Produce
a very public media event - to and including the scripted “arrests” of
selected protesters - and you’re a success in life, according to Lisa
Fithian, the on-scene director of today’s anti-capitalistic movement in
America. Fithian is a highly experienced crisis creator and Breitbart TV has this report to document her latest efforts.
As you can see from this profile, Fithian is a professional atagonist, having practiced her trade since high school. Lisa Fithian - Crisis Creator
Despite
the obligatory “non violent” declaration, Fithian knows that the media
becomes personally involved and outraged when school teachers,
minorities, and the poor become arrested “victims” of any movement. She
orchestrates such arrests right down to the scripted responses of those
“victims” as the media microphones and tape recorders are thrust in
their faces. The media eats this stuff up! Throw in a couple of burning cars and you've got yourself an entire evening news broadcast.
Fithian
will be heard from again....and soon. The G-8 Summit, which involves
the personal appearance of the heads of state of the eight leading
industrialized nations in the world, will be held in Chicago next
Summer. If history is any indicator, Fithian and her crisis creators
will be there and chaos can be expected.
And then, of course, there’s the Democrat Party National Convention....
The
supreme court is the highest court in the land. State supreme courts
are the highest courts within each state for jurisdiction on state legal
matters. Most supreme court judges have served for many years as
triers of fact at local and district court levels, attaining invaluable
experience, before earning highly sought-after supreme court
nominations.
Not so in Vermont.
Here’s the WCAX TV report on Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin’s (D) first appointment to the state’s highest court.
“Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin has named his choice to sit on Vermont Supreme Court.
Shumlin has chosen his own legal counsel, Beth Robinson, for the job.
Robinson has no experience as a judge. She is best known for leading the legal battle to legalize same-sex marriage in Vermont.
Robinson
is Shumlin's first appointee to the 5-member high court. If confirmed
by the Legislature, she will replace Justice Denise Johnson who retired
from the bench in August.”
“Robinson
has no experience as a judge”! She hasn’t even presided over family
court matters. Has never been directly involved in the administration
of the rules of civil and criminal procedure. Has never considered the
points of law required to render a judicial decision and Governor
Shumlin thinks she’s qualified to be a State SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.
As
for her reported “legal battle to legalize same-sex marriage in
Vermont”, it isn’t exactly difficult to get legislation passed in
Vermont. Both the House and Senate are very heavily Democrat controlled
and, of course, the Governor is also a Democrat.
Republicans
elected to state offices in Vermont would save themselves a lot of time
and wasted effort by simply staying home during the legislative
sessions. They won’t, of course. They’ll try to make themselves heard
above the roar of the Democrat’s iron grip on the state, but - for the
most part - they’re just going through the motions.
Next
we’ll hear how these same Democrats have voted to approve the
nomination of a totally inexperienced person as a Justice on the Vermont
Supreme Court.
Clearly a “political payback appointment” to a good soldier in Shumlin’s cause.
I
hope they all realize that if she’s confirmed, Robinson will have to
recuse herself on any and all matters involving same-sex issues that
come before the state’s highest court. She just might be said to have a
“bias”.
Darrel
Issa (R-Ca) shows a document "turned over" by the Obama Administration
in response to his committee’s subpoena in the Fast and Furious
investigation. The document is redacted (blacked out) in its entirety.
A Black cow at midnight, eating licorice.
Obama,
of course, will cite “executive privilege” as he plays every card in
the deck to avoid any connection to the now infamous gun and grenade
scandal.
How’s that for “the most transparent administration ever”?
My good friend, Doug Ross,
is spearheading a movement that will trump anything you’ve seen so far.
Here’s our theme and you’re welcome to share it all across the land.
Next Week He’ll Be At The Vatican With The Pope In The Background
By Dell Hill
Is everything about this Barack Obama person fake? Distorted? Contrived?
One
would reasonably think so, based on his latest effort to make it appear
as though he’s in one place when he’s actually in another. Call it the
“Hollywood effect”.
He may fool some of the people all the time, but he didn’t fool the folks at Breitbart TV.
“President
Obama delivered his weekly address to the nation from Detroit, Michigan
this week after visiting workers at a GM assembly plant. When the
videohit at Breitbart.tv,
our tip box suddenly became very active with people claiming that the
President was actually sitting in front of a green screen and the
background image was really a composite image of an assembly line.
In
the image below, you can see a black outline around the president’s
shoulder, and you can see the background image slightly distorted around
the president’s ear. Several experts in the field of video effects have given us their opinions on the matter. Some examples of their takes:
It
is a complete lie as this is so obviously green screen it ridiculous! I
have been doing green screen for a very long time and although the Key
on the green screen is very well done it shows the clean edges that a
natural environment doesn’t have. Also, they have added an ambient sound
of an empty warehouse and buzz of the transformers to make it more
believable.
It’s
a green screen, IMO. Notice the lines and cables behind him, they are
totally still. Even if a factory is abandoned lines don’t just hang
frozen like that. When I took it to full screen HD the most telling part
for me were the areas around his head.
It
definitely looks greenscreen to me. there’s a lot of artifacting going
on around the edges, which makes me think it was keyed out. also, the
spacial relationships look off…just doesn’t seem to fit…however, around
his hair, I don’t see any traces of the keyed out background…this is
usually a good place to see some artifacting from the keys.. that said,
its tough to say definitively, but it does look greenscreen
I’m
an expert with 20 years of experience in digital visual effects. I’ve
been the visual effects supervisor on features and TV shows. I was also
the editor-in-chief of two magazines, I’ve hosted dozens of
instructional videos and I’ve taught hundreds of seminars around the
world. The shot is obviously a composite and a ‘weatherman quality’
one. In it’s front of a still photo and President Obama doesn’t blend
into the scene at all.
I
just spoke to a friend of my from Skywalker Ranch. He has been doing
Visual X for 2o years. He said “100 % Green Screen” and He LOVES Obama.
He was also crushed by watching the video.
My
brother – Emmy award winning VFX artist. – at first thought it was
green screen but after looking at it thinks it was likely shot
It’s
likely that if the video was shot in front of a green screen, it was so
the president wouldn’t disrupt the important work being done at the
factory. If this is the case, it does bring up several interesting
questions about the stage-management of the presidency.
President
Obama has been routinely placed in front of stirring backgrounds dating
back to his candidacy. The Greek columns placed behind him for his
nomination acceptance in Denver was a perfect example of his reliance on
visual imagery to convey an important, unspoken message to his
audience.
It’s
true that the president was in Detroit. And it’s probably true that it
would have been wrong for him to shut down production for the sake of
taping his weekly address. That being said, why go to the great lengths
they went to (assuming this was a green screen composite) just to
convey the image of the president sitting on a factory floor? What does
it say about the White House’s desire to manipulate reality to evoke an
emotional response from voters?
Here
is the full video. We’re interested in your opinion. We’ve asked the
White House about it and as soon as they respond, we’ll let you know.”
Hat Tip - Ace of Spades HQ Victor Davis Hanson does a victory lap (for all of us) on the2008 case against Obama, proven disastrously true.-
The words of Ace in highlighting this outstanding analysis of one
Barack Hussein Obama in his quest for the Democrat nomination - and
ultimately the Presidency of the United States. The piece by Mr.
Hanson, in total, is much longer and more in-depth that what I’ve posted
here. Please read the entire analysis by clicking here.
The Right-Wing Complaint of 2008
In 2008, the following was the general right-wing argument against Obama’s candidacy:
a)
The self-professed “uniter” Obama had, in truth, little record of
uniting disparate groups. From community organizing to politics, his
preferred modus operandi was rather to praise moderation, but politick
more as a radical, and sometimes go after opponents as unreasonable or
illiberal. Thus the most partisan voting senator in the Congress, who
talked grandly of “working across the aisle,” also urged supporters to
“get in their faces” and “take a gun to a knife fight.” Acorn, Project
Vote, and SEIU were not ecumenical organizations.
b)
Obama knew very little about foreign affairs, or perhaps even raw human
nature as it plays out in power politics abroad. At times, he seemed
naive about the singular role of the U.S. in the world, especially his
sense that problems with Iran, the Middle East, Venezuela, Russia, and
others were somehow predicated on American arrogance and unilateralism
(and neither predating nor postdating George Bush) — to be remedied by
Obama’s post-racial, post-national diplomacy.
c) In truth, Obama, for all his rhetorical skills and soft-spoken charisma,had little experience
in the private sector outside of politics, academia, foundations, and
subsidized organizing. Consequently, he did not seem to understand the
nature of profit and loss, payrolls, how businesses worked and planned,
or much of anything in the private sector.
d)
Obama at times seemed to lack common sense, and perhaps even common
knowledge. He appeared confused about everything from the number of
U.S. states to the idea that air pressure and “tune-ups” might
substitute for new oil exploration. He seemed assured when reading a
teleprompted script, and yetlost much of his eloquence when it came to repartee and question and answer.
e)
Obama saw race as essential to his persona and his success, rarely
incidental. Collate the writings and rantings of his triad of pastors
and friends — Rev. Wright, Rev. Pfleger, and Rev. Meeks — and one sees a
common theme of racism (sometimes overt), anti-Semitism, and class
warfare. It was considered irrelevant to remind voters in 2008 that
Michelle Obama had alleged that the U.S. was a downright mean country,
or that she had confessed to never heretoforebeing very proud
of her country until it gave consideration to her husband as a
presidential candidate — though both sentiments would seem rare for a
potential first lady.
f)
Obama, it was also felt, counted on a sense of entitlement. His
admissions to Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard were alleged not to have
been based on the usual competitive test scores or grades — and such
charges were not refuted, but considered ancient history. As Harvard
Law Review editor, he seemed to assume, quite rightly, that he did not
have to publish an article. As a University of Chicago Law School
lecturer he also rightly assumed that Chicago — and later Harvard as
well — would, if he had wished, granted him tenure, again, despite
nonexistent publication. Sen. Clinton argued, without much refutation,
that as a state legislator Obama had both authored very little
legislation and voted present on any vote that might be considered
problematic for a higher political office — a charge that later
disappointed supporters would come to echo, along withadmissions of prior inexperience on Obama’s apart.
g)
Obama, like many on the elite left, had an ambiguous attitude about
affluence and its dividends. The more, as a community organizer, he had
railed about bankers and unfairness, the more he had enjoyed a
mini-mansion and dealt with the soon-to-be criminalTony Rezko.
The current Wall Street protests take their cue not just from
presidential anger at “millionaires and billionaires,” but also from the
idea that affluent young people are exempt from their own rhetorical
charges.
Yet
in 2008, to suggest “spread the wealth” meant anything important was to
be either racist or a rank partisan. But Obama in 2001 in a Chicago
public radio interview could not have been clearer about the need for
government to redistribute income and his unhappiness that the
Constitution seemed to prohibit that.Here is a telling excerpt in all its half-baked Foucauldian vocabulary:
But,
the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of
wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice
in the society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to
characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break
free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding
Fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren
Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a
charter of negative liberties. … I think, the tragedies of the civil
rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court
focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and
community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put
together the actual coalitions of powers through which you bring about
redistributive change.
Obama On Rejection Of Jobs Bill: "Maybe They Just Didn't Understand"
The folks at Real Clear Politics document our genius leader’s latest re-election campaign tour. "We've
decided, let's let them do the right thing one more time. We're going
to give them another chance to do their jobs by looking after your jobs.
So this week, I'm asking members of Congress to vote. What we're
going to do is we're going to break up my jobs bill. Maybe they just
couldn't understand the whole thing all at once. So we're going to
break it up into bite-size pieces so they can take a thoughtful approach
to this legislation," President Obama said at a campaign stop in
Asheville, NC. Watch the video at the link.
In
other words; I’m so brilliant that it’s probably very difficult for
Republicans to embrace my socialist proposal, so I’m going to give them a
second chance.
In
other words; the tax bill I proposed - disguised as a jobs bill - which
was defeated in congress, is coming up again and I’m producing TV
commercials showing that those nasty Republicans defeated YOUR jobs
twice.
In other words; Republicans are stupid.
Now
lets roll that big Canadian built Obama re-election campaign bus out
again and watch the never-ending Obama campaign spring into action.
Of
course, Air Force One and Marine One will be transporting the President
to within a few miles of the point where he climbs aboard the campaign
bus and pretends he traveled the entire distance over the open roads.
The cost of which will be borne by US taxpayers, because this campaign
tour.....No, strike that....this trip is “official business”. Let the
taxpayers pick up the tab.
Mr.
President, we weren’t fooled the first time and we certainly won’t be
fooled this time. We know a tax increase bill when we see one and yours
is exactly that. Remove the tax increases...to and including the
Democrat sponsored amendments...and then you might have a “jobs bill”.
Until that time, even members of your own party will vote against this
legislation.
