Lets back up a little bit and define the word Democrats. There are two categories of Democrats, and it aligns with the caste system more than a representative republic. Taking the last definition first, a representative republic is pretty straight forward. A republic:
Democrats can be defined as:
An advocate or supporter of democracy.Democracy in turn is:
A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
An advocate or supporter of democracy.Democracy in turn is:
A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
Democrats have bastardized the literal definition by using the word as the name of their party, under the guise of standing up for the little people. On the two categories, the first is the population that considers themselves Democrats. The second is the ruling class that manipulates the first by any and all means necessary to achieve power and wealth for themselves while suppressing the second class using lies, distortion and manipulation.
Without the support of the little people, the leaders would fall. An open-eyed look at the policies and actions of the Democrat leaders would cause a uprising of their minions that would make Mussolini's ousting of being dragged through the streets would pale in comparison. To avoid the exposure to the truth a number of controls over the followers must be in place to facilitate their acceptance.
The first, and most important, is creating an enemy to rally against. This is not a tactic that is new or exclusive to the Democrats, but rather old and proven throughout history again and again.
In the Democrats regime, the enemy is the Republicans, Right Wing, Conservatives, Tea-Party, Christians, and ultimately America itself. The enemy is created by not only identifying the weak points, but creating them where they do not exist. Perception is reality and when a single group dominates education (to indoctrinate and teach), entertainment (to amuse and captivate), and the media (to inform and report news). If you can see how those positions can, and have been manipulated in the past, you can see how they are manipulated today in an attempt to control the masses.
The first, and most important, is creating an enemy to rally against. This is not a tactic that is new or exclusive to the Democrats, but rather old and proven throughout history again and again.
In the Democrats regime, the enemy is the Republicans, Right Wing, Conservatives, Tea-Party, Christians, and ultimately America itself. The enemy is created by not only identifying the weak points, but creating them where they do not exist. Perception is reality and when a single group dominates education (to indoctrinate and teach), entertainment (to amuse and captivate), and the media (to inform and report news). If you can see how those positions can, and have been manipulated in the past, you can see how they are manipulated today in an attempt to control the masses.
Democrats not only manipulate people to follow their policies blindly, but count on a herd mentality to persuade people to follow the leaders. It is human nature to support the majority and be inline with the winning team. When people don't know, or are not educated on an issue, they rely on believing others (that they think) that are better informed or know better. So who are these more informed people? Teachers vs students, news reporters vs uneducated citizens, people on TV vs people at the grocery store, it's pretty easy to see who has the creditably and should be trusted, if you don't know for yourself. But it is never presented as "Here are the two sides, look at them and decide for yourself." instead it is presented as "This is what it is, and those other guys are ...crazy, hateful, bigots, racists, conspiratorial theorists, greedy, warmongers, profiteers, the 2%, teabaggers, etc..." If it sounds like shooting the messenger, it is. Creating an enemy and discrediting the group is at the heart of it. It is the Johnny Cockran defense, not to be confused with the South Park Chewbacca defense, even though that example does support what democrats do, in a simplistic way identifying the red herring.
For those unfamiliar, Johnny Cockran was one of the attorneys that defended OJ Simpson in the murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Simpson, and her lover, Ron Goldman. While the evidence in the case showed overwhelmingly that OJ committed the act, the jury came back with a non-guilty verdict. How did this miscarage of justice happen? Easy, the defense distracted from the truth and focused on discrediting the people involved. The LA Police department, Mark Ferman, an investigator on the case, based on racism. While it is a lawyers duty to defend his client to the best of his ability, is it a party's job to defend their agenda with misdirection or outright falsehoods? In a court of law it's called jury nullification. In the party of Democrats it's called business as usual.
Looking at the enemy that Democrats create and blame for everything is easy to spot. First lets look at the major enemy, Republicans. They are labeled as heartless, evil, rich, money grubbing business people who are only concerned with profit and taking advantage of the poor, workers. The notion that the rich got rich on the backs of the poor is a commonly held belief. It reflects back to the hay day of unions, workers against management, rich against poor. But this is not an American phenomenon, it is as old as time itself. Every uprising has a class element to it. The royals overthrown by the peasants (think french revolution), The bourgeois (middle class) and the proletariat (non-property owners), popularized by Karl Marx. Democrats use this class divide to gain favor even when it is at the detriment of the class they are pretending to represent.
In the current environment, our country has been experiencing a rapid decline under the Administration of Barack Obama. Being the most liberal democrat since Jimmy Carter, Obama's economy has promoted the underclass in speak, but in action supported the upper class. During his first term, every problem in the country was answered with "Blame Bush". It became so common it was eventually aboandoned as a lame excuse, but what happened in the 1st Obama term is monumental, in the accomplishments and failures. The question is, were these things accurately portrayed, or more importantly, what is believed, regardless of the real truth.
