Saturday, November 01, 2008

Will November 4th mark the new era of "1984"?




A free thinking society can't be controlled or manipulated. Notice I said "free thinking". Have any of you ever heard of a free market capitalist ever talk about "economic justice" ? A person that believes in free market capitalism believes that a person's earning potential is tied to that person's willingness to pursue it. Doesn't that make sense? Obama supporters blindly and loyally follow his hollow word of "change". The mind numbed masses become highly offended when other people question Obama on anything that they believe is negative. They can't defend the issues on which Obama support. Their sole recourse is to attack the "MESSENGER" and to try and deflect the actual "MESSAGE". The Obama collective have called McCAIN ads against Obama "negative", yet they can't acknowledge that the ads are "factual". They attack people like Joe the plumber for making a statement based on Obama's policy, yet they ignore and try to discredit the statement by trying to discredit the "messenger". This why the Obama cult is so very dangerous. They aren't to be feared based on knowledge, education or analytical prowless. They are to be feared, because they represent a huge collective of manipulated, dumbed down, ignorant people that have the power to cancel other people's votes that are free thinkers. He who controls the masses as one controls the world.

Since Barack Obama has his own "presidential seal", shouldn't he have his own National Anthem?

12 Comments:

Blogger The Vegas Art Guy said...

If the campaign is any indication then the answer is yes. And to think they called Bush a Nazi for eight years. They ain't seen nuthin yet...

3:07 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"This why the Obama cult is so very dangerous. They aren't to be feared based on knowledge, education or analytical prowless. They are to be feared, because they represent a huge collective of manipulated, dumbed down, ignorant people that have the power to cancel other people's votes that are free thinkers."

Wow Tyrone, you sound really, really, really terrified! A large group of "voting" Americans are to be "feared" because of "manipulation" and being "dumb"??? You almost sound like the country is going to be taken over by a tyrant!

Well allow me to ease your mind a bit. Mind you, this is just my opinion. Perhaps you can pin your hopes on this idea.

In order for Barak Obama to win the presidency of the United States, he must receive an considerable amount (if not a majority) of the "White-working-class" vote. I continue to be, and have been very skeptical of the polling throughout this entire campaign. As Obama said once during the campaign, "and by the way, did I mention he's Black..." I am a firm believer in the so-called "Bradley Effect." Election day is a couple of days away, yet we must wait until then to see if the theory pans out.

Thus, in my opinion, you still have "hope" on your side. Hope in that the majority of working class White voters did indeed "lie" (as JMK does) to the pollsters, in that when they go into the voting booth, he or she makes the decision not to vote for a Black candidate.

Although you might hope that the Rev. Wright, Rezko, Khalidi, Marxism ect.. could be their focus. Much to late and completely unemployable. You have to discount that effect because the Republican base has already taken that crowd. Even the Pollsters have found that the disgruntled Hillary voters and Rev. Wright hating former Democrats openly inform them of their party and voting switch.

Furthermore, I really can't see a someone who thinks Obama is a socialist/terrorist/racist/Marxist/communist/anti-Semite/baby-killer/criminal, allowing the idea, let alone the words pass their lips that they would vote for Obama...especially to a POLLSTER!

That only leaves the "Bradley Effect" to defeat Obama. So there is hope that McCain can win solely based on the idea that "Whites" are not ready for a Black President. In all honesty, it's nothing new. Whites not voting for Black politicians because of their race has happened before, I wouldn't be surprised nor upset if it happened again.

7:22 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

the vegas art guy "If the campaign is any indication then the answer is yes. And to think they called Bush a Nazi for eight years. They ain't seen nuthin yet.."

You're right Vegas. Obama represents mostly everything that Nazis held dear. Adolph Hitler also rose to power on the backs of stupid Germans that feel for the propaganda that the Jews were responsible for Germany's economic striff. Funny how history has repeated itself. Obama could rise to power based on the propaganda that he is putting out blamming the current economic situation to McCain via Republicans. Nobody in the media has talked about Obama wanting to create a "civilian task force". Would they be the Obama SS storm troopers"? From wanting to give people other people's wealth, to controlling the media to promote his propaganda, to attacking individuals that oppose him. Obama is following very dangerously in the footsteps of a fullblown Nazi.

