Replies to post #7755 on General Stock Ideas

[bigworld]

MF4: Just mentioning race these days gets you labelled a racsist (if you're white). It comes with the territory. But in regard to Obama race is a paramount consideration. Honestly, if Obama had been white but with the same track record/experience/resume would he have beaten out Hillary Clinton for the nomination in 2008? I don't think anyone with 3 digits to their IQ could conclude that he would have. So he won the nomination in large part due to his skin color. Fast forward to the present. If Obama was white he would have had a primary challenge within his own party with the results of the last 4 years. You know the litany...Billions given to green energy hucksters who later went bankrupt, REAL unemployment near 14%, $6 Trillion more in debt and nothing to show for it, Fast and Furious, the Libyan consulate tragedy and the subsequent cover-up spin.....But someone like Hillary, who longs for Airforce One with a quiet seething passion, couldn't mount a primary challenge because they knew it would have alienated the black vote and would have doomed them in the general election. Obama benefitted from his race since the time he started college and that continued throughout his life. Mysterious financial aid, sealed records and transcripts, dubious birth certificate, sealed passport records so we can't see how he was able to visit Pakistan at a time when Americans were not allowed to travel there....I wonder how many Editors of Harvard's Law Review ever got there without having published a single legal scholarship paper? Just asking.

And that leaves me to the flip side of my rant...and it entails the mainstream media and their obvious pro-Democrat bias and especially their fervent Obama worship. I remember when Reagan was President and the Iran/Contra scandal happened. It was front and center on every newscast and on page One of every newspaper worthy of the name. And this happened day after day after day....Congressional hearings, the whole nine yards. Fast forward to a year and half ago when it was learned that Obama's administration arranged to have thousands of assault weapons delivered to Mexican cartels in order to incite even more violence in the hope that it would change public opinion toward restricting assault weapons first and eventually all personal firearms in the USA. Yet the story, far worse than Iran/Contra including the death of at least one American Border Agent, barely garners a blip of coverage from the mainstream media. Now if this had happened under a Republican administration would the MSM be ignoring it? I highly doubt it. They'd be on it like flies on shit. With the recent Libyan consulate fiasco the same thing. Reporters would be ceaseless in trying to get to the bottom of who knew what and when. It would drown out all other campaign news..they'd see to that. The Republican running for reelection wouldn't have a chance. Poor Ambassador Stevens practically begged for more security, which was of course denied, while the State Department spent over $100 K at the same time promoting some green initiative bullshit at their Vienna, Austria embassy. We couldn't give Stevens a squad of heavily armed Marines in a very dangerous area but we can give Obama aid Valerie Jarrett a full Secret Service protection detail when she vacations to Martha's Vineyard, and 999 out of every 1000 American couldn't pick Jarrett's face out of a 6 face picture lineup. Perhaps the Obama administration would have had a few bucks left to protect our Ambassador if we hadn't spent all that money flying O and Michelle all over the world to vacation. What's the estimate cost...something like $1.4 Billion so far?

Anyway, enough. I don't want to have by blood pressure rise. I've already voted, now I'll head to the health club and burn off my breakfast. Have a great day. How's business out your way?

[gfp927z]

MarketFest, Don't fall for the divide and conquer method used by the globalists. Their goal is to have black/white, old/young, rich/poor, men/women, etc perpetually at eachother's throats. This prevents the people from uniting and realizing their common enemy is the cartel overlords. It's the same technique used so successfully for centuries by the British Empire.

As George Carlin astutely said -

"All the media and politicians are ever talking about - the things that separate us, things that make us different from one another. That's the way the ruling class operates in any society - they try to divide the rest of the people. They keep the lower and middle classes fighting with eachother, so that they, the rich, can run off with all the money. Fairly simple thing, and it happens to work. Anything different, that's what they're going to talk about -- race, religion, ethnic and national backround, jobs, income, education, social status, sexuality -- anything they can do to keep us fighting with eachother so they can keep going to the bank."

Leaders who emerge who are uniters are always eliminated by the globalists. Ghandi for example, refused the British in their desire to inflame ethnic/religious divisions in India between Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims, so they had him assassinated. Same with Martin Luther King in the US, a non violent pacifist who could unite black/white, old/young, so the globalist cartel had him killed. It was the cartel who funded the radicalization of the Black Panthers and also the SDS spin off, the 'Weathermen Underground'. It's divide and conquer.

Most of the funding for societal destabilization goes through the cartel's Foundations - Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, etc. Remember Obama's minister, the divisive Rev Jeremiah Wright? His racist Black Liberation Theology is funded by these same Foundations. They also funded the feminist movement in the early 1970s to drive a wedge between men and women and to wreck the traditional family structure. Destabilizing and wrecking societies is the cartel's stock in trade.