How do you know this is immediate state run media propaganda?   Well, setting aside the fact it’s Clinton’s White House Communications Director -who became Senior Democrat Advisor For Policy and Strategy- George Stephanopoulos doing the interview, the first sentence reveals structure and propaganda.

“I spoke to John Kerry earlier this morning right after he sealed the deal”.

“this morning” as in Europe time.
Kerry held his presser at 4:45am to 5:30am Euro time. [As in 10:45 to 11:30pm DC time]. So this interview was actually done Saturday night (midnight-ish) for airing today.
Follow.The.Bouncing.Ball…… So this interview was previously arranged/coordinated between the White House (Administration McDonough) and ABC (Pravda).

NRO has a detailed explanation which is 100% in-line with all the research and prior considerations we have assembled.    The only point of contention I would lay over the well written article would be to remind readers it is not a construct of just Barack Obama per se’.  He is, after all, merely a willing participant in the scheme.   The actual architecture comes from a league of people, the circle of influence, in and around him.

( Via NRO) […]  The point of showing that Obama is carrying out a massive scheme to defraud — one that certainly would be prosecuted if committed in the private sector — is not to agitate for a prosecution that is never going to happen. It is to demonstrate that there is logic to the lies. There is an objective that the fraud aims to achieve. The scheme is the framework within which the myriad deceptions are peddled. Once you understand the scheme, once you can put the lies in a rational context, you understand why fraud was the president’s only option — and why “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” barely scratches the surface of Obamacare’s deceit.
In 2003, when he was an ambitious Illinois state senator from a hyper-statist district, Obama declared: (more…)

Twelve hours after President Obama announces a John Kerry brokered deal with Iran the international community responds.

(Via New York Post)  People are puzzled: Why would Barack Obama have lied about how wonderfully everything was going to go with ObamaCare when officials in his administration knew perfectly well that disaster was going to strike?
In one sense, the answer is simple: At the time, just before Oct. 1, Republicans were insisting ObamaCare be delayed or defunded. The president and his team weren’t going to give the enemy the satisfaction of agreeing — or the potent ammunition that would have come from a rueful admission the system wasn’t ready.
Today, a bipartisan agreement to delay ObamaCare seems like it would have been a pretty good deal. It didn’t look that way at all in the last two weeks of September.
But there’s a deeper reason he and his people lied: They did it because they could. They did it because nearly five years in the White House had given Obama and his team confidence they would not face the music and they could finesse the problems until they got fixed. (more…)

You have to give the Democrats credit for the openly visible audacity to call Republicans Obstructionists and Terrorists for their delay tactics –  then openly doing exactly the same when it can be used to serve their political interests.

Obama just delayed the start of Obamacare enrollments from Oct. 15, 2014 to Nov. 15, 2014..after the midterm election.

— Steve Stockman (@SteveWorks4You) November 22, 2013

Just a few weeks ago even suggesting moving Obamacare deadlines was "arson" and "terrorism." Now it's White House policy.

— Steve Stockman (@SteveWorks4You) November 22, 2013

Meanwhile a nation of slack jaws just stand quietly and watch a spineless Congress do exactly NOTHING about it.

The Washington Post has an article today finally solving the riddle of who was driving the tank in his historic picture of Tiananmen Square.   
According to Washington Post columnist, Bill Minutaglio, the driver of the tank in the famous Tiananmen Square picture was Thomas Jefferson;  yes, that Thomas Jefferson.
(Washington Post)   […]  To find the very roots of the tea party of 2013, just go back to downtown Dallas in 1963,   back to the months and weeks leading to the Kennedy assassination. It was where and when a deeply angry political polarization, driven by a band of zealots, burst wide open in America.
(more…)

Sometimes the only thing a person can do is to inform others the scope, size and propensity of the opponents armory – the listener can then judge for themselves what the enemy is going to do with it.

Paul Revere did as much when he spotted The Somerset, a British Man-O-War, resting in the bay of Charlestown – His mounted ride thereafter was written into the history of our Republic.
Today the enemy is more common; yet beholden of a similar stealth and specific intent.   Today the enemy is, as it was well predicted to be, the Washington DC political class.  More specifically the GOP establishment; and more specific still – the head of that class, Mitch McConnell. (more…)

Other than the passage of the 17th amendment the action of the Senate yesterday to strip the rule of minority consent, sold by the media under the obfuscation term of “the filibuster rule”, nothing has been so stark as to destroy the very foundation from our republic.
To justify the usurpation the White House tweets this message:

Everything you need to know about why today’s #filibuster rule change is a really big deal: http://t.co/Sl4lKRMxpe, pic.twitter.com/69aLdZ8kpL

— White House Archived (@ObamaWhiteHouse) November 22, 2013

Understand the severity – The “minority consent“, now dispatched in rather willy nilly fashion, by Majority Leader Harry Reid is the thread which binds the very fabric of the constitution.
There is NOT one mention of the word “Democracy” in our constitution – NOT ONE.  The absence of the word democracy is specifically intentional.
The exact phrase which sums up our united states charter is:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government.”

The “Consent of the Minority” was not merely a substantive point of constitutional construction.  It was -by intentional construct- the very binding substance which created the parchment before a single word was penned. (more…)

(Via Heritage)   Last week’s closed-door testimony by five CIA operatives who witnessed the attack on the U.S. special mission in Benghazi has finally created an opening for the congressional investigating committees.

The five CIA contractors, who testified in closed-door hearings before the House Intelligence Committee Thursday and Friday, were stationed at the “CIA annex” in Benghazi, about one mile from the U.S. special diplomatic mission. This was the facility that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tasked Ambassador Chris Stevens to turn into a permanent consulate, even though security staff there was totally inadequate. (more…)

Prior to the revolutionary war the majority did not want to fight England for our independence.   During the revolutionary war the majority did not want to help fight England for our independence, they were called loyalists.   In the actual fighting itself many loyalists assisted the armies of King George against the army of our congress who were called Continentals.
From our own soil 50,000 Loyalists joined England and fought for King George.   For comparison only 35,000 Continentals were in the fight for independence.
Hence 44,500 non-military militia were needed and eventually mobilized from every village and farm.
People often forget it was a minority of patriots who wanted, fought for, and won liberty for an entire nation.

Those Loyalists who favored British colonial rule never left, they were not dispatched after our national independence was won.   Those British Loyalists who were uncommitted to our struggle for independence stayed here in a new nation enjoying the liberty and freedom they never lifted a finger to support – and in many cases fought against.
For 207 years we have been in a war of ideas with that uncommitted crew.   We have been fighting a war of ideas between a proposition of “liberty and independence”, and those who prefer, or at least are comfortable with, a lesser freedom.
Today that loyalist-minded majority changed the rules.
(more…)