Obama is not Slowing Down Dinesh D’Souza


Dinesh D'Souza 3

John R. Houk

© March 14, 2016

 

Dinesh D’Souza (Wikipedia Bio) was convicted fair and square of breaking campaign finance law. He admits this. What is astonishing about D’Souza is that Obama’s Justice Department came after D’Souza as if he was a hardened criminal that needed put away for the protection of American citizens. Isn’t it interesting that Barack Obama also broke campaign finance laws while he received a paltry 375 thousand dollars fine and no felony conviction while D’Souza had to pay a 500-thousand-dollar bond to wait trial then had a felony added to his life. It cost D’Souza eight months in a low security half-way house designed for long term prison inmates about to be freed to have a readjustment time from prison to freedom for time served.

 

In 2013 Obama was levied this fine by the FEC because he accepted around 1,300 contributions to the tune of 1.8 MILLION dollars as a sitting President. D’Souza’s infraction was laid out by Andrew McCarthy:

 

… Wendy Long, his good friend and Dartmouth classmate, was waging a futile campaign against incumbent U.S. senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.). With the press of business leaving him unable to be more of a campaign presence, D’Souza decided to provide financial support. He had, however, already donated the personal maximum of $10,000. So he convinced two friends to be nominal contributors, with D’Souza reimbursing them the combined $20,000. (How Dinesh D’Souza Became a Victim of Obama’s Lawless Administration; By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY; National Review; 12/19/15 4:00 AM)

 

Why did the Obama Justice Department want to spank Dinesh D’Souza so badly? Perhaps the reason is similar to why the IRS targeted Conservative and Tea Party organizations. There was a lot work to expose Obama as one of the most nefarious Presidents in U.S. history. In D’Souza’s case he made a documentary movie based on a 2010 book exposing Obama entitled “The Roots of Obama’s Rage”. The documentary is entitled “2016: Obama’s America”.

 

So what’s D’Souza up to these days? He’s preparing to expose Hillary Clinton and the cycle of Democratic Party nefarious activities that have served the Clinton family for decades. PJ Media quotes D’Souza and has a one sentence description:

 

“If that film got me eight months in the slammer, this new movie is going to earn me life in prison,” he said at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). “It’s time to take the gloves off.”

 

D’Souza described the film, Hillary’s America, as a sordid history of the Democratic Party from the very beginning all the way through Hillary Clinton. (D’Souza: Hillary Film Could Earn Me ‘Life in Prison’; By Nicholas Ballasy; PJ Media; 3/13/16)

 

Below is the cross post of the entire PJ Media post.

 

JRH 3/14/16

Please Support NCCR

**********************

D’Souza: Hillary Film Could Earn Me ‘Life in Prison’

 

By NICHOLAS BALLASY

MARCH 13, 2016

PJ Media

 

Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza said his upcoming film about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is going to result in a lifelong prison sentence.

 

D’Souza said he was locked up for 8 months in a “federal confinement center” for a “relatively minor campaign finance infraction” following the release of his film,2016, about President Obama.

 

“If that film got me eight months in the slammer, this new movie is going to earn me life in prison,” he said at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). “It’s time to take the gloves off.”

 

D’Souza described the film, Hillary’s America, as a sordid history of the Democratic Party from the very beginning all the way through Hillary Clinton.

 

“The Democrats want us to believe they’re the party of equal rights and human rights and civil rights. The truth is the Democrats are the party of slavery, and Indian removal, of broken treaties and the Trail of Tears, they’re the party of segregation and Jim Crow and lynching and the Ku Klux Klan, they’re the party of Japanese internment, and opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fair Housing Bill of 1968,” he said. “This is their actual history so what they do is they try to cover it up.”

 

D’Souza said Democratic politicians attempt to hide their party’s past connections to segregation by “blaming America” as a whole.

 

“The reality is America didn’t do it, the Democrats did. Now, another story from the Democrats is they changed, that somehow recently they became enlightened and they became the good guys and the bad guys all became the Republicans. This is the story of the so-called switch,” he said. “But the truth of it is there never was a switch. The Democrats now are the same as they always were.”

 

D’Souza said former President Abraham Lincoln described slavery as “you work, I eat.” According to D’Souza, that defines the modern Democratic Party.

 

“This concept of ‘you work, I eat’ is still the center of the politics of the Democratic Party. They were playing plantation politics back then and they are playing plantation politics right now,” D’Souza said.

 

His documentary Hillary’s America is set for release the week of the Democratic Party convention.

 

“We’re going to be telling the story they don’t want you to know. Here’s how you can help us: Go see the film the opening weekend,” he said, explaining that the film will be shown in more theaters if it does well the first week. “This is how you affect the politics of Hollywood.”

