UPDATED: State of Disunion Stars Two Chief Dividers

Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, History, Nationhood, Politics, Republicans, States' Rights, The State

A most divisive president, Barack Obama, will be devoting his last State of the Union extravaganza to dispelling the conviction that he, Obama, has been an extraordinarily divisive and antagonistic president. Even Obama’s decision not to mention the capture, today (1/12/2016), by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard of 10 American marines will prove divisive. But hey, legacy before loyalty. In that tradition, hubristic Obama will be speaking to the things that unite America, namely his legacy.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who’ll be delivering the Republicans’ SOTU response, is an equally divisive figure, having chosen, last year, to excise a part of Southern history: Haley tore down the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia from the State House grounds, even though the Confederate flag “never flew over an official Confederate building,” and “was a battle flag intended to honor the great Robert E. Lee.”

I won’t be dignifying Il Duce’s last SOTU address. Instead I’ll excerpt the 2010 WND column about this “Stalinesque Extravaganza.” Just about everything in the column, “Barry Soetoro Frankenstein: Spawn of the State,” still obtains:

Barry Soetoro Frankenstein: Spawn of the State

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires that the president “shall from time to time give to Congress information of the state of Union.” Like everything in the Constitution, a modest thing has morphed into a monstrosity.

A “Stalinesque extravaganza” that ought to offend “anyone of a republican (small ‘r’) sensibility” is how National Review’s John Derbyshire has described the annual State of the Union address. “American politics frequently throws up disgusting spectacles. It throws up one most years in January: the State of the Union speech,” writes Derbyshire in “We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism,” in which John (he’s a friend) goes on to detail how “the great man” is announced, how he makes an entrance; the way “the legislators jostle to catch his eye” and receive his favor. (This year, the most repulsive among the representatives staked out aisle seats for themselves, starting early in the morning.)

“On the podium at last, the president offers up preposterously grandiose assurances of protection, provision, and moral guidance from his government, these declarations of benevolent omnipotence punctuated by standing ovations and cheers from legislators” (p. 45). The president of the USA is now “pontiff, in touch with Divinity, to be addressed like the Almighty.”

The razzmatazz includes a display of “Lenny Skutniks” in the royal box. These are “model citizens chosen in order to represent some quality the president will call on us to admire and emulate.” Last year it was the family of the girl who was murdered by the Tucson shooter. This year’s “Lenny Skutnik” was Debbie Bosanek, Warren Buffett’s secretary. Bosanek is supposed to embody the Barf(fett) Rule, described by the Divine One thus: “If you make more than a million dollars a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes.”

“We Are Doomed” deconstructs this monarchical, contrived tradition against the backdrop of the steady inflation of the presidential office, and the trend “away from ‘prose’ to ‘poetry’; away from substantive argument to “hot air.” In Obama’s simplistic scheme of things—as measured by the Flesch-Kincaid readability test, “for the third straight Address, the President’s speech was written at an eighth-grade level”—to recreate the glory of America, it is essential to reinvent the state. Since Obama has no understanding of how the economy works and why it collapsed, he honestly thinks that centrally planned political projects are every bit as productive as profit-driven investments of private property.

Ever the source of deafening demagoguery, the president promised pay dirt to businesses that heeded his call to greatness. Should a company “relocate to a community that was hit hard when a factory left town,” the president will plunder (private property), print (funny-money), and beg (borrow) in order to help these friends-in-fascism to “finance a new plant, equipment, or train for new workers.”

In the spirit of brute-force statism, the POTUS also promised a Trade Enforcement Unit to police “unfair trading practices,” and a “Financial Crimes Unit to “crack down on large-scale fraud.” And he, BHO, will corral corporations into “model partnerships” with community colleges, while simultaneously redesigning the curricula and websites of said colleges.

Il Duce’s next derring-do? Send him the bill, and Obama will even instruct the provinces to incarcerate local kids in high school “until they graduate or turn 18.”

To keep the student-loan bubble afloat, America’s potentate wants to mandate more loans at fixed prices, as well as expand federally financed research and development. Nowhere is it authorized by the Constitution, but—don’t you know it?—without “federally financed labs and universities” and “public research dollars,” the Internet and assorted “technologies to extract natural gas out of shale rock” would never have come about.

Having used the military to great political effect, Obama now intends to deploy the Department of Defense, no less, in the “clean energy business.” In Obama’s very elementary thinking—eighth-grade elementary—the DOD is bound to do a bang-up job.

From financial aid (for foreign students) to an affirmative-action placement in Harvard Law School, Barry Soetoro is a Frankenstein of the state’s creation. If not for government, Obama would have never managed to write himself into history. As a product of the state, Barry Soetoro sees it as the source of all possibilities.

And so the president forges ahead with plans to grow the Dead Zone of government.

(From “Barry Soetoro Frankenstein: Spawn of the State.”)

UPDATE: So was it good for you? Did the earth move? Barack Obama’s presidency was to be, by his account “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.”

Those were the words of the Messiah himself, excerpted from the nomination victory speech in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Migrant Vetting & American Safety Outsourced To The UN

Europe, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Nationhood, Republicans, Terrorism, UN

In November last year (11.25.15), I pointed out “that [House Speaker Paul] Ryan loves our refugee laws—they are important legislation, he said on that occasion.” I further alerted you to just what this affinity says about Ryan.

For “Like most positive law, US refugee law is written by and for special interests, starting with one of the most corrupt UN agencies, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Besides, who approved these refugee laws? Likely fewer than 535 law makers, legislating on behalf of 323 million people who have to live with the law’s consequences.” (Read “Why Does Paul Ryan Conflate Bill Of Rights With Refugee Bill Of Goods?!”)

A few months after that, the cutting edge Center for Immigration Studies confirms and fleshes out what you could read at BAB months prior (DONATIONS ARE NEEDED AND APPRECIATED SO AS TO KEEP UP THE LEVEL OF INTENSITY AND PREDICTABILITY ON BAB, AS WE HAVE SINCE 2005):

The CIS’s reports is “The UN’s Role in U.S. Refugee Resettlement: A ‘benefit of the doubt’ screening policy” By Nayla Rush January 2016.

Frau Merkel’s Idea of Defending Germans

Crime, EU, Europe, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Middle East, Multiculturalism

With the blessing of the treacherous Angela Merkel, migrants—mostly Muslim, male, Middle-Eastern—may endanger the lives of Germans all they want. But they cannot be returned to sender if there’s even the slightest concern that their lives will be imperiled back at “home.”

German law doesn’t protect the rights of German citizens, but the rights of migrants. So Merkel’s response to the mass molestation by migrants of German girls is no response at all. “Serial offenders who repeatedly rob or repeatedly affront women must feel the full force of the law,’ Merkel told journalists in Mainz.”

By “the full force of the law,” what does this repulsive woman mean?

“Under German law,” explain Reuters reporters Joseph Nasr and Matthias Inverardi, “asylum seekers are now typically only deported if they have been sentenced to at least three years in prison, and providing their lives are not at risk at home.”

Three years in prison is probably the sentence meted out for murder in Germany.

Muslims, Not Nazis, Invented Yellow Cloth With Which To Tag Jews

Donald Trump, History, Islam, Judaism & Jews

To demonstrate how victimized she felt by Donald Trump, a swaddled Muslim woman (a flight attendant, no less; I hope with Air Islam!) appeared at Trump’s Rock Hill, South Carolina rally wearing what the WaPo described as the “yellow eight-pointed stars, reminiscent of the six-pointed stars Jews were forced by the Nazis to wear on their clothing during the Holocaust. On the eight-pointed stars, a common symbol in the Islamic world, was this message: ‘Stop Islamophobia.’”

As Donald Trump questioned the motives of Syrian refugees at a Friday night rally, saying they “probably are ISIS,” a woman sitting in the stands of the sports arena behind him silently stood. She was wearing a white hijab and a blue T-shirt that read: “Salam, I come in peace.”
Trump kept speaking, but soon the crowd erupted, holding up their campaign signs and chanting: “Trump! Trump! Trump!” That was the formal signal for security to remove her from the rally — even though she stood quietly, not saying anything.

For her theatrics, the woman, Rosa Hamid, had appropriated a symbol of Jewish oppression. Worse. Hamid has a Chutzpah, considering Muslims invented this Mark of Cain for Jews. It was not the Nazis who dreamt up the yellow cloth with which they tagged Jews; it was “introduced by the caliph who succeeded the prophet Mohammad.”

From “DID MOHAMMED INVENT PROFILING?”:

When it comes to the sensitive topic of racial or ethnic profiling, Muslims, historically, were innovators in their own right. The Nazis were not the originators of the yellow cloth with which they tagged Jews. The odious tagging rag has its origins in the laws of the Charter of Omar—a set of vicious anti-infidel rules that were applied to Jews with extra vim. These laws were introduced by the caliph who succeeded the prophet Mohammed.

Prior to the prophet, Jews and Arabs did indeed live in relative harmony, but when Mohammed failed to convert the Jews to Islam, the proselytizing prophet of peace exterminated at least one Jewish tribe, etched the Holy Koran with anti-Jewish vitriol, and launched centuries of brutality against Jews. Arabs also preceded the Nazis by centuries when they devised the Jewish ghetto, that dwelling demarcator known in Arabic as the hara or mella. Following the Arab conquest in the seventh century, Jewish life in the Islamic world became fraught with massacres, blood libel, and plunder. Synagogues were regularly torn down, and Jews were impelled to pay special head and property taxes. … (January 9, 2002)

(January 9, 2002.)

MORE.