About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

WILL SOCIALISM REPLACE CAPITALISM IN THE USA?

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

"Socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the object worship of the state. It will prescribe for every one where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say. Socialism is an attack on the right to breathe freely. No socialist system can be established without a political police. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance”. – Winston Churchill


Obama’s decision not to build the Missile Defense System in Poland and the Czech Republic and his Noble Prize have not yet been comprehended from a philosophical viewpoint. It’s time to do it.
The last turning point similar to the current one happened approximately 400 years ago. The Western European society discovered a new hierarchy of values. Feudalism that valued service and chivalry was replaced with capitalism. Wealth became the measure of success, and everyone was to care about his own pocket only. The cult of money replaced all other values, including religious.

Capitalism turned everything upside down and made people more excited about stuffing their bank accounts than anything else. This system turned out to be extremely efficient in terms of production of goods, services, and comfort. America benefited from the system the most, and decided that the rest of the world has to adopt it as well. If some underdeveloped countries are unable to appreciate the benefits of capitalism, they should be forced to do it.
Meanwhile, philosophers say that capitalism is driven not by hard cash, but rather, striving for hard cash. It’s driven not by the production of goods, but rather, striving for consumption of these goods.
If everyone had these values, the “dog-eat-dog” principle would be the major principal in the world history. But America failed to do it. There are plenty of “underdeveloped” people in the world who continue to cherish spiritual values. There are not that many chances left to force them into worshiping money since these “underdeveloped” people adopt western technology and become stronger. The appeal to adopt American values doesn’t work either. Why would we adopt the system if the system is in crisis? Pragmatic America realized that billions of people are not willing to live in the kingdom of hard cash and decided that it would be better off leaving this kingdom itself. Now the USA is talking about introducing elements of socialism. Source: Pravda

What does Obama’s decision not to build the Eastern European Missile Defense System have to do with all of this? Well, it means that it’s not capitalism that’s undergoing the crisis, but the belief in its high-efficiency. And this, in turn, means that America, the bulwark of capitalism, is no longer the boss of the world. And if it’s not the boss any more, it has to be friends with everybody, including Russia. And it’s America’s turn to offer Russia to push the reset button. Or maybe it’s just tired of imposing its rules on others and felt that friendship is more valuable than money and power? If this is the case, we will soon witness another turning point in the world history. The preceeding article was written by an un-named reporter who wrote the article for Pravda, the Moscow version o the Washington Post and New York Times. The mouth piece for the Russian government.

This article portends the coming of Socialism to the USA not for the reasons my blog will outline, but because the American people have decided that capitalism cannot work. You would expect this from a person who lives and works in a totalitarian Marxist state. But the reference to American’s deciding that capitalism does not work is not the reason why we are racing toward the “nanny” welfare State.

The reasons are because we have a man in the Oval Office that is dedicated to attaining power and total control over the lives of Americans, and has a Congress that appears to be afraid to oppose any thing he and his ideologically committed Leftists who surround him!

If Congress passes the Democrat Bill for Universal health Care that leaves out at least 25 million people, but will add over one trillion dollars to the National debt. We will transform 1/6 th of the USA to government control from the Capitalism free enterprise system in a stoke of the pen!

And waiting in the wings of the Congress is the nail that will put the lid on the coffin that buries the free enterprise system The Cap and Trade Bill! This bill should properly be called the Cap and Tax bill, because it not only will give the Federal government control over our lives more fully. It will place limits on the energy output all walks of life starting with your homes and the industry that provides the engine that makes the Capitalism work.
To support the largesse that the Obama administration is providing to his supporters disguised as a Stimulus. The government is running the printing presses in the Treasury dept on a 24 hour cycle turning out paper money that has diminishing value!

If a miracle does not occur next November in the election that will return the Republicans if not to power to a number that can stop the stampede to Socialism by the Democrats and Obama. WE will be well on our way toward the “cradle to grave” Socialism!


Massive Federal debt( presently at 12.03 trillion$) has to eventually devalue our dollar to a point of collapse and roaring inflation that will allow those who have wanted the “New World Order” to attain their goal. With the collapse of the dollar and the inability of the Federal government to pay its way out of bankruptcy lost, and the destruction of the Free enterprising system that provides the taxes that allow the government to function . The people will grasp for anything or any body who will “save” them, and the United Nations is waiting anxiously in the wings for the demise of our system. The body that is controlled by Leftist Countries like Communist China, Russia and Third World South American and African nations would love to take control of the USA!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE FOX IN THE HEN HOUSE IS OBAMA

Tuesday, September 22, 2009







When Obama ran for president those close to him and his rich, socialist friends like George Sorros, knew full well that this was a born and bred socialist they were backing. But the electorate who put him in the White House thought he was the savior that would clean up corruption in Washington, and enhance the great country they lived in.

Now we know that he is not the "messia" who will make this country great  and clean out the corruption in Washington. He is in the bed with the corrupt organization ACORN and the "thug" run SEIU union. In fact SEIU has briefing regularly in the White House!

It appears that more than 52% of Americans voted for a Marxist socialist who detests the free enterprise system and feels the Constituttion we live by is a flawd document that does not address redistribution of wealth. A hallmark of a man who thinks of Socialism as the only way to run a country! Take from those who earn and give to those who are on the government dole!

His legislative proposals have been nothing short of trying to dismantle the free enterprise system and concentrate the powers that are granted in our Bill of Rights and from GOD to the Federal government.
 The more his dangerous agenda unfolds, from Mirandizing battlefield jihadists to scrapping our missile defense systems to unilaterally disarming our nukes when rogue nations like IRAN, North Korea are nuking up, tohis emasculating the CIA by letting the Attorney General investigate and possibly prosecute CIA members who were doing their duty, and attacking the salariest of middle- and upper-income earners.I hope this will bring more Americans to oppose his blueprint for Socialism!


But, remember Obama has been groomed for and anticipated this moment for decades, and will not abandon his ambitions -- no matter how much resistance he encounters from the American people -- because in the end, he believes, like all radicals, that he knows better than the people what is in their best interests.
And if you doubt he is a page right out of Alinsky's" Rules For Radicals". I want you to reflect on his interview Sunday with George Stepanopolus.When George asked him if he thought the tax on those who fail to buy health insurance was a tax? He followed Alinsky's fifth rule:" ridicule your opponent".
When he was told by Stepanopolus  that he had looked up the deffinition of a tax in the Marion Webster dictionary. Obama replied that if he had to look the word up, "that indicates to me that you are stretching a bit"! He then said, "you can't just make up that language and call it a tax increase!"
He compared the fine to buying auto insurance, which any right thinking man would not make that comparison.  Obama talked over Stepanopouls questions and flatly denied that if you do not buy health insurance there will be a tax imposed. Mr. President we can read!!!