9:14 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

P allen "Wow Tyrone, you sound really, really, really terrified! A large group of "voting" Americans are to be "feared" because of "manipulation" and being "dumb"??? You almost sound like the country is going to be taken over by a tyrant!

If you were in the lookout tower of the S.S Titanic and you told the captain "iceberg dead ahead" and the captain didn't listen, how would you feel allen? Here's another scenario allen. If you were in a "Night of the living dead" movie and you were the only person not a zombie in a town full of them, would you be terrified allen?An ignorant person with the power to vote is like a child playing with a loaded handgun. It's very dangerous allen.

P ALlen "
In order for Barak Obama to win the presidency of the United States, he must receive an considerable amount (if not a majority) of the "White-working-class" vote. I continue to be, and have been very skeptical of the polling throughout this entire campaign. As Obama said once during the campaign, "and by the way, did I mention he's Black..." I am a firm believer in the so-called "Bradley Effect." Election day is a couple of days away, yet we must wait until then to see if the theory pans out."

Am I reading this right, You're "skeptical" allen? Hell I thought you would already have a few bottles of champagne already chilling in the frig ready for Tuesday night. I keep hearing stories here and there about the "Bradley Effect". I don't think that is going to be a factor in this election allen. Your missing and important equation not apart of the formula for the Bradley Effect to happen. Obama has a huge following among young white college age people. They aren't as focused on the issue of race as older voters that lived during a different time. The average Obama supporter is more then likely going to be in their twenties to early thirties. These are the post civil rights era voters. When they look at Obama, all they see is a snake oil salesman, I meant someone they think is cool. They see an American Idol" style candidate at best. So I seriously doubt the Bradley Effect will apply allen.


P Allen ". As Obama said once during the campaign, "and by the way, did I mention he's Black..." I am a firm believer in the so-called "Bradley Effect." Election day is a couple of days away, yet we must wait until then to see if the theory pans out."

By him kept repeating that passage to his supporters, he would have brought on the Bradley Effect on himself allen if it was too happen. Those young white voters I mentioned are actually many of the cross over Ron Paul voters. The Bradley Effect might have been a relevant claim twenty years ago, but it won't be an excuse if Obama loses this time around allen.

P Allen "Thus, in my opinion, you still have "hope" on your side. Hope in that the majority of working class White voters did indeed "lie" (as JMK does) to the pollsters, in that when they go into the voting booth, he or she makes the decision not to vote for a Black candidate."

The concept behind the Bradley Effect always puzzled me allen. Why would white voters openly support Obama then change their mind at the actual moment to vote. If they couldn't vote for Obama based on race, why would they support him prior to them voting? The concept seems flawed. Let's say I would never vote for a Hispanic for President, why would I openly support the Hispanic candidate if I couldn't follow through with my support? Also if the Bradley Effect was legitimate, how come Barack Obama won the Democrat Nomination over a white female then allen? As I said before, they're is flaws in the theory.

9:44 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

The Bradley Effect is not my theory. The term was coined by professional pollsters who were befuddled on how and why general election polling figures became so skewed. It's just that it's an idea that hasn't been...let's say "thoroughly" tested.

I truly hope that there has been an evolution of sort's reference race in America. If the Bradley Effect is unfounded, then, so be it.

Yet, I still believe that an individual's perception and the possibility of a "spiral of silence" can still play a role in American society today.

In all honesty, such idea's and effects can work in either direction. So, who knows what the outcome may be. We'll just have to wait and see.

10:37 PM  
Anonymous Chilerkle said...

I love this political cartoon it's so on point!
Too bad the liberal nerds of Family Guy wouldn't poke fun at the Affirmative Action Candidate!

This cartoon tops family guy in satire because it's so tragically true!

I almost wanna cry and gnash my teeth in concern for the welfare of America!

Obama could be a foreign plant for all we know.
The media is beyond biased they are totally corrupt and unreliable!

12:36 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

Alright, grow-ups clearly have a right to their view's of Barak Obama. But the attempt to scare and frighten innocent children with you views takes political attack's to a new low.

