Project Syndicate Adores China (and seems to Despise Israel) – Read Project Syndicate with Great Care, it is NOT Our Friend

I am writing with regard to the article published by Project Syndicate, and republished in the Taipei Times on May 1, 2018 on p. 8 entitled China Should Follow WTO Rules written by Martin Feldstein.

While not bashing Israel, Project Syndicate seems to make great efforts to glorify Communist China and the new Emperor Xi. This is another Project Syndicate “hail China” article. Is it any surprise? What is wrong with these people? George Soros continues to seek a revolution with totalitarian flavor in the world (a “World with Chinese Characteristics” – he would really love that, it seems). Truthfully, this article and Martin Feldstein, disgusted me from the very first line: “I am a great admirer of China and its ability to adjust its economic policies to maintain rapid growth, but now that it has risen to the top of the global economy…” WHAT ABOUT ITS TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIP AND CRUSHING OPPRESSION OF ITS PEOPLE? Not one word. Not one.

Professor Feldstein recounts how he traveled to China in 1982, and how poor it was, and governed by a communist regime. Even then he makes no reference to the nature of the regime – and that is the point – very little has changed since 1982 aside from having beguiled the world into sending trillions of dollars into building up the world’s biggest threat to freedom. I think as an economist, Martin looks at the Chinese economic experiment and marvels at it, sort of like a biologist might examine anthrax or the plague and marvel at the complexity and efficiency at killing. At least the biologist recognizes the threat to humanity. Here, well….only marveling. This kind of appeasement of China is one of the most dangerous aspects of this platform, filling heads around the world with glowing praise for China, a silent killer adept at its own propaganda and blackmail.

Where does Project Syndicate find these pro-China hacks with stellar resumes? You would think that as a member of the Reagan and Bush administrations, Feldstein might have developed a healthy perspective on China’s menace to the world. Perhaps he was brainwashed and turned sappy when he served in the Obama administration and then the Council on Foreign Relations.

Here is an example of another Harvard economist overwhelmed with admiration by the ease with which a totalitarian government can manipulate its economy to become whatever it wishes on the backs of over a billion peasants. Amazing what killing 80 million of its own people, and oppressing billions, strictly controlling every aspect of society and foreign competition at will, and stealing every single item of technology within its sticky, greedy hands, and elevating industrial espionage to a national duty can do for your economy.

Remarkably, Feldstein focuses only on China’s compliance with WTO requirements to admit China into the world as an international leader, and nothing else. He already puts their economy at the top. However, not one time, not one word, not a whisper is devoted to China’s horrendous treatment of its people, the complete absence of any freedom, rights, justice, free will, license, democracy, free enterprise, its aggression towards the South China Sea, its neighbors and in particular its obsession with destroying Taiwan’s democracy, a threat to China’s malignant one-party dictatorship. How is it possible that Feldstein, a member of three Presidential administrations, a supposedly world class economist cannot even recognize China’s hegemonic intentions (e.g. his glowing view of One Belt One Road, ignoring its threat to the world) and complete domination of its people, or that its economic “success” is done with blood on the Emperor’s hands?

This is why we are in danger. People like this, like Feldstein, with long resumes, appointments at the best universities (Harvard in his case), a large platform and absolutely no brains whatsoever in their empty Project Syndicate heads (empty aside from some economic guidelines, formulae and statistics, devoid of morality apparently). In my opinion, Mr. Feldstein is a brilliant economist and a complete idiot (something I feel he has in common with Joseph Stiglitz).

 

 

 

Women’s rights are universal, not political – the left kidnapped the cause, making it exclusive, not “inclusive”

“The march in Washington took on the feel of a political rally when US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and US Representative Nancy Pelosi, both Democrats, urged women to run for office and vote to oppose Trump and the Republicans’ agenda.”  Washington Post, 1/21/18 (Celebrities join march for women’s rights, encourage voting)

I agree with most of the principles of women’s rights, especially equality on all levels. Most people in the U.S. do abide by those principles, even the President.

