Monday, June 4, 2012

Are Americans Stupid?


Federal government’s and the teachers’ union takeover of the nation’s educational system


- Alan Caruba Monday, June 4, 2012

The most common opinion I hear is that “Americans are stupid.”

I think it would be more accurate to say they are often ignorant of things educated people are expected to know. Most certainly much of the news media leaves them uninformed or misinformed and our educational system—K through 12—has been doing a poor job for decades.

I, however, am more encouraged about American’s IQ. The rise of the Tea Party movement suggests quite a few Americans were paying attention when they attended school. In addition, polling data supports an encouraging picture of whether Americans are aware of the issues affecting their lives these days.

As of May 26, Rasmussen Reportssaid that 64% of likely voters prefer “a government with fewer services and lower taxes.” Just slightly more than half, 51%, think the government will go bankrupt. Few are fooled regarding the economy; 63% say the country is going in the wrong direction. In general, the majority has a good fix on what’s wrong and what has to be done.

That’s encouraging, but I also worry that too many likely voters and others do not know or do not possess a fundamental knowledge of math, science, and history. Their basic reading and writing skills often are minimal. Is it because they are less intelligent than earlier generations or, as I believe, they are poorly served in our nation’s schools.

If Congress, composed of our elected representatives, is an example, then it is clear that many Senators and Representatives are clueless when it comes to economics, science, history and other bodies of knowledge necessary to make informed decisions.

Every President wants to look like he’s solving the problem of a poorly performing educational system. President Obama has a “Race to the Top” program that is typically just another excuse to give away money. His predecessor, President Bush, introduced “No Child Left Behind” legislation that imposed a regimen of constant testing that is an abject failure, ignoring the fact that children learn at different rates, and altering the entire educational system to “teach to the test.”

The federal government’s and the teachers’ union takeover of the nation’s educational system threatens any progress, any reform, any repair. The problem has roots that reach back to the 1960s, nor should anyone be surprised that many of those youthful radicals became part of academia, shaping the nation’s educational system.

The facts about education in America are well known and well established. It is no surprise that a recent Wall Street Journal article reported that the “School-Test Backlash Grows” as “the increasing role of standardized testing in U.S. classrooms is triggering pockets of rebellion across he country from school officials, teachers and parents who say the system is stifling teaching and learning.”

William Bennett, a former Secretary of Education, led the Empower America Education Project and, in 2000 as the new century dawned, he noted the following:
American 12th graders rank 19th out of 21 industrialized countries in mathematics achievement, 16th out of 21 nations in science.
Since 1983 more than ten million Americans have reached the 12th grade without having learned to read at a basic level. More than 20 million had reached their senior year unable to do basic math. Almost 25% had reached 12th grade without knowing the essentials of U.S. history.

In February 2012 The National Center for Policy Analysis, a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization released a report, “Restructuring Public Education for the 21st Century, noting that “Students in dozens of other countries, including China, South Korea, Germany and Finland, outperformed American students in reading, math and science, according to the Program for International Student Assessment results released in December 2010.” In the course of a single decade, they slid to a ranking of 23rd in science, 17th in reading, and 31st in math.”

The average dropout rate nationwide is between 30% and 40%. Urban centers report dropout rates as high as 80%. The Center concluded that “A six-hour school day and 190 day school year will not and cannot compete with other industrialized nations where students meet higher academic standards, have better prepared teachers, spend 30% to 50% more time in class, and are supported by a parental culture that expects and requires more from their children.”

In Wisconsin, it was the teachers’ union that was the most vocal in its opposition to changes in collective bargaining rules. A recall election of Gov. Scott Walker will occur on June 5th. The Heartland Institute just released a study of Gov. Walker’s reforms known as Act 10.

“Act 10 virtually eliminated [Wisconsin’s] $3.6 billion budget deficit ... and provided school districts with measures previously unavailable to them to accomplish spending reductions,” writes report author Maureen Martin, a Wisconsin resident and general counsel and senior fellow for legal affairs at The Heartland Institute “Many districts have balanced their budgets for the first time in years” and “some even have surpluses and are hiring more teachers and reducing class size.”

Not only do the nation’s schools continue to pose an obstacle to the education of young Americans and by extension to the nation’s ability to compete in a world where other nations are emerging to challenge us, the nation’s school system has been turned into a threat to freedoms we take for granted.

Schools have become places where what children eat is of greater concern than what they learn. Students are tracked like criminals with educational data collection. A government mental health curricula through the third grade has been imposed. The widespread use of behavioral drugs for children who are bored by the daily straight jacket imposed is commonplace. Many middle and high schools are analogous to minimum security prisons.

As voters go to the polls in November, studies indicate that the majority will not know the names of their congressman or opposing candidates. Fully 45% do not know that each State elects two senators, 40% do not know the name of the vice president, and 63% cannot name the chief justice of the U.S.

This is ignorance, but it contributes to the impression of a nation of stupid people making critical decisions about who will lead it.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Constitutionally Ignorant and Politically Tone-Deaf

June 4, 2012
By Sara Goodman

A Miami synagogue recently canceled DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz's planned speech about "Maintaining a Strong U.S.-Israel Relationship" at a Friday night religious service after an influential Republican member of the congregation, Stanley Tate, resigned.

The Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel published an editorial shortly after the incident decrying the temple's "stifling" of Wasserman Schultz's speech and criticizing the synagogue for "advanc[ing] the voices of intolerance." What the editorial board of the Sun-Sentinel failed to tell its readers was that Mr. Tate had not wanted Schultz's speech muffled, but had merely asked for equal time for rebuttal and to have the entire discussion moved to a venue other than in the sanctuary during a religious service. It was a plea to his congregation of 70 years (whose Joni & Stanley Tate Early Childhood Center bears his family's name) not to endorse or give even an appearance of religious endorsement of Wasserman Schultz's political speech, and by extension a religious endorsement of President Obama and the Democratic Party's 2012 election campaign message.

There is an irony in this church-state "speech stifling or speech endorsement" incident, because Debbie Wasserman Schultz was involved in another "church-state" "speech stifling or speech endorsement" issue in Florida almost ten years earlier -- an incident which the Sun-Sentinel characterized as a "nationwide controversy" but which received only eleven lines in the local section of the paper, buried within minutiae about local school board officials and a local judge's political ad.


In the summer of 2004 -- the same summer that Floridians were experiencing the devastating effects of Hurricanes Charley, Frances, and Jeanne, then Florida Democratic State Senator Wasserman Schultz had picked a fight with Governor Jeb Bush over the First Amendment, "separation of church and state," and what Wasserman Schultz complained was a "hurtful and offensive" display of a religious symbol inside the governor's office in Tallahassee that should "not [have been] imposed on the public" because it conveyed the wrong "message."

It wasn't a Nativity scene in the Florida capitol's entranceway during the Christmas holiday season or a sculpture of Moses receiving the Ten Commandments. Nor was it a loan to the Republican governor of Titian's Pieta from the Gallerie dell'Accademia of Venice. Wasserman Schultz complained about the display of a greeting card on the bulletin board hung above the Republican Governor's General Counsel's receptionist's desk along with several personal family photos belonging to the receptionist. The greeting card featured a picture of the American flag with a white cross superimposed amongst the white stars on the flag's blue field background. According to the Palm Beach Post's report about Wasserman Schultz's complaint, the artwork on the greeting card was designed by a Tallahassee photographer to commemorate the victims of 9-11, but Wasserman Schultz objected to its display because it sent a hurtful and offensive message that the country was a "Christian nation." The Palm Beach Post article reported that Governor Bush's general counsel's response for its request for comment was that "it warrants no response."

Although almost no one in South Florida ever knew about the "nationwide controversy," the pre-Facebook and pre-Twitter internet lit up in angry response. Among the more benign comments was a post by "Colorado Doug," who wrote, "Suppose a muslim employee had a greeting card with a crescent moon displayed, would Wasserman Schultz or anyone else be offended? I think the answer would be no." "ZULU" commented, "If Ms. Wasserman ever took the time to visit Normandy, she would see a sight which, no doubt would horrify her -- rows and rows of crosses and stars of David." Someone named "Anonymous" wrote: "To me, your face is offensive and hurtful, but my solution is to avoid looking at it." Most of the comments were so vile and anti-Semitic that neither the Palm Beach Post nor the Sun-Sentinel would reprint them.

I wrote to the Sun-Sentinel about the "nationwide controversy," and although almost every letter I have ever submitted to the paper has been published, this one wasn't. My letter contained a message that the Sun-Sentinel didn't want its readers to hear, although I did get a personal note from the reporter who had written the eleven lines thanking me for "sharing" my thoughts with him.

In my letter to the paper, I explained that 20 years earlier, in the mid-'80s, I had represented seven churches in Scarsdale, New York that had sued the Village of Scarsdale when their jointly and privately owned Nativity scene was no longer allowed to be displayed for two weeks in a public park in the center of town, where it had been displayed amongst other Christmas decorations for over a quarter of a century. The case was so controversial that the large New York City law firm where I was a junior associate didn't put its name on the briefs -- just mine and the senior partner's. We argued that the temporary display of a crèche in a public park during Christmas was constitutionally protected symbolic speech and that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment -- often colloquially referred to as the "separation of church and state" portion of the First Amendment -- didn't permit Scarsdale to suppress our clients' speech in the absence of any reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions governing the use of Scarsdale's parks. We never expected the case to end up in the United States Supreme Court, but it did, and we won by a 4-4 split vote affirming our victory below in the Second Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. I told the Sun-Sentinel in my letter that not only was Wasserman Schultz wrong on the law -- there was no governmental endorsement of religion by a secretary's display of a cross on a greeting card in her own personal workspace, no matter how visible the location was to the general public -- but the state senator was also wrong on the facts. My experience in the Scarsdale crèche case had taught me that constitutionally ignorant and tone-deaf politicians like Wasserman Schultz engender more anti-Semitism when they use "offense" and the "First Amendment" to attack their political opponents. The reaction to the Anti-Defamation League's Amicus Curiae brief against our church-clients' nativity scene was a perfect example of this regrettable phenomenon.

Wasserman Schultz currently faces a Republican opponent in the upcoming 20th Congressional District -- Karen Harrington -- who has already received the endorsement of prominent Jews in Florida (including Stanley Tate) as well as many national and state representatives. Harrington is a small business owner who has run a family restaurant with her sister for thirty years. Now that South Florida synagogues will likely turn off the speech spigot for Wasserman Schultz and other Obama surrogates, the DNC chair will no doubt turn to making more rounds on the Florida condominium circuit praising President Obama and the Democratic Party. But she has a tough sell: Florida's seniors as well as the state's general electorate are ravaged by Florida's real estate crises and unemployment figures. And Florida's seniors, who are deeply worried about funding ObamaCare, recognize that there are wiser and more surgically precise approaches to Medicare and Medicaid reform.

After the Temple Israel debacle in Miami, the Obama Team and the DNC have figured out that that the choice of Wasserman Schultz was a perverse choice for "Jewish outreach" in Florida. Many of Wasserman Schultz's Jewish constituents don't care deeply about Israel. (Those who do would have voted for Romney anyway.) The others are more like Wasserman Schultz herself on the subject: agnostic, uninformed about Middle East history, and uninformed about Obama's "Love Me I'm Not George Bush" Middle East foreign policy. The Wall Street Journal published an eye-opening piece about the Florida congresswoman back in February this year, which did a light air kiss on Wasserman Schultz's polarizing comments about the Republicans' "Jim Crow" laws and the Tea Party's blame for the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The Journal piece mentioned Wasserman Schultz being asked by President Obama's advisers to meet with "two seasoned Democratic female pros, Anita Dunn and Hilary Rosen." Hilary Rosen, of course, was the "seasoned" expert who decided that attacking breast cancer and MS survivor Ann Romney for "never working a day in her life" was a brilliant way to frame the Republican "War on Women."

Meanwhile, South Floridians expecting any balanced editorializing on the subject of Debbie Wasserman Schultz will have a tough time finding it at the Sun-Sentinel. This is, after all, the same newspaper whose local editorial columnist, Stephen L. Goldstein, thinks nothing of exhorting readers to perform a "Mitzvah" by voting Democratic, not Republican ("Democratic Punch": Sun-Sentinel January 31, 2010).

Sara Goodman is an attorney practicing in the areas of intellectual property law and commercial contracts. She may be emailed at lawofficeofsaragoodman@gmail.com.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/debbie_wasserman_schultz_constitutionally_ignorant_and_politically_tone_deaf.html#ixzz1wocdvjBL

Sunday, June 3, 2012

Animal Rights Legislation Would Make Eggs a Luxury Food


June 1, 2012
Animal Rights Legislation Would Make Eggs a Luxury Food



One day soon, America could wake up to a dozen eggs costing $8 or more. And unless you are involved in some aspect of farming or agriculture, you would never know that egg prices are about to skyrocket or the reason why. With food prices already increasing due to high grain and fuel costs, extraneous so-called animal welfare regulations are being imposed on U.S. food producers, large and small, by the animal rights powerhouse known as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

With HSUS' vegan animal rights platform as the motivations behind crafting a controversial egg bill, S. 3239 was introduced in the U.S. Senate on Friday, May 25, 2012, inching U.S. egg producers closer to a mandate which would require them to phase out conventional cages for egg-laying hens and transition to a system called "enriched colony cages" by 2029, at a cost to U.S. egg producers ranging between $4 billion to $10 billion.

And while most Americans shrug their shoulders and live their lives, they are completely unaware of how this regulation will affect the cost of food and its availability in the future. The current egg shortage in the U.K. should be a jolting wake-up call for Americans, illustrating that the onerous animal welfare regulations which have phased out conventional cages there have caused egg prices to quadruple, while diminishing egg supply to a "crisis" level. This is a glimpse of what's coming to America if HSUS' egg bill becomes law.

Instead of improving productivity for the American egg industry and supporting our farmers and ranchers, these imposed regulations will incrementally squeeze egg producers out of business. Fewer egg farmers means fewer eggs. Fewer eggs mean higher prices for the consumer, and importing more of our food from other countries where neither animal welfare nor food safety is top priority.

While these regulations may seem reasonable on the surface, the agenda behind them lies within the organization pushing these cleverly crafted laws, cloaked in a disguise of emotional propaganda used to advance these proposed regulations into law. HSUS is an organization that makes no bones about its mission to push anti-animal agriculture regulations, or any stiff regulatory reform on American farmers and ranchers. Just consider the goal of HSUS' lead policy director and vegan activist, J.P. Goodwin, who has gone on record by saying, "My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture." 

HSUS' goal is to provide relief to chickens, not provide food for humans. Will enriched cage systems truly satisfy the vegan animal rights organization which has repeatedly wielded its bully tactics to gain a hold on animal agriculture? My prediction is no. After all, the ultimate goal of HSUS is about empty cages, not bigger cages. 

At a time when jobs are scarce, and the looming possibility that affordable food may become more difficult to come by, now is not the time to stand by and allow an anti-egg-consuming animal rights organization to righteously dictate the future of U.S. egg producers and the future of our domestic food supply. Years ago, as an observation of foreign oppression, Henry Kissenger once said, "If you control the food supply, you control the people." Today, Americans are facing food tyranny on our own shores, which must be stopped. I implore everyone to contact his or her U.S. representative and senator and urge them to vote no on this rotten egg bill, S. 3239, and its identical counterpart in the House, H.R. 3798. 

Mindy Patterson is president and co-founder of The Cavalry Group, an organization working to fight against the radical animal rights movement which threatens American farming and ranching cultures, animal ownership, and private property rights. www.thecavalrygroup.com



Saturday, June 2, 2012

Jamie Glazov Targets the Left’s Jihadist Romance on GBTV

\



Frontpage’s editor Jamie Glazov appeared on GBTV on May 30 to discuss the Unholy Alliance between the radical Left and Islamic Jihad. Host Erick Stakelbeck filled in for Glenn Beck.

South Africa: Students kicked out of college dorms for carrying Bibles, refusing to study Qur'an and wear Islamic dress

Jihad Watch

"All we wanted was to be free to practice our own religions and not be forced to follow Islam, but now we have been punished by being deprived of safe accommodation." Imagine the outcry that would ensue if they had been kicked out of the dorms for refusing Christianity. But no one will take particular notice of this.

Islamic Tolerance Alert: "Protesting students kicked out of dorms," by Bongani Hans for The Mercury, May 31 (thanks to all who sent this in):
A row over the observance of Islamic customs and rules has left about 70 students without a roof over thier [sic] heads.

More than 70 further education and training students on the South Coast have been left without a roof over their heads after they were kicked out of the institution’s dormitories following a row over the observance of Islamic customs and rules.

The Coastal KZN As-Salaam campus in Braemar near Umzinto suspended lessons two weeks ago after students protested that those staying in the college dormitories were being forced to follow the religion.

About 500 students study at the college premises.

The campus was reopened on Tuesday, but more than 70 students who had been living in the dormitories, were told to find their own accommodation outside the institution.

Those living in dormitories were funded by the Department of Higher Education’s national student financial aid scheme, which was believed to be paying about R16 000 a student a year towards meals and accommodation. The beneficiaries said they could not afford to pay for their accommodation and meals because they were from poor families.

“Now that we have been kicked out of the dormitories, our parents have been forced to pay for rent outside the college. I’m paying R300 a month and I’m sharing the room with 11 other students, and I still have to buy groceries. In the dormitories, I was sharing the room with four people, and the meals were provided by the college,” student Zanele Mgedezi said....

The students went on strike after campus management allegedly compelled them to study the Qur’an and wear Muslim clothes.

They said they were not allowed to carry Bibles inside the premises.

The campus belongs to the Department of Higher Education, which rents the premises to the As-Salaam Institution, which promotes Islamic education and religion.

“All we wanted was to be free to practice our own religions and not be forced to follow Islam, but now we have been punished by being deprived of safe accommodation,” said Mofokeng.....

Cases of 'Truman Show' delusions on the rise as more people believe they're the stars of their own reality TV programs



By DAILY MAIL REPORTER

PUBLISHED: 00:19 EST, 1 June 2012 | UPDATED: 00:20 EST, 1 June 2012

Reality TV shows are making increasing numbers of people convinced that they're the stars of their own, unwanted television programs.

Psychiatrists are treating more people for so-called 'Truman Show' delusions -- named after the 1998 movie starring Jim Carrey as a man who spends his entire life unwittingly at the center of a fictional world that's being broadcast to millions of homes.

The startling cases often afflict successful people who develop paranoid fantasies that they're being filmed at all times and that the world that's in front of them isn't real.


They're being watched: People suffering from 'Truman Show' delusions believe they are the star of a TV program like Jim Carrey's character in the 1998 movie


Their friends and loves ones are actors. The news they see on TV is made up to control the way they think. The things that happen to them are merely events staged for the amusement of others.

The result can turn disturbing and even violent.

In 2009, Anthony Waterlow killed his father and his sister in Australia because he believed they were broadcasting his life to the world as part of a game show to either murder him or convince him to kill himself.

During a psychological exam, he specially mentioned 'The Truman Show,' according to the Sydney Morning Herald.



Affliction: The paranoid suspicion of being spied on has driven some people to violence -- even murder -- in event years

In 2007, psychiatrist William Johns III allegedly assaulted a 2-year-old and his mother in New York City after he left his home in Florida because he 'had to get out of the Truman Show' that he believed was filming him in his home town, according to ABC News.

Drs Joel and Ian Gold, researchers at New York University and McGill University in Montreal, respectively, recently published a series of case studies about suffers of 'Truman Show' delusions.

Their article in the journal Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, followed five patients who believed their lives were the center of a secret TV show.

One patient traveled to New York City and walked in a federal building and demanded to see 'the director.' He said he had to come to Manhattan because he believed the World Trade Center attacks had been faked for the TV show being filmed around him, according to BuzzFeed.

He said he had to see for himself whether the twin towers were still standing. If they weren't, he said, it would be final proof that he was the unwilling star of a reality TV program.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2153071/Cases-Truman-Show-delusions-rise-people-believe-theyre-stars-reality-TV-programs.html#ixzz1wdzwL8mB

Friday, June 1, 2012

Is Obama really a Failure?

I listen to talk radio and all the political pundits... and seems like everyone is referring to Obama as a failure or failed Presidency  .... that drives me crazy!  Before you get irate with me keep reading.  If your expectation of Barak Obama was that he was supposed to come into the Office of the Presidency to turn the economy around and get us out of debt then it was your assumption that was wrong.  While I agree he is a horrible President, its not because I think he was a failure, its because he had a completely different agenda than what the average American thought.  His agenda and those supporting it has all along been to push our shaky Capitalist economny over the edge to the point of no return.  I would say that he is accomplishing that very well. Now, the left is also calling Obama a failure because he hasnt transformed America fast enough and pushed his agenda hard enough but Im sure given another 4 years and they will be happy.  My point is, the condition of the United State is not due to Obama' incompetence or mishandling the situation, its because this has always been the goal in order to complete the transition from "Romney's kind of Capitalism and Obama's kind of Capitalism"  as I heard someone say on CNN last Sunday.  Obama'a kind has Never been Capitalism, his end goal is to transform America in to part of a Global Communist Government.  If we dont get America out of the hands of the Marxist in and around our White House and House of  Representatives we will be telling our children and grandchildren what it was like to be free.




UPDATE:  I posted my article yesterday prior to listening to Glenn 's Monologue and it was crazy because he was saying the same thing... See below.



Why are leftists complaining about Obama?



Not one to defend anything that comes out of the Obama White House, Glenn started the radio program this morning coming to the President’s defense – kind of.
With all of the progressive policies the President has put forth these last three years, it is hard to believe that many leftists and progressives continue to express dismay with the President’s job performance. After all, Obama has done things no progressive president ever has – passed government healthcare and so much more.
So what’s the problem?
“I honestly don’t understand what the left wants from this President. Let me play devil’s advocate, and I may mean that literally, and argue for the President here for a second,” Glenn said.
“If you are a Marxist, if you are a revolutionary, if you’re a communist, really, if you’re an anarchist, if you’re an extreme leftist, if you’re somebody who doesn’t like the system as it is on the left, what more could this President do for you,” he asked.
Once you begin to run through the list of everything Barak Obama has ‘accomplished’ in his first term, it’s difficult to find anything that would be construed as a ‘failure’ by the left.
Just a quick look at President Obama’s first three years reveals he has:
- Passed universal health care
- Ended the war on terror
- Pacified the labor unions
- Lead the largest financial reform in U.S. history
- Created the Credit Protection Agency
- Changed foreign constitutions in support abortion
- Given NATO a leading role over the United States
- Appointed literal socialists, literal communists, literal revolutionaries to high office
- Supported anarchists, communists, and revolutionaries by supporting Occupy Wall Street
- Made it near criminal to have a differing point of view
- Put in place more regulations than could ever be undone
- Allowed the Department of Justice to stop a bid to halt illegal voting
- Controlled what food we can and cannot eat through his wife’s anti-obesity initiatives
- Given the Environmental Protection Agency the ability to regulate carbon emissions
- Doubled the amount of people on food stamps in three and half years
- Enacted a stimulus policy, which blindly threw billions of dollars at green energy companies among other things
Oh and one more minor achievement: this President has overseen the fundamental transformation of the United States America.
“I’d like to hear from you on what did we miss because we sat around this morning and we went through this list. And I’ll bet you we missed over half of what this President has done,” Glenn said. “It’s overwhelming what this President has done. He has overseen the fundamental transformation of the United States of America. He’s literally rewriting history in real time.”
This list just scratches the surface, and yet the left is still not satisfied with the President’s job. Ironically, it would seem their unhappiness stems from the same place conservatives’ does – President Obama has not been truthful.
“I know you know the guy’s a Marxist, period. He’s not a communist. He’s a Marxist. He wants to fundamentally transform the United States of America. He is more Hugo Chavez than George Washington,” Glenn said.
“We all know that. And we know he knows that, and we know he’s telling us lies, but I contend so does the left,” he continued. “The left looks at him and they’re seeing him – they’re seeing him cozying up with Wall Street and they’re saying, ‘Wait a minute. Why are you cozying up with Wall Street? What happened to you?’”
“They know he’s lying, and they’re angry he won’t come out and admit it because there’s nothing to be ashamed of. We’re all socialists now. We’re all Marxist now. Why can’t you be the President of the France? He won on the Marxist platform. He came out and admitted it. Why don’t you admit you’ve been hanging out with the Democratic Socialists of America? We’ve got all the evidence. We’ve seen you at their conferences. Why won’t you admit it? They don’t like it.”
Had the President been open with his ideology and accomplished all of these things with his intentions clearly stated, the left would be proud to call him their leader, but that has not been the case with this administration.
“They think he’s a liar, just like we think he’s a liar,” Glenn concluded. “He’s in trouble. He’s in trouble because our side, we don’t like him. We think he’s a liar. We vote him out of office. Communists, revolutionaries, and anarchists, they think you’re a liar, you betray the revolution, it usually doesn’t end well. The President is in trouble.”
“They don’t trust him. The same problem that the left has with the President of the United States is the problem we have. It’s the same problem. Nobody trusts him because you don’t really know who he is.”