|Items on this page are archived
An Endorsement Of The Idea
|Speaking to a
of minority journalists in Chicago, Obama said, "I personally would want to
see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history,
"I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it's Native
Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most
important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words,
but offer deeds."
Exactly what Obama is
advocating here cannot be determined, but it seems to be something
of an endorsement of the idea of "reparations for slavery," which is
usually taken to mean cash payments. In this view, the following deeds
are insufficient to balance the ledger between America and the
descendants of slaves: the Civil War, the ratification of the 13th, 14th
and 15th amendments, Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the continuing practice of
When Obama walked on stage at the McCormick Center, many journalists in
the audience leapt to their feet and applauded enthusiastically after
being told not to do so. During a two-minute break halfway through
the event, which was broadcast live on CNN, journalists ran to the stage
to snap photos of Obama.
Obama, who acknowledged that he needed a nap, stood up to say farewell
to the audience of journalists, many of whom gave him another standing
This is the first direct quote I've seen where
Obama clearly endorses reparations -- "When it comes to...reparations,
the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer
words, but offer deeds." -- he is saying the most important
thing for the government to do is offer reparations.
And, there he goes complaining about being tired again. On July
31st, 2008, a Google, using
-- Obama tired fatigue -- returned 238,000 items. Many others have
noticed that Obama, despite his comparative youth, often complains of being tired or
|Given Barack Obama's relentless populism this cycle, the
Wall Street Journal analysis of his tax cuts should surprise no one.
They find that Obama relies less on actual cuts in tax rates and more in
specific, "refundable" grants that filers receive whether they have a
tax liability or not. Instead of reducing taxes, Obama makes his redistributionism explicit.
Six of the seven listed in the Obama plan are these "refundables," money
people get from the federal government even if they pay no taxes at all.
These are not Ttax cuts," but instead welfare grants based on specific
social policy. It's blatant redistributionism, as the money
comes from tax increases on the wealthy.
More . . .
|Dramatic Redistribution Of Wealth
hard numbers on the Obama Tax Plan show a dramatic redistribution of
wealth according to a new Tax Foundation analysis.
In Tax Foundation Fiscal Fact, No. 132, Tax Foundation president Scott
Hodge uses revenue estimates from the Tax Policy Center to show that
Obama's plan would greatly accelerate the decades-long trend toward a
federal government that depends for tax revenue almost exclusively on a
few high-income people.
This contrasts starkly with the McCain plan, according to Hodge, which
would give every taxpayer a cut and leave the current tax burden
distribution approximately where it is.
"Under the Obama plan for 2009," explains Hodge, "more than $131 billion
would be redistributed from the top 1 percent of taxpayers to all other
Obama's plan to punish success is patterned
straight from Karl Marx -- "From each according to his ability, to each
according to his needs."
Of course, Obama has his millions in a "quasi-blind
trust" -- exempt from his "tax the rich" plan.
|Global Poverty Act
|February 17th -- Sen. Barack Obama, giving America a preview of his
priorities, is rejoicing over the Senate committee passage of a plan
that could end up costing taxpayers billions of dollars in an attempt to
reduce poverty in other nations.
The nice-sounding bill, called the "Global
Poverty Act," sponsored by Obama, is up for a Senate vote on
Thursday and could result in the imposition of a $845 billion global tax
on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal
religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient
to the dictates of the United Nations.
The U.N.'s "Millennium Project," says that the U.N. plan to force the
U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of its GNP in increased foreign aid spending
would add $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a
13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development
conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S. is
expected to meet the "Millennium Development Goals," this amounts to
$845 billion. And the only way to raise that kind of money is through a
global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels.
abstract of the proposed legislation:
"To require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive
strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of
promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme
global poverty, and the achievement of the [U.N.] Millennium Development
Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between
1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."
scary part of the bill is this:
In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits
nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series
of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the
Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological
Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the
The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as "the indispensable
common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to
realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and
Here's how Senator Obama's website
"With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world,
global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the
international community faces," said Senator Obama. "It must be a
priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme
poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and clean drinking
water. As we strive to rebuild America's standing in the world, this
important bill will demonstrate our promise and commitment to those in
the developing world. Our commitment to the global economy must extend
beyond trade agreements that are more about increasing corporate profits
than about helping workers and small farmers everywhere."
Will somebody tell this idiot that it's not the job of the United States
to cut global poverty by taxing its citizens and giving those monies to
the corrupt United Nations.
Welfare doesn't work in America and its sure not going to work anywhere
else. It's just more billions and trillions down the toilet.
|Joe The Plumber And Redistribution
|In this (video)
exchange between Obama and a plumber on the campaign trail this weekend,
the self-employed plumber said to Obama: "Your new tax plan is going to
tax me more. Isn't it?"