By turning the women’s movement into a leftist movement of the Democratic Party, it becomes not “inclusive”, but in fact “exclusive”. The idea that emerges is that women who do not support the “Party” (the Democratic Party) are not deserving of the same rights (in fact, the idea floated is that if you support the President, as a woman you definitely do not deserve any rights at all). This is the legacy of President Obama, the Great Divider. He championed the concept of “us or them”, either his disastrous ultra-leftist views or extremism on the right. As it turned out, there were 60 million people who voted otherwise, and an enormous legion of people who eschewed both the left and the right. But women’s rights should not be political.

Women’s rights are universal, not political. Yesterday, in Los Angeles, the marches for women were replete with political speeches against the current administration and any policies the Democratic Party does not support. Those issues have nothing to do with Women’s Rights.

In fact, and most importantly, many of the men who have been caught up in sexual harrassment cases (like Harvey Weinstein, a very high level high roller in the Democratic Party, and also Michael Oreskes, Chief of the news division of National Public Radio (who actually managed NPR’s coverage of the sexual harrassment narrative at NPR in recent months), and other TV and Screen stars) were high level members of, or supporters of the Democratic Party and extreme liberal views, proving that women’s rights transcend party lines. By co-opting the movement, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party has isolated at least half the women in the world. Now how is that “inclusive”?

The “women’s movement” as defined by the Democratic Party, has been designed to include many issues irrelevant to the woman’s movement itself, such as BLM, anti-Trumpism, and illegal immigration. By swelling the ranks with many people with other axes to grind, it makes it appear the movement is bigger than it might be, and also part of the Democratic Party’s platform, but also in doing so it robs the women’s movement of its absolute purity and righteousness, and obscures the universality of women’s rights. Actually, the women’s movement needs to reach all women, not just liberals. Women’s right’s advocates have said that already, only the Democrats, so worried about economic success of the administration, have sought to piggyback on the opportunity of opening Pandora’s box of sexual harassment (and much to its chagrin, many of the casualties have been their very own male “treasures”).

Hypocrisy has come to reside in the left, to infect it really, and it is very scary and tragic. It is one of the chief reasons I abandoned the Party some years ago, because when I saw the ideological table, I was shocked to find the Obama wing of the Democratic Party sitting right next to the most extreme right wing acolytes, both adamant that their own speech is the only permissible speech, that only their own ideas were worthy of protection, and that everyone and everything else had to be suppressed, stopped, destroyed, even questioning the wisdom of free speech, and seeming to support China’s totalitarian system and Palestinian terrorism.  College campuses have become infected with this rot, and Obama’s political correctness has produced calls for many unconstitutional restrictions on speech. There is a name for that – fascism.

Grave Danger Posed by China’s Trojan Horse – One Belt One Road

I have written before here about the grave danger posed by China’s One Belt One Road initiative – it is China’s Trojan Horse in Europe, Communist Chinese lucre a smokescreen for the Chinese Communist Party’s power grab, continuing battle with the U.S. for influence, and for the Communist Party’s hegemonic designs.

Greece fell prey to China because it has been the EU’s pauper, and bristled at its treatment at the hands of German/EU austerity in response to Greece’s uncontrolled spending. Hence, China’s offer of billions to Greece was most opportune for the Chinese Communist Party and welcome for Greece – and as usual, any money China “invests” has strings – strings to support its totalitarian system, its political evil, and its continuing assault on Western democracy and any kind of freedom.

In an article published in the Taipei Times on Monday, January 8, 2018 on p. 5 (Europe Wary of ‘One Belt One Road’), the article notes “The former NATO chief said that Greece — a major recipient of Chinese largesse — had in June last year blocked an EU declaration condemning Chinese rights abuses.” Here is the rub – take money from China, kneel to Uncle Xi and his political agenda. The march of the Chinese Communists begins with the infection wrought from within its Trojan Horses. Greece bent over for Uncle Xi. More to come in Europe.