 

D’Souza appeared on a panel at the conference called “Hollywood, Media and Education: The Three Strongholds Of The Left.”

 

D’Souza pointed out that filmmaker Michael Moore’s documentary films have been so successful because they are entertaining.

 

“No one goes to the movies for messaging. You go to the movies for entertainment,” he said. “You’ve got to give it to the guy [Moore]. Out of the top 10 documentaries of all time he has 5.”

 

He called for conservatives in Hollywood to produce more than documentaries, such as animated films, thrillers and romantic comedies.

 

“Ultimately, we’ve got to do that kind of stuff too because they [the left] tell their worldview through stories,” he said.

 

Moderator Mary Katharine Ham, a conservative political commentator, encouraged the audience to see the Broadway play Hamilton.

 

“The beauty of this play is it is truly unironically a celebration of Alexander Hamilton, pulled himself up from his bootstraps, came from nothing, fought with just his brain and got to the top of American society and really shaped this beautiful thing we have,” she said. “It is serious about that message.”

 

VIDEO: D’Souza: New Hillary Film Might Earn Me ‘Life In Prison’

 

 

Posted by Nicholas Ballasy

Published on Mar 8, 2016

 

Story by Nicholas Ballasy featured on The Drudge Report: https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/03/13/dsouza-hillary-film-could-earn-me-life-in-prison/

 

____________________________

Obama is not Slowing Down Dinesh D’Souza

John R. Houk

© March 14, 2016

___________________________

D’Souza: Hillary Film Could Earn Me ‘Life in Prison’

 

Copyright © 2005-2016 PJ Media All Rights Reserved.

 

About PJ Media

 

Since its inception in 2005, PJ Media has been focused on the news that matters — from the insightful commentary provided by our all-star lineup of columnists to our writers’ quick takes on breaking news and trending stories. The media company’s founders — Academy Award Nominee Roger L. Simon, Charles Johnson (Little Green Footballs) and Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) — brought together a tightly knit band of bloggers into an integrated website that has evolved into a reliable source for original, unique, and cutting-edge political news and analysis.

 

We’ve been there through primaries and general elections; the U.S. border crisis; doctored climate change data; the gunrunners’ scandal; Department of Justice voter fraud and the Ground Zero mosque — stories that others in the media initially passed by.

 

As a company, we’ve always felt a special connection to the values which make America special, as well as a dedication to keeping America great for our children and our children’s children. That’s why our main focus is on the three main areas that  READ THE REST

BO’s Blinding Islamophilia


Caution - BO-Hazard (as in BHO)

I’m probably not as much an erudite writer as I am one who writes within the scope of a sense frustration. Thus when I do run into an erudite writer as the Patriot Post’s Mark Alexander, I am quite happy to cross post their thoughts. In this post Alexander succinctly writes what I have been blogging for some time. Read, enjoy, but most of all, understand the message!

 

JRH 2/12/15

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

BO’s Blinding Islamophilia

The REAL National Security Threat

 

By Mark Alexander

Feb. 11, 2015

The Patriot Post

 

“There is a rank due to the United States, among nations, which will be withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the reputation of weakness. If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war.” –George Washington (1793)

 

Islamophile: One who is so enchanted by Islam as to be under the influence of its tenets.

 

In 2009, I noted that Barack Hussein Obama’s remarkably brief White House bio began with this fallacious assertion: “His story is the American story – values from the heartland, a middle-class upbringing in a strong family…” And you can make up the rest.

 

Amazingly, his [BIG Lie] (http://patriotpost.us/alexander/22209] bio page has not been altered since then.

 

So, in an effort to better understand who Obama really is, and where his religious alliances fall, let’s briefly review.

 

Barack was conceived to unwed parents, Ann Dunham and his Kenyan father, BHO senior, both atheists. They were later married and then divorced. When Obama was four, his mother remarried, this time to an Indonesian Muslim, Lolo Soetoro. In his 1995 memoir “Dreams from My Father,” Obama wrote that Soetoro subscribed to “a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths.”

 

At the age of 10, Obama returned to Hawaii to live with his grandparents, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, who might best be described as agnostic. There, he would fall under the spell of an avowed Marxist, Frank Marshall Davis.

 

As a young adult and budding “community organizer,” Obama was taken under wing by a radical black supremacist pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who married Barack and his wife, Michelle, baptized their children and stewarded BO’s “faith” for 20 years. For those two decades, Obama also developed close associations with many other leftist radicals, including Michael Pfleger, William Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi, Bob Creamer, Edward Said, Roberto Unger and others.

