Writing against Barack Obama in Pravda, Xavier Lerma offered his assessment of Obama and the people that reelected him. To capture the gist of Mr. Lerma’s (somewhat unartful but truthful) article, here’s a riff on an old joke: These days, if you send your son to Moscow he will return an anti-Communist; send him to Washington and he will return a Communist. (Your daughter will probably lean left wherever she goes. “Sisters love Uncle Sam.”)

Doff of the hat to Lou Dobbs and The Examiner for the Lerma link:.

….Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society and he is ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them. He gives speeches of peace and love in the world while he promotes wars as he did in Egypt, Libya and Syria. He plans his next war is with Iran as he fires or demotes his generals who get in the way. …
…O’bomber even keeps the war going along the Mexican border with projects like “fast and furious” and there is still no sign of ending it. He is a Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so. How shrewd he is in America. His cult of personality mesmerizes those who cannot go beyond their ignorance. They will continue to follow him like those fools who still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia. Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.

The Examiner provides an example (one among tens of millions) of the Idiocracy that elected Obama. He is Oscar-winning actor Jamie Foxx, who said this “on a previously recorded broadcast of the Soul Train Awards on Black Entertainment Television (BET) Sunday:

‘Give an honor to God and our lord and savior Barack Obama. Barack Obama.’”

like tweet google+ recommend print

Excerpted from “Mining Mitt’s Apartheid Moment,” now on WND:

“During the final presidential debate, Republican contender Mitt Romney got my hackles up (unnecessarily) with the following invocation of apartheid:

‘I would also make sure that [Iran's] diplomats are treated like the pariah they are around the world. The same way we treated the apartheid diplomats of South Africa.’

Why unnecessarily? Romney is unremarkable among Republicans. Pushing revolutionary radicalism on the Old South Africa was the goal not only in high diplomatic circles, but among most Republicans.

With a few exceptions.

As I document in ‘Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,’ ‘For advocating ‘constructive engagement’ with South Africa, members of his Republican Party issued a coruscating attack on Ronald Reagan.’

Reagan favored ‘constructive engagement’ with South Africa, together with a tough resistance to communist advances in the Third World. But political pressure, not least from the Republican majority, mounted for an increasingly punitive stance toward Pretoria. This entailed an ‘elaborate sanctions structure,’ disinvestment, and a prohibition on sharing intelligence with the South Africans. In 1986, the Soviet Union, which had until the 1980s supported a revolutionary takeover of white-ruled South Africa by its ANC protégés, suddenly changed its tune and denounced the idea. Once again, the US and the USSR were on the same side—that of ‘a negotiated settlement between Pretoria and its opponents.’

Senator Lowell P. Weicker Jr., in particular, stated: ‘For this moment, at least, President Reagan has become an irrelevancy to the ideals, heartfelt and spoken, of America.’

South Africa was just one more issue on which Republicans had slipped between the sheets with the fashionable left. Today they are as eager as the next drug-addled supermodel to press flesh with Saint Nelson Mandela and the functionaries who run the dominant-party state of South Africa. That is, run it into the ground. … ”

The complete column is “Mining Mitt’s Apartheid Moment.” Read it on WND.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION, AND DO BATTLE FOR LIBERTY BY:

• Using the content-sharing icons on Barely a Blog posts.

• At the WND and RT Comments Sections, and on Facebook.

• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” WND’s “Return To Reason” , and RT’s “Paleolibertarian Column.”

UPDATE I (Oct. 27): IT’S ALL ABOUT FACTION. As was noted in “Mining Mitt’s Apartheid Moment,” “…the ANC … is powerless to stop intimidation. In South Africa, the sacked workers are in the habit of killing scabs who want to work.”

Reports RT:

South African police fired stun grenades, rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse striking miners who tried to foil a rally of the nation’s largest union. The miners say the union reached an unfavorable deal with Amplants mine without their consent.
­The Anglo American Platinum mine in Rustenburg has announced an agreement to reinstate 12,000 miners fired earlier this month for staging illegal strikes and failing to appear at a disciplinary hearing. The credit for the deal was taken by the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM).
“[Amplants] agreed to reinstate all the dismissed workers on the provision that they return to work by Tuesday,” the NUM announced Saturday, a day after the breakthrough in talks.
But the Amplants workers said they were neither aware of nor happy with the deal.
“We know nothing about it. We were not consulted, we only heard about it on the radio,” Ampants miner Reuben Lerebolo told AFP.

UPDATE II (Oct. 27): The indefatigable Adriana Stuijt (@AdrianaStuijt) tweets out:

“Oxford-educated SA investment company owner Alexander Theo Otten murdered at #Velddrift http://bit.ly/ThZFld”

like tweet google+ recommend print

Not even the central planners that run the Olympics could suppress excellence and effort. (In its pursuit of egalitarianism, the Olympics rules committee decreed that “only two members of each team can advance to the all-around, meaning that even if one team is predominant above all others it can only have equal representation in the all-around at best.”)

