Who Would Herman Cain Pick?

Dream Team

That may well turn out to be the biggest question leading to the nomination of Herman Cain, a back-to-back offering of Black candidates. Got a problem with that? Too bad, it may be reality on the horizon, so I would beseech any White Supremacist readers to reconsider your views.

Herman Cain is gaining momentum and could set a record as an American first; no, not the first Black president, but the first of any color to attain the Oval Office with virtually no political experience. Can't happen, you say? Uh-huh, I used to believe the same thing, but hasn't Barack Hussein Obama come through on at least one promise, that being "change"?

Yes, I would tip my hat in that regard.

Obama was only the third U.S. Senator to win a general election for President of the United States directly from the Senate, sharing that distinction with John F. Kennedy and Warren G. Harding. Good company, but such that would now be recoiling in horror at what their new inductee hath wrought. However, Obama has achieved that which the others never considered; opening the field for the best candidate over the established crop, and our nation is once again ready to cast off old customs in the spirit of desperation.

Would it require desperation to elect a man like Herman Cain? In a purely political sense, I would say yes, but I believe that the electorate has had its fill of the unknown, trusting that Obama was a new ray of hope even as they have seen those hopes dashed by the machinations of a master manipulator. Obama made promises to deliver goods to which he held no title.

Herman Cain, on the other hand, is making lofty promises as well, but ones that bear no similar traits as the gossamer vows offered by Obama. Cain is holding out as candy the opportunity that all Americans have come to expect, sans the alleged guarantees that Obama pledged. If any further explanation is required on that topic, I'm afraid that you, the reader, simply can't understand.


Suffice it to say that Herman Cain may be the only member of the current crop of candidates who actually comprehends the desires of ordinary Americans, no matter what color he may be. No one that I know is asking for anything other than to be left to their own devices with as little government interference as possible. They want to be able to succeed or fail at their own discretion. Is that so bad?

Which brings us to the title question: "Who would Herman Cain pick?", as in, a running mate. Should Cain win the nomination, it would be on the whims of the electorate closely aligned with the same philosophy while the entire middle of the spectrum would be skeptical of a political neophyte in the Oval Office. (Again, that's already been tried, with disastrous results).

But what if a second attempt was all that remained available to an electorate ready to explode? Would our neighbors shun a new path simply because its direction was unclear, despite the end they see rapidly approaching downstream? For instance, let's suppose that Herman Cain was standing at the bow begging for an oar; would we be reluctant to deliver it to him and accept a rocky fate out of uncertainty?

I would be happy with Herman Cain at the helm, and if it meant someone like Newt Gingrich reading the charts, great! The Captain makes the ultimate decision but often relies on the expertise of his navigator. No better man is there than Gingrich, a seasoned House negotiator and himself an eloquent speaker, pardon the pun.

If Cain could set the course and have Newt available to avoid the anomalies therein, who could ask for anything more? While there is little doubt that our local "news" stations or papers would do their utmost to convince us otherwise, I'm committed to the fact that most of us have moved beyond the daily feeding cycle of those sources in determining our futures.

For the first time in my life, I am beginning to believe that we may actually have the chance to elect the best person to lead us, regardless of political pedigree. If Herman Cain can maintain his current stature in the polls and ultimately win the nomination, America would be faced with a 2012 choice between Obama or Cain. The irony is too delicious, and on so many levels.

Sphere: Related Content

The First Casualty of the Arab Spring



Ousted by Obama?

We've been told from the beginning of the campaign and every day since his election that Barack Hussein Obama is a brilliant man, perhaps the smartest to occupy the White House in the nations history. Many people believed the hype in part due to the eloquence of the way he read speeches from teleprompters, which allowed for the appearance of extemporaneous speaking.

With transparent screens -- the only transparent aspect of this administration thus far -- the teleprompters allow even live audiences to see his face, and long camera shots seem to miss the darned things. Without ever having to glance down to keep his place with notes, Obama's head swings from side to side -- catching his script effortlessly -- as he delivers heart-racing speeches that make his adoring masses swoon.

With all of that being said, however, I am now more convinced than ever of the man's utter brilliance, however sinister that brilliance may be. No one could have inflicted the damage on such a strong nation that Obama has -- and in such record time -- through simple ineptitude. No one could have accelerated the chaos we see around the globe so masterfully as he without either a keen understanding of the major culprits involved, or without their explicit anticipation.

Many will read what is about to follow and simply roll their eyes and click out of the site. That is exactly the reaction that has allowed Barack Hussein to come as far as he's come, and one I fully expect to continue. If one percent of people continue to read, however, and let the pieces of the puzzle fall into place, I will have done my job.

Briefly, his past was somewhat fuzzy as he rapidly advanced toward the Democratic nomination for President of the United States, and those who threw up the flags were ignored. The reason for this was the fact that it looked like America really had a shot at finally electing a Black president, and no one wanted to see that opportunity slip by. (Never mind the obvious racism involved in such a mindset, none of them would ever accept such a notion even if water boarded).

But someone was trying to sound the alarm in 2008, someone who was shooed away and brushed aside. His name is John Drew, and he was a classmate of Barack Obama's at Occidental College. He tried to warn anyone who would listen that Obama was a thoroughly dangerous man, as Charlie Daniels might say. The problem was that no one wanted to hear it; not even our own right-wing watchdogs. What Drew was saying seemed too fantastical to be taken seriously, despite his having been at the college with a young, Marxist Barack. 

By the way, John Drew -- by his own admission -- was himself a "leader of the Marxist students at Occidental". 

The people with whom Obama subsequently associated have been well documented, enjoying the same reception as that of John Drew's story. But the president has gone on to establish his own, very public track record, and one that -- if anyone cared to connect the dots -- points to an extremely nefarious agenda. When his treatment of Israel is considered, the dots appear.

After a series of damning encounters with the Israeli state and its head, Benjamin Netanyahu, it became evident that Obama was no fan of Israel. The community organizer extraordinaire, however, did recognize a perfect venue to further endanger the tiny democracy in the Middle East, and he would ironically use the guise of democracy in Egypt to remove one of the biggest barriers of security for the Jewish people.

Hosni Mubarak may have been a dictator, but he was far from the level of Saddam Hussein in terms of brutality. Mubarak kept order in Egypt and maintained its Northern border with Israel, giving that country a bit of breathing room over the past thirty years that allowed it to counter the relentless attacks from the East and the West (Gaza and the Golan Heights). Egypt was stable and tranquil, and posed no threat to Israel.

So Obama chose Cairo for his first international address abroad.

Not long after Obama signaled the Muslim world that he was with them, Egypt erupted into the dawn of the "Arab Spring", which spawned similar revolts in Yemen and Syria and Libya. These were preceded, however, by an unrelated and impromptu uprising by the people of Iran. The Iranian people were brutally suppressed in that incident with nary a peep of condemnation from the Obama regime. Nor did Obama object to the reactions of the Yemeni or Syrian governments.

He was quick to demand the resignation of Mubarak in Egypt, though, as he now bombs Moammar Ghadaffi in Libya. I would posit that Yemen and Syria were ignored as was Iran because they are already a significant threat to,  and bold enemies of,  Israel while Egypt and Libya were not. Perhaps in Obama's mind, these relatively benign states needed some inspiration. And that inspiration came in the clear demonstration that Obama shared their Muslim populations' disdain for Israel and that he would aid in the ascension of the "rebels" in these states that they may gain sufficient power to amass another front against Israel.

At the same time, Obama works feverishly here in America to weaken the very foundation of our nation while "organizing" a massive rebellious force, using labor unions and their sympathizers, and placing figurative bees in the bonnets of ordinary working, middle class Americans. One may speculate that he seeks an "Anglo Autumn" to complement the Arab version, making a sort of  perfect storm.

