Is Joe the Plumber Barack Obama's "“Civilian National Security Force” first victim ?
I don't think so, In my opinion the Socialist's just wanted to make a public example of their despised aspirational middle / working class, so emboldened are they by their own cheer squad, the MSM, they simply could not help themselves.
I can just imagine the party officials discussing how to screw Joe where it hurts, and so keep him occupied with matters other than "disrespecting the Messiah" by asking him questions "designed to cause fear or worry amongst the correct thinking people of the USA" "hey guys lets have some fun with Joe", "who the hell does this white,uppity blue collar male think he
is ?"
Was it decided that Joe and all those he represents simply had to be taught a lesson, lest he and other such incorrect thinkers, ask more questions of the Messiah that should not be asked by any unselfish American citizen, let alone by a Plumber who sees nothing wrong with Independence,enterprise and personal effort and personal responsibility, back in your hole Joe.
So far Joe the Plumber is still alive and in good health, he has suffered death threats, and a demand for him to be killed from a left loon radio announcer in San Francisco following his encounter with Mr Obama.
How many more Helen Jones-Kelly's are there in the US public service ? maybe she is the first public face of Mr Obama's new elite “Civilian National Security Force.” whose brief will be to change the worlds opinion of America , code for convincing the United Nations/ Eurabia and the rest of the worlds despots that just like their once free people, America's will soon be under the boot heel of international socialism.
Before the November 2007 Australian federal election, deputy Labor Party leader and former leftist activist (left wing ratbag & loon) Julia Gillard enunciated her desire to see Union Offices in every suburb, so as to monitor "working families" and ensure their rights are always maintained, I wondered what other matters these socialist (and Labor party fund raisers) "monitors" would concern themselves with, just as Helen Jones- Kelly has taken it upon herself to investigate the private life of Joe the Plumber.....
The Messiah's “Civilian National Security Force.” clearing their heads of bad thought with hymn's to their new Master ?
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
French author, humanist, rationalist, & satirist (1694 - 1778)
....well she did didn't she? take it upon herself I mean.... or did a superior higher up in the "civilian army" / Democratic Party tap her on the shoulder and simply hand her a piece of paper with Joe's name on it and instructions to give him something else to think about.
If Helen Jones -Kelly acted alone and out of a sense of loyalty to Mr Obama she should be dismissed.
If Helen Jones -Kelly was instructed to do a number on Joe the Plumber she should tell us who ordered her to do it and then she should be dismissed.
Helen Jones-Kelly should also be thoroughly investigated to see if she has violated any state or federal laws regarding privacy issues and prosecuted till the cows come home.
Political Correctness and the cult of Multiculturalism have shut down debate and made the western world defenceless against those whose admitted objectives are to destroy the western world and Judeo / Christian civilization.
Could Mr Obama's planned “Civilian National Security Force.” be the new hands on enforcers of "correct thought"
and will Helen Jones-Kelly be revered or scorned for exposing the purpose of this new 'civilian army" so public so soon or was she simply doing what she was told... like all good servants of the Socialist / Humanist manifesto are want to do in order to show their loyalty to Messiah / Dear Leader.
A blog revealing the horrors of Islam,International Socialism,the misery these two evils are inflicting upon the free the world,and those it has already enslaved,along with various articles revealing the attacks from within upon the western Judeo Christian ethic by those we entrusted to preserve it. Videos and Pictures of many varied subjects from around the world, along with some jokes of mine and any funny ones you want to send me.
Pages
▼
Pages
▼
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Obama a one trick pony.
"......Based on Obama’s record, voting for change, solely for change’s sake, is an affront to commonsense and a victory for stupidity."
What else has Obama got?
Piers Akerman
News.com.au
Monday, November 03,
2008 at 11:19pm
BARACK Obama’s predicted victory in the US presidential election is more likely to usher in a bleaker future for the globe, not the bright new dawn his optimistic supporters are hoping for.
Obama, an inexperienced first-term senator, has not presented the world with a blueprint for the future, he has run his extraordinarily successful campaign on nothing more than the promise of change.
As we have seen in Australia over the past 12 months, change is not always for the better.
See previous Aussie News & Views post:
Obama’s promised change is part of what pollsters are claiming as the mainstay of his attraction - vision.
Unfortunately, his vision is no more than the word. His vision is one-dimensional. It is in reality nothing less than a mirror in which supporters can see anything they hope to see. It is limitless, constrained only by the imagination of those who feel the need to embrace change and vision.
Empirically, however, all the evidence shows Obama is more limited than limitless. He is a creature of the historically corrupt Chicago political machine, an organisation that could teach WA Inc and the ALP’s notorious NSW Right about political larceny.
He is an enthusiast for the cause of victimhood and attended and wholeheartedly supported a racist church leader for the past two decades until the media reluctantly exposed the hate-spewing sermons of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor of choice until the middle of this year.
Last weekend, when former US president Bill Clinton endorsed the man who defeated his wife Hillary in the long struggle for the Democratic Party’s nomination, it was worth remembering that Wright had preached in Obama’s church that he (Clinton) “Did us (black Americans) like he did Monica Lewinsky”. Obama didn’t object.
Clinton prided himself on his relations with black Americans and was called by many commentators an honourary black but that cut no ice with Wright, who also preached God damn America.
That would have suited the man credited with launching Obama’s political career, the unrepentant former urban terrorist Bill Ayers, and Ayers’ partner Bernadine Dohrn, who served time in prison for her role in the Weatherman domestic terror bombings of the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Obama has said his own limited political experience largely hinges on his work as a community organiser. That would be for the activist organisation ACORN, which has been cited numerous times across the US for falsifying information used to register voters.
On character grounds, Obama is fortunate in the extreme to have reached the dizzy heights of the US Senate, to have found himself as the Democratic Party’s candidate.
He needed Senator Clinton. Without a white woman contesting the party’s nomination, it seems unlikely a black man would have won the party’s vote.
Though Obama’s Republican opponent, war hero and former PoW and US Senator John McCain, has not raised race as an issue, the Democrats have used it to engender a sense of guilt in white Americans who harbour doubts about Obama’s capacity as the leader of the free world. Not to support Obama raises the question of whether that decision has a racist undertone.
Shelby Steele, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at California’s prestigious Stanford University, characterised the phenomenon as arising from the fact that whites, since the ‘60s, have been stigmatised as racist.
He said since acknowledging a history of racism, segregation and slavery, whites had lived under the pressure of having always to prove they’re not racist; they developed political correctness for the sole purpose of being able to talk without seeming to be racist.
White people, he said, are desperate to vote for a black man to prove the US is not a racist society. Some people who have had the opportunity to meet Obama during the campaign have told me they are concerned what a Democrat victory will mean for Australia.
They say in conversation he showed an extraordinary naivete about economics, one describing his views as Cuban circa 1960; his foreign policy outlook was very ‘70s Eurocentric; and it was also pointed out that in his foreign policy statement he made no reference to Australia’s role in future schemes.
Further, it was noted that the Democratic Party leans towards greater protectionism and is well behind the ALP in its thinking on globalisation and the trade implications of modern technology.
While a vote for Obama may bring about a temporary boost of confidence in the US and a bounce on Wall Street, there is nothing to suggest an Obama administration will be good news for the rest of the world in the longer term.
Based on Obama’s record, voting for change, solely for change’s sake, is an affront to commonsense and a victory for stupidity.
What else has Obama got?
Piers Akerman
News.com.au
Monday, November 03,
2008 at 11:19pm
BARACK Obama’s predicted victory in the US presidential election is more likely to usher in a bleaker future for the globe, not the bright new dawn his optimistic supporters are hoping for.
Obama, an inexperienced first-term senator, has not presented the world with a blueprint for the future, he has run his extraordinarily successful campaign on nothing more than the promise of change.
As we have seen in Australia over the past 12 months, change is not always for the better.
See previous Aussie News & Views post:
Americans BEWARE Australian internet to be CENSORED by Australian Labor Party
Obama’s promised change is part of what pollsters are claiming as the mainstay of his attraction - vision.
Unfortunately, his vision is no more than the word. His vision is one-dimensional. It is in reality nothing less than a mirror in which supporters can see anything they hope to see. It is limitless, constrained only by the imagination of those who feel the need to embrace change and vision.
Empirically, however, all the evidence shows Obama is more limited than limitless. He is a creature of the historically corrupt Chicago political machine, an organisation that could teach WA Inc and the ALP’s notorious NSW Right about political larceny.
He is an enthusiast for the cause of victimhood and attended and wholeheartedly supported a racist church leader for the past two decades until the media reluctantly exposed the hate-spewing sermons of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor of choice until the middle of this year.
Last weekend, when former US president Bill Clinton endorsed the man who defeated his wife Hillary in the long struggle for the Democratic Party’s nomination, it was worth remembering that Wright had preached in Obama’s church that he (Clinton) “Did us (black Americans) like he did Monica Lewinsky”. Obama didn’t object.
Clinton prided himself on his relations with black Americans and was called by many commentators an honourary black but that cut no ice with Wright, who also preached God damn America.
That would have suited the man credited with launching Obama’s political career, the unrepentant former urban terrorist Bill Ayers, and Ayers’ partner Bernadine Dohrn, who served time in prison for her role in the Weatherman domestic terror bombings of the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Obama has said his own limited political experience largely hinges on his work as a community organiser. That would be for the activist organisation ACORN, which has been cited numerous times across the US for falsifying information used to register voters.
On character grounds, Obama is fortunate in the extreme to have reached the dizzy heights of the US Senate, to have found himself as the Democratic Party’s candidate.
He needed Senator Clinton. Without a white woman contesting the party’s nomination, it seems unlikely a black man would have won the party’s vote.
Though Obama’s Republican opponent, war hero and former PoW and US Senator John McCain, has not raised race as an issue, the Democrats have used it to engender a sense of guilt in white Americans who harbour doubts about Obama’s capacity as the leader of the free world. Not to support Obama raises the question of whether that decision has a racist undertone.
Shelby Steele, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at California’s prestigious Stanford University, characterised the phenomenon as arising from the fact that whites, since the ‘60s, have been stigmatised as racist.
He said since acknowledging a history of racism, segregation and slavery, whites had lived under the pressure of having always to prove they’re not racist; they developed political correctness for the sole purpose of being able to talk without seeming to be racist.
White people, he said, are desperate to vote for a black man to prove the US is not a racist society. Some people who have had the opportunity to meet Obama during the campaign have told me they are concerned what a Democrat victory will mean for Australia.
They say in conversation he showed an extraordinary naivete about economics, one describing his views as Cuban circa 1960; his foreign policy outlook was very ‘70s Eurocentric; and it was also pointed out that in his foreign policy statement he made no reference to Australia’s role in future schemes.
Further, it was noted that the Democratic Party leans towards greater protectionism and is well behind the ALP in its thinking on globalisation and the trade implications of modern technology.
While a vote for Obama may bring about a temporary boost of confidence in the US and a bounce on Wall Street, there is nothing to suggest an Obama administration will be good news for the rest of the world in the longer term.
Based on Obama’s record, voting for change, solely for change’s sake, is an affront to commonsense and a victory for stupidity.