McCain supporter Shiley Nagel of Grosse Point, (a suburb of Detroit) openly denied Holloween treats to any child who stated that they or their parents were supporters of Barak Obama. She even went so far as to place a note on her door referring to supporters as "liars and tricksters."

Take note that in the video report, Nagel displays a McCain/Palin campaign pamphlet with "candy" attached. This is beyond "sick"!!

4:33 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

P Allen "The Bradley Effect is not my theory. The term was coined by professional pollsters who were befuddled on how and why general election polling figures became so skewed. It's just that it's an idea that hasn't been...let's say "thoroughly" tested."

I didn't mean to imply it was your theory allen, I heard about the "Bradley Effect" a decade ago. I still think it's nothing more then a theory though. Polling data can sometimes be wrong just for the sake that people change their minds on who they are going to vote for for a variety of reasons not necessarily race allen. If I changed my mind at the very last minute while in the voting booth and decide to vote for Barr, will the Bradly Effect have played a role allen?

P Allen "Yet, I still believe that an individual's perception and the possibility of a "spiral of silence" can still play a role in American society today."

The "spiral of silence"?!!lol You are pretty creative with the catch phrases allen. So what exactly is this "spiral of silence"?

P Allen "In all honesty, such idea's and effects can work in either direction. So, who knows what the outcome may be. We'll just have to wait and see."

I'm actually dreading Tuesday Night to be honest. I'll probably be a nervous wreck with the count down to 8pm. I hope that people will vote based on the issues and nothing else. Good luck in that happening though.

8:12 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

THANK YOU ALLEN FOR MAKING MY DAY!!LOL I like that lady!!! :-)lol

Actually that lady in Michigan has a point allen. Obama supporters are just upset because she won't "redistribute her candy wealth" to kids that support Obama lol lol lol. Besides Democrats have always said that Republicans don't like children right?lol What the kids or parents that support Obama should have done is do what Obama himself has done allen, LIE!!LOL They should have just lied and say they support McCAIN and Palin, and they would have gotten the candy!!Simple as that lol

8:17 PM  
Blogger JMK said...

"The concept behind the Bradley Effect always puzzled me allen. Why would white voters openly support Obama then change their mind at the actual moment to vote. If they couldn't vote for Obama based on race, why would they support him prior to them voting?" (Tyrone)
<
<
There's no such thing as "the Bradley Effect."

Tom Bradley ran a...to be charitable, lackluster campaign and didn't campaign effectively at all down the stretch as George Deukmejian gained ground with each passing day.

Polls have ALWAYS over-estimated Democratic support - in 2000 and 2004 Al Gore and John Kerry respectively held significant but shrinking leads (according to the polls) in the last week before the election....enough said.

Bradley's own poor campaign was blamed post-mortem on the non-existent "Bradley effect."

9:45 PM  
Blogger JMK said...

"...in my opinion, you still have "hope" on your side. Hope in that the majority of working class White voters did indeed "lie" (as JMK does) to the pollsters, in that when they go into the voting booth, he or she makes the decision not to vote for a Black candidate." (PAA)
<
<
No American is supposed to make known their ballot choice....that's the purpose behind America's "secret ballot."

I have been polled about a half dozen times over the last two months and am still officially among those "undecideds."

It is a core belief of mine that I am bound by my Americanist views never to disclose what Tom Jefferson and Ben Franklin required to be cast anonymously.

I vote entirely on ideological grounds.

Now, I HAVE voted for Al Sharpton in one Democratic Mayoral Primary in NYC and I did that because I perceived him (rightly so, in my view) to be the weakest of the Democratic candidates in that Primary.

I'm a registered Democrat but a very Conservative one. I'm, in fact, a "Zell Miller Democrat." I believe that was a sound strategy, at that time, given that the other more mainstream Democratic Mayoral candidates were as Left-wing, albeit more popular and palatable than Al Sharpton.

Thankfully, the eventual winner of that Primary (Ruth Messinger) was a poor candidate, but there's no question in my mind that Sharpton would've been an even more ineffective candidate than Messinger. And I voted for Giuliani despite the fact that he had twice "ZEROED OUT" NYC's Municipal Unions (cops. firefighters, teachers, etc.) while doling out significant raises to commissioners and Deputy Mayors. He was, without question, the best NYC Mayor, post-WW II, in my view.

Voting for strategy is part of the democratic tradition. Not making your vote public knowledge is also a cornersstone of democracy....and there's nothing even vaguely dishonest about either of those two things. YOU (you PAA) have no business knowing how I'll vote in any given election, and I really don't much care how or why you'll vote as you do).
<
<
I've said since May that with the Pelosi-Reid Congress still in control, the only thing that a McCain win might accomplish would be "sharing the blame for what appears to be an upcoming economic catastrophe."

Jimmy Carter was the last Liberal American President to govern with a Liberal House and Senate and they presided over the REAL "Worst economy since the Great depression."

Carter was one of only two post-WW II American Presidents to preside over four straight years of double digit Misery Indexes (the inflation rate added to the unemployment rate)....George Bush Sr. was the other, but Carter's reign was far, FAR worse.

Bush Sr. presided over four years that the MI averaged 10.5, it never topped 11 during Bush Sr's tenure.

The Carter years averaged 16.5, with a high of 20.8 (21) his final year (1980)!

Carter inanely believed that tax rates had to be upped on higher income earners and Capital Gains and his following the Keynesian redistributionist policies of LBJ, Nixon and Ford, saw the economy implode on his watch.

We've seen a return to those kinds of Keynesian policies since Januaray 2007...and the economy has taken a dive since that time (since Pelosi-Reid took Congress) and that's no coincidence.

Tyrone's right about the Obama-Pelosi-Reid policies only further damaging a fragile economy, BUT, nothing done over the next few years can't be undone.

We are currently in the 16th straight year of single digit Misery Indexes (the current year to date is 9.08 and rising (September's was 11.07).

I would expect a MI of about 11.5 to 12 in 2009....and that would make 2010 the Obama-Pelosi-Reid's "make or break" year.

If the MI went down (even slightly) in 2010, that would be a credit for them....if it increased (and with all tax rates across the board scheduled to rise in 2010, as the Bush "across the board tax cuts" expire) it is far more likely than not that (1) tax revenues from the income tax will almost certainly DECREASE, as higher income earners (the top 10% of income earners pay 70% of the income taxes) will simply defer more of their income and the deficit will soar as the EITC is expanded to deliver a "tax cut" to more Americans who paid no income tax - those welfare payments will be credited as "deficit spending" and they'll, along with other such policies, increase the national debt....and both the unemployment rate and the inflation rate would be expected to rise as such things happen.

In 2010 far more Democratic Senate seats will be up for re-election, should the MI increase in 2009 and get worse in 2010, the ONLY sensible thing the American electorate could do would be to give Obama a GOP majority in the House and Senate to work with.

Now THAT, could WORK out!

Afterall, Bill Clinton's first two years were wildly ineffective.

He eventually came to work much better with fellow Supply Sider, Newt Gingrich, especially AFTER the "Gingrich Congress" shut down the federal government in 1995 to force the massive spending cuts AND a Cap Gains rate cut that not only improved the economy, but resulted in all those budget surpluses of the late 1990s and 2000!

IF Barack Obama would surrender to such a Supply Side Congress and accept both massive federal budget cuts AND some critical tax cuts, the economy would almost certainly improve very quickly.

In 1998, in the wake of the Gingrich mandated federal budget cuts and that Cap Gains rate cut, we had the lowest MI (6.05) since 1956!

Can Keynesian policies work?

They didn't under Carter...they haven't under Pelso-Reid's direction, so there's no reason to believe they can.

Do Supply Side policies work!

Well, post Carter, Supply Side policies delivered over a quarter century (1981 - 2007) of unprecedented prosperity.

Recently, I took the two most recent 12 year periods where each Party held BOTH Houses of Congress and compared the Misery Indexes for each of those periods.

When the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress the MI averaged 11.7 compared to 7.6 when the GOP controlled both Houses of Congress.

10:34 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB asks;"The "spiral of silence"?!!lol You are pretty creative with the catch phrases allen. So what exactly is this "spiral of silence"?

Spiral of Silence

7:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home