It all sounds ominous and portends a bad ending for America. Then again, that's what warnings are all about, and that's what this is; a warning. A wake-up call, if you will. For while my declaration of Obama's diabolical genius stands, such characters usually fail because of a fatal miscalculation of their enemies determination and capabilities. And equally of their collective gullibility.

Many of our fellow citizens have discovered that they've been hoodwinked, many more believe that they have been betrayed. Both groups are correct, and will join the ranks -- albeit reluctantly -- of the true American patriots in the portions of the country considered "fly-over country" by the elites so destined to fail.

Even if they don't, the patriots have always had sufficient numbers to thwart any attempt to hijack America. They've just been asleep for a very long time. The problem with an agenda such as Obama's is that it requires a lot of construction and, therefore, makes a lot of noise.

That will always awaken the sleeping giant. 

Sphere: Related Content

Barack Obama and the Bottomless Bucket

It's All an Illusion

The highly anticipated Obama jobs plan has been unveiled after a tantalizing few days tease. The big news is that the president has decided since lighter fluid is wet, that's what should be poured on this economic fire.


Remember that he said this would be "paid for"? Turns out it will be, ostensibly, by taxes on the "rich"; those making $200,000 per year. Oh sure, it was $250,000 originally, but now it's been lowered by fifty grand. Prime territory for small business owners, who file as individuals. How will that create job incentives? And it's odd that Obama makes this revelation in a speech to a labor-friendly crowd, but in his televised speech to a joint session of Congress, he gave the impression that his plan already had all the bases covered.

Oh yeah, Obama will take the increased taxes and offer a small business a $4000 credit as long as they hire a $50-70,000 employee that they don't really need. That, my friends, is the epitome of insanity.

While all this goes on, our media seems to have forgotten the first "stimulus" program that created nearly no new jobs. In a blushing, faux-mea culpa, Obama giggled and said that those jobs "weren't quite shovel ready", despite his and Joe Biden's insistence that they were at the time. Now he wants to "create" construction jobs, put teachers back in the classrooms, and "get this economy moving".

And Obama is still harping on this high-speed rail boondoggle that will never be self-sustaining -- much less profitable -- in a country like ours.  Oh, and according to David Axelrod, Obama wants to put veterans back to work.

The problem with this "plan" of his is that government never created a job, the private sector always has done that, but when people aren't consuming like they have in the past because they can't afford it -- and therefore companies aren't selling like they used to -- then there is no need to hire anyone, despite all the carrots Obama can dangle.

Pointless Work

Just like the magical "faucet from nowhere" and the "bottomless bucket" it appears to fill, Obama's economic plan is an illusion that creates not a bit of wealth, but rather, attempts to create busy-work for people in order to create yet another illusion of productive employment. In order for the government to pay its workers, it must first take taxes from the people. Then the government worker pays taxes, and receives a check. It recycles money just as the faucet and bucket recycle the same water, over and over.

What government can, and must, do is to create an environment let will allow the private sector -- the American people -- to do that which we do best; create actual jobs and genuine product. That is the surest way to kick-start our economy.

Sadly, this president either doesn't know that or simply doesn't want to believe it, because it's antithetical to the very core of his existence. The only other explanation is that he truly does know precisely what he is doing. I would hope that is not the case.

Sphere: Related Content

The Rationale of a Self-Loathing Liberal

Are You Ashamed? 

Paul Krugman is fast becoming perhaps the most valuable accelerant for my creative juices. Gracing the safe haven that is the New York Times -- yet again -- with the radiance of his razor sharp intellect, Krugman manages to insult virtually every one of his fellow countrymen on a day when we are nearly unanimous in our thoughts. While offending us, he is also brazen in his contempt for the people who so valiantly guided us through the awful events of the 9/11 attacks and their aftermath.

Early on Sunday morning, five minutes before the first plane struck the first tower ten years earlier, Krugman filed an OpEd piece in the New York Times that would be better described as an exercise in projection rather than an actual article. Better yet, it more closely resembles a brief vomiting of built up loathing for his own people or perhaps his own guilt. The big question is whether the timing was accidental or deliberate.

