Tag: politics

I warned you she wasn’t finished. But Obama is:

Some called a Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton pairing the “Dream Ticket” in 2008. It didn’t happen. But what about 2012? “It’s on the table,” veteran Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward told CNN’s John King in an interview Tuesday on John King, USA. “Some of Hillary Clinton’s advisers see it as a real possibility in 2012.”

Hillary is not going after Biden, she’s going after Obama. This is just a strategic ploy to get her name back in play. Then, after the Democrats lose both the House and Senate in November – and probably even if they just lose the House in an embarrasing manners – Team Clinton will begin playing upon the fears of the surviving politicos that they will lose their jobs in 2012 if they are forced to run with the weight of the Obama administration dragging them down.

Forget 2016. She wants to run in 2012. But she can’t do so without pushing Obama aside. And given what a vindictive bitch she is, the thought of humiliating the man who robbed her of what would have been a historic presidency, and more importantly, an easy walk to a historic presidency, has great appeal to her. The main problem with this scenario is that even if Rodham-Clinton successfully convinces the Democratic superdelegates to dump Obama, she can’t seriously hope to win unless the Republican leadership provokes the Tea Party into supporting a third-party candidate by arranging the nomination of another Dole/McCain RINO.

And they would never be dumb enough to do that, would they?

Which is why the Hawaiian Democratic Party changed its statement regarding Mr. Soetoro/Soebarkah’s Constitutional qualifications:

In choosing Al Gore and Joe Lieberman in 2000, this was their statement:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national Democratic Parties by balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held March 7, 2000 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 14-17, 2000 in Los Angeles, California.”

The wording was almost identical on behalf of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004:

But in 2008, the words missing include “the provisions of the United States Constitution.” It states, “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008, in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2009, in Denver, Colorado.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but “the provisions of the United States Constitution” are not synonymous with “the provisions of the National Democratic Parties balloting”. In other words, the Hawaiian Democrats were covering their posteriors in the event, as is gradually coming to pass, that it was discovered Obama is Constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of president. At this point, there can be little doubt that Obama is not hiding his records due to any grand strategery “to make his opponents look foolish” – his abysmal approval ratings show the absurdity of that defense – but because they will reveal his Constitutional ineligibility for the office he is illegally and illegitimately holding. It is worth noting, too, that the Democratic National Committee did not certify Obama’s eligibility in any other state despite the false ex posto facto claims of Nancy Pelosi.

Given that this is arguably the greatest political scandal in American history, it is remarkable that the mainstream media is so loathe to touch it. Especially considering that it’s already made a #1 New York Times-selling bestseller for Jerome Corsi.

The Right Wing News has named Vox Popoli the 37th best conservative blog. I appreciate that Mr. Hawkins thinks well of the blog, but I do find it to be somewhat ironic in that I am not a political conservative. But, I suppose that I am somewhat of a religious reactionary and there are a lot of conservatives who comment here, so it’s not a totally unreasonable inclusion.

In case it’s not already sufficiently apparent to you that neither the American nor European political elites actually give a damn about democracy, the Swedes are underlining this observable fact:

Members of several Swedish political parties are calling for a restructuring of the Riksdag [the Swedish parliament] to minimize the influence of the far-right Sweden Democrats. The parties are investigating whether it is possible to shift the make-up of parliamentary committees to reduce the sway of the far-right, anti-immigrant party which was voted into parliament for the first time at the weekend’s general elections, several Swedish dailies reported. Both Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt’s Moderate [center-right] Party and the main opposition Social Democrats are reportedly involved.

“Democracy” in both Europe and America is a complete sham. It’s nothing more than rhetorical propaganda; countries like Iraq and Afghanistan are invaded in the name of bringing democracy to their peoples even as genuine democracy is routinely crushed through the use of the courts in the United States and parliamentary rules in European countries.

In the USA, it doesn’t matter if you vote for Democrats or Republicans because you’re going to get essentially the same government either way. The differences are only at the margins and it is more accurate to think of them as a single bi-factional ruling party rather than two rival parties that subscribe to different ideologies. As Sweden is demonstrating, if it were possible to significantly transform society against the will of the trans-party political elite through voting, voting would be made irrelevant.

At this point, it is clear that despite all of the genuine dangers of democracy, representative democracy is actually worse. Since the tactic of expanding the franchise has rendered the limits of representation worse than toothless, the best strategy is to support real democracy. Therefore, I am thinking of changing my party identification from Christian Libertarian to Technodemocrat. But not Democrat in the sense of the modern U.S. Democratic Party, I mean a full and open democracy that dispenses with all of the limitations on the will of the people imposed by representative democracy in favor of technodemocracy.

The unfortunate fact is that the idea of protecting the minority against the will of majority has been utilized to impose the will of the corporatist oligarchy on the majority. Therefore, it would be a significant improvement to remove all limits on the will of the majority.

Albeit this time they are peace camp rather than presidential:

Two activists have exposed a disturbing phenomenon that they say is an open secret within the “peace camp”: female “peace” activists are routinely harassed and raped by the Arabs of Judea and Samaria with whom they have come to identify. They say the phenomenon has gotten worse lately and that many foreign women end up as wives of local Arabs against their will, but cannot escape their new homes…. Aloni-Sedovnik cites two specific cases which she has knowledge of – one is a case of rape and another is “severe sexual harassment.” The attackers in both cases, she stresses, were familiar with the victims and knew that they were “peace activists.” The rape occurred several months ago in the village of Umm Salmona, near Bethlehem. The victim, an American activist, wanted to press charges but leftist activists put pressure on her not to do so, so as not to damage the struggle against the ‘occupation.’

With feminism, as with other left-wing movements, the ideology always trumps the individual.

Lest one think for even a fraction of one second that the professional Republican class, also known as “the Republican leadership”, has any genuine commitment to any ideological principles beyond maintaining its own power and influence:

Party fractures on full display, Republican aides told Fox News Tuesday that O’Donnell would not be getting national fundraising support. State party leaders had warned that O’Donnell cannot compete against Democrat Chris Coons and vigorously backed Castle, a nine-term congressman and former governor…. Party leaders no doubt were looking at midterm polls that showed Castle leading Coons in November but O’Donnell trailing. The seat could be critical for Republicans hoping to gain control of the Senate. They need to pick up 10 seats to do so.

The point, which both the Republican establishment and a significant portion of the conservative media either does not understand after the eight-year Bush administration debacle or simply will not accept, is that it doesn’t matter if your party is in power if the representatives of that party are not ideologically reliable. If elected Republicans are simply going to behave like Democrats Lite in office, there is no reason for conservatives to elect them. None.

Lenin was correct in ascertaining that sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better. The conservative movement is in much stronger shape due to Barack Obama-Soetoro-Sobarkah’s election that it would have been if the RINO McCain had been elected; McCain would have moved things about 50 percent as far to the left as Obama has, but would have ensured that more Democrats were elected to the House and Senate this fall rather than the incipient Democratic drubbing that is in the making. The reason they would rather lose to a Democrat than see a genuinely conservative Republican get elected is because the former doesn’t threaten their long-term dominance over the party.

There are two flaws with the pragmatic approach. First, its analysis is always static and fails to recognize that the electorate responds to political dynamism. Second, it is an inept strategy that by its very nature prevents reaching the nominal objectives.

As the Instapundit reader commented: “It’s not enough, seemingly, to vote these people out. We have to stomp on them for them to get the message.”

2010 is gone for Democrats. “He cannot save 2010,” the big-time Democrat is saying of Barack Obama. “It is gone. He must now concentrate on saving 2012. But the biggest fear of some of those close to him is that he might not really want to go on in 2012, that he might not really care.”

I chortled a bit. You may recall that I have predicted three things here a while back. House lost. Senate lost. Obama doesn’t even make it to the general election in 2012. Suddenly, all three are looking a little less crazy then they were back then.