Mitt Romney Crushes President Empty Chair In First Debate

Some wit had this to offer as the picture that summed up the night in last night’s debate:

That of course being a reference to Clint Eastwood’s takedown of Obama.

Personally, I think the chair may have actually fared better if it had done less talking and more shutting the hell up.  Obama – according to CNN – actually got nearly five minutes of talk-time than Romney had.  For all the good it did him.

A lot of people noticed the difference between Governor Romney and President Empty Chair.  Look at the CNN post debate poll:

CNN Poll: Most watchers say Romney debate winner
October 3rd, 2012
CNN Political Unit

Denver, Colorado (CNN) – Two-thirds of people who watched the first presidential debate think that Republican nominee Mitt Romney won the showdown, according to a nationwide poll conducted Wednesday night.

According to a CNN/ORC International survey conducted right after the debate, 67% of debate watchers questioned said that the Republican nominee won the faceoff, with one in four saying  that President Barack Obama was victorious. – Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

“No presidential candidate has topped 60% in that question since it was first asked in 1984,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

While nearly half of debate watchers said the showdown didn’t make them more likely to vote for either candidate, 35% said the debate made them more likely to vote for Romney while only 18% said the faceoff made them more likely to vote to re-elect the president.

More than six in ten said that president did worse than expected, with one in five saying that Obama performed better than expected. Compare that to the 82% who said that Romney performed better than expected. Only one in ten felt that the former Massachusetts governor performed worse than expected.

“This poll does not and cannot reflect the views of all Americans. It only represents the views of people who watched the debate and by definition cannot be an indication of how the entire American public will react to Wednesday’s debate in the coming days,” cautions Holland.

The sample of debate-watchers in the poll was 37% Democratic and 33% Republican.

“That indicates that the sample of debate watchers is about four points more Democratic and about eight points more Republican than an average CNN poll of all Americans, for a small advantage for the Republicans in the sample of debate-watchers,” adds Holland.

The poll suggests that the debate didn’t change opinions of the president. Forty-nine percent of debate watchers said before the debate that they had a favorable opinion of Obama, and that number didn’t change following the debate.

It was pretty much a similar story for Romney, whose favorable rating among debate watchers edged up just two points, from 54% before the debate to 56% after the debate.

The economy dominated the first debate and according to the poll, and by a 55%-43% margin, debate watchers said that Romney rather than Obama would better handle the economy. On the issue of taxes, which kicked off the debate, Romney had a 53%-44% edge over Obama. And by a 52%-47% margin, debate watchers said Romney would better handle health care, and he had the edge on the budget deficit by a 57%-41% margin.

Debate watchers thought Romney was more aggressive. Fifty-three percent said Romney spent more time attacking his opponent. Only three in ten thought Obama spent more time taking it to Romney. By a 58%-37% margin, debate watchers thought Romney appeared to be the stronger leader.

“Romney’s only Achilles heel may be the perception that he spent more time attacking his opponent than Obama, which may explain why two-thirds of debate-watchers said that Romney did the best job but only 46% said that he was more likeable than Obama,” says Holland.

The CNN poll was conducted by ORC International, with 430 adult Americans who watched the debate questioned by telephone.  All interviews were conducted after the end of the debate. The survey’s sampling error is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

CNN Political Editor Paul Steinhauser contributed to this story

CBS’s post-debate poll wasn’t a whole lot better for the failure-in-chief:

Mitt Romney scored a clear victory among uncommitted voters who watched the first presidential debate, saying by a two-to-one margin that the Republican nominee was the winner.

Among uncommitted voters, 46 percent said Romney won the debate, versus 22 percent who said the same of President Obama, according to an online poll of 523 uncommitted voters conducted after the debate by CBS News. That poll found 32 percent said the debate was a tie.

A CNN telephone survey of 430 registered voters who were questioned after watching the contest handed an even more decisive victory to Romney: 67 percent said he won the debate, compared to only 25 percent who said the same of Obama.

