March 21, 2012
With elections around the corner, many people are wondering if in fact Obama will get elected for another four year term. It would seem that with the faltering economy, high unemployment, massive accruing government debt, and climbing gas prices, people would be ready to "throw the bum out" so to speak. Yet, I fear that with the liberal media supporting Obama, and the campaign contributions of Wall Street on his side, he may in fact have the next four years in the bag.
While I certainly want him out of the office of President, I feel that those in high positions of power may not be done with Obama yet. He has certainly continued the agenda to destroy and reshape our economy, as well as increase the police state here in America. Attacks on our 1st, 2nd, 4, and 5th amendment rights (as well as others) has been ongoing since his inauguration. Our country is in a real mess, and yet Obama marches forward destroying everything in his path.
Since the 2007 financial crisis, we have seen only nominal steps to correct the problems that led to the collapse, and almost no steps to find the sources and perpetrators of the fraud that created the mess in the first place. The Obama administration railed against the evil bankers and Wall Street, and yet did nothing to take away the ability for these crooks to stop the theft and fraud, but instead gave more money and power to them to continue the madness. Obama has been graciously blessed in turn by the same criminals in the form of campaign contributions.
Bailouts and quantitative easing used to prop up the stock market as a "see, we are in recovery" mirage has been the administration's move to fool the American average Joe, while the destruction of the dollar, housing market, jobs, and overall economy continues.
Meanwhile, the threat of "terrorists" who are trying to get us is pushed by the administration via the CIA and FBI through patsies and provocateurs in order to increase wiretapping, checkpoints, body scanners, drones, protest crackdowns, indefinite detentions, torture and overall tyranny here in our once great country that used to stand for freedom.
Although there are many Americans waking up to the agenda to transform our country, there are more than many who are oblivious to this "New World Order" dream- or should I say, Nightmare. Most Americans are programed by their televisions to believe that everything is under control, and that the government is somehow going to make everything better. Even as our middle class families struggle, unemployment lines grow, and food stamp numbers increase, there are many who believe Obama's rhetoric of a recovery, and job growth.
I believe that the GOP nomination will ultimately be Romney. He will be the one to run against Obama in the coming election. I also believe that Romney will lose against Obama. I can't say with 100% certainty that it will be because Romney will be told by his handlers to throw the fight, but I believe that this will be the case. It's just a feeling. A bad one at that. I believe it is a big "Dog and Pony show" for the masses, but the choice has already been made. In an article at Digital Journal on Jan. 4th 2012, it was pointed out how every candidate that won the Iowa caucus then turned around and became president. Romney won this time, but Obama won in 2008, and hence will win again since he is the Incumbent. In part the article states:
So it's all decided. It's all over folks. Stick a fork in it. It's done. Surely, Governor Mitt Romney, first place winner in the 2012 Iowa Republican Caucus will be the NEXT PRESIDENT OF THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!! No? and don't call you Shirley? Well, consider the following facts:
•In 1992, George H. W. Bush came in 1st place and--what?...he was the incumbent president? Oh...
•OK OK in 1996 Bill Clinton won first place in the Iowa Cauc...wait he was the incumbent president too.
•Wait wait wait... George W. Bush--no darn it --he was also an incumbent-- but NOT THE FIRST TIME!
•GEORGE W. BUSH won first place in 2000 and went on to get the nomination and became president! and so did
•BARACK OBAMA IN 2008!
Small problem. When George W. Bush and Barack Obama were candidates in 2000 and 2008, the incumbent presidents did not run, since both incumbent presidents were serving their second terms. With the exception of Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, history shows that if an incumbent president is running, he's gonna be re-elected. Had President Bill Clinton and President Bush respectively, not been serving their second terms, Candidate Bush and Barack Obama probably wouldn't have have become presidents, history shows.
In 1996, incumbent President Bill Clinton won the Iowa democrat caucus with 98% of the Iowa democrat vote, ahead of Undecided, who came in second place with 1%. Ralph Nader came in third place, also with 1% -- or was that Pat Paulsen?
Obama is the incumbent president. He ran in the 2012 Iowa democrat caucus, unopposed, and like incumbent Bill Clinton, he also won 98% of the Iowa democrat vote, coming in first place ahead of Undecided, who came in second place with 2% of the Iowa democrat vote.
Who do you think--will be--the next President of these fifty-seven United States of America? Hmm?
In a recent report on Politico, apparently "The Obama 2012 team hosted an off-the-record briefing for Mitt Romney's press corps at Chicago headquarters" it stated. And yet people want to claim that Romney and Ron Paul are colluding together? What about Romney and Obama instead?
I believe the global elites that are pushing for the total implementation of their idea of global government may want to keep Obama in office because he has the mental aptitude to carry out measures that will ultimately bring about this New World Order. Obama is a shadowy figure. He is a man of mystery in the way of his birth, and even as far as his earlier years attending schools and college. Some speculate that Obama was somehow connected with the CIA in those years.
I also believe the fact that Obama's birth certificate is a fraud, and his social security number is also bogus, and all the info being kept out of the media concerning his college transcripts, etc. are being done by Elites as a way to blackmail him and keep him from going rogue in any way, just in case he were to deviate from their agenda. When Donald Trump brought the Birth Certificate issue into the public, I believe there were several reasons to do this. First it set up the plan to bring the issue up, and hype up the media getting it out to the public, only to then show the so-called "real certificate" in order to kill the whole birther issue. Yet, on the other hand, it was a way for the Globalists to say to Obama, " hey, we can help you by killing this birther issue, or we can bring it out, and destroy your career, if you fall out of line."
Just a thought.
We know that he is an admirer of Zbigniew Brsesinski, and Saul Alinsky. As far as Zbigniew is concerned, he stated in his book, The grand Chessboard, that Africa would have to be put under submission to the U.S. as a part of the agenda to dominate Eurasia.
"How America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)I believe that since this part of the agenda is now being implemented by the globalists, it is necessary for the puppet in power as president to be of African decent. This gives the illusion that the operations by the U.S. in the African countries currently are not being done by a racist president. I am talking about the operations going on in Africa against the LRA by the Obama administration. We can include the other operations done in the recent past as well. Those of Egypt, Libya, and so on. These were carried out with the help of Al Qeada forces.
As for his "Alinsky" side, Jonah Goldberg excellently notes the comparison between Alinsky's rules for radicals, studied and perfected by Barack Obama, and shows them to have fascist roots:
" ....there's no disputing that vast swaths of [Alinsky's] writing are indistinguishable from the fascist rhetoric of the 1920s and 1930s ....His worldview is distinctly fascistic. Life is defined by war, contests of power, the imposition of will. Moreover, Alinsky shares with the fascists and propagandists of yore a bedrock hostility to dogma. All he believes in are the desired ends of the movement, which he regards as the source of life's meaning... But what comes through most is his unbridled love of power. Power is a good in its own right for Alinsky. Ours 'is a world not of angels but of angles,' he proclaims in 'Rules for Radicals,' ' where men speak of moral principles but act on power principles."This is the same for Obama. He is a chip off the old Alinsky block.
Obama's campaign slogan was "Change". What may not be known by many is that Hitler mobilized the masses in his day by an undefined demand for "Change" as well. Hitler's original campaign slogan of "Everything Must Be Different" transformed into "Unite for Change". Have you ever noticed that Obama's transition team website is called 'Change.gov.?
Another thing I noticed was Obama's insistence that we build highways and infrastructure in order to rebuild the economy. This sounds again like Hitler's call to build infrastructure back in 1933 when he became Chancellor. "We are setting up a program", Hitler said later that year, "the execution of which we do not want to leave to posterity." And in just the same way, the Obama administration set up the American Recovery and Reinvestment act of 2009. This included among other things, money put toward infrastructure.
And like Hitler's Waffen SS, Obama has called for a civilian Security force equal to that of our U.S. military.
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."The Waffen-SS grew from three regiments to over 38 divisions during World War II, and served alongside the Heer (regular army) but was never formally part of it. Adolf Hitler resisted integrating the Waffen-SS into the army, as it was to remain the armed wing of the Party and to become an elite police force once the war was won. - Wikipedia
So like Hitler, Obama would like to set up a civilan security force that would be equal to the military, and yet not a part of it. In a way, we can see the beginnings of this in the establishment of the TSA. We also see VIPR teams around America, and so on. I believe that Obama is the man who will carry out further objectives of his handlers without reservation because he is a narcissist. It seems that most of the globalists bent on controlling others are also Narcissists themselves, and therefore admire this trait in Obama.
Here are some of the traits of a narcissist:
- An obvious self-focus in interpersonal exchanges
- Problems in sustaining satisfying relationships
- A lack of psychological awareness (see insight in psychology and psychiatry, egosyntonic)
- Difficulty with empathy
- Problems distinguishing the self from others (see narcissism and boundaries)
- Hypersensitivity to any insults or imagined insults (see criticism and narcissists, narcissistic rage and narcissistic injury)
- Vulnerability to shame rather than guilt
- Haughty body language
- Flattery towards people who admire and affirm them (narcissistic supply)
- Detesting those who do not admire them (narcissistic abuse)
- Using other people without considering the cost of doing so
- Pretending to be more important than they really are
- Bragging (subtly but persistently) and exaggerating their achievements
- Claiming to be an "expert" at many things
- Inability to view the world from the perspective of other people
- Denial of remorse and gratitude
Source - Wikipedia
In Why Is It Always About You?, Hotchkiss describes what she calls the seven deadly sins of a Narcissist:
- Shamelessness: Shame is the feeling that lurks beneath all unhealthy narcissism, and the inability to process shame in healthy ways.
- Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.
- Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
- Envy: A narcissist may secure a sense of superiority in the face of another person's ability by using contempt to minimize the other person.
- Entitlement: Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.
- Exploitation: Can take many forms but always involves the exploitation of others without regard for their feelings or interests. Often the other is in a subservient position where resistance would be difficult or even impossible. Sometimes the subservience is not so much real as assumed.
- Bad boundaries: Narcissists do not recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not extensions of themselves. Others either exist to meet their needs or may as well not exist at all. Those who provide narcissistic supply to the narcissist are treated as if they are part of the narcissist and are expected to live up to those expectations. In the mind of a narcissist there is no boundary between self and other.
Source: Hotchkiss, Sandy & Masterson, James F. Why Is It Always About You?: The Seven Deadly Sins of Narcissism (2003)
And again we see these traits in Obama.
I believe that with the current wars in the Middle East, and now in Africa, (Africom has been there along with the CIA for at least a decade or so), the elites know they need a man who portrays the image of internationalism and global amalgamation. A Romney, or Santorum for that matter, could never do this.
You may agree with or disagree with my analysis of things, but one thing is certain - we will know in November whether I am right.
Let's hope I'm wrong.
BTW: I want Ron Paul to win in 2012!!!