Although America’s superb athletes may come short in many track and field events, our athletes have dominated the Olympics in the sports that count: gymnastics and swimming. (Who cares about ping-pong?) An American, Carmelita Jeter, became the second fastest woman in the world, winning silver in the 100 meter dash. The Jamaicans are unbeatable; gold medalist Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce a fierce runner.

I confess that the magnificent, down-to-earth Missy Franklin and team swim America charmed me more so than our bionic gymnasts. I am of the old-fashioned mindset that appreciates gymnastics when it balances the artistic and athletic elements. (The Russians still accomplish that, but they’ve lost their stamina.) Still, what amazing athletes these young women are and how impressive is each one’s quest for excellence. (Aly Raisman was my favorite.)

And what does one say about that meteor Michael Phelps? The way he brought home the 4×100-meter medley relay, tonight!!! Supernova.

Comedian Lily Tomlin once said that “98 percent of the adults in this country are decent, hard-working, honest Americans. It’s the other lousy 2 percent that get all the publicity. But then – we elected them.”

This lousy minority is the inescapable obsession of the weekly columnist. That’s why it’s so nice, for two weeks every two years – to shunt the kleptocracy to the sidelines, revealing it as the freak show it truly is.

For once, we can look to the unabashed individualism instantiated in the eager young faces, the lithe, lean bodies, the unabashed pursuit of victory.

Go USA. And well done.

UPDATE (Aug. 5): I’m awe struck. So should you be. What a strong, strategic marathon Ethiopia’s Tiki Gelana ran. She set “an Olympic record while winning the event in 2:23:07, fending off Kenya’s Priscah Jeptoo by five seconds.” Anyone who races through a marathon is my hero. That race is mind over matter. I was pleased to see Tatyana Petrova Arkhipova of Russia, who came third in 2:23:29, doggedly hold on to her position in the leading pack.

like tweet google+ recommend print

The indomitable Paul Graig Roberts on the US’s foreign policy and its financial (and other) repercussions:

“…the Bush/Obama regime is conducting military operations in violation of international law in Pakistan, Yemen, and Africa, organized the overthrow by armed conflict of the government in Libya, is currently working to overthrow the Syrian government, and continues to marshal military forces against Iran.

Finding the Muslim adversaries Washington created insufficient for its energies and budget, Washington has encircled Russia with military bases and has begun the encirclement of China. Washington has announced that the bulk of its naval forces will be shifted to the Pacific over the next few years, and Washington is working to re-establish its naval base in the Philippines, construct a new one on a South Korean island, acquire a naval base in Viet Nam, and air and troop bases elsewhere in Asia.

In Thailand Washington is attempting to purchase with the usual bribes an air base used in the Vietnam war. There is opposition as the country does not wish to be drawn into Washington’s orchestrated conflict with China. Downplaying the real reason for the airbase, Washington, according to Thai newspapers, told the Thai government that the base was needed for ‘humanitarian missions.’ This didn’t fly, so Washington had NASA ask for the air base in order to conduct ‘weather experiments.’ Whether this ruse is sufficient cover remains to be seen.

US Marines have been sent to Australia and elsewhere in Asia.

To corral China and Russia (and Iran) is a massive undertaking for a country that is financially busted. With wars and bankster bailouts, Bush and Obama have doubled the US national debt while failing to address the disintegration of the US economy and rising hardships of US citizens.

Despite the lack of an economic base, Washington’s hegemonic aspirations continue unabated. Other countries are amused at Washington’s unawareness. Russia, China, India, Brazil, and South Africa are forming an agreement to abandon the US dollar as the currency for international settlement between themselves.

On July 4 the China Daily reported: ‘Japanese politicians and prominent academics from China and Japan urged Tokyo on Tuesday to abandon its outdated foreign policy of leaning on the West and accept China as a key partner as important as the United States. The Tokyo Consensus, a joint statement issued at the end of the Beijing-Tokyo Forum, also called on both countries to expand trade and promote a free-trade agreement for China, Japan and South Korea.’

This means that Japan is in play.

The Chinese government, more intelligent than Washington, is responding to Washington’s military threats by enticing away Washington’s two key Asian allies. As the Chinese economy is now as large as the US and on far firmer footing, and as Japan now has more trade with China than with the US, the enticement is appealing. Moreover, China is next door, and Washington is distant and drowning in its hubris.

Washington, which flicked its middle finger to international law and to its own law and Constitution with its arrogance and gratuitous and illegal wars and with its assertion of the right to murder its own citizens and those of its allies, such as Pakistan, has made the United States a pariah state. …”

MORE.

like tweet google+ recommend print

NATO concluded a two-day summit in Chicago on May 21. Srdja Trifkovic, at Chronicles Magazine, distills the “impressively vacuous waffle” issuing from these publicly financed officials. This particular self-important convention, concludes Srdja, could have been avoided. A “day-long teleconference—preceded by a few thousand e-mails among a few dozen civil servants—at zero cost to U.S. taxpayers and zero inconvenience to the citizens of Chicago” would have done the job.

I’d go one better: There is no need for NATO. The sooner the US disinvests from NATO, the better off will “The American Interest” be served.

Alas, there is more at stake than the good of the people allegedly represented by NATO “leaders.” Thus, as Srdja points out, “The alliance will continue to expand its capabilities in spite of economic austerity.”

All of the key decisions on Afghanistan are made by the Obama administration.
It cannot be otherwise. That war has always been an American operation, with some peripheral support from a number of NATO countries. …
…the future of Afghanistan belongs to the Taliban. For 11 years, survival was all the Taliban needed to accomplish in order to win. Once the American and other NATO troops leave, the ANSF will collapse, President Karzai will seek refuge in the Emirates, and Afghanistan will revert to her premodern ways. It does not matter: The country is irrelevant to the security of NATO members, and it should never have become a theater of NATO operations.

On the American cold-war hangover of kicking Russia despite its co-operation, Srdja observes the following:

When Obama addressed the summit on May 21, he publicly thanked Russia and her Central Asian neighbors “that continue to provide critical transit” into Afghanistan. Therefore, it is remarkable that a major irritant in U.S.-Russian relations—the prospect of NATO membership for Georgia—was revived at the summit: “we have agreed to enhance Georgia’s connectivity with the Alliance, including by further strengthening our political dialogue, practical cooperation, and interoperability,” the declaration says, and “we appreciate Georgia’s substantial contribution . . . to Euro-Atlantic security.”
This is nonsense. Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia in August 2008 was one of
the most destabilizing events of the last decade in the Euro-Atlantic region. Imagine the reaction in Washington if Russia were to offer a military alliance to Mexico, equipped and trained the Mexican army, and guaranteed the inviolability of the Rio Grande frontier. Any further expansion of NATO along Russia’s flanks would confirm Moscow’s suspicion that, after the end of the Cold War, the underlying raison d’être of the alliance remains enmity with Russia. …
…Russia’s security interests demand a friendly “near-abroad” along her extended frontiers. Having a hostile Georgia on her southern flank—ran by an arguably unstable Mikhael Saakashvili—is a problem. Accepting Georgia into NATO would be seen in Russia as a security challenge of the highest order. Moreover, it would be detrimental to U.S. interests because of the security guarantee contained in Article V of the NATO Charter—the cornerstone of the alliance—which theoretically obliges the United States to risk an all-out war in defense of Georgia’s sovereignty over Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Srdja’s analysis in Chronicles is always highly recommended. Subscribe to the magazine once the editors complete their lineup with The Paleolibertarian Column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive (rightist) libertarian column, also on RT.

like tweet google+ recommend print

“The cable commentariat is a cog in the sprawling American comitatus. They all feed off Rome.” In this context, it’s hard not to notice just how hard the commentariat is working to create the illusion that America’s economic situation is better than Europe’s, and is the fault of Europe.

Not if you ask Vladimir Putin, who seems to have a reasonable grasp of matters monetary. In July of 2011, “Putin raged over the second plague of quantitative easing, QE2, unleashed by the Federal Reserve Bank, lambasting the Unites States for acting ‘as if they were ‘hooligans’ because they ‘flood’ the entire world with dollars … They start the money printing presses and throw dollars throughout the world in order to solve their immediate responsibilities. They say monopolies are bad but only if they are foreign – their monopolies are perfect. So they use their monopoly to print money until the whole world is flooded.’

This once-avowed communist congratulated his fellow Russians for not being like the Americans: ‘Good for us that we do not print reserve money.’”

In “One Nation Under Inflation,” I observed that “America’s debt-to-GDP ratio is larger than the European Union’s.”

I was wrong.

The US debt “is greater than the combined debt of the entire Eurozone and the U.K.”

At 15.6 trillion dollars of government debt, everyone should know by now that, from the fact that the US keeps loaning billions for bailouts to Christine Lagarde of the International Monetary Fund—it doesn’t follow that we are richer. Or that we have this money. We aren’t and we don’t.

Alas, according to the “logic” of Keynesian macroeconomics, solvency is not a precondition for prosperity.

Adding to the confusion is economist Nouriel Roubini. When asked by RT whether he thought “the US has the risk of seeing the same situation as in the Eurozone, Roubini said something curious:

For now I don’t think there will be a fiscal crisis in the US. Their deficit and debt are large and rising in part because the US can print money to finance its deficit, something the Europeans and their banks are unwilling to do, in part because the US dollar is still a reserve currency, so the foreign demand of China and the rest of emerging markets is financing the large US fiscal and current account deficits. Now, no country should be complacent. Over time, if the US were not to deal with their fiscal problems, if it’s not going to deal with its still low competitiveness, eventually we could see a fiscal train wreck, a sudden stop of capital. And then financial turmoil could happen in the US. Whatever is the result of the election next year, whoever is going to be a president, starting a plan to build a fiscal discipline, a fiscal consolidation, is part of what the US has to do in order to avoid the risk of something bad happening. This can happen later in the US than in other countries, but it can happen eventually.

Is he suggesting that US counterfeiting operations and reserve-currency status are magic amulets against economic realities?

Surely running the printing presses and gulling other governments to buy our worthless bonds serves only to mask the inevitable reality?

like tweet google+ recommend print