Obama responded: "It's not that I want to punish your success, I just
want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a
chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around,
it's good for everybody."
Obama's not a socialist? -- geez Louise!
More $$$ On Welfare Than The Entire Iraq War
|Fred Lucas reminds us that as a candidate for president, Barack
Obama decried the financial toll that the Iraq war was taking on the
economy, but Obamaís proposed spending on welfare through 2010 will
eclipse Bushís war spending by more than $260 billion.
of the Bush-McCain policies, our debt has ballooned," then-Sen. Barack
Obama told a
Charleston, W.V., crowd in March 2008: "This is creating problems
in our fragile economy. And that kind of debt also places an
unfair burden on our children and grandchildren, who will have to repay
During the entire administration of George W. Bush, the Iraq
a total of $622 billion, according to the Congressional Research
Obamaís welfare spending will reach $888 billion in a
single fiscal year -- 2010 -- more than the Bush administration spent on
war in Iraq from the first "shock and awe" attack in 2003 until Bush
left office in January.
here . . .
this isn't enough, Obama wants to
steal $177 billion from Medicare Advantage and $300 billion in
additional Medicare cuts, for payments to doctors and hospitals, for a
total of $500 billion, to insure illegal aliens, indigents, criminals
and chronic alcoholics and drug abusers.
The Congressional Budget
Office estimates that Obama's plan will increase federal costs by almost
$1 trillion. This is why taxes will be increased under the plan,
not reduced. But Harvard economics professor Martin Feldstein
writes, "the actual costs will be much higher" because "the CBO's method
of estimating the cost of such a program doesn't recognize the
incentives it creates for households and firms to change their
behavior." Independent private estimates project increased federal
costs of $3.5 trillion to $4.1 trillion under the Obama plan.
This guy is all about stealing from the productive to pay off his
constituency, the non-productive -- remember
Share The Wealth With The World
|The New York Posts
reports that Barack Obama doesn't simply want to "spread the wealth
around" here in America, he's on record as favoring redistribution on a
As the Democrat explained last year in Foreign
Affairs, he thinks we need to be "sharing more of our riches to help
those in need" around the world and promised to double American foreign
assistance. He also proposed a multibillion-dollar
Global Education Fund to eliminate what he calls the "global
Obama has already acted on these beliefs.
In the Senate, he co-sponsored the
Global Poverty Act,
which calls on the US to allocate 7/10ths of 1 percent of our GNP to
foreign aid and debt relief. (That's $845 billion more than we're
now set to spend over the next 13 years.)
In a statement on the
Global Poverty Act, Obama explained we need to
transfer massive amounts of money to the developing world and get
"beyond trade agreements that are more about increasing profits than
about helping workers and small farmers everywhere."
Obama's view, don't help people -- they hurt them. Whereas
redistribution can fix all kinds of problems -- including terrorism, a
global scourge that Obama believes is actually a result of inequality.
Obama has no experience in the business world. Few, however,
are as hostile to the notion of profit -- or as committed to
redistributing the wealth -- both nationally and globally.
|Spread The Wealth
grand theme is to spread America's wealth to the world's poor, as
the onetime community organizer from the streets of South Chicago goes
He says to his followers, "It's not too late to claim the American
dream," and they cheer wildly, and some even cry.
Don't they know that the American dream isn't a wish granted by a
politician, or an entitlement from the government? Do they need a
political seer to tell them what to hope for, and dream of, because they
are unable to find it for themselves?
most recent victory speech, delivered in Madison, Wisconsin on
February 13, Obama named some of those guilty of creating America's
victims. They included:
Exxon, turning record profits from high pump prices
Wall Street, whose agenda smothers Main Street
NAFTA, where the American worker has no voice at the negotiating table
Lobbyists, who drown out the peoples' voice.
Spread The Wealth -- Revisited
-- When Barack Obama responded to the Ohio plumber who didn't want his
taxes raised that he wanted to "spread the wealth around," I wanted to
tell him to spread his own wealth around. It was in any event a
rare moment of candor on the part of candidate Obama.
Obama all but told the plumber that his wealth should
be seized in the name of equity. The encounter played out one of
the old themes of democratic politics: the appeal to the many to take
from the few. It's traditionally an easy sell in small-d
Obama's "spread the wealth around" gospel has many
intellectual and political forerunners. In American politics,
Obama's gospel harks back to Huey Long, among others. In his
regular Newsweek column George Will
Obama an Ivy League Huey Long. He doesn't mean it as a compliment
and he doesn't much pursue the analogy with Long.
