent to Barack Obama in 2016. Most liberal pundits ignore the obvious and bare facts, blindly declaring Hillary as one of the greatest Secretaries of State in history.

     Sadly, nothing could be farther from the truth. If you measure success as a Secretary of State by miles traveled and pictures taken shaking hands with diplomats, then she’d win hands down. But those are not accomplishments, they are duties. Accomplishments are positive results from the tasks performed, of which there are few to list of any significance whatsoever.  Nevertheless, all those photo shoots and fawning reporters will be sure to sway millions of brain-dead followers, facts be damned.

     A book could be written about the failures of our state department during the last four years. For the sake of blog space, let’s keep it to a short bullet list:

     *    North Korea.  No achievements there. The sabers are still rattling and that little regime remains one of the world’s greatest dangers.

     *    Iran.  Closer to nuclear power than ever before and likely to be able to deliver a nuclear head toIsraelwithin the next year.

     *    Latin America.  Brutal dictator and hater of America, Hugo Chavez garnered control and power over much of Central and South America.

     *    Eastern Europe. Many of our allies feel less safe and protected since the dissemblance of their missile defense system there.

     *    Russia.  All indictors point to a return of dictatorial rule and resurgence of international power.

      *   China.  What Nixon developed as an ice-breaker returning to diplomatic relations with China has stung like a scorpion as China has evolved into our greatest debt with a stranglehold on our economy.

     *    Israel.  Diplomacy has all but vanished between Israel and the U.S. Never before have relations been as poor between the two countries, and never has Israel been so maligned on an international scale. Never before did the U.S. take sides against Israel, i.e. callinf for the return to old borders. The Palestinians under Hamas are further from peace than four years ago, the rockets keep firing and the on-going goals to destroy Israel are continuously shouted from the core of Islamist regimes. 

     *     The Middle East.  Give Hillary (and the Obama team) an F-Minus. The arch enemy of freedom and most extreme Islamist organization in the world, the Muslim Brotherhood, has assumed control over many countries, including Egypt,Tunisia, Libya, Mali, Niger, Syria. The administration’s claim that al Qaeda “is on the run” is a bald-face lie as al Qaeda is penetrating numerous nations inside of Africa today, not to mention Syria, India and Pakistan.

     Where Christianity and even Judaism were protected in Egypt under Mubarak, that is no longer the case as Christian Coptics are fleeing and churches and synagogues are closed.

     Ironically we are sending aid to Syria and other “rebel fighters” who are basically associated with al Qaeda, the very terror organization responsible for attacking the U.S. on September 11, 2001. That’s not to mention four F-16’s the Obama administration recently gifted to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood regime, the founder of Hamas.

     Our relations in the Islamist world/Middle East are about as bad as they’ve ever been, as the treaty between Israel and Egypt is all but defunct and multi-millions of people remain on edge to see where the first nuclear strike will land.

     We should ask Mrs. Clinton, whose side are we on?

*     Huma Abedin.  Hillary’s most trusted aide and travel companion is an educated Saudi woman whose mother, father and brother are all tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. One could only imagine how much the status of  U.S.  security has been breached and handed over to the one notorious organization whose stated goals, in writing, is to destroy America “from within.” Yet, the left and right wings of mainstream media ignore her presence. Huma Abedin would not pass a basic clearance test to be a local policeman. Thanks to the power of Mrs. Clinton, she is untouchable and our national security is at risk. 

*     The Benghazi attack.  The worst attack on an American consulate in years, with four dead Americans one of whom is an Ambassador to Libya, working directly in the State Department under Hillary Clinton, and she artfully dodges questions from the media and congress for 4 ½ months before taking the stand, plenty of time to evaluate the fallout then rehearse and plan what to say and how to say it.

     No serious accountability has been accepted for virtually decimating ambassadorial security in a non-secure zone, especially when beefed up security was specifically asked for by the ambassador – and refused. Not only was it refused, it was diminished. That, despite knowing  the Red Cross and the British were attacked and they hauled butt out of there. Especially when the Libyan consulate had already been under attack before.

     All this, then lying to the American public by stating it was all a result of an amateur video insulting to Islam, knowing that was a lie when she said it.  And knowing it was a lie when her employee, UN Ambassador Susan Rice was dispatched to five television shows to regurgitate the same lie.

     Her answer: “What difference does it make?”  Excuse me?  Is this OUR Secretary of State?

     Under her watch, the Libyan ambassador and three other brave American soldiers were murdered because of poor decisions – or no decisions – made by this Secretary of State.  And, she gets a pass?

     Are you kidding me?

     The greatest Secretary of State?

     For which country?

Dick Morris points out why Mrs. Clinton continues to receive such glowing press. Her press corps travels with her regularly, assigned to her exclusively. If they are not kind to Madame Secretary, a reporter can easily fall out of favor and be rendered dismissed.  Thus, poor press coverage is not permitted and well controlled.

     Makes sense.

     And here, you all thought the media was neutral all this time.

Click here: Hillary’s Trivial Tenure – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert! at DickMorris.com

 Click here: One of the greatest secretaries of state? Not Hillary Clinton – Opinion – The Boston Globe

Click here: Articles: Hillary Clinton: America’s Worst Secretary of State

 Click here: Muslim Brotherhood taking aim at Jordan

 Click here: Hugo Chavez Wages War on Free Press in Venezuela, Other Latin Presidents Follow Suit

 Click here: What Is the US Debt to China

 Click here: U.S. gift of F-16 fighters headed to Egypt, despite Morsi’s harsh rhetoric | Fox News

 Click here: Rep. Steve King: We Must Investigate Huma Abedin’s Muslim Brotherhood Connections

 

 

OSCAR PREDICTIONS FOR 2013

 While forecasting this year’s major Oscar winners, I am at a disadvantage having not seen all the nominated movies, hindered by one circumstance or another. The following are based on what I have viewed, which are most. (Asterisk denotes having seen all the films)

* Best Supporting Actor :

This could be very close. Tommy Lee Jones is a sentimental favorite for Lincoln followed by Phillip Seymour Hoffman for The Master. Robert DeNiro was good in Silver Linings Playbook, but he’s already racked up his share of Oscars. I see it one of two.

Who should win: Alan Arkin for Argo

Will probably win: Christoph Waltz for Django Unchained

* Best Supporting Actress:

This will be a runaway. The only real challenger is Amy Adams who is inching closer to her first Oscar each year. Sally Field is a popular favorite, but she can’t beat this front runner who stole the first thirty minutes of the movie.

Who should win: Anne Hathaway for Les Miserables

Will probably win: Anne Hathaway for Les Miserables

* Best Actor:

This is the tightest competition, as all five nominated actors are deserving of the Oscar for their individual film performances. Hugh Jackman is a front runner favorite for the sheer difficulty of his role, virtually singing the lyrics from beginning to end in Les Miserables. I left the theater after seeing The Master and predicted Joaquin Pheonix to win the Oscar, but I may be wrong. Denzel Washington was amazing as the alcoholic pilot in Flight. Daniel Day-Lewis is the greatest living actor, who shined as Abraham Lincoln. But I think we’re in for a surprise with the brilliant performance of Oscar newcomer, Bradley Cooper in Silver Lining Playbook.

Who should win: Daniel Day-Lewis for Lincoln

Will probably win: Bradley Cooper for Silver Lining Playbook

Best Actress:

I failed to see Emmanuelle Riva in Amour, or nine year-old Quvenzhane Wallis in Beasts of the Southern Wild. The child was six years old when the film was shot. While I am certain her performance was deserving of praise, I’m not in favor of children under the age of twelve being eligible for Oscar awards, competing against seasoned actors who have honed their craft over many years. Perhaps there should be a special award category for Best Child Actor and Actress.

That said, I suspect Jessica Chastain (Zero Dark Thirty) is a favorite for this year, though I don’t believe she was better than her competitors. This is one of those heroine roles in a compelling story that would render most good actresses a nomination, no matter who played the role. Naomi Watts (The Impossible) is a great actress, but the most skill in acting by a female could be seen by Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Lining Playbook.

Who should win: Jennifer Lawrence, Silver Lining Playbook

Will probably win: Jessica Chastain, Zero Dark Thirty

Best Picture:

I still do not understand the rational behind nominating nine, not five, movies for this category. These comments are based on seven of those movies, I have yet to see Amour or Beasts of the Southern Wild, neither of which will win based on all the reviews and articles.

It is also inconceivable that Anna Karenina was passed over for any nominations in the major categories, a fine and beautiful rendition of Tolstoy’s story, wonderfully acted and directed.

Of the nominees, the most entertaining movie, by far, was Django Unchained, though I don’t see it as an Oscar winner. Les Miserables is a favorite of many, but as a musical it was not close to the level of Chicago or Moulin Rouge. The story Bin Laden story line of Zero Dark Thirty could not miss as an Oscar nominee, but it had too many flaws to win, especially in the screen writing. It’s a final challenge between two great movies, Lincoln and Argo, both superbly directed. My prediction:

Who should win: Argo

Will probably win: Argo

Best Director:

I only saw three of the nominees. Ben Affleck’s name is conspicuous by his absence among nominees for his wonderful directing of Argo. Based on all that, David Russell and Ang Lee were certainly deserving of the nominees for their movies, Silver Linings Playbook and Life of Pi, respectively. And because Affleck is out of the running, that leaves – who else? – the one and only:

Who should win: Steven Spielberg for Lincoln

Will probably win: Steven Spielberg for Lincoln.

The Academy Awards show is this coming Sunday, February 24th. Be sure to watch. Meanwhile, movie buffs can make their own predictions.

NATIONAL DISASTER: JOHN BRENNAN AS CIA DIRECTOR

If America is lucky the senate will reject the nomination of John Brennan to be our CIA Director.  This business of staunch support of party can go to far, especially when political loyalty supercedes national security. Whatever happened to “country first?”
 
John Brennan is the president’s hot choice to be in charge of our country’s major intelligence agency, with access  and control over all our national security operations and its secrets.  I wrote a piece about Mr. Brennan two years back. Now it’s time to resurrect that essay so people can review it once more and get a good snapshot at who we Americans will be employing for the chief of national and international interlligence security. If you have not read it, I suggest you do.
 
 
 Today, one of the FBI’s former top experts on radical Islam, and national security has come forward accusing Brennan of having converted to Islam several years ago while serving in Saudi Arabia. Naturally, considering his aspirations within the government, Brennan would not make that public knowledge, but neither has he refuted it, that I can find.  Thus, if true, we will have a man in charge of the CIA who is an agent of the other side, the side who is responsible for 9/11, the side which has covert plans in place for the future destruction of the free world.
 
Without surprise, commentators in the sack with Barack Obama are denouncing the claim, charging the FBI agent of being another right-wing fanatic. But, where is Mr. Brennan on this?
 
It is absolutely mind boggling that this is happening to America.
 
 
Check out the highly credible Wikipedia report on Brennan, and tell us if this is who we want for the head of the CIA.  Pay particular attention to the last sentence of the report, a quote by Mr. Morris Davis,  a former Chief Prosecutor for the Guantanamo Military Commissions

 
 
  I still wonder whose side he’s on, and that should never be a concern when appointing a CIA chief.  Then again, it speaks volumes about the motivations of the person who has nominated him. After all, Mr. Obama will be wanting a loyal subject who will carry out his agenda…but what agenda is that?