Saturday, July 27, 2013

Obama Would Love to See Civil Unrest in US Like Arab Spring

Fox News Contributor, Charles Payne, says what a lot of us have been silently thinking.

Stuart Varney: Obama used the term “inequality” more than he used the word “growth”. And this is a problem, according to Charles Payne.
Charles Payne: It is a problem. He talked about [income inequality] being morally wrong. You know, Stuart, if you and I entered this building and there were different rules for each of us, that would be morally wrong. But if I dropped out of high school and smoked weed all day and you worked your way through college and made more money than I did, that’s not inequality, that’s just.
Here’s what this president did: he tried to condemn capitalism. He tried to condemn success. He promotes mediocrity. And he’s making excuses for people to fail in this country, instead of being honest about it.
His phrases: “people who lost their homes through no fault of their own”, “people who lost their jobs through no fault of their own…” You know what: if I own a business and have 10 employees and things get bad, guess what? I’m not going to fire my best employees! Maybe you did lose your job because you weren’t up to snuff!
The bottom line is this: the president is pushing this agenda. That America is somehow a mean-spirited country without opportunity and we’re going backwards. When, in fact, every single year we get closer to that “more perfect union” that we strive for.
[On Obama's prediction that income inequality will increase and "social tensions will rise as various groups fight to hold on to what they have"]
In my mind — and I hate to say this — I think President Obama would love to see civil unrest in this country very much like the Arab Spring. I think what he’s trying to do is to spark this revolution against the wealthy, against the “One Percent” who are holding us back, who are hoarding this money,


midnight rider said...

Mrs. MR and I were watching this live last night when Payne said it and we were absolutely stunned that someone finally said it out loud on a national news program.

Stunned, and delighted.

Anonymous said...

Charles Payne has been a long time favorite of mine. Back in 2006 I e-mailed an article about Saudi investments in water distribution in the midwest and west. He did not ignore or brush me off. He responded immediately and said he would look into it further but didn't find anything of concern. Really nice guy - all around.

Charles Martel said...

The situation is getting worse by the minute. He is finally taking the mask off and showing his hand. The behavior towards Egypt and his support of the MB is despicable. Unless Congress finds its balls nothing will be able to stop this until it's too late. Maybe already is.120 tyDstsI

Epaminondas said...

HE is the 1%.
Hillary is the 1%.
Reid is the 1%.
Van Jones - 1%.
Big Sis - 1%.
Kerry - 0.000001%

Removal of Louis XVI resulted in Danton, Robespierre and then THEY were consumed.

Removal of Nicholas II eventually killed everyone but Stalin, who was an out of it bit player in 1917.

Are they THAT STUPID to play with fire in an armed nation?
Do they REALLY think the Tea Party people would be FIRED ON BY..???

How many cell phones would be videoing?
How many ad hoc networks would distribute?
How many scoped Winchester 70's are just floating around out there?

I am not saying such thoughts are not rooting around out there in the minds of fools with power, but the idea that there are forces who can be DEPENDED UPON to open fire on the so called Tea Party types is a chimera. Such an act would IMMEDIATELY open civil war WITHIN the armed forces.
And WHO would give this order, and WHAT would happen to this person?