Tag Archives: Time Magazine

Rebuttal of Kingston Reif’s and Greg Thielmann’s newest lies – about missile defense

North_Korean_missile_range

Kingston Reif – a pacifist propagandist working for the extremely-leftist “Council for a Livable World” – has shown his utter ignorance, as well as his extremely leftist beliefs and desires to disarm the US unilaterally, on quite a few occassions, and in December, I even took the time to completely refute his utter garbage calling for scrapping the nuclear triad. Since then, however, Reif has not stoppped writing his ignorant leftist garbage, and has recently (on June 4th) written a screed in the liberal Time magazine criticizing House Republicans for “all sorts of madness on nuclear weapons, missile defense, and related issues” – especially their proposal to create an East Coast missile defense site in the northeastern United States (e.g. New York state or Maine).

Reif claims that it would be “unnecessary, technically dubious, and cost-ineffective”.

Regarding the latter, he invokes CBO’s estimate that creating such a site would cost $3.6 bn over 5 years, and another by the National Academy of Sciences saying that their proposed “evolved GMD system” would cost $25.4 bn over 20 years.

But those numbers are not only small by themselves, they’re even small when put into perspective on a per year basis. Reif, to exaggerate the cost and scaremonger taxpayers, conveniently omits the “over X years” part of the price tag.

Divided over 5 years, $3.6 bn is $720 mn; that is 0.152% of the DOD’s base budget for FY2014 even under sequestration ($475 bn), or % if sequestration is cancelled (the DOD’s base budget would then be $526 bn).

Divided over 20 years, $25.4 bn is $1.27 bn, i.e. 0.276% of the DOD’s base budget for FY2014 even under sequestration.

So the cost would be tiny – a small fraction of one percent of the base defense budget even with sequestration accounted for. A fraction of 1% of the DOD’s budget is all that it would cost to build an EC missile defense site.

Reif claims it’s “unnecessary.” But the DOD and the Intelligence Community estimate Iran will have an ICBM in 2015/2016. That is just 2-3 years from now. So the US has just 2-3 years to prepare itself for a potential Iranian ICBM threat. Iran has made considerable progress  in long-range missile development, including being able to launch satellites into orbit (e.g. with the Safir space rocket).

Reif invokes the recent statement by VADM James Syring, director of the Missile Defense Agency, that money for East Coast missile defense would not be used in the next FY. Of course, Syring was just expressing the position of the leftist Obama Administration – he can’t speak against his own president. But former Missile Defense Agency Director Henry “Trey” Obering, in a recent article, has expressed strong support for an East Coast BMD site.

In his screed, Reif totally contradicts himself, claiming, alternately, that the current ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California are either sufficient for protecting the East Coast or deficient and unreliable. He alternately claims they already offer adequate protection… or don’t work at all. So which is it, Kingston?

As for thereal experts on the issue (other than Gen. Obering), current Strategic Command leader Gen. Bob Kehler says that:

“I am confident that we can defend against a limited attack from Iran, although we are not in the most optimum posture to do that today… it doesn’t provide total defense today.”

The Commander of the Northern Command (charged with defending the US homeland and Canada), Gen. Charles Jacoby, says that the current GBI system is “sub-optimum.” This is no surprise; the interceptors in Alaska and California would be at the extreme margin of their performance envelopes if tasked with shooting down an ICBM heading for the East Coast.

A “sub-optimum” defense posture is not good enough. Not even close.

Moreover, in March, just 3 months ago, Gen. Jacoby told the Senate:

“What a third site gives me, whether it’s on the East Coast or an alternate location, would be increased battle space; that means increased opportunity for me to engage threats from either Iran or North Korea.”

Also in March, Gen. Jacoby told the House:

“I would agree that a third site, wherever the decision is to build a third site, would give me better weapons access, increased GBI inventory and allow us the battle space to more optimize our defense against future threats from Iran and North Korea.”

Doesn’t this nation owe it to the Northern Command – the one charged with protecting the homeland?

The requirement for a third site to protect against Iranian ICBMs was also stated in the 2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review, which said:

“… defense of the US homeland will be augmented by Europe-based SM-3 Block IIB interceptors, which are planned to be able to provide an early-intercept capability against potential Iranian ICBMs.”

But the SM-3 Block 2B has been cancelled now, so an EC missile defense site is needed.

Reif also claims that the proposal is “technically dubious” because GBIs supposedly don’t work. Here, he’s wrong as well. GBIs have passed most of their tests, including a recent flight test, and more tests are planned for later months. The interceptors themselves work, as do their current, first generation kill vehicles (kinetic “warhead” counterparts). Critics love to seize on the two failed intercept tests from 2010, but in those tests, it was a new generation of kill vehicles that failed – not the older kill vehicles, and not the missiles themselves. The MDA, in any case, is working to solve the problem.

And even if and when a weapon fails, this teaches us something and doesn’t mean the weapon can never work. Quite the contrary. The Polaris submarine-launched ballistic missile – the first American nuclear-armed missile deployed on submarines – failed the vast majority of its tests: 17 out of 22. Yet, it passed 5, was ultimately proven to work (with President Kennedy watching), and was deployed on 41 USN ballistic missile subs – and later became the basis for the development of the Trident ballistic missile.

Reif bemoans the GBI’s low ability to distinguish real missiles and warheads from decoys. But the MDA actually had a program to solve that problem – called the Multiple Kill Vehicle, essentially a bus carrying dozens of small kill vehicles sufficient to kill all warheads and countermeasures – until April 2009, when President Obama killed the program and when General Obering had already retired. (General Obering, of course, points this out in his piece.)

So the problem of enabling GBIs to discriminate between genuine targets – like real missiles and warheads – and decoys can be solved quite easily, if the MKV program is simply revived.

Reif complains that there is “no guarantee” that this problem will ever be solved and the GBI system made highly effective. Actually, in life, there is no guarantee of anything. There is no guarantee that your car will always start (especially in winter), or that your bus, train, or flight won’t be delayed, or that even the best friends will not fail you, or that even the most reliable weapons will always work perfectly.

There is no perfect person, vehicle, weapon, plane, ship, or anything that humans make.

But if the development and improvement of ground-based interceptors is continued, and the MKV program revived, there’s a high likelihood that these interceptors will become highly effective.

Moreover, Reif and other missile defense opponents are contradicting themselves. On the one hand, they claim that US BMD systems can’t distinguish real warheads from decoys, but OTOH, they also claim that North Korea and Iran don’t know how to mate nuclear warheads to missiles.

But if they don’t know how, they also certainly don’t know how to make credible decoys (or mate them to missiles). Why? Because decoys, in order to deceive anyone, must EXACTLY match real warheads in size and flight patterns – they must look and fly exactly like the real thing. Any decoy not matching a real warhead EXACTLY in size, shape, and flight patterns will immediately be seen on radars as what it really is – a fake.

In order to make a fake of something that exactly matches that “something” in size, shape, and flight patterns, you must first be able to make the real thing. Otherwise, you don’t know how to mimic it exactly. It’s simple logic.

So simple logic alone utterly refutes the lies of missile defense opponents like Reif. It exposes their real motivation – ideological, implacable knee-jerk opposition to missile defense per se, which motivates them to make any false claims, even contradictory ones.

You can’t have it both ways, Kingston. Either North Korea and Iran  can make credible decoys and mate them with missiles – in which case they can do the same with real warheads – or they can’t.

In short, there is a clear need for the East Coast missile defense site; it would be cheap; and if the GBI system continues to be developed and improved, and if the MKV program is revived, the system can become very effective.

Like Reif, ACA’s Greg Thielmann falsely claims that an East Coast missile defense site – and deploying the now-cancelled SM-3 Block 2B missile also intended against ICBM – would be too expensive and that the Iranian ballistic missile threat hasn’t even even begun to emerge. He even claims it’s doubtful that Iran will have an ICBM by the end of this decade.

