Tuesday, December 29, 2015

Seeing black and white bookends 2015

At the end of any given year—or the beginning of the next—it is a common practice of many to soul-search and reflect on the past. In this preoccupation, Washington Post columnist Lonnae O'Neal is no exception. Her concession—obvious to anyone familiar with her relentless race-based scribbling—is still a real whopper. A person of rare moments of surprising clarity, Ms. O'Neal admits to seeing a world of gradation and layered human interactions in the unrealistic contours, literally and figuratively, of black and white. Therefore, as such, she is a self-confessed unreliable narrator with no business being employed as a de facto journalist in a major news-reporting organization.

As a typical, misguided liberal goody two-shoes, on the surface she seeks to “heal” the racial divide by constantly pointing it out. The disconnect is seen in how it is done: in the most divisive and polarizing manner possible. This creates a deep-seeded hypocrisy of philosophically claiming to “address” society's ills (a “good” deed) while simultaneously making her living sowing the seeds of racial discontent (seen like brush fires across the nation in places like Ferguson, MO, Chicago and Cleveland). Therefore, ironically she has a direct economic incentive not to solve anything, but to “keep the stirring the pot” with a steady stream of racially-charged propaganda.

This is the standard fare of the MSM: two-faced duplicity that parallels all Democrats' lies (à la Mr. Obama) and seeks not to cover them, but to minimize and/or change the subject entirely. It also mirrors both Hillary Clinton's style of falsehoods and her Sal Alinsky-inspired college thesis (“There is only the fight...”) in order to sell newspapers. Specifically, Ms. O'Neal's oversimplified “monotone” victim/victimizer formula usually fixates on some minor, unfortunate incident, for example, between the police and a black minority. Anytime the authority figure is white she promotes the racist “bogeyman:” a fantasy specter hiding around every corner that minorities should fear.

The fact that such an outrageous point of view is given credence in 21st century America is completely out of touch with the good faith of a country that has elected a black man to the presidency twice. Worse, it completely ignores generations of substantive civil rights gains made since the 1960s and is antithetical to MLK's admonishment to focus on the content of character rather than the superficial difference of skin color; a hang-up more than fifty years later Ms. O'Neal cannot seem to grasp or move beyond in 2015.

As a minister, MLK's advice is grounded in Biblical scripture: “Do not judge so that you will not be judged.” For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?” (Matthew 7:1-3). Once again, true to form in her latest article, Ms. O'Neal claims victimization (this time for herself) due to unfortunate and vulgar comments she received as negative reactions to her year's labors in the shallow end of race relations. In any case, as a self-proclaimed 'race woman,' it is equally wrong when she has judged others with the broad brush of ethnicity as when she, in turn, has also been pigeonholed by readers for her biology. That is the only issue here that is truly “black and white.”

Collective societal harmony has not been in evidence since Mr. Obama assumed office in 2008. My New Year's resolution for America: a more tolerant, forgiving and constructive 2016 reflecting mutual respect and Dr. King's non-violent code of conduct on all sides. May we see brotherhood through the colors of red, white and blue before any other consideration.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Monday, December 14, 2015

Basic Obama unknowns plague presidency, legacy

As “Christians,” Barack and Michelle Obama should easily recognize Matthew 15:18, in which it is written: “But the things that come out of a person's mouth come from the heart, and these defile them.” For the Obamas, it seems, honesty comes through various historically odd slips of the tongue that reveal truth despite MSM narratives designed to cover up and obscure.

The controversy starts with what Mr. Obama's “real name” is. At one point during his formative years—an Indonesian childhood infused with the study of the Islamic holy book the Koran—our 44th president took on a step-father's last name. Back then, and later as an undergraduate at Columbia University, he was known as Barry Soetoro. (Ironically, as president, Mr. Obama also has trouble appropriately “naming” things such as calling domestic terrorism “workplace violence;” ISIS as ISSL; terrorism obviously perpetrated by radical Islamic extremists in San Bernardino, as such.)

Specifically, this myopic obtuseness explains Mr. Obama's inflexible, progressive ideology, and reputation for cool, personal aloofness. Likewise, time has made clear his consistently tone-deaf policies and politics that are, by and large, completely out of touch with the American people. (Much like his previously described unorthodox upbringing).

Indeed, this inability to label things what they actually are, speaks to Mr. Obama's delusion that the world should be as he “mandates it” rather than meeting it where it is. Indeed, Mr. Obama's Sal Alinsky brand of divisive, “destroy within” rabble-rousing is the antithesis to JFK's embrace of “being American” as a unifying ideal of Christian brotherhood that overlooks superficial differences that Mr. Obama exploits for personal political gain.

For Mr. Kennedy, we should selflessly aspire to our purer instincts modeled by Jesus Christ's gentle example. Yet, Mr. Obama embodies the opposite. For him, everything is “burn, baby, burn,” a violent upheaval coded by the soft innocuous phrase, the “fundamental transformation of America.” What it really means: tis better to rule in a Democrat-created first world redistributionist, big government Hell (à la socialist Bernie “90% tax rate” Sanders). Hence, the last 7 years of the ignoble Obama Administration is finally laid bare.

However, the enigma at its center—and basic facts related to the man himself—remain a mystery. Fundamental to this dynamic is the Obama “is he, or is he not” this-or-that? For example, beyond his surname, what is Mr. Obama's place of birth? Kenya, Hawaii, somewhere else? In any case, in Denver, Michelle Obama publicly muddied the waters in August of 2008 during her GLBT luncheon speech: “When we took our trip to Africa and visited his home country in Kenya, we took a public HIV test for the very point of showing folks in Kenya that there is nothing to be embarrassed about in getting tested, and we did it as a couple.” Would any worldly and educated spouse in a 20 year marriage ever mistake her husband's birth country? Moreover, would any American generally confuse a home country with somewhere else?

This begs another question: because of his well established connections with foreign lands, is Mr. Obama somehow “A closeted American?” On the other hand, speaking of closets, if the claims of outspoken homosexual Larry Sinclair have merit, is Mr. Obama in the closet of a different kind? While the answer is intimate, is never likely to be known and is not the public's concern, it is a relief to know that the Obamas are in the practice of taking HIV tests. This is the point: after almost two full presidential terms, isn't it amazing that Mr. Obama remains so ill-defined in such basic ways?

Now, we move to the big kahuna: the president's religion. For 20 years, Mr. Obama allegedly sat in the back of the Christian church of anti-American ranting Jeremiah “America's chickens are coming home to roost” Wright who proclaimed from the pulpit “God damn America.” Specifically, in a September 2008 pre-election first term interview with George Stephanopoulous, Mr. Obama said:

“You’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith and you’re absolutely right that that has not …”
Stephanopoulos (interrupting): “Your Christian faith.”
Obama: “My Christian faith. Well, what I’m saying …”

Utilizing the above nebulous history as context and fast-forwarding to today, we now learn per Washington Times columnist Tammy Bruce that Mr. Obama's inexplicable foreign policy is being heavily influenced by Koranic prophesy. Hence, the irrational position that America should not put puts on the ground in order to destroy ISIS because that is “what the latter wants,” some apocalyptic battle.

To truly be known, any person should be viewed by their faith-informed actions not their words. By definition, Christians traditionally look to the Holy Bible for guidance and prophesy, not elsewhere. On this basis, the religious question regarding Mr. Obama is more than answered. What remains is what else may also be true of the most polarizing president ever to helm the country.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Successful Hillary: worst political year?

Although I agree with Chris Cillizza's worst-year assessment of Jeb Bush—and the now unlikely Bush-Clinton 2016 presidential contest made my skin crawl—how can the same be said for Hillary? Beyond that, Mr. Cillizza is confused on a few key points. The truly “gifted politician” named Clinton is clearly Bill, not Hillary. Furthermore, as a lock for her party's nomination—and with a statistical 50/50 probability of becoming the next POTUS—how can she be mischaracterized by The Washington Post as having the worst year on the Democrat's side? (The unexplained reason for Mr. Cillizza's selection: Hillary is the only viable candidate of the biologically lilly-white three on the Democrat side; in contrast Republicans have ten diverse and serious contenders). Lastly, as historically the first female presidential nominee from a major political party, that seems like success to me rather than failure.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Thursday, December 10, 2015

Butt-naked “fish story” Admiral transferred not dismissed

For 7 years now and counting—in service of the scandal-prone Obama Administration—the MSM doesn't cover government official's activities, it “covers up” for them.

The narrative widely disseminated, the so-called “firing” of Rear Admiral David F. Baucom due to his naked, drunken shenanigans at a beachfront south Florida resort, doesn't exactly ring true. So, the sycophantic press calls a donkey wearing horse harnesses a stallion to the rest of us, and moves on. That is exactly what has happened here.

Mr. Baucom, a Navy man used to “fishy” stories, gave a really whopper for truly inexcusable behavior unworthy of any mature adult—let alone a military leader—yet he is still part of the military to this day. To my mind, a reassignment to a desk job in the Pentagon—a different job with full benefits and a pension—isn't Donald Trump's catch phrase of “get out with no second chances.” I think the 93 million unemployed John Q. Publics out there—many who were forcibly separated from their livelihoods and know what a “firing” actually is—would agree with my assessment rather than the tale being spun by the media.

Now, the Federal government is so large and powerful it acts precisely with the same tone-deaf impunity that the Catholic Church did when transferring “troubled” priests to distant parishes. Unfortunately, the bureaucracy's “out of sight, out of mind” isn't going to erase the memories of two female hotel guests who got an eyeful of a two-star admiral's “assets.”

As with Mr. Obama's Secret Service reported last March, less than one month later the ironically titled Rear Admiral Baucom also got into the irresponsible south Florida party-boy mode. Apparently, he was on official business that April, attending a conference with defense contractors, where he got so rip-roaring drunk he ended up in public in only his birthday suit. (Exactly, what are they putting in the water down there that all of these government-types utterly forget themselves?)

In any case, this supposedly “in charge” middle-aged person, the now former director of strategy and policy at the U.S. Transportation Command, got so blitzed he struck his head on a barstool, wet himself, and needed a bellman's assistance to get “strategically transported” to his room.

Hours later, still in a drunken haze, Mr. Baucom inexplicably reemerged from his room “looking for a bathroom” instead of using the one readily at hand. On the other side of his automatically-locking hotel room door. Naked as a jaybird. In dire need of his dress blues or a stitch of clothing of any kind like underoos. In short, anything with a waistband in which to stow a key card. (As Homer Simpson would exclaim: “D'oh!”) This was a pickle, no doubt, for our intrepid admiral.

To make matters worse, this He-Man laughably claimed later in an email to a colleague, per The Post, that he had failed to bring his pajamas on the trip because he was concerned about the heft of his luggage and “Did not want to to pay the extra $25 for a 2nd bag.” A series of bad calls leading to cringe-worthy circumstances spiraling rapidly out of control.

So what else is a 34-year serviceman to do than stumble around the grounds of the pricey $350.00 a night, 5-star Ponte Vedra Inn and Club with his exposed backside to the wind in desperate need of a beach towel? (Or perhaps a washcloth.)

Naturally, the rear admiral states: “I deeply regret my actions caused discredit to the Navy I love.” Then, in true pajama boy fashion (except with PJs obviously forgotten) this professional military man blames his behavior—rapid fire—on a heart medication that left him lightheaded, confused and disoriented. (To borrow the catch phrase “Clueless” actress Alicia Silverstone made famous: “As if!” which means “Yeah, right.”)

Mr. Baucom's personal Obamaesque “teachable moment” has led to a mild reprimand for disorderly conduct, and conduct unbecoming an officer. And his subsequent transfer (not firing as previously explained) to the Pentagon might ultimately be fortuitous: perhaps the world's largest low-rise office building is big enough for this rear end-baring admiral to lose himself in or at least to crawl under. Presumably wearing clothing first, like his uniform, of course.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Tuesday, December 8, 2015

WaPo: Never met a criminal-alien they didn't like

Heaven forbid The Washington Post show a smidgen of the same bleeding-heart compassion to the victims of convicted felons instead of criminal perpetrators.

Profiled subject Rodolfo Padilla's first lawlessness from age 10 permitted him the enjoyment of the stolen hospitality of the United States. In the ensuing 37 years, in gratitude, Mr. Padilla chose to become a cocaine-peddling scourge, no doubt ruining countless lives.  One again, our society has generously granted him the boon of an early release from prison after a 7 year stint.  Apparently, America, "the land of opportunity," was not sufficient for this economic parasite to make a positive contribution.

Why this uninvited squatter living in the shadows should suddenly be thrust from obscurity into the pages of The Washington Post is no mystery.  It seems their reporters have never met anyone truly worthy of being deported.

Where is the journalistic balance of the truly victimized?  Ignored, the nameless sufferers of Mr. Padilla's actions don't even warrant a mention, let alone receive this criminal-alien's gentle and sympathetic treatment in the press.

Now, because Mr. Padilla is not an American citizen, he faces the fate of possible deportation to his birth country, Mexico, where he has no familial ties. And unlike The Washington Post's frankly tenuous connection with the truth on these matters, Mr. Padilla has a moment of clarity before bemoaning the reality of his circumstances: “I know I messed up. I know I have to face facts.” In this, he could teach the powers-that-be in the MSM a thing or two.

As Miss Manners would agree: no matter how well behaved, any guest overstaying his welcome ultimately becomes a pest to his hosts. (With the holidays upon us, observant Democrats should litmus test their in-laws.)  In any case, it is the height of hypocrisy that illegal alien “advocates” would be quoted hollering about the rights of people who, by definition, don't respect American laws in the first place. This is doubly true of Mr. Padilla who is both an illegal alien (none of this vague politically correct “undocumented migrant” nonsense) and a convicted jailbird.

It's long overdue for this birdy, like his 43,479 incarcerated fellows, to fly south (of the border) for winter. Per U.S. Sentencing Commission data, men of Mr. Padilla's caliber make up 3.5 percent of the U.S. population, but account for 16.8 percent of drug trafficking cases and 36.7 percent of all federal sentences for criminal convictions in FY 2014. And the damage this group has done to society at large is unknown. 

What is clear is that The Washington Post promotes the false and irresponsible notion that this country should be left wide open to persons impossible to track in the case of illegals; impossible to vet, as in the Syrians; and anyone else with the desire and the gumption to make the trip. To these dystopian ideologues, Mr. Padilla's newly found clean living, high school equivalency and mastery of the guitar are more than sufficient reasons to allow any perpetual law-breaker second chances to remain.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

“Funny business” conference Obama worldwide scam

Allotted a mere three minutes to speak at the UN “climate change” conference in Paris, our Chicken Little “sky is falling” president—who equates weather changes as a greater threat to civilization than radical Islamic terrorism—rambled and sputtered for 14. (By contrast, Abraham Lincoln’s now world famous Gettysburg Address—which reaffirmed the goodness of a geographically reunified North and South, and encapsulated the American ideal of sacrifice for the greater good of human equality—took just over two minutes.)

Oblivious, Mr. Obama was buzzed five times to get a clue and wrap it up—and didn’t. (The person manning the buzzer gave up after the 11th minute.) Meanwhile to add to the comic relief, an equally clueless woman crosses in the background behind him twice (at 1:05 and 2:15: bully to the Secret Service). This hysterical video shows our intrepid leader uttering the word “signal” followed by an almost choreographed buzz (2:28). Such a gaffe-prone circumstance more typical of his foot-in-mouth VP Joe “a three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S” Biden. As reported solely by the Washington Free Beaconthe 7-year MIA hiatus of the MSM once again in evidencethe clearly flummoxed organizers badly needed one of those old fashioned vaudeville hooks and the famous giant gong from NBC’s ‘70s amateur “talent” show to silence Mr. Obama and drag him into the wings.

Let me be clear: this “weather” summit is Obama’s economic redistribution sham. A veiled effort to use his personal “terror” of raindrops and snowflakes to justify funneling American dollars (borrowed at interest from China due to our ever-growing 19 trillion dollar debt) to third world totalitarian regimes that also use a pen and a phone to get things done. The other world leaders in attendance are happy to let the president drone on and on—in giddy anticipation of their Obama-promised handouts:

“Here in Paris, let’s also make sure that these resources flow to the countries that need help preparing for the impacts of climate change that we can no longer avoid.” ... “There are hundreds of billions of dollars ready to deploy to countries around the world if they get the signal that we mean business this time.” ... “[A]n agreement that helps us lift people from poverty without condemning the next generation to a planet that’s beyond its capacity to repair.”

Obviously, the “people in poverty to be helped” do not refer to Mr. Obama’s fellow citizens as his policies have added 9 trillion to the nation’s red ink—almost double that of all preceding U.S. presidents—in the 7 years he has been in office. More of the “fundamental transformation of America” designed to pulverize America into something no better than the third world hellholes Mr. Obama embraces (read: Cuba).

As with all of Obama’s “weakening” monetary policies of deficit-spending and redistribution of American treasure to ideological allies, the underlying purpose is the further fleecing of America. See the pattern of the Obama doctrine of “rewarding friends and punishing enemies:” the wasted 2009 Obama “stimulus” funneled to green energy Democrat political cronies like the bankrupt Solyndra; the taxpayer funds squandered by pro-Democrat unions controlling GM; the trillion dollars wasted by Obamacare in the big government bureaucratic takeover of free market medicine (which redistributes coverage to the economically downtrodden—not incidentally pro-liberal voters—while ultimately leaving a different 30 million uninsured (read: the “problem” the dubiously named Affordable Care Act was supposed to solve)). This international meeting is more of the same.

JFK was the last true Democrat in the traditional sense of the concept. The divisive, self-obsessed “free stuff” anti-Capitalist triumvirate of Obama-Clinton-Sanders bears no resemblance beyond appropriating the label. JFK famously said: “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” Today that means having a good, long belly laugh at Mr. Obama’s expense—listening for that repeating “signaling” beep for his final exit (left) from the world stage—and electing the most conservative, strict Constitutionalist we can find. A salt-of-the-earth American like Ted Cruz who speaks plainly, commands respect, and is a leader no one would ever hasten from the podium.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Friday, November 20, 2015

Bodily harm greater than secret shame

According to Washington Post columnist Lonnae O'Neal, Charlie Sheen is a victim. Raised in Beverly Hills by the Hollywood set, sharing famous father Martin Sheen's movie star good looks, and success as an award winning actor with both a highly successful movie career (lead character in Best Picture “Platoon” (1986); opposite Michael Douglas's Oscar-winning performance in “Wall Street” (1987)) as well as being a one-time highest paid TV actor at $2 million per episode. Further, a previous marriage to fellow actress, former Bond girl bombshell Denise Richards wasn't half bad either. Indeed, by any rational standard, Mr. Sheen the younger, has led a very charmed life.

Yes, Charlie had the world on a string—and understandably millions would have traded places with him. Many brave souls among us probably still would despite Mr. Sheen's new public disclosure as HIV positive. After all, while not cured, there are effective treatments. Likewise, the very real terror of the disco era late 70's and early 80's and the stigma faced by Rock Hudson and Freddie Mercury is nothing compared to the educated and tolerant attitudes of today.

Per 2012 World Health Organization (WHO) figures HIV is the 6th leading cause of deaths worldwide at 1.5 million. So, the threat—same as the stigma—has receded, but remains real. Yet, Charlie Sheen should not be portrayed as a victim due to his poor personal life choices. With this wrong-headed assertion, Ms. O'Neal has missed the mark: the true victims here are Mr. Sheen's sexual partners—who did not know about his status—and may have contracted the virus from him. In the final analysis public health trumps “sick” secret shame every time.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog


Thursday, November 12, 2015

A controversy full of beans

A plain, solid red Starbucks coffee cup as a veiled political statement?  Maybe it's simply a corporate printing cost-cutting measure?  Maybe it's a wink to China's Communist red?  This dynamic reminds me of surrealist painter Rene Magritte's The Treachery of Images.  This work clearly shows a smoker's pipe despite the fact that the artist wrote in neat French cursive beneath it: “This is not a pipe.”  Both above instances examples of mind-bending perception.  Real head-scratchers: Rorschach tests to ponder while sipping that $4 cup of morning Joe.

In today's hypersensitive society, it seems any minutia—even the absence of a snowflake pattern on a beverage receptacle—inexplicably rises to the level of a newspaper-reported “controversy?”  Even Freud acknowledged that sometimes “a cigar is just a cigar” and moved on.  The Washington Post should drink up and follow suit.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Monday, November 9, 2015

Race: from the eye of the beholder

Stop The Washington Post presses! One of their race-obsessed scribblers—their intrepid columnist Lonnae O'Neal—has begrudgingly admitted in print that she was wrong! She who previously has seen absolutely every black-white human interaction through that divisive prism—might have had a moment of clarity. A real rarity in political terms: a "come to Jesus" epiphany. Don't expect it to last as habitual race-baiting pays the bills. After all, unlike 93 million able-bodied Americans who can't find a job, Ms. O'Neal doesn't want to inadvertently find herself the latest casualty of Mr. Obama's “5%” unemployment rate.

Her new column, 'Why can’t we agree on what we see when we see race?' addresses her previous one: 'Was classroom arrest a case of excessive force? Just imagine it was a white girl.' Regarding the latter, the reader has not even gotten to body of the article (or the objective details of the situation) and Ms. O'Neal's bias is already in full flower in the title.

Fast-forward two weeks. Suddenly, that which she was so adamant about—that race was the causal factor—perhaps, after all, was incidental to the greater issue of a bullying cop wrongly manhandling an intransigent student. Although Ms. O'Neal is very late to the party of evolved and generally tolerant 21st century race relations, it is a real pleasure to extend a welcoming hand. If she lounges, she will find the waters more than fine.

Today, she sensibly sees video cop incidents, such as the above, as “'racial Rorschach test[s,]' [d]ifferent people seeing the same thing but drawing different conclusions.” In other words, scientifically, one's internal belief system automatically filters physical stimuli into a unique point of view. Therefore, by definition, a “racist” has nothing to do with skin color, but with a mindset that sees every societal ill as framed by a racial cause or consequence.

Is it any wonder 7 years into the most polarizing president in U.S. history who subverts the social order (“The cops acted stupidly”) and engages in race (“If I had a son he'd look like Trayvon”) and class warfare (“You didn't build that”) at every opportunity that attitudes would not be hardened? Indeed, how could they not be? Obama and the abetting MSM (which, of late, Ms. O'Neal has been an active participant) have spawned the Black Lives Matter Frankenstein monster.

Ms. O'Neal has finally seen the enemy that she acknowledges threatens to tear our divided republic asunder from within. Yet, same as our chronically responsibility-phobic president, she has still not realized she was looking in the mirror at the time.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Monday, November 2, 2015

Bad/good cops or unruly/innocent teenagers?

In the contest of the dueling Washington Post columnists Lonnae O'Neal and Petula Dvorak, both address competing viral police videos. In the first, Ms. O'Neal focuses on the negative view, highlighting the superficiality of ethnicity: a white officer inappropriately manhandles a seated black teen in a classroom. In Ms. Dvorak's, a white cop and a black teen have an impromptu dance-off which diffuses emotional tension, and causes spectator laughs and cheers. While O'Neal's subject is terrible and unfortunate, it thankfully is not Democrat Bull Connor's army of cops brandishing batons and attack dogs, barring the schoolhouse doors to minorities. On the other hand, Dvorak's “dancing” cop got her unexpected 15 minutes of internet fame while O'Neal's ill-tempered cop was fired.

In the final analysis which scenario truthfully depicts how 780,000 law enforcement officers generally interact with the public?

If we use MLK's enlightened standard of evaluating individuals by the content of their characters and not skin color, latitude should be given equally to cops and minorities. Indeed, demonizing either group compounds the disharmony MLK worked so diligently 60 years ago to overcome.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Like Elvis, “clock boy” has left the building

Under Obama, a record number of Americans have renounced their U.S. Citizenship. Some don't bother with that formality and simply leave.  Among that number is teen hoaxer, Ahmed Mohammad known by his internet nickname “clock boy.” He of 15 minute millennial fame has fled to Qatar—an Islamic totalitarian state—for freedoms apparently no longer found here. Interestingly, this decision came just 24 hours after personally meeting with Mr. Obama. Indeed, after lavishing such public praise—via Twitter: 'Cool clock, Ahmed. Want to bring it to the White House? We should inspire more kids like you to like science. It's what makes America great'—the loss of Ahmed's so-called scientific “genius” is something he must privately bemoan. But, like Mr. Obama's “chicken little” obsession with weather, this trivia is the least of our country's many woes.

Snap! Even dissed by a 14 year-old Islamic boy. Despite Mr. Obama's clear pro-Islamic bias, the admiration is historically never mutual (much, I imagine, to his private frustration). If only Mr. Obama, a two-term U.S. president, would show such impassioned fidelity to average Americans and Christians, in specific. In any case, Ahmed Mohammad's sudden flight is an interesting commentary on Mr. Obama's political radioactivity as the worst-ranked living U.S. president.

This unprecedented migration is a direct consequence of Democratic leaders' bold-faced lies and anti-American policies causing our ever-dwindling fortunes, widespread societal chaos and the dimming of the long-term prospects of this nation. Since when has the politician's big lie become “no big deal?” While Richard Nixon turns in his grave, that has certainly been the case during the 7 years of the Obama administration. And while Mr. Obama—like his prodigal “clock boy” wunderkind who took the money and ran—so too will Mr. Obama take the taxpayer-funded largesse of his presidential pension and likely retire to some exclusive golf course laden enclave of the uber-rich. However, as past is prologue, current Democrat-created circumstances do not portend good things for the rest of us.

Indeed, Obama—who only praises all things big government (anti-Capitalist), Islamic and/or scientifically backwards—perhaps could join scholarship-awarded Ahmed at the Qatar Foundation of Education to teach U.S. Constitutional law; no doubt an elective class subservient to Sharia law. Ahmed created a crock (not a clock) and the same thing can be said for the disastrous Obama presidency.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Monday, October 26, 2015

Interracial marriage: a big deal now?

Interracial marriage was indeed a hot-button issue in America—in 1958. With the aptly named Lovings—a white man, Richard, married Mildred Jeter, a black woman—in violation of Virginia state statutes against miscegenation. Undoubtedly 57 years ago racial tension was a seemingly insurmountable issue reflected by novels like To Kill a Mockingbird (1960) and in film with “Guess Whose Coming to Dinner” (1967). Contrast that to 2013 when a record-high 12% of newlyweds married someone of a different race, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of census data. So, in light of a factually-supported more open cultural dynamic why is Washington Post columnist Lonnae O'Neal—apparently stuck in a time warp—writing about it in now?

As Bob Dylan prophetically sang of social mores in 1964, “The Times They Are A-Changin.'” And they have to an amazing degree with a black man cooling his heels in the Oval Office for 7 years and minorities at all levels of American society. Today, for example, it would be unconscionable for public opinion to condemn interracial marriage or children of mixed parentage (who tend genetically to embody the best of both). And while there will always be unfortunate, isolated circumstances to this obvious societal trend (as the divided family Ms. O'Neal highlights) one must recall that gay marriage has recently been embraced in all 50 states. In any case, however one evaluates others' marriage choices, to be black in America—compared to past generations long gone—is beautiful.

Naturally, per First Amendment guarantees of free speech (which in particular protects unpopular views), differences of opinion are healthy in a democracy and all should be respected. Therefore, individual bigotry is to be pitied as a throwback exception to our society's 21st century rules of widespread tolerance. Ms. O'Neal's bumbling attempt to trumpet the rare exception as more than it is is nothing but the vain creation of a tempest in a teapot.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Friday, October 23, 2015

Blowing dollars: Obama's, politicians' choicest drug

Will the schizophrenic man who has theoretically been “in charge” as president (but is apparently not responsible for anything, ever) please step forward for his psychotropic medication?  Once again, Mr. Obama single-mindedly pontificates about race and income inequality.  This time at a West Virginia town hall meeting, poverty was cited as the primary casual factor of that region's skyrocketing drug epidemic, highest and double the national average: 33.5 fatalities per 100,000 people.  His also-ran Democratic non-solution response that always compounds every problem—a hallmark for MrObama's dytopian administration: more government spending, this time on treatment centers and “training” for doctors.  As if our beleaguered, highly educated physicians don't have enough to deal with already related to Obamacare: socialized, costly medical bureaucracy that has gutted the best medical system in the world.  Likewise, spending a record 8 trillion under Mr. Obama's oblivious watch which threatens to sink America into a permanent Greek economic morass.  (In concrete terms that's more debt than every president combined over 227 years from George Washington and the inception of the republic to Bill Clinton.)  Is this what Mr. Obama meant by his cryptic reference to the “fundamental transformation of America?”  Who knows?  7 years in to this total debacle, the powers-that-be in the MSM have yet to questioned him about it.

Indeed, with Biden's exit stage left from a White House bid (and Hillary circling the presidency with the inevitability of a vulture) what difference at this point does it make, right?  None to Mr. Obama who is content to kick-the-can down the road to the next undoubtedly headache-prone occupant of the Oval Office.  In truth, his denial—a complete, deep-seeded almost pathological disconnect from his actions and their real world consequences—an unwillingness to acknowledge the obvious connection between his extreme environmental policies that have dismantled the coal industry and with it any hope of American energy independence (read: the Keystone XL Pipeline).  Better to monetarily submit to Islam by funneling U.S. resources into that Middle East powder keg borrowed at interest by our Communist banking masters in China.  As bad as the drug epidemic may be in West Virginia it pales in comparison to politicians in Washington of both parties who treat the American dollar like an endless supply of crack cocaine.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

Thursday, October 15, 2015

The secret meaning of debate handshake

As Tuesday's overly chummy Democratic sham of a “debate” demonstrated Bernie Sanders is nothing more than a shill for the Democratic Party. Why else would he leap to a spirited defense of scandal-ridden front-runner Hillary Clinton? Before shaking hands with a grinning Hillary—no symbolism of collusion there—he said:

“Let me say something that may not be great politics, but I think the secretary is right, and that is the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your [Hillary's] damned emails!”

In any case, in the American sense of the word, there is nothing “independent” about Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders; an outspoken advocate of bigger government, a 90% tax rate and further income redistribution á la Obama. As an avowed Socialist, his collectivist views are anti-Capitalist and antithetical to the American economic system. With 93 million able-bodied Americans looking for full time employment— and uncounted by labor statistics which laughably report 5.1%— a politician with Mr. Sanders’s views is too radical to be elected, even by loopy Democrat standards. So why is such a wild card in the race for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president?

Make no mistake: he of the little "I" by his surname is nothing more than a plant for the Democrats. Indeed, he who regularly caucuses and votes with Democrats is a de facto Democrat. In truth, Mr. Sanders is running precisely because he is unelectable. His role in this Kabuki theater is to happily serve the Democrat's collective: to be a smiling, friendly placeholder to populate the stage during debates and in the press. To this end, he has not and will not say anything truly controversial about Hillary Clinton as any legitimate contender would. For example, the best Mr. Sanders can muster is milquetoast platitudes: “Hillary Clinton is a candidate, I am a candidate…. The people in this country will make their choice.” The closest thing to a criticism thus far was calling Mrs. Clinton a “fence-sitter” on the Trans-Pacific trade proposal. Mr. Sanders should know that fence-sitting— and going with changing political winds—is the very epitome of Clintonian politics.

Mr. Sanders's colorful presence creates the illusion of a contest for the Democratic nomination—rather than a coronation—and makes Hillary Clinton appear more politically mainstream—and therefore, more palatable to the general electorate. The payoff to Mr. Sanders is increased personal visibility in the political conversation and a wide platform to promote his anti-American agenda.

Socialists like Sanders believe in the economic fantasy of “free” stuff—which is never really free—and is always paid for by someone else. Hence, his policy of “free” tuition for students at public colleges and universities. Likewise, Clinton believes in cradle to grave government dependence though “free money” welfare programs like the ever-expanding food stamp rolls. With typical Democrat blasé, these birds of a feather operate in a fiscal twilight zone (where an 18 Trillion dollar debt and deficit spending don’t matter) and resources just drop magically from the heavens to serve their dystopian designs. In essence they demonize “Paul” (Wall Street) to justify stealing from him (class warfare) in order to pander for “Peter's” vote. Everything for Democrats revolves around garnering numbers for reelection: maintaining their own political power base. In this case, that is exactly Mr. Sanders’s underlying purpose: to get Hillary Clinton into the Oval Office in 2016.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog