Archive for the ‘Obama’s Radicalism’ Category
President Obama revealed a lot about himself when, on the campaign trail the other day, he made this statement:
If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
Obama is a believer in government, not in the private sector, not in businesss.
Obama steered virtually all stimulus dollars to plug holes in state and local government (to prevent layoffs of government workers) or to his pet “green energy” projects, mostly run by his big donors (i.e. Solyndra)
Now, obviously what Obama is saying makes some sense on one level.
We certainly need government. We need police. We need roads. We need regulators. The free market cannot operate without rules and laws. No one (with perhaps the exception of a few Ron Paul supporters) is saying we don’t.
We also need government when an enormous amount of resources is required to achieve a single focused objective — i.e. win World War Two.
We can’t expect the private sector to do something like that.
We also need government to conduct other big worthwhile projects — such as build the Hoover Dam or land on the moon in the 1960s (something we haven’t done again in half a century).
Obama’s rhetorical style is to posit straw-man arguments and knock them down — that is, to misrepresent our true views.
He says conservatives (and those who love freedom) are anti-government, that we just want a dog-eat-dog society where everyone fends for themselves — sink or swim, survival of the fittest.
But that could not be farther from the truth.
Conservatives are strong believers in government. Conservatives are not anarchists. Conservatives believe in ordered liberty, not chaos, not everyone fend for himself Road Warrior-style.
Conservatives believe government should be very strong where it’s supposed to be strong. Conservatives believe government is needed to do jobs that the private sector is not set up to do, can’t do, or can’t do very well.
America’s founders did an excellent job of outlining the proper responsibilities of the federal government in the Constitution of the United States.
But to say, as Obama did, that “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that — somebody else made that happen” is like saying the New York Giants did not win the Super Bowl last year, the referees made that happen, or NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell made that happen.
Certainly referees were necessary to the playing of the Super Bowl. Also a stadium had to be built. The NFL brass had to decide to hold a Super Bowl on a specific date in a specific location. And there must be rules for the conduct of the game. But to suggest that, because of all this, the New York Giants did not win the Super Bowl (someone else did), is pretty silly.
People pay to watch the game. People pay to watch the players play. They don’t pay to watch the referees. Obama wants to emphasize the referees, not the game.
The main game in America is capitalism.
Capitalism is why America grew to be so prosperous so quickly.
Capitalism is what creates the products we buy, generates the wealth, and pays for all this government. Government doesn’t create wealth. The private sector does.
We could not have won World War Two if America had been a poor country.
Obama thinks wealth is a finite and constant resource that needs to be spread around evenly.
But if that were true, America would continue to look like it did in the 18th Century.
Instead, just about everyone in America today (including the poor) has a computer, a flat screen TV, a car, a washer and dryer, a refrigerator, and very few Americans go hungry or homeless (unless they have a drug abuse or mental health problem).
The rising tide of capitalist-generated prosperity lifts almost all boats.
Yes, Jesse Jackson is right when he says some boats remain stuck on the bottom and need some help. Fine. But that’s a small percentage. Maybe 10 percent, maybe 5 percent if you really look closely.
But capitalism has been very good for 90-95 percent of us.
Even the bottom 5 percent in America are far better off than if they lived a century earlier.
But Obama has an almost Medieval view of the world — an age when the world looked exactly the same for hundreds, even thousands of years — a feudal, anti-capitalist world where there was no discernible progress from century to century.
It was grinding poverty for everyone – unless you were royalty or a high-level church figure.
Capitalism and capitalist institutions (such as enforceable contract law and banks) changed all that — also the PROTESTANT ETHIC & THE SPIRIT OF ENTERPRISE (as Max Weber called it).
Obama doesn’t understand capitalism, doesn’t like it. He thinks it’s more noble to work for a non-profit or for government.
But who has done more real good for the world — the RED CROSS (one of the world largest non-profits) or Bill Gates and Microsoft?
I would argue Bill Gates and Microsoft.
Bill Gates made the world a better and more productive place by creating software for personal computers that almost anyone can afford. He created hundreds of multi-millionaires (his employees and shareholders). And now he’s set up his own non-profit foundation that’s exponentially bigger than the RED CROSS — because of the profits he made from Microsoft.
Plus, of course, the RED CROSS could not exist without donations. Where do these donations come from?
The same place taxes are generated to finance government — the private sector.
But Obama tells us “the private sector” is doing fine now. It’s government that’s hurting, in his view.
But if the private sector really were doing fine, government would not be hurting. The tax revenue would be there.
Obama doesn’t seem to know where the golden eggs come from. He just continues to keep trying to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
He sees the goose that’s laying the golden eggs as the enemy.
In one of his memoirs (“Dreams of My Father”), Obama talks about a job he had briefly in the private sector. He wrote that he felt like “a spy behind enemy lines.”
Obama actually sees the private sector and business as the enemy.
Obama has spent his entire life working for far-left non-profits (like the notorious vote fraud organization ACORN) and for government.
Even Communist China and most of the Communist World has woken up to the fact that its capitalism that creates the wealth. Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez are the only true Communists left in the world — well, except also apparently Obama.
While the Communists have abandoned Communism, Obama still clings to Socialist rhetoric that was common in the 1930s. He sounds like a relic from a bygone era.
He blames ATM machines and other forms of automation for the slow economy.
He’s like a Flat Earther who refuses to let observable facts alter his thinking.
Obama doesn’t understand the American Dream, and doesn’t like it much.
He thinks everyone should be working in soup kitchens and the like.
Then he wonders why his polices aren’t creating any new jobs, aren’t generating any economic growth.
If Obama were running the NFL, there would be hundreds of referees on the field — so many you’d have a tough time finding the players. And the rule book would be thousands of pages long — to ensure fairness, of course. A flag would be thrown on every play.
And then NFL Commissioner Obama would wonder why the game has become so difficult to play, and why so few people want to play the game or watch it anymore.
That, in a nutshell, is what he’s doing to the U.S. economy.
His ObamaCare law is 2700 pages. His administration has just produced 13,000 additional pages of ObamaCare regulations under the 2700-page law.
Obama is very good at that — creating more rules, regulations and bureaucracy. That’s what he knows how to do. That’s what he loves doing.
He is now in the process of hiring 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce ObamaCare. He is now building 159 brand new government bureaucracies to administer ObamaCare.
Paradoxically, the more government has grown, the more responsibilities it has taken on, the less capable it has become in undertaking big projects.
When was the last time the U.S. government undertook a project on the size and scope of the Hoover Dam?
In what truly is the ultimate insult, American astronauts are now going into space on Russian rockets because we cancelled our space program. We have a government today that’s enormous, but really can’t do much.
It took America one year and 45 days to build the Empire State Building in 1929-1930.
It took us 11 years to build the new version of the World Trade Center. And now it’s just one building instead of two. We’ll call this World Trade Center minus one tower.
We’ve become a pathetic country, unable to do much anymore.
We’ve become a world laughingstock.
Most Conservatives, of course, believe in a safety net for the disabled and those who are incapable of providing for themselves. We don’t want people starving on the streets or granny kicked out of her house into the snow. We believe there should be a floor through which no one should fall, but there should also be no limit (no cap) on what one can earn.
We’re still a relatively rich country (not nearly as rich as we used to be). We can afford an intelligently designed safety net that has incentives for able-bodied people to get off it.
We’re happy to rescue the defenseless, but we don’t want to subsidize the lazy and clueless.
We don’t think the safety net should be gold-plated and lavish. Or why would anyone want to get off it? Why work if you don’t have to?
The safety net is not supposed to become a hammock.
But Obama has now (on his own) gutted the welfare reforms that Bill Clinton signed into law, including the requirement that you at least try to find work. That requirement’s gone. Now you can just sit on the couch, watch TV, and call that work.
He’s also running TV ads in poor communities urging people to get on Food Stamps.
In the World According to Obama, going on Food Stamps is good and noble, but working in a business is working for the enemy.
At every turn, Obama undermines the work ethic and competitive spirit that are essential to capitalism and a flourishing free-enterprise economy.
Instead of admiring a Michel Phelps and celebrating achievement, Obama’s first instinct is to tie a cement block around his ankle to make the race more fair.
And then he wonders why businesses are keeping trillions of dollars in cash parked on the sidelines until he’s gone . . . or setting up factories in places more hospitable to capitalism, such as in Communist China.
BEN SAYS: The WASHINGTON TIMES article below is good on how Obama’s new campaign slogan, “Forward”, has extensive ties to Communism. But the TIMES article leaves out Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” and MSNBC’s “Lean Forward” ad campaign. Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” killed 45 million Chinese over a three-year period (1958-1961). So MSNBC doesn’t quite want a “Great Leap Forward” (like Mao). MSNBC just wants to “Lean Forward” — that is “lean” toward Maoist Communism. But Obama apparently wants to go all the way. Obama’s 2012 campaign slogan “Forward” is the name of Vladimir Lenin’s publication. It’s also the name of a number of other prominent Marxist magazines and journals. “Progressive” is a variation of the “Forward” Communist theme. Progressive is a kinder, gentler version of “Forward.” Obama apparently prefers “Forward” to “Progressive.” “Forward” is serious.
WASHINGTON TIMES: The Obama campaign apparently didn’t look backwards into history when selecting its new
campaign slogan, “Forward” — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.
Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name “Forward!” or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called “Forward (generic name of socialist publications).”
“The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications,” the online encyclopedia explains.
The slogan “Forward!” reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.
The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word “Forward” with the “O” having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign’s official beginning.
There have been at least two radical-left publications named “Vorwaerts” (the German word for “Forward”). One was the daily newspaper of the Social Democratic Party of Germany whose writers included Friedrich Engels and Leon Trotsky. It still publishes as the organ of Germany’s SDP, though that party has changed considerably since World War II. Another was the 1844 biweekly reader of the Communist League. Karl Marx, Engels and Mikhail Bakunin are among the names associated with that publication.
East Germany named its Army soccer club ASK Vorwaerts Berlin (later FC Vorwaerts Frankfort).
Vladimir Lenin founded the publication “Vpered” (the Russian word for “forward”) in 1905. Soviet propaganda film-maker Dziga Vertov made a documentary whose title is sometimes translated as “Forward, Soviet” (though also and more literally as “Stride, Soviet”).
Conservative critics of the Obama administration have noted numerous ties to radicalism and socialists throughout Mr. Obama’s history, from his first political campaign being launched from the living room of two former Weather Underground members, to appointing as green jobs czar Van Jones, a self-described communist.
Obama Channels Karl Marx, Mao: Says limited government that protects free markets ‘doesn’t work, has never worked’
CNS NEWS: In a speech delivered at Osawatomie High School in Osawatomie, Kansas, on Tuesday, President Barack Obama argued that while a limited government that preserves free markets “speaks to our rugged individualism” as Americans, such a system “doesn’t work” and “has never worked” and that Americans must look to a more activist government that taxes more, spends more and regulates more if they want to preserve the middle class.
“‘[T]here is a certain crowd in Washington who, for the last few decades, have said, let’s respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. ‘The market will take care of everything,’ they tell us,” said Obama. “If we just cut more regulations and cut more taxes–especially for the wealthy–our economy will grow stronger.
“Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers,” Obama continued. “But if the winners do really well, then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, well, that’s the price of liberty.
“Now, it’s a simple theory,” said Obama. “And we have to admit, it’s one that speaks to our rugged individualism and our healthy skepticism of too much government. That’s in America’s DNA. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked.
“It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression,” said Obama. “It’s not what led to the incredible postwar booms of the ‘50s and ‘60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade. I mean, understand, it’s not as if we haven’t tried this theory.
“Remember in those years, in 2001 and 2003, Congress passed two of the most expensive tax cuts for the wealthy in history,” said Obama. “And what did it get us? The slowest job growth in half a century. Massive deficits that have made it much harder to pay for the investments that built this country and provided the basic security that helped millions of Americans reach and stay in the middle class==things like education and infrastructure, science and technology, Medicare and Social Security.
NEW YORK TIMES: The 1,100 full- and part-time employees who were abruptly laid off two weeks ago aren’t the only ones whose paychecks have been affected by the sudden and dramatic failure of bankrupt solar energy company, Solyndra Inc.
Because for its brief lifespan, Solyndra proved to be pretty good for the lobbying community.
According to records filed with the Clerk of the House and a search of disclosure forms compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Solyndra spent nearly $1.9 million on lobbying activities over a period of 43 months from 2008 to 2011.
About $1 million of that was earned by the company’s two in-house lobbyists, Joseph Pasetti and Victoria Sanville, over an 18-month period from 2010 until this year. But Solyndra has also had several big-name lobbying shops on its payroll, including established powerhouses Dutko Worldwide and Holland and Knight, which began representing the then-fledgling company in 2008.
If you read nothing else today, read this
JOHN DREW-AMERICAN THINKER: What would you do if you knew that the top Democrat running for president was lying about his past?
That is the question I was faced with in 2008. I had met the young Barack Obama while he was a sophomore at Occidental College, and I knew that his commitment to socialism was deep, genuine, and longstanding. See my earlier article on American Thinker.
I had been a leader of the Marxist students at Occidental College myself, starting in 1976 when I founded the precursor of the Democrat Socialist Alliance on campus. The young Obama I knew was a Marxist socialist who would have been quite comfortable with Communist party members like his Hawaii mentor Frank Marshall Davis, retired domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers, or active socialist politicians like Illinois State Senator Alice Palmer.
The Obama I knew was nothing like the lifelong pragmatic centrist that he was pretending to be in the 2008 presidential campaign. When I talked politics with the young Obama, he expressed a profound commitment to bringing about a socialist economic system in the U.S. — completely divorced from the profit motive — which would occur, in his lifetime, through a potentially violent, Communist-style revolution. In this context, I saw my report on young Obama as a key piece of evidence suggesting a profound continuity in his belief system.
Although I was surprised by Barack Obama’s insistence on his mainstream ideological credentials, I was shocked that my attempts to spread the news about young Obama’s Marxism failed to gain any media traction with reporters, activists, or campaign staffs during the 2008 presidential campaign.
BOYD RICHARD BOYD-AMERICAN THINKER: In his own words, during the campaign:
Sept, 17 2007 to SEIU:
“[Y]our agenda’s been my agenda[.]“
November 2007 to ACORN:
“I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career.”
December 2007 addressing ACORN and other community organizations:
“[W]e’re going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda, We’re going to be having meetings all across the country with community organizations so that you have input into the agenda for the next presidency of the United States of America.”
January 5, 2008 to SEIU
“I’ve been working with the SEIU before I was elected to anything … We are going to paint the nation purple with SEIU. SEIU, I’m glad you are with me. Let’s together change the country. SEIU! SEIU!”
“[I]f somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can, it’s just that it will bankrupt them…under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
May 16, 2008 in Oregon:
“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…That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”
June 3, 2008 in St Paul Minnesota
“This was the moment — this was the time –when we came together to remake this great nation”
July 13, 2008 to La Raza:
“[W]e rise and fall together as one people…And together, we won’t just win an election — we will transform this nation.”
October 12, 2008 to Joe the Plumber:
“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
October 30, 2008 at the University of Mississippi, Columbia:
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America[.]“
How many Marxist groups will he share agendas with before it’s apparent? How many times will he say he wants to change, remake, or fundamentally transform America before we believe he wants to?
Almost everything Obama says and does is a scripted, controlled, and choreographed event. The man causes relentless instability, yet it is all planned. We know where his ideas come from: the George Soros-funded, Hillary Clinton-founded Center for American Progress and Joel Rogers’ Apollo Alliance with help from its ex-Weather Underground co-founder, among others.
As president he’s appointed the following foxes as hen house guards:
- A former SEIU member who kind of agrees with Mao…as manufacturing czar.
- A former commissioner of Socialist International, eco-profiteer, and CAP board member…as global warming czar.
- An ACORN defender and Obama’s private attorney…as ethics and transparency czar.
- A revolutionary communist…as green jobs czar.
- A power-lusting control freak longing to delimit choices…as regulatory czar.
- An anti-capitalist Chicken Little peddling junk science…as science czar.
- A man who thinks terrorists represent the legitimate needs and grievances of ordinary people…as counter-terrorism czar.
- An anti-Israel “poverty breeds terrorism” theorist…as U.S. ambassador to the U.N.
- A woman who believes that Congress can abridge free speech and another who thinks the court of appeals is where policy is made…as Supreme Court justices.
- An SEIU VP, activist for the Working Families Party, and political director for Bertha Lewis, the head of ACORN’s New York chapter…as director of the office of public affairs to help push the president’s agenda.
- A man who gives guns to drug cartels while allowing them to smuggle drugs in, who refuses to protect our borders while litigating any state which tries to defend its own as and turns a blind eye to voter intimidation…as attorney general.
- A woman worried about white right-wing extremists while she has Grandma groped at the airport…as homeland security chief.
- A woman who proposes that the U.S. has the right to protect “Palestine” from Israel…as a foreign policy adviser.
SEIU president and Marxist Andy Stern and the AFL-CIO’s Dick Trumka are/were two of the most frequent White House guests. Obama directs NASA’s chief to perform Muslim outreach. The EPA will handle cap and trade after Congress said no. The borders won’t be secured until O gets amnesty for millions of potential voters with no allegiance to America. O imposed a drilling ban for oil, then said the judge could fly a kite when the judge lifted the ban. Brazil purchasedsome of those rigs, and Obama wants to be a big consumer of Brazil’s oil. His administration may have facilitated the murder of a border agent and is trying to suppress second-amendment rights, as a result.
Says he’ll focus only deporting criminals.
WASHINGTON TIMES: Bowing to pressure from immigrant rights activists, the Obama administration said Thursday that it will halt deportation proceedings on a case-by-case basis against illegal immigrants who meet certain criteria, such as attending school, having family in the military or having primary responsible for other family members’ care.
The move marks a major step for President Obama, who for months has said he does not have broad categorical authority to halt deportations and said he must follow the laws as Congress has written them.
But in letters to Congress on Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she does have discretion to focus on “priorities” and that her department and the Justice Department will review all ongoing cases to see who meets the new criteria.
“This case-by-case approach will enhance public safety,” she said. “Immigration judges will be able to more swiftly adjudicate high-priority cases, such as those involving convicted felons.”
The move won immediate praise from Hispanic activists and Democrats who had strenuously argued with the administration that it did have authority to take these actions, and said as long as Congress is deadlocked on the issue, it was up to Mr. Obama to act.
This should surprise no one.
WND: It may be early in the campaign season, but the Communist Party USA already has seen fit to endorse Barack Obama for the 2012 election.
While noting he is disappointed with “some aspects” of the Obama administration’s domestic and foreign policy, Sam Webb, chairman of the Communist Party USA, threw his support behind Obama’s re-election bid.
In an article last week at People’s Weekly World, the official newspaper of the Communist Party USA, Webb discussed the need for a third party consisting of the so-called working class and labor as well as “racially and nationally oppressed people, women, youth, immigrants, seniors, gay and straight.”
Webb, however, recognized that such a party is not likely to emerge by next year.
“Millions who have to be at the core of this party still operate under the umbrella of the Democratic Party, albeit increasingly in an independent fashion,” he noted.
Webb said that for communists there are major differences between Democrats and Republicans. He urged his supported to continue to back the Democrats.
Then I got fidgety as his half-truths about the debt grew into full-blown whoppers. As he droned on, I did something I never did before during an Obama appearance: I turned off the TV.
Enough. He is the Man Who Won’t Listen to Anybody, so why should anybody listen to him?
Tuning out and turning off the president does not fill me with gladness. He cannot be ignored.
But for now, I will leave that unhappy duty to others. I am tired of Barack Obama. There’s nothing new there. His speeches are like “Groundhog Day.”
His presidency is a spectacular failure, his historic mandate squandered by adherence to leftist ideology and relentless partisanship. His policies are crushing the prospects for growth and dooming the hopes of 24 million Americans who are unemployed or working part-time.
Yet he is not going to change. He listens only to his own voice, which is why he has lost virtually his entire economic team.
The biggest media myth is that he is a centrist. Oh, please. It’s a theory without evidence, for there is not a single example on domestic issues where he voluntarily staked out a spot in the American middle.
Sure, on occasion, Obama will be to the right of the far, far left, but that is not the center. That just means he’s not Michael Moore.
Nor is he a centrist because he’ll make a deal under duress with Republicans, as he did last December. All politicians have a pragmatic streak, otherwise they couldn’t get anything done in a divided government.
But Obama’s default statist position remains unmolested by facts or last year’s landslide that was a rebuke to his first two years. He continues to push bigger and bigger government, higher and higher taxes and more and more welfare programs.
He will compromise if he must, but he still wants what he wants and will come back for it again and again.
That’s the subtext of the debt-ceiling talks and his press conference. He voted against raising the ceiling as a senator, calling the need for an increase a “failure.”
Now he is not embarrassed to demand a hike of about $2.5 trillion, and more hair of the spending-and-taxing dog. He reveals his belief that your money is really the government’s and it will decide how much you can keep. The only cut he is comfortable with is in the defense budget.
RASMUSSEN: Most voters still believe President Obama is more liberal than they are, while just one-out-of-four say they share the same ideological views as the president.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters think Obama is more ideologically liberal than they are, while only 13% view him as more conservative. Twenty-four percent (24%) say their political views are about the same as the president’s. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The number who see the president as more liberal than they are stayed at 57% in three-out-of-four previous surveys conducted since August of last year. That number climbed to 61% in late February. The number who view the president as more conservative ranged from nine percent (9%) to 12% in that same period.
The number of voters who say they share about the same political views as the president ties the lowest result measured since August and, interestingly, compares exactly with the number who say the same of Congress. Only 24% of voters hold about the same ideological views as the average Republican member of Congress, and another 24% feel that way about the views of the average Democratic congressman.