Progressives Are So Smart

ScreenHunter_782 Mar. 21 09.04

Russia might invade Ukraine if Obama wins, Palin warns


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Progressives Are So Smart

  1. When your entire strategy consists of talking about how dumb Sarah Palin is and racism…

  2. B.C. says:

    Much like the birthplace typos on the jacket of his autobiography lie-filled cover story, when Obongo’s resume’ was trotted out for his campaign, it listed “Community Organizer” instead of the more-accurate “Communist Organizer” as his chosen profession. It’s taken him a little while to really get going, but he’s well on his way to helping to organize the largest Communist empire on the planet.

  3. Gail Combs says:

    Obummer is so incompetent he couldn’t find his way out of a room without someone opening the door for him and showing him the way out. Now could some one please guide him out of the White House and NOT show him the way back?

    Barack Obama faces 30 death threats a day, stretching US Secret Service ” Since Mr Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent….” So much for Bush being more unpopular. (Why do we have to go to the UK to find this information?)

    Given the hysterical trashing Sarah Palin and Herman Cain got in the Bankster owned media, they were probably our best choices for president and VP.

  4. What could possibly go wrong? says:

    So the US backed Georgian attack on South Ossetia and the US backed coup in Ukraine with the fake “russian invasion” (how can you invade something where you are already there?) were known and in the planning before Obamas election and Palin asserted that he would be the one to set them in action?

    • B.C. says:

      US-backed Georgian attack in South Ossetia and US-backed coup in Ukraine? Where are you getting your information?

      As far as the “invasion”, Russian troops invaded the Crimean peninsula and took over. It would be like having US troops leave their base in Gitmo and taking over a large part of Cuba. (You could also throw in a full-scale amphibious landing to sort of equal the Russian response in Ukraine.) What’s so hard to understand about that?

      Palin and others simply had the foresight to know that Ear Leader’s weak-kneed, pants-pissing Librul worldview would be viewed, by Putin and his henchmen, as a prime opportunity for them to re-establish the borders of the former Soviet Union, knowing that there would be no real consequences.

      • Gail Combs says:

        It is all part of the Liberals goal of INTERDEPENDENCE.

        It is a biggy goal with Clinton and Gore and the IMF among others and very dangerous.

        Pascal Lamy (World Trade Organization) and Ian Goldin (University of Oxford ) wrote:

        Rethinking International Institutions

        The simple fact is that with interconnectedness comes interdependence. In order to protect the global commons, world leaders must pursue shared solutions as inclusively and efficiently as possible – a process that can be accomplished only through international institutions. Failure to do so would threaten the tremendous progress that globalization has facilitated in recent decades…. (wwwDOT)

        “Economic Interdependence and War: A Theory of Trade Expectations,” International Security, Vol. 20, no.4 (Spring 1996)“Does economic interdependence increase or decrease the probability of war among states?” This is well worth the read because it shows the holes in the Progressives wishful thinking.

        I think Putin answered NO! And “China is playing chicken with the US military in the South China Sea”

        IMF: Convergence, Interdependence, and Divergence
        Finance & Development, September 2012, Vol. 49, No. 3
        “Most feel that we live in an integrated globalized world. But when looking at recent history, what can one really say about the nature of this integration? It seems there are three fundamental trends at work that today characterize the world economy.

        The BRICS countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa just thumbed there noses at the IMF and started their own international bank to loan money to third world countries.

        More interesting is the fact that those countries are also busy mining and acquiring GOLD!
        2011 Top 10 Gold Producing Countries: goldinvestingnews(DOT)com/28894/top-10-gold-producing-countries-of-2011-australia-us-ghana-indonesia-china-peru-canada-russi.html

        • B.C. says:

          Yep. While the Community Whoreganizer flits about the country playing golf and appearing on serious TV shows like Jimmy Fallon and Ellen, his own henchmen in the EPA, DOJ, DOI, DOE, USDA, et al are actively undermining American energy, mining, manufacturing and food production, as well as destroying our military capabilities and doing everything they possibly can to implode our monetary system and way of life. If one didn’t know better, one would think that there was some kind of plan in place… Oh, wait, there was that little thing that was read into the Congressional record back in the ’60’s… I can’t quite put my finger on it… Oh, yeah, it was the Communist Manifesto

      • phodges says:

        I suppose the BRIC block and the SCO countries should just lie down and let their nations be destroyed…like us!

      • What could possibly go wrong? says:

        The american policy is only very superficially decided by the acting guy in the white house. The long term strategic interests are – as in other countries – determined mainly by the people who do NOT change with the next election. Look in the Pentagon, in the administration and also in the circles which actually “make” the representatives within the parties.

        But back to Georgia. That was actually one of the first test runs of the “colour revolution” scheme later adopted across other eastern european countries and the middle east.

        Those NGOs, namely the ones which are directly state funded like the National Edowment for Democracy and for a german example the “Konrad Adenauer Stiftung” which was one of the main relays in Ukraine (via the Boxer wanting to be politician) are todays weapons of state destruction.

        In Georgia among other places the US also broke the agreement with Russoa that the NATO would not try to expand eastward. In 2008, mere weeks before the Georgians launched their attack there was a common exercise between US and Georgian troops.

        The international fact finding mission of the swiss diplomat Heidi Tagliavini did not find any of the officially waved reasons brought forward by the US and Georgia to be correct. It was Georgian artillery opening fire and there was no impending or actual russian invasion.

        Full report here:

        So… with american troops and military advisors in the country and full propagandistic backing by the west – you think Saakashvili did it on his own and surprised them?

        In the case of the Ukraine we even know the price tag (I linked the video in another comment already). Victoria “Fuck the EU” Nuland proudly told the press in front of a Chevron logo that 5 billion of american tax payer money were “invested” in Ukraine via the known NGOs to further regime change. But hey! Better some already fabulously rich gangsters in Ukraine like Timoshenko get a billion or 2 more instead of repairing some of the stuff in your country.

        Now the video of that nice guy from Swoboda beating the director of a TV station into resignation because he dared to air the Putin speech made some waves, but it is quite funny to see how they try to spin that as an exception. Just search a bit and you find plenty of nice fascist plunder, beating and coercing by Swoboda as well as the right sector. A lot of those guys fought in Chechnya alongside the islamists and swore to kill jews and russians.

        Now imagine that a new Führer comes to power in Germany and vows to kill all americans. Do you think the american troops would just stay in their bases and play dead when he actually starts doing that as the right sector did for example in Donetsk with abducting and disappearing for example Gubarov?

        Apart from all of that there is still the stinking odour of hypocrisy. The US never thought twice before invading a country on fake pretexts and lies or at least bomb them into little pieces. That is percieved as “leadership” and “projecting strength”. And it is not only the blatant violations of international law in Yugoslavia, Irak, Afghanistan, and Libya, but also the gazillion of smaller interventions like Grenada or Panama which were also based on the law of the jungle instead of the codified international law.

        You see, you cannot explain or excuse one breech of law with another. Chechnya was as bad from Russia as other wars from the US, but in Ukraine the situation IS different. The “government” in power atm in Kiev has no legitimation at all even by its own standards. They failed to get the necessary votes to oust Yanukovich by their own reinstated constitution of 2004 – and that even with banning the communist party and voting with their confiscated IDs

        Now you know how the “parliament” (what’s left of it) takes decisions. This is NOT the only picture proving fraud in the Rada.

        So we have an illegitimate “government” in Kiev dominated by armed and militant fascists of Swoboda and right sector which not only immediately banned the russian language, but by now also banned rallies and took over the “security”. All that while there are still a lot of people alive in Crimea who were Russians already before the drunken Ukrainian Chrustchev donated Crimea and the eastern parts to the Soviet republc of Ukraine without asking anyone there in 1954. (Btw. Ossetia and Abkhazia were russian also and gifted to Georgia by… the Georgian Stalin.) And no, they ddidn’t only want to reunite with Russia since a few weeks, but the movement is going since more than 10 years and just culminated in the turmoils of the coup. Now they were actually asked and that’s of course a dangerous precedent. Especially for the unelected and illegiimate “government” in Kiev doing business with the equally unelected “heads” of the EU. Imagine people actually deciding for themselves. The horror! They might realize that they don’t actually need those windbags with the big words and cut them down to a more sensible sized and authorized administration like the Swiss.

  5. Bob Koss says:

    Brit Hume tweeted the March Madness political brackets.

  6. Another Ian says:


    Another hold on the “you know whats”

    • Gail Combs says:

      AJ Strata is one smart guy.

      Out sourcing so much US manufacturing esp military strategic materials is absolutely idiotic but that is the whole idea behind the Progressives Interdependence.

      Clinton made even worse goofs: Chasing the Dragon: Clinton’s China Policy

      It really is too bad the US citizens do not have ‘legal standing’ and therefore can not go after these people.

      Legal Standing

      In the United States, the current doctrine is that a person cannot bring a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that he/she/it is or will “imminently” be harmed by the law. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff “lacks standing” to bring the suit, and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of unconstitutionality. To have a court declare a law unconstitutional, there must be a valid reason for the lawsuit. The party suing must have something to lose in order to sue…

  7. Gail Combs says:

    We have another crisis going on that people may not know about.

    Progressives (and those who are power hungry) find the US Constitution a real pain in the A$$. Now Bush and Obama have found a way around the Constitution. The Power to enact treaties. The Supreme court is AGAIN looking at whether or not a treaty can be used to nullify the Bill of Rights.

    I strongly recommend reading this. It is written by the Honorable Ted Cruz who worked under Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

    Does the Treaty Power Threaten Our System of Limited Government?

    This is a critical decision. If the Supreme Court rules that treaties can over ride the Constitution we will no longer have a United States. We will become a vassal state of the United Nations just as the UK is now a vassal of the EU.

    (Note that President Bush also made a try at giving the UN power)

    The World Court issued a decision in a case called Avena that was remarkable.[3] It was a decision that purported to order the United States to reopen the convictions of 51 murderers across this country, all of whom were Mexican nationals who had been convicted of murder and had not been informed of their right to contact the Mexican consulate by local law enforcement.

    It was the first instance of a foreign court trying to bind the United States and to bind our criminal justice system. ….

    The case took an even stranger turn because while the case was pending, then-President George W. Bush signed a two-paragraph order that purported to order the state courts to obey the World Court. It was an extraordinary order. The second time Medellin was before the Supreme Court, there were two issues at stake:

    * Does the World Court have the authority to bind the U.S. justice system to reopen final criminal convictions?

    * Does the President of the United States have the authority to order the state courts to submit to the authority of the World Court?

    As I said this is a very important article and should be read by everyone.

    • phodges says:

      GATT-WTO had the same objectives, as well as NAFTA and associated “administrative alignment”

      The rule of law, and our sovereignty, are long dead.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Not quite.

        …For implementing the GATT/WTO embodied in the Uruguay Round Agreements, the U.S. Congress adopted the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994 (URAA) to define the limits of legal effects of the GATT/WTO agreements in U.S. legal order. A brief of the URAA is that it prevents terms of the GATT/WTO that conflict with existing federal law from having domestic effects, and allows for continued ability of the United States to take unilateral actions pose for the WTO. This aim can be well evidenced by the legislative history of the URAA. During the debate on approving the WTO Agreement, the prevailing view was that the multinational pact was not in conflict with U.S. sovereignty generally for two reasons: first, Congress is ultimately responsible for changing the laws of the United States; and second, the U.S. is entitled to withdraw from the WTO if it feels that the DSB abused its power. These arguments were vehemently endorsed by Clinton Administration officials who were eager to get the agreement passed Congress. Mickey Kantor, U.S. Trade Representatives, stated emphatically that “[n]o ruling by any dispute panel … can force us to change any federal, state or local law or regulation. Not the city council of Los Angeles, nor the Senate of the United States can be bound by these dispute settlement rulings.” His assistant, Deputy USTR Rufus Yerxa reiterated that “a WTO dispute settlement panel recommendation does not automatically change U.S. law. It has not self-executing effect …. Only Congress can change that law to implement a panel recommendation.”

        But the language of the URAA is even clearer. The features of the URAA are described as follows:
        United States Law to Prevail in Conflict The URAA puts U.S. sovereignty and U.S. law under perfect protection. According to the Act, if there is a conflict between U.S. and any of the Uruguay Round agreements, U.S. law will take precedence regardless when U.S. law is enacted. § 3512 (a) states: “No provision of any of the Uruguay Round Agreements, nor the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, that is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect.” Specifically, implementing the WTO agreements shall not be construed to “amend or modify any law of the United States, including any law relating to (i) the protection of human, animal, or plant life or health, (ii) the protection of the environment, or (iii) worker safety”, or to “limit any authority conferred under any law of the United States, including section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.”

        However that did not mean the USDA and FDA were not arguing that “The Harmonization” of laws before 2009 was mandatory figuring most would not be aware of the ins and outs of the WTO agreements.

        This is from the 2008 FDA website. It has since changed because of the Food [Un]Safe Modernization Act of 2009

        International Harmonization

        The harmonization of laws, regulations and standards between and among trading partners requires intense, complex, time-consuming negotiations by CFSAN officials. Harmonization must simultaneously facilitate international trade and promote mutual understanding, while protecting national interests and establish a basis to resolve food issues on sound scientific evidence in an objective atmosphere. Failure to reach a consistent, harmonized set of laws, regulations and standards within the freetrade agreements and the World Trade Organization Agreements can result in considerable economic repercussions.
        Participation in Codex Alimentarius
        Cosmetics International Activities
        International Organizations and Standard-Setting Bodies
        International Office of Epizootics
        International Plant Protection Convention
        World Health Organization
        Food and Agricultural Organization
        Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)
        Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues
        Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Microbiological Risk Assessments
        Pan American Health Organization
        Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

        The battle over the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, National animal ID, Premise ID and the UN/WTO guides to good farming/Agricultural practices (now made US law) was when I realized DC stood for district of criminals.

      • Gail Combs says:

        “The rule of law, and our sovereignty, are long dead.” is definitely the plan and has been slowly implemented over more than one hundred years. Unfortunately people are just now waking up as the slave collars are being snapped on.

  8. gator69 says:

    Palin had an unfair advantage, as she could see Russia from her house. 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s