Downfall XIX: Iran

Leaving aside the question of whether Obama’s deal with Iran is a good deal for anyone other than Iran and their nefarious allies, I do not expect this to end well.

I expect Iran will use this break to regain its economic bearings and will proceed with getting the bomb.  And I’ll say right off that if my expectation is correct, it isn’t brilliance on my part.  Liars tend to lie.  Genocidal maniacs, if unchecked, tend to proceed towards genocide. 

In any case, Iran getting the bomb will increase discontent with Obama, especially after this deal.  Politically, it might have been better for him to do nothing.  (And I’ll be the first to say Iran is a difficult problem with which to deal short of nuking them back to the stone age, which I neither wish nor recommend.)

Note I do not expect Iran to be a primary cause of his downfall.  Obamacare is fulfilling that role.

Oh, I stole the pic from Drudge’s page this morning.  We think so much alike I think he stole the idea from my brain overnight.  So there.

----

Downfall is an ongoing series anticipating and tracking what I expect will be the self-destruction of Obama.

The first post may be found here.  The series may be found here.

On the Sunday Next Before Advent

This Sunday is the Sunday Next Before Advent, which begins my favorite time of the church year, Advent through Christmas to Epiphany.  Yes, I know Advent does not really begin until next Sunday, but when this Sunday comes around, I can almost taste it.  For one thing I can get out my ADVENT music and listen to it with a clear conscious.  (Christmas music is still a forbidden enormity for a couple weeks at least.)

But this Sunday in particular also has a warm place in my heart. 

I especially remember this Sunday, also Christ the King Sunday, in Oxford back in 2007.  It began with church bells out my window then a glorious mass at Pusey House complete with a rousing Solemn Te Deum.  (And, yes, I highly recommend Pusey House on Christ the King Sunday for those in the Oxford area.)  It ended with a long anticipated heavenly candlelit Advent Lessons and Carols service at Magdalen in the evening.  (Well, it really ended with me taking dinner at a good Oxford pub, but with me that goes without saying.)

Also, that Sunday let me know that my long dark rainy Oxford Autumn was near an end.  Advent and home was near.

Wow, funny how the emotions of that time are coming back to me.

Then there is the unalloyed triumph of Christ the King Sunday, appropriate for the end of this church year.  Christ is King now and soon will reign on the Earth.

You can see that the Sunday Next Before Advent has a special place in my heart.  I hope this Sunday will be special to you as well.

Downfall XVIII: Obama Blames Republicans for Obamacare

Yes, this is a second Downfall post today, and, no, I am not kidding.  Obama really did blame Republicans for the problems besetting Obamacare:

“One of the problems we’ve had is one side of Capitol Hill is invested in failure,” Obama said at the Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council meeting in Washington.

One reason I include this in my Downfall series is this what tyrants do when their regime is failing; they blame others for their own failure.  The Communist Pigs in charge of Venezuela blame those Yanquis, especially the CIA.  Yeah, the CIA is very busy keeping toilet paper from Venezuelans.  Heck, Hitler blamed the whole German people.  They failed him as if his foolish invasion of the Soviet Union had nothing to do with losing WW2.

Anyway, I do not find Obama’s blame game even worthy of rebutting.  But Ed Morrissey has posted a good one anyway.  AND if you want a really meaty epic rant that this blogger envies, go to Ace and his taking apart the attempts of Dana Milbank and other Leftist hacks to blame Republicans for Obamacare's problems.  In short, Milbank and company are attempting to vilify Republicans because they were soooo evil as to oppose Obamacare and to – brace yourself – tell the truth about it.  Horrors!  In Ace’s words:

[Milbank’s] just Darned Angry at the GOP for blowing the whistle and letting people know that Obama is turning them into farm-animals to be periodically shorn of fur with which to make sweaters for members of Obama's coalition.

Pretty much.

-----

Downfall is an ongoing series anticipating and tracking what I expect will be the self-destruction of Obama.

The first post may be found here.  The series may be found here.

Downfall XVII: CBS Poll – Obama Approval Falls to 37%

Just over a month ago, I opined the following:

Obamacare will be the biggest factor in the Downfall of the Obama Regime.  Americans have been very tolerant towards Obama, too much so.  Anger and frustration with Obamacare could be the tidalwave that washes that tolerance away.

In case you haven’t noticed, that seems to be happening.  The worst indication for Obama came this morning.  A CBS, yes CBS, Poll has Obama’s approval in Bush territory – 37%

And the employee insurance cancellations have not even begun yet.