But that threat has already begun to emerge: the US intel community and the DOD estimate Iran will have an ICBM by 2015/2016, and it could simply buy one from North Korea or China. It has already (allegedly) bought Musudan-ri MRBMs (with a 4,000 km range) from North Korea and has developed its own solid-fuel Sejjil and Ashoura MRBMs with a range of 2,500 kms. Moreover, it has also launched a satellite into space, thus making a huge step towards constructing an ICBM and demonstrating the capability to mate nuclear payloads with missiles.

Again, this truth must be repeated: the technology used to install satellites on missiles is THE SAME as that used to mate warheads to missiles. Fact.

Moreover, the point of defense, including missile defense, is to stay AHEAD of the threat, not to barely keep up with it. Yet, the US intel community and the DOD project Iran to have an ICBM by 2015/2016, so the US now has only 2-3 years to build an East Coast missile defense site.

But Thielmann goes even further, falsely claiming that North Korea doesn’t have ICBMs either and that its successful December 2012 launch of a satellite on an Unha-3 (Taepodong-2) rocket, i.e. on an ICBM. Again, the technology used to marry satellites and warheads to missiles is the same.

Moreover, after that successful launch, the South Koreans retrieved the upper stages and the delivery bus of the rocket from water; TheDailyBeast investigative journalist Eli Lake was the first to report this fact. The retrieved pieces of the missile demonstrated that North Korea DOES have the ability to marry payloads to missiles. CDN’s Defense Issues Weekly duly reported the story.

North Korea’s TD-2 ICBM, capable of reaching the CONUS, was the basis for the successful space rocket. On top of that, North Korea also has the road-mobile KN-08 ICBM, whose existence and genuity were recognized by the DOD (spoken for by Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Adm. Sandy Winnefeld) in March.

Thielmann also wrongly touts the utterly false numbers given for Russia’s and China’s nuclear arsenals by Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris (for Russia, 466 ICBMs and SLBMs and less than 1,500 deployed warheads; for China, only 300 warheads and 50-75 ICBMs and SLBMs). This is supposed to prove that even the Russian and Chinese nuclear threat isn’t big; like other advocates of America’s disarmament, he dramatically understates the real size of China’s nuclear arsenal.

But both countries have far more weapons than that. Russia has 434 ICBMs and 224 SLBMs (16 for each of its 14 ballistic missile subs), a total of 658 intercontinental missiles, and 1,550, not 1,466, deployed strategic warheads – right at New START limits. (It has significantly built its arsenal up since New START’s ratification, while the US has had to cut its own.)

China has at least 86 ICBMs, plus at least 60 SLBMs on its five Jin class submarines (which, contrary to Thielmann’s blatant lies, ARE operational, and China has 5 of these, not merely 2), plus another 12 on its Xia class sub. And China’s real nuclear arsenal numbers at least 1,600-1,800, not 300-400, warheads.

Thielmann also falsely claims that Russia and China have many common interests that make their attacks on the US unlikely. This is also a blatant lie.

The US and China share no interests whatsoever; their national interests are diametrically opposed. The US wants to safeguard freedom of navigation at sea and in the air, freedom of trade and travel around the world, and to preserve its own and its Pacific’ allies security, as well as the international rules-based order. China wants to replace the US as the world’s top power, turn the Western Pacific into an internal Chinese lake, seize the Okinawa, the Senkakus, the Spratlys, Taiwan, and goodness knows what else, and push the US out of Asia completely.

China has behaved in a very hostile manner towards the US, whether by harassing unarmed American ships, stalking American carriers, blinding American satellites with lasers, threatening war with the US, or launching massive cyberattacks on US networks. The same is true of Russia, whose President Vladimir Putin openly vents his hatred of the US at every opportunity, while conducting an arms race against America, bullying US diplomats, launching his own cyberattacks on America, and supplying America’s enemies around the world (including Iran) with weapons and nuclear fuel.

Russia and the US share very few, if any, interests.

Lastly, Thielmann falsely claims that missile defense is impeding new arms control agreements and “additional” cuts in Russia’s arsenal. This is totally false. Since the late 2000s, Russia has not been cutting anything; under New START, it has significantly increased its nuclear arsenal.

Moreover, both Russia and China know that America’s current and planned missile defense systems are of limited scope and capability – capable enough against Iran and North Korea, but not against Russia’s and China’s much more advanced missiles, let alone the huge arsenals that Moscow and Beijing have. The idea that US missile defense systems pose any threat whatsoever to Russia’s or China’s nuclear arsenals is utterly ridiculous – like everything that Thielmann and his Arms Control Association colleagues write.

Thielmann’s ACA program is ridiculously called the “Realistic Threat Assessment Project”; in fact, it’s a Threat Dramatic Understatement Project and should be called that way.

Thus, Kingston Reif’s and Greg Thielmann’s claims have once again been exposed for what they really are – blatant lies.

Time: Pro-Choice Activists Losing Abortion Fight

TIME Magazine’s newest cover story laments the fact that the tide is turning away from the pro-choice camp, and America is becoming more pro-life. The cover caption reads:

“40-years ago, abortion rights activists won an epic victory with Roe v. Wade. They’ve been losing ever since.”

Pro-life laws now give women more information on abortion, as well as other alternatives in an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy.

The article also highlights the fact that early feminists, like Susan B. Anthony, were in fact pro-life.

Time Person of the Year – and the winner is….

Barack Obama, of course. That could be considered a minor improvement over romanticizing the stinking, rude, and destructive masses otherwise known as the Occupy Protesters last year. And in minor defense of the Time folks, at least this administration’s “Slut-in-Chief”, Sandra Fluke, didn’t make the short list.

TRF_Mr_Hyde (CC)

TRF_Mr_Hyde (CC)


Of course there were arguably better choices on the table at the end – most notably, Malala Yousafzai, the young Pakistani girl that was shot in the head by the Taliban for the terrible crime of suggesting that Muslim women should enjoy the benefits of education. At least 87% of those that bothered to chime in on the voting thought she deserved the recognition. I’d say that’s an indication that there is some degree of hope for humanity in the U.S., but I just have to watch a tag search on Twitter for #p2 for five minutes to realize the truth – this country is populated with liberal sheeple that simply can’t imagine living a life where they are actually responsible for anything.

Why this particular “honor” has remained even remotely close to relevant for all these years speaks volumes about the nature of our populace as well. Now that Barack Obama has gotten the nod twice for this, I think it’s fair to say that he is free game for being compared with previous recipients. So, if the Obama zombies want to celebrate this tiny accomplishment with some sort of twisted orgy, I say have at it! It’s not my problem if you think its a “good” thing to be directly compared with say Adolf Hitler – the Person of the Year in 1938.

Sandra Fluke: Too much for even the earth to bear

We are just days away from finding out who the 2012 TIME Person of the Year will be. You may be surprised to know that one of the 2012 “candidates” —  if chosen as Person of the Year — is literally “too much for even the earth to bear.”

The Person of The Year is considered the person who “most influenced the news this year for better or worse.”

Sandra Fluke, the now-infamous disgruntled Georgetown student who is outraged that the Catholic University “does not provide enough access to birth control pills for female students”, is a candidate for the title this year. Ms. Fluke is described by TIME Magazine as “the target of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh’s vicious rants.” The magazine goes on to say, “Conservatives painted Fluke as the epitome of liberal entitlement; to liberals, she was a victim of the right’s war on women.”

Victim? A more accurate description is that she is “the political prop” for “The War On Women’s Brains”.

You may be surprised that the real description of Sandra Fluke was written sometime between the 10th and 6th centuries B.C., when Agur, son of Jakeh wrote Proverbs 30.

“Three things are too much for even the earth to bear,
yes, four things shake its foundations—
when the janitor becomes the boss,
when a fool gets rich,
when a whore is voted “woman of the year,”
when a “girlfriend” replaces a faithful wife.”

Proverbs 30:20-23 (The Message)

 

 

When discussing her nomination as TIME Person of The Year, Ms. Fluke stated:

“I would do this again, because these issues are that important to me.”

This is not surprising:

 “A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions.”  Proverbs 18:2

On December 14, we will know who this years most influential person is. Sandra Fluke most definitely influenced the news this year- for worse! Will the American people vote for her just as they did Barack Obama? If  Sandra Fluke is indeed voted the 2012 Person of The Year, she is sure to receive another phone call from Jamie Foxx’s “lord and savior” Barack Obama, congratulating her!

