jump to navigation

The ‘Regretful Obama Voter’ Speaks July 12, 2011

Posted by seeineye in : Politics , add a comment

Interesting converstion between Bob Parks &  Jodi Carroll

JODI CARROLL: I was asked to give a speech to a group of people last summer through my connections with Docs 4 Patient Care. I took it upon myself at that time to bring my recorder to get it recorded. Then last December, I was asked again to give the speech, so again I brought my recorder and then I just downloaded my speech onto YouTube to share with others.

BOB: When I first saw this video, it brought back memories of my left-to-right conversion. However, I didn’t get an opportunity to “come out” as publicly as Jodi Carroll. Jodi, before we get into specifics, how did the video idea happen?

Bob Parks has over 20 years in print journalism, television and radio. Bob started his career in 1987 as a Navy journalist for his carrier publications. After a brief investigative reporter stint with the Guam Tribune, Bob progressed into television as a graphic designer for the Fox Broadcasting Company in Hollywood.

He became an online columnist in 2002 for Men’s News Daily, and has since written for the New Media Journal, New Media Alliance, The Washington Times, ChronWatch, the Canada Free Press, Family Security Matters, and Accuracy In Media. Bob has also appeared as a guest on numerous talk radio programs, as well as on C-SPAN, CNN, and Fox News. Bob Parks served as the Vice-chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Assembly, ran for the chair of the Massachusetts Republican Party in 2007, ran for state representative in the Massachusetts legislature in 2008, is currently Executive Director of New Media Alliance Television (nmatv.com) produced, wrote, and edited the cable access program Black & Right.

BOB: I read some of the comments on the YouTube video and while some of them were encouraging, some were a little mean and I’m thinking “They don’t even know you”. Thus I decided to contact you.

JODI: Thank you, that is an insightful and respectable approach.

BOB: I take it until recently you were “born” a liberal…?

JODI: Well, I was born to really cherish freedom. I have always been called a “free spirit” by those who know me well. For a long time, I believed that freedom was what liberalism was all about.

I am disappointed to find out that is not the case. While I am reluctant to use labels for myself these days, as I have learned that labels tend to push us into a position where we shut down any thoughts/ideas that do not fit our label, I have to say that I feel a political label that might best fit me is Libertarian, because it seems to honor individuality and true freedom the most. But I am a bit reluctant to assign myself to that, even if I feel it reflects me the best.

BOB: That’s cool. As you (for lack of a better phrase) leaned left, I’m assuming you hung around left-leaning people. What did you think about conservatives and/or Republicans. I’m sure we weren’t liked very much in that company.

JODI: Yes, I was educated at a very liberal university in a very liberal setting. Strangely, in retrospect, I am not sure a lot of those people are truly any more liberal than I am right now, they just haven’t figured out yet that liberalism isn’t really about freedom.

I like to believe that I have always been willing to vote Republican, and in retrospect I think I have always been a fiscal conservative to some degree. But I was not a fan of George W. Bush strictly from a social issues standpoint. That time period pushed me further to the left, I am sorry to say. That being said, I touted GWB during his tenure for his management of the economy, up until stimulus checks.

Now, I have a great deal more respect for both conservatives, conservativism, and George W Bush (I miss him!!). But, for full disclosure, prior to my political tsunami, I thought conservatives and Republicans were the ones who were really dishonest about facts and wanting suppress my freedoms. I have found, however, that conservatives and Republicans are much more honest and liberalism really does not function well when reality and facts are ubiquitous.

BOB: I’m trying to be respectful of your time so forgive me if I try and extract some specifics. How did you think, outside of the traditional reproductive issues, Republicans wanted to suppress your freedoms?

JODI: There are really only two issues that I felt they wanted to suppress my freedoms, and that is reproductive decision making and whom I should partner with. The abortion issue is one I do struggle with because I see very, very valid arguments from both sides. I understand why conservatives think it is murder and murder is unacceptable by any society. But I also understand how others do not see death as a the worst that can happen to a being and for those who believe in reincarnation letting an unborn life go before it is born seems humane to them, not cruel.

I know both sides can argue their side well, and I cannot truly disagree with either side. I do not disagree with conservatives on this issue, and I do not disagree with liberals…. I want them both to be free to exercise their own beliefs. The other issue is whether or not I am free to marry 10 women if we wanted to. I feel consenting adults should have that freedom. If my husband and I are recognized with certain legal rights because we are married, I just feel that I should be able to have those same rights if I chose to union in the same manner with 10 consenting women.

I know, many are gasping in horror, but that is what freedom is – guiding our own choices so we can pursue our own happiness. It is not for me to judge other people’s decisions/beliefs, unless they directly impose upon the freedom/rights of others.

BOB: Yeah, you sound like a Libertarian but I won’t hold that against you. I would like to invite you to continue this at another time when we can concentrate on your last two responses.

You ever been to a Tea Party?

JODI: I would be happy to continue, and thank you for not holding my Libertarianism against me. We have more common ground than not.

Yes, both of my speeches were at Tea Party events. I am hoping to give my speech again at Tea Party events in the future once the 2012 election heats up. I have met several Libertarians and many Independents at the Tea Party events. As long as they stick to the fiscal conservative issues and do not try to squeeze me out because we might disagree on some social issues, I am a fan ;-)

But, one last point on the abortion issue, never would I support any public funding of abortion, not ever and not even a little bit. I believe it should be a personal choice with some limits – but like most choices, the consequences of those choices should fall strictly upon the chooser, not society as a whole. I look forward to speaking again in the future.

BOB: Second to last question for today: You earlier said the left was kinda dishonest. What were some of the misconceptions immediately busted upon getting to know conservatives?

JODI: My transition didn’t happen because I realized conservatives were honest, it happened because I realized liberals were not. It was not an easy transition, it was emotionally painful and I fought on some deep level. I fought it because I could not believe that people I trusted (liberal media) could possibly be dishonest.

It started as I began to hear Obama push the first stimulus with, what appeared to be, pork spending, yet he had campaigned against it. I began to distrust him. Then he began to speak about health care and I knew he/they were lying about the results of the WHO study, because I know health care. So, in a nutshell, it really started for me because, for once, I knew the subject of hot debate really well so it was easy for me to know who was lying. Before, I didn’t really know subjects all that deeply, so being misled by the mainstream media was easy.

I didn’t start turning toward conservatives until I started turning away from liberals, realizing they were so dishonest. Once I started to really research more facts, I realized that, all this time, conservatives were the ones who were more honest and more educated about the facts. As I said earlier, it was really a political tsunami for me, it was painful and hard to go through. It is hard to believe that all the while you believed you were intelligent, yet allowed yourself to be grossly misled.

Now, I check all the facts, myself. And as I do, I generally find that conservatives are bringing the real facts and realities to the table, even if we disagree on non-fact issues like abortion and homosexual unions.

BOB: As a nurse, I’d really like to get into specifics of the health care bill and unions, but let me end with this: how have you been treated by your liberal friends now that you’ve achieved traitor status?

JODI: Liberals in general tend to use emotional weaponry as their tool, and that is exactly what I receive. When I try to present rational facts, I do not receive facts in return. I receive emotional verbal assaults designed to make me feel unkind and inhumane.

I have learned, the hard way, not to argue with most of them because they are not interested in facts/realities, they are only interested in pushing emotional buttons because they believe that is what wins the argument. I have to say, however, that I do have some people who are similar to the way I was, a liberal but not averse to facts/realities and they are truly waking up, like I did. As I have found facts and I push those facts onto them, they struggle to dispute them and are also transitioning a bit.

The liberals who think facts do not matter, I have learned, are not people I can have a rational dialogue with so I no longer try. They think I am a mean and unkind person, and that has to be okay with me. To each his own. :-)

BOB: Jodi Carroll, thank you for your time, welcome to the team (and I’m sure you’ve heard a lot of that), we’ll continue this, and please feel free to drop by and join in our many conversations.

JODI: Thank you so much, it has been a pleasure as well. I am happy to be a part of the team, and I hope we are a winning team because I love the United States of America deeply and believe strongly in the freedom it was founded upon. I look forward to continuing our conversation and would be happy to join the many conservations. If I happen to give my speech again, I will assuredly let you know

Michelle Obama Thanks the Media for Their Support and Their Bias (That Got Barack Elected) June 26, 2011

Posted by seeineye in : Politics , add a comment

If you watched the 2008 election, it amazed me how Obama’s numerous gaffes were ignored by the mainstream media. Any other candidate that made the mistakes Obama made would have been front page news and then ridiculed by the late night talk show hosts. Had the media directed focus on Obama’s obvious ignorance, my bet is Hillary Clinton would be president today. (Seriously, you don’t think John McCain would have beat her do you?)

Examples of this media bias include Obama saying he has campaigned in 57 states:

 

Largely ignored by the media.

Obama saying the key to solving the nation’s energy problems comes from a tire pressure gauge:

Largely ignored by the media.

Or this Freudian slip where Obama admits he is Muslim:

Largely ignored by the media.

Of course, the media tried to cover up Obama’s association with America hating preacher Jeremiah Wright:

Largely ignored by the media.

Or that Obama launched his campaign in a known domestic terrorist’s home:

Largely ignored by the media, until after the election and the media began asking the questions about William Ayers and Obama.

Just days before the election of Barack Obama, Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose admit they haven’t vetted Barack Obama.

When Tina Fey said something funny on Saturday Night Live, the press ran with it as if Sarah Palin herself said it.

What Palin really said is that Russia is just a few minutes away from Alaska and that as governor of Alaska, she must be briefed with national security information. Of course the media left this out.

Why is all of this important nearly three years after Obama was elected president. Because Michelle Obama has come out admitted the advantage the mainstream media has provided Barack Obama.

CNN reporter: “How’s the family ready for this [the election]? It’s going to be quite vicious, isn’t it? How do you prepare for that?”

First Lady Michelle Obama: “You know, it’s … we’re ready, you know. Our children, you know, could care less about what we’re doing. We work hard to do that. Fortunately, we have help from the media. I have to say this: I’m very grateful for the support and kindness that we’ve gotten. People have respected their privacy and in that way, I think, you know, no matter what people may feel about my husband’s policies or what have you, they care about children and that’s been good to see.”

Ayn Rand Was Right: Wealthy Are on Strike Against Obama June 24, 2011

Posted by seeineye in : Politics , add a comment

The U.S. economy is crumbling. Businesses are collapsing in record numbers. Jobs have disappeared. Tax revenues are down dramatically. Coincidence?

Everything happening today under Obama resembles the storyline of Ayn Rand’s famous book, Atlas Shrugged, one of the most popular books of all time, selling over 7 million copies. Now, under President Obama, Atlas Shrugged has come to life. Rand prophesized a country dominated by socialists, Marxists and statists, where looters, free loaders and poverty promoters live off the productive class. To rationalize the fleecing of innovative business owners and job creators, the looter class demonized the wealthy, just as Obama and his socialist cabal are doing in real life today.

The central plot of Atlas Shrugged is that in response to being demonized, over-taxed, over-regulated, and punished for success, America’s business owners were disappearing — dropping off the grid, and refusing to work 16-hour days to support those unwilling to put in the same blood, sweat and tears. They were going on strike. Because of that the original proposed title of “Atlas Shrugged” was “The Strike.”

They were going on strike to teach that civilization cannot survive when people are slaves to government. That without a productive class of innovative business owners willing to risk their own money and work 16-hour days, weekends and holidays, there are no jobs and no taxes to pay for government. If you punish the wealthy, the risk-takers, the innovators, you kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. In Obama’s America, fiction is becoming fact.

The lesson of Atlas Shrugged is that without the $100,000+ earners paying into Social Security, there are no pensions for the poor and lower middle class. Without the wealthy owners of million-dollar mansions paying $25,000 and $50,000 annual property tax bills, there is no funding for public schools. Without the wealthy paying into Medicare, there is no “free” healthcare for the elderly. Without capitalists motivated by profit, there are no discoveries to eradicate polio or create miraculous cancer and AIDS drugs. Without capitalists motivated by profit, there are no jobs, period! That is what happens when the producers of society go on strike to protect themselves from the looters.

Ayn Rand was warning the looters that there are consequences to their overzealous actions. She was warning that if the productive classes felt used, demonized, ripped off, and taken for granted, they would go on strike — stop working, retire early, go underground, or move to places where achievement is celebrated and they feel appreciated.

The latest U.S. Census proves Ayn Rand right. Under Obama the wealthy are striking, voting with their feet. They are moving to low-tax red states in droves, escaping from high-tax blue states where they are being demonized and punished by the millions.

The Census proves that Obama’s tax and spend philosophy is a dismal failure, an economic disaster killing jobs. It is no coincidence that 1.9 million FEWER Americans are working than before Obama’s stimulus. It is no coincidence that jobs are not returning to the private sector. It is no coincidence that tax revenues have dropped dramatically and cannot support Obama’s bloated Big Brother government. The innovators, risk-takers, and wealthy he demonized and punished are on strike.

The high tech revolution has killed the progressive-liberal tax-and-spend dream. Because of the Internet, email, Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Satellite TV, I-phones, I-pads, and cell phones, business owners are no longer prisoners of Big Brother. Take a look at states where the latest Census shows Americans moved during the past decade: Nevada, Texas, Arizona, Florida, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alaska, Virginia — all low- or no-tax red states, states that lead the USA in economic freedom.

Now look at states they escaped from: New York, New Jersey, California, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan. Taxpayers, business owners, jobs creators, retirees with assets are fleeing the high tax, big spending, Big Brother states — the states being run like Obama is running the nation.

Progressives be afraid, be very afraid. If Obama is re-elected, these valuable producers will pick up and leave America altogether. There is a big world out there begging them to come. Places like Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Monte Carlo, Belize, Costa Rica, Panama, Bahamas, and Cayman Islands are low-tax havens that appreciate business owners and their sacrifices. They welcome wealthy ex-patriots. They celebrate individual achievement. They reward instead of punish business owners and financial risk-takers. They are wonderful places to live and are aggressively pursuing Americans.

I am just one small businessman, a third-party Libertarian political leader. Yet I personally have heard from thousands of fans, friends and supporters who have left America, are thinking of leaving America, are visiting other countries right now to decide where to go, or making preparations to leave in case Obama is re-elected. Just as Ayn Rand predicted, business owners are going on strike. Permanently.

The high tech revolution has freed them to run their businesses from anywhere in the world. The same high tech tools and toys that toppled a powerful and invincible 30-year dictator in Egypt and now threaten to topple powerful leaders throughout the Arab world, also offer mobility and freedom to U.S. taxpayers. Obama better learn the lesson of Mubarek before millions more business people decide they do not need to put up with looters, free loaders, and politicians who despise them.

Atlas is shrugging. Ayn Rand is saying “I told you so.”

Obama’s Israel Policy: “F*** The Jews, They Will Vote For Us Anyway!” June 23, 2011

Posted by seeineye in : Politics , add a comment

President Obama gave Bibi Netanyahu an ultimatum on renewing negotiations with the Palestinians, according to reports cited by Israel Radio Sunday morning. According to the ultimatum, Netanyahu has to decide within a month whether he agrees to accept President Barack Obama’s platform and resume talks based on 1967 lines.

The President has been working on getting the leaders of major Jewish organizations on their side realizing that some of them, such as Abe Foxman of the ADL are more concerned about advancing their power in the progressive political world than their organization’s Jewish mission.

According to Eli Lake of the Washington Times the Obama White House appealed to Jewish leaders on Friday that the request of Israel was part of an effort to head off Palestinian plans to declare an independent state at the United Nations

Defenders of the President insist that the President’s “1967 borders with land swaps” is nothing new. But it certainly is.

 As Jennifer Rubin reported in the Washington Post, “On Saturday I asked a State Department official authorized only to speak on background: Does “1967 borders with land swaps” mean “1967 and then we discuss swaps” or does it mean “1967 borders plus the swaps that the parties previously agreed to in negotiations including the Jerusalem suburbs”? The latter, I pointed out is consistent with the 2004 Bush-Sharon letters, but the former is not. In fact, if it is 1967 and then they discuss land swaps, that is the same as starting with the 1967 borders. Period. And sure enough the State Department official told me, “It means swaps that the parties will agree on in the course of direct negotiations.”

In other words, Obama wants Israel to start negotiating under the assumption that that the Kotel, the old city and the Jerusalem suburbs are Palestinian property, cancelling up prior understandings that these areas would never be part of a Palestinian state. That has never before been the U.S. government’s demand, and it weakens Israel’s bargaining position.” In other words, there is zero difference in the Obama plan between “1967 borders” and “1967 border with land swaps.” In both, the starting point is borders Israel has deemed indefensible.

At the same time President Obama has not made similar demands of the Palestinians, not even requesting the most basic of concessions that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish State.  When you put it all together, Obama is asking Israel to make concessions with a government which is comprised of two terrorist organizations bent on its destruction, Fatah makes their calls for Israel’s destruction in Arabic only, and Hamas who calls for the destruction of Israel is clear in any language.

It’s time for the President to remember the famous words of Albert Einstein “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.” The last time Obama called for one-sided concessions by Israel (the settlement freeze), the only result was a break off in talks because the Palestinians used the administration’s demands as preconditions for further talks. The bottom line is that the Palestinian Authority is not ready to sign a peace deal that recognizes Israel as a Jewish State, whether the boarders are the 1948 armistice lines or the small UN Mandate borders.

Supposedly Obama is making the demands because he does not want to be forced to veto the unilateral Palestinian Statehood declaration in September. The truth is that the Palestinians are well aware their unilateral statehood push has no chance; its only purpose is to continue the international de-legitimization of Israel. Obama’s demand for the 67 lines as a starting point is serving the same purpose, because there is no way Israel can agree to it. An Israeli concession on borders prior to talks even start robs them of their one bargaining chip. And there is no corresponding Palestinian concession.

But that is not a concern of the President, almost every action he as taken since his inauguration indicates that he is not a big friend of the Jewish State, despite the support he has gotten from the progressive leadership of the major Jewish organizations.

Unfortunately it looks as if the administration will be able to have it both ways. While the President’s strategy is being exposed here and in much of the conservative media, the progressive mainstream media, most of the Jewish press, normally pro-Israel democratic legislators and even leaders of major Jewish organizations are reluctant to stand in front of the camera and break with their progressive meal ticket Barack Obama.

During the administration of George H.W. Bush, probably the most anti-Israel American presidency prior to this one, Secretary of State James Baker once commented on whether his anti-Israel stance will hurt the Jewish vote for Bush’s reelection campaign. His famous response was, “F*** the Jews, they won’t vote for us any way.”  Today the administration of Barack Obama has a similar attitude, “F*** the Jews, they will vote for us whatever we do!”

Sadly they are probably right.  Jewish money still pours into Democratic Party coffers even though the President from their party is the most anti-Israel in history, and the legislators are two cowardly to confront him in public.  Hopefully when it comes time to vote in 2012, American Jews will wake up and smell the hummus. If this administration is this anti-Israel in the middle of a re-election campaign, I shudder to think what will happen during a second, lame duck campaign when he no longer needs any Jewish support.

While Obama’s Playing Games, Who’s Playing President? June 11, 2011

Posted by seeineye in : Politics , add a comment

In November 2008 a majority of voters chose to put Barack Obama in the White House, ostensibly to be president: which entails doing what a president should do, speaking as a president should speak, etc. The expectations for Obama were high because of his own rhetoric about “remaking America,” about “hope and change,” and whatever else it was that caused Louis Farrakhan to say that when Obama speaks “the Messiah is absolutely speaking.”

But a funny thing happened on the way to the golf course White House: the magic wore off. The dream maker proved to be a nightmare for this country and the job of being president actually seemed to be secondary to a whole host of other things he’d rather be doing: things like playing golf, taking vacations, bowing before foreign rulers, etc.

His apparent obsession with these other things was never clearer than on Memorial Day 2011, when he took time out in the morning to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns then headed to the golf course to play the 70th round he’s played since becoming president. (And this was the second Memorial Day on which he’d played golf: he also did it in 2009.)

Don’t you think his Memorial Day would have been better spent memorializing those who have given their lives in service to this country?

 Ought not a President be the first to demonstrate the debt we owe our service men and women? (Quick side note: It’s worth pointing out that George W. Bush gave up golf toward the end of his presidency. He did not think it right that the Commander-in-Chief be seen playing games while our military personnel were at war.)

But Obama has other things to do. And those things obviously don’t involve studying up on our economy, which has now floundered so far out of control that the president doesn’t even bother getting daily briefings on economic matters anymore. That’s right – he doesn’t even bother.

However, The Hill reports that he does get “regular updates” from Vice President Joe Biden. (Yes, the same Joe Biden who said unemployment would never top 8% under an Obama presidency and then, when it topped 9%, took to the television waves to blame Bush.)

Folks, this is a serious matter. We have a president who has run this economy into the ground and now, simply looks the other way while the collapse continues. It’s as if he thinks looking the other way somehow washes his hands of the crime.

Regrettably, I expect Obama will keep playing games on the golf course, games with our money, and subsequently, games with our nation’s future. My only question is: While he’s playing games, who’s playing president?