At some point, you have to call a commie a commie. In other words, if it hates capitalism, it hates capitalism. Check this out from the Colorado Education Association, the state’s affiliate to the National Education Association. This is their latest resolution:
A final version of the resolution that was passed states that “CEA believes that capitalism requires exploitation of children, public schools, land, labor, and/or resources. Capitalism is in opposition to fully addressing systemic racism (the school to prison pipeline), climate change, patriarchy, (gender and LGBTQ disparities), education inequality, and income inequality.”
There you have it. Don’t call them well-meaning liberals because this is communism.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. opens his latest op-ed, this one regarding the Obama administration’s diplomacy-warming of a U.S.-Cuba relationship by embargo change, by putting blame on two of his own relatives…
In early December, President Barack Obama announced the restoration of diplomatic relations with Cuba after more than five decades of a misguided policy which my uncle, John F. Kennedy, and my father, Robert F. Kennedy, had been responsible for enforcing after the U.S. embargo against the country was first implemented in October 1960 by the Eisenhower administration.
RFK Jr., I guess, thinks shaking his head and finger at his father and uncle, AND pointing out his privileged visit to the island, solidifies his views that the embargo is broken and must be scrapped, or something. He manages to basically scold the Castro regime for being bad communists.
However, his belief is the U.S. embargo was behind the Cuban government’s reasoning and justification for treating Cuba’s people like starving prisoners and keeping the country’s economy down. Yeah, we made them do it.
It is almost beyond irony that the very same politicians who argued that we should punish Castro for curtailing human rights and mistreating prisoners in Cuban jails elsewhere contend that the United States is justified in mistreating our own prisoners in Cuban jails.
Imagine a U.S. president faced, as Castro was, with over 400 assassination attempts, thousands of episodes of foreign-sponsored sabotage directed at our nation’s people, factories and bridges, a foreign-sponsored invasion and fifty years of economic warfare that has effectively deprived our citizens of basic necessities and strangled our economy.
No, what’s ironic, Bobby Jr., is the conspiracy theory of Castro’s alleged involvement in your POTUS Uncle JFK’s assassination. But, eh…
The Cuban leadership has pointed to the embargo with abundant justification as the reason for economic deprivation in Cuba.
The embargo allows the regime to portray the United States as a bully and itself as the personification of courage, standing up to threats, intimidation and economic warfare by history’s greatest military superpower.
It perpetually reminds the proud Cuban people that our powerful nation, which has staged invasions of their island and plotted for decades to assassinate their leaders and sabotaged their industry, continues an aggressive campaign to ruin their economy.
Yeah, he said that. The same-old same-old claptrap that has been heard for years. Sort of flies in the face(s) of half a century of countless Cubans climbing into dangerous, leaky rafts to sail deadly shark-infested waters to get here to the great Satan … Doesn’t it?
Oh, and I found this one priceless…
Unlike other Caribbean islands where poverty means starvation, all Cubans receive a monthly food ration book that provides for their basic necessities.
A week ago A.J. Delgado wrote, “Arguing with idiots about #Cuba”, where she counters many of the anti-embargo talking points liberals, such as RFK Jr., are constantly regurgitating. The fact is Barack Obama’s new age plan for changing diplomacy with Cuba is yet another one of his foreign policy decisions granting trust where trust is not deserved … and is already evident.
“”I am a Marxist-Leninist and shall be one until the end of my life.”
He went on to state that, “Marxism or scientific socialism has become the revolutionary movement of the working class.”
He also noted that communism would be the dominant force in Cuban politics:
“There cannot be three or four movements.””
And that was it!
It happened about 7 months after The Bay of Pigs and confirmed that Castro would rule Cuba as a dictator. It ended any hopes of a multiparty election or restoration of the freedoms that the regime had eliminated by executive decree.
I should add that people were thrown in jail or executed in 1959-61 for calling Castro “un comunista”.
None of those people were ever released after Castro confirmed that he was “un communista”.
“China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Cuba and Algeria won seats Tuesday on the U.N. Human Rights Council, riling independent human rights groups who said their election undermined the rights watchdog’s credibility.
The General Assembly elected 14 new members to the 47-seat Geneva-based council, which can shine a spotlight on rights abuses by adopting resolutions — when it chooses to do so.
It also has dozens of special monitors watching problem countries and major issues ranging from executions to drone strikes.”
This is a travesty but what else do you expect from the UN? I can’t wait for Cuba to pass judgement on a member country that puts dissidents in jail or harasses citizens marching for freedom. Let’s see how Cuba votes when that issue comes before the council.
Again, this is a travesty and an insult to our intelligence.
Marc Masferrer has been at the forefront of this battle. Please check out interview with Marc.
