These days Judicial Watch is doing some of the finest work in the nation. It is throwing FOIA requests at the government and continually attempting to expose the rampant corruption and manipulation in the Obama administration.
Thusly today, from JudicialWatch.org:
Records Show Obama Hired Behavioral Experts to Expand Use of Govt. Programs
The Obama administration quietly hired 20 social and behavioral research experts to help expand the use of government programs at dozens of agencies by, among other things, simplifying federal forms, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. The controversial group of experts is collectively known as the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team (SBST) and it functions under the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
In 2015 Obama signed an executive order directing federal agencies to use behavioral science to sell their programs to the public, the records obtained by Judicial Watch reveal. By then the government had contracted “20 leading social and behavioral research experts” that at that point had already been involved in “more than 75 agency collaborations,” the records state. A memo sent from SBST chair Maya Shankar, a neuroscientist, to OSTP Director John Holdren offers agencies guidance and information about available government support for using behavioral insights to improve federal forms. Sent electronically, the memo is titled “Behavioral Science Insights and Federal Forms.”
Ladies and gentlemen, many of you in the US have been manipulated by professional behavioral scientists — purposely — in order to create your continued and expanded dependency on government for more and more assets and instances in your life.
The goal of this is to strip away your discretionary powers, your right to choose, to make independent decisions, to make life choices, to say what you wish about any thing at any time, to defend yourself against governmental intrusion and oppression, to monitor your every move, your every action, your every dollar, your every investment of money, time or sweat equity. The goal is dominance and tyranny.
“When behavioral insights—research findings from behavioral economics and psychology about how people make decisions and act on them—are brought into policy, the returns are significant,” according to the SBST report.
Yes. Significant for the government; less so for you.
And now this isn’t just speculative theory, oh no.
The proof is here.
Obama, Demorats, Leftists, Progressives, Socialists, want you weak, dependent, unable to think critically, brainwashed and sucking at the government teat, in order for them to acquire vaster amounts of power and control over you and your life.
BZ
At the NBC News Commander-In-Chief Forum, earlier in the week, the Congenital Liar, Hillary Clinton dropped another bombshell lie when she claimed no one died on her watch in Libya.
Hillary Clinton said “I put together a coalition that included NATO, included the Arab League, and we were able to save lives. We did not lose a single American in that action. And I think taking that action was the right decision.”
She should tell that to U.S. Ambassador Chris Steven’s family, oh wait she already told them another lie. I am having trouble keeping them straight.
Americans DID die in Benghazi – needlessly! Hillary’s failures, incompetence, and refusal to act caused the needless deaths of 4 Americans.
Te. Two words: she lies. She cannot stop it.
BZ
Donald Trump has managed to create yet another controversy about himself, based, as closely as I can tell, on his massive ego and loose lips. We know Donald’s philosophy on “live and let live”. It’s basically: “Fahgetaboutit”. He has been famously quoted:
“When somebody screws you, screw them back in spades.” And “When someone attacks you publicly, always strike back.”
His wife has been quoted as saying when someone attacks Trump he “hits back ten times as hard”. She was probably quoting him.
Khizr Khan, the father of a Muslim US soldier killed in Iraq in 2004, made some disparaging remarks about Trump at the Democrat’s convention. I’m shocked! Someone saying mean things about a Republican at a Democrat convention…whowouldathunkit?
Now, I’m not a presidential candidate, nor do I play one on TV, but I can think of a number of ways The Donald could have responded to Khizr Khan’s emotional outburst at the Democrat convention:
1) Do nothing. Period. Be the bigger man. Khizr Khan was a grieving father who took a cheap political shot at Trump. Trump could have ignored the slight and the day after the convention, Khan would have gone back to the anonymity he enjoyed prior to his fifteen minutes of fame.
This is, as we have seen, not within Trump’s makeup. By firing back at the wrath of Khan, he gave the story legs to carry it through several more news cycles.
2) He could have said, “Mr. and Mrs. Khan, first let me express my deepest sympathies for the loss of your son. I can’t imagine the depths of grief you must feel over the loss of a child. I can tell that you’re angry, but I’m a little bit puzzled that you’re angry with me, when it was Hillary Clinton who voted to authorize sending your son in harm’s way.” That way, it humanizes him and with a little political jiu-jitsu, turns the discussion to one of Hillary’s weaknesses with her base.
3) Pundit John LeBoutillier went so far as to suggest that Trump might have created an endowment seat in Captain Khan’s name at his alma mater to honor his service. A scholarship or donation to a military charity in the Captain’s name could have gone a long way to prove himself the bigger man.
Instead, you have a person with a massive ego, who must punish every slur and slight against him, getting into a pissing match with a Gold Star family, as no doubt the Clinton campaign wanted him to do, and then to have such an Obama grade tin ear that he would compare the sacrifice of losing a child to his “creating thousands of jobs”. Newsflash, Donald. Creating jobs to further your own financial gain is not a “sacrifice”. It could be asked if you, born to wealth, wealthy in your own right, have ever in your life made a genuine sacrifice. Certainly not as great as that of losing a child. Did you “sacrifice” your first two wives so that you could score a younger hotter one? /sarc
In one fell swoop, the Hillary camp baited Trump into overreacting, attacking the parents of a slain soldier, giving false equivalence to the word sacrifice, which could demonstrate that he is out of touch, and created an equal narrative to match that of Hillary’s treatment of Sean Smith’s mother.
Now granted, the liberals have not covered themselves with glory here. One writer said of Patricia Smith, “I would like to beat her to death.”
Patricia Smith was able to testify about the lack of honesty and moral character of Mrs. Clinton. Khizr Khan distorted what Trump had said for political theater. Trump, in taking the bait and dignifying the slurs with a response, has badly miscalculated and made it a bigger story than it was or had to be, and made himself look smaller in the process.
SNJ, I am not going to disagree with much of anything that you have stated. You have made a cogent and well-written argument. Please continue reading and commenting whenever you wish, here.
That said, in totality, I am still going to vote for Donald Trump. In my eye and mind, Hillary is simply worse. Sad, but true.
BZ
Would suggest that at least half this country want Obama and the Clintons gone by any means possible. Screw their agendas!
We’ll know in two months.
BZ