Interesting How Liberals Were Once Disappointed in Obama – But Few Admit it Now

Interesting How Liberals Were Once Disappointed in Obama - But Few Admit it NowAmazing how liberals today lament about the Trump White House.

And dearly how they they wish for Obama to be back.

Recently, a New York Time Reporter revealed that she keeps a small Obama doll in her purse to remind her that American once had a “progressive African-American president”.

Notice how she didn’t say she missed any of his accomplishments? Or how WELL he did his job?

No, she only missed him because he’s black. Is that what we really want as a President? Someone who fills a quota? Is this why Obama was elected?

Liberals Who Were Disappointed in Obama

Now let us look at some clips of those from the left who were very disappointed in Obama. Of course, all these videos were shot during Obama’s terms when there was no elections at stake.

Michael Moore – Famous film maker

“Diddy” the Rapper

Disappointed Voter During a Townhall

Tamir Rice’s Mom – An Obama Voter

Cornell West – an activist

The Young Turks – Popular YouTube Channel

Thomas Sewell – Political Philosopher

So how well did Obama take this advice?

Here’s what he accomplished during his last term: 1) Made that horrendous nuclear deal with Iran, and 2) tried to close GTMO.  In other words, he accomplished NOTHING.

And since leaving the White House, he has spent a huge amount of time living on billionaire Richard Branson’s massive yacht. He once told a reporter before leaving the White House that he didn’t intend to earn money making speeches, but has since made several speeches for insane amounts of money – and continues to do so.

He received a book deal worth around $60 million and has apparently given very little thought to any of the concerns mentioned by those in the above videos.

It seems that what Obama cares most about is Obama.

Perhaps that is why he accomplished so little in the White House.



4 Reasons Why Obama Cannot Take Credit for Trump’s Growing Economy

4 Reasons Why Obama Cannot Take Credit for Trumps Growing EconomyIf you think Obama is the reason for this growing economy, then you are not paying attention. This notion is preposterous.

Those of us who follow the political landscape have seen some very exciting things in the last few Presidential terms. We saw the terms of George Bush provide us with great job growth in the early part of his Presidency, only to be followed by the biggest economic crash since the Great Depression. When Bush left office, the American economy was losing 180,000 jobs every month on average and the financial markets were plummeting.

Obama Entered the White House with Lots of Promise

Barrack Obama’s Presidency was one about hope and change with promises to repair the nation’s crippling economy and bring jobs back. Congress helped by providing him with almost a trillion dollars for a “stimulus package” to pump into the economy and make it flourish again. This was often referred to as the “bail-out” package.

There was job growth during Obama’s terms, but Department of Labor data suggests that many of those jobs were either low paying jobs or only part time jobs. This further is indicated by the stagnant growth of hourly wages that are also reported each month. Although there was certainly a long stretch of decent job reports under Obama, there has been no growth in wages. Furthermore, the economy remained stagnant throughout his two terms with GDP’s barely above recession levels.

Today, under President Trump, we are seeing extraordinary economic growth. In just his first year in office, Trump’s booming economy has already surpassed Obama’s lifeless one.

Recently, we have seen Obama attempt to take credit for this new massive economic growth. Nothing could be more wrong or further from the truth. And deep down, Obama knows this, but with all things regarding Trump, the democrats refuse to give him any credit for any of his accomplishments.

4 Reasons Trump is Responsible for Today’s Economic Growth – And NOT OBAMA

1) The Start Date of the current Stock Market rally – During the early part of this year, the Dow Jones Index reached a record 26,000 points. From the time Trump since got elected, that index grew over 7500 points. And in one recent stretch, it grew 1000 points in the shortest amount of time in history.

Almost $7 trillion of new wealth has been created since Trump was elected. That’s the key phrase here “SINCE TRUMP WAS ELECTED”. Not “since Obama was in office”, not “because Obama did this or that”. It occurred “since Trump was elected” PERIOD. And to emphasize that fact further, the rally started the VERY NEXT DAY after Trump won the election.

The real question was WHY did the stock market rally after Trump was elected? It rallied because of the anticipation of corporate tax cuts that had been promised during Trump’s 2016 campaign. Also, there was a promise of infrastructure spending which the markets also liked, but it was the promise of tax cuts that mostly fueled the rally.

Did Obama ever promise a tax cut to corporations? Nope. Did Hillary Clinton promise a tax cut to businesses? Nope. She actually did the opposite. In a move of sheer stupidity, Hillary threatened to shut down the coal industry.  Bye-bye union votes – and unions have been historic supporters of the democrats – Hillary broke that trend with her bad decision.

We can easily conclude that there is no way Obama is responsible for the current stock market rally. And that, my friends, is a big reason for the growing economy we are seeing.

2) Trump eliminated over 600 Obama Regulations – This is why it is absolutely absurd for Obama to take any credit – his own policies were preventing the growth in the first place. Obama had the power all along to improve the lives of Americans but wouldn’t pull the trigger. He seemed more preoccupied with being a globalization superstar instead. He seemed more preoccupied with climate change and making a big splash in Paris.

If Obama had been willing to cut away just a faction of the regulations that were his economy, his presidency could have been legendary.

Instead, Trump took full advantage of Obama’s mistake and achieved instant growth and economic success by doing this one simple thing. This is the MAIN REASON why Obama cannot take credit for the current economic growth in America. Because he prevented it from happening.

3) Just Look at Obama’s Economic Data – The media and people from the left are quick to praise Obama for all the great things he allegedly accomplished. They obviously have not looked very closely at his economic data. When you see his lack of accomplishments in the financial arena, you are reminded that he is merely a “community organizer” and didn’t really have the knowledge or skills to run a country.

Let us examine his economic accomplishments:

Only President to Never Have 3% or more GDP Growth in at least one year of office – This is especially bad for a President who served TWO TERMS! Just think of one term Presidents like Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush who managed to reach the 3% growth level for at least one of their four years. Obama had eight chances to accomplish this and didn’t – pretty pathetic. In fact, they were telling America that 3% GDP was a thing of the past, and they should only expect 2% from now on.

Historical Drop in the Job Participation Rate – This is a measure of how many working age people in the population are no longer employed. Unlike the unemployment rate, it actually includes people who have quit looking for jobs. The JPR dropped by over 3% during Obama’s terms and it reached the lowest levels not seen since the 1970s. The JPR is one of those metrics that changes slowly, so seeing this kind of drop is pretty Earth shattering.

Little to No Growth in Wages – We alluded to this earlier, but Obama’s economy was plagued by stagnant growth in wages. He simply was not able to move the country into full employment mode. He boasts about job creation, but the data implies many of those were part-time jobs. If one person gets three part time jobs, Obama gets credit for creating three jobs, but that person is struggling to support his or her household. Obama celebrates, thinking he’s done well, yet that one person is suffering.

Worst Economic Recovery Since World War II – To his credit, Obama inherited a mess from George W. Bush. But he was given a generous stimulus package of almost a trillion dollars to boost the economy. Sadly, Obama’s economy barely stayed above a “recession level” growth.

And if these facts aren’t enough, Bill Clinton’s worst economic year was STILL BETTER than Obama’s best economic year. Politifact confirmed this fact.

So ask yourself, do you really think that someone with these horrific financial credentials could be responsible for the economy we are seeing now? His economic report card says “no” – quite emphatically.

4) Listen to Obama’s Own Comments – Remember the story about the 1500 jobs at the Carrier Plant in Indiana? Carrier had decided to move that particular plant to Mexico for a host of reasons that were common for American Companies during Obama’s terms.

Earlier that year while campaigning for Hillary, Obama told the people of that community that those Carrier jobs were gone for good and they would have to beginning “retooling” themselves for new jobs. Trump, who had just won the election but was not yet inaugurated, announced that he was going to make a deal with Carrier to save those jobs.

Obama mocked Trump publicly about this. Listen to the video below for the exact words he used:

Yet Trump convinced the Carrier Plant to stay in the United States. As of this writing, 1100 people still have jobs there, although a few hundred were laid off.

At the time, the main stream media and the democrats argued about the “exact number” of jobs that Trump actually saved and other trivial factors. Who cares? It could be 1500 jobs or 0 jobs. THAT is not the point here. The point is Obama never even tried.

So why was our current President so quick and willing to write those jobs off in the first place? And yet, Trump was willing to fight for them – that’s the difference. Obama didn’t fight for those jobs because he didn’t know there were other alternatives – the thought never crossed his mind. This is the difference between how a “community organizer” and how a “billionaire entrepreneur” thinks.

When you compare these two mindsets, which is the most likely the creator of a booming economy? A President who increase your health premiums over 100%, or the one who cuts your taxes? VERY easy answer to that question, folks.


Not only is Obama NOT responsible for today’s economic growth, he deserves no credit for this new economy because it was his own policies that had prevented growth. Obama only enrages the people who voted for him by trying to steal credit.

Yes, there were 9 million voters who voted for Trump that had previously voted for Obama in 2012. This is because these voters wanted the “hope and change” that Obama promised, but it was Trump who ended up giving it to them.

10 Damaging facts Revealed from the DNC Leaks

One thing that we learned from the 2016 Presidential Campaign is that the Democratic Party and email mix about as well as nitro and glycerin. The massive email scandal that occurred in the summer of 2016 was a huge media explosion and it sent shockwaves all through the Democrats. This scandal involved tens of thousands of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) that were leaked to Wikileaks. These leaked emails revealed a political party that were biased beyond all imagination, that they were driven by scandal, and that they excelled at being incompetent.

1) The DNC Bad Mouthed their Donors

dnc donorsA primary function for the DNC is to raise future funds for to support the Democratic Party. Every political party relies heavily on these donations, so common sense would tell you that they would very grateful to their donors. Not the DNC.

One testy exchange of emails talks about a major donor from Florida named Stephen Bittel. They were angry because of the seat he got at a fundraiser. Jordan Kaplan, who was the DNC national finance director, stated angrily, “He doesn’t sit next to POTUS!” Alexandra Shapiro, who was his deputy at the time, responded that “Bittel will be sitting in the shittiest corner I can find.” Another email called several major donors to the DNC as “clowns.”

And in another exhangel, Shapiro mockingly compared the New York philanthropist Philip Munger to the Maryland ophthalmologist Sreedhar Potarazu. She lamented that Munger had donated a mere $100,600 over the years, as compared to Potarazu’s family donating $332,250. So much for gratitude.

2) The DNC sucks at Managing Donor Data

dnc hacksMost of the time when people give away big buck to a political party, they do it with the understanding that their private data will be protected. Not so with the DNC. Their staffers repeatedly sent emails that contained their donors’ names, their credit card numbers, their contact information, and even their social security numbers. Should this info ever be hacked—and it eventually was—it would be a field day for an identity thief.

Many of those screw-ups were just plain stupid. One staffer sent out an image of a $150,000 check, apparently not knowing that any hacker could withdraw money from any checking account with only a routing number from the check. And because of this email leak, that data is on the Internet for any person to see.

3) Strong bias against Bernie Sanders

bias against bernieThe guideline of the DNC requires that it remain neutral during presidential primaries. These emails show that they violated this guideline over and over again. During the 2016 primaries,  the DNC constantly undermined Senator Sanders and his attempt to win the primary.

In a 2016 May email, DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz stated that Bernie Sanders “isn’t going to be president.” In April, she had written that he had “no understanding of” the Democratic Party.

4) Questioning the religion of Bernie Sanders

bernie sanders religionOne of the dirtiest parts about the DNC campaign attacks against Bernie Sanders pertained to his religious beliefs. A May email that was written by DNC CFO Brad Marshall proposed a plan to attack Sanders’s campaign by posing questions to his religious beliefs.

The email stated: “It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”

This is amazingly unethical, when you consider that the DNC own regulations state they should be impartial during the primaries.

5) Questionable Journalistic Ethics

politicoIt is not common for a journalist to email advance copies of the stories they write to those people they are writing about. Doing so would be a horrific breach of journalistic ethics. These leaked emails indicate that at least one major journalist sent stories to the Dems to “get approval” before making them public.

One particular email from Kenneth Vogel of Politico that was sent to the DNC was revealed. It was entitled “per agreement . . . Any thoughts appreciated.” Attached was a major news story he penned in April.

6) Hostile Attacks on Opposing Media Stories

news mediaWhenever we hear about the DNC making a hostile attack on a Republican media outlet, we would not be surprised. However, these emails indicate that anger at the DNC runs deeper than this. During the presidential primaries, the DNC had openly defined “hostile media” as “anyone who doesn’t like Hillary.”

Even some leftist reporters were considered way too pro-Bernie for the DNC and those were constantly denied interviews and were tagged as “Berniebros.” Mark Thompson, from Sirius, got an interview denied after he was believed to prefer Bernie over Hillary. Whenever MSNBC anchor Mika Brzezinski hammered the DNC over its anti-Bernie bias, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz called the president of NBC and demanded an apology from her. Even a Twitter hashtag, #bernieclickbait, was established to mock the DNC bias toward Hillary Clinton.

Yet again, the DNC was supposedly bound by its very own rules to be impartial, but these emails clearly indicate the bias.

7) Possibly Planting Informers in the Sanders Campaign

bernie sandersBy now, we have seen that the DNC treated the primaries as a “beat Bernie” campaign. One of these emails suggested that the DNC actually planted some informers to go inside the Bernie Sanders campaign.

This information comes from a May email and refers to a “counter event.” This was organized on Facebook by a progressive group called Citizens for Ethical Government. The invitation indicated that Senator Sanders could be speaking over Skype. The DNC apparently freaked out by not knowing this and tried to find some “intel.” The very last email in this chain referred to someone with “friends inside the Bernie organization” who was passing information.

8) Possible FEC Violations

In May 2016, Justin Klein from sent an email to Jordan Kaplan, who again was national finance director of the DNC. Klein had gotten a check for the amount of $144,100 that was from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. He instructed Kaplan, “please note the first $100,200 should be allocated to the convention fund, while the remaining $43,900 should be allocated to the building fund.”

The FEC (Federal Election Commission) rules state that the existing limit for campaign contributions is $100,200 for any nonmulticandidate PACs during a single year. The email indicates that Klein, who was operating on behalf of, was attempting to circumvent the FEC limit. This would constitute a crminal offense.

Kaplan even seems to know about this limit. His response stated “Don’t send me an email like this again . . . Don’t be a dick.”

9) Identity Politics Hypocrisies

identity politicsA very progressive wing from the Democratic Party has obsessed over identity politics for years. This email leaks reveal that the DNC actually cares very little about identity politics – it just wants its supporters to think they do. Many emails are laden with jokes about Gays, lots of stereotyping, and even possible racial slurs.

One certain email with once again, the DNC national finance director Jordan Kaplan, signs off with a “no homo” joke. Another email from DNC communications director Luis Miranda pertains to getting the Latino vote and is chock full of questionable phrases like “Hispanics are the most brand loyal consumers in the World: Known fact” and “Once a brand loses this loyalty, Hispanics never re-engage: Unforgiving.” Even Gawker labeled these comments as stereotyping.

The DNC is constantly attacked Republicans for using these kinds of phrases, yet their upper level managers use them freely.

10) Democratic Party Learned Nothing in Regards to Cyber Security

cyber-securityProbably the most damaging fact of all about the DNC email leaks is that it happened in the first place. There are two reasons why it is absolutely shocking that the DNC servers even got hacked.

The first reason is that it came after all the hype and discussion about Hillary’s unsecured email server. Why did the DNC not learn something from this?

The second reason is that US intelligence warned both the DNC and RNC that they were vulnerable to hacking. The RNC took the threat serious and increased their level of cyber security, but the DNC ignored the threat. Again, why didn’t the DNC listen to the warnings from US intelligence?

Read more here 

Harvard Researchers Claim Young Americans are Dumping Democracy

Harvard Researchers Claim Young Americans are Dumping DemocracyThere is no doubt that 2016 was a crazy year from a political standpoint. In huge upset, voters in Britain voters chose to exit to leave the European Union which sent the markets spinning. And then Americans elected Donald Trump as President which shocked the world. And then In the country of Austria, the right wing populist candidate representing the Freedom Party barely lost the presidency to a 72-year-old opponent.

Democracy Getting Canned Worldwide

We saw Turkey, who is a member of NATO and a possible EU member, was often referred to as a shining example of a very stable Democracy from the Middle East. Then the military currently engaged in a coup d’etat under the cause of “constitutional order, human rights and freedoms, and the rule of law”. The ensuing defeat of this coup led to a huge crackdown on journalists, academia, and even police officers.

All these factors have made the recent results of a brand new study about the world’s young people understandable. This study was conducted by Roberto Stefan Foa and Yascha Mounk, and it has shown that young people have become increasingly un-democratic and un-liberal in their political views as to how a government should operate. In fact, they discover that just a third of millennials from the US view civil rights as essential to democracies, as compared to about 40% of citizens who are older. We have seen poll results on the topic are a little higher in Europe.

The study also found that only 20% of US millennials agreed with the statement “a military takeover is not legitimate in a democracy”. And there was about 25% of American millennials who believed that democracy is either “bad” or “very bad” for any country, which is up about 10% from a poll that is 20 years old. And European millennials pretty much responded the exact same way.

Finding Out Why

Why do these young people think this way? The polls have almost always shown that younger people have a tendency to have these kinds of attitudes toward anti-liberal political views, when compared to their elderly counterparts. The fact is that these millennials are remembering only the time after which Francis Fukuyama made the statement “End of History” along with the triumph of Western Liberal Democratic Capitalism. To a large extent, they are probably taking the social order for granted and are not seeing the full issue of reduced liberties. They have no memory at all of the evil totalitarian regimes from the past – like their older counterparts remember.

In all fairness to them, these young people have witnessed several failures of democracy within their lifetimes. Americans who are at least 24 have witnessed seven different presidential elections within their lifetime. They have seen two of these elections lost by the candidate who won the popular vote. They have also seen four of these elections won by people who didn’t even receive 50% of the votes.

Likewise in the United Kingdom, there was a recent election where results were the absolute worst ever in history in terms of voting results when compared to who wound up getting into office. Only about 36% of total votes cast were actually cast for their Conservative party, who was able to form a majority government in the end.

It is easy to look at these political events and conclude that your political participation makes very little difference.

Read more here 

Democracy is Declining Everywhere—even in the United States

Democracy is Declining Everywhere—even in the United StatesAs with any other government, there are many problems associated with a democratic government. And constant failure to resolve these problems can lead to the loss of trust by their citizens – especially in the face of declining quality in public services. However, in the end democracy relies on the support of its populous in order to function.

Unpopularity could be the least of Democracy’s Worries

The Economist Intelligence Unit, who provides an annual Democracy Index report, are indicating that democracies are in trouble all over the globe. There were 167 countries that received ranking this year, 89 of those countries got lower scores this year as compared to last year. These scores are reflecting a big range of attitudes, liberties, and norms that make up the most vital aspects of free society.

How does the scoring work?

This report assigns rank for each country on a 0-10 scale in each of the categories ranging from the electoral process and pluralism, government functionality, civil liberties, political participation, and the overall political culture. Every one of these categories is composed of more specific indicators. All these scores are then combined into one single score that represents the status of democracy and freedom within that country.

The overall score of every country places them into one of four classifications: a full democracy, a flawed democracy, a hybrid regime or an authoritarian regime.

How bad is the world overall?

As it turns out, less than 50% of the people in the world are living under some kind of a democracy. This margin is quite thin as a single percent swing could actually tip the scale, and it is also symbolic of how democracy has declined during the past decade. Approximately 33% of the world’s population is living underneath authoritarian regimes – the majority of this number represents the population of China. But only 5% of the world’s population is living in a full democracy.

The biggest driver for this fall in democratic governments is Asia. And then there is India, who became a democratic nation after their independence, who has seen a big drop in its country’s score because of a marked increase in ethnic and religious unrest. Cambodia, Myanmar, and Vietnam have all fallen deeper into authoritarian rule, and them there was the religiously infused election over the governorship of Jakarta that caused Indonesia’s score to drop tremendously.

Basically, the average score for all Asian country is equal to a hybrid regime, as opposed to full democracy status that are inherent throughout Europe and North America. And the averages core for Latin American countries is now a flawed democracy, even though Uruguay is the lone developing country which can claim full democracy status.

Why did this even happen?

While many of these democratic declines we are seeing globally is attributable to the extended use of authoritarian practices, like Spain’s response to the rebellion of Catalonia or the famous crackdowns on dissent in the nation of Venezuela, there were also some problems that occurred in established democracies as well.

The creators of this index also warn people that there are lots of elements for falling scores. Some of these elements go on to initiate deadly and vicious cycles, like the increase in the polarization that can hinder the overall function of government. This drop in functionality will almost always leads to the erosion of belief in their public institutions.

Read more here 

Does the US have the 5 Elements of Fascism?

Does the US have the 5 Elements of FascismMany Americans are witnessing the most politically polarizing times of their lifetimes. Both sides have and continue to make remarkable claims and accusations about the other side. One of those claims have been claiming the other sides are engaging in fascism.

Is this really true? Is American seeing one of her major political parties become fascists? Maybe we should examine this charge more closely.

The Real World of Fascism

To begin with, the word fascist is hardly ever used correctly. The present use totally ignores the historical precedent as well as the precise environment that is needed before a country can become fascist.

Actually, fascists do not come from Germany and the Nazis. Instead they come from Italy. The Italian leader Benito Mussolini started the National Fascist Party during the years of 1919 to 1921, right after the conclusion of World War I. As a matter of fact, the very word “fascism” is derived from “fascio littorio”, which is a group of rods that are tied to an axe, which is a symbol for the magistrate’s authority that originated in ancient Rome. And this authority could be used to order capital punishment if necessarily.

What has to happen for a country to go fascist?

1) Fascism requires a militaristic society. One of the reactions to World War I was the extreme militarization of several countries. Nations such as Germany and  Italy believed there was a great need for having the ability to quickly mobilize millions of people very quickly in order to fight wars and for various means of economic support.

2) Fascists reject democracy. They do not believe in governments where the general population is allowed to select government powers, because it is felt that the populous is not capable of picking proper leaders. Thus, people’s rights and freedoms are limited.

3) Fascists prefer a totalitarian rule of one-party with a strong sole leader (a dictator). They believe that this configuration allows for the country to enjoy an unparalleled national unity of purpose, to have a much more ordered society, and to maximize readiness for any armed conflict. It is also believed that these societies are better prepared to react quicker to economic measures as well, particularly during times of difficulties. This is what causes fascist countries to isolate themselves, and then they tend to blame international economics for its problems.

4) Fascism is not solely a left-wing or right-wing society. It can actually have elements from both sides of the political spectrum. Even Mussolini described the fascist movement as one that will strike “against the backwardness of the right and the destructiveness of the left”.

The historian Roger Griffin from Britain wrote that fascist societies from the 20th century possessed such elements as “a rebirth myth, populist ultra-nationalism and the myth of decadence.” In other words, fascism makes the claim that these radical and nationalist new politics will left a nation out of decadence and into a renewal period of renewal.

5) Fascism causes people to freely give up their ideals out of great fear for their safety. Nations who got the short end of the stick after World War I were quite ripe for a fascist movement because many of them greatly feared the rest of the world. This is a very important element of fascism as people are required to give up their rights in exchange for safety and security.

Is the US Really Ready for Fascism?

What would it actually take for the United States to brush aside democracy for the dark side? There are many out there who become fearful upon hearing the slogan “make America great again”, which does indicate a need for the renewal of America. But then there are others who fear a stronger government would only bring tyranny that take their guns away, take their money, and even dissolve their religion. Thus, both parties see elements of fascism in the other. The strong presence of state within the fascist structure directly defies the beliefs of the US Republican party, while potential social restrictions do not sit well for the Democratic party. This means in reality, fascism is a government that doesn’t really fit either political party in America.

As a matter of fact, these fascist conditions are not currently present in our country – at least not on a national level. Quite honestly, it appears to be impossible for any movement to attain the required militarization, get complete control of the media, and then have the social power that would be needed to become a serious threat to the democracy of the United States. However, as the old saying goes, never say never.

Read more here –

How 10 Notorious Dictators Died

When we think of a brutal dictator, we tend to think they lived by the sword, they must’ve have died by the sword – right? That assumption would be wrong for the most part – for most of them anyway.

It seems that our inclinations of these wicked dictators dying at the hands of an assassin, getting slaughtered after being overrun by an opposing arming, or even getting trampled by their enraged populace was not true in most cases. The majority of them died of old age.

However, the ways that these 10 notoriously brutal dictators died is still quite interesting and worth learning about. There were a few who met a worthy ending.

Deaths of 10 Brutal Dictators

Francisco_Franco_19501) Francisco Franco, Spain (1892-1975) – Francisco Franco began his brutal ruling of Spain from the year 1939 until he died in the year 1975. Among his questionable practices was the censoring of his political opponents, creating concentration camps for political enemies and instituting death penalties for those who spoke against him and his policies.

Franco’s health worsened during his late 70s, and he was forced to step away from daily duties and when became afflicted by his final illness. The dictator battled Parkinson’s disease, which is a degenerative disease that restricts bodily movement. On October 30, 1975, Franco drifted into a coma. He stayed on life support until November 20, when he died at the ripe old age of 82.

Mao_Zedong2) Mao Zedong, China (1893-1976) – Communist leader Chairman Mao Zedong from China also died at age 82. And like Franco, Mao struggled with poor health for a lengthy period prior to his death. The very last time that people saw him in public was in the month of May 1976. While it is not exactly clear what ailed Chairman Mao, many believed that he suffered from Lou Gehrig’s disease, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), which is a degenerative condition of nerve cells that make movement difficult.

Mao suffered from a heart attack on September 2, 1976, which led to his downfall. He suffered from different ailments over the days that followed, including a lung infection. Then on September 7, he lapsed into a coma and he never awoke again. Doctors removed him from life support the next day, and then he passed away a couple of minutes after midnight on September 9.

Kim_Il_Sung3) Kim Il-sung, North Korea (1912-1994) – Kim Il-sung [JB1] became the very first leader of North Korea when he took office in 1948 and established a hereditary dynasty. His grandson, Kim Jong-un, is the current ruler of the country. However technically, Kim Il-sung is still the country’s president, since he was proclaimed to remain in that position through eternity after he died in the year 1994.

Kim’s regime developed a North Korea that is virtually isolated from the entire outside world. During the late 1980s, a prominent tumor located on his neck became very visible during the broadcasts of official news. This was in spite of his trying to stand in way to hide its growth from the cameras.

Ultimately, a heart attack wound up killing Kim in the end. He collapsed on July 8, 1994, and then died a few hours later at the age of 82.

4) Augusto Pinochet, Chile (1915-2006) – Augusto Pinochet became dictator of Chile by a military coup in the year 1973. His regime was well known for the killing and imprisonments of dissidents, and for also torturing thousands of citizens.

But Pinochet agreed to step down peacefully in the year 1990 as he handed power over to Patricio Aylwin Azócar who had been democratically elected. All of his human rights crimes eventually came back to torment him. He had been placed under house arrest while in Great Britain during the year 1998, and was given back to Chile 2 years later – supposedly for medical reasons which included mild dementia.

While his legal battles waged on, Pinochet’s health keep on plummeting. After being charged with 23 counts of torture, one count of murder, and 36 counts of kidnapping, Pinochet suffered a major heart attack on December 3, 2006. He then died at the age of 91 while in intensive care on December 10 and was never convicted for his crimes.

Nicolae_Ceausescu5) Nicolae Ceausescu, Romania (1918-1989) – Romania’s very last Communist leader met his final end on Christmas Day in the year 1989. The nation’s mood was quite rebellious that December, and Ceausescu had attempted to pacify his citizens with a carefully controlled public speech on December 21. The crowd responded by booing him. Ceausescu’s refusal to fully understand what this heckling really meant to his leadership only bolstered the rebellion that was rising against him.

The very next day, Ceausescu and his wife, Elena, took a helicopter and escaped Bucharest just a few minutes before the arrival of an angry mob. But this respite was only temporary. The army later captured the couple and gave them a show trial, where they were given a death sentence for corruption and genocide. Even though there was usually a 10-day period for contesting the ruling, this execution was carried out immediately.

The hands of Ceausescus were tied and then they were placed against a wall. Then a firing squad promptly riddled them with bullets. One of the executioners named Dorin-Marian Cirlan described the experience as quite haunting. “He looked into my eyes and realized that he was going to die right then, not sometime in the future, then started to cry,” Cirlan commented of Ceausescu.

Saddam_Hussein6) Saddam Hussein, Iraq (1937-2006) – The brutal dictator Saddam Hussein from Iraq had his seat of power removed when the United States invaded Iraq in the year 2003. United States forces later discovered Hussein hiding deep in a “spider hole” that was located in the ground close to his hometown. He was promptly arrested, and later in the year 2006, he received a death sentence for the heinous murder of 148 Iraqis in the year 1982. This was a massacre against his own people that he ordered because of an attempted assassination.

On December 30, 2005, Saddam Hussein was taken to the gallows located at Camp Justice, which was located northeast of Baghdad. A cellphone video that was later leaked showed that Hussein became very vocal as he died, shouting back at hecklers, proclaiming himself as Iraq’s savior and demanding that  Iraqis to fight off against the hated Americans. His body was later buried at his hometown of Al-Awja.

Muammar_al-Gaddafi7) Muammar Gadhafi, Libya (1942-2011) – Muammar Gadhafi became the leader of Libya during the year 1969 and kept a firm grip on his dictatorship until the year 2011. Then he fled the city of Tripoli as it was taken over by rebels during the Liberian Civil War. No one knew where you was for several months, but most experts claim he hid somewhere within his hometown of Sirte with a group of loyalists.

When Sirte fell on October 20, Gadhafi and his group attempted to escape within a convoy that was heavily bombed by NATO forces. He hid himself within a drainage pipe alongside of a road, which was where Libyan forces found and captured him.

What ensured after this is heavily disputed. Original reports claimed Gadhafi got accidentally killed in crossfire, but this story is not supported by existing evidence, as stated in a 2012 Human Rights Watch report. Videos from various cellphones show Gadhafi alive and bloodied while in captivity. They also show him getting dragged, getting beaten, and getting poked with a bayonet. At some point during this captivity, he got shot in the head. Gadhafi’s body was then displayed inside a freezer for several days in the city of Misrata.

Joseph-Stalin8) Joseph Stalin, Russia (1878-1953) – Joseph Stalin was responsible for more deaths than anyone during the twentieth century, but trying to determine his exact victim count is no easy task. Official records indicate that at least 3 million died from executions and in prison camps under his rule, but most experts believe that numbers are very likely inaccurate. They attribute several million more deaths that he caused from famines and the like that were brought on by his cruel policies. Most historians of today believe Stalin’s death count is more like 15 to 20 million deaths.

If this death count bothered Stalin, then he did a masterful job of hiding it as he lived to be 73 years of age. One night, after enjoying a movie and a late-night dinner with a few political colleagues, Stalin went to bed in the early morning hours of March 1, 1953. He didn’t come out of his room the next morning. His guards had been ordered not to disturb him, so they were afraid to check on him. He was discovered on the floor of his room around 10 or 11 pm that night. He was on the floor, soaked in his own urine, after suffering a major stroke – but he was still alive.

He barely hung on until March 5 when he finally passed away. Regarding his final moments, his daughter had written, “At the last moment he suddenly opened his eyes. It was a horrible look — either mad, or angry and full of fear of death. … Suddenly he raised his left hand and sort of either pointed up somewhere, or shook his finger at us all. … The next moment his soul, after one last effort, broke away from his body.”

Benito_Mussolini9) Benito Mussolini, Italy (1883-1945) – Benito Mussolini, who was an Italian Fascist leader, got ousted from his rule in the month of July 1943 when Italy’s odds of enjoying a World War II victory became bleak. This ouster marked the beginning of the end for Benito Mussolini. He was arrested immediately and was imprisoned at the Campo Imperatore Hotel which was located in the central region of Italy. In September, German paratroopers swooped in and rescued him. He went to Germany, and later went Lombardy when is in northern Italy. Mussolini he seemed to understand that his end was near. In the year 1945, he remarked to an interviewer, “Seven years ago I was an interesting person. Now I am a corpse.”

In in only a few months after that, he did become a corpse. In the month of April 1945, Mussolini along with his mistress Clara Petacci were caught during an escape attempt as they tried to go to Spain. They were captured by communist partisans, who took them hostage and later shot them. Afterwards, their bodies were hung upside down in Milan’s Piazzale Loreto – which was the execution site for 15 anti-fascists the previous year. Citizens spit of their bodies and hammered them with rocks. Photos of their grisly corpses were very widely circulated.

Adolf_Hitler10) Adolf Hitler, Germany (1889-1945) – Adolf Hitler is perhaps the most notorious exception of dictators living into older ages. In the closing days of World War II, as the Russian Army was pursuing him at Berlin, Hitler went into a bunker that was located underneath the Reich Chancellery building.

As more and more bad news reached him, Hitler began to make preparations to die on his terms rather than his enemies. He had heard of Mussolini’s death and how his body had been desecrated, so Hitler ordered for his body to be burned. He also married Eva Braun, his mistress, and then took cyanide capsules on April 30, 1945 after retiring to the bunker’s lower room. Braun took the cyanide, and then Hitler shot himself in the head. Hitler’s lieutenants burned the corpses as commanded, but the burning wasn’t complete. Russian armed forced then destroyed what was left of the remains.