|
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism."
"But under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every
fragment of the socialist program,
until one day America
will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it
happened."
Socialist presidential candidate
Norman Thomas
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Socialism |
Nancy Morgan
says, when a word comes too close to actually identifying an
inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action. The
offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby
signifying that polite society will no longer accept it. You’ve
heard of the "N" word, the "B" word (think Hillary) and now comes the
"S" word.
By its abbreviation, the "S" word, formerly
known as socialism, infers a negative connotation. A negative
connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that
socialism
In a nutshell, socialism is
an economic system where property is held in common, not individually,
and its ideal is a centrally directed economy. Socialism entails
the substitution of group decision making for individual choice.
In this case, the "group" making the decisions are the 34 (and counting)
unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.
The origins
of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle. Aristotle
believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others
were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal
gain (capitalism) must be bad.
This theory of Aristotle’s is the
basic premise of the Obama administration. By claiming the "moral
high ground" of the "greater good" Obama and his minions have free reign
to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of
years of tradition it represents.
Under the guise of altruism and
the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism.
The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades. The
capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the
freest and most productive country in the world. But, according to
the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, "profit,"
and every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on
the backs of less fortunate. Right?
Obama and the secular
progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on
being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus
superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold
traditional values (conservatives). They believe their duty is to
offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or
traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.
The fly in
Obama’s ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isn’t very
good at creating wealth. Only individuals do that. But hey,
socialism is "ethically superior" and that’s what counts. Right?
Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract
ideas like equality and justice. Millions of Americans bought into
his spiel. Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery
tickets. Against all reason, they were led to believe that the
government can provide them a free lunch. And there will be no
cost to them. And best of all, these moochers can also claim the
moral high ground. After all, they are victims of rich
capitalists. And that’s not fair! And its not their fault
that they haven’t won life’s lottery.
The problem with their
premise can be reduced to two words -- free will. God gave us free
will -- the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make.
Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a
central government.
Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief.
Whew! Now, instead of losers, they’re much valued victims.
And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of
implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of
their bad choices. But best of all, socialism allows life’s losers
the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of
another man’s labor.
This is socialism. This is what Obama
wants America to be. But students of history insist on asking the
question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and
punishes success? Unfortunately, America will get an answer to
that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country
into his "new and improved" idea of a socialist utopia. |
| A Lesson On Socialism |
An economics professor said he had never
failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class.
The class had insisted that socialism worked -- and that no one would be
poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer for all, for society.
The professor then said OK, we will have an experiment in this class on
socialism.
He said that all grades would be averaged and everyone
would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would
receive an A. After the first test the grades were averaged and
everyone was given a B. The students who studied hard were upset,
and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second
test rolled around, the students who hadn’t studied much for the first
test had studied even less, and the ones who studied hard weren’t
motivated to study hard again, and they decided they wanted a free ride
too; so they studied little. The second Test average was a D!
No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was
an F.
The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name
calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone
else. All failed -- and the professor told them that the socialism
they wanted would ultimately fail, as they had, because the reward of
success normally goes to those that work harder, but when government
takes the reward away; few will try so no one will succeed. |
|
Endorsed By The New Party |
In 1995, Obama, as part of his first run for the
Illinois State Senate, began seeking the endorsement of the
New Party.
The New Party's objective was to push forth the socialist principles of
the
Democratic
Socialists of America (DSA), that
claimed Obama as a member, by focusing on winnable elections at a
local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards.
Obama had been running in a four way primary against his former boss,
Senator
Alice Palmer, an executive board member of the
U.S. Peace Council, which the FBI identified as a communist front
group, and an affiliate of the World Peace Council, a Soviet front
group.
The New Party required candidates who received the endorsement sign a
pledge of support for the party. Obama signed that pledge,
choosing to support a party that was, in effect, a front group for
communists. The July issue of the New Ground noted that 15% of the
New Party consisted of
DSA members and a good number of members of the
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a democratic
socialist group in the United States which originated in 1991 as the
Committees of Correspondence, a moderate, dissenting wing of the
Communist Party USA.
When allegations surfaced early this summer of the New Party's
endorsement of Obama, the Obama campaign along with the remnants of the
New Party and Democratic Socialists of America claimed that Obama was
never a member of either organization. The DSA and New Party then
systematically attempted to cover up any ties between Obama and the
Socialist Organizations. However, it now appears that Barack Obama was
indeed a certified and acknowledged member of the DSA's New Party.
On Tuesday, John Hinderaker of the PowerLine blog
discovered a web page that had been scrubbed from the New Party's
website. The web page which was published in October 1996, was an
internet newsletter update on that years congressional races.
Although the web page was deleted from the New Party's website, the
non-profit Internet Archive Organization had archived the page.
So the New Party claimed Obama as a member as of 1996. Progressive
Populist magazine agreed in this
editorial:
New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including
an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the
county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's
County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress,
as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory.
New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate
seat from Chicago.
Barack Obama chose to affiliate himself with this band of
quasi-communists. As the nation moves closer to the election,
it is clear that Obama chose to affiliate with assorted anti-American
radicals. Machiavelli once noted that we can know a leader by the
people he surrounds himself with. What does it say about Barack
Obama, that he chooses to surround himself with people committed to
overthrowing the United States and capitalism?
|
|
The Socialist New Party |
During his run
for the Illinois state senate seat, Obama received the endorsement of
the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Obama was an associate of the Chicago branch of
the DSA, and a member of the "New Party," and signed documents seeking their
support.
Obama actively
sought and received the stamp of approval of a Marxist third party
that operated briefly in Chicago between 1992 and 1998. The group
was called the "New Party" and was started in 1992 by Daniel Cantor (a
former staffer for Jesse Jackson’s 1988 presidential campaign) and Joel
Rogers (a sociology and law professor at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison).
The New Party was a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to
endorse and elect leftist public officials -- most often Democrats.
The New Party’s short-term objective was to move the Democratic Party
leftward, thereby setting the stage for the eventual rise of new Marxist
third party.
Most New Party members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America
(Obama was an associate of the Chicago branch), and the militant
organization ACORN. The party’s Chicago chapter also included a
large contingent from the Committees of Correspondence, a Marxist
coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and Communist Party USA
members. |
|
Endorsed By The Democratic Socialists Of America |
In 1996, Obama received the endorsement of the
Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for the Illinois state senate
seat. Obama is an associate of the Chicago branch of the DSA.
Here is a video
of Obama enthusiastically campaigning for openly socialist Senator
Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sanders, who won his seat in 2006,
called Obama "one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,"
even though Obama had only been in the body for less than two years.
On
November 1st,
2007, Obama made this startling comment, "We've got to make
sure that people who have more money help the people who have less
money."
His "solutions"
will sound familiar to those who listened to Lyndon Johnson's poverty
gurus and their fellow travelers under Jimmy Carter who promised massive
government assistance:
"When I'm President, I will raise the minimum wage and make it a
living wage by making sure that it rises every time the cost of living
does. I'll start letting our unions do what they do best again --
organize our workers and lift up our middle-class. And I'll finally make
sure every American has affordable health care that stays with you no
matter what happens by passing my plan to provide universal coverage and
cut the cost of health care by up to $2500 per family."
"The philosophy behind the project is simple -- if poverty is a disease
that infects an entire community in the form of unemployment and
violence; failing schools and broken homes, then we can't just treat
those symptoms in isolation. We have to heal that entire community. And
we have to focus on what actually works."
|
| Stealth Socialism |
Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about
something called "economic
justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code --
socialist code.
During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term
at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to
help build an America where economic justice is being served," he said
at the group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.
And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he
asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never
spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His
audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.
It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're
launching this special educational series.
"Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and
redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism
for socialism.
He's disguising the wealth transfers as "investments" -- "to make
America more competitive," he says, or "that give us a fighting chance,"
whatever that means.
Among his proposed "investments":
• "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.
• "Free" college tuition.
• "Universal national service" (a la Havana).
• "Free" job training (even for criminals).
• "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income
levels).
• "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.
• More subsidized public housing.
• A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."
• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the
Third World, first and foremost Africa.
• "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions
made by "low- and moderate-income families").
His new New Deal also guarantees a "living wage," with a $10 minimum
wage indexed to inflation; and "fair trade" and "fair labor practices,"
with breaks for "patriot employers" who cow-tow to unions, and sticks
for "nonpatriot" companies that don't.
That's just for starters -- first-term stuff.
Read more here . . . |
| "Change" |
Most Americans revile socialism, yet Obama's poll
numbers remain competitive. One explanation: He's a longtime
disciple of a man whose mission was to teach radicals to disguise their
ideology.
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee's choice of the word
"change" as his campaign's central slogan is not the product of
focus-group studies, or the brainstorming sessions of his political
consultants.
One of Obama's main inspirations was a man dedicated to revolutionary
change that he was convinced "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."
Saul Alinsky had no time for liberalism or liberals, declaring that "a
liberal is (someone) who puts his foot down firmly on thin air."
He wanted nothing less than transformational radicalism. "America
was begun by its radicals," he wrote. "America was built by its
radicals. The hope and future of America lies with its radicals."
And so, "This is the job for today's radical -- to fan the embers of
hopelessness into a flame to fight. To say, '. . . let us change
it together!' "
Obama called his years as an Alinskyesque community organizer in Chicago
"the best education I ever had."
Alinsky believed in sacrificing ethics and morals for the great cause.
"Ethical standards must be elastic to stretch with the times," Alinsky
wrote in his last book, "Rules for Radicals," adding that "all values
are relative in a world of political relativity."
Published a year before Alinsky's death in 1972, "Rules for Radicals"
includes a dedication in which he gives "an over-the-shoulder
acknowledgment to the very first radical . . . who rebelled against the
establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own
kingdom -- Lucifer."
More . . . |
| "Change" -- A Metaphor For
Socialism |
Following his election, Obama set up a new
website, Change.gov, that featured his
socialist policy proposals on everything from tax, the war, gun control,
education and health care, seemingly cut and past from his campaign
website, BarackObama.com.
Over the weekend, the webpage disappeared.
The list was replaced by a single paragraph committing Obama and
Vice-President-Elect Joe Biden to "...a plan to revive the economy, to
fix our health care, education, and social security systems, to define a
clear path to energy independence, to end the war in Iraq responsibly
and finish our mission in Afghanistan, and to work with our allies to
prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, among many other domestic
and foreign policy objectives".
Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro said: "We are currently retooling the web
site."
Well, nothing gets deleted from the web, and
here is the page. Lots of
reparations by another name, lots of free money, lots of "inner city"
and "urban" programs, no racial profiling and bring back the gun bans.
The federal government spent trillions on Lyndon Johnson's "The Great
Society" -- to no avail. Now, Obama plans on bringing us "The
Great Society -- Part Deux," which is nothing more than the biggest
redistribution of wealth in the nations' history.
Mo' money -- that's what this woman heard --
"I won't have to worry about
putting gas in my car. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage.
You know, if I help him, he's gonna help me." (video) |
| Change For The Greater Good |
ABC's George Stephanopoulos
wrote
on his blog:
"I asked the president-elect, 'At the end of the
day, are you really talking about over the course of your campaign some
kind of grand bargain? That you have tax reform, healthcare
reform, entitlement reform including Social Security
and Medicare, where everybody in the country is going to have to
sacrifice something, accept change for the greater good?'
"'Yes,' Obama said. |
| Nationalizing America's Industries |
After the election, when Barack Obama talked about
realigning the American automobile industry he was quick to offer a
caution, lest he sound more like the incoming leader of France, or
perhaps Japan. He wants to nationalizing America's industries.
"We don't want government to run companies," Obama told Tom Brokaw on
"Meet the Press." "Generally, government historically hasn't done that
very well."
But, what Obama went on to describe was a long-term government
bailout that would be conditioned on government oversight. It
could mean that the government would mandate, or at least heavily
influence, what kind of cars companies make, what mileage and
environmental standards they must meet and what large investments they
are permitted to make -- to recreate an industry that Obama said
"actually works, that actually functions."
It all sounds perilously close to a word that no one in Obama's camp
wants to be caught uttering: nationalization. |
|
Obama, Officials, Democrats Support Global Socialism |
|
But at a "Global
Progress Conference" in October, Barack
Obama's pollster, Joel Benenson, acknowledged that socialized medicine
in the U.S. faces a serious obstacle. He said that while Europeans
are receptive to the expansion of government in their lives, in America
there is an anti-government culture which prevents people from
"expecting the State to solve their problems."
"This explains why Obama will find it
difficult to implement the social coverage plans such as a broader
health service,"
Benenson reportedly said.
The conference was held in Madrid,
Spain under the patronage of Spain's socialist Prime Minister José Luis
Rodríguez Zapatero, whose pro-homosexual and pro-abortion policies have
led to
street protests by thousands of
supporters of traditional values. Zapatero is also under fire for
a jobless rate of nearly 18 percent.
Former Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean said on
December 8 that "cooperation" between European socialists and the
Democratic Party has "intensified significantly" over the last several
years and involves "regular contact" at "Congress, Senate, party and
foundation levels." He added that "efforts have been remarkable
from both sides."
Dean's comments came in
a video address
in which he joked that his failure to personally attend the Party of
European Socialists (PES) convention, which was advertised as a "carbon
neutral congress," was actually a smart move because he avoided flying
and contributing to global warming. "We've saved a lot of carbon,"
Dean said.
In his comments, Dean called for a
"long-term global vision" for the transformation of the global economy
and mentioned that disgraced Democratic President Bill Clinton had
previously spoken at a meeting of the PES-sponsored Global Progressive
Forum. The
April 2-3 Global Progressive Forum
also featured Robert Borosage of the left-wing group that calls itself
the Campaign for America's Future.
The
Global Progressive Forum is
also sponsored by the Socialist International, whose U.S. affiliate, the
Democratic Socialists of America, includes long-time backers of Barack
Obama.
"Free-market globalization alone cannot achieve social
justice," Dean told the PES convention. "What the world needs is a
global New Deal."
Continue reading how this will happen
here . . .
|
|
The "S" Word |
Nancy Morgan
says, when a word comes too close to actually identifying an
inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action. The
offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby
signifying that polite society will no longer accept it. You’ve
heard of the "N" word, the "B" word (think Hillary) and now comes the
"S" word.
By its abbreviation, the "S" word, formerly
known as socialism, infers a negative connotation. A negative
connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that
socialism
In a nutshell, socialism is
an economic system where property is held in common, not individually,
and its ideal is a centrally directed economy. Socialism entails
the substitution of group decision making for individual choice.
In this case, the "group" making the decisions are the 34 (and counting)
unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.
The origins
of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle. Aristotle
believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others
were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal
gain (capitalism) must be bad.
This theory of Aristotle’s is the
basic premise of the Obama administration. By claiming the "moral
high ground" of the "greater good" Obama and his minions have free reign
to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of
years of tradition it represents.
Under the guise of altruism and
the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism.
The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades. The
capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the
freest and most productive country in the world. But, according to
the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, "profit,"
and every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on
the backs of less fortunate. Right?
Obama and the secular
progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on
being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus
superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold
traditional values (conservatives). They believe their duty is to
offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or
traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.
The fly in
Obama’s ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isn’t very
good at creating wealth. Only individuals do that. But hey,
socialism is "ethically superior" and that’s what counts. Right?
Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract
ideas like equality and justice. Millions of Americans bought into
his spiel. Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery
tickets. Against all reason, they were led to believe that the
government can provide them a free lunch. And there will be no
cost to them. And best of all, these moochers can also claim the
moral high ground. After all, they are victims of rich
capitalists. And that’s not fair! And its not their fault
that they haven’t won life’s lottery.
The problem with their
premise can be reduced to two words -- free will. God gave us free
will -- the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make.
Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a
central government.
Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief.
Whew! Now, instead of losers, they’re much valued victims.
And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of
implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of
their bad choices. But best of all, socialism allows life’s losers
the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of
another man’s labor.
This is socialism. This is what Obama
wants America to be. But students of history insist on asking the
question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and
punishes success? Unfortunately, America will get an answer to
that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country
into his "new and improved" idea of a socialist utopia. |
|
The Hexagon Of Progress |
Barack Obama -- Working Families Party -- Democratic Socialists Of
America -- New Party -- ACORN -- SEIU Folks, we are not
calling Democrats "socialists." That’s a mean, ugly word frequently
used as an epithet to smear people on a personal level. We are
calling them "Democratic Socialists." We don’t mean this as a
judgment. It is simply a fact which the politicians involved
with the Working Families Party group should be made to own.
Caution: This is a lengthy post, but, it’s easy to follow and
there’s a party favor at very end. Let’s review the
facts: |
| |
©
Copyright Beckwith 2010
All right reserved
|
