Obama’s Divisional National Socialist Party Rhetoric

We have an interesting  interview with our resident tyrant Obama who is once again blaming the GOP for all the problems in the nation and his failed agenda, we have this jewel:

Our politics are dysfunctional… societies don’t work if political factions take maximalist positions,” said Obama, who repeatedly claims to be a moderate stymied by the GOP’s supposed obstructionism and radicalism.

If we take a moment and make a few definitions we may begin to see what it is our tyrant is talking about the word maximalist is striking so lets define it before continuing from Bing:

Somebody who rejects compromise: an uncompromising person who is determined to achieve a political aim, directly if necessary.

We see that Obama is actually describing himself and projecting this characteristic on everyone else, which is a typical technique, we see from the left and National Socialists in particular. Then we have the other descriptors “obstructionism” and “radicalism” concerning the GOP so what it appears so far is the Obama is a failure because the GOP is taking a position of winner take all, and they are not willing to compromise.

What is so ironic about all this is that describes Obama and how he has acted since he lost his majority in the House, a truculent serial abuser threatening his laughable “pen and phone” in place of law. The interview did not end there it was just warming up these next statements are telling:

“And the more diverse, the country is, the less it can afford to take maximalist positions,” Obama added.

Obama is making reference to the forced balkanization that he has created on our southern border and forcing on the nation. At the end of the day all Obama is a community organizer that is all he knows how to do so he is using the budget of the U.S Treasury to remake the nation into a nation of welfare takers.

Since he does not like the current makeup of our nation and its citizens that are self-reliant and resistant to the destruction to rule of law so he is importing a more pliant people from Latin America. These illiterate third world people are already comfortable with the concept of a welfare state and will settle into a life of quiet servitude to the National Socialist political machines in Americas largest cities.

He understands and expects a backlash to his balkanization effort and he makes, mention of this in his next statement:

“Increasingly politicians are rewarded for taking the most extreme maximalist positions… and sooner or later, that catches up with you,” Obama warned.

He knows and fully expects to lose at the elections this November and he is going so far as to say that he expects even more drastic consequences. He expects to pay a personal cost for these acts of treachery against this nation, people and Constitution, our guess is he intends to be impeached.

The next statement is telling and ominous in what he is describing:

“While he blamed the rise of the Republican far right for extinguishing so many potential compromises, Obama also acknowledged that gerrymandering, the Balkanization of the news media and uncontrolled money in politics — the guts of our political system today — are sapping our ability to face big challenges together, more than any foreign enemy,” said Friendman, who is an Obama supporter, and a champion of progressive-style expansive government.

We will ignore the first comment, because he is accusing the GOP of his own failures and we discussed this tactic above, the next two are frightening when we drill down into them.

Gerrymandering is a practice that both parties have practiced whenever a Census is taken every ten years and the parties that win the State legislatures get to draw up the legislative districts for their State. What in effect he is saying that he does not like our current legislative allocation process and that States get to choose the districts for the House of Representatives. This practice has created some odd House districts at times, he is correct about that but he is saying the entire process is what is wrong so in the end he does not recognize the States sovereign powers and wishes to abolish them.

This is decidedly anti-American.

The next one is telling the Balkanization of the news media this one is frightening, because the implication is that he wishes to have a media that is no longer a free press but one he controls. We have to assume that he is talking about internet new channels, websites that are not in the tank for his agenda. For a president to make such a statement means that his core beliefs that we should not have a free press and that he should be able to control what information we are allowed to have.  The uncontrolled money in politics and the news media are co-mingled and go back to the Citizens United, case that SCOTUS ruled allowed corporations to have a say in the political arena.

What these mean is that he wishes to have the right to abolish the right of the freedom of speech, since political contributions are free speech in action, and that the media should be muzzled.

This simply the destruction of our first amendment rights, the Senate has heard him and has obeyed and has drafted a Constitutional amendment to do just that. What is telling is that he uses the word balkanization the definition from Bing:

Division into hostile subgroups: division of an area, region, or group into smaller and often mutually hostile units

This is also known as polarization which Obama has refined to an art form and we are being subjected to that as well on a daily basis with a media and National Socialist political machinery that boils everything down to racial politics. He uses this in connection with the media, but what is he really saying when uses the term balkanization? He simply wishes that media would talk in only one voice, one that he approves of, that is not news that is propaganda.

This is how Obama chose to act in this regard to his “balkanization” and “polarization” efforts in a speech in October 2013:

But Obama didn’t suggest he’s responsible for the nation’s political divides.

Obama’s claim of moderation is contradicted by much evidence.

For example, in October 2013, during the dispute over the 2014 budget, Obama used one speech to describe Republican legislators in the House as akin to arsonists, kidnappers, deadbeats, butchers, lunatics and extortionists, obsessives, out-of-touch hostage-takers, nuclear-armed bombers, and unserious irresponsible extremists.

For a president to use such divisive language is unheard in the history of the Republic.  It is our resident community organizer that has caused all the ills to befall our nation as he transitions this nation to a fascist state ruled by fiat and creates anarchy and chaos. It is in this cauldron of hate as this language signifies that Obama is planning his “final solution” to the divide in this nation that he himself created.

What that will it be, is yet to be seen though the action will be swift and possibly decisive, we believe he is bringing the nation to the brink of civil war.

If he is willing to open the borders and visit anarchy and lawlessness on our citizens by unleashing criminal illegal aliens among us, who have caused the murders of at least 3,000 citizens and untold sexual assaults, robberies and other crime he is capable of about anything. And to keep it open with the threat of an epidemic of Ebola looming worldwide, then he is deliberately planning for the downfall of this nation and Republic. From Daily Caller.

Back to Patriots & Tyrants Articles or HOME



  • Pingback: Psychologia

  • Pingback: tier2 junk

  • Leave a Reply