Socialism In Action

Obamacare Will Break Our Already Weakened Economy In One Year

WASHINGTON –  Many states are still on the fence about President Barack Obama's health care law. Now the administration says governors can have more time.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a letter to governors Friday that she still wants to hear by the end of next week if states will be setting up new health insurance markets under the law.

States that can't or won't set up these new insurance exchanges will have theirs run by Washington. But Sebelius said states can now take another month, until mid-December, to submit detailed blueprints.

And states considering a partnership with the federal government have until mid-February to make a decision and submit blueprints.

The administration is trying to show flexibility without slowing down its rollout of the law.

See Video:  Dr Siegel Explains Effects Of Obamacare

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/09/states-will-get-more-time-to-work-on-health-care-plans/?test=latestnews#ixzz2BpHhSoYa

Obama Actively Promotes Socialist Agenda

“I Said What?!?”: Recording Reveals Much About Obama (and Media too)

September 25, 2012 | By Ivan Kenneally | 2 Replies

For days now, rumors have swirled about a Loyola College forum on community organizing in which President Obama purportedly reveals his commitment to property redistribution. Almost immediately, the liberal press corps closed ranks, first casting doubts on the authenticity of the recording, and then once that was solidly established, declaring the meaning tortured out of pertinent context. Loyola College resisted repeated calls to review the tape and NBC News, the only media organization in possession of it, summarily dismissed it as unworthy of further investigative scrutiny (or a proper public viewing).

This journalistic restraint stands in stark contrast to the mainstream media reaction to a recording of remarks Mitt Romney recently delivered at a private fundraising event in which he uttered his now infamous remarks regarding the 47% of Americans who don’t pay federal income tax. These comments were demonstrably wrenched from a context that would have mitigated their clumsy presentation and would have clarified their flippant but relatively innocuous meaning. And yet, with all the febrile enthusiasm of hungry sharks in well chummed waters, the press advanced, unchastened by the swarm of doubts surrounding the recording. In place of an apparently selective discipline there was willful daring.

But now the full recording has been obtained and made generally accessible by the Daily Caller. Unlike Romney’s remarks, which were less than revealing even when situated inside the rhetorical and political context within which they occur, Obama’s comments are genuinely candid, providing a portal into his political convictions he rarely provides on the teleprompter accompanied stump, ranging over a wide swath of explosively controversial issues he might be inclined to sidestep in the midst of a campaign.

For example, the comments which originally stirred so much controversy were as follows:

“I actually believe in wealth redistribution. At least at a certain level, to make sure that everyone’s got a shot”.

NBC News went out of its way, without actually sharing the context to which it only obliquely refers, to declare that Obama merely “seems” to be announcing his agreement with the principle of government directed property redistribution. However, given the simple declarative character of the statement in question, it’s not at all clear what context would negate its plain meaning (unless the next sentence is something akin to “just kidding!”). Also, if the remarks that couch the statement are so obviously exculpatory, why not simply disclose them? What journalistic principle justifies the steadfast refusal to share information with the public in order for them to make these determinations for themselves?

In fact, the newly available context is more an indictment than an exoneration, casting Obama as a dogmatic ideologue who can’t help but vilify his political opponents and caricature their positions. He makes is unambiguously clear that he supports a rehabilitation of “government action”, lambasting the “propaganda” that has sullied its good name:

“I think that what we’re gonna have to do is somehow resuscitate the notion that government action can be effective at all.” There has been a systematic — I don’t think it’s too strong to call it a propaganda campaign — against the possibility of government action and its efficacy.”

Obama discusses the need to cultivate the notion that political solidarity means somehow united by the government, the crucible of patriotic sentiment:

“What that means, then is that as we try to resuscitate this notion that we’re all in this thing together — ‘leave nobody behind’ — we do have to be innovative in thinking.’What are the delivery systems that are actually effective and meet people where they live?’”

Obama also stakes out some controversial political territory, claiming that he likely would not have voted for the very popular welfare reform under President Clinton in 1996:

“I did not entirely agree with and probably would have voted against at the federal level.”

However, Obama reveals one happy consequence that issued from that legislation:

“But one good thing that comes out of it is that it essentially desegregates the welfare population,” collapsing the black community into “the working poor, which are the other people. Now you just have one batch of folks. … That is increasingly a majority population.”

Obama cynically refers to this new demographic as an emergent “majority coalition” noting that the success of liberal platforms will require a large and united front of poorer, disenfranchised voters and an electorally influential and well organized band of unions. So the primary benefit of welfare reform, as far as Obama is concerned, is not the boost to the economy it delivered, or the lessening of state dependence and a boon to a general culture of self-sufficiency, or even the superior socioeconomic mobility it catalyzed. The real advantage is that it helped to coalesce a community of otherwise electorally disjointed poor citizens into a reliable voting block for the Democratic party.

And before his 2008 promises to conquer America’s querulous partisan divide, he didn’t hesitate to refer to his political opponents as the “bad guys” though he cheekily refuses to identify exactly who they are. (Spoiler alert: they’re Republicans):

“The people who are guilty of disempowering the population are not only the bad guys — I won’t be partisan here and say who the bad guys are. It’s not only the folks who are representing the special interests, quote-unquote, and the guys with the pinky diamond rings and the fat cats. Sometimes it is also us.”

At least one could admit that Obama was laudably forthcoming that day, pointing out that his political inclinations were generally unrepresentative of most of America, conceding that they wouldn’t likely “see the light of the day in either Springfield or Washington.” He recognized that he was planting his flag well to the left of most of the country but in good faith forwarded, however stridently, the substance of his convictions.  Today, he clothes his ideological extremism in centrist garb, feigning a pragmatic disdain for flights of philosophical attachment.

And the press remains complicit in his strategic dissembling, extending him such generous latitude it finally amounts to coordinated protection. This is both disappointing and shameful, since the great significance and esteem historically attributed to the press was a function of its faithful commitment to the impartial delivery of the truth, in the service of sustaining a well-informed and vigilant citizenry. Now, like Obama’s condescendingly paternalistic interpretation of the proper role of government, they no longer trust their audience to make up their own minds, and would rather instruct and edify than apprise them.

---
Ivan Kenneally is Editor in Chief of the Daily Witness.

Reagan V. Obama

Socialism Explained

Make Mine Freedom (1948)

Obama's Socialist Plan

Obama's Global Tax
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth on a global level is moving forward in the Senate. It follows Marxist theology — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

We are citizens of the world, Sen. Obama told thousands of nonvoting Germans during his recent tour of the Middle East and Europe. And if the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433) he has sponsored becomes law, which is almost certain if he wins in November, we're also going to be taxpayers of the world.

Speaking in Berlin, Obama said: "While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history."

What the 20th century really showed was a series of totalitarian threats — from fascism to Nazism to communism — defeated by the U.S. military. Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Tojo's Japan and the Soviet Union offered destinies we did not share.

Our destiny of peace and freedom through strength was not achieved by a transnationalist fantasy of buying the world a Coke and singing "Kumbaya."

Obama's Global Poverty Act offers us a global socialist destiny we do not want, one that challenges America's very sovereignty. The former "post-racial" candidate obviously intends to be a post-national president.

A statement from Obama's office says: "With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces. It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter and clean drinking water."

These are worthy goals, but note there's no mention of spreading democracy, expanding free trade, promoting entrepreneurial capitalism or ridding the world of despots who rule and ravage countries such as Zimbabwe and Sudan.

Obama would give them all a fish without teaching them how to fish. Pledging to cut global poverty in half on the backs of U.S. taxpayers is a ridiculous and impossible goal.

His legislation refers to the "millennium development goal," a phrase from a declaration adopted by the United Nations Millennium Assembly in 2000 and supported by President Clinton.

It calls for the "eradication of poverty" in part through the "redistribution (of) wealth of land" and "a fair distribution of the earth's resources." In other words: American resources.

It's a mantra of liberals that the U.S. is only a small portion of the world's population yet consumes an unseemly portion of the planet's supposedly finite resources. Never mentioned is the fact that America's population, just 5% of the world's total, also produces a stunning 27% of the world's GDP — to the enormous benefit of other countries. Nonetheless, their solution is to siphon off the product of our free democracy and distribute it.

We already transfer too much national wealth to the United Nations and its busybody agencies. Obama's bill would force U.S. taxpayers to fork over 0.7% of our gross domestic product every year to fund a global war on poverty, spending well above the $16.3 billion in global poverty aid the U.S. already spends.

Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development Conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S is expected to meet its part of the U.N. Millennium goals, we would be spending an additional $65 billion annually for a total of $845 billion.

During a time of economic uncertainty, the plan would cost every American taxpayer around $2,500.

If you're worried abut gasoline and heating oil prices now, think what they'll be like when the U.S. is subjected in an Obama administration to global energy consumption and production taxes. Obama's Global Poverty Act is the "international community's" foot in the door.

The U.N. Millennium declaration called for a "currency transfer tax," a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources," a "royalty on worldwide fossil energy production — oil, natural gas, coal . . . fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for the airplane use of the skies, fees for the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions, and a tax on the carbon content of fuels."

Co-sponsors of S. 2433 include Democrats Maria Cantwell of Washington, Dianne Feinstein of California, Richard Durbin of Illinois and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. GOP globalists supporting the bill include Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar of Indiana.

Lugar has worked with Obama to promote more aid to Russia to promote nuclear nonproliferation. Lugar also promotes the Law of the Sea treaty, which turns over the world's oceans to an International Seabed Authority that would charge us to drill offshore and have veto power over the movements and actions of the U.S. Navy.

Obama's agenda sounds like defeated 2004 Democratic candidate John Kerry's "global test" for U.S. foreign policy decisions where "you have to do it in a way that passes the test — that passes the global test — where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

Obama has called on the U.S. to "lead by example" on global warming and probably would submit to a Kyoto-like agreement that would sock Americans with literally trillions of dollars in costs over the next half century for little or no benefit.

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama has said. "That's not leadership. That's not going to happen."

Oh, really? Who's to say we can't load up our SUV and head out in search of bacon double cheeseburgers at the mall? China? India? Bangladesh? The U.N.?

In an Obama White House, American sovereignty will become an endangered species. The Global Poverty Act is the first toe in the water of global socialism.

Democratic Socialism ?

The American Pursuit of Democratic Socialism
NewsByUs ^ | March 1, 2008 | JB Williams


“Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.” - John Adams, in a Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, circa 1765

People have been predicting the demise of democracy, individual freedom and liberty, as well as resulting American supremacy, since the day American democracy was born. The most vastly distributed prediction has often been attributed to historian Alexander Tytler, dating back to the late 1700’s, and the prediction goes something like this.

• From bondage to spiritual faith; • From spiritual faith to great courage; • >From courage to liberty; • From liberty to abundance; • From abundance to complacency; • From complacency to apathy; • From apathy to dependence; • From dependence back into bondage."

The implication being that a rich complacent free self-governed people will sooner or later, democratically vote themselves out of individual freedom and back into government dependency, self-invoked tyranny and political bondage.

While years of research have failed to fully confirm the true author or point of reference for the above prediction, a study of failing democratic societies and twentieth century American voting patterns, tend to confirm the validity of the concept itself. No matter whom the original author was; his concept was right…

Two Sides of the Same Warning

America’s founding fathers, the greatest human proponents of freedom in history, warned us repeatedly to remain forever vigilant in the protection and preservation of individual liberty and freedom.

“Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” - John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

“Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories.” - Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 14, 1781

The world’s greatest enemies of freedom and liberty have warned us as well.

“Democracy is the road to socialism.” – Karl Marx

“I once said, "We will bury you," and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you.” – Nikita Khrushchev

Our founders and our enemies agreed on little. But they indeed agreed that our American democracy would one day fail, and that it would fail from within, much along the order of the natural democratic cycle above, from tyranny into freedom and freedom back into tyranny.

A Hope for What Kind of Change?

The world has always known revolutionaries promising change for the betterment of all mankind. Sadly, most of those revolutionaries have been members of some form of communist movement promising to make life better for those not suited for self-governance. Nothing has changed…

Today’s Democrat Party is selling change again and they have exactly the same kinds of change in mind that Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev and Alinsky had in mind.

Today’s Democrats call themselves “the Party of the Working Class, the poor, the downtrodden.” They promise to rob from “the rich” for the betterment of the poor. In other words, they are selling exactly what Marx and many other communists have sold over the years, “From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need.”

Same Change – New Name

Socialized medicine is being sold as “universal health care” - Government ownership or control of the nation’s vast natural resources is being sold as “environmentalism” – Freedom of Religion is now being sold as “freedom from religion,” in accordance with the Marx view that “The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.” Need I go on with example after example, through every facet of today’s federal atrocity called government, before you will realize what we have done?

Corporations, which are nothing more than people, from the hourly worker to the CEO and shareholder, are now the “evil” face of Democrat’s primary target, capitalism. That’s because Democrats have adopted the belief of Vladimir Lenin, that “Capitalists are no more capable of self-sacrifice than a man is capable of lifting himself up by his own bootstraps.”

In sum, according to Lenin and today’s Democrats, the average American is no longer suited for self-governance and they (Democrats) must step in and rob from those greedy capitalists in order to save you from yourself.

As Hillary Clinton recently stated it quite clearly, “We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” Nikita Khrushchev said it this way, “Comrades! We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all” and obviously, today’s Democrat Party is united in this belief system.

The Obama Revolution

On the basis of an abstract idea, change, which none of his followers can define because he refuses to openly define it himself, Obama fans, and that is the correct term since he is nothing more than a media creation, swoon at his feet like prepubescent girls at a Beatles concert, begging to be led deeper and deeper into Democratic Socialism whereby private resources can be confiscated by the federal government from unwilling private citizens who earned them, for the greater common good.

There is nothing new, innovative or exciting about the kinds of change being offered by today’s DNC. They are the same old revolutionary ideas of men like Lenin, Marx and Alinsky in the past, and Chavez and Castro today.

But America is indeed a democratic society, which is only to say that the people must vote for Democratic Socialism. It can not be forced upon them. Socialism must be sold and purchased in America and so far, the sale is going just fine.

Selling Democratic Socialism

It’s an easy process really. As Karl Marx once pointed out, “Democracy is the road to socialism.” The “working class” (aka proletariat), once convinced by propaganda that he deserves much more than he earns, will vote for Socialism by democratic process.

Lenin provided the means, “A lie told often enough becomes the truth” – and the method, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” More than sixty years of socialist principles and values taught in the U.S. public education system worked like a charm.

Once sold on a few other communist ideas, like “Crime is a product of social excess” and “Fascism is capitalism in decay” (Lenin), getting working class Americans to vote themselves into socialist tyranny via democratic process was easy.

Our Founders Prepared

This is why our founders did not form a “democracy” but instead a “representative republic,” in which even the minority view has power. In a pure “democracy,” the mob rules and so long as the mob desires socialism, socialism it is.

But in a representative republic, the Electoral College exists to stop a socialist mob always shoving its way to the public trough, from foolishly running socialist roughshod over the true minority in America, “the rich” – That productive ten percent of the population that currently picks up over seventy percent of the tax bill for the entire nation, those who live under daily threat of Democrat politicians who must take more and more from “the rich” in order to buy votes from “the poor”, the proletariat.

The Founder’s Escape Clause

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it…” - U.S. Declaration of Independence

Well, here we are, some 230 years after the formation of the greatest, most productive, prosperous, powerful and generous free nation on earth, freely voting ourselves back into tyranny in the name of a greater common good.

We no longer respect or protect the first fundamental unalienable American right, Life. The second, the right to individual Liberty has been replaced with the mob rights of the commune and our right to individually define and pursue (earn) Happiness has been traded for the right of the commune to both define and re-distribute happiness at the federal level.

Our federal government has indeed become destructive of the very values and principles every American is called to uphold and defend and unless we alter our government by altering our voting patterns, we will soon have no choice but to abolish it and start anew.

Democrats now stand fully opposed to all founding American principles and values. But Republicans will get no free pass here either. The party which once stood up to Democratic Socialists in defense of the real American Dream, has in recent years joined the left in an only slightly slower march into Democratic Socialism and as a result, all elected members of the federal government enjoy the lowest approval ratings in U.S. history.

“If it were necessary to give the briefest possible definition of imperialism, we should have to say that imperialism is the monopoly stage of capitalism. - The way to crush the bourgeoisie (the rich and productive) is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”

This is the belief system and strategy of today’s Democrat Party and it is the centerpiece of both the Clinton and the Obama campaigns. This is the change both candidates have in mind for America.

But these words were not authored by either campaign. These words were authored by Vladimir Lenin. You will hear these notions sold from every DNC campaign stage between here and November. But it was Lenin, Marx, Stalin and Alinsky who first sold these ideas to those who now run the Democrat Party.

No matter who wrote the cycle of democratic self-destruction above, they got it right. The warning of our founders and our enemies were also right. This is the eleventh hour in American freedom and the clock is ticking.

Only the American voters can provide the right kind of change by reversing the trends of the last sixty years. They will alter it today, or abolish it tomorrow. Freedom is an unalienable gift from our Creator. But maintaining freedom here on earth requires the sacrifice of the brave and the strong, for benefit of those who are too weak to fight, or even too lost to care.

Our future is visible in our past. Study the past well and choose your future wisely…