The days top political news
The Federal Reserve boosted lending to commercial banks and investment firms over the past week.
The action indicates a severe credit crisis still squeezing the financial system.
The Fed says commercial banks averaged $93.6 billion in daily borrowing for the week ending Wednesday. That was up from an average of $91.6 billion for the week ending Nov. 19.
The report also said investment firms borrowed an average of $52.4 billion from the Fed's emergency loan program over the week ending Wednesday, up from an average of $50.2 billion the previous week.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081128/D94O722O1.html
NY Times slanders Czech President
Uses old Communist intel document in the smear
The NY Times assault a result of the Czech present’s skepticism regarding theories of global warming.
What else is new? The Times smears all who disagree with the paper’s extremism
Obama sees his administration as having already begun while trying to hide that very fact
In its early days, the Obama clan tries desperately to convince Americans he is not the radical extremist he played during his campaign.
Radicals who gave him his victory may not embrace the idea
Radicals are seldom rational politicians and make very poor governments.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122773612620961005.html
Opinion:
It’s not only the extremism of Obama himself we have to fear, it’s that of those who put him where he is and who call the shots
Nothing underscores the real threat of an Obama presidency as much as the forces that put him on the throne.
Obama is a naïve and unprepared puppet of a darker conspiracy – a conspiracy against normal America and one whose ultimate goal and purpose is undermining the very values that have made this country great.
Don’t expect any regard for such values as honor, duty or country from any of the Obama brigades – they have no remote inclination for harboring patriotic thoughts or intents. They were aided in their electoral success by the usual suspects, including the brain dead and the brain empty minions among the young and among those who populate the nation’s west coast in huge volumes.
Most of all, the groups that backed Obama are to be feared. It is crucial we identify them, understand them, then find ways to combat them effectively.
One advantage the extreme left, anti American clique has is Georgia Soros, an immigrant who neither owes honest allegiance to this country or has any interest in such an entanglement.
He is a manipulator who uses huge sums of money he has taken from society to undercut and betray the very freedoms that allows someone of his ilk survive.
Normal America needs to find its own banker. At present, there is not. Strange since the system and values that allowed Soros to rip off his billions is one that needs serious protection from him and his conspiracies – now more than ever.
What follows in today’s collection of blogs, articles, and columns, is an examination – by no means complete – of the tentacles of power manipulated by Soros in his effort to pull down and destroy American society and culture.
I suggest everyone read these articles carefully, then pass them along to others. We are met at Armageddon, and the enemy is clear.
Buddy
The days top blogs
1.
George Soros: The Man, The Mind And The Money Behind MoveOn
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
The Left: The smear ad published against Gen. Petraeus has drawn attention to its sponsor, MoveOn.org. But the fingerprints of the group's chief financial backer, George Soros, were all over it. Who is this man and what is he up to?
To read Soros' own spun story, he's a Jewish survivor of Nazi-occupied Hungary who pulled himself up by his bootstraps, studied economics in England, became a U.S. citizen in 1961 and made a multibillion-dollar fortune as a financier who pioneered hedge funds.
Over the years, Soros has written books giving his philosophical take on global affairs and acquired a reputation as something of a "stateless statesman." He calls himself a philanthropist and has given away $5 billion of his now $8.5 billion fortune through his principal vehicle, the Open Society Institute. The institute, in turn, has passed cash on to far more radical groups, such as MoveOn.org.
But Soros is no hands-off donor. According to the Open Society Institute's Web site: "Despite the breadth of his endeavors, Soros is personally involved in planning and implementing many of the foundation network's projects."
Soros says he gives away about $400 million annually.
It's an admirable picture, but "philanthropy" may be the wrong word. Unlike, say, Bill Gates, who really does put the bulk of his charity into helping the world's poor through medical services, Soros tends to fund pressure groups and foundations he misleadingly characterizes as promoting "civil society" and "democracy."
The image gives him moral cover to manipulate democracies whose voter verdicts he opposes.
Tearing Down America
The first groups Soros supported back in the 1980s did play a role in undercutting the rickety communist regimes of Eastern Europe. But his motives seemed less than idealistic. All Soros groups tend to tear down tyrannies rather than build up democracies.
And since 2003, tearing down what he views as the "fascist" tyranny of the United States, as he has put it, is "the central focus of my life."
Through networks of nongovernmental organizations, Soros intends to ruin the presidency of George W. Bush "by any legal means necessary" and knock America off its global pedestal. "His view of America is so negative," says Sen. Joe Lieberman, who, like Gen. David Petraeus, has been a target of Soros' electoral "philanthropy." "The places he's put his money are . . . so destructive that it unsettles me." Soros' aim seems to be to make the U.S. just another client state easily controlled by the United Nations and other one-world groups where he has lots of friends.
Best known among these groups is MoveOn.org, a previously small fringe-left group to which Soros has given $5 million since 2004. Bulked up by cash, the group now uses professional public relations tactics to undercut the Iraq War effort, with its latest a full-page New York Times ad that branded Gen. Petraeus "General Betray Us."
It ran Sept. 10 in the New York Times, the same day Petraeus delivered his progress report on the surge in Iraq.
MoveOn.org previously put out ads depicting Bush as a Nazi, something that certainly echoes Soros' sentiment.
"We have to go through a certain de-Nazification process," he told this year's Davos conference in Switzerland.
Moving On To The Far Left
MoveOn.org was also pivotal in getting Howard Dean elected chairman of the Democratic Party in a bid to push the party to the far left.
More on this story at:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275181103776079
2.
A Party Bought And Paid For
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Election 2008: MoveOn.org once crowed that it had bought and owned the Democratic Party. With the Senate now blasting its tactics, that's an open question. But not, apparently, for Democrats running for president.
The Senate voted 72-25 on Wednesday to stand up for the integrity of America's leading military field commander, Gen. David Petraeus.
Everyone knew what it was really about: MoveOn's big-bucks ad in the New York Times that outrageously attacked Petraeus even before he gave his report to Congress on the Iraq War's progress.
MoveOn.org's Sept. 10 full-page ad childishly played on the field commander's name as "General Betray Us," in a pre-emptive bid to obscure any potentially positive news about the war getting out.
The Senate's nonbinding resolution was simple enough: It expressed "full support" for the general returning from the field of battle and "strongly" condemned "personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces." Given that they voted 81-0 to confirm him less than a year earlier, it was a reasonable gesture.
MoveOn's ad disgusted average Americans across the country. Even the Democrat-dominated Senate couldn't halt a vote to condemn it. A quarter of the Senate, however, did refuse to condemn the attacks, and curiously, that included all Senate Democrats who seek to become the military's next commander in chief.
Sens. Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd voted against the symbolic measure. Sens. Joe Biden and Barack Obama had other things to do that day and abstained from voting.
That's peculiar. Democrats like Clinton are perfectly capable of voting against radical leftists when their stunts step over the line.
Last summer, for example, Dodd sponsored a bill condemning Venezuela's leftist president, Hugo Chavez, for his shutdown of TV station RCTV as millions of angry Venezuelans protested in Caracas. Clinton, Obama and Biden signed on as co-sponsors.
If they hadn't, they might have looked as though they were in the dictator's pocket.
That's why these same Democrats' failure to condemn cheap-shot ads against Petraeus is worth a closer look.
MoveOn.org is the sort of radical group that ought to be on a park soapbox instead of driving the U.S. presidential debate.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275267411712756
3.
Obama Administration to Be Among Most Far-Left Ever
By Rajini Vaidyanathan Washington
BBC News,
Well, at least one blogger's willing to come right out and say it: Barack Obama really is at the extreme left of the political spectrum, even farther left than was Franklin Delano Roosvelt, and on par with Lyndon Johnson:
Obama's agenda is farther to the left than anything we've seen since at least Lyndon Johnson, and Congress has never in its history seen a Democratic Party so united in its leftward tilt. It doesn't matter whether Obama has centrists and moderate Republicans as part of his coalition. What matters is if he can unite (enough of) this country behind a common purpose to get things done.
Geez, I thought I'd never see the day!
Now if these folks will just come out and admit that "progressive" is just a euphemism for a neo-socialist agenda, then my job will be done.
4.
The Soros Threat To Democracy
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Democracy: George Soros is known for funding groups such as MoveOn.org that seek to manipulate public opinion. So why is the billionaire's backing of what he believes in problematic? In a word: transparency.
How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely "NASA whistleblower" standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros' Open Society Institute , which gave him "legal and media advice"?
That's right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros' flagship "philanthropy," by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI's "politicization of science" program.
That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly "censored" spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda.
Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen's OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different.
That's not the only case. Didn't the mainstream media report that 2006's vast immigration rallies across the country began as a spontaneous uprising of 2 million angry Mexican-flag waving illegal immigrants demanding U.S. citizenship in Los Angeles, egged on only by a local Spanish-language radio announcer?
Turns out that wasn't what happened, either. Soros' OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17 million Justice Fund. The fund lists 19 projects in 2006. One was vaguely described involvement in the immigration rallies. Another project funded illegal immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases.
So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI's glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI's 2006 annual report.
Meanwhile, OSI cash backed terrorist-friendly court rulings, too.
Do people know last year's Supreme Court ruling abolishing special military commissions for terrorists at Guantanamo was a Soros project? OSI gave support to Georgetown lawyers in 2006 to win Hamdan v. Rumsfeld — for the terrorists.
OSI also gave cash to other radicals who pressured the Transportation Security Administration to scrap a program called "Secure Flight," which matched flight passenger lists with terrorist names. It gave more cash to other left-wing lawyers who persuaded a Texas judge to block cell phone tracking of terrorists.
They trumpeted this as a victory for civil liberties. Feel safer?
It's all part of the $74 million OSI spent on "U.S. Programs" in 2006 to "shape policy." Who knows what revelations 2007's report will bring around events now in the news?
OSI isn't the only secretive organization that Soros funds. OSI partners with the Tides Foundation, which funnels cash from wealthy donors who may not want it known that their cash goes to fringe groups engaged in "direct action" — also known as eco-terrorism.
On the political front, Soros has a great influence in a secretive organization called "Democracy Alliance" whose idea of democracy seems to be government controlled solely of Democrats.
"As with everything about the Democracy Alliance, the strangest aspect of this entire process was the incessant secrecy. Among the alliance's stated values was a commitment to political transparency — as long as it didn't apply to the alliance," wrote Matt Bai, describing how the alliance was formed in 2005, in his book "The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics."
Soros' "shaping public policies," as OSI calls it, is not illegal. But it's a problem for democracy because it drives issues with cash and then only lets the public know about it after it's old news.
That means the public makes decisions about issues without understanding the special agendas of groups behind them.
More of the story can be found at:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275526219598836
Comments