Cheat Seeking Missiles

Cloward-Piven, Obama And The Fall Of America

ust drop everything and click on over to American Thinker and James Simpson’s Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis.

The article delves into the Cloward-Piven strategy, spawned in 1966 by two radical socialist professors from Columbia University, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The strategy was promptly - and accurately - described in The Nation, a publication that would like to put an end to our nation:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

The strategy’s first big success came in 1975, when New York City was forced into bankruptcy by Cloward-Piven acolytes who stormed welfare offices demanding their “rights,” quickly overburdening the welfare system. Simpson makes the point that the current financial crisis appears to be a classic Cloward-Piven strategy, this time with the poor and underqualified demanding their “right” to homownership.

There are so many hard-left radicals linked in the article that at times it seems you’re reading more blue type than black - and all these names link ultimately to one Barack Hussein Obama:

As Simpson says:

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who’s who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.

Remember “Obama, the empty suit?” This article shows that the suit Obama wears is not empty; rather, it is a Trojan horse, filled with the most vile ideas about - and plans for - America.

Don’t believe it? Well, what if we told you that the Dems want to set up the financial bailout so radical left wing groups like Acorn get any funds generated through bailout paybacks? It’s true.

hat-tip: Okie on the Lam

Al Gore Flips As Global Warming Flops

ity Al poor, poor Gore. As real crises take center stage, most notably the financial meltdown which could, unlike global warming, actually hurt people, he’s growing more erratic and desperate for attention … and money. So in the midst of the meltdown (financial, not icecap) off he trekked to his heartland, the Silicon Valley. The Merc News reports:

Al Gore said in San Jose Saturday that the climate crisis deserves the same type of attention and money from Washington that the financial meltdown is getting. “Instead of a focus only on a bailout, we need to bail in renewable energy,” Gore said during a 50-minute speech at the Civic Auditorium.

Of course we do. Gore is, after all, heavily invested in alternative energy. Move along folks, no conflict of interest here, even if there is some pretty darn funny oratory:

He traced the current crisis with the financial markets to the subprime mortgage mess. There’s also a “subprime carbon” mess that’s shaking the world’s economy, he said, one that puts 70 million tons of carbon dioxide into the air each day. And companies that deny it’s harmful are engaging in “a form of stock fraud,” he said.

But you know, he’s not rigid. He understands the need for short-term and long-term solutions in order to manage the crisis and minimize impacts, especially on the poor:

He [sees] plans to seek oil from Canadian oil shale and tar sands are “utter and complete madness, complete insanity,” he said. And new coal plants should be banned in the United States, he said.

Poor Al. He’ll just have to slink home to his energy-frittering estate and wait for better times, when the world can afford to worry about problems that are merely possible and far, far in the future.

Dublin Over With Laugher

ou can always count on The Stats Blog for a good knee-slapper, and it delivers in a stand-up routine called The New York Times Shrinks Dublin. After introducing us to the size of Dublin and the reality that it is really a county, not a city, The Stats Blog introduces us to an NYT story:

In the New York Times “Portrait of Dublin as a boomtown” (an unfortunate description given that the year began with predictions of recession), David Amsden, the Times intrepid cartographer, confuses all:

“No matter how large its economy, Dublin remains a city still very much defined by its actual size: to even call it a city, in fact, is something of a misnomer. A million people live inside Dublin’s official borders, which are such that you can literally walk anywhere in about half an hour.”

Not laughing quite yet? Well, let’s continue on:

Even the most fleet of foot flâneur would be unlikely to cover more than two miles in 30 minutes, which means, according to the Times, one million people live in four square miles. This would make Dublin one of the most densely populated cities in the world, with 250,000 people per square mile, on a par with Mumbai and Hong Kong (New York by comparison has 83,000 people per square mile – and it has skyscrapers). While not physically impossible – each Dubliner would have approximately 111 square feet to him or herself at ground level ….

And people continue to trust the Gray Lady as the paragon of good reporting?

Euros Get Tough On China

ne gets the sense that appeasement-oriented Europeans would confront an Asian invasion by passing laws to keep Asians from getting offended - you know, banning the word “yellow,” making sure rice is available for lunch at every public school on the continent, that sort of thing.

But it turns out that they still have a bit of spine left:

EU Plans Crack-Down on High-Risk Chinese Food Products

The European Commission decided Thursday on safeguard measures in the face of the tainted Chinese milk scare, including plans to ban the most risky imports like biscuits and chocolate. …

“We have had to step up our measures in order to be… 100 percent protected,” commission spokeswoman Nina Papadoulaki told journalists in Brussels.

The toughest of the measures, which are due to be adopted on Friday, consisted of “an explicit, total ban on all products originating from China for infants and young children containing any percentage of milk,” she said.

The measure was intended “to ensure that such products are not imported in any form,” Papadoulaki added. (AFP)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Capitalism must be tied to morality, and China, because it is Communist to the core, does not have this essential moral core.

Just one nagging question: Is the FDA watching out for us, too?

It’s Just Been 780,000 Years, And Here We Go Again Already

ny day now you might wake up, check your trusty compass, and find the needle pointing south instead of north. Compasses have been pointing north since their invention because, Science Daily tells us:

The main magnetic field, generated by turbulent currents within the deep mass of molten iron of the Earth’s outer core, periodically flips its direction, such that a compass needle would point south rather than north. Such polarity reversals have occurred hundreds of times at irregular intervals throughout the planet’s history – most recently about 780,000 years ago – but scientists are still trying to understand how and why.

Where is Al Gore when we need him? Shouldn’t he be proclaiming the horrors of Global Flipping and calling for the expenditure of billions to stop it? After all, it’s obvious that we over-consumers in the Northern Hemisphere are to blame because of … because of … because of all the stuff we do with iron, maybe.

Rest easy; the report says the reversal is at least 1,000 years away. Plenty of time to reprogram all the GPS systems.

Big Surprise

ver at Open Secrets, the site that tracks campaign contributions like a bloodhound tracks a fugitive, there’s a timely article, Money and Votes Aligned in Congress’ Last Debate Over Bank Regulation. It correlates campaign contributions to votes on 1999’s Financial Services Modernization Act (aka Gramm-Leach-Bliley), the legislation that allowed banks to grow so large that the were able to fail as spectacularly as they are failing now.

Here’s the unsurprising finding from Open Secrets:

Looking back at the vote on the 1999 act, and the campaign contributions that led up to it, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics has found that those members of Congress who supported lifting Depression-era restrictions on commercial banks, investment banks and insurance companies received more than twice as much money from those interests than did those lawmakers who opposed the measure. …

There was little difference in the money collected by Republicans who supported the bill and those who opposed it; the 255 GOP supporters collected an average of $179,175, while the opponents in their ranks-and there were only five of them-collected $171,890. On the Democratic side, however, there was a wide gulf, as the graph indicates. The 195 Democrats who supported the Financial Services Modernization Act had received an average of $179,920 in the two years and 10 months leading up to its passage, while the 59 Democrats who opposed it received just $83,475.

John McCain was absent for the vote.

SS Storm Troopers For Obama

magine for a moment, if you can, that the McCain campaign has enlisted a bunch of people with the power to arrest you, convict you and throw you in jail, and tasked them with attacking anyone who uttered anything that, in their opinion, was not true about McCain.

Unimaginable, right? But easy to imagine the howls from the media you’d hear were such a thing to happen. Not hearing any howling? Well, that’s because this un-American idea didn’t come out of the McCain camp, it came from those who see Barack Obama as our national savior:

As the squib on the KMOV TV news page says, “The Barack Obama campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading TV ad during the presidential campaign.”

Anyone care to define “target” for me?

Hat-tip: Jim

Share this Logic Bomb with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.