Skip to comments.''We Don't All Define Liberty the Same Way. . . ''
Posted on 01/27/2013 2:18:27 PM PST by GiovannaNicoletta
The Moocher King's second inauguration was pretty much as terrifying as was the first one. He promised to keep piling on the entitlements, cheering his constituency and further enraging the shrinking middle class that will have to pay for them, despite promises to put the entire burden on 'the rich'.
"We must make the hard choices to reduce the cost of health care and the size of our deficit. But we reject the belief that America must choose between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future," Obama said.
They are great, swelling words, but they don't actually mean anything. America is not facing a choice between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future.
What 'choice' could he be talking about? Do you remember making such a choice? Or having a choice offered to you? Is an ultimatum (pay up or else) a choice?
"The commitments we make to each other -- through Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security -- these things do not sap our initiative; they strengthen us. They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great."
Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security aren't sapping our initiative -- they are sapping our economic lifeblood. And in any case, these commitments were not made to each other -- they were made by the government and thrust upon the people.
(Did any of you notice your paycheck got smaller after January 1? Was that your choice? )
According to Obama's worldview, that was due to the "commitment" you made to Social Security, not to the confiscation of part of your earnings by the government (who never put any of it into the "Social Security Trust Fund", which never actually existed.)
None of Obama's policies strengthen any of these programs; indeed, according to every single independent analysis, they are weakened by them. As for not being a nation of "takers" -- he is right.
According to government statistics, only about half the nation are takers. (In Ayn Rand's novel, "Atlas Shrugged" they were called "moochers". And in this world where life imitates art, Obama is their King.)
Obama didn't explain how his having added $50,000.00 worth of new debt per taxpayer (since 2009) made America free to take the risks that made this country great. Presumably, he was talking about the half that pays federal taxes, which have gone up despite his promises to put the entire burden on, ummm,
"a shrinking few [who] do very well and a growing many [who] barely make it."
I think that may have been the only accurate statement contained in the entire speech -- and almost everybody missed it. Here, he openly acknowledged that under his watch, the ranks of those "doing very well" are shrinking as the ranks of those "barely making it" are growing.
In other words, his policies are not spreading the wealth around, but rather, they are spreading the misery. But Obama has correctly calculated that few of his constituency will be smart enough to figure it out. They either voted for ObamaCash or they were voting for Marx's impossible utopia.
As we demonstrated yesterday, none of Obama's voters even understand what they were really voting for, since most Democrats think that because "fascism" is an "f" word, it takes on the meaning of whatever it is used to modify, as in "fascist Republican".
He promised to push through his version of 'immigration reform', pledging to find;
"a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity; until bright young students and engineers are enlisted in our workforce rather than expelled from our country."
Indeed, it would be a horrible thing for America to expel "striving, hopeful immigrants" -- but Obama isn't talking about "immigrants" who apply for permission to become legal residents, pay the fees, wait their turn and enter the country legally.
He is talking about invaders who break federal entry laws, commit identify theft and Social Security fraud, take government benefits paid for by citizens and send most of their earnings outside the country.
Who knew that they were really "bright young students" and "engineers" and not chambermaids, busboys, day laborers, etc., that we used to be told that Americans required in order to "do all the tough jobs Americans won't do."
Color me confused. Did they all go to foreign universities before "immigrating" to America in the dead of night with fraudulent working papers?
Having hit on every other straw man argument, he shifted gears one more time, laying out what he said may be THE most important issue facing the nation at this moment in history.
No, it isn't the deficit, now running at almost $5 billion per day! And it isn't the debt, now approaching sixteen and a half trillion dollars!
(Million, billion trillion . . . what does it all mean? A million seconds is twelve days. A billion seconds is 32 years. A trillion seconds is 32,000 years!)
Breaking it down into numbers you'll understand, as a taxpayer, you woke up this morning $145,860.00 in debt that was run up in your name.
Pete Garcia's newborn daughter (Ella Rain) arrived in this world at 2:26 AM yesterday morning. At one day old, her share of the debt is $52,246.00.
But according to Obama's second term inaugural speech, THAT isn't what he's worried about. He never mentioned it once in his entire speech. Instead, he promised to aggressively respond to . . . wait for it . .
. . ."the threat of climate change knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms."
Before it was global warming. But then it started to get cold. (Minnesota is bracing for its forecast -50 windchill while the Lord Mayor of London published an op-ed in the UK Telegraph speculating that the world is slipping into a mini-Ice Age.)
So now it is "climate change" which essentially means nothing, since the climate is in a constant state of change that used to be called 'weather' before the semanticists re-invented it as a threat.
In reality, what it all really means was laid out in Davos yesterday by the World Economic Forum. It really means spending $14 trillion on 'green' energy.
"The alliance, which includes the World Bank, Deutsche Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, proposes that governments use public money to give guarantees, insurance and incentives to potential low-carbon investors at the same time as phasing out fossil fuel subsidies."
The banks are European, but you can be certain that they'll expect the bulk of the $14 trillion will be paid in US greenbacks -- Obama isn't the only one trying to bankrupt America.
In the end, Obama outlined his actual vision for the next four years, which will fundamentally change America by destroying the basic principle behind the Declaration of Independence.
"Being true to our founding documents does not require us to agree on every contour of life; it does not mean we will all define liberty in exactly the same way
WHAT??????? We don't?
Noted Breitbart's Ben Shapiro;
"The founders may have disagreed on many things, but they agreed on the meaning of liberty: the right to live as an individual, without centralized planning infringing basic property rights, economic opportunities, and religious freedoms. Obamas fundamental redefinition of liberty to include communitarianism is not merely wrong, it spells the end of the political commonality that has held the fabric of the nation together. If we define liberty differently, then there is nothing to talk about: my liberty is your tyranny, and vice versa. Our goals can never be shared. That gap can never be bridged."
If we all don't define liberty in the same way, then "liberty" and "fascism" can mean the same thing.
"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:" (2nd Thessalonians 2:10-11)
I admit that I never turned on the television all day yesterday. I could not participate in what was being billed as an "inaugural celebration" -- I couldn't bring myself to celebrate the death of liberty or the rise of American fascism.
I didn't need to hear Obama speak to know what he said --I knew I could read the transcripts later. I didn't need to be talked down to by a condescending politician or sickened by a fawning, slobbering, moronic handful of elitist propagandists masquerading as members of the First Amendment empowered "Free Press."
It was enough to read about it later.
Chris Matthews didn't get a thrill up his leg, but he was reminded of the similarities between Obama's speech and the most famous and revered speech ever delivered by an American president.
"Reminds me of another second inaugural Lincolns. So much of Lincoln in that speech, the Gettysburg address to the second inaugural itself."
During a discussion about the Moocher King's second inauguration, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wondered why Obama, as brilliant as he is, hasnt been able to get Washington to "work better" with his "super-brain" and "amazing insights".
She eventually answered her own question, concluding that Obama relies more on his heart and what is right than he does on his superior intellect. A few more examples of the unbiased mainstream media reporting on a presidential inauguration before moving on:
MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell fawned over Obamas inaugural speech, saying it was in the mood of Martin Luther King Jr. and the day that were celebrating and of that legacy.
I thought that the tone of this speech, aside from the policy prescriptions, was much more eloquent than I expected, frankly, she added.
CNN reporter Jim Acosta was practically giddy due to the fact that he was near President Obama as he was walking down Pennsylvania [Avenue] during the inaugural parade.
You know, I feel like I should pinch myself right now, Wolf (Blitzer). I cant believe I have this vantage point of history in the making.
CNN host Wolf Blitzer himself later got caught up in the excitement and attempted to get noticed by Obama by standing up and waving at him like a fan. He later said he and his co-anchor were just spectators and tourists at the event.
NBCs Brian Williams went on about First Lady Michelle Obama and claimed that she was easily the most fascinating first lady since Jackie Kennedy.
We can say without hesitation there has not been this much fascination with a first lady easily since Jackie Kennedy, he said.
Additionally, CNNs Piers Morgan tweeted: Obama sounding more and more like Martin Luther King as this speech goes on powerful, rousing rhetoric. He later called Obama articulate, engaging, intelligent and a great figurehead for America.
NBCs Al Roker went nuts trying to get the attention of the president and Vice President Joe Biden during the parade. He screamed their names and flailed his arms around, until both acknowledged him.
Is it even possible that all these college-educated professionals whose jobs put them in the position to see things that most of us never do, can actually believe the stuff they are selling? If it is so tellingly transparent to me, how can it be so opaque to them?
Behold the power of propaganda!
Adolf Hitler called it "The Big Lie". At his trial at Nuremberg, Hermann Goering explained the principle to the Allies. In summary, he explained that if you are going to tell a lie make it such a BIG one that nobody would ever believe you would dare lie about it.
The Big Lie can be broken down into its constituent parts:
First, your problems are not your fault. They are the fault of a malicious, irredeemable, evil "Other": (the rich, the Right, Christians, Jews, etc) And thanks to them, your problems, (whatever they might be) will keep getting worse.
Were it not for the interference of the "Other" you would be recognized for the superior individual you really are.
The implied solution to this problem is to do what the Big Liar wants you to do.
The Big Lie works. For example, the Obamanation is big on "rights". Rights are very important. Gays have the right to marry. Women have the right to choose to abort their babies. Muslims have the right not to be profiled. Atheists have a right to be protected from God.
For the Other, gun ownership is a privilege to be issued or revoked like a driver's license, rather than an unconditional Constitutionally-guaranteed right of citizenship. They don't have the right to travel freely within their own country.
Christians don't have the right to practice their faith in public. Christian students don't have the right to pray. The unborn have no right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
There are those who believe that they are too sophisticated to fall under the propagandists' spell. That arrogance is what makes them so susceptible.
Propaganda and semantics were elevated to the level of science during the last century, and the advent of television gave us new terms like 'sublimatics' to explain how brainwashing works. All these tools were developed at just the right moment in history.
The infrastructure of antichrist continues to develop before our eyes as the hours count down for the last generation of human government. Everything is in place.
"And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." (Luke 21:28)
Noted Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro;
“The founders may have disagreed on many things, but they agreed on the meaning of liberty: the right to live as an individual, without centralized planning infringing basic property rights, economic opportunities, and religious freedoms. Obamas fundamental redefinition of liberty to include communitarianism is not merely wrong, it spells the end of the political commonality that has held the fabric of the nation together. If we define liberty differently, then there is nothing to talk about: my liberty is your tyranny, and vice versa. Our goals can never be shared. That gap can never be bridged.”
Maybe we're missing something. The founders, though speaking of individuals, may have assumed a family unit to assist the individual. (What was the divorce rate in 1776?)
Maybe since Obama, and so many others now, come from broken families and they are are pushing the whole "collective" experience to replace that which was lost. Do you think this "broken home" generation might just settle for Facebook and the right to bear arms?