The CBS poll also showed Romney making clear strides in improving his likeability, with 56 percent of those surveyed saying their opinions of him had changed for the better. He saw a huge jump – 30 percent – in the number of uncommitted voters who said Romney cares about their needs and problems. Before the debate, 30 percent agreed with the statement. Afterward, that number rose to 63 percent. Sixty-nine percent of those surveyed said the same of Obama, up from 53 percent before the debate.

The CNN poll actually found Romney leading on likeability among the poll respondents, with 46 percent saying Romney was more likeable and 45 percent choosing Obama. Fifty-eight percent also deemed Romney the stronger leader, compared to 37 percent for Obama.

Romney also far exceeded expectations, while the opposite was true of Obama. Among registered voters surveyed by CNN, 82 percent said the former Massachusetts governor exceeded their expectations, but 61 percent said the president did worse than expected.

The one silver lining for the Obama campaign may be that nearly half of respondents in the CNN poll – 47 percent – said that the debate didn’t make them more likely to vote for either candidate. But Romney also won on that measure, with 35 percent saying the matchup made them more likely to vote for him. Only 18 percent  said the same of the president.

Six in 10 respondents to the CBS News poll identify as independents, 22 percent say they are Democrats, and 18 percent identify as Republicans. The margin of error was four points for the CBS poll and 4.5 points for CNN.

Obama was rarely ever able to gin up the courage to look Romney in the eye.  And judging by the amount of time Obama spent looking down, I’m guessing that the people who write the script for his teleprompter took his wristwatch away so the camera couldn’t focus on him desperately looking at the seconds tick by in his asskicking.

Don’t listen to me, though.  Listen to Obama supporter and big Obama donor Bill Maher:

Slate isn’t merely reliably leftist, it is überüberleftist.  But here was their headline on the debate:

“Pundits Agree: Romney Wins Round One—and It Wasn’t Even Close“

The final paragraph of that piece was this:

And what seems to be, so far at least, the pretty unanimous view that Obama lost the debate may hurt him more than how he actually did at the podium. “Much worse for Obamas than the debate is the media’s harsh verdict on his debate performance,” writes the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein on Twitter.

If you survey the tweets and opinion pieces of liberals, you very quickly realize that if liberals were preying mantises (they’re actually a different kind of insect), they would have literally devoured Barack Obama.

In 2008, John McCain’s performance demonstrated that he did not deserve to be president.  Obama didn’t deserve to be president, either, mind you, but John McCain failed to make a case for himself far more than Obama did.

Last night, Mitt Romney clearly and decisively proved he deserves to be president.  And Barack Obama proved just as clearly and decisively that he does NOT deserve another term.

Yes, Being A Democrat Pretty Much Means Being A Vicious Union Fascist Bully By Proxy

We’re hearing about just how vile the teachers union is in Chicago.  But it isn’t just there that unions and in particular teachers unions are evil; it is pretty much anywhere you can shake a stick.

Check out the action in Colorado.

Quote: “‘Our teachers spend lots of time on stopping bullying in schools,’ Stagr wrote. ‘Well, this group could have taught a class in HOW TO BULLY.'”

Quote: “One of the speakers escorted from the meeting reflected on the difficulty of finding a resolution going forward. ‘The tragedy is that most of the protesters never heard the board speak that night,” Hein said. “If we can’t have a dialogue, I’m not sure how we improve things for students.'”

Conclusion: They ARE bullies.  And what we are seeing all over the damn country is that they couldn’t care LESS about improving things for the students.

DeGROW: CO security officials protect parents from union protesters
By Watchdog Staff  /   September 11, 2012
By Ben DeGrow | Special to Colorado Watchdog

Last Wednesday’s Adams 12 School Board meeting packed the house with union protesters, while security officers escorted three residents from the boardroom to their vehicles to ensure their protection.

The offense? Two of the residents openly and respectfully took exception with the District Twelve Educators Association’s loudly projected point of view concerning the board’s proposal to balance the budget. Teacher pension contributions are being increased to align with other employee groups, resulting in a net pay reduction of 1.5 percent.

Adams 12 is Colorado’s fifth largest school district, with nearly 43,000 students enrolled last year. DTEA is one of the larger affiliates of the Colorado Education Association, which reports having lost roughly 8 percent of its membership in the past two years.

Nearly 400 teachers — including many from six other area school districts — showed up at Wednesday’s board meeting to protest the suburban Denver board’s decision. The school board made the move when adopting the new budget June 20. On Aug. 24, DTEA distributed a flier through its building representatives alerting members of the decision.

Several pro-union speakers provided public comments to applause from the crowd, claiming the board had violated the collective-bargaining agreement.

But two other attendees rose to offer a different view.

District taxpayer Joseph Hein, who has attended numerous board meetings this year, mentioned the extra burdens parents have taken from recent cuts made to transportation and middle school sports. He then gently urged the District 12 teachers in attendance to listen carefully to the board’s response. “You guys are part of the solution, as well,” he said, while union members waved signs from the crowd.

Sara Colburn, mother of three Adams 12 students, also pleaded with those in attendance. “You need to realize that you are not the only people hurting right now. I guarantee you that families have made many more sacrifices than you have,” she said, prompting most of the union members in the crowd to file out of the boardroom — some booing, many clapping rhythmically — as she concluded her remarks.

“We sat there and we listened to what they had to say,” Colburn later explained. “As soon as they heard something they didn’t like or didn’t agree with, I guess they felt like they didn’t owe me the same courtesy.”

Afterward, the school district’s head of security approached the speakers out of concern for their safety. “(He) told me he thought it probably would be a good idea if he took us to our cars,” said Colburn. “He said all those people that had cleared out were outside the front doors waiting for us.”

The security officer escorted Colburn and her husband through a separate exit to the back of the building, where he then drove them to their vehicle in the main parking lot. Plain-clothes security officers walked Hein to his car, out of the same concern.

“I was taken aback by the intensity of the protest,” Hein later said. “It was a bit disturbing to be escorted out of the building for my protection.”

Another Adams 12 parent, Patty Stagr, sent a note to the superintendent and school board after the meeting indicating she opted not to speak on behalf of taxpayers because she felt “intimidated by the aggressive nature of” union protesters making displays of “disrespect.” She refused to answer one teacher’s inquiry into where her children attend school.

“Our teachers spend lots of time on stopping bullying in schools,” Stagr wrote. “Well, this group could have taught a class in HOW TO BULLY.”

These accounts, many of which are directly supported by video evidence, contradict the report of one DTEA official quoted by local news reporter Darin Moriki:

“There was no anger or hostility among those people who came tonight,” said Missy Salter, a District 12 Educators’ Association executive board member and Shadow Ridge Middle School sixth-grade mathematics teacher.

Very few of the union protesters remained to hear the board’s response. Director Norm Jennings explained how state law required the adoption of a budget before June 30. He argued that the board’s actions did not violate the union contract, and that cutting teacher compensation was a difficult but necessary decision.

“We are not going to create further budget problems that impact our kids even further later on by taking the easy road now,” Jennings said.

Having reached an impasse in collective-bargaining negotiations, Adams 12 and DTEA await the report of a fact finder due out later this fall.

One of the speakers escorted from the meeting reflected on the difficulty of finding a resolution going forward. “The tragedy is that most of the protesters never heard the board speak that night,” Hein said. “If we can’t have a dialogue, I’m not sure how we improve things for students.”

It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about the fascist Occupy Movement, the fascist unions, or the fascist Obama.  And of course the fascist Obama protects the fascist unions and the fascist Occupy Movement even as they break the law.  They’re thugs who will not and cannot listen to any competing idea.  And rank and file Democrats are part of the vicious machine.

Democrats keep idiotically voting for these fascist fools.  Which is why we’re on the verge of total, catastrophic collapse.

Left Continues To Be Source Of ACTUAL Acts of Violence

I’ve heard all kinds of crap about right wing violence over health care.  I haven’t SEEN any violence; I haven’t seen or heard a shred of evidence caught on tape; but I’ve certainly heard bogus charges.

House Democrat Black Caucus members deliberately went through the crowd of Tea Party protesters hoping to create an incident – and video recorded their passage just in case their deliberate provocation incited something.  They certainly didn’t have to walk through that crowd.  You know who else did that?  Nazis, hoping to create an incident when they went through Skokie, Illinois, home of many Jewish death camp survivors.  Which is to say, the Black Caucus literally used a vile Nazi tactic.

There’s no evidence of it, no tape, no video, no cell phone footage, but when the Tea Party people didn’t give them what they wanted, Black Caucus members invented it for them: they screamed that someone in a crowd of tens of thousands of people used the N-word.

Rep. John Lewis is one of the main figures saying he heard the N-word.  Should anybody believe him?  He’s a documented race-baiter.  He accused John McCain of being tantamount to segregationist Alabama Governor George Wallace.  If John Lewis wants to encounter a racist, he need only look in the mirror.

One thing: Wallace was a racist, all right.  He was also a DEMOCRAT.  It would have been nice if Lewis had actually been able to find a right wing racist if he wanted to demonize the right wing as racist.

The left has tried to falsely demonize the right as racist before.  At a Sarah Palin rally during the 2008 presidential campaign, a reporter claimed he heard someone shout “Kill him!” regarding Barack Obama.  The Secret Service – which takes such threats seriously – thoroughly investigated the  case and specifically concluded that no such threat had been made.

Glenn Beck had the following to say about where the REAL violence has come from from the very outset:

The media, they’ll spin it.  CNN was doing more today on the violence of the right. Why would they do that? A, to set you up; B, to stop you from talking about health care and what are you going to do to stop it. They are setting the trap to make anybody who is against this bill an enemy of the State, a traitor, a terrorist, a violent killer.

Let me ask you this: The tea parties have been peaceful and, yet, they’re dangerous killers. Peaceful but, yet, dangerous. Let’s look at the bricks through the window. When there’s been actual violence, the democratic headquarters, this is the first brick that went through the window.  In Denver, there was a brick that went through the window. Who did it?  It was a lefty, democratic operative that threw a brick through the democratic window. It was a lefty that did it! Where was the press on the liberal who bit off a man’s finger in a health care argument? Bit his finger off. That wasn’t somebody on the right. That was somebody on the left. How about the media on all of the damage done by the G 20 protesters? That wasn’t a protest from the right. That was a protest from the left. How about the stories of the radio tower that was torn down, blown up, in Seattle? That was done by the left. How about the Hummers, because they get bad gas mileage? That’s from the left. How about Amy Bishop, who shot coworkers? She was from the left, an Obama fan. How about the SEIU thugs that beat down opponents at health care rallies? Intimidation? You want intimidation? How about that? How about the SEIU members that the media decided not to cover and you have it on tape as they are beating down a black man, calling him the N word?! How about Ann Coulter?

Note: I supplied the links.

There’s more violence by the left.  Here’s footage of a Tea Party bus getting egged by Harry Reid supporters.  Andrew Breitbart got out to question the lefties.  One starts saying “Get him out of here, or I’m going to go to jail” (for the violent act he is going to commit on him):

Now we have a story about Norman Leboon, Sr., an Obama financial donor, being arrested for making death threats against Rep. Eric Cantor.  Should I mention that Cantor is Jewish?

Here’s video of Karl Rove shouted down and forced to leave a book signing event.  Hundreds of Rove fans came to have him sign their books and hear him speak; but a tiny group of protestors shouted him down and forced him to leave:

You could call this Stalinist, or Nazi, or fascist; they’d all be correct.  It is the LEFT that despises free speech, and it is the LEFT which routinely shouts down speech with which they disagree in clear demonstrations of hate and wild disregard for our democracy.