I for one don’t trust France’s Macron to resist China’s Trojan Horse offerings, trading access to a fake Chinese market (there is no Chinese market except for Chinese companies so long as foreign companies are required to partner with Chinese local partners, themselves Communist Party Trojan Horses) for softness on Communist China’s political demands and violations of human rights and every other fundamental French principle. France has been perennially rushing to China to get better market position and to tell the Emperor Xi his clothes are most lovely. I haven’t trusted President Trump with such issues either, the bright light of China’s phantom market a very juicy mirage hard to resist. Trump also is not so enamored with Democracy as he is with Businessocracy, and evening out the playing field with Communist China is a priority – but even that comes with risks of Trojan Horses. There is also the North Korea chess game that China has been playing with the U.S. for 25 years, and playing it very well against the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations, and continuing with the current administration, though Trump’s unpredictability and bullish attitude has China unnerved. The EU’s stance on North Korea and Iran is disappointing – appeasement at its worst.

Europe does not have the backbone to resist Communist China’s hegemony and political moves, because Europe has no stomach for conflict (its foreign policy is basically “appease, appease, appease”) and is so eager to jump on any advantage over the US with Chinese trade when there are conflicts, such as North Korea or the South China Sea. We do not see Europe sending carriers to the region or supporting the US in its opposition to North Korea’s nuclear ambitions (only softness, weakness and more appeasement). The same can be said of Iran, where Europe has lined up with China and Russia in failing to comprehend the value of a strong hand against a rogue enemy like Iran. Europe’s suicidal embrace of the enemies of democracy is both surprising and disgusting, turning my stomach every time I see it (note the loving comments made yesterday by High Representative of the European Union (EU) for Foreign Affairs and Vice-President of the European Commission Federica Mogherini about Cuba and dictator Raul Castro, like the words of a lover). Consequently, I have no faith that Europe can resist Communist China’s quest to plant as many Trojan Horses as possible around Europe. Let’s remember that Europe failed to act to stop the conflagration in Syria, instead following Obama’s Oppeasement policy there, and the result was millions of refugees flooding Europe, something that will change adversely European culture, society and politics for many generations. Already many people are fearful of travel to Europe, caring about where it is safe…

One Belt, One Road will look bright and shiny to the EU’s infrastructure starved members. But the cost of that infrastructure is political suicide and being indebted to Communist China, a tyrant who demands obedience to its “life with Chinese characteristics.”

Opposition to Legislation Against Israel on the Spurious Grounds of Violating Palestinian Children’s Human Rights – Pro-Palestinian Groups using Palestinian Kids as “Human Shields”

This is an email I just sent to Betty McCollum, Congresswoman for the 4th District in Minnesota after learning of her sponsorship of a bill entitled Promoting Human Rights by Ending Israeli Military Detention of Palestinian Children Act.  It seems the BDS lobby is now using Palestinian kids as human shields to try to hide the malice in the Palestinian campaign to end Israel and Jews. It is embarrassing there are actually people in Congress who have bought this ruse.

1. I am appalled at your bill regarding Israel.

2. A child aged 8 walks into a department store in downtown St. Paul wearing a suicide bomb vest. What should you do? After the child is tackled to the ground by an heroic officer, and apprehended before the vest can be detonated, what to do with the child? Catch and release? Release to parents (who armed the child in the first place, or failed to stop Uncle X from teaching the child to kill)? Detain the child pending further investigation? How about if the story is about thousands of child/teen bombers over a longer time period?

3. Instead of focusing on a tiny nation fighting against a billion adversaries all religiously committed to exterminating them and all Jews worldwide, how about focusing on the brainwashing in Palestinian schools? How about preventing a child from taking part in terrorism by halting aid to a regime that indoctrinates its children with the notion that suicide bombing Jews is the highest achievement they can attain, and that all Jews must be killed? This is the basic curriculum in Palestinian schools. Not be a doctor. Not be a lawyer. Not be an artist. Not be a scientist. Be a terrorist, be a Jew killer.