But it is sad that Americans had to be so directly and personally hurt by Obama’s policies before they turned against him.  That is not a good commentary on the current state of our political culture.

It is also an indication of how foolish and ideological Obama was to cram Obamacare down our throats.  If he had taken the message of Scott Brown’s election to heart and relented back in 2010, he would, however wrongly, still have the good will of most Americans and might even control both houses of Congress.

Behold, the wicked man conceives evil

and is pregnant with mischief

and gives birth to lies.

He makes a pit, digging it out,

and falls into the hole that he has made.

His mischief returns upon his own head,

and on his own skull his violence descends.

         Psalm 7: 14-16

-----

Downfall is an ongoing series anticipating and tracking what I expect will be the self-destruction of Obama.

The first post may be found here.  The series may be found here.

Obama’s Census Bureau “Faked” 2012 Pre-Election Employment Numbers

Before the 2012 elections, the reported unemployment rate dropped markedly with precious little to account for said drop.  Coming from this regime, the drop was too convenient for me to believe.  I suspected it was bogus (as I very briefly mentioned at the time).

It now appears my suspicions were right.

The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September [2012] — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated.

And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it.

Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy.

And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.

“He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked.

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

And the Instapundit reminds that Obama’s White House took the Census Bureau under its wing during his first term.  His take on this new revelation of faked employment numbers?

So with this and the IRS intimidation of the opposition, the asterisk on Obama’s re-election gets bigger. . . .

I would add that the blatant vote fraud in urban precincts also makes that asterisk rather large.

And with the pattern of using the federal government illegally and fraudulently to aid Obama and attack political opposition, I’m beginning to wonder if Obama can be impeached for racketeering.

Telegraph: C of E on Brink of Women Bishops Resolution

If the Telegraph is to be believed, I was on to something last week.  Things are looking good for an amicable resolution to the women bishop’s issue in the Church of England.

Not only can Forward in Faith people live with the current proposal, but Women and the Church seems happy with it, too.

The legislation has also been praised by Women and the Church, the most prominent group currently campaigning for women bishops. Anne Stevens, a group vice chairman, said: “It’s good to see draft legislation that is so clear and concise, and we look forward to a day of great national rejoicing when women are finally made bishops.”

We shall see.  Again, my attitude is that women bishops in the Church of England are inevitable.  So if a way to that can be found that respects and protects traditionalists, then that is probably the way to go.

Given the past attitudes of some women bishops proponents, I doubted such a way was possible.  I would be most happy to be proven mistaken in that regard.

Isn’t That Special

Back in late 2009 and 2010, poll after poll indicated a majority of Americans did not want Obamacare.

But Democrats went ahead anyway.

Early in 2010, opposition to Obamacare got a Republican elected as Senator in a special election . . . in Massachusetts.

But Democrats went ahead anyway.

It became clear that, unlike past major entitlement initiatives, Obamacare would get virtually no Republican votes in either the Senate or the House.  And polls continued to show a majority of Americans did not want it.

But Democrats went ahead anyway.

In September 2010, Senate Republicans tried to stop cancellations of health insurance policies due to Obamacare implementation.

But Democrats voted their resolution down . . . every Democrat.

In September 2013, when Obamacare was about to go into effect and it was obvious it was not ready to go, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and others tried to delay Obamacare.

But Democrats were so determined to go ahead with Obamacare on schedule that they shut down other parts of the Federal government to do so.

But nowwww that there is a growing backlash against the enormities of Obamacare, particularly policy cancellations, with Democrat poll numbers plummeting, Democrats are OH-so-concerned.

Well, isn’t that special.

In fact, it is so heartwarming, I created a meme this morning.

You're welcome.

“A Very Significant Improvement” in CofE Women Bishops Proposals

Up to now, I have been pessimistic about the prospects for an amicable resolution to the push for women bishops in the Church of England given a major faction (feminists) has no problem pushing another (traditionalists) out of the church.

But yesterday, Bishop Jonathan Baker, Chairman of Forward in Faith, issued a statement that gives some hope.  It begins:

The new draft legislation on Women in the Episcopate and the associated proposals in the Steering Committee’s report represent a very significant improvement on the former draft legislation which failed in November 2012.

