Barack Obama is desperate to make people believe that he really cares about “the middle class.” After four years, his actions speak louder than words. Some 85% of the middle class say they are worse off today than they were ten years ago. According to the Wall Street Journal, from the time Obama took office in 2009, “The Obama years have been brutal on middle-class incomes” wiping out “$4019 in real income” for families. The report goes on to say, “The last time incomes fell this fast was during the late 1970s under Jimmy Carter, and it’s no coincidence that economic policies then and now are so similar. If Mr. Obama succeeds in convincing voters that he really is the tribune of the middle class, it will be the political conjurer’s trick of the century.”
The financial loss and burden imposed by Obama will be greater on all workers, including Black, Hispanic, Asian and White, when looming tax hikes go into effect January 2013 along with Obamacare’s vast array of hidden taxes set to further rip family budgets apart. The question is—why has the middle class been hit so hard by Obama? Is it an ideological grudge?
Obama had two doggedly radical mentors that shaped both his ideology and his current policies. One was a committed hardcore Communist and the other was renowned as a hardcore Socialist. Neither man stressed American values, but taught the opposite—that America with its free enterprise, republic based, God-worshipping system is the enemy of the people. Frank Marshall Davis, a reported pedophile, race mongerer and strident Communist, was Obama’s family friend and was recruited by Obama’s grandfather to educate young Barry in the ways of the world. It was, however, Obama’s educational mentor, that stressed that if “real power” is to be gained, it must be done at the expense of the American people and the economy.............................
Obama taught “Destroy Middle Class”
“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”[ From the dedication page of Rules for Radicals]
“Radicals must be resilient, adaptable to shifting political circumstances, and sensitive enough to the process of action and reaction to avoid being trapped by their own tactics and forced to travel a road not of their choosing.”
“Change means movement. Movement means friction. Only in the frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or change occur without that abrasive friction of conflict.”...............
Saul Alinsky strategy was taught by Obama as a ‘community organizer’
Liberals self-righteously wrap themselves in the mantle of public spirit. They ardently promote policies promising to deliver the poor and oppressed from their latest misery — policies which can only find solution in the halls of government. But no matter what issue one examines, over the last fifty plus years, the liberal prescription has almost always been a failure.
Why is this so? Why does virtually every liberal scheme result in ever-increasing public spending while conditions seem to get continually worse? There are a number of reasons:
1. The programs usually create adverse incentives. This is especially true in so-called “anti-poverty” programs. The beneficiaries find government subsidies a replacement for, rather than a supplement to, gainful employment and eventually become incapable of supporting themselves. This in turn creates a dependent culture with its attendant toxic behaviors which demand still more government “remedies.”
2. The programs create their own industry, complete with scads of “think tanks” and “experts” who survive on government research grants. These are the aptly named “Beltway Bandits.”
3. They create their own bureaucracies, whose managers conspire with interested members of Congress to continually increase program funding, regardless of merit.
4. Members of Congress secure votes and campaign donations by extorting them from beneficiaries of such programs, either through veiled threats — “vote for me or those mean Republicans will wipe out your benefits” — or promises of still more bennies.
In short, all develop a vested interest in the program’s survival. But if the result is always more and more government, of government, by government, and for government, with no solution in sight, then why do liberals always see government as the solution rather than the problem? ................
The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis [Obama's strategy for destroying the economy]
.....Obama’s educational mentor, that stressed that if “real power” is to be gained, it must be done at the expense of the American people and the economy.............................
Meet the hard-core Communist who mentored the future 44th President of the United States
LET’S CUT TO THE CHASE: Frank Marshall Davis was a literal, card-carrying member of Communist Party USA (CPUSA). His card number was 47544. He was pro-Soviet, pro–Red China. He edited and wrote for Party-line publications such as the Chicago Star and the Honolulu Record; contributors to the former actually served as secret agents to Stalin’s Soviet Union. Davis did outrageous Soviet propaganda work in his columns, at every juncture agitating and opposing U.S. attempts to slow Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung. He favored Yalta and Red Army takeovers of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Central and Eastern Europe. He urged America to dump the “fascist” Chiang Kaishek in support of Mao’s Red forces. He wanted Communist takeovers in Korea and Vietnam. He was adamantly, angrily anti-NATO, anti–Marshall Plan, anti–Truman Doctrine. He argued that the U.S. under President Harry Truman—whom he portrayed as a fascist, racist, and imperialist—and under secretaries of state George Marshall and Dean Acheson, was handing West Germany back to the Nazis, while Stalin was pursuing “democracy” in East Germany and throughout the Communist Bloc. He portrayed America’s leaders as “aching for an excuse to launch a nuclear nightmare of mass murder and extermination” against the Soviets and the Chinese— as eager to end all civilization.
In short, Frank Marshall Davis’ writings were outrageous. A Jeremiah Wright sermon or Bill Ayers lecture is tame by comparison..................
Dreams From Frank Marshall Davis
"What if I told you that you will have a black president very soon and he will be a Communist?"
It was then that the husband unsuccessfully tried to change the subject; but she was on a roll and would have nothing of it. One of us asked, "It sounds like you know something we don't know."
"Yes, it is true. This is not some idle talk. He is already born and he is educated and being groomed to be president right now. You will be impressed to know that he has gone to the best schools of Presidents. He is what you call "Ivy League". You don't believe me, but he is real and I even know his name. His name is Barack. His mother is white and American and his father is black from Africa. That's right, a chocolate baby! And he's going to be your President."
” After four years, his actions speak louder than words. Some 85% of the middle class say they are worse off today than they were ten years ago
On March 9, Brannon Howse of Worldview Radio interviewed author James Simpson. Entitled “Barack Obama is Destroying Our Economy on Purpose,” Howse’s interview of Simpson concentrated on Columbia University professors Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven who wrote an article in 1966 for The Nation magazine. “The article was published on May 2, 1966 and laid out what is now known as the ‘Cloward-Piven Strategy’. The plan calls for the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions,” explains a synopsis on the Worldview Radio website. “Cloward and Piven studied Saul Alinsky just like Hillary Clinton and President Obama.”
Alinsky is considered to be the founder of modern community organizing in America. Alinsky’s teachings influenced Obama early in his career as a community organizer on the far South Side of Chicago. Obama worked for Gerald Kellman’s Developing Communities Project where he learned and taught Alinsky’s methods for community organizing. Obama would later work for ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now..............
Obama, the Cloward-Piven Strategy, and the New World Order
Originally posted by drwizardphd
I don't get it.
If Obama is supposed to be this radical marxist-socialist-communist whatever, why hasn't he done anything about it in almost 4 years of presidency? Where is the slow-steady red march bloggers have been harping about since '08? If Obama truly was a Socialist he would have my vote locked down, but from what I can see he's just another Keynesian Capitalist like every other president.
You guys would have much better luck picking apart Obama's actual policies, rather than trying to invent a fake platform to attack him on.
Originally posted by RottenBeauty
reply to post by drwizardphd
These posters have an agenda. Logic, reason and legitimate criticisms do not fit into it. Why? I dunno but they're ruining this site.
Originally posted by drwizardphd
I don't get it.
If Obama is supposed to be this radical marxist-socialist-communist whatever, why hasn't he done anything about it in almost 4 years of presidency? Where is the slow-steady red march bloggers have been harping about since '08?
You would think that a program to spend “$20 million per year for 10 years to aid 10,000 minority students each year, including blacks, Arabs, Hispanics, Asians and native Americans” would be referred to somewhere other than one obscure 1979 column, but I haven’t found any other word of it.
Maybe the funding materialized, maybe it didn’t, but what’s particularly noteworthy is that this black Islamic lawyer who “for several years [had] urged the rich Arab kingdoms to cultivate stronger ties to America’s blacks by supporting black businesses and black colleges and giving financial help to disadvantaged students” was also the same lawyer who allegedly helped arrange for the entrance of Barack Obama into Harvard Law School in 1988.
That tale had surfaced in 2008 when Barack Obama was a candidate for president and one of the leading black politicians in the country — Percy Sutton of New York — told an interviewer on a Manhattan TV news show that he had been introduced to Obama “by a friend who was raising money for him. The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas. He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.”
It also might be considered more than coincidence that the author of that 1979 newspaper column was from Chicago, where Barack Obama settled in 1986 a few years after his stint at Columbia University. It is certainly surprising that the author of that column was none other than Vernon Jarrett, the future (and later former) father-in-law of Valerie Jarrett, who ultimately became the consigliatore of the Obama White House.
It is also noteworthy that Vernon Jarrett was one of the best friends and a colleague of Frank Marshall Davis, the former Chicago journalist and lifelong communist who moved to Hawaii in the late 1940s and years later befriended Stanley and Madelyn Dunham and their daughter Stanley Ann, the mother of Barack Obama. (4)
And to anyone who has the modicum of a spark of curiosity, it is surely intriguing that Frank Davis took an active role in the rearing of young Barack from the age of 10 until he turned 18 and left Hawaii for his first year of college at Occidental College in Los Angeles. (5)
It is also at least suggestive that Obama began that college education as a member of the highly international student body of Occidental College in 1979, the same year when Vernon Jarrett was touting the college aid program being funded by OPEC and possibly Prince Alwaleed. The fact that President Obama has studiously avoided releasing records of his college years is suggestive also, but has no evidentiary value in the present discussion. (6)