Titled The Years of Shame, this vile diatribe actually refers to police chief Bernard Kerik, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and President Bush as "fake heroes", then baldly hides behind his closing declaration that, "I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons."

Perhaps that's because many, like myself, would like to ask for an example of how any of these "fake heroes" cashed in on the horror of those attacks, or who the "lot of other people" who "behaved badly" are, and what they did to earn Krugman's condemnation.

Come on, Paulie, open it up for discussion. No? Well, that's to be expected from a coward.

Paul Krugman

My biggest problem is not the attacks on the three aforementioned public figures, however. They expect this level of vitriol. They knew going into public life that they would be subjected to it, and they are tougher as a result. When I think of some kid -- maybe the one who today read a note to the father he never met --reading Krugman's hatred, though, I am both saddened and angered.

The biggest brain-rattler in Krugman's lament comes when he declares that, "the memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned." One must wonder if he believes that this "article" of his is supposed to be some form of antidote.  I'd ask him, but he has decided that he would not field questions. Darn.

Finally, just to be additionally annoying I suppose, Krugman insists twice that we know he is right even if we won't admit it. Finishing -- just before he slams the door to challenge, that is -- with this bit of wisdom:

The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.

Krugman makes a leaping assumption that has no basis in reality, but only serves to infuriate an already tender populace as we commemorate this occasion.  Then he retreats into seclusion.

Good job, Paul, and I mean that most insincerely.

Sphere: Related Content

Cometh the Proletariat

Labor Declares War on America

I doubt that most of our fellow citizens are aware, but the "Soviet invasion" has begun in earnest. Oh yeah, we we're busy hunkering down in school hallways or under our desks in the myriad drills we participated in as kids, but then we saw the old USSR fall in the 80's and complacency set in; we believed it was over.

When Nikita Khrushchev bellowed, "We will bury you!", we naturally assumed that meant with bombs. The truth today is that "they" are already throwing the dirt on our bodies without so much as a small "boom" being heard.

"They", of course, are not the Soviets or even the Russians, but our own neighbors who adhere to the same ideology of our former enemies. The labor movement; the working class. The proletariat.

In separate speeches over the Labor Day weekend, TEA Party members and proponents were called barbarians by Vice President Joe Biden, and sons of female dogs by Teamster president Jimmy Hoffa Jr., who went a step further by threatening to "take [us] out". Joe Biden's comment was particularly amusing, however, considering his choice of target and the characterization of them.

While union thugs routinely bully and beat people and destroy property when "protesting" something, TEA Party rallies are calm and respectful. Heck, look at a park a few hours after a TEA Party rally has taken place...one wouldn't know there was anyone there. Those rallies are attended by people who were raised properly, people who respect the property on which they stand, and who clean up after themselves. There really isn't much to clean up since they don't litter in the first place.

So Joe, really? Barbarians? I hardly think so.

Hoffa's comments were more vicious, hinting at the violent nature of union members that we have come to know and loathe. Part of what he said:

"We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They've got a war, they got a war with us and there's only going to be one winner. It's going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We're going to win that war.

President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let's take these son of bi**hes out and give America back to an America where we belong."

Hoffa's words were part of a crowd-warmer for Obama's own "jobs" speech. How troublesome, then, that the president never bothered to repudiate those words, even declaring during his speech that he was "proud" of  Junior and other labor leaders in attendance. And despite his appeals for civility in our political dialogue, Obama didn't even mention Hoffa's speech.

Compare that with the losing tactics of John McCain in February of 2008. As a warm up and introduction for then-candidate McCain, syndicated talk radio host Bill Cunningham whipped up the crowd by twice referring to Obama by his full name (gasp!), Barack Hussein Obama. Cunningham also called Obama a "hack, Chicago-style Daley politician". When McCain was told of Cunningham's comments, he issued a rebuke:

 "I take responsibility and I repudiate what he said. I will not tolerate anything in this campaign that denigrates either Sen. Obama or Sen. (Hillary) Clinton."

What a barbarian!

As the labor movement gets ever more bolder, it becomes more radical and determined to remake America into a soviet-style nation. It is a socialist's dream come true, and they will do all that they can to bring it to fruition. Perhaps that is why the Communist Party U.S.A. endorsed Obama in 2008, and why they will probably do so again next year. Obama's platform mirrors that of the CPUSA.

I wonder if our media watchdogs will ever get off of Obama's porch long enough to actually do what they're supposed to do; report the truth.

Sphere: Related Content

As Our Nation Teeters, My Guitar Weeps Ungently

"Beast on the Wing" Reprise

Long before Barack Obama retired his own special "seal" for the official presidential one, I have been warning my fellow citizens about this man. Once he assumed office on the auspices of a decidedly derelict electorate, I continued to monitor his mischief and report accordingly. Thus far, none of it has amounted to anything, and our country continues to recede behind lines none of us ever dreamed even existed.

All of our lives -- those of us among the living -- have previously been defined by a vision of America as the greatest nation on Earth. Now we see small, poor nations we once pitied thumbing their noses at us.

Part of the reason that Barack Hussein Obama now sits with his shoes propped up cavalierly on the Resolute Desk is the Democrats' engineering of the fiscal crisis of 2008, when the housing bubble -- that many economists warned about in vain -- burst, leaving President Bush with egg on his face and candidate John McCain relegated to the ash heap of history.

With a media reticent to report the true timeline and causation of this financial meltdown, Obama was seen as the candidate America has been pining for but always afraid to try; our first black president, just so we could finally say that we did. So...we did, and now we're sorry, but we can't take it back. And the problem now lies in the shame of the choice and the humiliation of the requisite admission, so people duck and cover and hope for the best.

Sorry kids, that is simply not going to cut it anymore.

In 2009, I wrote The Beast on the Wing, an article eight months into the president's administration, but one chronicling the vindication of my pre-election position on the man. In it, I compared myself to the character played by first William Shatner and later Jon Lithgow about a man forced by his job to fly despite an intense terror of doing so. In the story, the man sees -- in mid-flight and in a storm -- a strange creature tearing at the structure of the aircraft.

I wrote that Obama was that creature, tearing at the very structure of America, and how I hoped we'd land safely by the time he was done. He was far from done, and thankfully, unlike the character in the story, I was not sedated, so I followed up with An Empire in Peril  shortly before becoming a contributor at Red County.com. That article was written in February of 2010.

It's now a year-and-a-half beyond that writing, and we continue to suffer the wages of Obama's deeds. We now have Operation Fast and Furious, about which our press is last and incurious, and now, amidst the latest jobs report -- in which the unemployment rate remains at 9.1% -- we have our Department of Justice (DOJ) conducting raids on a guitar factory, at a time when our citizens are being massacred by foreigners using our own weapons.

Ebony Wood from India

It appears that this administration is more concerned with the origin of the lumber used on fret boards by Gibson Guitar, Inc than it is with protecting Americans from marauding Mexicans on our Southern border. Perhaps more disturbing is the notion that the DOJ and the Administration are contemplating compliance with Indian law as more important than our own laws, and that Gibson could avoid prosecution by accepting shipments of wood processed overseas and then shipped here.

Get it? The DOJ and the Obama administration want Gibson to comply with the law by letting people in India perform the work. Are you listening, SEIU? While this country struggles to regain its financial footing, Obama and his cronies remain creative in finding ways to weaken us and impoverish us, even as they push our jobs off shore, all in the name of "the law".

Funny, then, how our immigration laws are flouted across the country while our own liberties are diminished. Sad how the federal government files suit against its own member states. And terrifying how it is all but ignored by a press that was once touted as the beacon of freedom in the world.

And to think, Woodward and Bernstein are still alive, at least physically.

Sphere: Related Content

Want to learn about our Constitution? This is the place to do it in your free time. Registration is required, but there is absolutely no cost. I'm signed up! 

Introduction to the Constitution - Hillsdale College

constitution.hillsdale.edu

Sphere: Related Content