Gmail - Godfather Politics - retrader.ray@gmail.com

Gmail - Godfather Politics - retrader.ray@gmail.com


Godfather Politics
Inbox
x

Godfather Politics christianvoteralliance@gmail.com via google.com
10:56 PM (13 hours ago)

to me
Godfather Politics

Six Walton Heirs Have More Wealth than the Bottom 30% of Americans
The Dangers of Gun Control
Will Newt Be Faithful to the Old Hag Called the Constitution?
Tax Increases Kill Jobs
How Many People Has Barbara Boxer Killed?
Rabbi Claims Tebow-Mania Might Lead to Mosque Burnings
Nazi Overtones of Obama Campaign Effort to Collect GOP Email Addresses
Feds Challenging Redistricting Maps, but Only Those Favoring Republicans
Obama More Like Arrogant Professor than President Says Dem Rep
Six Walton Heirs Have More Wealth than the Bottom 30% of Americans
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 06:09 PM PST
Did Sam Walton know that his small company would make him and his family billions of dollars? No. Did he hope that Walmart would make him a lot of money? You bet. “The Waltons are now collectively worth about $93 billion, according to Forbes.” Does the wealth of the Walton heirs make any of us poorer? Nope. Walmart employs more than 1.4 million people in the Unites States. That’s a bit more than one percent of our workforce.

Next to the Federal Government, Walmart is our nation’s largest employer. The Federal Government costs you and me money and freedom. Walmart doesn’t cost us a penny and can’t compel us to do anything.

Walmart does not do business in a vacuum. It has thousands of suppliers that employ millions of people around the world. In fact, Walmart employs nearly a million people overseas. They money paid to these employees enables them to purchase goods from the United States.

Why is Jeffrey Goldberg reporting this story? Tim Wortsall at Forbes has a theory:

I think we all know what Mr. Goldberg wants us to make of it, it’s a telling indictment of American wealth inequality, the world’s going to the dogs and something must be done about rising inequality.

Mr. Goldberg is pushing the class warfare agenda. He’s arguing that the Walton fortune is too much money for any six people to have, although it’s less than John D. Rockefeller (1839–1937) was worth all by himself. Adjusting for inflation, Rockefeller is often regarded as the richest person who ever lived.

A millionaire and billionaire tax would not do anything to the Waltons because their billions are not income. In order to redistribute their wealth, the government would have to confiscate their stock. It’s not in cash.

Ninety-three billion dollars is a lot of money. If all of their stock was sold and the assets confiscated and equally redistributed to every American, a family of four would get $1240. And that would be the end of anything else the Waltons’ billions could do long-term. The wealth of the Waltons works for other people in investments and charity work.

Mr. Goldberg does not mention the philanthropy of the Waltons. Helen dropped in her wealth ranking because of her extensive philanthropic work. After Helen Walton died in April 2007, her fortune passed to charities.

Christy Ruth Walton, the widow of John T. Walton, is ranked as the highest female philanthropist according to Facesofphilanthropy.com, in terms of the amount she gives as a percentage of her wealth. Between 2002 and 2006, she contributed billions from her then $16.3 billion net worth towards philanthropic efforts.

Additionally, she supports her family’s own charitable foundation, the Walton Family Charitable Support Foundation, which prioritizes education and benefits colleges such as the University of Arkansas, the College of Business Administration of the University of Arkansas, and several other colleges, community trusts, universities and foundations. In 2007, her family’s foundation donated as much as $1.6 billion.

If you don’t like the Waltons having this much money, then don’t shop at Walmart.

Sam Walton and his brother took a huge risk. They invested time and money in business that became a retailing phenomenon.

Few people understand the small beginnings of companies and how long it takes to make a profit. Consider Brad Anderson, former CEO of Best Buy. When he was young, Anderson considered business people to be evil, John Stossel writes.

“But then he ‘stumbled into a business career’ by going to work in a stereo store. ‘I watched what happens in building a business. [My store] the Sound of Music, which became Best Buy, was 11 years [old] before I made a dollar of profit.’ In 36 years, he turned that store into a $50 billion company.”

His efforts did not cost any of us anything but resulted in the employment of thousands of people and made purchasing electronic equipment convenient for millions of shoppers.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says, “My job is to create jobs.” Governments cannot create jobs because governments don’t have any money that they don’t first take from other people.

Most people who despise big business have almost nothing negative to say about the confiscatory policies of government.

I’d rather trust $93 billion to the six Waltons than $15 trillion to tens of thousands of government bureaucrats.


The Dangers of Gun Control
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 04:33 PM PST
There are those who “suspect the Obama administration used the gun-running operation [Fast and Furious] to support regulations Congress would not even consider, namely, a rule requiring gun stores in the Southwest to report anyone who tries to buy multiple ‘long guns,’ or rifles, in a one-week period.” The border between the United States and Mexico is dangerous. The federal government has tied the hands of states and counties to do anything about the unrestricted border and the violence and murders that take place there.

Foreign entities that want to see the United States toppled are using our porous border as an access point. Criminals don’t care anything for restrictive guns laws. In fact, they encourage them. Look what illegal drugs have done for the drug cartels of Mexico. Our restrictive gun laws have made them rich, well armed, and violent.

“All we are saying is give Peace a Chance.” John Lennon had the right idea, but he didn’t account for the fact that at least one person wanted him dead. I’m all for peace until someday wants to kill me. In the “On Religion” section of USA Today, Oliver “Buzz” Thomas appeals to the Bible to declare that Christians should work for peace in the world. I couldn’t agree more. Christian leaders should call for an international summit to establish a workable agenda to pursue peace in the world. At the same time, they should recognize that there are people in the world that want us dead.

In the movie Ben Hur (1959), there is a discussion between Balthasar and Judah Ben Hur about seeking revenge.

Judah: I must deal with Messala in my own way.

Balthasar: And your way is to kill him. I see this terrible thing in your eyes, Judah Ben-Hur. But no matter what this man has done to you, you have no right to take his life. He will be punished inevitably.

Overhearing their conversation, Sheik Ilderim speaks wisdom: “Balthasar is a good man. But until all men are like him, we must keep our swords bright!” If all those in the world had the heart of Balthasar, then there would be no need to discuss what the right response is regarding self-defense and war.

Mr. Thomas quotes some familiar New Testament passages in attempt to support his point that peace is the best way. Jesus tells us “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matt. 5:9), but He doesn’t tell us what our response should be when someone, despite our best efforts to be peaceful, still wants to steal, rape, and murder.

Then there’s Jesus’ injunction to “turn the other cheek” (Matt. 5:38–39). There’s quite a difference between slapping someone across the face and someone wanting to take a baseball bat to your head. Self-defense is a biblical option in such cases:

“If the thief is caught while breaking in, and is struck so that he dies, there will be no bloodguiltiness on his account” (Ex. 22:2).

The homeowner can assume that someone breaking into his house at night has nothing but bad intentions.

So what is a legitimate reaction when we are told what the goals are of those who are planning to kill us in “the name of Allah” or anything else? Peace doesn’t have a chance!

The laws used by Mr. Thomas apply to personal relationships. They are not describing the proper response of governments or actions of self-defense. While governments should pursue peace in every way possible, there are still times when peace is not an option. We can see the differences when we compare Romans 12:17–21 with 13:4. Paul tells Christians, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men” (12:18). Sometimes peace isn’t possible. While the individual is never to take his own “revenge” (12:19), the civil magistrate “does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil” (13:4).

Mr. Thomas appeals to Christians to develop a proper biblical ethic regarding pursuing peace. He implies that he wants these personal views regarding peace to transfer over to the civil magistrate since that’s who wages war. He then ruins the deal by stating that “Our beloved nation is a civil state, not a religious one.” Then why should our civil leaders listen to Mr. Oliver’s biblical arguments? Mr. Thomas can’t have it both ways.

The push for gun control is a push for assured destruction. If only 10 percent of the Muslim world is radicalized, that’s 100 million Muslim radicals. A well-armed American population will stop any attempt by Islamic extremists to coordinate a planned domestic terror attack. I’m reminded of an exchange between Rick, Humphrey Bogart’s character in the film Casablanca (1942), and Major Heinrik Strasser (Conrad Veidt[1]):

Major Strasser: Are you one of those people who cannot imagine the Germans in their beloved Paris?
Rick: It’s not particularly my beloved Paris.
Heinz: Can you imagine us in London?
Rick: When you get there, ask me!
Captain Renault: Hmmh! Diplomatist!
Major Strasser: How about New York?
Rick: Well there are certain sections of New York, Major, that I wouldn’t advise you to try to invade.

At the present time, the United States would be difficult to invade, but if gun-control advocates get their way, it will be Red Dawn (1984 and 2012) with a different ending.

Sorry for all the film references, but I can’t help myself.

Notes:
Conrad Veidt (1893–1943) was a German actor. While playing a Nazi heavy in Casablanca, Veidt was married to a Jewish woman. They left Germany in 1933 and settled in the United Kingdom. Veidt fervently opposed the Nazi regime.

Will Newt Be Faithful to the Old Hag Called the Constitution?
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 04:38 AM PST
The following article is written by Kevin Craig. Craig is the Libertarian Party Candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Southwest Missouri.

He is the only candidate uncompromisingly committed to the ideal of Liberty Under God.

Liberty Under God is the philosophy that made America the most prosperous and most admired nation in history. America is now bankrupt and despised even by former admirers. Only one candidate for U.S. Congress would get the vote of America’s Founding Fathers. Your vote for KEVIN CRAIG shows you put America ahead of the two-party monopoly.

I found his article on Newt Gingrich on the money and to the point. I wanted to share it with GodfatherPolitics readers. I found Craig’s final point to be the nail in the coffin:

Will Newt Be Faithful to the Old Hag Called the Constitution?

By Kevin Craig

Since there is no essential ethical or moral difference between the oath one takes in marriage, and the oath of office, it is proper to ask questions about the political qualifications of one who has repeatedly violated his oath to be faithful to one woman, “in sickness and in health,” “till death do us part.”

Nobody contests the accusation that Newt Gingrich was not faithful to his first two wives. Constitutionalists like Ron Paul will charge that Newt has consistently promoted government programs which are not authorized by the Constitution, thus repeatedly violating the oath of office he has taken many times.

Now Newt wants to take an oath that will make him the most powerful human being on the planet, and subject him to those powerfully corrupting influences.

Does anyone seriously believe that Newt “Mr. Globalism” Gingrich can remain faithful to a sickly 224-year old hag called the Constitution when the opportunity to run off with a rich young New World Order presents itself?


Tax Increases Kill Jobs
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 04:32 AM PST
It’s the end of the year, and my business partner and I have to figure out how to reduce our taxes. If we didn’t have to pay so much in taxes, we could hire the four people we need to hire. The government takes so much in taxes from us that it’s getting more difficult to want to work harder. Why bother? But we keep working and trying to figure out how to reduce our taxes. Unfortunately, these reductions don’t lead to further employment. What’s true of our businesses is true of every business, even the biggest of them.

If government had its way, oil prices would be regulated and “excessive” profits taxed. The majority of Americans support higher taxes on the oil companies because of short-term self interest. This is why many of the people who are protesting the healthcare bill are really protesting the possibility that there Medicare benefits will be cut.

The majority of Americans like government subsidies, everything from “free” public education to government subsidized and backed loans, when they benefit from them. They don’t like subsidies for others, and they don’t like corporations making so much money, but they will defend their “right” to get government freebies.

When oil prices spike, usually conservative, anti-welfare Americans scream bloody murder. “Why won’t the government do something . . . The oil companies are making too much money . . . Tax the SOBs.” I read the following article in the New York Times, “Oil Industry Sets a Brisk Pace of New Discoveries”:

The oil industry has been on a hot streak this year, thanks to a series of major discoveries that have rekindled a sense of excitement across the petroleum sector, despite falling prices and a tough economy.

These discoveries, spanning five continents, are the result of hefty investments that began earlier in the decade when oil prices rose, and of new technologies that allow explorers to drill at greater depths and break tougher rocks.

“That’s the wonderful thing about price signals in a free market—it puts people in a better position to take more exploration risk,” said James T. Hackett, chairman and chief executive of Anadarko Petroleum.

More than 200 discoveries have been reported so far this year in dozens of countries, including northern Iraq’s Kurdish region, Australia, Israel, Iran, Brazil, Norway, Ghana and Russia. They have been made by international giants, like Exxon Mobil, but also by industry minnows, like Tullow Oil.—

The next time you read about “excessive” oil profits, remember where the profits are going. Tens of thousands of investors get some of that profit. They invested in oil companies to make a profit. Many of them are retirees who live on fixed income. No one invests to lose money, unless, of course, it’s the government. The money they initially invested helped the oil companies to buy equipment so they could extract oil from deep deposits. It’s getting more expensive to locate, drill, and transport oil. It doesn’t ooze out of the ground like it used to. Profits insure that there will be oil in the future. If there aren’t “excessive” profits, then there can’t be any research and development.

Years ago, gas pumps used to include a small sign that told consumers how much they were paying in state and federal gasoline taxes. These signs no longer grace our gas pumps. The average tax on a gallon of gasoline is around 45 cents. A CNNMoney article reported that “Exxon also had a hefty tax bill. Worldwide, the company paid $10.5 billion in income taxes in the second quarter [of 2008], $9.5 billion in sales taxes, and over $12 billion in what it called ‘other taxes.’” Actually, Exxon didn’t pay a penny in taxes. We consumers paid all of it!

Of course, this is true of all corporate taxation. A tax is considered a business expense. As an expense it’s passed on to consumers, and there is no law that will change this reality. Any company forced to eat the cost of taxation will go out of business or be subsidized by the State. Once again, a subsidy is an extraction of capital from workers, either in taxes paid to the State for the subsidy or by inflation (increasing the money supply). Since a large minority of Americans knows almost nothing about economics, they serve as cheerleaders for “tax the rich” rhetoric and economic policy and vote the Prince Johns into office, all the while blaming poor economic conditions on those under the thumb of the Sheriff of Nottingham.


How Many People Has Barbara Boxer Killed?
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 04:25 AM PST
During the Vietnam War, anti-war activists used several anti-LBJ slogans. This one was the most effective:

Hey, Hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?

A North Vietnam leaflet was published and distributed using the slogan as a way to get young Americans not to fight in the war:

“Hey, hey LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?”

That’s what everybody is saying all over the US Today.

And millions of people all over the world who know no other English shout it.

“How many kids did you kill today?”

* * * * * *

Do you want to go down in history as one of LBJ’S killers!

Think it over, talk it over. Act together.

Don’t let the Babykiller think for you.

It’s your head. USE IT, DON’T LOSE IT.”

Sen. Barbara Boxer is using a variation of the slogan by claiming that Republican legislation to roll back some environmental regulations will result in the deaths of thousands of people. Here’s what she said:

“They have attached a poison pill — literally, colleagues — because it will kill 8,100 more people more than would have otherwise been killed from pollution.”

Boxer was referring to the Republicans who lessened EPA industrial boiler regulations in the payroll tax cut extension bill currently in the Senate. She argued that lessening the standards will result in arsenic, lead, and mercury poisoning.

The 8,100 number has no basis in fact. It’s from the EPA that has to justify its existence with outrageous environmental claims. There’s no way to quantify deaths from boiler emissions. Nobody is doing as a direct result of boiler emissions. In fact, these boilers are already heavily regulated.

But there is a more tangible number that can be cited about the number of people who have died as the result of a government policy that Boxer supports with religious fervor: 1.5 million pre-born babies that are killed every year because of liberalized abortion laws.

Boxer has served in Congress since 1983. That’s 28 years she has been an advocate of abortion. This makes her legally complicit in the death of 42 million pre-born babies.

Then there are the nearly 600,000 deaths and the more than 1,000,000 people in the US who have been diagnosed with AIDS that have occurred as the result of homosexual behavior. When men who had sex with men were dying of a rare cancer began to spread throughout the medical communities, the syndrome began to be called by the colloquialism “gay cancer.” Even though people like Boxer knew there was a causal relationship, she and other liberals would not publicly acknowledge the connection.


Rabbi Claims Tebow-Mania Might Lead to Mosque Burnings
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 04:08 AM PST
Tim Tebow attacks have gotten out of hand. It started when the Christian group Focus on the Family ran an ad during the Super Bowl that featured Tim and his mother Pam. Here’s what it said:

PAM TEBOW: I call him my miracle baby. He almost didn’t make it into this world. I remember so many times when I almost lost him. It was so hard. Well, he’s all grown up now, and I still worry about his health. Everybody treats him like he’s different, but to me, he’s just my baby. He’s my Timmy, and I love him.

TIM TEBOW: Thanks mom. Love you too.

After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, Pam Tebow ignored doctors when they told her she should abort her fifth child. She later gave birth to Tim who went on to win the coveted Heisman Trophy in 2007 and helped the Florida Gators win two BCS championships. Tebow was later drafted by the Denver Broncos and is now the quarterback.

Pro-abortion groups nearly had a heart attack when they heard that Focus on the Family was going to run an ad that they believed was going to carry a pro-life message. Planned Parenthood even released a preemptive video in response to the commercial that the pro-abortion organization had not seen. These people are insane.

Since making his debut in the NFL, there has been relentless handwringing over Tebow’s public display of religion that amounts to nothing more than kneeling on one knee and bowing his head.

Public and media sentiment regarding Tebow has been on the upswing because of the way he has led the Broncos back from the football dead. His 4th quarter comeback victories are the stuff of legend. He’s packing them in the seats, and news stories continue to extol his toughness and fortitude. Tebow has made believers out of them.

Now comes the rabid Left-Wing Rabbi Joshua Hammerman who writes that he has a “Tebow Problem”:

I want to root for the guy, but I’m afraid of what will happen if the hulky Denver Bronco quarterback continues to pull off what is fast becoming the Greatest Gridiron Story Ever Told.

******

A poster boy of the Christian right, Tebow steadfastly thanks Jesus after every game and, while in college, often inscribed biblical messages on his eye paint. Homeschooled in Florida, this child of missionaries turned down his selection as a Playboy All American because it was, well, Playboy. His trademark prayerful touchdown celebration . . . has become a verb. Google “tebowing” and you’ll find 84 million hits, including lots of YouTube parodies.

Nothing terribly wrong so far. The jab about Tebow being “a poster boy of the Christian right” is a little over the top. Being against killing pre-born babies should extend to Jews whose memory of the holocaust is still fresh, but for many Jews it’s not.

Now here come the rabid comments from Rabbi Hammerman. You won’t find all of them on his post as it now appears on his website. The rabbi got so much negative feedback from nearly everyone that he removed them, but not before the folks at the Heritage Foundation copied them.

When supposedly well-educated candidates publicly question overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change and evolution and then gain electoral traction by fabricating conspiracies about a war on Christmas, these are not rational times.

Hammerman is a Liberal who believes in irrational things like man can affect the weather and spontaneous generation.

Are you ready for the most outrageous one? Keep in mind that this is a Jew saying this. Can you imagine what the ADL would be doing if a Christian said the following about a large segment of the Jewish voting community? Do you remember the firestorm over comments by Southern Baptist minister Bailey Smith that “God does not hear the prayers of a Jew”?:

If Tebow wins the Super Bowl, against all odds, it will buoy his faithful, and emboldened faithful can do insane things, like burning mosques, bashing gays and indiscriminately banishing immigrants. While America has become more inclusive since Jerry Falwell’s first political forays, a Tebow triumph could set those efforts back considerably.

Muslims are burning churches, killing Christians, and threatening to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, and this guy is worried about a low-key Christian quarterback. Can the world get anymore insane?

The article includes some other stupid things, but I think this one says enough. The Rabbi concludes his article with this line: “For me, only one thing is certain. On Sunday, I’ll be praying for the Patriots.”

I won’t be praying for either team, because, as Tebow himself says, God doesn’t take sides in football games.


Nazi Overtones of Obama Campaign Effort to Collect GOP Email Addresses
Posted: 15 Dec 2011 01:26 AM PST
It’s no secret that the Obama campaign has launched an effort to collect email addresses of Republicans across the nation. They claim that it is being done to have a little fun at the expense of Republicans, but it could be a ruse for a more sinister motive.

Obama’s official campaign website posted,

“Who inspires you to give?

This holiday season, we’re giving you a chance to have a little fun at the expense of a Republican in your life by letting them know they inspired you to make a donation to the Obama campaign.

Simply enter their name and email address below. Then, we’ll send them a message letting them know they inspired you to donate.

Thank you for supporting this campaign, and happy holidays.

Important: By making a donation today, you’ll be automatically entered for a chance to have dinner with Barack and Michelle Obama. By clicking on the “Submit” button below or otherwise participating in the promotion, you agree to be bound by these Official Rules and represent that you satisfy all of the eligibility requirements.”

Some political pundits believe the email gathering campaign may be used by the president’s campaigners to push Republicans towards supporting GOP candidates that are less likely to defeat Obama in 2012.

This may be the surface reason for collecting Republican’s email addresses but if you have been following the Marxist policies of the Obama administration, the collection of our emails could easily become a database for any possible dictatorial actions he may take if he gets re-elected. Asking for people to turn over this personal information on their family and friends is eerily similar to Nazi Germany when they had people telling on their neighbors, friends and family, only to have Gestapo agents show up and arrest them. What a better place to start monitoring your enemies than to have their email addresses so they can monitor everything you say and do.

If any of my friends or family give my email address to the Obama Gestapo, I promise that there’ll be words between me and them and then I’ll change my email address and be very careful to whom I give it to.




Feds Challenging Redistricting Maps, but Only Those Favoring Republicans
Posted: 14 Dec 2011 11:38 PM PST
A number of states have been busy trying to draw up new districting maps for state and federal legislatures.

In California, the new redistricting map strongly favors Democrats and Latinos who traditionally vote Democratic. Some state Republicans have seen their districts disappear entirely. Even though state GOP leaders have vehemently protested the biased new maps, no one in the federal government has blinked an eye or offered to review the legality of the state’s redistricting map.

In Ohio, the new redistricting map strongly favors Democrats and may make House Speaker John Boehner’s bid for re-election tougher in 2012 than in it was on 2010, but despite GOP complaints, no one at the national level is looking into the matter.

In Texas, the new redistricting map drawn up by the state legislature favors Republicans. State Democrats and Latinos are up in arms, just like the California and Ohio Republicans were over their maps. The main difference is that in Texas and Ohio, the courts have stepped in to try to subvert the GOP redistricting and have offered up their own redistricting map favoring Latinos and Democrats. The case is now before the US Supreme Court who will have the final say.

US Attorney General Eric Holder has also waded into the fray and vowed to use the Department of Justice to the fullest to challenge any state’s redistricting map or voting laws that he feels is unfair. He has stated the DOJ reviews will be fair and impartial.

Yeah right. Holder and his DOJ comrades are as fair and impartial as Al Sharpton is non-prejudice.

Additionally, Holder also plans to challenge any state’s voter registration laws that he feels places any specific requirements to register to vote. Specifically he says that the federal government should automatically register everyone in the nation and that there should not be any restrictions such as photo id, permanent address, etc.

What Holder is really saying and doing is to make sure that Democrats across the nation gain as much of an advantage in redistricting and he wants to remove any voter registration laws that will prohibit any form of voter fraud or people being able to vote more than once.

His actions are the signs of a desperate political party that feels it has to resort to whatever means possible, regardless of how legal or ethical they are, in order to try to win Obama’s re-election. It’s dirty politics to the core, but what do you expect out of Obama’s Chicago politics.


Obama More Like Arrogant Professor than President Says Dem Rep
Posted: 14 Dec 2011 11:32 PM PST
California Democratic Representative Dennis Cardoza claims that Obama has acted more like an elitist college professor lecturing to a class of students than as president of the nation.

He points out that during Obama’s first year in office that he and his administration suffered from what Cardoza described as ‘idea disease.’ The White House spent most of their time turning out one program after another, sometimes as frequent as one per day. They did not take time to prioritize or even act on one idea before releasing the next one. Cardoza described the experience as overwhelming and like trying to take a drink of water from fire hose.

Cardoza also points out that Obama quickly took on an attitude of ‘I’m right and you’re wrong,’ shortly after taking office. He often told the public, members of Congress and staff that we could all learn from him. Instead of acting like a national leader, Obama acted more like a college professor, and not just any college professor but one who considers himself above all those around him. I would tend to describe Obama’s professor attitude as that of Richard Dawkins, who is so arrogant that he says whatever he wants and expects everyone to take it as gospel truth.

Like many elitist professors, Obama often avoided contact with normal people and even most members of Congress. Cardoza recounts how one former Obamanite told him that White House staff were instructed to “NEVER TALK TO REAL PEOPLE.” Another staffer told Cardoza that Obama kept at arm’s length from everyone outside in inner circle.

In keeping with his arrogant professorship mentality, Obama could care less for any input from anyone outside his immediate collective. This aloofness has alienated Obama from America. Unlike Presidents Clinton and Bush (both of them) Obama avoided meeting and talking to anyone from the general public unless it was a well scripted performance staged in advance. This alienation has only served to distance Obama from a number of his early supporters and backers.

Finally, Rep Cardoza says that many Democrats would rather have New York Gov Andrew Cuomo or California Gov Jerry Brown or Maryland Gov Martin O’Malley or even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton run for president than see Obama run for a second term. But if left with Obama on the 2012 ticket, Cardoza said he would remain loyal to the Party and support Obama over the GOP ‘goat rodeo clowns.’

Cardoza’s short expose reveals the disharmony and disenchantment within the donkey Party realm. It also raises the question of why none of the other donkeycrats have been willing to challenge Obama for the party’s nomination. What are they afraid of? Is Obama’s inner sanctum that powerful as to intimidate any possible party challenge?