4. There are hundreds of millions of children suffering around the world, many many many many of them suffering at the hands of Islamic societies using them as child soldiers or as child brides or as slaves. And yet, you focus on Israel, the only true democracy in the region, a nation of around 8 million people, not on the 1.5 billion in Arab nations surrounding it eager to kill every Jew alive. Imagine, if only the region were focused on actually educating their children instead of indoctrinating them to murder? Golda Meir said “Peace? There will be no peace until the Arabs love their children more than they hate us.” She said that 60 years ago. It is still completely true today. By the way. The doctrine for Israel is “Never again.” I wonder. Have you ever visited Dachau? Auschwitz? Buchenwald? If you haven’t been to a concentration camp, you cannot viscerally understand what Israel is dealing with.

5. Palestinians always have had the opportunity for normalcy. But having been chosen by the Arab world as cannon fodder, they have decided to torture their people to try to destroy Israel. Congratulations for buying into the lie that Israel is persecuting Palestinians. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been given to the Palestinians and used there to pay terrorists’ families when they have murdered Jewish children, or to build bombs, or tunnels, not build schools, hospitals or commercial enterprises. Israel created an oasis out of a desert. The Palestinians have turned an oasis into a desert. Go figure.

6. My fervent hope is that this legislation dies an ignominious death in some Committee somewhere. However, given the recent insanity gripping my Democratic Party, I am not sure of the support. Imagine having to turn to Republicans for common sense. What a strange and twisted thing liberalism has become. You were among a group who sponsored the Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act of 2017 – are  you really going to conflate the Holocaust with Palestinians opposed to Israel’s battle for survival against all adversaries determined to kill all Jews? Perhaps you believe that Hamas is a charitable organization?

Chairman Xi’s Chinese Dream – Only the Manual Can Discern the Truth

Regarding an article which appeared in the Taipei Times on Tuesday, Oct. 24th on P. 8 entitled “‘Chinese Dream’ will become a nightmare”, and with a nod to Chen Fang-ming (陳芳明), who wrote the article, confusion regarding Xi Jinping’s real motivations and intent can be discerned from reference to the Chinese Communist Party Manual of Commonly Misunderstood Terms (the “Manual”), which is essential when attempting to parse CCP policies, statements and doctrine. Now that Xi has become Chairman Xi, and venerated to the status of Mao, it becomes important to understand Xi’s true intentions.

First, the article refers to a proposal by the Chairman/ President/Leader/Commander/Icon/Top Guy/Numero Uno Xi Jinping called his “Chinese dream”, a slogan which came with the goals (according to the article) of “prosperous, strong, democratic, civilized, harmonious, free, fair, abide by the rule of law, patriotic, just, honest and friendly”, words which are uncommon normally having anything to do with the Chinese Communist Party run government in Communist China, possibly the world’s worst and most repressive totalitarian regime.

Referring then to the Manual, we can more easiliy understand what Xi meant when he talked about these goals in the context of his “Chinese dream”. Xi has used the word ‘democracy’ before, but clearly he is referring to the definition of “democracy” in the Manual, which is “democracy with Chinese characteristics”. In the Manual, the definition of “democracy with Chinese characteristics is “the right to vote for the Chinese Communist Party slate of candidates in the order provided, a right given to only those members of the Party given permission to attend and vote according to Party directions at the National Congress held every 5 years”. There is another second definition, written in smaller print that says that the definition of democracy in the Manual is “2. No democracy – see Freedom”

Going on then to the definition of ‘freedom’ in the Manual, we find some help in understanding Xi’s animus. “Freedom” is defined in the Manual as “The right and legal obligation to obey each and every order, rule, regulation, law, statute, directive, policy and dictate of the Chinese Communist Party and each and every of its representatives at all times and in all places, failure to follow which is punishable by any means dictated by the Party.” That clears that up, doesn’t it? The Manual offers a secondary definition as follows “Freedom – 2. No freedom”.

Now we are getting a better idea of just what Xi meant by his liberal pronouncement for the future of Communist China.

As to “prosperity”, there can be no question that China has been more prosperous than at any time in the history of the Chinese Communist Party, in large part because it abandoned ‘communism’ and adopted “communism with Chinese characteristics”. In the Manual, ‘communism with Chinese characteristics’ is defined as “not communism per se, but rather allowing free enterprise under strict control by the Party, and all enterprises subject to control by the Party to the greatest extent possible, and otherwise open to free exchange of capital subject to Party rules and regulations, violation of which are punishable by death”. Basically this is capitalism with Chinese characteristics, otherwise known as “prosperity” for Party members, until the Party decides a member is too powerful, and then prosecution for corruption is required.

As for “strong”, the Chinese Communist Party is certainly set to become stronger under “Chairman” Xi, considering the power the Communist Party has accumulated, and Communist China itself has become stronger partly because it has been devoting double digit parts of its GDP to its military, partly because through espionage it keeps stealing technology and advances from others (mostly the US). Also, as liberal democracies in Europe have become weaker and more reliant on Chinese Kommunist Kash, Communist China has become stronger through weakening resistance to China’s temptations, large bucks and its enormous supposedly “open” markets. However, in the Manual, “open markets” has been defined as “segments of the Chinese economy open to foreign entities under strict regulation by the Party, and only when a local Chinese partner participates in at least 50% ownership of the entity, such Chinese partners subject to absolute control by the Party”. Also, though the Manual is silent, it is well-known that the Party philosophy on local partners is they have 3 years from acquiring their interest in the foreign business to steal all available IP, set up backdoor avenues for walking products and technology out the back door, and to acquire complete control of the business, or set up a competing entity which can take over the business that is left when the foreign owner runs away.

As for civilized, I presume Xi is referring to the Party no longer starving its citizens or murdering them in public. However, all that the Party has done is taken these tools inside, where all options are available to the Party to ensure compliance with any of its dictates. Being one of the worst human rights violators in the world, Beijing has a long way to go to reach “civilized”. In the manual “civilized” is defined as “The Party rules require the government to conduct its security processes in a civilized manner, especially during official secret arrests, torture, and blackmail.” It’s not much, but it’s an improvement.

Xi loves using the term “harmonious”, but the true nature of this concept is set out in the Manual, where “harmonious” is defined as “every citizen following the Party’s instructions in every aspect of life in Communist China obediently, and making sure not to criticize the Party or the government under any circumstances.” It is easy to see how wonderful it is for China to be harmonious for Chairman Xi.

As for “fair” and “abide by the law”, we need to jump around a bit to understand this core principle of the Communist Party. First, “justice” in China is defined as “any ruling made by a Court with the approval of the Party shall be considered full justice.” Though you have to dig through the Manual to find it, “justice process” (also called due process in the Manual) is defined as “having the absolute right as a citizen in the People’s Republic of China to be subjected to the Party’s justice through the rulings made by judges in the Party’s courts with the abolute directives of the Party”. It reads a little differently than other common views of due process. There is a footnote under the entry for “due process” as follows: “2. Due Process – no due process”. Actually, as Xi knows, there can be no due process without an independent judiciary, but as the Manual identifies in the definition of “Court”, there is no independent judiciary in China (in the Manual “Court” is defined as “the tribunal dealing with legal matters subject to the directives of the Party to do justice as the Party shall see fit.” Gotta love dictators. They really know how to get results.

As for honest, the Manual defines honest as follows: “Honest: The truth is what the Party says is the truth. Honesty is absolutely keeping to the truth as mandated by the Party in all things, no matter how ridiculous it seems, upon pain of death.”

As for “friendly”, there is a reference in the Manual as follows: “friendly: see Taiwan”. Under the entry for “Taiwan”, for some reason, it says only: “Grrrrrrrrr.” There is a secondary entry under Taiwan that says “Taiwan: 2. Chinese Taipei, Taiwan, China, China, China, China”.

As we can see, Xi’s Chinese Dream is really not much of a dream, unless you define dream to include nightmare. In the Manual, “Chinese dream” is defined as “the Party becoming the most powerful government in the world, adopting the slogan ‘My name is Chairman Xi, Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!'”

 

 

The Chinese Communist Party Emperor’s New Clothes – Buck Naked and Waiting for the Truth from the World

Taiwan is completely independent, it is just mildly schizophrenic, because one very small side of it (the die-hards of the Chinese Nationalist Party (a/k/a KMT)) keeps mistaking itself for Communist China.

We are in fact stuck in the fairy tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, and in this tale, the entire world, fearful that the Chinese Communist Party will bar them from selling their goods at the Communist Party kasbah, is willing to tell the CCP that the “Emperor’s” new clothes are delightful, and anything else it wants to hear, including that they believe Taiwan is not independent and is a part of Communist China (nudge nudge, wink, wink). In fact, as we know, the Emperor is buck naked, and the Chinese Communist Party is simply delusional if it thinks Taiwan’s full-fledged democracy is going to go back to the stone age of tyranny (Japan for 50 years and the KMT for 50 years), except this time with Communist China’s communist dictatorship.

Oh. And no one believes Taiwan is actually part of Communist China. They just say that so they can sell their whatever to China, or buy China’s really cheap stuff, get Kommunist Kash from it, or avoid China squeezing off their oxygen because they made the mistake of telling the truth.

We are waiting for the day the rest of the world actually has the guts to tell the Emperor that he is naked, and Taiwan is a great independent democratic nation of 23 million fantastic people who are not communists. Only when the world has the courage of its convictions and stands up as one to tell this to the Emperor’s face will the world be free from Communist China’s blackmail, propaganda, prevarication, and bullying, and the people of China free from the Chinese Communist Party’s 70 years of suffocating tyranny.

Charlottsville – the illegitimate child of Barack Obama, “The Great Divider”

Note: I was born in Brooklyn, New York. I grew up in a melting pot and I was raised not to see any color or creed or religion or race in other people, and that is how I lived my whole life. I am a lifelong member of the Democratic Party, though I have not supported the Party in quite some time, probably not since Bill Clinton’s administration. I would say I am an independent. I want to make it clear that Nazis, White Supremacists, KKK, racists and others of such ilk have no place in our society. When I see Nazi symbols I feel sick. When I hear the N word I am horrified and repulsed, (even when it is used by a black person). I grew up in dire fear of the KKK, as I was as much a target of their hatred as anyone else. I supported Martin Luther King, loved him, followed him, was too young to travel to Mississippi, and knew some men who died there fighting for civil rights and freedom.

Trying to sum up the 8 year legacy of former President Barack Obama, I was drawn to some former Presidents who had an impact on American history. Abraham Lincoln is known mostly as “The Great Emancipator”, and Ronald Reagan is known mostly as “The Great Communicator”.

I thought about this, since many of his followers have likened Obama to Lincoln, and many of his detractors have distinguished him from Reagan.

I began to think of these comparisons, and what former President Obama left us as his legacy. More and more, every day, it becomes clear that Barack Obama was “The Great Divider”. No better evidence of this is what happened in Charlottsville in the past few days. Many in the media have placed the blame for the violence in Charlottsville at the feet of President Trump. However, the enormous gap between the “far right” and the “far left” began long before Donald Trump even showed up on the political scene, it began back in the early days of Obama’s presidential campaign before he was elected.

While former President Obama talked often of uniting America, he did nothing of the sort. In fact, Barack Obama led liberals, progressives, socialists and communists, those who disliked the right, disliked conservatives, disliked religion, disliked Christians, disliked white people, disliked America, disliked Israel, disliked Jews who supported Israel, disliked drug control, disliked law enforcement, and many of the like out into the wilderness, for eight years. And when he returned from the wildnerness, with his tens of millions of followers, they had become rabid haters of all they had disliked, having been emboldened by how far to the left the President had driven the Democratic Party, my party, so far left, so extreme in their views, so intolerant, so politically correct, so sensitive, so violent, so vocal, and so hell bent on forcing their views on everyone, everywhere, that when the American conscience sat around the table that has been America’s melting pot of ideas, Obama’s followers and fascists, nazis, white supremacists and KKK members, who were many of the people who showed up in Charlottsville, were actually sitting right next to each other, because in fact the far, extreme, disgusting right, and the far, extreme disgusting left could no longer be distinguished, both imbued with hatred, both hopelessly irreconciliable, both so far to the left and right that their hatred was mutually bright and blinding, their methods equally offensive and loud, their hearts filled with murder and destruction and intolerance and both absolutely convinced they and only they are right about everything and that no one can disagree.

President Obama united nothing. He flung the world into chaos by refusing to act, whether out of a belief the US has no business in international affairs, emasculating the United States so as to convince the world the US was not a shining light, not the answer to any question or to any problem, or promising one thing and doing another (such as abandoning the Syrian rebels mid-stream), inventing the foreign policy doctrine of “Oppeasement”, and bowing to the likes of Hu Jintao, Xi Jinping, and Putin, not to mention Iran, North Korea and the Palestinians, managing to put Russia back at the top of the list and emboldening every evil in the world with his weakness, hesitation, indecisiveness and passivism.

Obama, the first black President, did not do one single thing to raise up black people in the United States, but merely encouraged them to rise up without leading them in any particular direction to give them the voice and wherewithal to achieve the equality they deserve and are absolutely entitled to in American life. He did not lead them to schools, but fashioned excuses for low performance, he did not pound on the importance of families in getting a good education, he did not exhort blacks to obey the law, but rather justified their fear of the law, setting minority against authority by injecting himself into legal matters the President had no business commenting on during investigation. He turned out to be wrong in every single case. He made the advice “when you see the man, run” the standing order of the day for minorities in America and tacitly approved of it, instead of encouraging faith in the legal system, and explaining that no one single significant shooting of a person of color in the years of his presidency would have occurred if the victim had only been encouraged by the President of the United States, the first black president, to obey a lawful order of the police, and not “run, when you see the man”, or resist arrest or carry a weapon, or take it out. I don’t recall a single time in eight years that President Obama supported law enforcement in the United States regarding the black community. In fact, the Great Divider drove a wedge between blacks and police, between blacks and whites, between rich and poor, between educated and uneducated, between lawful legal aliens and immigrants and illegal aliens (Obama using the euphemism “undocumented” to avoid “illegal alien”, the perfectly correct concept under the law (under the law of every country on Earth) applying to immigrants without the legal right to stay in the country).

Even in his own party, the Democratic Party, Obama was the great divider. If you did not support his extreme “progressive” and “liberal” ideas, you were not with the program. I often thought, wait, this is the Democratic Party, not the Liberal Party or Progressive Party, or Socialist Party or Communist Party. In his push to impose his extreme leftist views on his followers, he ended up making it necessary for white people to hate themselves in order to get into his Party. He even drove wedges between white people, and successfully made “old white men” a derogatory term, like the “N” word, which if I spoke, my parents would have washed my mouth out with soap (and I never did or could say it or any other derogatory term because I didn’t believe in that kind of racism against people I had always embraced and respected every diverse person in my life, which in New York was many).