Kristen Walker Hatten said it quite eloquently:

“Sandra Fluke totally deserves to be TIME Magazine‘s Person of the Year!”

Sandra Fluke truly represents what America has become: a nation of blind, conceited, wicked fools who are making no attempt to turn from evil.  Sadly, “Sandra Fluke embodies the times’!

“Sin whispers to the wicked, deep within their hearts.
They have no fear of God at all.
In their blind conceit,
they cannot see how wicked they really are.
Everything they say is crooked and deceitful.
They refuse to act wisely or do good.
They lie awake at night, hatching sinful plots.
Their actions are never good.
They make no attempt to turn from evil.”
Psalm 36:1-4

Media Deception and Brainwashing Techniques Working Well

I ran across an article by Ben Kinchlow in a World Net Daily “Commentary” column  a few days ago, and the title caught my attention. The “Exclusive” line hit a nerve with me. The quote in that line, “Founders’ intent has been subverted by new doctrine” must be the largest understatement in the history of this nation. But he hits the nail on the head, directly and powerfully. This article by Kinchlow is absolutely fabulous and right on the money. He has broken our nation’s problems down to a level that anyone with any bit of comprehension should be able to see and understand. The media is one great big propaganda scheme orchestrated to control everything we think, and do.

The media tells us how we “deserve” anything and everything we desire, and that whatever we want should be provided for us by someone else. Unfortunately it is working all too well. These people are trampling on the very fabric of our nation and pulling the rug of freedom right out from underneath us while millions sit around and watch the latest rage in “I Got’s Some Talent” nonsense.
Kinchlow quite aptly describes the treatment and even the “labeling” of conservative elements in society today by the media, and the politicians they pay to control us with laws and regulations. Isn’t profiling and labeling wrong according to these very media brainiacs? Everything the founders stood for is ridiculed at the very least. Most of the values of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and the others are totally derided or ignored by the media and the politicians. Anyone espousing anything decent, honest, traditional, or earned is ridiculed and intimidated into silence by bullies and tyrants. And don’t you dare bring any mention or glimpse of anything remotely Christian.

Time Magazine comes out and says Catholic bishops should be put in prison for expressing their outrage at the latest example of dictatorial bullying in the Sebelius rule about abortion and religious facilities (a part of Obamacare no one mentioned in the highlight reels of the campaign). That is some nice “freedom of speech” stance by that veritable Communist rag. “Thank You 3rd Rail” for the staunch defense of freedom of speech for all. Now, back to “I Got’s Some Talent”.

And while America is focused on the latest “talent” show serial, the politicians are flowing with this politically correct nonsense and passing laws and regulations, including involving our very use of language (“Hate Crimes” legislation comes to mind). More “feel good”, “let’s stop bullies” legislation, yeah!!! But it doesn’t stop the bullies, it only encourages them. The bullies are the ones deciding what is bullying and what is “freedom of speech”.

When you see there the money is and where it goes in KInchlow’s article you begin to find a pattern. The unions, and Wall Street / “K” Street tycoons make and spend their money in the same places. Look at the money spent by politicians and their backers to buy media time, some of it even acknowledged as political ads. Go research some more and broaden your horizons. This is one big circle of financial deals that doesn’t include us “commoners”. This benefits the REAL 1%’ers, and it really isn’t that hard to see if you look.

Take a real close look at the Republican candidate debates. The “moderators” can’t find anything more important than who is going to pay for condoms for whom? The candidates all wring their hands and say we have to be “compassionate”, and “we need to be inclusive”, yada yada yada. We are being played by a very elaborate system of bait and switch, and we are being played by professionals. This is what they do, con good hearted people into doing what is desired by the baiters. It is a mob mentality of “attack the one who doesn’t conform”. Isolate, Denigrate, Destroy. Make an example of one to keep millions in line.

Your freedoms are being spirited away right under your noses. Anyone who stands up and speaks out against this activity is pounced on by the wolves in an instant. Look at the treatment given “Joe the Plumber”, Sarah Palin, Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and countless others who have had the audacity to stand in defiance of the media and their left-wing politicians (both parties included here).

And notice how few of the “staunch conservatives” in the Senate stand with Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn when it comes time to start giving some semblance of control back to the citizens. The House of Representatives is even worse. Leadership of both parties in both houses of Congress is corrupt and playing us every day by cheap talk and actions opposite of what they promised us to get elected.
Once again the Republican Party trots out a bunch of current or former politicians, the same lame ones who have had a hand in ruining our nation, and tells us we better “pick one of them or our nation is lost”. “Anyone but Obama, as long as it is one of these guys”. Go back as far as Gerald Ford and see if I am right (guess who didn’t want Ronald Reagan). And then all the “conservative” talking heads come on and tear anyone who does not fit their agenda to pieces, i.e., Herman Cain. “Conservatives need not apply” is the message from those running the Republican Party and its propaganda arm in the media. Of course, the Democrat Party and their large propaganda subsidies are more than happy to assist in the character assassination of anyone remotely conservative in any value. Oh, by the way, “truth need not apply” either.

Each candidate is the “only one” that can solve our nation’s woes and “if we don’t vote for him we are doomed” We the People are also told, by the same media people mentioned earlier, that Republicans better nominate Mitt Romney, not so affectionately known here as Mitty the Poo, or “all is lost”. What a line of crap; but out trots John McCain to endorse Mitty. “He lost to me last time so it is his turn for the limelight”. “Mitty is my ‘Jimmy Carter’ moment”. “Thanks, Mitty”. “He will lose worse than I did and I will be off the hook as the worst candidate ever”.

Now, back to “I Got’s SomeTalent”. In the meanwhile politicians are busy tightening controls on internet information. We saw what they did to the TV broadcasts a few months back. They haven’t quite managed to totally control the internet yet but they are very close, watch for March 8th. Those intent on taking total control of everything in America are dependant that citizens continue to be enamored with the latest cutsey talent show while they destroy your very way of life.

Are you aware of how society used to be in Cuba, pre-Castro? Not the way it is portrayed in the media, but the REAL society of Cuba. There were rich, there were poor, and there was the middle class. After Che Guevara and Fidel Castro were finished there were only very rich and very poor. The ultra wealthy paid Castro for protection, or left the island. Those without the assets to pick up and move to America had everything they owned taken by the government. Homeowners were pushed out of their homes and business owners were pushed out of their businesses by bureaucrats. Those who worked to earn the wages for a decent income were forced to become slaves because the “benevolent rulers” decided that poverty was a good lifestyle, it was equal for everyone. Of course, that “everyone” didn’t include the Castro brothers and their friends.

Ladies and Gentlemen of America, you are being played for suckers by people with evil intent. Once you have frittered all of your rights away you will be cannon fodder for tyrants. These tyrants are in both political parties. When “I Got’s Talent” is no longer needed to distract you it will go away and you will be left with a situation you really don’t want. But by then it will be too late to do anything about it, the barn door will have been shut, the trap door will have come down.

We don’t have to fall for this and lose the republic our founding fathers forged with their courage and their blood. There is time, there are solutions but it is up to We the People to implement those solutions. I have some thoughts, Next!!!!!

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor his work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell
Claremore, Oklahoma
March 6, 2012

Just what the heck is Mitt Romney's strategy

His face is on all the big magazine covers, but he won’t do profile interviews, went negative against the current GOP field leader and won’t accept a face-to-face debate with the one man between him and the White House. What is Mitt Romney’s campaign strategy?

This weekend, Mitt’s mug will grace the coveres of  Time, The New York Times Magazine and Parade. Mitt only did a lengthy, sit-down interview with one – Parade.

Time’s Joe Klein complained about Mitt’s actions saying that, “It’s an idiotic strategy, because usually what politicians do is to do big profile-y sort of interviews at the front end of a campaign and then close off access at the end.”

While some surmise that Romney’s handlers bypassed Time to give interviews to Parade so that Romney could handle softball questions on his personal character and family values, it may also paint him as weak, timid or afraid of the hard news media.