There are 12 rules for radicals, but I will just list the first five to give you an idea of what we fcaewith the " fox in the hen house"!
Some of these rules are ruthless, but they work. Here are the rules to be aware of:

RULE 1: "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." Power is derived from 2 main sources - money and people. "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

Americans WAKE UP!! Your life depends on defeating this man!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

SOCIALISTS DON'T WANT A BETTER ECONOMY

 





The leftist leaning Media tells the people that the TARP plan and Cash for Clunkers have been the impetus for the beginning of the economic recovery.
Conservatives like myself believe that the recovery is artificial, and we are in for a back slide in the stock market and the economy in particular.

If you analyse the effect that the TARP program has had, you will find that less than 15% of the hundreds of billions that were appropriated have actually been spent, and very little has gone to "shovel ready" plans!
The Clunker program is a temporary stimulus that is fast on car sales, but slow on payment to the auto dealers. Some dealers have as much as 45 million dollars outstanding.
Some well known economic experts, people who have analysed the clunker program, believe that once the program ceases there will be a dearth of sales as car buyers have tripled the pace of car purchases during the CFC program.

While Obama and his cohorts in Congress are "crowing" about the recovery they are responsible for. Many, including I say it is just the natural progression of past recessions taking place.All the depressions in the past have an inverse Bell curve pattern if you chart them. I believe we are still at the bottom and will remain there for another six months as there is very little encouraging news from the labor market.

We have a president who readily brags that he grew up and gravitated to radicals during his formative years, and it is possible that Obama is a Marxist/Leninist! After all he has so far appointed 44 Czars who are not responsible to anyone but him! Sounds tyrannical to me! And one is a Communist, The Green Czar!

Leninism holds that capitalism can only be overthrown by revolutionary means; that is, any attempts to reform capitalism from within, such as Fabianism and non-revolutionary forms of democratic socialism, are doomed to fail. I do not believe Obama is an advocate for revolution, but he apparently believes in redistribution of wealth and changing our free enterprise system to one where the government runs our lives from cradle to grave!

The first goal of a Leninist party is to educate the proletariat, so as to remove the various modes of false consciousness the bourgeois have instilled in them, instilled in order to make them more docile and easier to exploit economically, such as religion and nationalism. This going full force by Obama and his willing propagandists, the Media!
Once the proletariat has gained class consciousness the party will coordinate the proletariat's total might to overthrow the existing government, thus the proletariat will seize all political and economic power. Sounds like what happened to General Motors and the auto workers union!

Lastly the proletariat (thanks to their education by the party) will implement a dictatorship of the proletariat which would bring upon them socialism, the lower phase of communism. After this, the party would essentially dissolve as the entire proletariat is elevated to the level of revolutionaries.Source:Encyclopedia Britannica

Don't laugh! This is not as far fetched as you might think. If they get Obamacare and Cap and Tax passed, they will control most of our lives at home and in the work place! I believe that is the place where socialism resides!

It is my belief that what Obama wants to do to this country is based upon the "father" of Community Organizing, Saul Alinsky)1902-72), as this is where Obama spent his years before he entered politics. Community Organizing in Chicago, the birthplace of Alinsky.
Alinsky wrote a book called: "RULES FOR RADICALS"

In the first chapter, opening paragraph of the book Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

In Rules for Radicals, Alinsky outlines his strategy in organizing, writing in the prologue,

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future.
Does this not sound like "a crisis should never be wasted", as uttered by Rahm Emanuel!!

This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families – more than seventy million people – whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year [in 1971]. They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default." Source:Wikapedia

This is why Obama and his associates are so attached with such organisations as SEIU, ACORN, and the Auto Workers Union to name just a few "at the ready" activists and enforcers!

Maybe I am just way off base, but something does not pass my smell test. Obama is cozy with Socialist like Chavez, and sends two billion dollars during the middle of a recession to Brazil for off shore drilling! But will not allow off shore drilling off our shores to help US get independence from oil producers that hate us and our economic system!

Americans better wake up to what the Obama administration is doing to our once strong and proud country. Uncle Sam can't run Medicaid/ Medicare/ Prescription Drug Benefit now, they are insolvent by 2017 according to a recent GAO report. I can't trust them in small things, how can I trust them in really big things?
Or maybe that is the plan? instead of reducing taxes and stopping spending, they will increase taxes, and keep spending until massive inflation occurs, and our dollar is worthless! Then we have the emergency they need to "CHANGE and SAVE" the USA with Socialism and total government control!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

REFLECTIONS ON GOVERNMENT HEALTH INSURANCE

 

 





It is apparent that president Obama and his merry band of leftist followers plan to destroy the private health Insurance industry that covers over 65% of the populace of the USA, and replace it with a government single payer program. Socialized medicine!
This despite the fact that polls show that in early 1993 the sense of a health care crisis was far more widespread than it is today – a 55% majority in 1993 said they felt the health care system needed to be “completely rebuilt” compared with 41% today. Health care costs were also a broader problem in 1993 – 63% of Americans said paying for the cost of a major illness was a “major problem” for them, compared with 48% currently.


In my life I have experienced government medicine first hand by being a Navy veteran with a service connected disability that makes me eligible for Veterans medical care and medicines.
Persoanally, I think the Congress of the USA doesn't allow enough money for the VA to care for the varied wounds and mental traumas that have occured to our brave warriors from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of the 23.4 million veterans currently alive, nearly three-quarters served during a war or an official period of conflict, and the 2009 budget for this 12.7% of the U.S.population is 40 billion dollars!

But,my experience with the VA medicine is good, even though I have to travel 42 miles each way to See my VA doctor twice a year, and the yearly blood and x-ray exams. I am lucky to get the medicines I need from the VA pharmacy via the US mail at a deep savings.

So I am offering a plan to cover the estimated 46 million people who do not have medical insurance by utilizing special clinics for those who either cannot afford medical insurance, or choose to not spend the money to buy it.
If it is good enough for those who put their lives on the line for the Country, why not utilize special clinics for those who don't have insurance?

There will be those that cry second class treatment for these people, but if it is good enough for those who risked life and limb for their Country. Why not for those who cannot or will not buy health insurance?

There is the question of how do you staff these clinics with doctors and nurses?
It is a fact that most medical and nursing students utilize government guaranteed loans that accumulate in some cases to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I suggest that instead of relying on the doctor and nurse graduate to pay back the loan. Many never do! The requirement should be for every year the medical student or nurse attends school on a government loan, they must pay back one year of service to the government by serving a year in these clinics.

All clinics should be placed on regular bus lines so that no one could say they were inaccessible, and emergency rooms would be open 24 hours a day, unlike the VA clinics!

Of course there are horror stories about VA clinics as this post on VETERANS TODAY illustrates, but then there are many such cases in the private practice of medicine. Else there would not be any malpractice lawyers!

"The Veterans Affairs Department appears poised to hit a milestone it would rather avoid. That's a backlog of 1 million claims to process.

The milestone approaches as the agency scrambles to hire and train new claims processors. VA officials are working with the Pentagon to create by 2012 a system that will allow the two agencies to electronically exchange records. The process is now done manually on paper.

Former Marine Corporal Patrick Murray of Arlington, Virginia, says the first claim he filed was lost. The second ended up at a VA office in Colorado.