Former President Obama divided American allies from America, almost all of them, his foreign policy based on “resetting” relationships, which all failed (every single one), and no more embarrassing than Russia, which Obama had proudly and arrogantly instructed his challenger Romney on when Romney said Russia was our primary enemy, saying the Cold War had ended decades before. Obama’s passivity elevated Russia to new heights, allowing Putin to assume the mantle of Russian dictator, and allowed Russia to once again stick its ugly head into foreign affairs in order to thwart every single American initiative. Putin also buddied up with Xi Jinping when convenient to form a block of totalitarian opposition to American support for freedom and democracy, those things being anathema to both Russia and Communist China. Former President Obama divided Jews and Palestinians (and Jews who swore by “never again” and Jews in Israel and the United States who followed his extremism so much so they hated themselves and pursued policies which could only lead to the eventual destruction of Israel). President Obama divided Christians and Muslims, by exhorting Islam and characterizing Christianity as the problem, creating deep conflicts in the US, and giving rise to a huge swath of discontented Americans who could no longer support his party, and went looking for something, anything else than his dogmatic American self-hatred, and many of whom ended up in Donald Trump’s lap (as much the fault of the weak, divided and hopelessly unfocused Republican Party, which could not even agree on debating rules, let alone policies for the American people or fielding a small group of leaders who could stand for election and actually get elected – debates turned into boxing matches which turned off most of the electorate).

Former President Obama made it a crime to be successful, to be comfortable, to have worked hard and earned a good living, he actually made it a crime to earn more than someone else – and the name for this is “socialism”. He made “taxing the rich” a mantra, and Obamacare was not as much about bringing 40 million Americans into the health care system as it was about decimating the health care apparatus for the other 300 million Americans. Obama’s own medical care for his family and him was not affected. The quality of health care dropped like a stone, waiting times tripled or were even ten times as long, insurance companies raised premiums because the system was untenable as proposed by the Great Divider. The end result was basically to sabotage the health care system, scrap it, and start from scratch, leaving hundreds of millions of Americans affected and fuming. The Great Divider achieved his aim of making sure success did not mean success – in his system, utterly opposite of the American system of working hard to get ahead, everyone was entitled to the same, even if the government had to pay to achieve that – socialism. To achieve this, Obama decimated the military to save billions for his socialist programs, trying to turn the US into Europe’s Mini-me.

The hatred demonstrated at the march in Charlottsville has been around for centuries. Nazis have been parading for more than 70 years. Is it disgusting? Yes. Is it allowed under the Constitution? Absolutely. And here is the problem. Former President Obama actually divided the nation in what it could and could not say, by imposing Political Correctness on every single utterance, except those things said by his followers.

Nazis can march. They have always had the right to march. Our Constitution protects all speech. But the last five years have seen a tendency to characterize any ideas that infringe on the ideas of the left as illegal speech. This is not true. Nazis can march. We can stand on the other side of the street with signs and shout slogans against their disgusting racist un-American principles. We cannot assault them, we cannot throw stones at them, we cannot shoot them. We can say they have no place here, but they are entitled to their disgusting thoughts under our Consitution. And the minute that stops. the minute that segments of speech become prohibited, that is the moment we descend into autocracy, and that is the bus that President Obama was driving for 8 years.

The Great Divider – he left office with the world and our beautiful country in chaos. He was a great speaker, a great motivator, but his policies and principles were a million miles further to the left than Trump’s are to the right. President Obama elected President Trump just as surely as if he voted for him. Obama created an enormous silent majority of people who believe like I set forth here, not like a dyed-in-the-wool leftist, like a socialist, or communist, all of whom believe, based on Obama’s teachings, that their droppings smell like roses. Unfortunately, President Trump and his White House Circus have not figured out yet how to run the country, and so long as the President has a twitter account it will be so. He does not realize that every single word he utters has a consequence, and that he needs advisers to advise him before he speaks, not after. The concept of “damage control” has become the primary function of day to day White House life.

It will take some time, maybe another 8-20 years to fix the mess that The Great Divider left for us, both here in America and abroad. There are many fires to put out, and many concepts to re-purpose. But I think the fires that The Great Divider started cannot be extinguished so easily, and they are not the fires of progress but the fires of destruction. Of course Barry would rather burn down the house than let it survive. That is the definition of extremism. And we are on fire now, and it is not a good fire, it is a totalitarian fire burning on the left…look at Venezuela, if you dare.