The mainstream national news media has been a collective of Joseph Goebbels wannabes, as is their usual custom.  They fell all over themselves to point out that conservatives had called Bart Stupak with hateful messages after he announced he was going to vote for ObamaCare.  What they DIDN’T bother to report was that Bart Stupak got hateful messages from liberals during the period when he said he would vote AGAINST ObamaCare.

The media intentionally provides the false narrative that violence is only coming from the right; if anything, it’s only coming from the left.  We’re not saying don’t cover the anger: what we’re saying is stop being partisan about it.  Cover BOTH sides.  Put the story into context.  Stop the propaganda.  Stop covering only one side of the anger through a narrow, partisan viewpoint intentionally manipulated to demonize the right.  If you’re going to cover Bart Stupak receiving hateful phone calls after saying he’d vote yes for ObamaCare, cover Bart Stupak receiving hateful phone calls throughout the period he said he’d vote NO for ObamaCare.

The anger, rage, and even acts of violence isn’t something that just happened yesterday.  It’s been going on for months.  And the documented incidents are coming from the left.

If you want to see real hatred, and real acts of violence, look at the left, because that’s where it is.

If you want to see the worst kind of demonization and demagoguery, also look to the left.

Nancy Pelosi Cries Alligator Tears To Demonize Right

Nancy Pelosi – she who falsely compared ObamaCare protesters at town hall meetings to swastika-toting Nazi AstroTurf – decried the climate of hate from everyone who doesn’t think exactly like her.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi: “I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw … I saw this myself in the late ’70s in San Francisco,” Pelosi said, choking up and with tears forming in her eyes. “This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening and it created a climate in which we, violence took place and … I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made.”

Video:

I find a few things hilarious.  First of all, remember not very long ago when the Democrats were accusing us of “manufactured anger”?  Well, when that lie failed, they trot out another one – and lie one a direct contradiction from the last lie.  Before, it was “apparent outrage” and “manufactured anger” from “Astroturfers.”  Fake protesters with fake anger.  Now all of a sudden they are so afraid of this very REAL and GENUINE anger that they have to wonder if we’re going to become violent.

That, in addition to the fact that Democrats have proven to be loathsome enough to carry out hate attacks just to blame them on the right, such as what clearly happened in Denver, Colorado.

And that a lot of the “Nazi” stuff has actually been the work of Lyndon LaRouche supporters.  LaRouche, mind you, has run for political office seven times AS A DEMOCRAT.

But let’s consider the actual violence that made Nancy the Alligator so teary-eyed:

Remember the elderly man in stage four cancer who got shoved around by SEIU thugs?  That was Democrats doing the physical attacking:

You remember that black conservative named Kenneth Gladney who got physically beaten and kicked by four SEIU goons as he tried to hand out “Don’t Tread On Me” flags outside of a town hall event?  That was Democrats doing the physical attacking:

Do you remember a man from a MoveOn.org counter-protest walking over to threaten – and ultimately BITE OFF THE FINGER – of a man who had merely stopped to ask ObamaCare protesters about their purpose/goals? That was DEMOCRATS doing the physical attacking.

And – given that the nasty little rodent biter came from MoveOn.org – innocent victim William Rice had better get shots for rabies.

These were the people who claimed that the hundreds of thousands of ObamaCare protesters from across the country were “AstroTurf” even as they were PAYING their own side to show up at events.

These are people who go to bed at night wondering how they can demonize and lie about their opponents.  And if the lie the tell the following morning completely contradicts the lie they told the previous night, it doesn’t matter.  Democrats are thorough-going postmodernists.  Truth is irrelevant.  Mutual contradictions can simultaneously exist.  Facts don’t matter; only the will to power matters.  And they can deconstruct reality and re imagine history to suit their ambitions.

Let’s see.  Where has the violence come from?  Gee, I remember it coming from the Democrats and being directed toward the Republicans.

What’s interesting is that Pelosi is clearly alluding to the murder of gay Democrat politicians Harvey Milk and George Moscone.  There’s no question that Milk was brutally murdered – but maybe Nancy Pelosi is simply too stupid and too ignorant to know that Milk and Moscone were murdered by a DEMOCRAT who was angry because his fellow Democrats refused to reappoint him.

So we have demagogue Nancy Pelosi falsely demonizing the right for hate that is clearly coming from her side – and shedding false tears to remind us of what turns out to be a lie – as the violence she alludes to was committed by DEMOCRATS.  This woman has no honor, no credibility, and absolutely no shame.

Nancy Pelosi and those like her are liars to the cores of their shriveled, hollow souls.  And if she truly has any desire to stop “this kind of frightening rhetoric,” the first thing she needs to do is stop spreading her evil hatred and her demonic lies.

We are under such sustained and such false attack that protesters are resigned to carry signs like this:

Not that it matters: demagogues in the Democrat Party along with their media propagandist lackeys call it ‘racism’ or whatever else suits them anyway.

Here’s an example of where we stand as a free country being objectively informed by an independent media.  MSNBC has this story:

What they don’t tell you – after showing this threatening figure with the assault weapon slung over his shoulder and raising the conclusion that this is “racial” – is that the man is black.  As the next video of the SAME event reveals:

Newsbusters carries the full story, with a transcript to show just how blatantly dishonest the media has become.

We have become a society that is being spoon fed one lie after another, by Democrats and by the mainstream media, as liberals attempt to impose their agenda by the most vile tactics ever seen in this country.  The innocent are demonized by the guilty, edited and polished for mass consumption.

My telling the truth by revealing the fraud and the twisted lies by people like Nancy Pelosi is not hateful; her lies and demagoguery are.

Democrats’ Pseudo-Demonization Again On Display

1 suspect in custody following Dem HQ vandalism in Denver
By Jessica Fender
The Denver Post

Posted: 08/25/2009 11:53:20 AM MDT

A volunteer cleans up glass at the Colorado Democratic Party Headquarters after someone smashed nearly all the windows of the office early Tuesday morning, on August 25, 2009. (THE DENVER POST

A 24-year-old arrested this morning on suspicion of smashing 11 windows at Colorado Democratic Party headquarters tried to conceal his identity while allegedly committing the crime, according to police descriptions.

Maurice Schwenkler wore a shirt over his face, a hooded sweat shirt and latex gloves before he and another man fled the scene on bicycles, police said. Schwenkler was apprehended after a short chase. The other suspect remains at large.

While Schwenkler does not appear in the state’s voter registration database, a person by that name in November 2008 received $500 from a political 527 committee called Colorado Citizens Coalition for “communications,” according to campaign finance disclosures.

The accountant for the 527 appears to be the same woman who handles the books for many other Democratic-leaning political committees.

A Maurice Schwenkler also signed an online 2005 petition to free anti-war Christian protesters who were captured in Iraq.

State Democratic Party Chairwoman Pat Waak initially blamed the vandalism on animosity surrounding the health care debate, though Denver police declined to comment on possible motives.

The shattered windows were emblazoned with posters touting President Barack Obama and the Democratic position on health care reform.

The other storefronts surrounding the building on West Eighth Avenue and Santa Fe Drive in downtown Denver’s art district were untouched. But the Democratic posters are scuffed from hammer blows, Waak said.

“We ought to be having a serious, conscientious debate about what’s best for the country,” Waak said. “Clearly there’s been an effort on the other side to stir up hate. I think this is the consequence of it.”

She estimates the damage at $11,000.

An officer on patrol spotted vandals in the act around 2:20 a.m. and took Schwenkler into custody after a short chase, Denver police spokeswoman Vicki Ferrari said.

And, lo and behold, the police arrested the 2nd person – a transgender anarchist.  Pretty clearly, “she” is not a Republican:

Ariel Attack, a Denver-based anarchist, was arrested at 2:27am Tues, 24 here in Denver for allegedly smashing 11 windows of the Democratic Party headquaters at 777 Santa Fe Drive.

***PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY***

Ariel Attack, a Denver-based anarchist, was arrested at 2:27am Tues, 24 here in Denver for allegedly smashing 11 windows of the Democratic Party headquaters at 777 Santa Fe Drive.

Right now we are trying to raise the bail money for her to get out of jail; her bail hearing will be tomorrow at 10am Denver time. Several lawyers have told us to expect anywhere from between $3,000 to $10,000 in bail, and due to the high publicity of the case here in Denver, we are expecting higher (lead story for most all local news outlets, and being picked up by national news networks).

At this moment, we do not know Ariel’s status within the jail, especially regarding her gender classification. We have been unable to talk with Ariel since she went in. She is listed in the jail records and media under her birth name. We also do not know what plans, if any, she had made for this situation.

So you see, when you hear about the “stirring up of hate,” think Democrats.

When you see a swastika and hear a Democrat talking about the vileness of Republicans, realize that a Democrat almost certainly put it there.

When you see Democrats blaming Republicans for something that is truly awful, realize that in all probability, a Democrat did it.

This has been going on at least since the 1960s, when radical black students burned a cross in a black women’s dorm to justify their violent riots.

The episode gives Kyle-Ann Shiver’s article, “Obama’s Nazi Straw Man: An Old Alinsky Trick,” a whole lot more credibility:

When Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and now the president’s own deputy press secretary conjure up images of Nazis at healthcare town halls, they are engaging in one of the oldest tricks in anyone’s book, but an especial favorite of their mentor, Saul Alinsky.

Alinsky himself employed this method, quite deviously.  Alinsky biographer, Sanford D. Horwitt provides an anecdote using precisely this same diabolical tactic to deceive the people.  From Horwitt’s Let Them Call Me Rebel:

“…in the spring of 1972, at Tulane University…students asked Alinsky to help plan a protest of a scheduled speech by George H. W. Bush, then U.S. representative to the United Nations – a speech likely to include a defense of the Nixon administration’s Vietnam War policies.  The students told Alinsky they were thinking about picketing or disrupting Bush’s address.  That’s the wrong approach, he rejoined, not very creative – and besides causing a disruption might get them thrown out of school.  He told them, instead, to go to hear the speech dressed as members of the Ku Klux Klan, and whenever Bush said something in defense of the Vietnam War, they should cheer and wave placards reading, ‘The KKK supports Bush.’  And that is what they did, with very successful, attention-getting results.”

Planting major falsehoods has been a favorite Alinsky strategy from the start.  His acolyte, Barack Obama, learned his Industrial Areas Foundation lessons on deceiving for power while on a side trip during his Harvard years, then taught the Alinsky power tactics at the University of Chicago.

Democrats are increasingly becoming truly vile people.  They don’t believe in God, they don’t believe in objective truth, they believe in the same postmodern and existentialist principles that led to Marxism and Nazism, and their philosophy of “will to power” permits them to say anything or do anything that will advance their agenda – no holds barred, and no consequences beyond their ideological objective ever once considered.

Archbishop Rips Moral Idiocy Of Obama’s Abortion Democrats

Denver Archbishop Charles J. Chaput had a lot to say about Democrats and abortion:

DENVER (AP) – Denver Roman Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput labeled Barack Obama the “most committed” abortion-rights candidate from a major party in 35 years while accusing a Catholic Obama ally and other Democratic-friendly Catholic groups of doing a “disservice to the church.” ….

Chaput, without getting into much detail, called Obama the “most committed” abortion-rights major-party presidential candidate since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on abortion in 1973.

“To suggest – as some Catholics do – that Senator Obama is this year’s ‘real’ pro-life candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse,” Chaput said according to his prepared remarks, titled “Little Murders.” ….

The Obama campaign has been promoting an unusual-suspect sort of endorsement from Douglas Kmiec, a Catholic law professor and former legal counsel in the Reagan administration.

Kmiec wrote a book making a Catholic case for Obama. He argues the Obama campaign is premised on Catholic social teaching like care for working families and the poor and foreign policy premised on peace over war. Democratic efforts to tackle social and economic factors that contribute to abortion hold more promise, Kmiec said, than Republican efforts to criminalize it.

While applauding Kmiec’s past record, Chaput said: “I think his activism for Senator Barack Obama, and the work of Democratic-friendly groups like Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, have done a disservice to the church, confused the natural priorities of Catholic social teaching, undermined the progress pro-lifers have made, and provided an excuse for some Catholics to abandon the abortion issue instead of fighting within their parties and at the ballot box to protect the unborn.”

Pro-Obama Catholics “seek to contextualize, demote and then counterbalance the evil of abortion with other important but less foundational social issues,” said Chaput, who wrote a book this year, “Render Unto Caesar,” about Catholics and politics.

I have heard many people say that world hunger, global poverty, and other social welfare issues should be primary, and that abortion is of relatively minor significance in comparison.  It doesn’t work that way.

First of all, a fetus is a human being, every bit as much as you are or I am.  According to the most rigorous scientific categorizing of all things – taxonomy – a human fetus is of the Kingdom Animalia, of the Phylum Chordata, of the Class Mammalia, of the Order Primates, of the Family Hominidae, of the Genus Homo, and of the Species Sapiens.  From the moment of conception, that is how a human being is classified.  And nothing else in existence is so classified.  As a matter of funamental reality, you who are reading this are no more or less human than a human zygote.  An unborn human being is human by virtue of its parents, and a being by virtue of the fact that it is a living, growing, developing thing: it is a human being.

Either human beings are fundamentally, intrinsically, and incommensurably valuable as human beings in and of themselves or they are not.  If they are not, and a woman can subjectively choose to terminate her pregnancy – and kill her child – then human beings have only subjective value.  Human beings in this sense would be little different from a pet dog: my dog has a great deal of value to me, but not much to anyone else.  One woman loves and cherishes the baby growing in her womb; another despises it and wants it dead.  Neither is any more “right” or “wrong” than the other.

The baby who emerges from its mother’s womb in the delivery womb would be the kind of thing that could have been killed only moments before.  And as that child grows into adulthood, it is always the kind of thing that could have been terminated without moral consequences.

I remember seeing a bumper sticker on a car that read, “Pro Child, Pro Choice.”  If you can be pro-child while strongly supporting abortion, then why can’t you be “Pro Jew, Pro Holocaust”?  We have in the United States aborted nearly 50,000,000 innocent human beings for the simple reason that they were unwanted.  And the view that one can care about children so much that one supports that babies’ death because it isn’t wanted by its mother has rather terrifying implications about other “unwanted” people.

That’s not a real strong position from which to argue about social and economic justice.  The desperately poor, starving child in Africa?  Does he or she have rights?  Does he or she matter?

Is a newborn baby a precious human being, or is it merely an abortion that didn’t happen?

If his or her value is merely a matter of subjective determination, then the answer may be yes or or it may be no, depending on how you personally feel about the baby in question.  If, on the other hand, his or her value is a matter of objective ontological status as a human being, then the answer is an unqualified YES.  And if you don’t care about that baby, then the issue isn’t about that baby’s humanity, but about your appalling lack of human decency and compassion.

Why should a woman’s decision to have her child or to kill it alter the reality of that child’s value?  Who is she to decide, “This child is valuable,” or “This child is worthless”?  “Oh, she had her child, so therefore it matters, and I should care” is a bizarre thought to hold at the same time as “Oh, she aborted her child, so therefore it didn’t matter, and I shouldn’t care.”

That’s the archbishop’s point.  If you’re not pro-life, nothing else really matters.  It’s such a bunch of subjective posturing once you have abandoned the fundamental dignity of human life.  We’re just meat puppets, then.  We’re just primates who are somewhat more “evolved” than the very animals we eat for food or allow to live as pets.  We’ve killed untold millions of such primates in wars, and untold millions more have died of neglect.  What does one more – or one million or one billion more – matter?

Please watch this video: