I took my mandated continuing education course hours in order to maintain my occupational license as a locksmith in the State of Texas yesterday; passed by the way, the world is a safer place knowing that. There were two classes, each four hours worth of credits to adhere to guidelines set up by the Department of Public Safety/Private Security Bureau. One had to do with ethics while the other covered rule and regulations; pretty much the same information from year to year.
As a means of verifying the material covered there was a test at the end of each block of instruction. You might be wondering what this has to do with the title, “Is Obama a Saboteur”; I’m about to tell you.
One of the questions on the test had to do with integrity and loyalty. It listed a few instances where an employee’s actions might be grounds to question his/her integrity and loyalty. Saboteur was listed as a reason to question one’s loyalty along with others indicators such as inattention to detail or misappropriation of funds; I could be mistaken as I wasn’t really intending to have to quote the information later on, it was a simple test question.
“Sabotage is a deliberate action aimed at weakening another entity through subversion, obstruction, disruption, or destruction. In a workplace setting, sabotage is the conscious withdrawal of efficiency generally directed at causing some change in workplace conditions.”
My goodness; was that a picture of Obama in the dictionary next to Sabotage? Some claim it’s the implementation of the Cloward-Piven strategy, a means to an end that will bring about America’s Change from capitalism to some communal order more in tune with European socialism. Any way you slice it (couldn’t resist the opportunity to link, my apologies), if you connect the dots Obama’s actions would lend plausibility to the notion of Obama being a saboteur.
What dots, you might ask? Start with the pork ridden Stimulus package which we were told would create shovel ready jobs in the private sector. Where are those jobs? They don’t exist. What about the governments take over of GM and Chrysler, how about Wall Street and health insurance/medical services industry? Are any of these moves within the best interests of a free market system or would they be more in tune with progressive totalitarianism?
The last issue, at least for today, has to do with Big Oil. The news media has been grinding away at evil Big Oil for years, painting Big Oil as first cousin to Satan. The media swayed public opinion against Republicans; folks like Bush and Cheney had Big Oil’s albatross around their necks each time drilling came up either off shore or in Alaska. The environmental folks made sure to remind everyone each time drilling for oil came up that our top administrators were in the pocket of Big Oil. I have news for you, without Big Oil America, and for that matter the rest of the world could never enjoy the industrial marvels that make our economy work; we are all indebted to Big Oil in some way so let’s try to remember that.
Here’s a news flash, one that isn’t in LARGE PRINT, at least not when it comes to ABC, CBS, NBC or any of “the usual suspects”; OBAMA is in bed with BIG OIL. The only problem, at least as I see it, the BIG OIL OBAMA is in bed with is in BRASIL. Obama wants to loan $ 2 Billion to Petrobras, a Brazilian nationally owned entity, for deep water off shore drilling.
Glenn Beck wrote in his article, Left Strangely Silent on Petrobras , and asked the question, “Mind you, this is a multi-billion dollar company that rakes in tens of billions in profits each year. Why in the world would these guys need a loan? And why are we investing in another country's offshore drilling while banning ours?”
A logical question jumps off the page, why would Obama shut down off shore drilling here in the United States and destroy American oil interests in favor of Brazilian oil entity, a competitor? It goes deeper than “save the environment” or “worst oil spill of all times”; read on.
The moratorium on off shore drilling which Obama declared meant economical disaster for those who’ve invested billions in those fancy off shore drilling rigs not to mention the jobs lost adding to an already recessionary economy. The owners of those rigs can’t let these expensive investments sit around waiting for the ecological movement to grant them permission to drill. I’m aware, through people in the industry who know, that at least one of these fancy off shore rigs is already on its way to Brazil where it has been contracted for the next 3 years. Did you get that; for the next 3 years a very important piece of equipment will be unavailable to jump start our own oil industry because Obama shut it down in our territorial waters.
Add to the string of dots a story out of Reuters, Brazil stocks, real jump on China, Petrobras plan , where the sudden good fortune of Petrobras, its offshore drilling future assured, has sparked economic recovery in Brazil.
“Brazil’s currency, the real ( BRBY), firmed 1.6 percent to 1.819 per dollar, as the greenback sank against a basket of major currencies.”
The value of the dollar was damaged by Obama’s handy work while the real’s value went up; does this sound like the kind of Change promised? The Obama administration has guaranteed American taxpayers a debt so large as to be incomprehensible, a debt that will be passed on to our children and our grandchildren; but has also managed to damage, perhaps irreparably, the free market system and the means to supply oil to power American industries without having to import that oil from elsewhere, often times from countries who consider the United States of America their enemy.
Did I forget to mention that Petrobras has a contract which promises all their oil to China? That means American taxpayers are supporting Brazil’s Petrobras oil company in a venture which will weaken our own monetary system and at the same time we won’t even be able to purchase any of their oil. Glenn Beck was right; this whole thing doesn’t pass the “smell test”. I’d go a step further; this whole administration stinks to high heaven.
Obama’s decision has been to cripple American oil drilling interests, chasing off specialized drilling equipment which take years to obtain and put into use, loaning American tax dollars to a Brazilian oil company which just happens to have as one of its largest investors, George Soros; are any of these dots worth connecting?
Billionaire George Soros was a huge contributor to Obama’s presidential campaign and supports left wing political organizations like the Center for American Progress, “government that champions the common good over narrow self-interest” (socialism and the collective are more important than individual rights for those needing an interpretation). Soros also funds the Open Society Institute and the Tides Foundation which tend to be anti-capitalist minded. Soros has openly stated he would like to see a new world order take the place of sovereign democracies, the United States included, and his wealth and power grow as a result.
Much of Soros money has been and is made through currency speculation, purchasing one country’s fiat money in favor of another’s based on fluctuating market conditions. What better way to increase the value of an investment than for Obama to sweeten the pot by making Petrobras oil more attractive to investors while at the same time solidifying the Brazilian monetary system; Soros wins both ways while the American economy takes another hit.
Obama makes me wonder where his loyalties lie; saboteur isn’t a strong enough word. Obama’s actions show he’s not above selling out his own country to benefit his friends. Benedict Arnold was willing to sell out his country; his name is synonymous with traitor. Obama would destroy over 200 years of individual liberty and freedom and claim it was “for the common good over narrow self-interest”; no, calling Obama a saboteur is too kind.
This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.