The Romney campaign took another strange tack in recent weeks – they went negative on someone other than Obama. In a Fox News interview with Bret Baier last Thursday, Mitt shaped every comment to paint Newt Gingrich as a lifetime politician and a flip-flopper in the hopes of deflecting the criticism he is receiving from voters for having changed stances on global warming, cap-and-trade, right-to-life and stimulus spending.

To continue the list of confounding moves, Mitt Romney refused a face-to-face debate with Newt Gingrich. Granted, Newt is a skillful debater and would likely outshine the former governor. The refusal turns that assumption into a foregone conclusion – Mitt can’t beat Newt head-to-head. As a MarkAmerica.com post said:

If the former Massachusetts Governor had confidence in his message, this sort of opportunity would be just the sort of event he could use, not only to knock off Newt as the front-runner, but also to demonstrate his ability to go head-to-head with one of the more agile minds in politics.

The Romney campaign is unleashing another, newer, shinier strategy. Yesterday, the campaign announced the “earn it” campaign. Romney has been going door-to-door in New Hampshire ahead of the January 10th primary. His strategy includes a month of “super Saturdays” where, according to his website, “volunteers will mobilize in New Hampshire to make calls, knock doors and connect with voters. Our team is energized and excited to act on its support for Mitt.” He has no such effort going in Iowa as if he has already conceded that to Newt Gingrich.

Mitt’s strategy is all over the place – big news, but not hard interviews. He will only do the game show style debates. Now grass roots, but in only one state. The question is begged – what the heck is Mitt Romney’s strategy?

 

The Whitehouse Carnival Barker

Jay Carny White House Spokesman

Many of us have ran into a ‘Carnival Barker’ at one time or the other in our lives, even if we weren’t familiar with the term.  The Carnival Barker is the loud mouthed person outside the Circus tent or Carnival gates  trying to get you  to spend your money by shouting things that may peak your curiosity. They shout things like come in and see the bearded lady, the worlds smallest horse, the two-headed gorilla etc.  If they are an effective Carnival Barker, they will convince you that if you pay to enter the show you will see things that you previously thought were nothing more than props used in the making of horror films and other assorted man made fiction. And the fact remains that very often that is just what you will see there, man-made fiction, with a quirk of nature thrown in once in awhile to keep you believing in the myths being promoted in the carnival atmosphere. The Carnival Barker must change your perception of what is real and what is not, in order to get you to buy into the mystic carnival sideshows shouted attractions.

Back in the days before TV and the Internet, people relied heavily on the word of mouth to promote their agenda and/or sales pitch. Where some people would believe in such a thing as the half man – half horse cirus attraction, and then entice others to pay to see it by telling them how real it is, after a wider group of people observe the promoted freak of nature and determine that is is in fact, nothing more man made fiction, word travels around, and thus creates the demand for a new carnival/circus attraction that the more naive folks that will pay more money to see the latest attraction. Thus the value of the Carnival Barker in the old days before the Internet let people research the facts at home with lightning speed. Word spreads fast and the truth is more readily available for the public today, thus the decline of the Carnival Barker’s value and importance in persuading the public to pay good money to see fake phenomena.

Meet the new age Carnival Barker of modern day politics pictured above , Mr. Jay Carney, the current White House spokesman.  While he doesn’t wear the outrageous costumes of the Carnival Barkers of yester-year, make no mistake about it, he is in costume none the less.  The fact is, Mr. Carney is  made up in appearance to look like some sort of academic brain child, yet is being exposed to be just like most phony ex-Time magazine propaganda pimps responsible for the degrading of the once proud magazine. Note the glasses trying for the intelligent look, while hiding the beady, untrustworthy eyes. Notice the missing lips that this Carnival Barker often purses when acting like he is actually pondering a truthful, honest answer to the softball questions lobbed at him from the mainly Liberal propagandist White House press corp. Mute the next White House press conference the next time you see him on TV, and just observe Mr. Carney and you will get a totally different opinion of him. He actually will appear to be making an honest attempt at informing the tax paying citizens of America just what the current administration is up to and the reasons behind their actions …. until you turn the sound back on. Then it is all downhill from there for any informed citizen listening to the White House Carnival Barker, as he dodges any attempt at serious questions and/or explanations about why Barack Obama is doing this or that today. Just like the Carnival Barkers of decades ago, Mr. Carney is trying to sell the American people a bunch of bunk, while trying to change their perception of said bunk.  Lets take a look at some of today’s top questions about American citizen’s concerns and just what answers we have gotten from the White House Carnival Barker extraordinaire.