He goes briefly into the improvements, then adds:

Though these proposals are still far from what we have long said would be ideal, we believe that they may have the potential to provide workable arrangements for the future, which will ensure that our people, clergy and parishes have continued access to a ministry that will enable us to flourish within the structures of the Church of England and make our full contribution to its life and mission. They hold out the possibility of bringing to a conclusion a process that for too long has been a distraction from the Church’s mission. Much will depend on the continuance of the atmosphere of trust that has at last begun to be fostered by the process that produced these proposals.

We therefore encourage the General Synod to send the legislation for revision in full Synod, so that the process may continue as expeditiously as possible.

Do read the whole statement for yourself.

And I invite those with more knowledge of the discussions than me to comment.  But really I could not have hoped for more at this point.  Women bishops in the Church of England are close to inevitable.  The main question is whether traditionalists will at the same time be given a tenable place.  And Bishop Jonathan, whom I know and highly respect, now seems reasonably hopeful of that prospect.

The Bookworm on Obama’s Pattern of Lying

Back in 2008, I rightly had Obama pegged as a Leftist and a liar.  And nobody can say I did not warn people about him.

But one Bookworm did me one better I must confess.  Not only did he see Obama as a liar, he dissected with remarkable precision the character and pattern of his lies.  Last week, he pretty much said “I told you so,”  beginning,

More than five years ago, when Barack Obama threw his hat into the political ring, I realized that he was a malignant narcissist who lied compulsively.  For Obama, truth was then and is now defined by the needs of the moment.  If it will benefit him at that moment to say something at variance with facts as other people know them, he is telling the truth because his political needs are the ultimate yardstick by which all truth must be measured.  This pathological outlook means that, when Obama is caught in what ordinary people would characterize an out-and-out lie, he engages in a cascading cover-up of lies, all dictated, not by objective facts, but by his needs at the moment.

And then he goes back to what he said in 2008, which goes into more detail of Obama’s pattern of lying.  I don’t want to paste too much of his post, so please go read for yourself.  But it suffices to say Obama habitually engages in the textbook “affirmative defense” method of prevarication, and the Bookworm was remarkably prescient in spotting that before The One became king President.

And we are seeing that pattern again with his progression of lies on Obamacare.

A Reminder About Apologies

Not all apologies are created equal.  For an apology to be genuine, it has to be accompanied by reasonable efforts to make amends when that is possible.  If the one who makes the apology has the power to make amends, to right the wrong he did, but does not do so, his apology is close to worthless.

I thought this reminder might be timely after a certain so-called apology yesterday.

Ace Sums Up the Obama Presidency

I might have mentioned this before, but Ace of Spades has become my favorite blog.  It comes with a language warning and *ahem* uninhibited “moron” commenters, but wow is it informative, fun, and wide-ranging.

Yesterday, the lead blogger there, Ace, teed off on Obama for giving his union buddies a $63 Obamacare break while not lifting a finger to keep his promises and help those afflicted by Obamacare cancellations, higher premiums, and higher deductibles.  But then most of those unfortunates don’t vote Democrat, do they.

Obama has shellacked middle class individual policy holders precisely because they're (mostly) not in his coalition, but boy is he afraid to impose a $63 a year tax -- that's like five pizzas, in case you're wondering -- on members of his coalition.

The reason I bring this to your attention is that, in the process of addressing this outrage, Ace summed up the Obama Regime all too well:

This is deadly, toxic stuff, pure out in the open piracy, stealing from citizens outside Obama's core supporters to give to his loyal minions. This is Banana Republic stuff.

This is looting.

Obama is the President who bequeathed America our new Looter Economy. . . .

It's government-sanctioned piracy -- it's privateering, siccing some citizens on others, giving First Tier Citizens permission to loot the Second Tier Citizens.

And I cannot do better than that in summarizing the Obama presidency.

The Problem With Lying, Illustrated

To be exact, there are many problems with lying.  God doesn’t like it, for one thing.  But one big problem is that if one wishes a lie to remain believed, one may have to tell additional lies to cover for the earlier lie.  For example…

President Barack Obama told his enthusiastic supporters Monday night that he never promised what video recordings show him promising at least 29 times.

The videos show Obama promising 300 million Americans that “if you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period.”  [ed. To be exact, Obama did use that exact wording.  I am not sure he used that exact wording 29 times.]

But that’s not what he really said, Obama announced Monday in a speech to about 200 Organizing for Action supporters, gathered at the St. Regis hotel in D.C.

“What we said was you could keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law was passed,” he told Obamacare’s political beneficiaries and contractors.