Interested readers may want to take a look back at
Share Our Wealth platform and
Share Our Wealth Society clubs.
"By the summer of 1935," according to the linked page on Long's program,
"there were more than 27,000 Share Our Wealth clubs with a membership of
more than 7.5 million. Loyal followers met every week to discuss
Long's ideas and spread the message."
Now, of course, Barack Obama has
America to do the legwork and the mainstream
media to spread his message.
Toward the end of his column Will makes good use of
Steven Hayward and Kenneth Green's essay on the cap-and-tax bill.
AEI has posted the Hayward-Green essay online under the title
Waxman-Markey: An Exercise in Unreality.
Please check it out.
says Washington shouldn't just offer apologies for slavery, but also
"deeds." Don't worry, he says, he's not talking about direct
reparations. Relieved? Don't be.
Obama knows that if he pushes too hard on reparations, he might scare
off white voters. So he couches race-specific welfare as
"universal" social programs that appeal to broad-based political
coalitions -- "even if they disproportionately help minorities," he
confides in his book, "Audacity of Hope."
Obama has a name for his scheme: "universal strategies."
"An emphasis on universal, as opposed to race-specific, programs isn't
just good policy," he wrote. "It's also good politics."
Maybe so. But not all his plans for reparations are roundabout.
His book and Web site outline a separate plan calling for essentially a
government bailout of the inner cities. Among other things, he
ē Doling out faith-based grants "targeting ex-offenders."
ē Subsidizing supermarket chains that relocate to the inner city to
deliver "fresh produce" to blacks, helping wean them off unhealthy fast
ē Imposing "goals and timetables for minority hiring" on large
corporations whose work forces are deemed too white.
ē Continuing to fund the Community Development Block Grant program, Head
Start and HUD public housing subsidies.
ē Funding Small Business Administration loans for minority businesses
who train ex-felons, including gangbangers, for the "green jobs" of the
future, such as installing extra insulation in homes.
ē Doubling the funding for federal after-school programs such as
ē Subsidizing job training, day care, transportation for inner-city
poor, as well as doubling the funding of the federal Jobs Access and
Reverse Commute program.
ē Expanding the eligibility of the earned income tax credit to include
more poor, and indexing it to inflation.
ē Adopting entire inner-city neighborhoods as wards of the federal
ē Spending billions on new inner-city employment programs, including
This is just a down payment on the "economic justice" Obama has promised
the NAACP -- financed by "tax laws that restore some balance to the
distribution of the nation's wealth," he says in his book.
"The problems of inner-city poverty arise from our failure to face up to
an often tragic past," Obama said.
Now it's payback time.
|Reparations By Another Name
Obama is close to
creating an Office of Urban Policy to allocate funds to urban areas
for a range of initiatives, including job training and the creation of
Obama's urban renewal plan -- from neighborhoods to
downtown corridors -- calls for creating more opportunities for minority
businesses, establishing more affordable public transportation, raising
the minimum wage, ending tax breaks for businesses that send jobs
overseas, providing additional funding for community policing and ending
|H.R. 40 is a
bill in the U.S. House
of Representatives to create a commission to study reparation proposals
The bill is to acknowledge the fundamental
injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United
States and the 13 American colonies between 1619 and 1865 and to
establish a commission to examine the institution of slavery,
subsequently de jure and de facto racial and economic discrimination
against African-Americans, and the impact of these forces on living
African-Americans, to make recommendations to the Congress on
appropriate remedies, and for other purposes.
It should be no
surprise, that its sponsor is Rep. John Conyers, Democrat from Michigan
-- and he has an ally in the White House.
In this transcript of a 2001
radio interview, Obama
advocates redistribution as reparations for slavery and other
injustices towards "previously dispossessed peoples."
"the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of
wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice
in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to
characterize the Warren court, it wasnít that radical."
didnít break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the
founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as itís been interpreted,
and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the
Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the
states canít do to you, it says what the federal government canít do to
you, but it doesnít say what the federal government or the state
government must do on your behalf. And that hasnít shifted."
"One of the, I think tragedies of the civil rights movement was because
the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there
was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing
and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual
coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change
and in some ways we still suffer from that."
|The Los Angeles Times is
reporting that more than $1 billion will be set aside for those who
alleged loan discrimination by the Department of Agriculture. The
agreement would allow the workers to seek damage awards or debt relief.
The Obama administration agreed Thursday to provide $1.25 billion to
compensate African American farmers who alleged racial discrimination by
the Department of Agriculture farm loan programs.
subject to congressional approval, would set up a nonjudicial claims
process that would allow farmers to seek damage awards or debt relief.