 

That is the real Barack Obama bio, and those are his “values from the heartland.” Further, while he self-identifies as “Christian” rather than Muslim, that claim may be as deceptive as his bio.

 

With that in mind, in this seventh year of Obama’s seemingly limitless foreign and domestic policy failures, despite the ominous and impending threats from resurgent al-Qa’ida terrorist networks, the Islamic State, and clear evidence that Islamist Jihadis are targeting the USA, Obama never mentioned al-Qa’ida or Islam in his 2015 SOTU address three weeks ago.

 

Nor did Obama mention Islam when referencing the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris in early January, except to insist again that Islam is the “Religion of Peace.”

 

British journalist Douglas Kear Murray, an expert on Islam, asserts that many Muslims today subscribe to “a creed of Islamic fascism – a malignant fundamentalism, woken from the dark ages to assault us here and now.” He notes, “The claim that Islam is a religion of peace is a nicety invented by Western politicians so as either not to offend their Muslim populations or simply lie to themselves that everything might yet turn out fine. In fact, since its beginning Islam has been pretty violent.”

 

More recently, Obama dismissed the subsequent slaughter of Jews in Paris as an act committed by “a bunch of violent vicious zealots who … randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli.” Obama’s spokesman Josh Earnest demonstrated a heroic display of verbal contortionism in endeavoring to explain Obama’s assertion that the attack was random. Those “violent vicious zealots” were Islamists, and there was nothing “random” about terrorists targeting a kosher Jewish deli.

 

Last week, Obama used a Christian forum, the National Prayer Breakfast, to sanctimoniously denigrate Christians. The theme for this year’s event was “Remembering the Armenian Genocide of 1915,” when more than a million Christians were murdered by Muslims. That notwithstanding, he claimed Christians and Muslims are equal partners in murder and mayhem:

 

“Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place – remember that the Crusades and the Inquisition committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” He added, “Slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

 

Really? For the record, Obama has ordered drone strikes against Islamic targets that have killed more Muslims in six years than were killed during three centuries of the Spanish Inquisition. (Look it up!) And the Crusades were, arguably, undertaken in the name of “the church,” not Jesus Christ. As Islamic scholar and historian Bernard Lewis notes,

 

“The Crusades could more accurately be described as a limited, belated and, in the last analysis, ineffectual response to the jihad – a failed attempt to recover by a Christian holy war what had been lost to a Muslim holy war.”

 

Clearly, there is nothing in the Gospel of Jesus Christ that advocates or could even be loosely construed to advocate violence against non-Christians. However, there is plenty in the Quran and the Hadith (the teachings of Muhammad) advocating death to infidels. As Franklin Graham reminds us,

 

“Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give his life for the sins of mankind, not to take life.”

 

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, the child in Indian immigrants, rebutted Obama’s assertion, saying,

 

“It was nice of the President to give us a history lesson at the Prayer breakfast. Today, however, the issue right in front of his nose, in the here and now, is the terrorism of Radical Islam. … The Medieval Christian threat is under control, Mr. President. Please deal with the Radical Islamic threat today.”

 

As to Obama’s reference to slavery, the abolitionist movement to end chattel slavery in the United States 150 years ago was led by white and black Christian men and women, as was the movement to end segregation 50 years ago. Christians of yore were at the forefront of these sweeping changes, while Muslims today are at the forefront of murderous global Jihad.

 

This metastasizing Islamic threat advocates for a “master race,” much as did Adolf Hitler prior to World War II. However, rather than a world dominated by Aryans, Islamists seek a worldwide caliphate of Islamists, or “Jihadistan.” And on the subject of percentages, some have suggested that because only 10 percent of Muslims are extremists we need not worry. However, in 1940 only seven percent of Germans belonged to the National Socialist German Workers Party. How did that work out?

 

Notably, the 2014 Global Slavery Index reports that of the more than 29 million humans held today in captive slavery – defined as “the possession and control of a person in such a way as to significantly deprive that person of his or her individual liberty, with the intent of exploiting that person through their use, management, profit, transfer or disposal” – more than 18 million are being held in Islamic countries, primarily (and ironically) in Africa.

 

Indeed, ISIL has institutionalized slavery in the Middle East.

 

In an interview this week, Obama delusionally insisted that concern about [Islamic] terrorism is simply media-driven hype:

 

“If it bleeds it leads, right? … It’s all about ratings.”

 

When asked why Obama would posit such a ludicrous assertion, my favorite psychiatrist, Charles Krauthammer, said flatly,

 

“Because he believes it. … If he was just being cynical as a way to dismiss this because of the failure of his policies, that would be one thing. I think he believes this. … This is what is so terrifying about the man who is commander in chief of a country, essentially a civilization, under attack.”

 

Krauthammer added,

 

“For the last six years Obama has acted as if the biggest threat American security [in the Middle East] is the Israeli government.”

 

Curiously, at the National Prayer Breakfast, Obama asserted, “We are summoned to push back against those who would distort our religion for their nihilistic ends.” Whose religion was he referencing?

 

Perhaps the answer is found in Obama’s many words of praise for Islam since 2009:

 

“I will stand with [Muslims] should the political winds shift in an ugly direction. … The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. … We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world – including in my own country. … As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. … Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. … Islam has always been part of America. … We will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities. … These [Ramadan] rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings. … America and Islam … share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. … America is not and will never be at war with Islam. … Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace. … So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. … In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education. … Throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. … That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. … Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”

 

So, why does Obama refuse to mention Islam in connection with worldwide Islamic Jihad that is at our doorstep?

 

I believe it is because he is, first and foremost, an Islamophile, and thus he has what is almost a pathological blindness to the threat posed by Jihad.

 

On the other hand, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, former Defense Intelligence Agency director, has been very clear in his assessment of our enemy:

 

“You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists. … There are many sincere people in our government who frankly are paralyzed by this complexity. … [They] accept a defensive posture, reasoning that passivity is less likely to provoke our enemies. … A strong defense is the best deterrent. … The dangers to the U.S. do not arise from the arrogance of American power, but from unpreparedness or an excessive unwillingness to fight when fighting is necessary. I think there is confusion about what it is that we are facing. It’s not just what has been defined as 40,000 fighters in the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, it’s also a large [radicalized segment of Muslims] who or threatening our very way of life. … We really don’t have an effective strategy that is coherent, that actually addresses the wider problem. … I think what the American public is looking for is … moral and intellectual courage and clarity, and not a sense of passivity and confusion.”

 

Flynn’s assessment follows that of the Director of National Intelligence, Lt. Gen. James Clapper, who, in testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said a year ago,

 

“Al-Qa’ida is morphing and franchising itself … in Yemen, Somalia, in North Africa, in Syria … and what’s going on there … is very, very worrisome. … Looking back over my more than half a century in intelligence, I have not experienced a time when we’ve been beset by more crises and threats around the globe.”

 

Even one of the Democratic Party’s most liberal members, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, insisted,

 

“The presence of terrorist groups including those formerly affiliated with al-Qa’ida and others, has spread over the past year. In fact terrorism is at an all-time high worldwide.”

 

And this week, Congress provided the Army an end-run around Obama’s classifying Nidal Hasan’s murderous attack at Fort Hood as “workplace violence.” Instead, it is now classified as an act of terrorism and Hasan’s victims will now receive Purple Hearts.

 

But Obama can’t bring himself to call it what it is.

 

In fact, he insisted this week that climate change is a far greater threat, but noted it’s “happening [on] such a broad scale and [is] such a complex system, it’s a hard story for the media to tell on a day-to-day basis.”

 

Fact is, bloody Islamist attacks are also “happening on a broad scale” and on a “day-to-day basis” – and are getting closer to home every day. The murder of American relief worker Kayla Mueller, as confirmed yesterday, is yet another example of the evil we are confronting.

 

So, let me script this one for Obama so at his next stump speech he gets it right:

 

“We are at war with radical Islamic terrorists. Violent global jihad poses an immense existential threat to the civilized world, particularly since Iran is, or already has, the capacity to hand its asymmetric surrogates a nuclear weapon.”

 

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

_______________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

As Editor I took the liberty to block quote the quotations used by Mark Alexander if those quotations were at the end of a paragraph.

 

Contribute to The Patriot Post

 

© 2015, The Patriot Post.

 

About The Patriot Post

 

“Our cause is noble; it is the cause of mankind! —George Washington

 

Mission

The Patriot Post is the nation’s highly acclaimed Journal of Essential Liberty, advocating individual Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values.

 

We believe, as did our Founders, that we have an irrevocable right and obligation “to support and defend” Liberty, as “endowed by our creator” and enshrined as Rule of Law in our Republic’s Constitution.

 

The Patriot Post frames current policy and culture issues in the correct constitutionally constructionist context established by our Founders, and supported today by the plurality of Americans who uphold the most basic tenet of our Republic: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

 

Operations

Key Managers of the Patriot Team

 

The Patriot Post—inspired by our National Advisory Committee and crafted by an editorial team headed by Mark Alexander—is an indispensable resource for “grass-top” leaders across the nation. These conservative gate keepers use our content as a force multiplier, a source of critical information and inspiration for their grassroots constituencies. The Patriot Post provides a hard-hitting rebuttal to contemporary political, social and mainstream media protagonists on the Left. We offer a brief, informative and entertaining analysis of the week’s most significant news, policy and opinion in our Daily Digest, while READ THE REST

 

An Examination of Klein Book ‘The Amateur’


The Amateur bk jk

John R. Houk

© May 19, 2012

 

I received an email from AC2C friend CJ pertaining to Reverend Jeremiah Wright being interviewed by Edward Klein. Wright had told Klein in that interview that Barack Hussein Obama had offered him $150,000 to hold back from any incendiary preaching until after the 2008 election.

 

I have already listened to Liberal pundits that have brushed of these revelations as insignificant. I have heard Left Wing pundits say things ranging from Americans don’t care about the Obama-Wright relationship to Conservatives should keep their hands off of Obama’s personal faith.

 

As to Americans “don’t care,” this is an insinuation that American voters are stupid and wouldn’t care that Obama was deceptive in his 2008 campaign to win the Presidency. As to keep your hands off of Obama’s personal faith, that is a load of crap as Leftist are attacking Mormonism’s Family Values track record which for example would be against abortion and homosexual sin. It is a load of crap to talk about Romney’s Mormonism and ignore Obama’s association with Jew-hating Black Supremacists like Wright, Farrakhan and Pro-Palestinian Israel-haters.

 

Now I am not a big fan of Romney’s Mormonism; however my disdain of Mormonism has nothing to do with Family Values. My disdain is due to my belief that Mormonism is a Gnostic-Christian cult spin-off from legitimate Christianity. Criticizing Romney’s faith but giving Obama’s odd secrecy of his personal faith is the height of Leftist hypocrisy!

 

CJ points to a Sean Hannity radio interview with Edward Klein and to an American Thinker article by Ed Lasky. The Hannity-Klein interview focused on the bribe issue between Obama representatives and Jeremiah Wright. Lasky’s book review focused on some of the damning personality traits of Obama exposed in Klein’s book “The Amateur”.

 

Here is some of the Jeremiah Wright wording courtesy of Hot Air:

 

 In his on-the-record interview with Klein, Wright claims that an Obama ally offered him $150,000 to keep his mouth shut and stop preaching until after the election, in excerpts published by the New York Post today:

 

‘Man, the media ate me alive,” Wright told me when we met in his office at Chicago’s Kwame Nkrumah Academy. “After the media went ballistic on me, I received an e-mail offering me money not to preach at all until the November presidential election.”

 

“Who sent the e-mail?” I asked Wright.

 

“It was from one of Barack’s closest friends.”

 

“He offered you money?”

 

“Not directly,” Wright said. “He sent the offer to one of the members of the church, who sent it to me.”

 

“How much money did he offer you?”

 

“One hundred and fifty thousand dollars,” Wright said.

 

According to Wright, Obama met personally with his then-pastor to ask him to do the same, although Obama apparently didn’t offer money for his silence.  Wright’s version of the conversation makes it clear that Obama knew very well what his pastor had preached from the pulpit, and what he was likely to do once attention focused on him:

 

“And one of the first things Barack said was, ‘I really wish you wouldn’t do any more public speaking until after the November election.’ He knew I had some speaking engagements lined up, and he said, ‘I wish you wouldn’t speak. It’s gonna hurt the campaign if you do that.’

 

“And what did you say?” I asked. “I said, ‘I don’t see it that way. And anyway, how am I supposed to support my family?’ And he said, ‘Well, I wish you wouldn’t speak in public. The press is gonna eat you alive.’

 

“Barack said, ‘I’m sorry you don’t see it the way I do. Do you know what your problem is?’ And I said, ‘No, what’s my problem?’ And he said, ‘You have to tell the truth.’ I said, ‘That’s a good problem to have. That’s a good problem for all preachers to have. That’s why I could never be a politician.’ (Jeremiah Wright claims Obama ally offered $150,000 bribe in 2008 to shut up; by Ed Morrissey; Hot Air, 5/13/12 – READ ENTIRE POST)

 

The big question is: Will the mainstream media step in to report this legitimate news story and force Obama to do more than call Wright a liar? I am certain Obama will paint Wright as bathing in sour grapes. What I want to know is Obama willing to sue Wright for defamation? If not, then Obama is the liar. BUT we all know Obama is a liar.

 

Below is CJ’s post at AC2C which is an amalgamation a Theodore’s World post of the Hannity-Klein radio interview and Ed Lasky’s American Thinker article. I am to going to take the editorial liberty to also include Wild Thing’s Theodore’s World comment not included in CJ’s post.

 

JRH 5/19/12

Please Support NCCR

****************************

“The Amateur”…Revealing book based on a 3 hour taped interview with the Rev. Wright…and naughty Michelle

 

Posted by CJ

Posted May 17, 2012 at 1:00 am

America Conservative 2 Conservative

 

May 16, 2012

Rev. Jeremiah Wright Says of Obama, “I made it Comfortable for Him to Accept Christianity without having to Renounce His Islamic Background”

 

VIDEO: Ed Klein Wright on Obamas Christianity

 

 

Rev. Jeremiah Wright Says of Obama, “I made it Comfortable for Him to Accept Christianity without having to Renounce His Islamic Background”

 

Here is audio of Edward Klein, author of “The Amateur,” talking with Sean Hannity about his new book and his interview with Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Klein interviewed Wright for more than three hours for the book, and says he has much of it on tape.

 

Among other things, he said Wright is “fulminating” at Obama for having “thrown him under the bus” back in 2008 when Wright’s “Godd*mn America” sermon came out. Klein reports that Wright told him that he could not say he “converted” Obama to Christianity, but that “I made it comfortable for him to accept Christianity without having to renounce his Islamic background.” http://www.theodoresworld.net/archives/2012/05/rev_jeremiah_wright_says_of_ob.html

 

[Wild Thing’s comment…….

 

Like Tom says OBama is a Muslim.

The thing is we have learned that with Isalm (sic) Obama or anyone would be threatened and very possibly taken out if they were Muslim and turned away from their beliefs. They have done it enough times that we should believe them.

IMO Obama would have a very tuff time if he was ever really vetted to prove he was NOT a Muslim. His actions, associations, his administration that is heavy with Muslims and so many things prove it along with what this Rev. Wright has said…imo. ]

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

 

May 14, 2012

 

The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House

 

By Ed Lasky

 

Edward Klein’s new book on Barack Obama, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House, is a withering portrayal of a radical adrift, in over his head, drowning in his own incompetency — while being weighed down by a small circle of “advisers” who are compounding the problem of the Amateur in the White House.

 

Klein’s book begins with a talisman-like quote uttered by Barack Obama when his recently appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to boost Obama’s ego by telling him, “Your legacy is going to be preventing the second Great Depression.”  To which Barack Obama responded, “That’s not enough for me.”

 

As all of America knows by now, Obama has aggressively sought to “fundamentally transform” America — one of the few promises he has kept from the days of 2008.  Five trillion dollars of borrowing, ObamaCare passed over the objections of the majority of Americans through legislative legerdemain and special deals made with resistant politicians, failed stimulus, green programs failing left and right as taxpayers are left holding the bag, a recovery that is the most anemic on record, an America that has been sundered by the man who promises to unite us, America weaker abroad and at home — yes, America has been fundamentally transformed.  Mission Accomplished.

 

But how and why did Obama succeed in such a catastrophic way?  That is the question that Klein successfully answers in his extremely readable and enjoyable book, with enough spicy details to satisfy the craving of anyone interested in how President Obama and those closest to him have driven us to the condition we find ourselves in as we approach November.

 

One of the motifs that runs throughout the book is Barack Obama’s sheer level of incompetency.  He has the fatal conceit of many politicians: an overweening ego.  That may be a prerequisite for politicians and leaders, but when it is unleavened by a willingness to consider the views of others, it becomes a fatal conceit.  And Obama has that trait in abundance.

 

Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but omniscient — unwilling to give any credence to the views of others (especially but not limited to those across the aisle).  Experts in management are interviewed who point out that he lacks essential qualities of leadership.  Indeed, the book gets its title from an outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to encourage Hillary to take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012:

 

Obama doesn’t know how to be president. He doesn’t know how the world works. He’s incompetent. He’s…he’s…Barack Obama’s an amateur.

 

But Klein does not rest there.  He delves into associates from Obama’s career in Cook County politics, his stint as a state senator, and his rise to the United States Senate.  There is a common pattern: Obama likes to campaign, but once he is elected and actually starts working, his interest flags, and he starts looking for the next “big thing” — electorally speaking.  He had few if any accomplishments or professional standing in any of his previous positions.  Even when he served as a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, he avoided any encounters with other faculty who enjoyed discussing the law.  His reluctance to engage them is revealing in and of itself, suggesting he had a reason for his lack of confidence.

 

His disdain toward working with others is manifest.  He has gained a reputation over the last few years as being cold and distant, refusing to engage, as have other presidents, in the give-and-take of politics, in the social niceties that help grease the wheels in Washington.  Liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen recently advised him to read Robert Caro’s newest volume on the life of Lyndon Johnson as a primer on how to be president.  Johnson, of course, was a master at pulling levers of power, but he also knew how to persuade individual politicians on both sides of the aisle to work with him on legislation.  But, of course, LBJ also had the common touch and, having risen from humble beginnings, never considered it beneath him to work with those underneath him.  Not so Barack Obama.  He complained to foreign leaders that he had to waste time talking with “congressmen from Palookaville.”  At another time, he switched locales and said he was tired of dealing with people from “Podunk.”

 

His campaign trail comments regarding small-town America as being populated by “bitter” people who cling to guns and Bibles was not a one-off.  They are reflective of his views.

 

But the high and the mighty also come in for the Obama treatment.  Klein reveals dismay among former Obama supporters who feel they have been mistreated, maligned, and thrown under the bus.  Obama’s most generous early donors have been all but ignored; early mentors in the black business community have been sidelined if not completely ditched; people don’t hear from him or his staff unless a fundraiser is coming up.  But there is more: Caroline Kennedy is angry at the way she and her family were used for campaign purposes in 2008 and then summarily dismissed and stored away like so many movie props have been (the latter is my description).

 

Even Oprah Winfrey has been stiff-armed by the Obamas.  According to the book, Oprah took a big risk in supporting Obama in 2008 and campaigning for Obama in Iowa, being a big boost in his campaign.  The ratings for her show weakened significantly (and her new network has been a huge disappointment).  But when she has tried to visit the White House, she has been all but treated as persona non grata.  Apparently, Michelle Obama is a possessive person who fears the influence Oprah may have over Barack Obama (more on this below).  Oprah blames it on Michelle’s anti-obesity campaign.  She is quoted as saying, “Michelle hates fat people and doesn’t want me waddling around the White House.”  Klein digs up a quotation of Michelle Obama’s from a White House source that seems to confirm Oprah’s suspicion:

 

Oprah only wants to cash in using the White House as a backdrop for her show to perk up ratings. Oprah with her yo-yo dieting and huge girth, is a terrible role model. Kids will look at Oprah, who’s rich and famous and huge, and figure it’s okay to be fat.

 

Oprah, Caroline Kennedy, Pastor Jeremiah Wright (who merits a chapter), and Obama’s former long-time doctor (who feels Obama is distant and lacks feeling, passion, and humanity) all join a long list of people whom the Obamas have used, abused, and then cast aside once they moved into the White House.

 

A few have survived the winnowing process, of course.  There is Michelle, who might be described as the living and real-life descendant of Lady Macbeth.  The book provides some history of the early days between Barack and Michelle: marked by some tempests, yet also marked by Michelle’s overwhelming push for Barack to win power and wealth.  Insiders are reluctant to tangle with the First Lady, and with good reason.  Michelle, like her husband, has a proclivity to blame others for her husband’s failures.  Former Press Secretary Robert Gibbs felt her sting when it was revealed that Michelle had complained about life in the White House to the then-first lady of France, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy.  Gibbs acted to control the damage by arranging for the Élysée Palace to issue a denial.

 

But the response did not come quickly enough for Michelle, and she arranged for Valerie Jarrett — close to the Obamas for years, and who has an omnipresence in the White House that makes the unelected and unconfirmed czar issue seem trivial — to deliver a stern rebuke to Gibbs, who counter-attacked.  Anyone heard from Robert Gibbs lately?

 

The role of Valerie Jarrett has prompted much speculation.  As Edward Klein notes, she has a mouthful of a title —  senior adviser and assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs and public engagement — that “doesn’t begin to do justice to her unrivaled status in the White House.”  Valerie Jarrett apparently has a role in most major decisions: she often appears in meetings the president has with major political leaders from Capitol Hill and with foreign leaders as well.  She often stays behind to have private discussions with the president.  Obama admitted that he ran every decision by her.

 

That is worrying since, as Klein notes, Jarrett’s own career is not one that would prepare her to assume such a prominent role.  Hers is no rags-to-riches story that would give her the “chops” to have such a Svengali-like influence over the president of the United States.  She was blessed with a wonderful set of advantages — descended from a highly regarded political family in Chicago.  Jarrett was a force to be reckoned with in the Daley administration and then capitalized on her political connections to land a job heading up a real estate company in Chicago where she oversaw, among other developments, properties that under her company’s management degenerated into slums.  Business leaders are aghast that she has such a powerful role in the White House.  A donor is quoted as saying that not only is Valerie Jarrett a liability, but others in the White House concur with his views.  Jarrett has butted heads with Rahm Emanuel, who felt that it was wrong to focus on passing ObamaCare when the economy and jobs should have been higher priorities.

 

Who won that match?  Rahm returned to Chicago and became mayor in 2009.

 

The roles of Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett cannot be overstated.  They are symptomatic of a larger problem in the White House decision-making process (one that I noted in “How Obama Makes Decisions“).

 

Barack Obama, to a greater extent than any modern president, refuses to listen to the views of others or consult with experts and advisers outside his own tight and constricted circle from Cook County.  There are many revelations of his faulty decision making uncovered by Klein.  Indeed, one of Jarrett’s roles is to shield Obama from dealing with people who don’t agree with him or who may say something that deflates his ego.

 

When Bill Daley (the chief of staff) realized that the contraception and abortifacient mandates of ObamaCare might offend Catholics, he arranged a meeting without Jarrett’s knowledge between Obama and New York then-Archbishop Timothy Dolan to deal with an issue that would offend many as violating the principle of religious freedom (as well as Catholic beliefs).  Jarrett went to the president and vented her anger.

 

Anyone seen Bill Daley lately?

 

On issue after issue, President Obama remains his insular self, refusing to seek counsel or input from others with more experience.

 

Critics believe he has made a mess of foreign policy precisely because not only does he have a dearth of experience in this area, but because, under our system, foreign policy is one of the few areas where a president enjoys almost unlimited power.  Thus, he is free to formulate his own agenda regardless of the views of others and the damage these policies cause.

 

When pro-Israel Americans met with Obama to discuss his actions toward Israel (that many, including myself, view as being counterproductive) he dismissed the ideas of Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, with the statement “you are absolutely wrong.”  The president, who has no compunction telling people that they are not only wrong, but “absolutely wrong” in public, needs to start feeling some of the empathy he accuses Republicans of lacking.  According to veteran journalist Richard Chesnoff, quoted in the book, “Obama’s problem in dealing with the Arab-Israeli conundrum” comes “from his one-man style and his inflated view of his own leadership talents[.] … [P]erhaps, even more egregiously, he seems to have an exaggerated sense of his own depth of understanding of the Middle East, which is simply not borne out by his background or experience.”  There may be more to it than that to explain the pressure he has put on our one true ally in the Middle East, Israel.  American Thinker published numerous articles in 2008 covering not only Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Junior’s views of Israel as an apartheid state, but Obama’s associations with anti-Israel Palestinians in Chicago, his own suspect language regarding Israel, and his close relationship with Samantha Power (now playing a key role on his National Security Council), who not only has a long anti-Israel history but also made an anti-Semitic remark that was smothered by the media in 2008.  There were good reasons for the Los Angeles Times to run a column during the campaign that “Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Obama.”

 

Readers will thoroughly enjoy Klein’s book on Obama.  There are substantive issues raised about Obama’s leadership abilities that are enhanced with interesting digressions regarding life inside ObamaWorld and how those dynamics effect decisions made from the Oval Office.

 

Klein concludes the book with doubt that Obama could ever change his approach toward governing and suspicion that his agenda is to impose a vast redistribution scheme upon America that has worked so well in the decaying and disintegrating European Union.  He wonders if Republicans are up to the task of pointing out to the public the truth about Obama’s agenda, given the overwhelming media bias in favor of Barack Obama.

 

Klein’s book could serve as a roadmap for Republicans.

Read more: American Thinker

______________________

America Conservative 2 Conservative Main Page for this Ning Social Network.

Trump’s Birther Campaign could LEAD to Exposing Obama Secrets


John R. Houk

© April 22, 2011

 

I just finished reading a Larry Elder post from GOP USA pertaining to Donald Trump billionaire entrepreneur. Elder came to some of the same conclusions I posted entitled, “The Donald as a Conservative GOP Nominee?” That conclusion is that the Donald has too much baggage to translate himself from a cutthroat businessman to a schmooze the voters’ politician. And I do not use the word “cutthroat” in a pejorative sense. I am guessing a person who achieves the status of billionaire without an inheritance utilized some pretty aggressive moves to get where is.

 

Elder concludes some of Trump’s past dealings will be scrutinized so much that he would be spending as much time answering or justifying intrusive questions as he would actually campaigning for a GOP nomination.

 

Also, Elder places the Donald’s emphasis on the Birther quest as a deal breaker for a serious run for the high Office of President of the United States. HOWEVER, Elder also believes that the Donald’s emphasis on the Birther quest could do some political damage to President BHO because it will place in the forefront this question: Why is it that Obama has spent millions of dollars to keep his long form birth certificate from public view and why is it that Obama refuses to make public school records from elementary through college? These are things that EVERY President has provided to the public from time immemorial of our Revolutionary War created American Republic.

 

Donald Trump persists in Birther publicity even in the midst of Republican critics proclaim the Birther issue is a ludicrous campaign strategy. Check this out:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAVbygIRIUg&feature=player_embedded

 

JRH 4/22/11 (Hat Tip: Western Journalism)