Now, it may seem like saying the first black President was the monumental moment, and it was a first in our 230 year history, but once you put race aside, it is a working example that actions speak louder than words. We can first look at his monumental election and why it happened. Well he was black, and ran on 'hope and change'. The fanfare surrounding the election was a black President could unite an otherwise racially divided country. White men have controlled this country in all aspects since before its inception, and descendants of slaves have been discriminated against since. If a black man can be elected to the highest office of the land, if not the world, it would show our accomplishment to rights the wrongs of slavery. We are a nation of inclusion and not privilege based on race. Many white people voted for Obama based on that simple fact. So who was Obama, besides a black man? Lets look at his history.
Barack Hussain Obama was born to Ann Dunham, a white woman originally from Kansas and fathered by Barack Obama Sr., Kenyan born, student at University of Hawaii. His mother was 17 when she got pregnant, father was 24. They were married 3 months into the pregnancy when the mother was just over 18 years old. By September 1961 (one month after President Obama's birth) she moved to Washington and attended the University of Washington from August 1961 to June 1962. Unbeknownst to her, Barack Sr. was already married to Kezia Obama four years earlier, nullifying his marriage to Ann by US Law. Ann divorced him in March of 1964 but he remained married to Kezia until his death. He also married Ruth Baker, a Jewish American of Lithuanian decent in December of 1964 who divorced him in 1973 after he fathered two more children. Ann Dunham married Lolo Soero, an indonesian muslim in
For those unfamiliar, Johnny Cockran was one of the attorneys that defended OJ Simpson in the murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Simpson, and her lover, Ron Goldman. While the evidence in the case showed overwhelmingly that OJ committed the act, the jury came back with a non-guilty verdict. How did this miscarage of justice happen? Easy, the defense distracted from the truth and focused on discrediting the people involved. The LA Police department, Mark Ferman, an investigator on the case, based on racism. While it is a lawyers duty to defend his client to the best of his ability, is it a party's job to defend their agenda with misdirection or outright falsehoods? In a court of law it's called jury nullification. In the party of Democrats it's called business as usual.
Looking at the enemy that Democrats create and blame for everything is easy to spot. First lets look at the major enemy, Republicans. They are labeled as heartless, evil, rich, money grubbing business people who are only concerned with profit and taking advantage of the poor, workers. The notion that the rich got rich on the backs of the poor is a commonly held belief. It reflects back to the hay day of unions, workers against management, rich against poor. But this is not an American phenomenon, it is as old as time itself. Every uprising has a class element to it. The royals overthrown by the peasants (think french revolution), The bourgeois (middle class) and the proletariat (non-property owners), popularized by Karl Marx. Democrats use this class divide to gain favor even when it is at the detriment of the class they are pretending to represent.
In the current environment, our country has been experiencing a rapid decline under the Administration of Barack Obama. Being the most liberal democrat since Jimmy Carter, Obama's economy has promoted the underclass in speak, but in action supported the upper class. During his first term, every problem in the country was answered with "Blame Bush". It became so common it was eventually aboandoned as a lame excuse, but what happened in the 1st Obama term is monumental, in the accomplishments and failures. The question is, were these things accurately portrayed, or more importantly, what is believed, regardless of the real truth.
Now, it may seem like saying the first black President was the monumental moment, and it was a first in our 230 year history, but once you put race aside, it is a working example that actions speak louder than words. We can first look at his monumental election and why it happened. Well he was black, and ran on 'hope and change'. The fanfare surrounding the election was a black President could unite an otherwise racially divided country. White men have controlled this country in all aspects since before its inception, and descendants of slaves have been discriminated against since. If a black man can be elected to the highest office of the land, if not the world, it would show our accomplishment to rights the wrongs of slavery. We are a nation of inclusion and not privilege based on race. Many white people voted for Obama based on that simple fact. So who was Obama, besides a black man? Lets look at his history.
Barack Hussain Obama was born to Ann Dunham, a white woman originally from Kansas and fathered by Barack Obama Sr., Kenyan born, student at University of Hawaii. His mother was 17 when she got pregnant, father was 24. They were married 3 months into the pregnancy when the mother was just over 18 years old. By September 1961 (one month after President Obama's birth) she moved to Washington and attended the University of Washington from August 1961 to June 1962. Unbeknownst to her, Barack Sr. was already married to Kezia Obama four years earlier, nullifying his marriage to Ann by US Law. Ann divorced him in March of 1964 but he remained married to Kezia until his death. He also married Ruth Baker, a Jewish American of Lithuanian decent in December of 1964 who divorced him in 1973 after he fathered two more children. Ann Dunham married Lolo Soero, an indonesian muslim in