This is in addition to more than $1 billion the federal
government paid to settle about 16,000 claims that were part of a
discrimination suit black farmers brought against the department.
The farmers won that suit in 1999.
"The agreement reached today
is an important milestone in putting these discriminatory claims behind
us for good and in achieving finality for this group of farmers with
long-standing grievances," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus had sought
to reopen the lawsuit after thousands of farmers missed the original
filing deadline to apply for compensation. Members of the caucus
met with U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. and Vilsack to express their
In May, Obama requested an additional $1.15 billion in
the 2010 budget to close the long-standing lawsuit against the
"Today is a historic day for the American people,"
said John W. Boyd Jr., president of the National Black Farmers Assn. "We
have finally buried the hatchet."
|ObamaCare Taxes Will
Help Obama Spread The Wealth
said on the campaign trail in October 2008 that he wanted to "spread the
wealth around." By signing the sweeping health-care overhaul
legislation, heís about to do just that.
If the final version of
the legislation passes the Senate, high-income investors will pay higher
Medicare taxes, tax breaks for out-of-pocket medical deductions will be
curtailed, and it will cost insurance companies more to pay executives
millions of dollars. Those levies will help fund expansion of
Medicaid services for the poor and subsidize health insurance to cover
millions who donít currently have benefits.
"Itís very clear
that taxes are levied on the wealthy and the benefits will spread across
the entire income distribution, with a lot going to expanded Medicaid
distribution and expanding health insurance," said Roberton Williams, an
economist at the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research institute
backed by the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. "One
couldnít claim he didnít keep that promise" to "spread the wealth
here . . .
|Obama's Judge On
Reparations For Slavery
says that in May 2008, Ninth Circuit nominee Goodwin Liu took part
in a discussion of the documentary film "Traces of the Trade," which
explores the role of New Englanders in the slave trade. Liu lists
the event in his questionnaire response, but doesnít link to any video
or transcript (or any other account of his remarks).
Morgen of Verum Serum has dug up a video of the event and posted a
video excerpt, which I encourage you to watch. Hereís a
transcript of Liuís remarks (with some asides deleted):
Then thereís a further issue, which is that
maybe there are white families who were not involved as directly or
even indirectly with the slave trade, but who still benefited from
it. And then there is the whole question, which you put on the
table, about people who came to America after, and, you know, like
my family. And why is it that this movie speaks to me so
And so, what I would do, I think I would draw a
distinction between a concept of guilt, which locates accountability
in a sort of limited set of wrong-doers, and, on the other hand, a
concept of responsibility, which is, I think, a more broad
suggestion that all of us, whatever our lineage, whatever our
ancestry, whatever our complicity, still have a moral duty to Ö make
things right. And thatís a moral duty thatís incumbent upon
everybody who inherits this nation, regardless of whatever the
And I think, to add one more point on top of
that, the exercise of that responsibility Ö necessarily requires the
answer to the question, "What are we willing to give up to make
things right?" Because itís gonna require us to give up
something, whether it is the seat at Harvard, the seat at Princeton.
Or is it gonna require us to give up our segregated neighborhoods,
our segregated schools? Is it gonna require us to give up our
Itís gonna require giving up something, and so until
we can have that further conversation of what it is weíre willing to
give up, I agree that the reconciliation canít fully occur.
Letís expose the game that Liu is playing.
Just as Liu
completely ignores the innocent victims of racial preferences when
he urges the perpetual imposition of racial quotas as a remedy for
"societal discrimination," so he would make those who were not complicit
in slavery pay the price of his grandiose reparations project.
continues to use the term "segregated" so expansively that only the
imposition of racial quotas will achieve the elimination of what he
Even worse, Liu, far from making any
sacrifice himself (he didnít give up his seats at Stanford and at Yale
Law School, or his Rhodes Scholarship, or his clerkship with Justice
Ginsburg, or his professorship at Berkeley), is making a career out of
benefiting from his grievance-mongering. Itís precisely his
hard-edged ideology that has made him a darling of the Left and that
explains why he is being nominated to a judicial seat that he
craves as a steppingstone to the Supreme Court.
|ObamaCare Mainly Aimed At Redistributing
|Byron York says that it hasn't attracted much
notice, but recently some prominent advocates of ObamaCare have spoken
more frankly than ever before about why they supported a national health
care makeover. It wasn't just about making insurance more affordable. It
wasn't just about bending the cost curve. It wasn't just about cutting
the federal deficit. It was about redistributing wealth.
reform is "an income shift," Democratic Sen. Max Baucus said on March
25. "It is a shift, a leveling, to help lower income, middle income
In his halting, jumbled style, Baucus explained that
in recent years "the maldistribution of income in America has gone up
way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the
middle income class is left behind." The new health care legislation,
Baucus promised, "will have the effect of addressing that
maldistribution of income in America."
At about the same time,
Howard Dean, the former Democratic National Committee chairman and
presidential candidate, said the health bill was needed to correct
economic inequities. "The question is, in a democracy, what is the right
balance between those at the top ... and those at the bottom?" Dean said
during an appearance on CNBC. "When it gets out of whack, as it did in
the 1920s, and it has now, you need to do some redistribution. This is a
form of redistribution."
Summing things up in the New York Times,
the liberal economics columnist David Leonhardt called ObamaCare "the
federal government's biggest attack on economic inequality since
inequality began rising more than three decades ago."
tell us. For many opponents of the new legislation, the statements
confirmed a nagging suspicion that for Barack Obama and Democrats in
Congress, the health fight was about more than just insurance -- that
redistribution played a significant, if largely unspoken, part in the
drive for national health care.
here . . .
|Obama's Culture Of Dependence
|"Do you realize," CNN's Susan Roesgen asked a
man at the April 15, 2009, tea party in Chicago, "that you're eligible
for a $400 credit?" When the man refused to drop his "drop
socialism" sign, she went on, "Did you know that the state of Lincoln
gets fifty billion out of the stimulus?"
Roesgen is no longer
with CNN, and CNN has only about half as many viewers as it did last
year. But her questions are revealing. They help us
understand that the issue on which our politics has become centered --
the Obama Democrats' vast expansion of the size and scope of government
-- is really not just about economics.
It is really a battle
about culture, a battle between the culture of dependence and the
culture of independence. Probably unknowingly, Roesgen was
reflecting the the midcentury sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld's dictum that
politics is about who gets how much when. If some guy is getting
$400, shouldn't he just shut up and collect the money? Shouldn't
he be happy that his state government, headed recently by Rod
Blagojevich, was getting an extra $50 billion?
But public policy
also helps determine the kind of society we are. The Obama
Democrats see a society in which ordinary people cannot fend for
themselves, where they need to have their incomes supplemented, their
health care insurance regulated and guaranteed, their relationships with
their employers governed by union leaders. Highly educated
mandarins can make better decisions for them than they can make
Continue reading Michael Barone
here . . .
|Does Obama Agree That ObamaCare
|White House spokesman, Robert
Gibbels, has evaded
answering the question of whether Obama agrees with Dr. Donald Berwick,
his newly appointed administrator of Medicare and Medicaid, who has
insisted that health-care systems must redistribute wealth.
"Excellent health care is by definition redistributional," Berwick said
in a speech delivered on July 1, 2008.
When asked directly at the
July 7 White House press briefing whether Obama agreed with this, Gibbels
would not answer the question. Instead, he parried it with jocular
statements about the provenance of the quote.
On July 8,
Gibbels an email that included a link to a YouTube page on which is posted
a video of the portion of Berwickís July 1, 2008 speech in which Berwick
made the comment. Gibbels was also provided with a transcript of the
relevant segment of the video and a copy of the July 26, 2008 edition of
the British Medical Journal (BMJ) which published a written adaptation
of Berwick's speech.
"You could have had a monstrous insurance
industry of claims and rules and paper-pushing instead of using your tax
base to provide a single route of finance," said Berwick in the video
recording of the speech provided to Gibbels. "You could have
protected the wealthy and the well, instead of recognizing that sick
people tend to be poorer and that poor people tend to be sicker.
And that any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized
and humane must -- must -- redistribute wealth from the richer among us
to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by
definition redistributional. Britain, you chose well."
Gibbels was again asked -- in the July 8 emai -- whether Obama agreed with
Dr. Berwick that "excellent health care is by definition
Gibbels again did not answer.
Wednesday, Obama made Berwick the director of the Centers for Medicare
and Medicaid Services (CMS) through a recess appointment.
|Obama's "Livable Communities"
|The Senate Banking Committee passed the Livable
Communities Act on Tuesday, moving the bill one step closer to final
passage. The bill creates $4 billion in neighborhood planning
grants for "sustainable" living projects and a new federal office to
Similar legislation in the House has been
criticized by Republicans on the House Budget Committee, who charge that
"the programís aim is to impose a Washington-based, central planning
model on localities across the country."
In the Senate version,
written by outgoing Chairman Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), the Livable
Communities Act would designate $4 billion to aid local governments in
planning high-density, walkable neighborhoods.
helping local governments to combat suburban sprawl and traffic
congestion, the bill sets up two separate grant programs. One,
known as Comprehensive Planning Grants, would go to cities and counties
to assist them in carrying out such plans.
here . . .
|Obama Wants To Spend
$845 Billion More
is reporting that Barack Obama will travel to New York in late
September to address a summit to spur the achievement of U.N. goals to
combat poverty and the annual ministerial meeting of the General
The meeting on the Millennium Development Goals will be
held from Sept. 20-22. The list of speakers circulated Tuesday
includes Obama addressing the high-level session in the afternoon of
On Sept. 23, Obama will address the opening session of
the General Assemblyís ministerial meeting -- his second appearance
before the 192-nation world body.
The anti-poverty goals, adopted
by world leaders at a summit in 2000, including cutting extreme poverty
by half, ensuring universal primary education, halting and reversing the
HIV/AIDS pandemic, and cutting child and maternal mortality -- all by
The U.N.'s "Millennium
Project," says that the U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent
of its GNP in increased foreign aid spending would add $65 billion a
year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a 13-year period, from 2002,
when the U.N.'s Financing for Development conference was held, to the
target year of 2015, when the U.S. is expected to meet the "Millennium
Development Goals," this amounts to $845 billion. And the only way to
raise that kind of money is through a global tax, preferably on
carbon-emitting fossil fuels.
abstract of the proposed legislation:
require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive
strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of
promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of
extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the [U.N.] Millennium
Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people
worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."
scary part of
the bill is this:
addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits
nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a
series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court
Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention
on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the
Rights of the Child.
Related or a coincidence: The Senate
Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing for September 14th entitled "Firearms in
Commerce: Assessing the Need for Reform in the Federal Regulatory
The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N.
as "the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through
which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace,
cooperation and development."
Here's how Senator Obama
billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world,
global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies
the international community faces. It must be
a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating
extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and
clean drinking water. As we strive to rebuild America's standing in
the world, this important bill will demonstrate our promise and
commitment to those in the developing world. Our commitment to the
global economy must extend beyond trade agreements that are more
about increasing corporate profits than about helping workers and
small farmers everywhere."
Will somebody tell this idiot that it's not the job of the United
States to cut global poverty by taxing its citizens and giving those
monies to the corrupt United Nations.
Welfare doesn't work in
America and its sure not going to work anywhere else. It's just
more billions and trillions down the toilet.
|Do We Doubt What Our Eyes Have Seen
says when Barack Obama was elected, many of us were able to suspend
disbelief that someone with as little leadership experience could gain
the White House. This was made easier by the most anemic
Republican campaign since Bob Dole ran for office.
We put aside
candidate Obama's less-than-savory personal associations and
inexperience and gave the him the benefit of doubt because of a hope
that maybe, just maybe, this charismatic personality, the first black
president in the history of the land, would truly unite the country,
both racially and in a spirit of bipartisan middle-of-the-road politics.
This is what was promised the nation, and Obama deserved a chance to
live up to his rhetoric.
Two years later, Americans know the
truth. Together with Democratic majorities in both houses of
Congress, Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid have slingshot the country so far to the political left that
it was only a few months into Obama's term that our nation witnessed the
rebirth of conservatism.
Said to be dead and buried by a fawning
and sympathetic media and other politicos, conservatism, as represented
by a broad spectrum of public grassroots movements, has arisen from
interment to the point that, according to Democratic pollster Peter Hart
in Wednesday's Wall Street Journal, "It's hard to say Democrats are
facing anything less than a Category 4 hurricane."
Nonetheless, races are tightening as we
get closer to Nov. 2. This comes as no surprise since we now live
in a country where allegiance to political correctness reshapes us in a
mold of moral relativity, and worship for big government and
entitlements has gotten to the point where the members of the left in
America are so politically wedded to the false hopes of liberalism that
they refuse see that French, English, Irish and German governments are
bankrupt and reining in runaway deficit spending on entitlements as fast
as they can. One wonders, does the left read newspapers?
if Republicans reclaim the House of Representatives, and less likely the
Senate, Democrats will have nobody to blame but themselves. There
was no mandate for Obama, Pelosi and Reid to shove America so far to the
That's why Democrats are losing independents. They
gave Obama the benefit of doubt with their vote, and he has betrayed
them with a far-left political agenda, the signature legislation being a
massive and disastrous health care entitlement bought and paid for by
Pelosi's political threats and bribery.
It should be clear now
what Obama meant by "change," and I for one respect the man's passion
and unwavering doggedness. President Clinton pranced to polling
data. Not Obama.
Unlike so many progressives on the left,
scared to admit who they are, and herded about like so many collective
sheep, Obama truly believes this stuff. As he told Joe the
plumber, America would be a better place if wealth were redistributed
more evenly. And he's following through with that social-justice
agenda despite the fact these policies have economically crippled
Wealth redistribution is the core intent of the Obama
government. Pelosi said so in a speech to the United Steel Workers
Union last week. Getting there is more problematic. It means
bypassing an opposed electorate, reworking the Constitution to suit the
21st century, and subjugating the role of the individual in American
society to that of a central government.
wealth means that government must receive higher taxes and unearth more
taxable income from new sources to pay for these entitlements. It
must control health care to further control the economy. It must
regulate and control banks, insurance companies and other big business.
It must have education and labor union support. It must be able to
count on liberal federal judges to overrule state and federal
legislatures. With media friends, it must isolate and demonize
It will deflect blame to others if policies don't
show immediate fruit, and it will ignore public sentiment to pass laws
by whatever means necessary.
Once willing to give Obama the
benefit of the doubt, can we doubt any longer what our own eyes have
seen? If we do, we commit ourselves to the broken roads of
|Redistribution Of Liberty
|Mark Andrew Dwyer
case you wonder while boarding a plane, where have your Constitutional
rights gone, I have the answer for you: they have been redistributed.
You have to "voluntarily submit" yourself to humiliating procedure
that borders with sexual assault as a precondition to your exercise of
your right to travel. Your genitals may be inspected, a TSA agent
may wander with her hand under your wifeís skirt, and even your kids may
be exposed on what you thought was child molesting.
And all this
nonsense takes place while millions of Mexican illegal aliens, loyal to
their La Raza (The Race), and not to our nation, violate Americaís
border and the immigration law as they please because, we are being
told, any meaningful enforcement would create "a war zone" and offend
As if this werenít enough, verification of voterís
eligibility by means of proof of citizenship and photo ID has been
deemed a violation of Constitutional right to vote, even though untold
thousands of non-citizens fraudulently cast their votes in federal,
state, and local elections.
As if this werenít enough, either,
Muslims are given free pass on importation and exercise of laws and
customs of their half-religious and half-political Islam that are so
incompatible with what our Constitutional Republic stands for, and --
despite history of terror attacks and threats -- they cannot even be
suspect at the airports because, according Liberal orthodoxy, that would
amount to racial profiling and discrimination.
And if all these
werenít enough, the "liberal apologists" for the intrusive government,
who maintain that passengerís "safety" trumps all other considerations,
will flatly reject any idea that passengers safety is also more
important than the "liberal ideology" that in a futile attempt to prove
all people equal stops us from making obvious statistical connections
between the flyerís profile and the risk he poses to his fellow
travelers. This submits our individual liberties to "liberal
ideology" (since our liberties yield to our safety which yields to
"liberal ideology") -- an un-Constitutional doctrine that was very much
in order in the Soviet Union (where it most likely have originated from)
but is totally out of place in the U.S.
I am sure you can add
quite a lot to this list of absurdities that are being forced down our
But itís more than just absurd effects. There is
an obvious causality relationship here as well.
Federal Government de facto refuses to keep all undesirable aliens on
the other side of the American border, and even allows prospective
troublemakers to obtain U.S. citizenship, because it refuses to
"profile" those likely of breaking our nationís laws, the same Federal
Government is now compelled to trash our Constitutional liberties in
order to remedy for the results of its own indolence (to say the least).
In other words, we are being forced to give up some of our God-given
rights so that those who govern our country can keep bestowing various
rights, and undeservedly so, on those who should not be allowed into our
country in the first place. Not only do we see redistribution of
Americaís wealth, as our hi-tech manufacturing facilities, product of
our nationís ingenuity and hard work, are being siphoned to China,
India, and Mexico while America is drowning in national debt, but also
our Constitutional rights are being redistributed among foreign nations,
religions, and cultures at our expense. How typical.
core liberalism. Itís far more dangerous than most of you think it
is. And, according to most recent genetic research, itís
So, beware of liberals, both open and closeted ones.
They are benign only when kept muted and powerless. Each time you
elect a "liberal" to any office of power or give one a forum to deceive
and indoctrinate our youth, you make it more likely that our nation
will, eventually, be "liberated" from its Constitutional liberties, and
that these former liberties of ours, but not ours anymore, as our
government has deprived and is depriving us of them for our protection,
will be redistributed among the rapidly growing population of the rest
of the world.
And if you would like to see the future of America
under the "liberal rule" then just go ahead and try to board a plane on
your trip to Thanksgiving dinner next week. I guarantee you will
not be amazed.
|Obama Gives America Back To The Indians
is reporting that Barack Obama, while addressing a tribal nations
conference at the White House last week, announced that the U.S.
government is now supporting the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous People, which includes a sweeping declaration that
"indigenous peoples" have a right to lands and resources they
traditionally occupied or "otherwise used."
The U.N. resolution
"Indigenous peoples have the right to the
lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally
owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired."
At the White House Tribal Nations Conference, Obama reminded the
group that last year he signed a resolution passed by Congress that
"finally" recognizes "the sad and painful chapters in our shared
history -- a history too often marred by broken promises and grave
injustices against the First Americans," he said.
added that "no statement can undo the damage that was done," but he said
the resolution can "help reaffirm the principles that should guide our
future. Itís only by heeding the lessons of our history that
we can move forward," Obama said.
In his remarks, Obama also
recalled his trip to a Montana Indian reservation during his
presidential campaign where he said he was honored with a new name.
"I remember, more than two years ago, in Montana, I visited the Crow
Nation -- one of the many times I met with tribal leaders on the
campaign trail," Obama said. "You may know that on that trip, I became
an adopted Crow Indian."
"My Crow name is 'One Who Helps People
Throughout the Land,'" Obama said. "And my wife, when I told her about
this, she said, 'You should be named One Who Isnít Picking Up His Shoes
and His Socks.'"
|A Secret $6 Billion Bailout For Puerto
|Jonathan Strong says the Obama administration
is eying a secretive tax deal critics charge is an indirect bailout for
Puerto Rico to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars.
territory, desperate for revenues in the midst of the recession,
surprised industry with a $6 billion tax on foreign firms -- including a
significant bloc of U.S. pharmaceutical firms -- late October in a rare
weekend legislative session without any public debate in advance.
But now U.S. taxpayers, not the firms, could end up footing at least
a significant chunk of the bill.
Gov. Luis FortuŮo signed the new
tax into law Oct. 25. That day, the Washington, D.C.-based
white-shoe law firm Steptoe & Johnson issued him a legal brief arguing
U.S. firms should receive money from the U.S. government to offset the
Puerto Rico tax increase, which FortuŮo sent to the Internal Revenue
Service, where a decision is pending.
The international tax law
in question is complicated, but experts agree the tax, and the request,
are an unusual use of portions of the tax code intended to avoid double
taxation on U.S. firms in countries that have reciprocity treaties with
"We would call it creative," said James Hines, an expert
on international tax issues and the L. Hart Wright Collegiate Professor
of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. "It's an unusual
tax for sure."
It's an "indirect bailout," said Dan Mitchell, an
international tax expert and senior fellow at the Cato Institute
here . . .
|Obama Apology Leads To Foreign Lawsuit And
|Floyd Reports says Barack Obamaís coterminous
policies of apologetic weakness abroad and guilt-riddled self-loathing
at home have just made the United States the victim of a baseless
lawsuit filed by a foreign government -- one that seems destined to
further drain the wallets of the shrinking number of Americans still
For decades, the Left has claimed that if America atoned
for our past sins, the "international community" would in turn respect
us and treat us kindly. More realistic analysts warned the world
would interpret this as weakness and pounce like tigers on a wounded
hyena. Obamaís international apology has just proven us right.
On October 1, Obama apologized to Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom for
medical experiments conducted in the 1940s and approved by both
governments. To be sure no nation missed the spectacle, Obama had
the moment immortalized in a PR photo. Hillary Clinton, Kathleen
Sebelius, and then-White House spokesman Robert Gibbs beat their breasts
and begged pardon. This author was the only conservative who
reported on it at the time, forecasting Guatemalans would demand
reparations and that the money "will probably be forthcoming."
The Associated Press reported yesterday, "Attorneys representing
potentially thousands of Guatemalans who were affected by U.S. syphilis
experiments decades ago said Tuesday they will sue top federal health
officials unless a system is created out of court to settle claims by
the victims or their survivors."
What do you think inspired these
foreigners to demand your tax dollars? "The administrationís
apologetic tone led the Guatemalansí attorneys to seek the unusual
out-of-court settlement before a lawsuit is filed," according to the AP.
(Emphasis added.) Guatemalan shakedown artists are demanding Obama
"waive any sovereign immunity defenses to block the Guatemalan claims
or, as an alternative, they want a claims process similar to those set
up in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the 9/11 terror attacks."
Or more to the point Pigford, Pigford II, and the whole constellation of
stealth reparations payments this administration has made to black,
American Indian, Hispanic, and female "farmers."
here . . .
Copyright Beckwith 2010 - 2011
All right reserved