And Obama’s lie upon a lie is verified by Politico reporter Reid Epstein:

Obama adds a clause to "you can keep it" - "What we said was you can keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law passed."
— Reid J. Epstein (@reidepstein) November 4, 2013

Another problem with lies is that when they are discovered, people who trusted them and acted on them, say, by voting for you, might become unhappy.

A Push for Women Bishops at GAFCON

I should say first that I do not want to detract from GAFCON.  Almost everything I’ve read about last week’s meeting in Nairobi is positive, and I am glad my church is a full participant in this movement.

However, I was unpleasantly surprised to read, from the ever reliable George Conger no less, that there was a push to get GAFCON explicitly to support women bishops:

A behind-the-scenes fight over language describing the ministry of women also shaped the final document. It said: "We affirm the ministries of women and their vital contribution to the life of the Church: their call to the task of evangelism, discipling, and building strong marriages, families, churches, and communities. GAFCON 2013 upholds the Bible's teaching that men and women are equally made in the image of God . . . excercising different gifts. We recognise that we have differing views over the roles of men and women in church leadership."

Delegates from provinces that support women in episcopal leadership, however, fought for the inclusion of language in support of women bishops. The move was blocked by the dominant Nigerian bloc (almost 500 of the 1300 delegates), in alliance with conservative Evangelicals. When the final document was offered to the conference, a Ugandan woman clergy delegate voiced a lone "No" vote.

While thankful that this effort was successfully blocked, I am flummoxed that there was a notable effort to get GAFCON to support women bishops at all.  Are there that many in GAFCON who are that ignorant or unconcerned about how the issue of women bishops has strained and is straining Christian unity, particularly in the West?  Are there many that insensitive to the awful experiences orthodox Anglicans in the West have had with that issue and with a number of women bishops in particular?

Up to now, GAFCON has wisely had a flexible policy about women bishops – that it is up to the provinces – and has otherwise pretty much left the issue alone.  Even many or most of those who support women bishops have seen that forcing that on a church is destructive and have seen amicable disagreement and space on this issue a far better way to go. That continues to be the policy, thanks largely to the Nigerians and allied conservatives.

But naysayers of orthodox Anglicanism have said that the germs of the problems that have consumed much of the Western church remain in the bodies of those Anglicans who have split off and formed orthodox provinces and dioceses.  I hope said naysayers are mistaken, but after reading the above about GAFCON, I wonder.

The Usual Losers

The Federalist has an article by John Daniel Davidson of the Texas Public Policy Foundation which documents that many of the losers under Obamacare will be the young and the healthy.

I’ll defer to Mr. Davidson for the details.  But it immediately occurred to me that this is typical of Democrat policies, and not just under Obama but for decades.

Democrat policy has always been to buy votes now at the expense of future generations.  Opposing Social Security reforms is but one example.  Simple demographics have long shown that Social Security has become a Ponzi scheme that will blow up on today’s young.  But when Republicans tried to avoid this outcome with reforms, Democrats demagogued and told the elderly that Republicans were trying to take their Social Security.  And this worked at the ballot box time and time again as the elderly for decades voted Democrat.

Then there are the multiple ways of buying votes with deficit spending, endangering the future economic health of the nation.  (And, yes, establishment Republicans have participated in this vote buying as well.)

In short, Democrat policy has long been “Screw the young!  Win the next election!”

The other major set of losers under Obamacare and Democrat policies are those who take care of themselves, in other words, the healthy.  (Granted, some people through genetic or economic inheritance are physically or financially healthy through little effort of their own.  So, yes, I am generalizing.)  Under Obamacare, a big reason premiums for the healthy are going up is because people with pre-existing conditions are covered, and someone has to pay for that.

Now it sounds all good that pre-existing conditions are covered. And I have a friend who has had epilepsy since childhood.  I don’t have a big problem helping out someone like him, who has an acute health problem that is no fault of his own.  But a lot of pre-existing conditions are self-inflicted through over-eating, laziness, smoking, etc.  Should someone who works to take care of herself have to pay for the willful negligence of others?  But that is exactly what happens under Obamacare.

And you probably see where I’m going.  Democrat policy is to buy the votes of the lazy and the looters with the taxes of the workers and with deficit spending.  Work, responsibility, and success are punished.  Laziness and fecklessness are rewarded.

So Obamacare is the same old same old from Democrats . . . just on steroids.

So hey, you younguns and those who take care of yourselves, are you tired of being screwed over yet?