Why does Florida keep sending Alan Grayson back to Washington DC time and time again? Are the people in Grayson’s congressional district really of like-mind with this unmitigated, uncivil, uncouth buffoon? Or are they just eager to get him off their streets and out of town?
Here is Grayson’s latest email…
What a propagandistic, agent provocateur, embarrassment this guy is.
Grayson is the epitome of a useful idiot assclown for the progressive/socialist/communist/Marxist democrat party agenda whose designated job is to go on the TV screen to slobber and spew ugly vitriol, playing to the most willfully ignorant among us … which is why the majority of TV gigs Grayson does are either on that assclown car wreck called MSNBC or HBO’s Bill Maher show. The problem is, the nation is led to believe Alan Grayson is the mirror image and resolute voice of his constituents that sent him to DC. Think hard and carefully in the election, FL-9. You do have a serious choice for sane and dignified representation on the floor of the US Congress … and on TV. “Stop the insanity!” The guy really does write the political ads for his own election opponent(s).
By the way, there are many minority members of the TEA Party, and growing, so, the above disgusting image is, I find, a not-so-subliminal threat to them by Grayson. Yet, people such as Grayson strip them of their skin color and heritage because they are not good little zip-lipped comrades for the “Progressive” cause. They must not think for themselves and expect others to do so as well. Minorities must have a political lobotomy or be skinned alive by the left. The jaded racist history of the nation’s democrat party is something the current democrats and the MSM try very hard to bury every moment of the day. However, since a republican POTUS broke free the chains of slavery, the liberal/leftist democrat party has slapped on new chains of oppression through endless entitlement baiting and addiction, and through ridicule and personal destruction for daring to have and practice free thought and free will … For stepping off the democrat party plantation.
Grayson is defending his remarks and the KKK analogy citing erroneous claims of racism of the TEA Party (some of which were discovered to be interloping outside ‘plants’ at TEA Party rallies deliberately there for the MSM to do gotcha slams against the TP, and other claims having nothing to do with TEA Party affiliations).
“Workers were exhorted to participate in this gargantuan effort through a massive propaganda campaign. All means of communication were devoted to the dissemination of the official rallying cry: “The Ten Millions Go” (Los Diez Millones Van).
A popular music group achieved almost immediate fame, echoing the government’s slogan by identifying themselves as Los Van Van.
The government controlled media, mass organizations, schools, and work centers were used to convince the population that the harvest represented another battle. The nation was encouraged to win this battle through discipline, sacrifice, and self-denial.
Yet, the miscalculations, mismanagement, censorship, emphasis on moral incentives, massive mobilization of unskilled workers to the cane fields and lack of sober planning led to the failure of this inordinate effort.
It is estimated that at the end of the 1970 harvest more than one million people had worked in the cutting, loading and transporting of the sugar cane.
The concentration of all resources and energies into achieving a ten million-ton sugar harvest also had adverse effects in other production sectors of the economy, with the exception of rice, fish, and eggs. Economic dependence upon the Soviet Union increased.
The cutting and milling of planted sugar cane that should have been reserved compromised the success of the 1971 harvest. In 1971 domestic consumption of sugar per capita was rationed to two pounds a month in order to meet export obligations.
Turning the harvest into the sole objective of every productive center, agency and mass organization, in the end, promoted the disorganization of the entire society.
It also contributed to further consolidate the on-going militarization process. The total social and economic cost caused by the 1970 harvest may never be properly measured.
Although the goal was not achieved (the 1970 harvest only reached 7,558,569 tons) the harvest occupied the lives of the Cuban people for an entire year and passed into history under the name of “The Ten Million Ton Sugar Harvest”.
“La zafra” failed because “los azucareros”, the people who had managed Cuba’s very successful sugar industry for decades, were in Miami, in prison or not listened to.
We are learning today that ObamaCare is one gigantic mess. Once again, we see that no one listened to those who knew a thing or two about health care or designing software.
CBS has an amazing report about the computer problems behind ObamaCare. The best part of the report is an interview with a software consultant who said that “he’d be embarrassed” to put out something like this.
Watch the video here:
The amazing thing is that The White House was aware of these problems but nevertheless went ahead with the release date.
Industry experts warned The White House that the computer was not ready, much like sugar industry experts warned Castro that a “10 million harvest” would not work.
My guess is that the Obama administration is 24/7 political enterprise devoid of any economic reality or critical input.
They didn’t listen to reason or people who warned several times that ObamaCare was not ready for prime time, lunch time, morning time, weekend time or any other time!
Like Castro and the “zafra de 10 millones”, Obama did not listen to the people who were warning him about the problems.
Like Castro and “la zafra”, Obama put ideology over common sense in the pursuit of a goal.
Castro never got his “zafra de 10 millones” but his irresponsible pursuit of the goal wrecked the Cuban economy and increased the island’s dependency on the USSR.
Wonder if ObamaCare will meet the same fate? Wonder what damage this mindless pursuit of ObamaCare will have on our economy today and tomorrow? We already know that it has had been a job wrecker so far.
“Despite Che’s death more than 30 years ago, his face is still familiar to millions around the world, adorning T-shirts, key chains, and posters. He is also a constant presence in Cuba, with his image painted on walls and buildings around the nation. Many compelling films have been made about the life of Che, including the 2004 Oscar-winning film The Motorcycle Diaries.”
Professional revolutionary means what?
By any “professional standard”, Che was a complete failure.
His Bolivian experience failed miserably
He died a frustrated man. He was saved by a left wing machine determined to turn a failure into a professional revolutionary, or a symbol of something that he never was.
Che never stood for justice, human rights or freedom. He stood for the exact opposite.
In the end, it was the peasants he was trying to convert who turned him in. These peasants were not in the mood for “liberation messages” from a white guy who spoke with an Argentine accent.
“No Che Day” is a great day for those of us who know the truth and love freedom!
You see, it is never the shooter’s responsibility, or their history of mental illness and its occasionally volatilemedications. It is always a deflection of responsibility and blame and condemnation of the gun(s), the Second Amendment, those who persist in defending the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, the other political party, violence-based entertainment, global warming/climate change…
However, while we are grasping at blame cards, Ann Coulter does find a viable source of blame that absolutely does connect with the mass murderers in America over the last four decades:
There’s been another mass shooting by a crazy person, and liberals still refuse to consider institutionalizing the dangerous mentally ill.
But Alexis couldn’t be institutionalized because the left has officially certified the mentally ill as “victims,” and once you’re a victim, all that matters is that you not be “stigmatized.”
But here’s the problem: Coddling the mentally ill isn’t even helping the mentally ill. Ask the sisters of crazy homeless woman “Billie Boggs” how grateful they were to the ACLU for keeping Boggs living on the streets of New York City. Ask the parents of Aaron Alexis, James Holmes (Aurora, Colo., movie theater shooter), Jared Loughner (Tucson, Ariz., mall shooter) or Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech shooter) how happy they are that their sons weren’t institutionalized.
Tellingly, throughout the last three decades, the overall homicide rate has been in free fall, thanks to Republican crime policies, from 10 per 100,000 in 1980 to 4 per 100,00 today. (You might even call them “common sense” crime policies.) But the number of mass shootings has skyrocketed from 4 per year, between 1900 and 1970, to 29 per year since then.
Something seems to have gone horribly wrong right around 1970. What could it be? Was it the introduction of bell-bottoms?
That date happens to correlate precisely with when the country began throwing the mentally ill out of institutions in 1969. Your memory of there not being as many mass murders a few decades ago is correct. Your memory of there not being as many homeless people a few decades ago is also correct.
But liberals won’t allow the dangerous mentally ill to be committed to institutions against their will. (The threat of commitment is very persuasive in getting disturbed individuals to take their medicine.) Something in liberals’ genetic makeup compels them to attack civilization, for example, by defending the right of dangerous psychotics to refuse treatment and then representing them in court after they commit murder.
In the decades since the deinstitutionalization movement began, more and more people kept being killed as a result of that movement — including the deinstitutionalized themselves. According to Torrey, between 1970 and 2004, the mentally ill were responsible for at least 4,700 murders in California.
Liberals will pretend to have missed the news that the Washington Navy Yard shooter was a paranoid schizophrenic. They refuse to acknowledge that the mass murder problem — as well as the homeless problem — only began after crazy people were thrown out of institutions in the 1970s. They tell us crapping in your pants on a New York City sidewalk is a “civil right.” They say that haranguing passersby on the street about your persecution by various movie stars is a form of “free speech.”
Only after a mass murder committed by a psychotic with a firearm do liberals spring to life and suggest a solution: Take away everyone’s guns.
“Si el Che Guevara levantara la cabeza, probablemente volvería a morirse al ver que uno de los hombres más ricos del mundo, defensor del capitalismo a ultranza que lo ha llevado a la cima de las listas de los más millonarios, ha utilizado su mítica boina, su uniforme y sus gestos más característicos para promocionar la marca que más dinero le ha hecho ganar: Virgin.”
It translates to something like this: If Che raised his head, he’d be shocked to see a big time capitalist dressed up like him.
We can make fun of the picture but there is a serious side to all of this.
Thank God that Mr Branson was not the owner of an airliner in Cuba when the Castro brothers and Che came into power.
He would have been treated to a very bad case of repression and his business would have expropriated in the name of a corrupt revolution.
Branson is really stupid and lucky.
He is stupid for dressing like a communist to promote capitalism.
He is lucky that he never had to live under the leader that he is glorifying with this stupid rebel outfit.
What’s next? Is he “going Mao or Stalin” to promote Virgin’s flights to Moscow or Peking?
As the one year anniversary of the deadly attack on an American consulate in Benghazi approaches, journalists have begun to take another look into the scandal surrounding the government’s response to that terrorist event. Last week, CNN aired two striking reports revealing that the Central Intelligence Agency had a large number of agents on the ground on the night of the attack and that a suspect in the attack has never been interviewed by investigators. Following these revelatory reports, which some in President Barack Obama’s administration believe represent a political threat, some CNN reporters now fear for their access to the White House. They are not alone.
On July 31, CNN’s The Situation Room broadcast a portion of an interview conducted by reporter Arwa Damon with a suspect in the Benghazi attacks. The suspect revealed to Damon that no investigator has attempted to contact him regarding his involvement in that deadly assault. The following day, CNN’s Drew Griffin broke the news that more than 30 CIA agents were on the ground in Libya on the day of the attack and they are being pressured by the spy agency to not reveal to reporters or congressional investigators what they know of the events of that night. Some CNN reporters are reportedly fearful now that their access to the White House will be hampered following their probing into a story that members of the Obama administration would prefer remain uninvestigated.
“Access is a very serious consideration when it comes to stories that could adversely impact a show, correspondent, or network’s relationship with the administration, a campaign, or any political leader,” one source with insider information told Mediaite.
“I would suggest it’s not an accident that those who have been given a lot of access to the president have generally been AWOL when it comes to stories that might reflect poorly on him,” the source, who did not wish to be identified, continued. “It’s the name of the game. And it’s bad for everyone trying to do this job the right way.” Those reporters have reason to fear for their access to America’s executive branch. Some suspect that reporters who soft-pedal or underreport stories uncomfortable to the administration receive preferential access to White House officials.
President Obama continues to say nothing to a jittery nation about what some who have been briefed on the danger are describing as the worst terrorist threat since 9/11, declining to either offer reassurance or an explanation of the peril the nation faces.
Certainly, the president does not want to take questions about a threat he had minimized during the 2012 campaign. But what’s striking is that he has not addressed the nation in a formal manner on the potential for a major attack.
Incredibly, the first question Obama might take on the situation could come from a comedian. Obama is scheduled to appear on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno this evening in California, and the topic is sure to come up. He has an event earlier in the day, but it’s a campaign-style appearance at a high school in Phoenix, also an odd venue to be discussing potential terrorist attacks.
Hey, MSM, you’re not the least bit pissed about this? I mean, can you imagine how the very same MSM would be reacting were it Pres. George W. Bush spending the weekend golfing while a record number of U.S. embassies in the world were closed due to a hightened terror threat(s) here and abroad … and then ducking onto a late night entertainment show for a bit of softball back-and-forth?
Embattled Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner and an attorney in the Federal Election Commission’s general counsel’s office appear to have twice colluded to influence the record before the FEC’s vote in the case of a conservative non-profit organization, according to e-mails unearthed by the House Ways and Means Committee and obtained exclusively by National Review Online. The correspondence suggests the discrimination of conservative groups extended beyond the IRS and into the FEC, where an attorney from the agency’s enforcement division in at least one case sought and received tax information about the status of a conservative group, the American Future Fund, before recommending that the commission prosecute it for violations of campaign-finance law. Lerner, the former head of the IRS’s exempt-organizations division, worked at the FEC from 1986 to 1995, and was known for aggressive investigation of conservative groups during her tenure there, too.
“Several months ago . . . I spoke with you about the American Future Fund, a 501(c)(4) organization that had submitted an exemption application the IRS [sic],” the FEC attorney wrote Lerner in February 2009. The FEC, which polices violations of campaign-finance laws, is not exempted under Rule 6103, which prohibits the IRS from sharing confidential taxpayer information, but the e-mail indicates Lerner may have provided that information nonetheless: “When we spoke last July, you had told us that the American Future Fund had not received an exemption letter from the IRS,” the FEC attorney wrote.
The timing of the correspondence between Lerner and the FEC suggests the FEC attorney sought information from the IRS in order to influence an upcoming vote by the six FEC commissioners…
House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp and oversight-subcommittee chairman Charles Boustany are calling on the IRS, in the wake of these revelations, to provide all communications between the agency and the FEC between 2008 and 2012. “The American public is entitled to know whether the IRS is inappropriately sharing their confidential tax information with other agencies,” …