From FoxNews here, we see that the Carnival Barker will not tolerate anyone questioning Obama’s openness or lack thereof:

The “transparency” in the Obama administration means sometimes a question  can’t even get asked.

The discovery came today at the daily White  House news briefing with press secretary Jay Carney, who responded to a  request to be allowed to ask about the president’s positions: “I’m not going to  take your questions.”

Ironically, Les Kinsolving, WND’s correspondent at the White House and the  No. 2 reporter on the White House beat, had wanted to ask about Obama’s  openness.

While the White House Carnival Barker preaches about the current administration’s honesty and openness constantly, if you dare question blatant episodes that show lack of the same, you will be told that the Carnival Barker will not take any of your questions,  that is if you are among the lucky ones and do not get banned all together from the White House press corps for exposing the Carnival Barker’s lies and myths being told through his marching orders from the ringmaster himself, Mr. Barack Obama.

This is exactly like in the old movies, where they show the loudmouth guy being thrown out of the carnival by the strong man because he is calling the Carnival Barker a liar and a fake. Carnival Barkers have to be notoriously thick-skinned due to the fact that they rely on falsehoods and perception management to promote their bunk. Mr. Carney has shown himself to be fairly thin-skinned in his statement above, and therefor he must be considered a lightweight among the history of successful con-men Carnival Barkers. I do not look for Mr. Carney to last long as Obama’s Carnival Barker due to his misinformation and propaganda being proven to be nothing more than a bunch of bunk on a constant basis. Too much exposure to the real facts that dispel the myths being perpetuated by the Carnival Barker will always lead to the Carnival Barker being relegated to cleaning out the Circus horse stalls in the end, or in this case maybe relegate Mr. Carney back to writing for the now leftist propaganda rag , the bankrupt Time Magazine. Both jobs require the shoveling of massive amounts of manure, so the relevance between the two is quite ironic. Anyone with the least bit of common sense can see that the latest White House Carnival Barker, Mr. Jay Carney is as phony as a three-dollar bill in what he is trying to sell the American public.

The recent killing of the Muslim Terrorist Osama Bin Laden has the White House Carnival Barker caught in a  firestorm of misinformation and outright propaganda promotion. His explanation to the controversy about the White House’s dysfunctional messages about what really happened  during the killing of Bin Laden was that it is all simply due to the fog of war. What he failed to admit is that, as the White House Carnival Barker, Mr. Carney is the man operating the fog machine behind all the misinformation today. If you ask too real of a question about our White House today, the Carnival Barker will shut you out of the conversation. He will not tolerate anyone exposing the misinformation behind his message of the day, period.

Look at the demand for real proof of Bin Laden’s death being asked for today, in the form of releasing the pictures of Bin Laden after he was shot in the head. The Carnival Barker uses the excuse that the pictures are gruesome and that there are “sensitivities” here in terms of the appropriateness of releasing the photographs.  We see movies every single day labeled with extreme violence and bloodshed, and we make the decision on whether we want to view them or not. The same thing would apply to the pictures of Bin laden with half his head blown off. We can make our own decisions on whether to look at them or not, yet the Carnival Barker wants to change that perception to be that we need government approval to view them.  This is in line with trying to sell the American people the bunk and propaganda that we are not smart enough to make out own decisions in life, yet  Obama the Ringmaster and his Carnival Barker somehow are. I  hear you barking Mr. Carney, and I for one chose to walk right on by, and refuse to buy into your carnival act. The same goes for the rest of the “Carnival Barkers” in the pathetic so-called mainstream media. I,m simply not buying the fiction those clowns are selling today. America deserves better than this.