The 25-year-old Murray was severely burned and his right leg was amputated after a roadside bomb explosion in 2006. He says it's mind-boggling to have spent 11 months in Walter Reed Army Medical
Center and in outpatient care, only to find out he had to mail his records to the VA to prove he was injured".

Before we dismantle the present private medical system that is the envy of the World. I believe we should consider the establishment of clinics for people without insurance.
And do not tell me that this concept is degrading to those who have no insurance! If it is good enough for us veterans, then it is good enough for those who have done nothing to warrant medical care except get sick!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE MARCH TO SOCIALISM THROUGH REGULATIONS

Wednesday, June 17, 2009




Obama's new Financial regulations that he will propose today will in my opinion wreck the incentive of innovation and risk taking that has made this country great over the last two hundred plus years.

One of the "nanny" state goodies being proposed by the Obama administration to address what they say were the causes of the financial meltdown.Is his plan to overhaul the nation's "outdated" financial system.

Obama's plan seeks to overhaul the nation's system of financial regulations. The White House makes its case for this approach in an 85-page white paper that describes the roots of the crisis. Gaps in regulation allowed companies to make loans many borrowers could not afford. They believe that funding came from new kinds of investments that were poorly understood by regulators. They further believe and are saying that big firms paid employees massive bonuses, while setting aside little money to absorb potential losses.

By vastly expanding the mandate of the Federal Reserve, Obama is giving the quasi-independent agency regulatory power, that is not not answerable to Congress.Just as all 15 other Czars of Obama creation have no one to report to other than the president.
If you're a company and have a complaint about how the Fed is regulating your business,good luck. You will get no satisfaction from our lawmakers.Ask the minority bond holders in the Chrysler and Gm "rapid" bankruptcy, or the dealers ho were summarily "fired" by the now government run car companies, how much satisfaction they got by complaining. It is said that some dismissed dealers were even given a gag order from the government! So much for free speech!

This is a nightmare for those who value free, independent markets. And it will get worse as time passes. Interpreting Obama's broad goals will be the job of federal regulators who may take the opportunity to impose even more draconian restrictions.

I see no other end result from these regulations except the loss of American pre-eminence in world finance. What set us apart from other nations was the freedom enjoyed by companies large and small to generate capital for investment, for business and job creation, and for new industries and technologies. Obama will mostly destroy that. Risk taking will be frowned upon, perhaps even made illegal in some ways. It was risk taking by entrepreneurs, financiers, markets, and investors that greased the wheels of capitalism and created a financial system where the entire world was welcome to join in the joy of wealth creation.
Where would be today if Henry Ford listen to government regulators who told him he could not risk the millions he spent developing the first assembly line for automobile production?
Or if the government regulators had told Bill Gates or Steve Jobs that their ideas for personal computers were not worth the risk of asking people to invest in their dreams?

Obama is marching us directly into government control of all forms of business and the way we live our lives, even how and when we die if he gets his socialised medicine scheme passed!
There is no doubt in any ones mind who examines what he has done and what he proposes to do. That Obama is a hard core progressive who believes in the government control over our lives. He and his band of sycophants believe we "rubes" do not have the brains to fend for ourselves, so they will tell us( really demand us) how we should live from cradle to grave!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

HOW OBAMA PLANS TO REPLACE LOST JOBS!

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

 





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Ronald Reagan was right on and almost a prophet when his statement is applied to what Obama is doing to the economy and the free enterprise private sector these days.
His regulation of the banks and auto industry, and today his announcement that he will look into the salaries of financial executives9banks), show his determination to bury the private sector with strangling regulations, and take over by the government of one after another private sector businesses.

In light of his move toward replacing the private sector executives in the industries that he has already effectively taken over, with government bureaucrats. He is sort of keeping his campaign promise to create millions of jobs. The only hitch is that the job growth will be in the Federal government bureaucracy not the private sector.
Even as I write this post the news is reporting that General Motors stock has dropped to as low as a dollar today, and their is a talk of closing over 150 GM distributors that will put on the street without jobs close to a hundred thousand people!

"At a time when the official unemployment rate is nearing double digits, and 6.35 million people are receiving unemployment benefits, the U.S. government is on a hiring binge.

Executive branch employment - 1.98 million in 2009, excluding the Postal Service and the Defense Department - is set to increase by 15.6 percent for the 2010 fiscal year. Most of that is thanks to the Census Bureau hiring 102,000 temporary workers, but not counting them still yields a net increase of 2 percent in one year.

There's little belt-tightening in evidence in Washington, D.C.: Counting benefits, the average pay per federal worker will leap from $72,800 in 2008 to $75,419 next year.

Meanwhile, according to Forbes' layoff tracker, there have been 558,087 layoffs since November 2008 at large public companies; even local school districts aren't immune. That's just a sliver of the total unemployed, which government data estimate to be 8.6 percent of the workforce, or an alternate method of reckoning that counts discouraged workers puts at 20 percent.

Some of the Feds' hiring increases have been stunning. If you look at the four-year period from 2006 to 2010, the number of Homeland Security employees has grown by 22 percent, the Justice Department has increased by 15 percent, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can claim 25 percent more employees" source: The American Thinker

If anyone has any doubts about president Obama's socialist tendencies. These facts should open their eyes. It is my opinion that Obama intends to destroy as much of the private sector with punitive regulations like taxes, cap and trade costs and card check that will force many small business out of the private sector.
His "marriage" with big labor unions is quite evident from his dealings with the Chrysler bail-out and rapid bankruptcy and his response to SEIU request to put pressure on the California Governor and legislature to restore cuts in pay for SEIU employees approved by the Democrat controlled legislature to avoid imminent bankruptcy for California!

Will the Silent Majority wake up before it is too late?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THERE OUGHT TO BE A LAW!

Tuesday, April 28, 2009





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
unfortunately WE HAVE TO ADD ONE MORE EVIL TO THAT WHICH OUR GOVERNMENT CAN DO TO US. IT CAN AND IS SOCIALIZING OUR MAIN INDUSTRIES.

The blatant lie hat Mr. Gibbs told to the press corp recently is an example of the duplicity and double talking that is coming out of the "Chicago Style" White House daily.He said this:"We strongly back an auto industry that we believe can and should be self-reliant. It is not our desire to either own or run one of the auto companies.”

Well, the President just joined forces with the UAW union to take over the Chrysler Corporation. And in doing so committed a crime of drastic proportions in that they reduce the Bond holders share of the company that they owned last month, to a ten percent share!

Under the agreement, the four banks will forgo claims to their portion of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt in exchange for $2 billion in cash when the deal closes.

The Treasury needs to persuade all 46 banks and hedge funds that hold Chrysler debt to go along. If not, a bankruptcy filing could still be possible for the nation's third largest automaker.

If the remaining debt holders agree to the deal, that leaves a partnership with Italian automaker Fiat Group SpA as the lone remaining hurdle to Chrysler meeting a government-imposed deadline Thursday to complete a number of major restructuring steps and become eligible for further government aid.

The UAW reached a deal over the weekend that would give it a 55 percent stake in the company and assurances over issues like health care. At no cost to the union I should remind all who bother to read this post! While the Bond holders get the shaft!

Chrysler has been living off $4 billion in government funds since the start of the year and would likely need more to avoid bankruptcy.

The people familiar with the matter said a "surgical" bankruptcy is still possible if all of Chrysler creditors don't go along with the deal, but that it was not the preferred option for resolving Chrysler's problems. Has any one bothered to ask individual bond holders who they want running the company? I am sure they would not say the union or the President, who has not even run a candy store!

The debt holders and the Treasury Department have been trading proposals in the past several weeks but had remained far apart on how much the creditors would recoup in a Chrysler restructuring. Debt holders last week offered to reduce their debt to $3.75 billion in exchange for a 40 percent stake in the company. Treasury has offered much less generous terms. What the government is offering is a Chance to take part in the first, but certainly not the last step, in Obama's change of the free Enterprise system to that of a socialized economy run by a non-responsive government.
The people close to this deal, said the government told the debt holders that they could lose everything if no deal was reached.

This is a blatant falsehood! A bankruptcy court would certainly not give the union controlling interest in Chrysler. It would certainly nullify the union contracts and make the union slash their benefits package for themselves and the retirees.That is reality as the world of economics knows it. Not the fairy tale system that Obama has used very effectively to slip the USA into the beginnings of a socialist system, and pay back a debt to one of the group's that helped him get elected, The UAW.

First Obama went around the world apologizing for America being a "bad" country under the Bush administration. Then he went to South America, and not only did he listen for 50 minutes silently while Hugo Chavez lambasted the USA, he then accepted a book damning America from Chavez that any patriot would have thrown in the trash. Now he is in the process of trashing the free enterprise syestem in the name of "CHANGE AND HOPE" that violates every principle of the Constitution and Bill of Rights that he is sworn to defend and protect!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

EVEN EUROPEANS THINK OBAMA IS WRONG!

Wednesday, April 01, 2009





"In a time of economic calamity, it is expected that people look to their governments for answers. However, plausible solutions to the current economic crisis do not lie in more direct government intervention, which will prolong the crisis by adding more risk and uncertainty. Furthermore, governments' stimulus packages should not be based on handing out cash or shortsighted populism. Nor they should target one group or industry: Such packages should benefit the whole economy. To achieve maximum impact, the state should guarantee market rules and reassure market confidence.

In doing so, as President of the European Central Bank Jean-Claude Trichet pointed out, governments will have to "reassure [their] own people that [they] have an exit strategy, to reassure households that [they] are not putting in jeopardy the situation of the children, and to reassure businesses that what is done today is not done to the detriment of their own taxation in the years to come."
Source:Tony Blankley

"Yet economic freedom, like other freedoms, is always vulnerable. History demonstrates that this is never more so than when politicians espouse populist rhetoric, playing to people's fears and calling for more government interventions that promise a quick fix to whatever is deemed faulty in a complex economy. Politicians and leaders increasingly disparage free markets and push for counterproductive regulatory rules, increase costs on investment, or, worse, pursue protectionist policies that curtail global economic growth.
As the direct opposite of government interference and control, economic freedom is a threat only to those who want special privileges by pressuring societies to expand the size and weight of government intervention.

The world must not be discouraged from pursuing greater economic freedom. The G-20 should take this week's summit as an opportunity to renew their commitment to economic freedom.
Source:
Anthony B. Kim is Policy Analyst in the Center for International Trade and Economics at The Heritage Foundation".

"The massive programs designed to rescue the nation's financial sector are operating without adequate oversight, with vague goals and limited disclosure of their details to the taxpayers who are paying for them, government watchdogs told a Senate panel Tuesday.

The Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, was launched in the midst of last fall's collapse of the nation's banking system and is designed to get loans flowing to businesses and individuals.

But "without a clearer explanation" about parts of the program, "it is not possible to exercise meaningful oversight over Treasury's actions," said Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard Law School professor who leads a special congressional oversight panel monitoring the TARP program. Her comments came in a Senate Finance Committee hearing on the bailout program.

Noting that TARP passed Congress six months ago, Warren said that her group has repeatedly called on the Treasury Department to provide a clear strategy for the program — and that "the absence of such a vision hampers effective oversight."

Although she has asked Treasury to explain its strategy, "Congress and the American public have no clear answer to that question."

TARP is one of several programs the government has launched in recent months to help ailing institutions and even bolster healthy banks. Warren singled out one program, known as TALF, for appearing to involve "substantial downside risk and high costs for the American taxpayer" while offering big potential rewards for private interests. She said the public information about that program was "contradictory, promoting substantial confusion."

The Government Accountability Office shared some of the same concerns, saying in a new report that "Treasury continues to struggle with developing an effective overall communication strategy" for the TARP program.

Beyond that, the GAO's report pointed out the difficulty in even measuring whether TARP is working. As of March 27, the Treasury Department had handed out more than $300 billion of the $700 billion in approved TARP funds, the GAO said".Source: MCCLATCHY NEWS SERVICE

Despite this cogent advice about what apparently has failed, and suggestions how to save and promote the present free enterprise system. President Obama and his cohorts in Congress are racing to shape the USA economy as a socialist economy with the government defining all matters related to our way of life.
A failed policy in Europe and Great Britain that they are suffering under at the present time.The welfare state that Obama wants for the USA is a backwards step away from the Constitution and Bill of Rights that is BAD for all but the neo-communists and hard core socialists who are cheering Obama and company to move fast before America wakes up!

"The US emphasis on a global fiscal stimulus creates an unfortunate and unnecessary tension. First, European governments have higher taxes and more social guarantees, so that there is already a large automatic fiscal stimulus when output falls. More fundamentally, European leaders rightly question the cost-benefit calculation of spending wildly to fight the recession. Ultimately the debts must be repaid, and many European countries already are facing grim fiscal calculations between the prospective costs of bailing out their own financial system (as well as weaker states in Europe), together with adverse demographics.

"President Obama should downplay this issue. The US is in no position to be lecturing anyone on macroeconomic policy right now. Of course the leaders must take steps to ensure that the world’s poor do not become collateral damage to the financial crisis. The head of the UN is quite right to worry about a collapse of aid in the face of growing fiscal constraints".
Comments excerpted from speech by EU PRESIDENT

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

IT IS OFFICIAL, OBAMA PROMOTES SOCIALISM!!

 





There have been a lot of promises by the two candidates running to be OUR next President, but the one promise that has been hidden until now is Obama's promise to redistribute the wealth.
It is not a new concept for Obama that has been prompted by his campaign flip flops. It is a philosophical concept that Obama demonstrated publicly on a radio show while he was a member of the Illinois State Senate. It clearly shows that the front runner is a SOCIALIST!


Obama, in 2001 said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.

"A 7-year-old radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.
The interview -- conducted by Chicago Public Radio WBEZ-FM in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law lecturer at the University of Chicago -- delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when "dispossessed peoples" appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal!
In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a "redistributive change" in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren, also a Liberal. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.
"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical," Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.
"It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.
"And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way -- that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted. my comment==Thank God!
"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that," Obama said.
The 2001 interview evokes recent questioning by Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher, the Ohio man who asked Obama about his proposal to raise taxes on people making more than $250,000. Obama told Wurzelbacher he wants to hike taxes on the wealthy so that the government can spread the wealth. source: American Thinker

Of course Obama's campaign managers denied this 2001 statement had any thing to do with his economic plans, but only those who have already drank the "Kool Aide" that Obama has been feeding the public, could possibly not recognize that Obama is an advocate of Marxism, and his change will be a severe jerk to the left for this country!
And as would be expected, the Main Stream Media has used one of the favorite tactics of the press in this campaign; pretending that what Obama said isn't really what he meant and that what he meant is harmless fluff! Hopefully, Ameicans will not be so easily tricked! Why else do all Socialist Countrys around the world hope that Obama is OUR next President?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE CHOICE IS CLEAR, SOCIALISM OR FREE ENTERPISE?





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
This for the coming election has boiled down to one basic ingredient! Do the majority of Americans desire a Socialist government or do they want to maintain our Free Enterprise Capitalist system that is the foundation of OUR Republic?

All the hyperbole and promises to do one thing or another for special interest groups should not dissuade anyone from voting for or against the two candidates. Class hatred and racism has been a part of this dirty campaign, and it is notable for the fact that the Democrats have spent four times the amount of money for adds than the Republicans. More than both parties had spent in the past elections.

The real issue is do the majority, be it simple or a large number, of voters want this Country to be led by a Socialist? This is the question all voters must answer before they go into the voting booth!

The first really big lie Obama told was the evening of November 8, 2004 on the evening of his election to the U.S. State Senate, when he promised to serve out his full term beore attempting to camapign for a national ofice, because he was too inexperienced. Source:UTUBE
But two years after being elected to the senate he began his campaign for president!

Obama himself confessed that he is not ready to be president. It is amazing how George Soros was able to buy enough experience for Obama to run and defeat many far more qualified candidates, including his own VP. The question the American people will have to confront if Obama is elected is, “Who really owns Barack Obama?”


As Barack Obama was making his way from house-to-house in Toledo, Ohio, a young plumber, Joe Wurzelbacher, standing in front of his house, asked Sen. Obama a pretty straight forward question:
“Senator Obama, I’m going to have a business that makes $280,000 a year. You want to tax me. Why do you want to do that?”
And Obama gave him a pretty straight-forward, albeit chilling response:
“It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance at success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.”

“I think that when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.” There is so much wrong with not only this statement but this ideology it’s hard to know where to begin, but I’ll start with this: Senator Obama...it’s not your money to give!

Wealth redistribution is one of the core tenets of Socialism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Expressing a desire to “spread the wealth around,” indicates that Sen. Obama favors the Socialist dogma of income or wealth redistribution. This means he favors social/economic engineering; where those who possess less are afforded more at the demise of those who dedicated themselves to earning more.

Milton Friedman, the American Nobel Laureate economist, famously and successfully argued that this code of belief, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," turns ability into a liability, and need into an asset. It rewards those who simply exist and punishes those that produce, with all due respect to Mr. Obama’s declaration that he doesn’t want to “penalize” that Ohio plumber.
source: NEW MEDIA JOURNAL

To quote Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Jr -- Barack Obama's confidant and close friend for over twenty years -- about the Senator,
"Obama's a politician and he says what he has to say as a politician."
I hope Americans do not fall for the main theme of the Obama/Biden campaign " George Bush, George Bush, George Bush, George Bush. Such a classic diversion. Feed on the people’s anger towards Bush, Blind their hearts and minds, prevent them from paying attention to Barack Obama’s complete inability to lead this country!

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA AND SOCIALISM GO HAND IN HAND

Monday, October 13, 2008





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

October 14, 2008 Why Obama's socialism matters source:  Bookworm
For conservatives opposed to an Obama presidency, the last few days have brought the wonder of the smoking gun: Obama really was a socialist. Combine that hidden paper trail with his Ayers affiliation, and it's reasonable to believe that Obama still holds these socialist political views.

Conservatives' excitement at finally having found the real socialist hiding inside that empty suit is tempered by one thing -- outside of conservative circles, nobody really seems to care. The media, of course, is very aggressive about not caring, but the malaise seems to affect ordinary Americans as well.

In order to stir ordinary Americans to the sense of outrage those of us in the blogosphere feel, we need to remind them that socialism is not simply a more liberal version of ordinary American politics. It is, instead, its own animal, and a very feral, dangerous animal indeed.

It helps to begin by understanding what socialism is not. It isn't Liberalism and it isn't mere Leftism. The terms Liberal and Conservative date back to Victorian England, when Liberals were pushing vast social reforms, such as the end of child labor, while Conservatives were all for maintaining a deeply hierarchical status quo. Considering that modern "liberals" are seeking a return to 20th Century socialism, those phrases too scarcely seem like apt descriptors.

The original Utopians did not yet look to the state for help establishing a world of perfect equality. Instead, they relied on each enlightened individuals moral sense, and they set up myriad high-minded communes to achieve this end. All of them failed. It took Marx and Engels to carry socialism to the next level, in which they envisioned the complete overthrow of all governments, with the workers of the world uniting so that all contributed to a single socialist government, which in turn would give back to them on an as needed basis.

Assuming that you're not big on individualism and exceptionalism, this might be an attractive doctrine as a way to destroy want and exploitation, except for one thing: It does not take into account the fact that the state has no conscience.

Once you vest all power in the state, history demonstrates that the state, although technically composed of individuals, in fact takes on a life of its own, with the operating bureaucracy driving it to ever greater extremes of control. Additionally, history demonstrates that, if the wrong person becomes all-powerful in the state, the absence of individualism means that the state becomes a juggernaut, completely in thrall to a psychopath's ideas.

Herewith some examples:
First, consider Nazi Germany because so many people forget that it was a socialist dictatorship. Or perhaps they're ignorant of the fact that the Nazi's official and frequently forgotten name was the National Socialist German Worker's Party. In other words, while most people consider the Nazi party to be a totalitarian ideology arising from the right, it was, in fact, a totalitarian party arising from the left.
Practically within minutes of the Nazi takeover of the German government, individuals were subordinated to the state.

Even industries that remained privately owned (and there were many, as opponents of the Nazis = socialist theory like to point out), were allowed to do so only if their owners bent their efforts to the benefit of the state. Show a hint of individualism, and an unwillingness to cooperate, and you'd swiftly find yourself in Dachau, with a government operative sitting in that executive chair you once owned.

Then there's another example: the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. From its inception, the Soviet state brutalized people, whether it was the upper echelon party purges or the mass slaughter of the kulaks -- all in the name of collectivism and the protection of the state envisioned by Lenin and Stalin.

Most estimates are that, in the years leading up to WWII, the Soviet socialist state killed between 30 and 60 million of its own citizens. Not all of the victims died, or at least they didn't die instantly. Those who didn't receive a swift bullet to the head might starve to death on collective farms or join the millions who ended up as slave laborers in the gulags, with most of the latter incarcerated for thought crimes against the state.

Another example is the People's Republic of China, another socialist state. One sees the same pattern as in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia: individuals were instantly subordinated to the needs of the state and, as the state's needs became ever more grandiose, more and more people had to die. Current estimates are that Mao's "visionary" Great Leap Forward resulted in the deaths of up to 100 million people. The people died from starvation, or were tortured to death, or just outright murdered because of thought crimes. The same pattern, of course, daily plays out on a smaller scale in socialist North Korea.

Those are examples of hard socialism. Soft socialism is better, but it certainly isn't the American ideal. Britain springs to mind as the perfect example of soft socialism. Britain's socialist medicine is a disaster, with practically daily stories about people being denied treatment or receiving minimal treatment.

Invariably, the denials arise because the State's needs trump the individual's: Either the treatment is generally deemed too costly (and there are no market forces at work) or the patients are deemed unworthy of care, especially if they're old.
British socialism has other problems, aside from the dead left behind in her hospital wards. As did Germany, Russia, and China (and as would Obama), socialist Britain took guns away (at least in London), with the evitable result that violent crime against innocent people skyrocketed.

The British socialist bureaucracy also controls people's lives at a level currently incomprehensible to Americans, who can't appreciate a state that is constantly looking out for its own good. In Britain, government protects thieves right's against property owner's, has it's public utilities urge children to report their parents for "green" crimes; tries to criminalize people taking pictures of their own children in public places; destroys perfectly good food that does not meet obsessive compulsive bureaucratic standards; and increasingly stifles free speech. (Impressively, all of the preceding examples are from just the last six months in England.)

Both history and current events demonstrate that the socialist reality is always bad for the individual, and this is true whether one is looking at the painfully brutal socialism of the Nazis or the Soviets or the Chinese, with its wholesale slaughters, or at the soft socialism of England, in which people's lives are ever more tightly circumscribed, and the state incrementally destroys individual freedom. And that is why Obama's socialism is so scary!

Regardless of Obama’s presumed good intentions, socialism always brings a society to a bad ending. Americans who live in our free society that allows people to think what they will, do what they want, and succeed if they can, will not willingly hand themselves over to the socialist ideology.

They must therefore be reminded, again and again and again, that socialism is not just another political party; it’s the death knell to freedom. So remember, while McCain wants to change DC, Obama wants to change America! source: The American Thinker

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE CREEPING PYTHON OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA

Thursday, October 09, 2008





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

An administration official, who spoke late Tuesday on condition of anonymity because no decision has been made, said the $700 billion rescue package passed by Congress last week allows the Treasury Department to inject fresh capital into financial institutions and get ownership shares in return.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told reporters that Treasury was moving quickly to implement the $700 billion rescue effort and he specifically mentioned reviewing ways to bolster the capital of banks.

“We will use all the tools we’ve been given to maximum effectiveness, including strengthening the capitalization of financial institutions of every size,” Paulson said at a Wednesday news conference.

His statements came on the heels of Britain’s move to pour cash into troubled banks in exchange for stakes in them — a partial nationalization.

Asked whether he would try something like the British plan, Paulson said: “We have a broad range of authorities and tools. ... We’ve emphasized the purchase of liquid assets, but we have a broad range of authorities. And I’m confident we have the authorities we need to work with going forward.”SOURCE:AP NEWS

"Corporations employ accounting practices promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) that established Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and government agencies have accounting practices that don't come close to, and never did, the honesty of private accounting practices. Accounting fraud and deception are the dominant features of government agencies. If a private business kept and cooked the books, like government agencies do,(example is the non-existent Social Security Trust Fund) the top executives would go to jail. Shouldn't the accounting standards businesses have to meet be applied to Washington? My answer is yes and if a congressman says no, I'd like for him to tell us why?" SOURCE; WALTER WILLIAMS

The dictionary describes Socialism thus:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

WE have entered the first stage of socialism with he so called "bail-out", and we are moving even deeper into the beginning of item two above, by the Federal government announcing that IT will put money into banks.
Since the government makes no money! What this announcement means, is they will make more worthless paper available, and the tax payers will have to pay for it in higher taxes. All this is nothing more than taking control of the banking system, with incumbent regulations and demands that ran the Freddie and Fannie into the ground!

In the 1930's Roosevelt called in all the privately held gold and closed the banks, and now we have a sitting President who is reacting to the fear tactics and politics of the moment to push the USA further down the road to Socialism!

An example of the road map we are following is the small country of Iceland, where people and corporations did the same thing as Americans. Over extended their liabilities via cheap loans, and the consequences are so dire that the government took complete control, as this following excerpt indicates.


People go bankrupt all the time. Companies do, too. But countries?

The global financial crisis has laid waste to some major banks and other financial institutions in the United States and Europe, but Iceland may be the first country to face the prospect of going bust along with them.

After a decade-long binge in which Iceland's banks, and some of its citizens, expanded beyond their means, the bill has come due. While the full effects of the potential crash have not hit yet, some Icelanders like Bubbi Morthens are already feeling the pain.

"There is a lot of fear in society and there are people who are losing everything," Morthens said Wednesday after singing at an impromptu midday concert in central Reykjavik intended to lift people's spirits.

Morthens is a former fish industry worker turned rock singer who is now known as the Elvis of Iceland. Like many of his compatriots, he did well when Iceland was riding high, accumulating considerable wealth.
Then, the financial crisis gripping his country intensified last month. The government seized control of Iceland's third-largest bank. Morthens said he lost his life savings, which he had invested mostly in the bank's stock.

Government attempts to get ahead of the problems cascading through its financial system have not restored confidence. In just 24 hours, for instance, it abandoned an effort to peg its currency to a basket of others.

And on Thursday, the government seized Kaupthing Bank, the country's largest lender, effectively completing the nationalization of the banking system.

Meanwhile the prime minister,Mr. Haarde, was drawing some practical conclusions, as Fitch Ratings downgraded the country's debt and Iceland awaited a possible loan from Russia! source :Reuters News

It is not unusual to learn of government intrusion into private industry in Europe and Great Britain. Most of the Countries in the EU and Britain have or have had Socialist governments for years. The situation at this time, in England, is a radical shift to the left for the present government.
The British government's plan to inject capital into its ailing banks has been embraced by a European continent with a long tradition of encouraging a state role in the economy. And it is rapidly being seen here as an improvement - philosophical as well as functional - over America's $700 billion fund to purchase defunct mortgage assets from troubled financial institutions.In announcing his take over, Prime Minister Gordon Brown had this to say.
"Brown pointed out that time for buying toxic assets had passed - a not so subtle dig at the plan sponsored by the U.S. Treasury secretary, Henry Paulson Jr. Many analysts agree that the U.S. government will have to move beyond its own $700 billion fund to ultimately stabilize the housing market and recapitalize American banks". source: International Herald Tribune

There is plenty of blame for this financial crisis to go around. Congress with the leadership of Senator Dodd and Congressman Frank over looked or ignored the facts that government mandates on Banking and Mortgage companies to accomplish ideological,and Social/welfare aims were bad business!
But also some blame has to be laid at the feet of the Economic "guru" Greenspan. It was he that promoted and supported HEDGE Funds that helped make billionaires like George Sorros richer, and when they were adversely affected by the housing slow down, they were the tipping point for the "house of cards" that is our Economy!

Greenspan's credentials and confidence reinforced his reputation — helping him to persuade Congress to repeal Depression-era laws that separated commercial and investment banking in order to reduce overall risk in the financial system.

"He had a way of speaking that made you think he knew exactly what he was talking about at all times," said Senator Tom Harkin, a Democrat from Iowa. "He was able to say things in a way that made people not want to question him on anything, like he knew it all. He was the Oracle, and who were you to question him?"

In 2000, Harkin asked what might happen if Congress weakened the CFTC's authority.

"If you have this exclusion and something unforeseen happens, who does something about it?" he asked Greenspan in a hearing.

Greenspan said that Wall Street could be trusted. "There is a very fundamental trade-off of what type of economy you wish to have," he said. "You can have huge amounts of regulation and I will guarantee nothing will go wrong, but nothing will go right either," he said. It would seem that the "worm has turned"!



Brown's political salvo could well serve as a model across Europe, as well as other emerging economies where the idea of the state taking supervisory stakes in strategic economic entities is an accepted one. Already, governments in France and Italy have said they would consider buying stakes in their banks if it would improve their financial conditions.


Britain's decision to effectively nationalize any bank that accepts public funds to rebuild its shrunken capital base rolls back more than 20 years of accepted political and economic thought. That view held that financial institutions, charged with the responsibility of protecting a nation's savings, should do so with minimal supervision and aid from the government.

Look for the USA banks to follow the path of the Iceland and Banks in England toward more decimation of the Constitutional rights of Americans, in the ruse of saving US from financial disaster.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE CREEPING PYTHON OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA

Thursday, October 09, 2008




Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

An administration official, who spoke late Tuesday on condition of anonymity because no decision has been made, said the $700 billion rescue package passed by Congress last week allows the Treasury Department to inject fresh capital into financial institutions and get ownership shares in return.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told reporters that Treasury was moving quickly to implement the $700 billion rescue effort and he specifically mentioned reviewing ways to bolster the capital of banks.

“We will use all the tools we’ve been given to maximum effectiveness, including strengthening the capitalization of financial institutions of every size,” Paulson said at a Wednesday news conference.

His statements came on the heels of Britain’s move to pour cash into troubled banks in exchange for stakes in them — a partial nationalization.

Asked whether he would try something like the British plan, Paulson said: “We have a broad range of authorities and tools. ... We’ve emphasized the purchase of liquid assets, but we have a broad range of authorities. And I’m confident we have the authorities we need to work with going forward.”SOURCE:AP NEWS

"Corporations employ accounting practices promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) that established Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and government agencies have accounting practices that don't come close to, and never did, the honesty of private accounting practices. Accounting fraud and deception are the dominant features of government agencies. If a private business kept and cooked the books, like government agencies do,(example is the non-existent Social Security Trust Fund) the top executives would go to jail. Shouldn't the accounting standards businesses have to meet be applied to Washington? My answer is yes and if a congressman says no, I'd like for him to tell us why?" SOURCE; WALTER WILLIAMS

The dictionary describes Socialism thus:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

WE have entered the first stage of socialism with he so called "bail-out", and we are moving even deeper into the beginning of item two above, by the Federal government announcing that IT will put money into banks.
Since the government makes no money! What this announcement means, is they will make more worthless paper available, and the tax payers will have to pay for it in higher taxes. All this is nothing more than taking control of the banking system, with incumbent regulations and demands that ran the Freddie and Fannie into the ground!

In the 1930's Roosevelt called in all the privately held gold and closed the banks, and now we have a sitting President who is reacting to the fear tactics and politics of the moment to push the USA further down the road to Socialism!

An example of the road map we are following is the small country of Iceland, where people and corporations did the same thing as Americans. Over extended their liabilities via cheap loans, and the consequences are so dire that the government took complete control, as this following excerpt indicates.


People go bankrupt all the time. Companies do, too. But countries?

The global financial crisis has laid waste to some major banks and other financial institutions in the United States and Europe, but Iceland may be the first country to face the prospect of going bust along with them.

After a decade-long binge in which Iceland's banks, and some of its citizens, expanded beyond their means, the bill has come due. While the full effects of the potential crash have not hit yet, some Icelanders like Bubbi Morthens are already feeling the pain.

"There is a lot of fear in society and there are people who are losing everything," Morthens said Wednesday after singing at an impromptu midday concert in central Reykjavik intended to lift people's spirits.

Morthens is a former fish industry worker turned rock singer who is now known as the Elvis of Iceland. Like many of his compatriots, he did well when Iceland was riding high, accumulating considerable wealth.
Then, the financial crisis gripping his country intensified last month. The government seized control of Iceland's third-largest bank. Morthens said he lost his life savings, which he had invested mostly in the bank's stock.

Government attempts to get ahead of the problems cascading through its financial system have not restored confidence. In just 24 hours, for instance, it abandoned an effort to peg its currency to a basket of others.

And on Thursday, the government seized Kaupthing Bank, the country's largest lender, effectively completing the nationalization of the banking system.

Meanwhile the prime minister,Mr. Haarde, was drawing some practical conclusions, as Fitch Ratings downgraded the country's debt and Iceland awaited a possible loan from Russia! source :Reuters News

It is not unusual to learn of government intrusion into private industry in Europe and Great Britain. Most of the Countries in the EU and Britain have or have had Socialist governments for years. The situation at this time, in England, is a radical shift to the left for the present government.
The British government's plan to inject capital into its ailing banks has been embraced by a European continent with a long tradition of encouraging a state role in the economy. And it is rapidly being seen here as an improvement - philosophical as well as functional - over America's $700 billion fund to purchase defunct mortgage assets from troubled financial institutions.In announcing his take over, Prime Minister Gordon Brown had this to say.
"Brown pointed out that time for buying toxic assets had passed - a not so subtle dig at the plan sponsored by the U.S. Treasury secretary, Henry Paulson Jr. Many analysts agree that the U.S. government will have to move beyond its own $700 billion fund to ultimately stabilize the housing market and recapitalize American banks". source: International Herald Tribune

There is plenty of blame for this financial crisis to go around. Congress with the leadership of Senator Dodd and Congressman Frank over looked or ignored the facts that government mandates on Banking and Mortgage companies to accomplish ideological,and Social/welfare aims were bad business!
But also some blame has to be laid at the feet of the Economic "guru" Greenspan. It was he that promoted and supported HEDGE Funds that helped make billionaires like George Sorros richer, and when they were adversely affected by the housing slow down, they were the tipping point for the "house of cards" that is our Economy!

Greenspan's credentials and confidence reinforced his reputation — helping him to persuade Congress to repeal Depression-era laws that separated commercial and investment banking in order to reduce overall risk in the financial system.

"He had a way of speaking that made you think he knew exactly what he was talking about at all times," said Senator Tom Harkin, a Democrat from Iowa. "He was able to say things in a way that made people not want to question him on anything, like he knew it all. He was the Oracle, and who were you to question him?"

In 2000, Harkin asked what might happen if Congress weakened the CFTC's authority.

"If you have this exclusion and something unforeseen happens, who does something about it?" he asked Greenspan in a hearing.

Greenspan said that Wall Street could be trusted. "There is a very fundamental trade-off of what type of economy you wish to have," he said. "You can have huge amounts of regulation and I will guarantee nothing will go wrong, but nothing will go right either," he said. It would seem that the "worm has turned"!



Brown's political salvo could well serve as a model across Europe, as well as other emerging economies where the idea of the state taking supervisory stakes in strategic economic entities is an accepted one. Already, governments in France and Italy have said they would consider buying stakes in their banks if it would improve their financial conditions.


Britain's decision to effectively nationalize any bank that accepts public funds to rebuild its shrunken capital base rolls back more than 20 years of accepted political and economic thought. That view held that financial institutions, charged with the responsibility of protecting a nation's savings, should do so with minimal supervision and aid from the government.

Look for the USA banks to follow the path of the Iceland and Banks in England toward more decimation of the Constitutional rights of Americans, in the ruse of saving US from financial disaster.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DEMS. SEND THE WRONG MESSAGE

Thursday, August 28, 2008





The Democrats on the platform are trying to sell another lie to the American people.
They say it is time for a change, because the Country is going the "wrong Way"!

What they fail to remind us is that they are responsible for the USA going in the wrong way. From a predominantly Judeo-Christian country with morals and principles, the Democrats have consistently led us down the path to a country that is Secular, humanistic and Godless! They also show there divisive principals in the way they arranged the "forums" in Denver. They separated group discussions by special interest. Gay-Lesbian, Hispanic, Native American, women's forum and many others. This only emphasizes the ploy of the Democrats to use victimization and hatred as tolls for the election campaign.

The party that has as it's priorities abortion rights, reproductive freedom and full support for Roe-Wade, is responsible for the 80% of Americans that think the country is going the wrong way!Their negative opinion of Congress is even greater!!

The RINOS are complicit in this degradation of a once proud and free Republic, but the Congressional Democrats and the "hard Core" left members of the Supreme Court are the ones who have taken us to a country that kills over a million unborn and partially born babies each year, allows people to burn our symbol of freedom, the flag, and allows rampant pornography to be displayed in all public places under the false guise of "free speech"!

There is a call to "change" by the Obama minions. But the change they offer is Bills like "Employees Free Choice Act", which if passed will take away the secret ballot in all Union organizing votes. Increased taxes,spending programs with the stink of Socialism, and more inflation.

Thanks to the profligate spending of the Congress over the last 20 years we have experienced inflation to the point where it now takes $185.99 to purchase the same goods as could be bought in 1988 for $100.00. source: US Department of Commerce web site.

Democrats shout that unemployment is rampant! It is a lie! There are some cities and states where the unemployment is very high. Most are in the rust belt, where Union demands on employers have driven the jobs out of the Country. Here in my home town of Jacksonville, Florida, the unemployment 4.4%. The national unemployment rate is currently 5.7%. Too high, but nothing compared with the Socialist governed EU countries of Germany with 7.3%, France with 7.8% and Spain with 9.1% unemployment!

When they talk of unemployment, the Deamoncrats seldom mention the porous borders that have allowed over 20 million illegals to come into the unemployment statistics. They do not talk about their consistent failure to address the stopping of this "tidal wave", for fear of offending their Hispanic supporters!

Presidential nominee Barrack Obama is nothing less than a re-worked 60's radical with ties to a corrupt Chicago political history. He reads eloquently when using a teleprompter, as he will do tonight. But when asked unscripted questions. He stammers for answers, for fear he will expose his true radical roots and feelings.
I believe that is why he refuse to debate McCain in other than the three debates scheduled, for which you can expect the Lame Stream Media moderators will throw "powder puff" question at him!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CONGRESSWOMAN WATERS THREATENS OIL EXECUTIVE

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

OPEN MOUTH AND PUT FOOT IN IT!




AS anyone who has the rudimentary knowledge of economics understands that business and government all require money to operate. Without a source of money the business and a government will go bankrupt. s evidence of this fact we can look at the implosion of the once powerful Soviet Union. Try to keep up with the "Star Wars" arms race that President Reagan began was the undoing of a powerful and threatening regime.




Now comes a Congresswoman from California with a degree in Sociology. who with a slip of a tongue during a Congressional hearing indicated her desire to Nationalize the Oil Industry.




The following is an excerpt from an article written by Lance Thompson for The New Media Journal that illustrates the Leftist members of Congress are willing to "cut their nose off despite their face"!




"Sensing another opportunity to posture and pretend they are relevant to national events, members of congressional committees in May called oil company executives to hearings about high oil company profits and even higher gas prices. This would all have been quite forgettable but for Congresswoman Maxine Waters’ revealing slip of the tongue that laid bare the liberal agenda for private industry–nationalize it and replace it with government bureaucracy.

During the hearings in the House, Shell Oil Company president John Hofmeister charged that Congress bore some responsibility for high oil prices because of the severe limitations on exploration and drilling in Alaska and along the coasts. He further stated that prices were likely to rise further if these restrictions weren’t lifted. Congresswoman Maxine Waters answered with an angry, and barely controlled, threat that the government would retaliate for higher prices by taking over the oil companies".




It is not surprising that Ms.Waters made a threat to the Shell Oil executive, she has had similar outrageous incidents, such as dedicating the Impeachment Center in Los Angles. And it is notable that she like her fellow traveler Jesse Jackson, are exemplary as people who can intimidate and are extortionists in their operations.




Never the less, Ms. Walters should think before she puts her foot in her mouth. Free enterprise is the grease that runs the wheels of our government. The Oil Industry contributes billions of dollars in taxes each year to grease the government machine we call Congress, and the millions who work within it!


Exxon's tax payment in 2007 of $30 billion (that's $30,000,000,000) is a record, exceeding the $28 billion it paid last year.
By the way, Exxon pays taxes at a rate of 41% on its taxable income!
[Update: The $40.6 billion and $39.5 billion figures are after-tax profits. For 2006, Exxon's EBT (earnings before tax) was $67.4 billion, it paid $27.9 billion in taxes (41.4% tax rate), and its NIAT (net income after tax), or profit, was $39.5 billion.] .AND THIS IS JUST ONE OIL COMPANY!


In other words, just one corporation (Exxon Mobil) pays as much in taxes ($27 billion) annually as the entire bottom 50% of individual taxpayers, which is 65,000,000 people! Further, the tax rate for the bottom 50% is only 3% of adjusted gross income ($27.4 billion / $922 billion), and the tax rate for Exxon was 41% in 2006 ($67.4 billion in taxable income, $27.




Maxine Waters and her leftist cohorts better think twice about destroying "the chicken that lays the eggs"!

Nationalizing private industry has a long track record in communist countries, and the petroleum industry is a common target. Dictators such as Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin, and Saddam Hussein have all nationalized their energy industries and funneled the profits to themselves. Waters has always occupied the extreme left of her party, and evidently the ways of totalitarian regimes appeal to her.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »